RippedOnNitro 22 Report post Posted August 30, 2012 Then both sides need to be part of this bailout. Players through lower payroll, owners through revenue sharing. I haven't heard anything about revenue sharing in NHL's proposal. Unfortunately the nhlpa stands on keeping the players at 57 per cent in the end... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ogreslayer 1,069 Report post Posted August 30, 2012 If they buy players out then they lose them so how would this help the teams salary cap situations when they would have to sign someone to replace them? Say the Wild have cap trouble, which they will cause they're currently a couple mil from the 70.2 mil cap, and they have no choice but to buy out a more expensive player or 2 to be cap compliant. Say Heatley and Gilbert, which wouldn't be that bad to get rid of anyways, but that shaves 11 mil off and now they are at 66 mil, they still need 2 roster spots filled with 2 mil remaining on their cap. The NHL's proposal wouldn't work for most teams that have already committed funds to the "already proposed cap" unless there's a salary roll back like last time. It's impossible to shave 12.2 mil without players current salaries taking the hit. just found this quote in the article provided: Well, perhaps the easiest way to look at this is in terms of the salary cap. If this deal proceeds as planned, then the 2012-13 cap would be $58 million. Which, by the way, if there’s no rollback of current salaries or other adjustments, would mean that 16 teams are over the proposed cap based on the current figures from Cap Geek. The Boston Bruins and Minnesota Wild are currently exceeding the proposed salary cap by more than $10 million. Pretty much says what i was getting at. The twist, evidently, in the NHL's latest proposal is that they're not asking for a salary rollback but instead increasing the amount of a player's salary that goes into escrow. So instead of the NHL saying "We're just going to shave 24% off the top like we did last time" it's more of a "We're going to withhold 24% more in safekeeping for you, you know like tax withholding, and you might actually see some of it back after the season. It's what the government does, right?" type of thing. If they're going to have that many teams over the new proposed cap, I wouldn't be too surprised if the cap hit turns into an actual dollars paid per season minus escrow amount in order to get the half of the league currently well over the proposed cap below it along w/ buy outs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sibiriak 84 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 Unfortunately the nhlpa stands on keeping the players at 57 per cent in the end... Read the NHLPA proposal again. Your statement is factually incorrect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ally 448 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 I agree that it's hard to sympathize with either side of a millionaires vs billionaires discussion, especially one that's threatening this hundredaires ability to watch the only sport I actually care about this season BUT 1. The billionaires don't entertain me all season so I like them less and 2. Didn't the players try to push back the expiration of this CBA in order to avoid another lockout? ideas: 1.lock them all in a room until they agree, jury-style. 2.take all the money that goes towards redesigning/ruining jerseys and use that to settle everything? 1 Z Winged Dangler reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RippedOnNitro 22 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 (edited) Read the NHLPA proposal again. Your statement is factually incorrect. This is where I got the info from: http://www.canada.com/news/NHLPA+tables+offer+league+says+players+willing+accept+less/7089103/story.html "The proposal includes delinking the salary cap from hockey-related revenue and setting a fixed rate -- increasing by two per cent for the first year, four per cent for the second and six per cent for the third. Afterwards, the players would hold an option to have the fourth year revert back to the current system, where they are entitled to receive 57 per cent of all revenues." Edited August 31, 2012 by RippedOnNitro Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RippedOnNitro 22 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 We will wait and see if NHLPA is going to drop their demands as well in regards of their first offer. At least the NHL is flexible according to NHL.com (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=640748) "We're not married to the structure, so if it's a good proposal [from the Union] and takes a different route, we're open to that," Daly said." "The NHL is planning to take time to analyze the Union's proposal, and it is possible the sides continue to negotiate through the holiday weekend." <-- they better be!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Z Winged Dangler 2,082 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 The twist, evidently, in the NHL's latest proposal is that they're not asking for a salary rollback but instead increasing the amount of a player's salary that goes into escrow. So instead of the NHL saying "We're just going to shave 24% off the top like we did last time" it's more of a "We're going to withhold 24% more in safekeeping for you, you know like tax withholding, and you might actually see some of it back after the season. It's what the government does, right?" type of thing. If they're going to have that many teams over the new proposed cap, I wouldn't be too surprised if the cap hit turns into an actual dollars paid per season minus escrow amount in order to get the half of the league currently well over the proposed cap below it along w/ buy outs. the NHL and NHLPA need to simplify the CBA. It's way more technical than it needs to be. Roll back all salaries 10% Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 The twist, evidently, in the NHL's latest proposal is that they're not asking for a salary rollback but instead increasing the amount of a player's salary that goes into escrow. So instead of the NHL saying "We're just going to shave 24% off the top like we did last time" it's more of a "We're going to withhold 24% more in safekeeping for you, you know like tax withholding, and you might actually see some of it back after the season. It's what the government does, right?" type of thing. If they're going to have that many teams over the new proposed cap, I wouldn't be too surprised if the cap hit turns into an actual dollars paid per season minus escrow amount in order to get the half of the league currently well over the proposed cap below it along w/ buy outs. Isn't that basically rolling the salary back without calling it a rollback? Either way the players end up with less money than the value of the contracts they signed with the league. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladdy16 2,154 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 Dan Rosen @drosennhl The NHLPA negotiating team has arrived for today's meeting. Henrik Zetterberg and Ron Hainsey are the players in attendance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 Dan Rosen @drosennhl The NHLPA negotiating team has arrived for today's meeting. Henrik Zetterberg and Ron Hainsey are the players in attendance. This just in: Zetterberg finalizes CBA deal. Zetteberg's beard named new NHL commissioner. 6 55fan, Z Winged Dangler, Ally and 3 others reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
