JLumme Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 so this would be the 3rd lock-out in his time and he will probably still keep his job. Expanding the NHL was the only good thing that I'm aware of that he's done. Lets just hope the NHL agree's with the counter proposal...I doubt it though :S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Who was offering long term front loaded contracts? Owners and GM's. Who makes crazy RFA contract offers and drives up salaries? Again Owners and GM's Who decided to go to places like Phoenix and water down the league? Owners and Bettman. Not one of the current problems was created by the players. And who in the end pays the freight? The Fans. Who gets screwed by having a lockout. Once again...the fans. And Gary deserves support because? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Who was offering long term front loaded contracts? Owners and GM's. Who makes crazy RFA contract offers and drives up salaries? Again Owners and GM's Who decided to go to places like Phoenix and water down the league? Owners and Bettman. Not one of the current problems was created by the players. And who in the end pays the freight? The Fans. Who gets screwed by having a lockout. Once again...the Canadian fans. And Gary deserves support because? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Would've read that if it wasn't written by Spector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prngr44 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 If what I heard was right, players are at 57% right now. Owners/league wants to bring it down to 43%. Every other league is currently 50/50, but the players won't even wanna drop the 7% to get to 50/50, let alone 43%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Wait so that means that the CHL will play for the Stanley Cup next season if there is a lockout? Since in 2006 they said the cup can be win by the highest level of hockey in CANADA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canacks1970 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Nothing wrong with Bettman's stance IMO. The CBA has some loopholes that need to be closed, ie: cap circumvention. The revenue sharing needs to be revised to match other leagues. It needs to be at least 50/50. If there needs to be a lockout then so be it. At least the league will be healthier going forward. I can take a couple of months delay in start to the season in exchange for long-term health of the NHL. The only way to really put pressure on the players and let them know the league is serious is by threatening and following thru with a lockout. Nothing will get their attention like a few missed pay cheques. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaku Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Bettman the reason there has been 3 lockouts in the last 18 years. What a friggen clown. This guy is the biggest joke in the history of hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Yes the players would prefer to play under the old CBA. And yes the players will push the owners to lock them out because they will refuse to sign on for what the owners are offering. It is very simple. It is the players' decision to be locked out. It is NOT their first choice of course, but it is their decision. Accept the NHL offer or anything close to it and there is no lock out. Refuse and you are locked out. What is so hard to understand here? (and the escrow has nothing to do with this whatsoever) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neufy161 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I'm just trying to understand the logistics of this a bit better. Assuming the NHL and NHLPA split 50% When a team makes its revenue they put them all in the middle give the NHLPA 50% Then split their 50% amongst 30 teams, then pay there expenses? Does the NHLPA pay the players salarys with there 50% or is that an expense the NHL owners are paying with their share of their revenues 1.67% of total revenues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neufy161 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 They should add into this CBA that negotiations will commence in the summer 1 year before the CBA expires. Clearly 3 month's isn't enough time, you would think they would have figured this out by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I'm just trying to understand the logistics of this a bit better. Assuming the NHL and NHLPA split 50% When a team makes its revenue they put them all in the middle give the NHLPA 50% Then split their 50% amongst 30 teams, then pay there expenses? Does the NHLPA pay the players salarys with there 50% or is that an expense the NHL owners are paying with their share of their revenues 1.67% of total revenues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 No hockey until after Christmas is my bet. This is going to be terrible for the southern teams who have enough of a tough time keeping fans. I guess we also have another 6 months to trade Luongo though! Two lockouts in a short period is a joke, I think the owners will find a lot less sympathy than they did last time. The players entirely caved last time and gave the owner's "cost certainty"... now they are saying that what they had asked for last time wasn't really good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neufy161 