×
Jump to content

Ducks Hockey Forum Coyotes Hockey Forum Bruins Hockey Forum Sabres Hockey Forum Flames Hockey Forum Hurricanes Hockey Forum Blackhawks Hockey Forum Avalanche Hockey Forum Blue Jackets Hockey Forum Stars Hockey Forum Red Wings Jackets Hockey Forum Oilers Hockey Forum Panthers Hockey Forum Kings Hockey Forum Wild Hockey Forum Canadiens Hockey Forum Predators Hockey Forum Devils Hockey Forum Islanders Hockey Forum Rangers Hockey Forum Senators Hockey Forum Flyers Hockey Forum Penguins Hockey Forum Sharks Hockey Forum Blues Hockey Forum Lightning Hockey Forum Maple Leafs Hockey Forum Canucks Hockey Forum Golden Knights Hockey Forum Capitals Hockey Forum Jets Hockey Forum

News Ticker
  • News Around the NHL
Paparanger

There could be another lockout after this season.

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Paparanger said:

Please Allow me to clarify something: The article I read said that the NHLPA & The NHL both have the "Option" to terminate the CBA after this upcoming season. In other words, this is not an option that has to have mutual approval. If either side decides to do this then there is a more than  90% chance of a stoppage. The one thing I forgot to mention is that the other reason the players are disgruntled is because of the 2018 Olympics not being on the table this time around.

 

One of the things the article mentioned is that the NHL (The league) has a net worth of Four Billion Dollars while the NFL (The League) has a net worth of Sixty-two Billion Dollars while MLB has a net worth of Thirty-Six Billion Dollars. Because of this, there is only so much money to go around. And that is a problem the owners face.

 

If I were to read between the lines I would have to conclude that Gary Bettman is the major problem here. True the NHL had it's problems as a league prior to him being named a commissioner but it seems that ever since he has come into the league there has been more ciaos than harmony. I lost count of the lockouts because of him. Plus he wants to expand the league which is a drain on the talent pool of a hard game to play while putting teams in venues that don't support hockey. The imbalance of teams from the east to the west with the absurd travel schedule of the western teams is a joke. He puts a team in Vegas which is good but he snubs Seattle . HUH? Quebec is looking to get back into the NHL but he won't move any failing teams to that venue & allow them to thrive. This guy has flipped the script. He is supposed to be working for the owners but it seems that it is the other way around. Then he wonders why he gets booed every time he makes a public appearance. I see no reasonable answer in sight.

 

If Bettman wasn't working for the owners he wouldn't be commissioner for very long. Expansion required approval of the Board of Governors. They approved it. Not Gary Bettman.  

 

Under Bettman, the owners and players have exponentially increased their worth. The highest paid player in the NHL when Bettman took over was Eric Lindros at $3.5 million per year. Conor McDavid just signed a deal averaging $12.5 million per year. 

 

I chuckle when Bettman gets blamed for the work stoppages. Bettman can't lock out the players. Only the owners can. It's not as if the owners felt player salaries were all hunky dory and the (the owners) felt as if they were making enough money and Bettman was whispering in the ears behind the scenes that they should be making more and that a lock-out was the way to do it.

 

I'd argue you would have had those work stoppages regardless of who was commissioner.

 

Here's all you need to know. In 1993, the Florida Panthers and Anaheim Ducks paid expansion fees of $50 million. The Vegas Golden Knights just forked over $500 million. #blamebettman :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  The NHL will lock out the players. It's basically a foregone conclusion. Owners have their whole lives, players have 10-12 seasons or so. Take away one of those years, it's HUGE. Take away 2 in an extended lockout, it's monumental. The owners have all the leverage here,  AND sitting firmly in their back pocket is the knowledge that the fans come back with their tails between their legs, they love the sport and will not abandon it like MLB fans after they missed a season. 

 

 I don't think it will be this lockout, but eventually, the NHL will make contracts not guaranteed. They will break the union's backs on this issue when they think the time is right. Most franchises sign at least one player to a ridiculously risky deal, knowing they have this buy out in looming on the horizon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, jammer2 said:

 I don't think it will be this lockout, but eventually, the NHL will make contracts not guaranteed. They will break the union's backs on this issue when they think the time is right. Most franchises sign at least one player to a ridiculously risky deal, knowing they have this buy out in looming on the horizon. 

 

This is what the next lock out will be about - guaranteed contracts. I think you'll see the NHL want to move to an NFL style of contract where salaries aren't guaranteed, but bonuses are. I'm also thinking that if the NHL/NHLPA end up in another war, it's time to file for binding arbitration immediately.

