Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
6226 replies to this topic

#2431 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,259 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 08 November 2012 - 02:57 PM

How would they do that? The cap is a percentage of the revenue. If revenues stay the same, and you go from 57% to 50%, the cap has to go down.


the league had proposed "freezing" the cap for the first year at least in order to stop teams from dumping players all over the league.
  • 0

#2432 goalie13

goalie13

    Osgoodian One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 08 November 2012 - 03:24 PM

the league had proposed "freezing" the cap for the first year at least in order to stop teams from dumping players all over the league.


So it would be a transitional cap? Maybe they are hoping revenue would increase during the transitional year to cover off the contracts under a lower percentage cap.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2433 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,259 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 08 November 2012 - 03:32 PM

So it would be a transitional cap? Maybe they are hoping revenue would increase during the transitional year to cover off the contracts under a lower percentage cap.


yeah i assume that would be part of the hope from the NHL & PA.

update:

@Real_ESPNLeBrun: NHLPA's offered concept to NHL on Make Whole would see players go down to 50-50 of HRR by Year 3. So there's a phase-in element to it


good to see the NHLPA being serious about negotiations, i thought we were passed this phase in crap no way the league likes that. :sadno:
  • 0

#2434 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,274 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 08 November 2012 - 03:39 PM

I think any proposed deal based on anticipated increased revenue could be illusionary. The economy is headed for another downturn. Maybe this time the fans will be the ones who walk away. I am not suggesting a boycot I am simply saying the cost of tickets will exceed ability to pay.
  • 0

#2435 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73,764 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 04:01 PM

@reporterchris: Five hours and counting for the NHL's CBA meeting.
  • 1

307mg00.jpg


#2436 forever_hope

forever_hope

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 06

Posted 08 November 2012 - 04:40 PM

Gino Reda said Fehr will be talking to the media soon.. IMO this is a bad thing and there could be a setback to the negotiations?
  • 0
Posted Image

#2437 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 08 November 2012 - 04:44 PM

How would they do that? The cap is a percentage of the revenue. If revenues stay the same, and you go from 57% to 50%, the cap has to go down.


I have already explained it repeatedly . Im sure you will get it if you think about it for a moment.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2438 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,428 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 04:45 PM

^ we've got to pay for Burrows and Edler's new deals some how. That money HAS to come from Ballard/Malholtra.

Yeah but they don't need to buyout Ballard. I'ts a bad contract on this team but still fully tradeable. There are teams desperate for defensemen.

Isn't Malhotra's contract up this year? I don't even know if he'll play again after that, I'm secretly hoping he retires and takes on a coaching or scouting role with the Canucks.


Good point.

And I'm hoping we re-sign Manny, at somewhere around 900k - 1.5 next year. He's a great 4th line center, and can fill in in the top 9 without concern. Then he is a great guy and leader.

At a bit cheaper price, there's no way I wouldn't bring him back.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 08 November 2012 - 04:46 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#2439 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 04:46 PM

hmmm let's see, the players want 50/50 in 3 yrs, the league wants it in the first year ...


jeez, there MUST be some kind of middle ground here, but what could it be??
  • 0

#2440 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,428 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 04:47 PM

This is so exciting, they are finally negotiating, my only question is.. Where was this in August and September?? Was it really necessary to go through all the propaganda that we did to get here? I think not.
  • 2

zackass.png


#2441 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 08 November 2012 - 04:51 PM

hmmm let's see, the players want 50/50 in 3 yrs, the league wants it in the first year ...


jeez, there MUST be some kind of middle ground here, but what could it be??


The league wants concessions for it. In the end there is no way they are rolling back the cap and all these salaries . Its too complicated and its horrible public relations.

The NHLPA demand of having the cap go to 50% in three years is what I have been suggesting all along. Projecting revenue to meet the current salary cap at 50% within 3 years.

My bet is the union knows the NHL wont go through with this and the League knows that refusing to budge on it costs the players more salary eveyr single day there is a lock out.

Is all about getting concessions to keep the current salary cap
  • 0
Posted Image

#2442 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73,764 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:00 PM

The 1994-95 lockout ended on Jan. 11 and season started on Jan. 20. So there's a chance lockout can end soon with the way things have gone in the past 2 days or so.

