Gerbera Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 @TSNBobMcKenzie: Only system issue addressed is back-diving contracts (cap hit penalties for retired players) but not 5 per cent variance rule or term limits What does this mean? it means PA allows this or put a counter proposal for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Now Fehr has sent a letter to the canadian government whining and complaining . The union has made a horrible mistake in bringing Fehr on board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 good to see them not negotiating in the media (not). funny how every detail is being leaked just like the NHL's offer in october. cant help but think this just for optics to get the fans on the players side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lui's Knob Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Help me get this straight. Do you like Fehr or not? Can't really tell, you haven't clarified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 @TSNBobMcKenzie: Only system issue addressed is back-diving contracts (cap hit penalties for retired players) but not 5 per cent variance rule or term limits What does this mean? it means PA allows this or put a counter proposal for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 More on the "state of the union" here - yikes....http://t.co/qceW8FQB (audio) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/20329/complete-nhlpa-offer-to-the-nhl here is the complete offer from the PA, on paper it looks amazing. a difference of 182million sure seems silly seeing as how the NHL stated they lost 100million from the Pre-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Now Fehr has sent a letter to the canadian government whining and complaining . The union has made a horrible mistake in bringing Fehr on board. The union has no hope of getting any kind of good deal, and they have lost a lot of money in salary they can never recover. The NHL will not give them even a fair deal as they blame the union for having them in this situation. I would have offered the players 50/50 in return for 5 year max , higher UFA , easier ability to send players down to the minors, and other adjustments. The union has not had a formal offer and now Bettman has them backed into a corner. All that is left is public perception. Bettman has played this one beautifully. He is forcing the union to put down a ridiculous offer on paper to discredit them, or an offer that is so modest the NHL accepts it and the union ends up with nothing. Like him or not, there is a reason why he has been NHL commissioner for 20 years. And in the end, I am on the fans side, and this idea that the union can just go get hired guns to BULLY the very league they play for has got to END. From now on, let a panel of 3 federal judges hear the union and owners arguments. Two from the US and one from Canada in an international court. Both sides have to agree to the ruling for 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I feel the rejection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 http://espn.go.com/b...ffer-to-the-nhl here is the complete offer from the PA, on paper it looks amazing. a difference of 182million sure seems silly seeing as how the NHL stated they lost 100million from the Pre-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I feel the rejection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackberries Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 so where do we stand now? Is the league reviewing? Praying for a miracle. Probably more likely the Giants will make the playoffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Ian Mendes ********@ian_mendes Fehr: "We've moved far more than halfway. Our expectation is the NHL is going to be willing to meet us if they want to reach an agreement." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 The immediate reduction to 50% would occur this year, meaning the players would take a hit as well. The 182m upfront would help lessen this burden, but it appears that the PA is coming towards the NHL's side in willing to split the cost of the games already lost. NHL should take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 i see a negotiation on the makewhole happening and the $ figure in year 1 being shifted to year4 11million? why even include it unless that is your tactic just seems like an accounting nightmare for such a small amount of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drybone Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 This proposal by Fehr is a joke. It does nothing in the slightest. Its just the same finger pointing . http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992 Fehr's ego is now way beyond the players interest. Fehr could never get over the fact he does not have equal power with Bettman or the owners. This is the downfall of union. They honestly thought they own 50% of the NHL and the owners have to give them 50% concessions. I guess Fehr is hoping his WHINING letter to the Canadian Parliament is going to somehow SPIN public opinion , when in fact it just turns everyone off. If you told the union 2 years ago Fehr would be in this position and the players locked out, they would have NEVER hired the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I am always hearing dollar figures from the NHLPA and not % of revenue. I also see Fehr wants a guarantee on the $1.88 billion moving forward along with incremental increases. That might work but what if revenue does not grow as anticipated? I am sure that is why the NHL wants to deal in % of revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Worth a read: http://www.theglobea..._medium=twitter there is a chart... but can't really format it. The NHL asked its players to present a detailed proposal on Wednesday morning, and they certainly delivered. The six-page document prepared by executive director Donald Fehr outlines seven key areas that could form the foundation for a new collective bargaining agreement: revenue sharing, pension plan, discipline, player contracting and system issues, players’ share, term of CBA and transition rules. It is by far the NHLPA’s most detailed offer yet, and it moves the two sides within less than $200-million of each other. Whether or not it can result in a shortened season starting in the near future remains to be seen. The key details The main thing to take away from what’s there is that the players have accepted a 50-50 share of revenues plus the “make whole” amount. The make whole amount in this offer is $393-million in total, with $182-million of that payable in Year 1, $128-million in Year 2, $72-million in Year 3 and $11-million in Year 4. There is no make whole for the fifth year of the deal as it will have been phased out. To determine what percentage of revenues the players’ share would be in each year, I’ve used the NHL’s projected revenues of $2.9-billion in a lockout shortened season for this year, then a 2.5 per cent increase in 2013-14 and a 5 per cent increase in each season after that. I consider these to be pretty conservative revenue projections given hockey-related revenue has grown at a rate of 7.2 per cent a season the past seven seasons. All figures are in millions of U.S. dollars: The NHL to this point has offered a straight 50-50 split as well as $211-million as part of the “make whole,” putting them that $182-million apart I mentioned above. Overall, what the players have proposed would likely give them roughly a 52 per cent share over the life of the deal, which is probably a little too high for the league’s liking. Splitting the difference to take them to $300-million in the make whole may ultimately be the final solution. Other issues Here things are trickier. The players rejected all of the league’s proposals on contracting rights except for attempting to eliminate “back-diving” contracts like the ones given out to Ilya Kovalchuk and Roberto Luongo in recent years. The PA proposal there would only apply to new contracts that are nine years or longer and would involve penalizing a team against the cap if the player retires before the end of the deal. The NHLPA also proposes a salary cap of no less than $67.25-million in any year and a floor and cap that will function as a 20 per cent range from the midpoint. (The midpoint for a $67.25-million cap in this system would be roughly $56-million, with the floor at closer to 45-million. The previous system had a range of $16-million between the cap and floor, which caused issues for poorer clubs attempting to reach the floor.) The fine print One other sticking point may be this line from the proposal: “There are no guarantees or fixed targets, other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players’ share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season.” That type of safety measure wouldn’t likely come into effect unless overall revenues cratered, something we haven’t seen in the NHL in more than a decade. But it’s still likely to draw the ire of owners who want to guarantee the player share is as close to 50-50 as possible every season. You can read the NHLPA’s full offer here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Impersonator Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 This proposal by Fehr is a joke. It does nothing in the slightest. Its just the same finger pointing . http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992 Fehr's ego is now way beyond the players interest. Fehr could never get over the fact he does not have equal power with Bettman or the owners. This is the downfall of union. They honestly thought they own 50% of the NHL and the owners have to give them 50% concessions. I guess Fehr is hoping his WHINING letter to the Canadian Parliament is going to somehow SPIN public opinion , when in fact it just turns everyone off. If you told the union 2 years ago Fehr would be in this position and the players locked out, they would have NEVER hired the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 This proposal by Fehr is a joke. It does nothing in the slightest. Its just the same finger pointing . http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992 Fehr's ego is now way beyond the players interest. Fehr could never get over the fact he does not have equal power with Bettman or the owners. This is the downfall of union. They honestly thought they own 50% of the NHL and the owners have to give them 50% concessions. I guess Fehr is hoping his WHINING letter to the Canadian Parliament is going to somehow SPIN public opinion , when in fact it just turns everyone off. If you told the union 2 years ago Fehr would be in this position and the players locked out, they would have NEVER hired the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.