Jump to content

CBA Negotiations Thread


Guest AJgoal
 Share

Recommended Posts

With the NHL making its first official pitch to the NHLPA, figured I would start up a thread to put all the new CBA stuff in as it becomes known.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=400580

Few quick hits about this offer: Players would get 46% of hockey related revenue, as opposed to the current 57%.

Contracts limited to 5 years

10 years before players become UFAs.

Bob McKenzie seems to think there will be a work stoppage, though the length is debateable. I'm not going to copy all the tweets, but if you look at the ones from 7/13, he talks a bit about the cba offer.

http://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what makes me laugh, the owners want shorter contract lengths. which i agree with but whats with all the 10yr contracts from these very same owners.

It's like a crack addict telling his dealer 'don't sell to me, I'm trying to kick'.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like a crack addict telling his dealer 'don't sell to me, I'm trying to kick'.....

exactly its like asking for one rock for the road. umm better make it 2. another part of this i'm a little confused on. max 5 year contracts. (Check) 10yrs NHL service before UFA (Check). but i read they want to get rid of RFA (This part i'm a little hazy on)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

kind of a joke they propose dropping the revenue-sharing down to 46% - from 57%. I realize it's the opening salvo but I expected a bit more reasonable number. 11 points?

So...I guess the compromise will be somewhere around 50%.

whatever, it's not my money...but if Bettman's boys are playing hardball you can be sure Mr. Fehr will do likewise... I'd say the odds are 50/50 the 2012-13 season starts on time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

another part of this i'm a little confused on. max 5 year contracts. (Check) 10yrs NHL service before UFA (Check). but i read they want to get rid of RFA (This part i'm a little hazy on)

Since I also read their proposal was to change rookie contracts from 3 to 5 years...if you're getting rid of RFA.....then my initial impression of that is that you would have no choice but to resign with your current team at the end of your rookie deal, and with only that team for 5 more years however many contracts that would be. I would find that hard to believe though, that would take us back to the pre Marvin Miller (MLB but he started FA movement in pro sports) days of restricted player movement and no player bargaining power.

Even aside from this, the league got everything they wanted in the last CBA, I can't believe they started things off with such a d*ckhead proposal. This goes way beyond lowballing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not surprised that the initial proposal is very one sided. Its supposed to be. First proposals usually are, but I can't imagine a work stoppage because of this CBA negotiations. Can the NHL really afford another work stoppage? I mean they had to sacrifice their sport a little and throw in a circus act (shootout) the last time they had one to try and win new fans and lure the old ones back so I doubt they'd risk it again. I imagine there would be an option to extend this current CBA for a year while they negotiate?

I hear a lot of people on twitter proclaiming worry about a work stoppage in the NHL and I know every sport tries terribly to avoid a stoppage, but the NHL has to really be desperate not to head towards one. That would be disastrous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, they know that these conditions are ridiculous. They are starting out the way anyone would negotiate. If you want 100 dollars you ask for 200-250 dollars...

indeed, negotiating 101

10 year thing is laughable though.

incredibly laughable... not even serious enough to be a distraction from what they might really want. Entertaining for us though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was worried this would happen. The KHL must be doing cartwheels hearing this crap. I've always been a management over the union type, (even though I'm not management at work...lol)....but this is outrageous. Agree with what the Grumpster said, it's an initial proposal...set high to work down to a number they are still happy with. WOW, I realize this is business and all, but this offer is a real slap in the face to the NHLPA. HELLLLOOOO, the 04 strike took years to recover from....be fair and divy up the enormous treasure chest of cash fairly for God's sake.

I really see this being a Buttman vs Fehr clash of egos. Fehr is obviously well respected in the sports union business, Gary see's a challange here. That little Napolonic troll is going to take our sport away from us because his ego is to huge. Yeah, yeah, he works/speaks for the owners, but he's at the front of the charge, working behind the scenes to manipulate events to go the NHL's way. God I HATE him. Of course, Fehr is going to want to make a name for himself in this new sport, showing his success in Baseball was not a fluke. I'm really surprised Betteman didn't try to make all contracts non-guaranteed like the NFL! !0 years to UFA....pffffffftttt.....good luck with that. Only 5 year deals might fly, but I doubt it. I can see us shut down for 2 years or more, cause the players will not cave into anything like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kind of a joke they propose dropping the revenue-sharing down to 46% - from 57%. I realize it's the opening salvo but I expected a bit more reasonable number. 11 points?

