2012 CBA Negotiations Thread

[bustaheims]

Without presenting something of their own, this is probably the best offer the players are going to get, and, if they reject this with a realistic counter proposal in the next few days, we can probably kiss the season goodbye.

I assume you mean without a realistic counter proposal you mean.

Whoops. Yeah. Fixed.

 

[Erndog]

Everyones clamoring how significant a movement this is by the league and how this offer seems like its around what we expected the ending result would be.  My office is pretty happy.

So I said to myself.... I need to come here and ask Nik why this offer doesn't appear to be any good?

So Nik, go ahead, tell me why this offer isn't really any movement on the leagues part>?

 

[Kin]

So I said to myself.... I need to come here and ask Nik why this offer doesn't appear to be any good?

Well, good is subjective. It may very well be the best offer the players can get before their resolve is seriously tested by a very lengthy lockout. In that case it's the best offer they can get and, if they're not prepared for a long lockout and what that means, then they should fall all over themselves to take it.

So Nik, go ahead, tell me why this offer isn't really any movement on the leagues part>?

Well, it's different from their last offer. They're asking for less of a reduction. I don't know if that's enough to make it palatable. I'd have to see the offer point by point to give a legitimate critique.

I'm just constitutionally incapable of pretending it is what it isn't. I still have yet to see a single, genuine concession made by the owners in an effort to get a deal done. They could make all sorts of non-economic concessions to try and get the economic changes that they apparently need but so far, not a one that I've heard. Does this deal change that? Again, I don't know without reading it.

 

[Bates]

Why should owners offer concessions.  They are the ones losing all the money and holding all the power.  If the players want to make big money and enjoy a great lifestyle they need the NHL.  They should make the best deal possible but expecting to keep the status quo is just not gonna happen.

 

[louisstamos]

There are a few more things the NHL could receive in this new offer:

The NHL proposal also includes four-year deals on entry-level contracts, unrestricted free agency for players at age 28 or eight years of NHL service, a five-year limit on non-entry level contracts and revenue sharing at or near $200 million.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407490

So an extra year to entry level contracts...an extra year before a player reaches UFA status, and a 5-year max on all non-entry level deals.

Granted, the players will like the no-salary rollback part, but that 5-year max may still be a point of contention...

In the end, the NHL had to do something after the PR "scandal" this past weekend.  They're asking for a lot less in this offer and the ball is in the players' court.

 

[Champ Kind]

Couple of interesting tidbits from the latest offer.  Can't say I dislike any of them, but of course these are only excerpts.

RT @JSportsnet: The only core issue that remains intact from previous NHL offers is the length on contracts (on all new deals).

RT @JSportsnet: Entry Level Contracts would be 4 years in Length

RT @JSportsnet: Free Agency would be at 28 and 8 years of service

EDIT: Louis beat me to it.

 

[Champ Kind]

Why should owners offer concessions.  They are the ones losing all the money and holding all the power.  If the players want to make big money and enjoy a great lifestyle they need the NHL.  They should make the best deal possible but expecting to keep the status quo is just not gonna happen.

Well, I can sort of see your point but the NHL is sort about the players, is it not?  Isn't it really a symbiotic relationship?  Shouldn't the bargaining reflect this?

 

[Kin]

Why should owners offer concessions.

Whether they should or not is beside the point. You can't, however, refuse to offer any and then claim to be genuinely interested in getting deal done or "negotiating" in any actual sense of the word.

  They are the ones losing all the money and holding all the power. 

Well, aside from the fact that the NHL is, according to Forbes, a profitable entity they're also the ones who would see their franchise values dip if a long lockout hurt the game. One would hope that would lead to a scenario where both sides, in the interest of avoiding a prolonged work stoppage, would be interested in making concessions.

Again, they wouldn't even have to be economic. The NFL, in their last labour deal, basically got what they want money wise but threw the players a bone in terms of reduced practices and workouts. It's not much but at least it was something.

 

[Deebo]

There are a few more things the NHL could receive in this new offer:

The NHL proposal also includes four-year deals on entry-level contracts, unrestricted free agency for players at age 28 or eight years of NHL service, a five-year limit on non-entry level contracts and revenue sharing at or near $200 million.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407490

So an extra year to entry level contracts...an extra year before a player reaches UFA status, and a 5-year max on all non-entry level deals.

Granted, the players will like the no-salary rollback part, but that 5-year max may still be a point of contention...

In the end, the NHL had to do something after the PR "scandal" this past weekend.  They're asking for a lot less in this offer and the ball is in the players' court.

I think the 5 year limit will be something the PA changes in their counter.

 

[louisstamos]

There are a few more things the NHL could receive in this new offer:

The NHL proposal also includes four-year deals on entry-level contracts, unrestricted free agency for players at age 28 or eight years of NHL service, a five-year limit on non-entry level contracts and revenue sharing at or near $200 million.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407490

So an extra year to entry level contracts...an extra year before a player reaches UFA status, and a 5-year max on all non-entry level deals.

Granted, the players will like the no-salary rollback part, but that 5-year max may still be a point of contention...

In the end, the NHL had to do something after the PR "scandal" this past weekend.  They're asking for a lot less in this offer and the ball is in the players' court.

I think the 5 year limit will be something the PA changes in their counter.

Agreed.  And I don't think they'd be adverse to a ceiling, but something higher. (7 years?  8 years?)