We'll see.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2443 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,989 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:12 PM

Via SamJam RT - a THN hockey columnist is swirling the rumor that staff there have been told to get ready for a Dec 1st puck drop....looks more and more they'll be some sort of season....
  • 0

#2444 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73,764 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:13 PM

‏@reporterchris
Gary Bettman: “Every day that passes I think is critical for the game and our fans.”

@reporterchris
Donald Fehr: "I'm not going to characterize (talks) except to say that it's always better when you're meeting than when you're not."
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2445 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,117 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:32 PM

I have already explained it repeatedly . Im sure you will get it if you think about it for a moment.


Are you using Republican math? 50% is less than 57%. The cap is set because of the players' percentage. You can't lower their percentage but keep the cap the same. It's a mathematical impossibility.

Are you perhaps confused that "make whole" would not part of the cap, at least until the years it's paid out? Delaying payments on portions of salary for an indefinite amount of time is not the same as "keeping the cap the same."

Edited by poetica, 08 November 2012 - 06:40 PM.

  • 2
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2446 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,103 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:36 PM

I think any proposed deal based on anticipated increased revenue could be illusionary. The economy is headed for another downturn. Maybe this time the fans will be the ones who walk away. I am not suggesting a boycot I am simply saying the cost of tickets will exceed ability to pay.


Now you're an economist? The economy is improving and will for quite a while. Not that it matters. The NHL grew irrespective of the recession.
  • 0

Keswho.jpg


#2447 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,927 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:39 PM

Are you using Republican math? 50% is less than 57%. The cap is set because of the players' percentage. You can't lower their percentage but keep the cap the same. It's a mathematical impossibility.

Are you perhaps confused that "make whole" would not part of the cap, at least until the years it's paid out? Delaying payments on portions of salary for an indefinite amount of time is not the same as "keeping the cap the same."


Unfortunately he is republican from what I've gathered. In the election thread he went on about Christianity building the constitution. Anyways, I've found out the hard way he's not worth it.

----

Looks like talks have wrapped up, but both sides plan to meet tomorrow (Friday). Glad to see both sides aren't saying more than that to the media.
  • 0

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#2448 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,117 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:40 PM

the league had proposed "freezing" the cap for the first year at least in order to stop teams from dumping players all over the league.


True, sort of. Their last public proposal set the cap at 50% but would allow teams to spend up to what was the projected cap for next year for one year only. That will still only facilitate teams dumping players in order to get under the new cap, just with more time to make the deals. And, it wouldn't be a freezing of the cap as teams would only be required to spend to the new cap floor (based on the 50% players' share), meaning even with that rule in place players' share would drop in the first year.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2449 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,103 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:47 PM

hmmm let's see, the players want 50/50 in 3 yrs, the league wants it in the first year ...


jeez, there MUST be some kind of middle ground here, but what could it be??


There isn't middle ground so much as the NHL is losing. Sponsors are suing and the cost of those settlements goes up every day the puck isn't dropped. Molson is first but you can bet Bridgestone and many others will have their way with the NHL in the courts. Behind the scenes, this return to the table by the NHL is because NBC laid into Bettman.

Make Whole was basically saying "We'll give you 50% this year, then less than 50% in following years to pay for the contracts we signed in the summer". It was a flat out lie to call it 50/50. It's simply impossible to honour current contracts and go straight to 50%, the difference has to come from somewhere. Make Whole meant that difference came from future player share. By saying Make Whole was negotiable, the NHL was signalling it was willing to make a deal that phased in 50% because that is the only way to honour contracts.

Fehr has won. These talks are just the endgame.
  • 1

Keswho.jpg


#2450 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73,764 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:49 PM

League, union meet more than five hours and agree to meet again Friday:

NEW YORK — The best that can be said about the ongoing NHL labor negotiations is that they are still going, and will continue for at least a fourth straight day.


The league and the locked-out players’ association got back together today and accomplished enough over five-plus hours to make plans to meet again Friday.


“I am not going to discuss the negotiations or the substance of what we’re talking about,” NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said today on a wind-blown street corner. “I really don’t think that would be helpful to the process.


“We have work to do, and my hope is that we can achieve the goal of getting a long-term, fair agreement in place as quickly as possible so we can play hockey.”


Players’ association executive director Donald Fehr didn’t rule out talks stretching into the weekend, too.


“All I can tell you is we have been meeting, and we will be meeting again (Friday),” he said. “I can’t say more than that. We haven’t talked about (the weekend), but if there is something to talk about then I expect we will be.”


