Lockout/CBA Discussion Thread

[BlueNGold]

10 seasons before a player can become a UFA? WTF?

[jyoung]

If true, that offer is horrible.

Gonna' be a long lockout.

[DJ]

Quote: Originally Posted by jyoung

If true, that offer is horrible. Gonna' be a long lockout.

The owners must want this sport to die. That offer is so bad, the only thing it is going to accomplish is angering the NHLPA, and then, look out.

I am a fan of the sport, love attending games live, but reading crap like this just infuriates me. The NHL should be on its hands and knees, thanking fans for coming back to the sport after the last Lockout.

Any type of labor strife is the absolute last thing the NHL needs, yet, the owners seem hell-bent on causing just that, yet again.

Baseball learned its lesson after the last strike. Football managed to avoid catastrophe and solved its labor issues.

If, and this is a big if, another season is lost due to stupidity, I will not come back to the sport.

[VanCitySportsGuy]

I wonder if Fehr asked Bettman if he was joking after that first offer? I knew the NHL wouldn't offer anything decent in their first proposal but that offer is insulting.

How can you brag about how much money the NHL is making and than offer something like that?

The whole 5 year max contract length doesn't make any sense when you consider at least 1/3rd of the teams have offered a contract that has been at least 10 years.

Based on what Bettman has been telling the public (record revenues/overall health of the game), I don't see why there should be any major changes in the CBA. I would only tweak the welfare payments and make teams like the Leafs/Canucks/Wings/Rangers/Flyers/Habs/Bruins/Caps/Penguins/Blackhawks give more money to lower revenue teams and close the cap-hit loophole on long term contracts.

One thing that I haven't seen discussed anywhere is that the National TV deals in Canada are set to expire soon and the NHL is going to get big increase in rights fees.

[mercalnd]

Quote: Originally Posted by VanCitySportsGuy

The whole 5 year max contract length doesn't make any sense when you consider at least 1/3rd of the teams have offered a contract that has been at least 10 years.

They're trying to close the loophole allowing teams to offer long contracts with the last years at a much lower salary to lower the cap hit that are essentially being used to circumvent the cap. However, they could achieve that by simply saying you cannot have more than say a 20% variation in salary between any 2 years of the same contract.

[VanCitySportsGuy]

Quote: Originally Posted by mercalnd

They're trying to close the loophole allowing teams to offer long contracts with the last years at a much lower salary to lower the cap hit that are essentially being used to circumvent the cap. However, they could achieve that by simply saying you cannot have more than say a 20% variation in salary between any 2 years of the same contract.

The %20 rule is a possible solution but I don't see it as a major problem for the league in the first place. Why would the Owners/GM's want to close the loophole? If you're a GM, isn't being able to "circumvent the cap" a good thing?

[Suntan Superman]

Quote: Originally Posted by VanCitySportsGuy

The %20 rule is a possible solution but I don't see it as a major problem for the league in the first place. Why would the Owners/GM's want to close the loophole? If you're a GM, isn't being able to "circumvent the cap" a good thing?

But the question is if it's in the spirit of the game.

[JJLinn]

The only one of those things I agree with is the contract limit, but I'd make the max either 6 or 7 years.

[Money99]

No need to panic just yet.
This is only the first offer, and both sides know that if you want half of something you initially ask for all of it.
The owners would be absolutely ecstatic if they could get a 50/50 split so I expect the players to eventually come down from 57% to 53, which the owners would be happy for.

The PA will eventually counter with something as equally ridiculous, but near the end, they will meet in the middle on most of the pressing matters.

I still wouldn't be surprised if the season didn't begin until Decemeber 1st and while that would stink for us diehards, I have a sneaking suspicion that a great majority of fans wouldn't care because a lot of them are busy paying attention to the NFL, MLB playoffs and the start of the NBA season from October through November.

[Cletus]

Quote: Originally Posted by Money99

No need to panic just yet. This is only the first offer, and both sides know that if you want half of something you initially ask for all of it. The owners would be absolutely ecstatic if they could get a 50/50 split so I expect the players to eventually come down from 57% to 53, which the owners would be happy for. The PA will eventually counter with something as equally ridiculous, but near the end, they will meet in the middle on most of the pressing matters. I still wouldn't be surprised if the season didn't begin until Decemeber 1st and while that would stink for us diehards, I have a sneaking suspicion that a great majority of fans wouldn't care because a lot of them are busy paying attention to the NFL, MLB playoffs and the start of the NBA season from October through November.

That's how I feel about this. It's way too early to jump off the ledge. If the season doesn't start until December you have a couple of months to support local teams. That's what I will do, most likely.