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 The 50% or whatever it ends up being is calculated by the combined salaries of all the NHL players or at least the allowable amount ie the Cap. So lets stick with the 50-50 share. if the Salary Cap is say $70,000,000 we would times that by 30 teams = 2.1 Billion meaning the total league revenue was 4.2 Billion. From the owners 2.1 Billion that they make they would still have to pay for operating costs like advertising, travel expenses etc. where the players 2.1 Billion would still have to go pay income tax etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neufy161 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 DP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 So currently the NHLPA makes 57% and the NHL is trying to cut that down to 43%. Hypothetically speaking, lets say this happened before last season. Does this mean that players salary's will be readjusted to fit the new Cap? If the Cap last season was 64.3 million, then it would have been rolled back to 50.8 million and a player making $1,000,000 that year before would have been readjusted to make $760,000? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Nothing wrong with Bettman's stance IMO. The CBA has some loopholes that need to be closed, ie: cap circumvention. The revenue sharing needs to be revised to match other leagues. It needs to be at least 50/50. If there needs to be a lockout then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neufy161 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 The 50% or whatever it ends up being is calculated by the combined salaries of all the NHL players or at least the allowable amount ie the Cap. So lets stick with the 50-50 share. if the Salary Cap is say $70,000,000 we would times that by 30 teams = 2.1 Billion meaning the total league revenue was 4.2 Billion. From the owners 2.1 Billion that they make they would still have to pay for operating costs like advertising, travel expenses etc. where the players 2.1 Billion would still have to go pay income tax etc. As a note the NHLPA does not actually make money from the revenue of the NHL but rather the fees and stuff associated with being a member of the Union which all player pay into (They are paid by their respective teams not the NHLPA), and the % of player income and fines levied by the league ect that is held in escrow for the player should there be a lockout or strike. So that they have some money rather than having potentially no work income for the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted August 10, 2012 Author Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hainsey: New CBA can “absolutely” be reached by Sept. 15: Members of the NHLPA’s negotiating committee continue to preach optimism regarding a new collective bargaining agreement. On Friday, Winnipeg Jets defenseman Ron Hainsey spoke on behalf of the committee and sounded confident a deal could be reached by Sept. 15 — the date when the current CBA expires. More, from ESPN’s Katie Strang: Hainsey just spoke on behalf of NHLPA, said he “absolutely” thinks a new deal can be done by September 15. NHL Deputy commissioner Bill Daly also “optimistic” a deal can get done but admits it will require a lot of “hard work.” Yesterday, Hainsey’s fellow committee member — Tampa Bay forward B.J. Crombeen — expressed a similar level of optimism regarding CBA talks. Crombeen told the St. Petersburg Times he’s hopeful the NHLPA’s counter proposal, to be presented on Tuesday, will go a long way in getting a new CBA. “Our proposal is a good proposal,” he said. “With our proposal we feel we’ll be closer to getting that agreement done.” Yesterday, Bettman said owners wouldn’t play another year under the current collective bargaining agreement, eschewing NHLPA boss Donald Fehr”s remarks that play could continue under the existing CBA while the two parties worked on a new deal. Translation: No deal by Sept. 15? Lockout. Crombeen said Bettman’s comments were “something you don’t want to hear,” but was “confident there’s still a lot of time left to get a deal done.” Of note: Friday’s meetings dealt primarily with hockey-related issues, according to Strang. Among the topics discussed were supplementary discipline, travel and ice conditions. http://prohockeytalk...hed-by-sept-15/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted August 10, 2012 Author Share Posted August 10, 2012 Mitchell to NHL - 'We Will Dig In': Former Canuck Willie Mitchell is bringing home the Stanley Cup to Port McNeill this weekend...and also may have launched the first public volley against the NHL on CKNW. Speaking to David Pratt in an interview that you can hear on Sportstalk tonight, Mitchell gives us the first real indication that despite all of the public smiles and good will by the NHL Player's Association, there probably will not be hockey in October. Among many topics discussed, Mitchell indicated the players will dig in on this negotiation as they gave up everything in the last CBA. Mitchell reiterated that the players want to play hockey in the fall, but will not be pushed around. You can hear the entire Mitchell interview tonight on Sportstalk with David Pratt beginning at 9:05 PM. http://www.cknw.com/Channels/Reg/SportsLocal/Story.aspx?ID=1754364 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.