2012 CBA Negotiations Thread

[bustaheims]

as long as the quality of hockey is the same I'd actually prefer a newer league that has less central authority.

My guess is you'd see the new league go with a stronger central authority - likely something along the lines of what MLS has going on.

 

[Corn Flake]

Sorry, bad choice of words. The league is what I meant.

It would be interesting to see your scenario play out but man a new league would wither without the relationships the NHL has fostered over the years, even if they are at their breaking point right now. I wonder how another league could possibly be profitable. Could go the route of WHA.

I think that overestimates peoples attachment to the brand that is the NHL. My only real brand loyalty here is to the Leafs. I think what CF is talking about is teams like the Leafs and the other profitable franchises forming a brand new league as opposed to something starting from scratch like the WHA and on that basis...as long as the quality of hockey is the same I'd actually prefer a newer league that has less central authority.

Right, so say.... Tor, NYR, Mtl, Van, Cgy, Edm, Wpg, Phi, Chi, Det, Pit, Bos, LA, Min, Stl, Col plus maybe a few straddler teams with big pocket owners like Buffalo, Washington and Ottawa (but if the Sens are in, they must be renamed to the 'Ugly Step Sisters') all re-form as a new league with the same franchise names, ownership groups and branding .. these teams generally all make money or are at least not propped up by a league or changing ownership/bankruptcy issues.  Some big markets and some smaller ones in there, could operate as they see fit and sign anyone they want.  Now that would be fun.

I could see the other franchises forming some AHL'esque league that would probably be a fraction of the scale, but maybe hang on and eventually fade away, WHA style.

Fun to imagine what that would be like.

 

[Corn Flake]

as long as the quality of hockey is the same I'd actually prefer a newer league that has less central authority.

My guess is you'd see the new league go with a stronger central authority - likely something along the lines of what MLS has going on.

Yes.  Is there a union for MLS players at all? Do they not have a cap of some sort?  I can't get my head around why the 'NHL' couldn't re-form and just operate without one.  Just open the doors and sign wheover you want. 

 

[Bates]

You can't just reform a business and not have a union.  There are Laws that prevent that.

 

[MBC]

Sorry, bad choice of words. The league is what I meant.

It would be interesting to see your scenario play out but man a new league would wither without the relationships the NHL has fostered over the years, even if they are at their breaking point right now. I wonder how another league could possibly be profitable. Could go the route of WHA.

I think that overestimates peoples attachment to the brand that is the NHL. My only real brand loyalty here is to the Leafs. I think what CF is talking about is teams like the Leafs and the other profitable franchises forming a brand new league as opposed to something starting from scratch like the WHA and on that basis...as long as the quality of hockey is the same I'd actually prefer a newer league that has less central authority.

Right, so say.... Tor, NYR, Mtl, Van, Cgy, Edm, Wpg, Phi, Chi, Det, Pit, Bos, LA, Min, Stl, Col plus maybe a few straddler teams with big pocket owners like Buffalo, Washington and Ottawa (but if the Sens are in, they must be renamed to the 'Ugly Step Sisters') all re-form as a new league with the same franchise names, ownership groups and branding .. these teams generally all make money or are at least not propped up by a league or changing ownership/bankruptcy issues.  Some big markets and some smaller ones in there, could operate as they see fit and sign anyone they want.  Now that would be fun.

I could see the other franchises forming some AHL'esque league that would probably be a fraction of the scale, but maybe hang on and eventually fade away, WHA style.

Fun to imagine what that would be like.

Wasn't the IHL that way for a number of years until some of them became NHL farm teams? 

 

[bustaheims]

Yes.  Is there a union for MLS players at all? Do they not have a cap of some sort?  I can't get my head around why the 'NHL' couldn't re-form and just operate without one.  Just open the doors and sign wheover you want.

I believe there is a union of some sort and I'm almost certain have a cap. The big thing for MLS is that it's considered to be a single entity which each team owner being legally defined as a shareholder. All contracts are signed and negotiated with the league rather than with the teams.

 

[Corn Flake]

Wasn't the IHL that way for a number of years until some of them became NHL farm teams?

Not sure how it got started but it merged with the AHL several years ago.

 

[Kin]

as long as the quality of hockey is the same I'd actually prefer a newer league that has less central authority.

My guess is you'd see the new league go with a stronger central authority - likely something along the lines of what MLS has going on.

