I have to agree with you. Negotiating a CBA involves taking the best proposals from each side and taking small steps forward and meeting in the middle somewhere. As has been said in this thread, two sides whom have a good rapport with each other could hammer out a CBA in 2 hours. Fehr went down on his initial proposal, the NHL did not.
Now you mention that Fehr has went down on each and every proposal since the initial one, to which I am going to call you out on because there has been no evidence that Fehr has done that. There has been plenty of discussion on the initial proposals, but each subsequent proposal has not been shared in the level of depth that would bring me to conclude what you are saying. I asked for some sources from you, which you have not been able to reveal. Hell, it would be nice to hear about the subsequent proposals from the NHL as well because I have heard the NHL has come down from their unfair initial proposals with each subsequent proposal. I don't know if that is true or not though, as nothing has been revealed in the press.
One thing is certain, the NHLPA has a much more fair proposal initially. The NHL has got to back down from these crazy demands and offer something that is much more fair. Meet in the middle so to speak.
Ok, I call bullcrap on that. Bargaining is all about ping pong. The NHL said it gave ground in one of its counterproposals, to which I don't know if that is true or not. But, if true, why isn't the NHLPA giving ground? Or, is the problem more likely a disconnect or lack of trust?
I think another full season is a possibility. Both sides have got to work together to make it happen. So far, I just don't get the impression that they want to work together.
FYI: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=405739 is the PAs second (and most recent) proposal. Details of the first were never all that clear, but it seems the first three years were very similar (maybe identical), but the first had a 4th year at 57% instead of the two years described in that link.
The owners initial offer was well documented, their second was reportedly mostly the same, but changed the players share to 46%. Their last offer has few details, other than it was "simplified". Revenue split is also given in the link above. However, according to Bettman, that offer was taken off the table when the lockout started so the details don't really matter.
The PA has made two proposals. The 2nd was around ~2% less than the first. (Hard to say for sure, since the players are asking for a set $ amount rather than a set %. The % will depend on actual growth.)
The owners have made 3 proposals. The last around 5% higher than the first, though really it was the only one that was at least somewhat realistic. Also, it is supposed to be off the table now.
- haroldsnepsts likes this