• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

2012 CBA Negotiations Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
cw said:
But the players "won" in that they still have a NHL to play in because the system they had was not financially sustainable. And all of the players who appeared in the NHL between 2006 and 2012 made more money under that deal than half the NHL teams they played for. And their salaries have risen decently from a $39 mil cap to maybe a $60-70 mil cap.
Click to expand...

Is it not true though, that the NHL owners had the opportunity to lock in a hard cap at 46.5 million in '05, yet insisted on getting to the 43 million starting point. In order to get there, the owners agreed to the fluctuating cap based on revenues.

So at the time, that cap was viewed as a loss for the players as I don't think the NHL, the NHLPA or the media thought that revenues would grow to the point of almost doubling that cap ceiling.
 
"NHL PULLS LATEST OFFER OFF THE TABLE AS DEADLINE PASSES"

Is that really supposed to be a threat? The NHLPA hate that deal. I'm sure they're pretty glad that terrible offer is in the garbage now. Time for one of these parties to table another proposal. One that both sides can work off of. Worst case scenario is both sides decide to go into hibernation mode. They need to get their heads out of their asses and get down to work. I believe they can still save all 82 games if they can get it done within a week or so. The only thing getting in the way now is stubbornness and pride.
 
My understanding is the NHL pulled their offer because they don't think they can get 82 games in now. They only liked their proposal based on 82 games.
 
Curious, would the PA have any interest in looking at the growth of team valuations since the lockout? From the numbers I saw it looked like quite a few had really grown.
 
The Sarge said:
My understanding is the NHL pulled their offer because they don't think they can get 82 games in now. They only liked their proposal based on 82 games.
Click to expand...

I think NHL has given itself a bit of breathing room here though. I could be wrong, but I doubt they cancel any more games today. My guess is they still have another week to save all 82 games. Perhaps they'll table another offer on the weekend or early next week that will still include all 82. I hope I'm right. If they do cancel more games today or tomorrow, it's for the sole purpose of intimidating the NHLPA, and nothing else.
 
OldTimeHockey said:
cw said:
But the players "won" in that they still have a NHL to play in because the system they had was not financially sustainable. And all of the players who appeared in the NHL between 2006 and 2012 made more money under that deal than half the NHL teams they played for. And their salaries have risen decently from a $39 mil cap to maybe a $60-70 mil cap.
Click to expand...

Is it not true though, that the NHL owners had the opportunity to lock in a hard cap at 46.5 million in '05, yet insisted on getting to the 43 million starting point. In order to get there, the owners agreed to the fluctuating cap based on revenues.

So at the time, that cap was viewed as a loss for the players as I don't think the NHL, the NHLPA or the media thought that revenues would grow to the point of almost doubling that cap ceiling.
Click to expand...

I'm not absolutely sure. I don't recall that.

The first cap in '05-06 was $39 mil which maybe throws a wrench into the $43 mil number you cite - and the $46 mil number because that would represent about 63% of revenues out the gate when the league needed help the most.

As well, what the cap is doesn't matter a heck of a lot. It could have been $1 and not made a difference to the players because the players are paid based on league revenues and the salaries prorated from that.

The Bettman theme of "cost certainty" from those negotiations was consistently sought after and they seemed intent on tying that to revenue very early on so that it would be fair and certain for both parties as revenues went up (or down). I think they were at 76% of revenues wanting 24% off that and settled for 22% off that - something like that.
 
I know many would prefer it not to be the case, but would/does expansion have any bearing in these negotiations?  With Quebec and Seattle building arenas, those would be two pretty good markets to enter in to.  It'd guarantee the PA an additional 40+ jobs and revenues would increase.  Could that convince the PA to move to 50-50 quicker? 
 
Peter D. said:
I know many would prefer it not to be the case, but would/does expansion have any bearing in these negotiations?  With Quebec and Seattle building arenas, those would be two pretty good markets to enter in to.  It'd guarantee the PA an additional 40+ jobs and revenues would increase.  Could that convince the PA to move to 50-50 quicker?
Click to expand...

I doubt it. For that to have any significant impact on what current players made either the owners would have to agree to count expansion fees as HRR, which seems far fetched, or Seattle and Quebec would have to be economic powerhouses in the league and make disproportionately large contributions to leaguewide revenue, which seems even less likely.
 
Tigger said:
Curious, would the PA have any interest in looking at the growth of team valuations since the lockout? From the numbers I saw it looked like quite a few had really grown.
Click to expand...

That is the hidden little bugaboo in all of this "The league's profit margin is razor thin/18 of 30 teams lost money" stuff. That same Forbes report had 23 of 30 teams gaining significantly in value, including some of the teams they estimated to have some of the bigger operating losses.
 
Deebo said:
As expected, the league will announce that entire November schedule has been cancelled.
Click to expand...

I'm not shocked, but a little surprised. Gary's really putting the screws to the players with this announcement. Personally, I think he's trying to break the union. Many players will start to cave soon I believe.
 
Deebo said:
As expected, the league will announce that entire November schedule has been cancelled.
Click to expand...

Cancelling the Winter Classic is most likely the next move. I have to imagine they're getting pretty close to the point where the timeline to get everything organized for it will be too compressed to make it work.
 
Nik V. Debs said:
Also, I'd dispute your contention that the NBA is stronger financially than the NHL. More in revenues, yes. But when the NBA negotiated their last deal they did so while claiming, as a league, hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. The NHL, at least according to Forbes, as a league is turning a very modest profit.
Click to expand...

Here are the facts as I know them that provide the basis for my remarks:

Comparing Forbes numbers for the two leagues between 2006 and 2011:

                      NHL        NBA
Revenues      16.2 Bil      2.2 Bil
Profit                .8 Bil      1.4 Bil
% Profit          5.1%      6.3%
Losing Teams  50%      34%

Forbes shows the NBA making an overall profit every year as did the NHL. But beyond revenues, in profit, % profit and % of teams losing money, the NBA is in better shape - and not marginally.

During the last two seasons, the NBA dipped and started to approach the NHL numbers but neither of those seasons dipped as low as the 3.x% profit the NHL made last season.

From that, I see no evidence or basis why the NHL players should get a better deal than the NBA players.
 
Deebo said:
As expected, the league will announce that entire November schedule has been cancelled.
Click to expand...

Of the $650 mil the players were looking for in transition dollars, $230 mil of it just went poof ... like 2005, probably forever.
 
cw said:
Deebo said:
As expected, the league will announce that entire November schedule has been cancelled.
Click to expand...

Of the $650 mil the players were looking for in transition dollars, $230 mil of it just went poof ... like 2005, probably forever.
Click to expand...

Yep. That's why this whole thing is such a farce. The NHLPA need to at least put another offer on the table at this point. Tweak it a bit and see if the owners can work off it. With millions of lost revenue being flushed down the toilet, and with neither side even trying and stop it, you just gotta shake your head.
 
cw said:
Here are the facts as I know them that provide the basis for my remarks:
Click to expand...

The Forbes numbers being estimates and all, I'm not too sure I'd rest all that heavily on them as facts. That said, it's largely immaterial to the point I'm making there. The NBA claimed to be hundreds of millions of dollars in the red as a whole when they negotiated that CBA, regardless of what the facts of the matter may actually be.

cw said:
From that, I see no evidence or basis why the NHL players should get a better deal than the NBA players.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd argue that the NBA's 50/50 with a soft cap and luxury tax, in the eyes of the players, would be a much more preferable deal than what the NHL has offered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top