Thats a 20% reduction. No way that the NHLPA goes for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, they know that these conditions are ridiculous. They are starting out the way anyone would negotiate. If you want 100 dollars you ask for 200-250 dollars... The 10 year thing is laughable though.

Of course you start out asking much more than you want. But you also don't piss on the other party's leg. That offer shows zero negotiation skill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can I paste my post from the other CBA thread without having to type it over again.........?

You should just be able to do it as a copy an paste. If that does not work. Copy it >paste it into MSWord> go to other thread> copy from MSWord > paste in other thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kind of a joke they propose dropping the revenue-sharing down to 46% - from 57%. I realize it's the opening salvo but I expected a bit more reasonable number. 11 points?

So...I guess the compromise will be somewhere around 50%.

whatever, it's not my money...but if Bettman's boys are playing hardball you can be sure Mr. Fehr will do likewise... I'd say the odds are 50/50 the 2012-13 season starts on time.

Bingo ground to work with...so basically they won't 5% more back, so they'll settle on from 57% to 52%....

...they're so generous...

10 years before UFA will be a sticking point i believe...it would for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a 20% reduction. No way that the NHLPA goes for that.

Thats a 20% reduction. No way that the NHLPA goes for that.

it gets even better ---> • The Salary Cap next season would be $52.516 million under the NHL's proposal – or more than $10 million less than it was during the 2011-12 NHL season. The cap ceiling would be just $4 million over the midpoint for each team. (According to capgeek.com 19 NHL teams are already over the proposed cap ceiling and the league is already $130 million in guaranteed money over the allowable salary for next season. The salary cap floor would remain $8 million under the midpoint total for each team.).---->: if this were true the wild just locked up 2 guys @ 20% of the available cap for 10 years. then penguins are screwed and so is the rest of the league for that matter.

if they stick to there guns like last time, gentleman the game we all love is dead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If you thing about it's labor against workers. Labor is team owners and worker are the player. The main problem is what size to make the salary cap, and length of all contracts. To fit the money that each team has to work with for each contract. Each of these contract take a slice of that cap. You have to remember you will have to freeze it at some point to prevent the team from going broke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you thing about it's labor against workers.

No, If you think about it, it is management(owners) against labor(workers). The big problem is this is a hobby for most of the Owners and they could care less about what we the fans want. They have to get protection from themselves......again. The Owners have already made their intentions clear. They have put out a ridiculous contract(wish list) that has nothing but benefits for the Owners. In essence, they are telling the NHLPA that they are going to lose...it is just a matter of how much........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good article from the Boston Globe:

http://www.bostonglo...l?event=event12

"Truth is, the existing CBA gave the owners everything they wanted in 2004 and ’05, and now they want more of a good thing — which is to say more of the product they said they needed the players to help grow in a “partnership.’’ But now that the growing has turned bountiful, they want a bigger portion of the harvest and, well, less of a partnership. No surprise. They’re businessmen. They have money, and they want to keep making more and more of it, aided by a dramatic reconfiguration of an existing document that they said seven years ago was essential in producing a better, more profitable product"

I pretty much agree with it, if the sport is doing as well financially as Bettman keeps saying then it's up to the owners to figure out how to share the spoils more equitably among themselves. There's no reason the players should be bailing out struggling franchises this time.

Edited by JackStraw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Latest update, hot off the press....

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=402495

"Among the items the NHLPA is expected to seek in a new agreement is an expanded revenue sharing system between teams and changes that could make the salary cap more flexible."

WOOOHOOOOO!!! Good news Flyers fans, a light at the end of the cap tunnel? Could this be the introduction of a baseball type of "luxury tax"....that would allow Comcast to spend it'd gazillions to win us a cup. No team has our kind of money, therefore, if only a handful of teams want to exceed the cap, why not let them....the excess money spent could go towards funding our weaker sisters of the league....everybody wins!! Make it soooooooooooo!!!!

Edited by jammer2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...