The lockout reached its 54th day, and this week is considered critical for the season to be saved. The work stoppage is threatening to force the second cancellation of an NHL season in seven years.


Even if an agreement is reached soon, it isn’t clear if any of this season’s games that have been called off through Nov. 30 can be rescheduled. The NHL has already said a full 82-game season won’t be played.


“Every day that passes, I think, is critical for the game and for our fans,” Bettman said.


During a second consecutive day of marathon negotiations Wednesday, the players’ association made an offer on revenue sharing, in which richer teams would help out poorer organizations, and another proposal regarding the “make-whole” provision that would guarantee full payment of all existing multiyear player contracts.


“There have been discussions over a wide range of topics,” Fehr said, while occupying the same location on the street that Bettman did. “We’re recessed for the night and we will be getting back together (Friday). I am not going to comment in the substance of the discussions.”


Fehr also declined to say if he felt progress was made in the latest long round of discussions at a Manhattan law firm — the location of the negotiations that had been kept secret until today.


“I am not going to characterize it except to say, as I have before, that its always better when you’re meeting than when you’re not,” he said.


Today’s discussions marked the fourth time in six days that face-to-face negotiations have taken place after both sides rejected proposals Oct. 18. The lockout, which began Sept. 16 after the collective bargaining agreement expired, has forced the cancellation of 327 regular-season games, including the New Year’s Day Winter Classic in Michigan.


It was unclear if the NHL made counterproposals to offers it received from the union on Wednesday. The belief is that the players’ association has agreed to a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenues, but that even division wouldn’t kick in until the third year of the deal.


“Collective bargaining is a process, and it has peaks and valleys and ebbs and flows,” Bettman said. “It is very tough to handicap.”


It was also difficult for the NHL and the union to keep the location of the talks hidden. Today it was revealed that negotiations were being conducted at the law offices of Proskauer Rose — the firm of NHL lead counsel Bob Batterman.


Revenue sharing and the make-whole provision are major hurdles in the way of making a deal. On Wednesday, the sides spent more than five hours dealing with the most contentious areas. Coupled with the more than seven hours they spent negotiating Tuesday, owners and players were together about 13 hours this week before reconvening today.


There is clearly still much to be done to work out the differences to reach a deal that will allow the already delayed and shortened season to begin.


Along with a handful of team owners, eight players attended Wednesday’s talks, five fewer than Tuesday. Pittsburgh Penguins captain Sidney Crosby and others left New York to try to avoid the impending snowstorm that hit the area, the union said.


Today, seven players were in attendance, according to the NHLPA, and at least three owners.


In October, the players’ association responded to an NHL offer with three of its own, but all of those were quickly dismissed by the league. That led to nearly three weeks without face-to-face discussions, although the parties kept in regular contact by phone.


Both sides have made proposals that included a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenues. The NHL has moved toward the players’ side in the “make-whole” provision and whose share of the economic pie that money will come from.


Along with the split of hockey-related revenue and other core economic issues, contract lengths, arbitration and free agency also must be agreed upon.


The union accepted a salary cap in the previous labor pact, which wasn’t reached until after the entire 2004-05 season was canceled because of a lockout. The union doesn’t want to absorb the majority of concessions this time after the NHL had record revenue that exceeded $3 billion last season.


http://www.nj.com/de..._medium=twitter

Well, at least they're meeting and will meet again tomorrow.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2451 goalie13

goalie13

    Osgoodian One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:55 PM

Well, at least they're meeting and will meet again tomorrow.


My other favourite part is that they have stopped fighting it out in the media.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2452 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,916 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:57 PM

Their idea of negotiation seems to be to extend and reject offers back and forth.

Instead of doing that, they should be finding a common ground and building off of it. All they're doing by constantly rejecting each others proposals is creating bad blood.

The key word of the CBA is collective, meaning both sides have to work together on an agreement. Somehow I don't see the NHL being humble enough to accept a deal put forth by the players. The only way this thing gets done is if the players accept a deal put forth by the owners.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#2453 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,103 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 08 November 2012 - 07:06 PM

Their idea of negotiation seems to be to extend and reject offers back and forth.

Instead of doing that, they should be finding a common ground and building off of it. All they're doing by constantly rejecting each others proposals is creating bad blood.

The key word of the CBA is collective, meaning both sides have to work together on an agreement. Somehow I don't see the NHL being humble enough to accept a deal put forth by the players. The only way this thing gets done is if the players accept a deal put forth by the owners.


