Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


Recommended Posts

So my question is this:

If the NHLPA files its disclaimer of Interest...

does that free up the league to impose a CBA on itself and any employees that want to come to work?

I mean if the union disolves...there is no group to Collectively bargain with...and at that point can not the league merely reignite the season, tell every player with a contract under the former CBA they are welcome back at work and then simply fire the top 100 paid guys.

it would be a decade before that even went to court, meanwhile the other 600 players would get to work pretty fast and the 100 individuals could be bargained with one on one and see if they can fit under the new league Agreement.

SOmething like this is possible is it not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My other thought is that since they have already basically agreed to keep the cap at 70m this half season that is left and prorate it...why not agree to play out the season under the previous CBA thus buying time, half a year, to finish closing the gap on the new one?

Is this unreasonable for some reason I do not see? If the money is the same why not get it out of the way...now that teams know they can't blow money like a sailor in port for a three day shore leave and that there will be a 60m cap next year, with some kind of make whole provision...to me it would be good to get the half season going and maybe see some trades of salary going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently PA has made a huge concession which IMO they would have had to do, other wise there would not be a season.

They are not asking for limit on Escrow anymore, which means the PA has abandoned it's attempt to de-couple from the 50% share of HRR.

Renaud Lavoie

45]

https://twitter.com/RenLavoieRDS' rel="external nofollow">
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am all for helping the small teams out with a lower cap, even if it means our team being dismantled. Parity = more exciting hockey. Besides, let's be honest here.. the Canucks aren't winning anything. We more or less stood still while other teams got better. We will still have more high end talent than most on the team. If anything, taking away from other teams might help us out more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am all for helping the small teams out with a lower cap, even if it means our team being dismantled. Parity = more exciting hockey. Besides, let's be honest here.. the Canucks aren't winning anything. We more or less stood still while other teams got better. We will still have more high end talent than most on the team. If anything, taking away from other teams might help us out more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me too, Only thing a $60 mill cap vs $65 mill cap does is create more parity. Players and owners will still get 50/50. I don't care if MG has to get rid of Ballard and Booth. Those players will help out another team more than they help VAN and it will add to my viewing pleasure.

I'm all for parity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A

tintin_normal.jpg

Frank Krulicki@krufrank

NHL has agreed to 2 amnesty buy-outs. NHLPA wants $65M capnext season and not asking for cap on escrow. I tell you - they are darn close

Frank Krulicki@krufrank

NHL also apparently agreed to NHLPA's request of 20% contract variance in light of NHLPA agreeing to 6 year max on contracts (7 for own UFA)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...