Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

New CBA or Lockout? "All things CBA"

Recommended Posts

Seems like a shot right across the bow of the NHLPA.

I think you have to admit its a heck of an opening salvo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a negotiation. I don't see any reason to be surprised the owners started high, knowing they will likely settle for something more reasonable, like:

1. Reduce players' hockey-related revenues to 46% from 57 %.

Owners are shooting for 50%, like in the NBA, NFL, ends up ~ 52-53%

2. 10 seasons in the NHL before being eligible for unrestricted free agency.

Owners like 7 or 8

3. Contracts limited to 5 years.

Owners settle for 7-8 years

4. No more salary arbitration.

Don't know about this one, maybe they don't like some of the process as it now occurs?

5. Entry-level contract are 5 years long instead of 3

Owners shooting for 4

Except for #4, all this can be negotiated, depending on how much push back we see from Fehr and the players association. Too early to jump off the bridge yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a negotiation. I don't see any reason to be surprised the owners started high, knowing they will likely settle for something more reasonable, like:

1. Reduce players' hockey-related revenues to 46% from 57 %.

Owners are shooting for 50%, like in the NBA, NFL, ends up ~ 52-53%

2. 10 seasons in the NHL before being eligible for unrestricted free agency.

Owners like 7 or 8

3. Contracts limited to 5 years.

Owners settle for 7-8 years

4. No more salary arbitration.

Don't know about this one, maybe they don't like some of the process as it now occurs?

5. Entry-level contract are 5 years long instead of 3

Owners shooting for 4

Except for #4, all this can be negotiated, depending on how much push back we see from Fehr and the players association. Too early to jump off the bridge yet.

You're right and you have to belief Fehr knows this too. So I'm sure there was no "real" NHLPA sticker shock with the proposal.

Not mentioned on the proposed list is associated with #4. No bonuses and salary is spread equally over the contract (ie: no front loading contracts and no mega signing bonuses).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd expect Fehr to take an equally extreme initial position. Don't be alarmed when you hear "I suggest the players immediately plan for the possibility of an extended period without playing the game they love." (or something like that to suggest an emphatic NO to the Owners).

Just positioning, but a necessary statement.

Edited by Manwolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam Proteau@Proteautype Many of the people telling all of you to relax over owners' offer are like Titanic passengers who stayed optimistic as the ship sunk.

That's just an absolutely ridiculous statement and I guess he's banking on some readers falling for that kind of drama, which I am sure some will.

He seems to have a short memory, because this time the NHLPA and owners aren't negotiating a salary cap, which was the most immediate cause of the last lockout.

All this is going to depend on what hard-line stance or non-starters the NHLPA will put on the owners initial provisions.

I would bet we see continuation of the current CBA going forward while negotiation continue before we see a season-long lockout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just an absolutely ridiculous statement and I guess he's banking on some readers falling for that kind of drama, which I am sure some will.

He seems to have a short memory, because this time the NHLPA and owners aren't negotiating a salary cap, which was the most immediate cause of the last lockout.

All this is going to depend on what hard-line stance or non-starters the NHLPA will put on the owners initial provisions.

I would bet we see continuation of the current CBA going forward while negotiation continue before we see a season-long lockout.

That could be but I didn't get that impression from the other tweets. I know it is to early to jump to that kind of conclusion but IMO the NHL just set the negotiating bar very high. There are probable a couple of the conditions that will be conceded by the owners to gain others. But if there are one or two of these terms that the owners are inflexible on it could b a very tough negotiation. IMO this isn't a good faith negotiating proposal but a hard line proposal that has just set the tone of the meetings.

Plenty of time to work it out and both sides have the negotiators to do it. The question is will they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's way too early to start comparing the situation to the Titanic disaster when the NHLPA hasn't even responded yet to the initial demands of the owners.

Some of these wishes as outlined by the owners could certainly benefit the smaller market teams, even after some concessions are made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's way too early to start comparing the situation to the Titanic disaster when the NHLPA hasn't even responded yet to the initial demands of the owners.

Some of these wishes as outlined by the owners could certainly benefit the smaller market teams, even after some concessions are made.

Alright I have taken the life vest off but I haven't stowed it away yet. It will be interesting to learn what NHLPA counters with. There is no question that player contracts need to be brought back in line. The money being thrown around this off-season in mind boggling. Small market teams won't be able to keep up. Limiting contract length is a way to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone notice that some of the rising stars were in attendance at the last meeting. Our own Jeff Skinner was there.

If second contracts coming off entry level deals start to get out of hand like some of these latest UFA contracts small market teams are in trouble.

Maybe it's no coincidence Skinner and other young stars like him showed up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all going to boil down to the money for the main sticking point. The owners threw out the 46%, knowing that they will meet somewhere in the middle. If they started at the 50% that they really want, they know that they would end up about 53 or 54 as a settlement. I'd say that if they can come to an agreement on that, the rest will fall in line.

For the salaries, what I see them doing is agreeing to a lower percentage for the cap, but freezing it as-is until the percentage and the cap meet. That way, they don't lose anything now. I think the salary floor will be changed to be a percentage of the cap and not the cap minus $16M. Revenue is going to increase. The owners could live with a reduction to about 52% of revenue but freezing the cap until the two meet. I think the players could swallow a deal like that.

The question to me is, what are the players going to ask for? If they are going to give up anything, they are going to be looking for something in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renaud P Lavoie ‏@RenLavoieRDS

NHL proposal to players: 1-reduce players hockey related revenues to 46% from 57 %. 2-10 seasons in NHL before being UFA.