See my last post. NHL aren't bargaining out of humility, they're over a barrel.
  • 0

Keswho.jpg


#2454 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,916 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 08 November 2012 - 07:14 PM

See my last post. NHL aren't bargaining out of humility, they're over a barrel.


I wouldn't be so sure about that. The NHL has already shown it doesn't care about fans or sponsors, otherwise it wouldn't have cancelled the winter classic.

Bettman and the owners will not come to an agreement unless they feel they've won.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#2455 theminister

theminister

    Head Troll

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,960 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 08 November 2012 - 08:07 PM

19 minutes ago

@aaronward_nhl: According to NHLPA source,and reported by @LouisJean_TVA,Union feels today's proposals were NOT rejected,rather countered.


  • 0

Posted ImageNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEPosted Image


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#2456 M A K A V E L I 96

M A K A V E L I 96

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,585 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 08 November 2012 - 09:06 PM

Posted Image
  • 2
Posted Image

#2457 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,103 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 08 November 2012 - 11:05 PM

Posted Image


French Connection is advertising in rinks now?
  • 0

Keswho.jpg


#2458 Mauii

Mauii

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Joined: 28-January 06

Posted 08 November 2012 - 11:59 PM

The NHL's thought process is truly perplexing and down right mind boggling...so they find themselves and put themselves in these financially detrimental situations be it the sunbelt teams or choosing to lock out players or signing players to contracts they can't afford and then expect everyone else be it the players to pay for their financial mistakes??? Who in their right mind would agree to that? They act with no accountability and then expect everyone else to pay for their mistakes/choices. Is this NHL's modus operandi for running a professional sports league? These matters were caused and created by the league and so should be resolved and handled internally by the league not the players. Get your 50/50 split but at the very least honor the contracts...and remember it was you who chose to lock out the players...the loss in revenue was again your doing, your problem and not the players. They need to be accountable for their choices, to do otherwise is just poor business practice/management. No wonder they haven't come to a deal because the NHLP is not about to pay for the NHL's financial mistakes...and the NHL is not about to look at the NHLP's proposal as it will highly unlikely include paying for NHL's financial mistakes. Until the NHL can accept responsibility for their own financial problems and take it off the table to be handled internally, then both parties can begin negotiating in good faith matters more relevant to the players, and not fixing the leagues financial woes, and come to a fair deal.

Edited by Mauii, 09 November 2012 - 12:42 AM.

  • 0
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."

#2459 goalie13

goalie13

    Osgoodian One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:08 AM

The NHL's thought process is truly perplexing and down right mind boggling...


You have to keep in mind some of the dynamic here. The NHL did not sign any of those players to their contracts. Individual teams do that. The only time the teams come together as a single entity is when they are trying to work out a new CBA. For all the remaining time, they are competitors.

This is why the situation is not as simple as some people want to make it out to be. There are several teams that can afford the kinds of contracts we have been seeing. There are several that cannot. But they all have to operate with the same CBA and they are all competing to win the same trophy.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2460 Mauii

Mauii

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Joined: 28-January 06

Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:36 AM

You have to keep in mind some of the dynamic here. The NHL did not sign any of those players to their contracts. Individual teams do that. The only time the teams come together as a single entity is when they are trying to work out a new CBA. For all the remaining time, they are competitors.

This is why the situation is not as simple as some people want to make it out to be. There are several teams that can afford the kinds of contracts we have been seeing. There are several that cannot. But they all have to operate with the same CBA and they are all competing to win the same trophy.


Again, all those internal problems ie. team revenue sharing, players contracts need to be resolved internally by the league and by the team itself...all the players need to be concerned about is that their contracts are honored and their percentage of HRR. As an employee all I know is I get paid a steady cheque, the company is not going to place the burden/responsibility of their financial problems and contract issues on me because it's not my responsibility, it's the company's. TBH I think the lock out was intended from the get go...perhaps as a cost saving strategy for the teams who didn't have the funds to pay the players and so I question if the CBA initially was negotiated in good faith, and to not even review, consider the NHLPA's proposal...a further delay tactic; however, the delay tactic is now effecting revenue, hence, the willingness to meet, however, but still and again expecting the players to pay for the NHL's financial problems and financial setbacks caused by the lock out initiated by the NHL. Why does the NHL feel they do not have to be accountable for any of their wrong doing?

Edited by Mauii, 09 November 2012 - 01:02 AM.

  • 0
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.