 

The 50/50 split of revenue will remain, but I think if the players give something up, they're going to demand to be more involved in terms of relocation or expansion. Enough of this keeping franchises afloat that have no business remaining in the markets where they are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2017 at 2:17 PM, aziz said:

 

the fear being that a deep-pockets team could offer a sum of money the smaller team just couldn't, fully planning on buying it out down the road to no consequence?  that's fair, i get that.  i'm also not opposed to teams with more vibrant fan bases being able to realize some sort of earned advantage.  my thinking is that a hard cap coupled to no-impact buyouts would do a fair job of allowing an advantage without letting it get out of control.  while team A might be able to offer a player eleventy-billion dollars per year, and plan on buying it out a few years down the road, they'd still need to fit that eleventy-billion dollars into their cap figures until they do.  i believe the mechanics of negotiating and acquiring players would remain largely as it is today, but we wouldn't have to worry about teams dealing with cap problems years after a questionable deal was signed.  

 

because:  who thinks teams dealing with cap problems helps the sport?  

 

i think the hard cap does as much to control spending on individual contracts as is needed, but teams decaying for years under their poor planning would be minimized.  which, i/m/h/o, can only help NHL hockey as a whole.

 

I must admit that I am not well versed on how the CBA works in the NHL, and this could actually be answered within this thread further on, but on the note of the buy outs.. Why not have something put in place that if a team were to buy out a player, they would have to pay some sort of tax (call it whatever you want), that goes into a pool...  If a team completes a buy out, that tax goes into the tax pool.  At some point, either in the off season or what not, that tax money gets disbursed to all the teams in the league.  If a team were to commit a buy out, they would be ineligible to receive and of that "tax" money.  

 

Now that "tax" could be a percentage of the salary bought out, a set fee, etc.  I don't know the right answer to that, but I would say something of a percentage of the buy out.  50, 60% of the remaining contract?  Now that money would go into the disbursement pool on a per season basis.  So, if John Doe has a remaining contract for 4 years, at a total value per season (signing bonus, base pay, etc.) of $6mil per season, then each season the team would have to put in whatever the percentage fine for the buyout would be.   Or, they could do it in one lump sum, but that could create for rather large disbursements each season.  

 

These should be a caveat for those teams receiving the disbursements..  That those funds have to be used towards player salaries, development, etc.  Prop up their minor league system..   It should also be disbursed on a fund needed basis...  Those teams in smaller markets that are struggling, get a better share of the pie...

 

I doubt this is a feasible solution, but maybe something along these lines could be a start.  The other teams should get some sort of benefit for being money conscious or just living within their means.  Hell, maybe allow teams to somehow earn buyout points that they can use to buy a buyout.  Shrug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2017 at 11:23 AM, murraycraven said:

 

 

Amen...   

 

NHL and it's ownership can't get out of it's own way.   If you are a betting man I think it is a pretty safe wager there will be another lockout.   

 

That would be bad news for Toronto fans since the Leafs are actually on the rise again. It would kill all the momentum that they're building with the current core group and would hurt the league badly. 

 

A lockout this time would backfire for the league. I think fans have reached their threshold for lockouts (it really is ridiculous when you think about it), and fans in Ontario would burn down the NHL's offices.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, the players have a LOUSY deal right now. The PA should strike to get the right to play in Olympics, have a LOT more say in the cap, and lots of other one-sided "rules". 

 

Here is my message to Gary 'the elf' Bettman : no players, no NHL. 

 

Sorry, I had to get that out..... :ahappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BluPuk said:

Here is my message to Gary 'the elf' Bettman : no players, no NHL.

 

sure, but "no NHL, no NHL" is also true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BluPuk said:

Here is my message to Gary 'the elf' Bettman : no players, no NHL. 

 

Here's the thing. In general, the owners don't need to own a team. The players need the NHL in order to continue getting paid as they are. If the owners would suffer significant financial difficulties with no NHL, do you really think they'd lock the players out?

 

What's interesting is that while I do think guaranteed contracts are the next hill for the owners, and that they'll want to go more towards the NFL model, the NFL players are looking ahead a couple of years and are supposedly planning to try to get guaranteed contracts in their next CBA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Trefilov22 said:

Yeah, I would have ot agree the players need the league more than the owners....

Another question is: How much do the fans need the NHL? The AHL and ECHL provide good hockey at an affordable price!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Lunatic said:

Another question is: How much do the fans need the NHL? The AHL and ECHL provide good hockey at an affordable price!