Renaud P Lavoie ‏@RenLavoieRDS

3-contracts limites to 5 years 4-no more salary arbitration. 5- entry-level contract 5 years instead of 3.

I understand starting off with something high, but the start off with this? shakeshead.gif A reaction from one of the agents:

Proteautype 7:34pm via Twitter for iPhone

"The moment the proposal was presented, every player in the room knew Gary had just written off 1st 3 months of the season." - an NHL agent

Also, looks like there will eventually be a lot of firesales if the NHL is determined to keep the cap within this range:

Larry Brooks ‏@NYP_BrooksiePost has learned proposal calls for ceiling to be set $4M above midpoint, floor $8M under

I hope that we don't lose any games this season, but knowing how Bettman and Fehr love to be greedy, the best deal for both sides probably won't be reached until games have been lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i will be royally pissed if any time is lost, think of us fans too, settle the darn thing, before season starts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel as though the media heads are trying to make this bigger than it currently is. You don't walk into negotiations with what you want knowing darn well their going to come back with less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel as though the media heads are trying to make this bigger than it currently is. You don't walk into negotiations with what you want knowing darn well their going to come back with less.

You also don't overshoot with a proposal like that (which is surely insulting to the NHLPA.) It's like reaching for the moon, but grabbing the stars, and it's going to set the tone for the rest of the negotiations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget the realignment for Winnipeg, and the ownership problems in Jersey and Phoneix. these may have a big impact on the CBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posting so Winger's post shows up, but also going to mention what the NHLPA could do.

They could change the goal posts persay.

1- Eliminate the cap.

2- 100% revenue sharing between teams.

3- Expand by 6 teams (3 in Canada' date=' 3 in US)

4- 2 Year ELC straight to UFA

5- Player representation on Competition Comittee, Player Safety Rulings...etc[/quote']

That'd be a bit drastic, but at the same time I can't help but feel the NHLPA will respond with a proposal just as childish as the NHL's, so why not toss things onto the table that owners don't want there?

Edited by Blinding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You also don't overshoot with a proposal like that (which is surely insulting to the NHLPA.) It's like reaching for the moon, but grabbing the stars, and it's going to set the tone for the rest of the negotiations.

Oh I bet it did insult the players but I doubt it insulted any lawyers who are actually doing the talking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i will be royally pissed if any time is lost, think of us fans too, settle the darn thing, before season starts

have to agree. with the lousy economy both the players and the owners must realize that a lockout/strike will really alienate the fan base

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I bet it did insult the players but I doubt it insulted any lawyers who are actually doing the talking.

I was the under the impression that actual NHL staff, GMs, NHLPA staff, and players were meeting for the negotiations, mostly because of this article on NHL.com:

The NHL was represented Tuesday by Bettman, Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly, Senior Vice President of Player Safety and Hockey Operations Brendan Shanahan, Boston Bruins Owner and Governor Jeremy Jacobs, Minnesota Wild Owner and Governor Craig Leipold, and Calgary Flames Chairman and Governor Murray Edwards, as well as counsel.

The NHLPA was represented by Fehr, Mathieu Schneider, who is the special assistant to the executive director, and legal counsel. The players in attendance were David Backes (St. Louis), Brad Boyes (New York Islanders), Chris Campoli, B.J. Crombeen (Tampa Bay), Mathieu Darche, Manny Malhotra (Vancouver), Steve Montador (Chicago), Jeff Skinner (Carolina), Jason Spezza (Ottawa), Kevin Westgarth (Los Angeles) and Daniel Winnik. Campoli, Darche and Winnik are all unrestricted free agents.

While lawyers have to absolutely be involved in something like this, I was under the impression that it was an actual meeting between the two sides as opposed to just lawyers getting together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think these peoples backgrounds are?

Sure some players are involved but they arent doing the talking.

Edited by legend-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think these peoples backgrounds are?

Sure some players are involved but they arent doing the talking.

Then what's the point to bringing them out there? Obviously they have some role in the negotiations, which means they're giving some form of input at these meetings, regardless of if they're the ones doing the "talking." Add on top that one side is representing team owners and the other representing players and it's not hard to see where a starting proposal like that might cause things to get sour very quickly, if they aren't already. The last thing you want to see as a fan when there's potential lockout or season delay talks going on about surrounding the new CBA is the NHL making an absurd proposal like that, just because of how a few key CBA negotiations went in the past and the personnel involved on both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, reality check:

@DarrenDreger: NHL's initial proposal is just that...the 1st proposal. Players knew it would be heavily one-sided. PA will counter and negotiation starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all the "news" media does now: over-sensationalize stuff to get ratings. Everything is overhyped. I honestly do not believe there will be a lockout. I think both sides know a lockout will kill any momentum the NHL has gained as a popular sport in the US, where the largest viewership is. Canadian sport or not, the NHL needs US dollars and viewers to keep everything afloat, and lockout will harm that a great deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all the "news" media does now: over-sensationalize stuff to get ratings. Everything is overhyped. I honestly do not believe there will be a lockout. I think both sides know a lockout will kill any momentum the NHL has gained as a popular sport in the US, where the largest viewership is. Canadian sport or not, the NHL needs US dollars and viewers to keep everything afloat, and lockout will harm that a great deal.

I tend to agree. Negotiations started early enough that these issues can be ironed out. Its safe to say that players and management don't want to lose any games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...