 

[Champ Kind]

There are a few more things the NHL could receive in this new offer:

The NHL proposal also includes four-year deals on entry-level contracts, unrestricted free agency for players at age 28 or eight years of NHL service, a five-year limit on non-entry level contracts and revenue sharing at or near $200 million.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407490

So an extra year to entry level contracts...an extra year before a player reaches UFA status, and a 5-year max on all non-entry level deals.

Granted, the players will like the no-salary rollback part, but that 5-year max may still be a point of contention...

In the end, the NHL had to do something after the PR "scandal" this past weekend.  They're asking for a lot less in this offer and the ball is in the players' court.

I think the 5 year limit will be something the PA changes in their counter.

I would agree but I think the PA would be unreasonable if they didn't offer some limitation to the length.  Would, perhaps, a 7 year cap work?

 

[Champ Kind]

There are a few more things the NHL could receive in this new offer:

The NHL proposal also includes four-year deals on entry-level contracts, unrestricted free agency for players at age 28 or eight years of NHL service, a five-year limit on non-entry level contracts and revenue sharing at or near $200 million.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407490

So an extra year to entry level contracts...an extra year before a player reaches UFA status, and a 5-year max on all non-entry level deals.

Granted, the players will like the no-salary rollback part, but that 5-year max may still be a point of contention...

In the end, the NHL had to do something after the PR "scandal" this past weekend.  They're asking for a lot less in this offer and the ball is in the players' court.

I think the 5 year limit will be something the PA changes in their counter.

I would agree but I think the PA would be unreasonable if they didn't offer some limitation to the length.  Would, perhaps, a 7 year cap work?

EDIT: Louis, again?  Must be on the same wavelength.

 

[louisstamos]

There are a few more things the NHL could receive in this new offer:

The NHL proposal also includes four-year deals on entry-level contracts, unrestricted free agency for players at age 28 or eight years of NHL service, a five-year limit on non-entry level contracts and revenue sharing at or near $200 million.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407490

So an extra year to entry level contracts...an extra year before a player reaches UFA status, and a 5-year max on all non-entry level deals.

Granted, the players will like the no-salary rollback part, but that 5-year max may still be a point of contention...

In the end, the NHL had to do something after the PR "scandal" this past weekend.  They're asking for a lot less in this offer and the ball is in the players' court.

I think the 5 year limit will be something the PA changes in their counter.

I would agree but I think the PA would be unreasonable if they didn't offer some limitation to the length.  Would, perhaps, a 7 year cap work?

You and me have been on the same page all day!

GET OUTTA MY HEAD!!!

 

[princedpw]

From the sounds of things, the League has made some very real concessions here.

What are the concessions here? All this offer is is asking for is less than they asked for previously. If I try to bargain with Scarlet Johannsen that I get to sleep with her two nights a week, it's not a concession if I cut my offer down to one when I started with zero.

True, but wouldn't it be true that you would really, REALLY like to sleep with her twice per week?  In that regard, isn't getting less than what you wanted a concession.

Incidentally, I would have used Charlise Theron, but I can live with your example.

The example didn't make any sense to me at all.  I would have gone with Chris O'Donnell.  ;-)

 

[Champ Kind]

I was thinking the same thing, but you probably already knew that.  :

 

[Champ Kind]

From the sounds of things, the League has made some very real concessions here.

What are the concessions here? All this offer is is asking for is less than they asked for previously. If I try to bargain with Scarlet Johannsen that I get to sleep with her two nights a week, it's not a concession if I cut my offer down to one when I started with zero.

True, but wouldn't it be true that you would really, REALLY like to sleep with her twice per week?  In that regard, isn't getting less than what you wanted a concession.

Incidentally, I would have used Charlise Theron, but I can live with your example.

The example didn't make any sense to me at all.  I would have gone with Chris O'Donnell.  ;-)

That's the thing with Nik, his metaphors and analogies just don't make sense to me.

 

[Kin]

That's the thing with Nik, his metaphors and analogies just don't make sense to me.

So, in that way, I'm like a bankrupt parfumerie?

 

[Joe S.]

There are a few more things the NHL could receive in this new offer:

The NHL proposal also includes four-year deals on entry-level contracts, unrestricted free agency for players at age 28 or eight years of NHL service, a five-year limit on non-entry level contracts and revenue sharing at or near $200 million.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407490

So an extra year to entry level contracts...an extra year before a player reaches UFA status, and a 5-year max on all non-entry level deals.

Granted, the players will like the no-salary rollback part, but that 5-year max may still be a point of contention...

In the end, the NHL had to do something after the PR "scandal" this past weekend.  They're asking for a lot less in this offer and the ball is in the players' court.

I think the 5 year limit will be something the PA changes in their counter.

that's probably why it's there - clearly the owners are ok with contracts longer than 5 years, so I would assume this was a throw away item for bargaining...

 

[Champ Kind]

That's the thing with Nik, his metaphors and analogies just don't make sense to me.

So, in that way, I'm like a bankrupt parfumerie?

Umm...Yes 

 

[Joe S.]

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/nhl-offers-50-50-split-revenue-no-rollback-171625394--nhl.html

Quote from Bettman - I found this funny.

A lot of you know we don't negotiate publicly, and I'm not going to break that habit because I don't think it's constructive. 

And then he goes on to say:

The fact of the matter is, we offered a 50-50 share of HRR, hockey related revenues, and we believe we addressed the concern that players have about what happens to their salaries as a result in this year of reducing the percentage from 57 to 50%.