 

I agree, their brand and quality isn't all that bad, and the price really can't be beat comparatively speaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Most Liked Posts in This Topic

    • 8
      Post
      If GMs don't want to live with the potential problems of NTC/NMC players, they don't have to offer the clause or sign the player.   Again a situation where ownership creates the problem and then expects the players to solve it for them.
    • 3
      Post
      Which will kill this sport ..... How forgiving are hockey fans??
    • 3
      Post
      Least popular major sport and the most amount of lockout/strikes (I think)… This would be ill advised and everyone involved would be smart to work something out.
    • 2
      Post
      Forgiving enough that it's survived two previous "kill the sport" lockouts in the past 15 years and is now more valuable and profitable than ever.   For that matter, the owners have been accused of trying to "kill the sport" since the first expansion.
    • 2
      Post
      or, when you have an organization that consists of 31 separate franchises competing for talent and success but not directly for dollars, drift towards short term decision-making is inevitable, and requires centralized control to rein in.  Centralized control from a party that is not specifically interested in the talent level or success of a given franchise, but the health and vitality of the organization as a whole.   I have been and will be offended at the suggestion or reality of salary roll-backs, but outside of that, I would have zero problem with the league saying, "NTC's will only be allowed to cover up to 2 years of any contract, NMC's are completely forbidden, salaries will be limited to 10% of the per-team cap ceiling, and a maximum 6 year duration.  all existing contracts are grandfathered, but all new deals will follow these rules."   salary roll backs are the only angle i can see players being expected to solve problems for ownership.  and i am against those roll backs.  beyond that, go nuts, NHL.  it doesn't help anyone that a third of the league will be hamstrung for the next 5 years because of bad deals.  yes, it's their own GMs' faults, but it still reduces the quality of the NHL product overall, and thus I'm good with the NHL looking to solve it unilaterally.  chicago basically had to put itself in perpetual cap hell to produce their cup champions, but now have no real choice but slowly rot away for the next half decade.  detroit tried to keep its salary levels under control, which was admirable, but they did it with movement-restricted (but largely cheaper than normal) deals, and are now going to rot for the attempt.  is that good?  i get that they reap what they sow, and this is the bed they made, and all sorts of other cliches, but....is it good for the league to have teams basically check out of competition for years at a time due to contract-related logjams?  wouldn't it be great if there was some kind of structure that would keep experiments like that from happening and dragging down the NHL's overall product?   one thing i'd like to see, and i think it'd go a long way towards fixing a good bit of this...maybe to the point of being the only change that needs to be made:  remove the cap hit for all buy-outs.  any buy-out at all simply goes away, in terms of the team's cap number.  unlimited caphit-free normal-course buy-outs available each summer.  who benefits from tightly controlled buyouts with significant cap consequences?  who'd be hurt?   lastly, i've said it before, but with this talk starting up again, i'll repeat: i think professional sports players' unions are one of the least funny jokes of the last 100 years.  it's a perversion, an idea for the good of the common worker that had no leverage and required protection being applied to some of the richest people on the continent.  the minimum wage of an NHL player is $650,000.  when the average doctor and lawyer look like paupers next to the least talented NHL player, my heart is a LONG way from breaking for them, no matter what concession is asked.
    • 1
      Post
      I’m going to use the New York Rangers as an example because this is the team that I follow, but this post deals pretty much with all thirty-one NHL teams.   I receive push notifications on my Android phone for subjects that I am interested in. One of those subjects is the NHL. The last push notification I received concerning the NHL stated that after this upcoming season the NHLPA has the option of terminating the current CBA. This option is also extended to the NHL. So, if the NHLPA terminates the CBA it is a work stoppage. But, if the NHL terminates the CBA it is a lockout. (Po-ta-toe - PoTah-toe)  The article goes on to say that around ninety-five percent of the players are disgruntled because of the fifteen percent escrow they are forced to pay the owners and this is the main reason the CBA may be terminated early.   The reason I am bringing this up is to 1. To prepare everyone for another lockout and 2. To talk about a second amnesty buyout that is sure to be on the negotiating table. This was brought up in the article and it sounds like something that will probably fly for the second time.   The reason I am bringing this up is because just about every NHL team has at least one contract that they would love to get off the books, but they can’t because they  don’t want to carry a negative cap hit for ex amount of seasons.    The Rangers have one of those in Marc Staal. He is carrying a five + million dollar contract for the next four years and if he were to be bought out, the cap hit would extend for eight years and would be money that they are charged with but can’t use. Not Good!   I will say this; if I were a GM in this league, I would propose at the next GM’s meeting that the No move, No trade contracts be off the table. This helps all thirty-one NHL clubs. The players have this as leverage but if all the GM’s said “NO” to this then the teams would be able to operate without a gun to their collective heads. The notion that a player is not capable of playing for a team or is not in their plans but has to remain because of that stupid agreement is crazy. These guys are not hurting for money but yet they continue to milk every penny they can get without any regard for other players on the team.  Normally I side with the players, but in this case I have to go with management on this one. They cry because they are being underpaid, but this is the sport they chose in a league that only has a net worth of four billion dollars and is fourth or fifth in popularity.   Oh Well…

About HF.net

 We are an enthusiastic community of HockeyFans who enjoy discussing the NHL and more in our Forums.  Our members may also write their own blogs, converse in chat, post pics in our gallery, join our fantasy hockey leagues and more.  If you are looking for a friendly community to discuss hockey then register today and begin your conversation in our NET.

 

 

Contact Us

 

Recent Topics

Like what we do? Help us keep doing it!
Supporting Members help keep HockeyForums Advertisement Free
×