2012 CBA Negotiations Thread
- Thread starter Kin
- Start date
- Status
Corn Flake
New member
lc9 said:
It's either Fehr & Bettman and their respective egos coming into the room and wanting to run the show, which will ultimately blow this thing up, or this is just fun with messaging while each side tries to squeeze everything they can out of the negotiation... get the other side to panic as much as possible.
bustaheims
Active member
Corn Flake said:
Considering the two sides aren't in the same room right now, I doubt it's that.
aaronward_nhl: At this stage,doesn't appear the Union will take this present NHL offer to a full vote.PA still actively engaged in internal meetings #TSN
Corn Flake
New member
bustaheims said:
They have been going back and forth all day between the league and PA.. from what TSN was reporting, both Bettman and Fehr have been in discusions.. just going by what they said and is staring back at me in this article: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=411086
bustaheims
Active member
Corn Flake said:
From what I've been reading, they haven't actually met in person - they've communicated but they haven't been in the same room. The PA has been having internal meetings all day.
Nik V. Debs said:
Agreed. It's too bad our GM didn't feel the same way.
Nik V. Debs said:
What I don't get is why the owners are demanding both a 5-year limit and a 5% cap on year-by-year variance. Their goal is to get rid of those retirement deals. And alone either one of those two options absolutely kills them. There's no need for both.
louisstamos
Active member
Would you be able to do both? Like say, for example, a player's cap hit would be the average of their salary from when they sign their contract until the age of 35. After that, their actual salary that year would also be their cap hit.
Players can still front load contracts and get paid up front (if they're willing to only get $1 or $2 million at ages 33-35) and can also take long deals, which as said, is not necessarily a bad thing. (i.e: if you've got Sidney Crosby, would you not want him signed for as long as you can)
Owners get rid of the bogus deals at the end of contracts since (Markus Naslund aside) most superstar players probably won't retire at ages 33-35.
Players can still front load contracts and get paid up front (if they're willing to only get $1 or $2 million at ages 33-35) and can also take long deals, which as said, is not necessarily a bad thing. (i.e: if you've got Sidney Crosby, would you not want him signed for as long as you can)
Owners get rid of the bogus deals at the end of contracts since (Markus Naslund aside) most superstar players probably won't retire at ages 33-35.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Damn, they sound close.
maplesyrup
New member
Close, but no cigar... Ah well. :
At this point I think an arbitrator would be the way to go.
At this point I think an arbitrator would be the way to go.
Kin
New member
CarltonTheBear said:
Well, I'm sure the argument from the owners on that one would be that as much as they dislike your Hossa/Kovalchuk kind of deals they also don't want to see deals like the one DiPietro got or even Carter/Richards. On the flip of that, I'm guessing that just a flat 5 year maximum with no limit on variance from year to year would probably be something that could be agreed upon but I'm guessing that's a no go for players.
Kin
New member
Corn Flake said:
Which is why every team would have the option of not agreeing to them if they felt that way.
As for what sense it makes, I think the key is to remember that right now people are only looking at these deals through the prism of what we've seen of them, namely players earning 8 or 10 or 12 million and only counting for 6 million or so against the cap. Where they start making financial sense is on the back end, where players will start to count for 6 or 7 million against the cap and be getting paid 1 or 2 million bucks in real money.
I have trouble taking what either side says at face value.
But if the NHL agree with what Fehr says and the only differences left are term limits and length of the CBA... Then I don't think there is any way we lose the entire season over those 2 issues.
Then again, we've heard them disagree on where they stood with one another.
But if the NHL agree with what Fehr says and the only differences left are term limits and length of the CBA... Then I don't think there is any way we lose the entire season over those 2 issues.
Then again, we've heard them disagree on where they stood with one another.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Welp, screw it.
bustaheims
Active member
Potvin29 said:
Other than the 25% thing, there's nothing that been reported so far that I can see being so unacceptable to the league that it's not an area were they're close enough to find a way to make it work. I have to believe there's something else in the PA's offer that hasn't been reported which the league is not going for. Maybe they stuck with the whole "players' share can not drop" thing or something similar.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Or just more posturing BS/message controlling.
But regardless of the sides speaking different languages a lot of the time, I doubt the PA would do this if they weren't legitimately close.
But regardless of the sides speaking different languages a lot of the time, I doubt the PA would do this if they weren't legitimately close.
Kessel Run
New member
HA HA HA
bustaheims
Active member
Real_ESPNLeBrun: Bettman says sense of optimism "almost inexplixably" disappeared Wednesday afternoon after such a good day Tuesday
Real_ESPNLeBrun: Bettman says the owners pushed hard on new deal last night. Bettman says union response last night was "shockingly silent."
Real_ESPNLeBrun: Bettman says owners last night in room were beside themselves at the players' reaction.
Real_ESPNLeBrun: Bettman says the owners pushed hard on new deal last night. Bettman says union response last night was "shockingly silent."
Real_ESPNLeBrun: Bettman says owners last night in room were beside themselves at the players' reaction.
- Status