I doubt it. Remember, MLS really can really only operate like that because they're the 9th or 10th best soccer league in the world and all of the clubs started out on equally shaky footing. If I own a very profitable business like the Leafs or the Rangers, I don't want to cede authority to a centralized league office.

 

[Kin]

as long as the quality of hockey is the same I'd actually prefer a newer league that has less central authority.

My guess is you'd see the new league go with a stronger central authority - likely something along the lines of what MLS has going on.

Yes.  Is there a union for MLS players at all? Do they not have a cap of some sort?  I can't get my head around why the 'NHL' couldn't re-form and just operate without one.  Just open the doors and sign wheover you want.

But keep in mind that MLS is very much a minor league and so their players have very little in the way of leverage or options. It'd essentially be impossible for them to operate the way they are and compete for the top talent in the world, the way a new NHL would want.

 

[bustaheims]

Real_ESPNLeBrun: On CBA length: NHLPA willing to go to 10 years with opt-out after Year 7; NHL at 10 years with opt-out after Year 8

Close enough here that, depending on how other things work out, this one could very well come down to a coin flip.

 

[bustaheims]

FriedgeHNIC: It is the league who want the June 30 ending and the NHLPA wants Sept. 15.

FriedgeHNIC: That way the NHL's owners won't be able to spend $199 million right before the CBA ends.

FriedgeHNIC: In addition, if anyone wants to end CBA after eight years, it must notify June 30th of the sixth year. (That is part of the NHL proposal.)

 

[bustaheims]

FriedgeHNIC: On variance, NHL has proposed 60 per cent limit. Therefore, lowest salary of any multi-year deal must be within that amount of the highest.

 

[bustaheims]

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opinion/2013/01/key-issues-remain-unsolved-in-nhl-labour-talks.html

Variance: various reports have had it bouncing around from 10 to 20 to 25 per season. Whatever the case, one source outlined the league has proposed 30 per cent, but that no year in any multi-season contract can be lower than 60 per cent of the highest-paid year. That kills the Kovalchuk/Luongo/Weber cap-buster. I can see the benefit for both the NHL and the NHLPA, since those deals hurt escrow, but allows for flexibility in the "middle-class," which will please a lot of the membership.

Finally, Wednesday, at the NHLPA's request, the NHL agreed to a second compliance buyout for the 2013-14 season. That's two per team. (Some of you have asked if players can be bought out right away if there is hockey this month. I'm under the impression the answer is no, because the concern is those bought out would be unable to find new work so quickly).

 

[caver]

Note to Bettman - Hey Gary, you can blow this whole deal by pulling sneaky stunts like today's HRR language. Bad timing considering the union had just let the disclaimer slide. Its supposed to be " bargaining in good faith."

Note to Fehr - Chill out Don. A snake is a snake is a snake, and Bettman is a snake. Don't lose the forward momentum.

Let's get it done !! 

 

[Hampreacher]

Whats the holdup. Settle now. Does the variance make that much difference if the length is 6 or 7 years, it is still averaged. They ciould even have any player whose contract varied 25% less that cap hit average of the contract upon retirement the  actual value of said contract shall be applied against the cap for the duration of the contract or a million dollars which ever is greater(Injury exemtion.)

 

[bustaheims]

Note to Bettman - Hey Gary, you can blow this whole deal by pulling sneaky stunts like today's HRR language. Bad timing considering the union had just let the disclaimer slide. Its supposed to be " bargaining in good faith."

DarrenDreger: League source says all "changes" to Article 50 were highlighted and flagged and the union has had docs for a week.

Not exactly as sneaky as some people want you to believe. Also, nothing the league did would considered to be "bad faith" negotiations.

Note to Fehr - Chill out Don. A snake is a snake is a snake, and Bettman is a snake. Don't lose the forward momentum.

Fehr is just as big a snake as anyone in these negotiations.

 

[Andy007]

Yea, Fehr is just as big a snake  :  I guess he should have taken the NHL's previous pitiful offers and perpetuate this cycle of having the players locked out for whatever further mistakes the NHL makes.

 

[caver]

I think locking out your employees from their workplace goes against "bargaining in good faith".

 

[Deebo]

I think locking out your employees from their workplace goes against "bargaining in good faith".

No it doesn't.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

I think locking out your employees from their workplace goes against "bargaining in good faith".

So what if the NHL had agreed to start the season without a deal and 'negotiate as they go'?  Now, assuming the playoffs are in the not too distant future and no deal is in place, don't the players hold all the cards via potential strike/walking off the job?  If I'm the NHL, I don't want to end up in that situation.