Jump to content

Lets Build Our Own CBA!


idahophilly
 Share

Recommended Posts

After conversing with @Flyerod he brings up a crucial point that I will tackle with a somewhat far fetched solution. I would like to discuss this with those interested and as we go along and draft our own CBA (one point at a time) as time goes along. Then, in fantacy land we can print a copy and mail it to the NHL and PA with a label "to whom it may concern"...

I won't tackle the biggies yet like 50/50 splits and make whole agreements. The point Rod brought up was that no matter what the new CBA finally looks like, the next day the 30 owners will send their lawyers and GM's to find loopholes and regardless of how much either side gives up or "wins" it will all repeat itself if this point isn't fixed. It's the source of much angst and suspicion. It can serve as a backdrop that things are really being fixed.

Now I believe with extremly strict rules on negotiating new contracts (whatever those rules wind up being) that this can be minimized to a great extent. But it can't be eliminated unless a new rule is put in place. Here it is:

I propose we take away the NHL's oversite on whether a contract violates the CBA rules. That would be handled by a third party not beholden to either the NHL, Owners or PA. There are a number of national and international firms that are well respected that could do this. But hang on, there's more.

I propose we take it a step further and allow this firm to rule on whether the spirit of the CBA was violated, even if technicaly the team operated with in the rules. This firm has final say with no appeal.

What is the penalty you ask. If it's just a garden variety mistake on a technical point then the trade or contract is just void. The team and player can fix the technicality and try again. However, if the "firm" determines that technicaly everything was fine but a "loophole" was used to violate the spirit of the CBA then the offending team must pay the first years salary as proposed for that player to the "firm" who holds it in escrow to be given to a charity that may change each year but is voted on by the board of goveners. No one in the PA or NHL benefits from the money lost and also is one step in discouraging huge contracts (screw with a "Crosby like" 9 million a year deal and that team gets fined 9 million dollars).

Further, as penalty to the player, who was certain to be going along with this, is fined 10% of their salary and has a 5 year moratorium of being allowed to be traded to that team (if not a member) or anyone else in that division (5 yrs, both!). If the player already is playing for the team that violates the spirit of the CBA, the player automaticaly forfeits 10% of his next contract for however long he decided to sign for.

This would REALLY discourage that behavior to the point that it would be nuts to even flirt with violating the spirit of the CBA. In addition, the penalty that that player can't go to any team in that division puts serious peer pressure on a team not to "fool" around. (hell, you could even say if the Flyers screw up then they pay the 1st years salary as stated and NJ, NYI, Penguins and Rangers all have to pay 250k, that would get them all going!). This would also seperate the decision making process from the NHL which could be percieved at times of having bias and make the PA and other owners far less suspicious.

One safety valve needed is a year to year salary variance rule. To prevent a team from signing Giroux to CBA "circumvention attemp" without risk a team may structure the first year of a deal at the league minimum and backload the rest, knowing they only risk that much smaller amount of money. We fix that by saying a contract can't vary by more than 5% from one year to another and no more than 20% from the first years salary over the life of the contract. No funny business allowed plus discourages (from the players stand point by far) not signing those long contracts.

Anyway, feel free to tell me I'm nuts but i think it would work. If that can be agreed upon then perhaps more CBA items can be agreed on knowing that any cheating, by owner or player, has little chance of working out and with huge consequences...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, let me be the first to chime in....

What is the penalty you ask. If it's just a garden variety mistake on a technical point then the trade or contract is just void. The team and player can fix the technicality and try again. However, if the "firm" determines that technicaly everything was fine but a "loophole" was used to violate the spirit of the CBA then the offending team must pay the first years salary as proposed for that player to the "firm" who holds it in escrow to be given to a charity that may change each year but is voted on by the board of goveners. No one in the PA or NHL benefits from the money lost and also is one step in discouraging huge contracts (screw with a "Crosby like" 9 million a year deal and that team gets fined 9 million dollars).

I like it...but there is no way on God's green earth you will get the Owners to agree to it. They don't mind screwing each other over but there is no way they would agree to have a "stranger" take them to task.... that would be beneath them and against their own Good Ole Boy Network.

I propose we take away the NHL's oversite on whether a contract violates the CBA rules. That would be handled by a third party not beholden to either the NHL, Owners or PA. There are a number of national and international firms that are well respected that could do this.

This is something that should be done. There also should be a panel consisting of 3 members for handing out punishments and fines for safety and rule violations that consists of 1 Owner (chosen by his peers),1 player rep( voted in by his peers) and a third party such as a former respected referee(someone like Ray Scapinello). All three would have to agree to the punishment/fines being handed down.

Further, as penalty to the player, who was certain to be going along with this, is fined 10% of their salary and has a 5 year moratorium of being allowed to be traded to that team (if not a member) or anyone else in that division (5 yrs, both!). If the player already is playing for the team that violates the spirit of the CBA, the player automaticaly forfeits 10% of his next contract for however long he decided to sign for.

The players are not the ones breaking or attempting to break the rules so I am not sure how you single them out and punish them for something an owner has done. You have to remember, all of these rules need to be put into effect because the owners can't control themselves and need someone to protect them from themselves. See, I really did read your posts. ;)

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...