puckloo39 5,686 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 Z has more hockey soul in one beard follicle than Bettman has in all of the sparse foliage on his noggin. 3 Z Winged Dangler, 55fan and pazzloski reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chances14 227 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 like darren dreger mentioned on twitter. the real negotiations won't begin until september 10, right before the cba expires. it always takes right down to crunch time for these guys to get serious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladdy16 2,154 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 George Malik has coined my new favorite term - "TaliBettman." LOVE IT! Everything about this offseason has been, well, off. Signings taking forever, CBA talks moving along like a rookie trying to learn how to drive a clutch. Can't take a whole lot more. 1 Z Winged Dangler reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted August 31, 2012 From Sportsnet: Don Fehr says that collective bargaining talks with the league are "recessed." The executive director of the NHL Players' Association said the NHL requested the hiatus after the union presented its latest proposal. ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted September 1, 2012 From Sportsnet: It's like if someone farts in a negotiation meeting both sides have to take a break for the day. Actually, that I would kind of understand, but you know what I meant. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sibiriak 84 Report post Posted September 1, 2012 If you want to get technical, it is only an option for the union. Even if they exercise it, their average share for the life of the new CBA will certainly be lower than 57%. Also, the definition of the hockey related revenue is being changed, so the players would get 57% of the lesser total, which would be a defacto decrease in salary. Not to mention the fact, that the current system was put in place by the NHL, who used the last lockout to roll over the players union and force them to accept this CBA. If you listened to Bettman speeches then, the expiring CBA was going to set he economic house of hockey in order. And now the system they devised is suddenly favoring the players? FYI, average share of wages, salaries etc. in all the other industries of American economy is near 70%. So the owners are already getting a good deal. What it amounts to is that the league appears to try to shake down the players at the end of each CBA period for as much as they can get away with. And lock them out if they resist. Rinse, lather, repeat every 4-5 years. Personally, I resent their bully tactics that result in my loss of enjoyment of my favorite sport. 5 Barrie, frankgrimes, Pskov Wings Fan and 2 others reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotty99 302 Report post Posted September 1, 2012 #nolockout 9 puckloo39, WizardOfOz30, Cloune and 6 others reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GunnarStahl 39 Report post Posted September 1, 2012 ^That video is incredible, I hope it goes viral. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
puckloo39 5,686 Report post Posted September 1, 2012 I cried through the last half of that video. The beautiful game...indeed. I hope and pray daily that they settle their differences and the boys, united, take the ice this season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted September 2, 2012 The new proposal is just another way for the dwarf to say screw you. Does this moron really believe Fehr would stupid enough to not see the rollback? I am starting to think some owners gave out these huge contracts expecting the players to take less again. They won't roll over this time Europe would be more than happy to welcome them back. We need a new commiSsioner asap. Owners should be embarassed by this offer. Sent from my BlackBerry 1 Z Winged Dangler reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ally 448 Report post Posted September 2, 2012 Cried and then tweeted that video. I know that even if it goes viral it probably won't change anything but it was really well made. 1 55fan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RusDRW 155 Report post Posted September 2, 2012 #nolockout [media] [/media] made with a lot of skill but still lame in its spirit. There are few guys running this league and giving players their contracts. They will do whatever they want. Players must be pleased that they were not offered 20-80 revenew share with strict cap at 40M. And those thinking that these are indeed fans bringing all these money to the owners, think again. If you're a fan you'll buy their product irrespective of how long it takes to get the season running simply because hockey is a unique sport. If you don't care about hockey you don't even know that there is a chance of lockout. Uniting and the rest of bla-bla-bla only matters for NHLPA bosses whose main aim is to get their salaries and not look pathetic in the process. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted September 2, 2012 In the beady eyes of Uncle Gary, the fans don't matter. He's using the same script that he used the last time. 1 haroldsnepsts reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
55fan 5,133 Report post Posted September 2, 2012 In the event that there is a lockout, would the Detroit-Toronto Winter Classic be postponed until next season, or would they choose two new teams? It would make sense to go with the teams they've chosen, but it would also make sense to not have a lock out, so there you go... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites