NHL Lockout Clock

[Carcillo]

With that in mind, the owner's know their bottom line, why don't they just spend accordingly? And when does it end? Next lockout, will there be a new crisis where the league is not healthy and the owners need a 60-40 split with 3 year contracts?

Well a lot of the teams that lose money spend only to the cap floor or to the mid-point. So you can say they spend accordingly and still lose money.

It's pointless to think about the future CBA negotiations. If it would require that to keep the league healthy then so be it. Or maybe the league is healthier than ever so that the players can require a bigger share of the pie? Who knows and it doesn't matter. Just focus on this current CBA - not what happened 8 years ago or what might happen 8 years from now.

[arctic_rogue]

Well a lot of the teams that lose money spend only to the cap floor or to the mid-point. So you can say they spend accordingly and still lose money.

It's pointless to think about the future CBA negotiations. If it would require that to keep the league healthy then so be it. Or maybe the league is healthier than ever so that the players can require a bigger share of the pie? Who knows and it doesn't matter. Just focus on this current CBA - not what happened 8 years ago or what might happen 8 years from now.

But it does matter. If this is the approach of the NHL repeatedly, then its like crying wolf. At asome point they have to realize that hitting the reset button on revenue gains doesn't help the cause. So yes, history is important. I agree considering the future is not, though.

[Bomm Bastic]

Well a lot of the teams that lose money spend only to the cap floor or to the mid-point. So you can say they spend accordingly and still lose money.

It's pointless to think about the future CBA negotiations. If it would require that to keep the league healthy then so be it. Or maybe the league is healthier than ever so that the players can require a bigger share of the pie? Who knows and it doesn't matter. Just focus on this current CBA - not what happened 8 years ago or what might happen 8 years from now.

Isn't that exactly why we're in this present cluster f**k? Lack of foresight/inability to remember past mistakes?

[Dakkster]

Isn't that exactly why we're in this present cluster f**k? Lack of foresight/inability to remember past mistakes?

Yes, it certainly is. The players have to be extra careful and get some sort of meaningful revenue sharing in there, or else the owners will come whining again in another eight years and say "THIS SYSTEM IS KILLING US, WE NEED A BIGGER SHARE OF THE PIE!!!111". They need to fix it now and also make sure that it's as future proof as possible.

Or we could just throw all of human history out the window, because hey, what is there to learn from that anyway, right?

[arctic_rogue]

Yes, it certainly is. The players have to be extra careful and get some sort of meaningful revenue sharing in there, or else the owners will come whining again in another eight years and say "THIS SYSTEM IS KILLING US, WE NEED A BIGGER SHARE OF THE PIE!!!111". They need to fix it now and also make sure that it's as future proof as possible.

Or we could just throw all of human history out the window, because hey, what is there to learn from that anyway, right?

And maybe the NHL needs to realize that there's no sense putting franchises in non-hockey markets.

[Loch]

And maybe the NHL needs to realize that there's no sense putting franchises in non-hockey markets.

Well, there goes my morning coffee...

Thanks, I needed the laugh!

[Dakkster]

And maybe the NHL needs to realize that there's no sense putting franchises in non-hockey markets.

I don't understand why you want to go and bring up logic into this discussion.

[Loch]

How Negotiations work, NHL style:

PA announces that they will agree to a 10 yr CBA and a 5yr cap on contract length in exchange for the max/min variation in a contract being set at 40% instead of 10%

Fans hear: Finally, the PA is getting serious about a deal getting done, the lock-out is almost over!

NHL hears: The PA is crumbling, we can break them. Let's pull the last offer off the table.

Steve Fehr hears: A voicemail from Bill Daly.

[Carcillo]

But it does matter. If this is the approach of the NHL repeatedly, then its like crying wolf. At asome point they have to realize that hitting the reset button on revenue gains doesn't help the cause. So yes, history is important. I agree considering the future is not, though.

Of course history is important. Didn't try to say that it wasn't. But fighting a fight that happened 8 years ago doesn't help get this CBA done and hockey back on the ice. That's been part of the problem here. Players made out like bandits during the last CBA and are still crying how much they gave during last round of negotiations.

We're talking about getting to 50/50 split of HRR. So yes I agree that hitting the reset button on revenue gains isn't always the answer but this time it is. 50/50 HRR split is fair and follows the industry trends.

Isn't that exactly why we're in this present cluster f**k? Lack of foresight/inability to remember past mistakes?

Lack of foresight? Yes. But you can never make any CBA foolproof. Also remember that CBA negotiations is give and take. There's no guarantee NHL would have gotten 50/50 split last time without the fight being much longer and bloodier. NHL got the cap and in concession the players got bigger share of HRR. And now the system needs to be tweaked. You can consider it as lack of foresight or a battle NHL needed to go in two rounds to get their end game.

Inability to remember past mistakes? Well remembering and learning from those is always important but you still need to fix current issues.

Yes, it certainly is. The players have to be extra careful and get some sort of meaningful revenue sharing in there, or else the owners will come whining again in another eight years and say "THIS SYSTEM IS KILLING US, WE NEED A BIGGER SHARE OF THE PIE!!!111". They need to fix it now and also make sure that it's as future proof as possible.

Or we could just throw all of human history out the window, because hey, what is there to learn from that anyway, right?

What is meaningful revenue sharing? NHL have already agreed to share more than $200 million in revenue. That's more than their national TV deal is worth. So is that enough? Maybe, maybe not. But it's not like the players are pushing on this issue anymore and the amount they requested (it was either $240 or $260 million) isn't far from what the NHL agreed to.

Yes, they do need to make it as future proof as possible. That's why it's easier to side with NHL here. They're the ones trying to do that while Fehr is trying to squeeze in all kinds of poison pills that could have huge adverse economical impact to the overall health of the league while giving the players more and more money.

[arctic_rogue]

That's why it's easier to side with NHL here. They're the ones trying to do that while Fehr is trying to squeeze in all kinds of poison pills that could have huge adverse economical impact to the overall health of the league while giving the players more and more money.

Alright Carcillo. Time to fess up. Which team's payroll are you on? Or are directly under the supervision of Mr. Bettman?

[Carcillo]

Alright Carcillo. Time to fess up. Which team's payroll are you on? Or are directly under the supervision of Mr. Bettman?

I don't have to be on NHL's payroll to realise that Fehr's proposals are all about getting the maximum amount of money to players and not about creating an economically healthy and sustainable league. If NHL took the PA's proposal today, I guarantee we'd be in this exact same situation when the CBA would expire. I'd rather not live another lockout anymore. I do believe the NHL's offers go a lot further in trying to prevent future lockouts than PA's offers.

[arctic_rogue]

I don't have to be on NHL's payroll to realise that Fehr's proposals are all about getting the maximum amount of money to players and not about creating an economically healthy and sustainable league.

Doesn't it work the same way too?

I don't have to be on NHLPA's payroll to realise that Bettman's proposals are all about getting the maximum amount of money to owners and not about creating an economically healthy and sustainable league.

[Carcillo]

Doesn't it work the same way too?

I don't have to be on NHLPA's payroll to realise that Bettman's proposals are all about getting the maximum amount of money to owners and not about creating an economically healthy and sustainable league.

You can spin it any way you want but based on what the parties have offered throughout these negotiations I'd say you're wrong. But feel to free to make your mind based on the info we have about the offers given.

[ericdaoust]

Doesn't it work the same way too?

I don't have to be on NHLPA's payroll to realise that Bettman's proposals are all about getting the maximum amount of money to owners and not about creating an economically healthy and sustainable league.

Except Bettman's last CBA did not get the owners the maximum amount of money, hence why we are here now.

The players are fighting for less than what they are losing by sitting out.

[arctic_rogue]

You can spin it any way you want but based on what the parties have offered throughout these negotiations I'd say you're wrong. But feel to free to make your mind based on the info we have about the offers given.

Bettman spent the last 4 or 5 years saying how the league is doing great and revenue is sky high. Again, why not re-evaluate the teams in struggling markets. There's more to than just cutting in to the pie. Although, I do agree that 50-50 should be a standard split.