Lockout Coming ?

  • From Brooks today...you just knew this crap was coming.


    Seven years after mortally wounding the Players’ Association, the NHL Board of Governors is moving in for yet another kill, its first collective bargaining submission yesterday in Toronto as much a declaration of war as an initial proposal off which to negotiate.
    The league power brokers who canceled the 2004-05 season in order to get the hard cap that is contained in the CBA that expires on Sept. 15 after seven seasons of unprecedented revenue growth, are essentially challenging the players, now led by Donald Fehr, to accept another round of massive givebacks or be prepared to miss 2012-13.


    Unless the players cave in historic fashion, a lengthy lockout is a certainty.
    Sources within the industry last night told The Post the league is not only demanding the players accept a cut in their percentage of the gross from the current 57 percent to 46 percent, but also recalculating the definition of Hockey Related Revenue so the pot from which the owners and players share would be drastically reduced.
    Moreover, the NHL proposal would reduce the team ceiling (the cap number) from the current $8 million over the midpoint to $4 million over the midpoint while maintaining the club floor at $8 million below the midpoint.
    The Post has learned that the NHL — which declared a record $3.2 billion in revenue for 2011-12 — is calling for a five-year term limit on all contracts, in which signing bonuses would be forbidden and salaries would be the same for every year of the contract.
    There is currently no restriction on contract lengths with few restrictions on signing bonuses and on front-loading to reduce cap hits on long-term deals.
    The proposal calls for unrestricted free agency to be granted only after a player has accrued 10 seasons in the NHL, without regard to age. Players currently are eligible to become free agents either at the age of 27 or after seven accrued seasons in the NHL.
    In addition, the proposal would eliminate salary arbitration and extend Entry Level contracts from three years to five years.
    Neither the NHL nor NHLPA has publicly acknowledged the proposal. A meeting between the parties is believed to be scheduled for this week in New York.

  • Quote

    Originally posted by slmharpo
    I better get my tickets to those KHL games at the Barclay center. If those are the initial proposals it's going to be a very long negotiation. Never underestimate the greed of sports owners.


    That's the owners proposal, we don't know what the players demanded.

  • Quote

    Originally posted by C
    Just part of the process. Both sides are making too much this time to risk a lockout, IMO.


    It'd be in NOONE's best interest to sit out 2012-13. Don't want to miss out on Ranger games another year. Seems like de ja vu all over again.

  • Whenever Fehr is involved in negotiations, I get worried.


    Of some of the NHL's proposed changes, this is how I feel:


    1) 10 years of NHL experience to gain UFA: too long.
    2) Contract limits of five years: too short.
    3) No more salary arbitration: could care less.
    4) Five-year entry level contracts: with the way the Rangers are developing their youth, this could help the team in the long run.

  • Quote

    Originally posted by joebudzjoe
    Whenever Fehr is involved in negotiations, I get worried.


    Exactly. The NHL players have had a history of employing bad negotiators in the past. Fehr's here to make his mark and he won't back down easily. I expect a shorter season at best.

  • Quote

    Originally posted by C
    Just part of the process. Both sides are making too much this time to risk a lockout, IMO.


    See, that's logical reasoning. But Buttman and the owners are too dumb.


    That offer is an outrage.

  • This is just the first proposal and it is supposed to be unrealistic! You ask for the sun, moon and the stars and you know you aren't gonna get it.


    I wouldn't worry at this point! Brooks is just being an extremist not a good journalist.

  • Last time I sided with the owners because a cap was needed. This time, I blame the owners. League has been growing and doing well. No need to change what isn't broken. Another long work stoppage will damage this sport for good.

  • Uncle Larry's reporting was pretty accurate last time, as I recall it. Hope he is wrong about the tenor of their proposal. Sure don't want to see a lock out. There is enough money in the pot for everyone. Learn to share, kiddies.

  • I have a feeling this lockout might get nastier than the previous one.


    Owners feel like they can dictate things to the players now.
    Players hired Fehr, who is a SOB in negotiations, cause they knew they lost the last time.


    Not a good combination. Both sides are looking to win.

  • The whole idea of players unions in any sport is a joke. They are multimillionaires with individual representation in contract negotiations. More importantly, the two biggest threats to their safety are self-inflicted -- long-term health risks related to PED use and their tendency to enjoy hitting each other in the head. In fact, when a league tries to crack down on players intentionally hurting each other, the UNION steps in to fight it! Not exactly The Jungle...

  • Quote

    Originally posted by KILL-EM-ALL
    I have a feeling this lockout might get nastier than the previous one.


    Owners feel like they can dictate things to the players now.
    Players hired Fehr, who is a SOB in negotiations, cause they knew they lost the last time.


    Not a good combination. Both sides are looking to win.

    I agree. Not a good combination. Hope they can figure it out so the fans get the games.

  • Here's the follow up from yesterday.


    http://www.nypost.com/p/sports…ng_ICDTR32c3ctsOZ3siejtMI


    This is what I said yesterday,


    Per Brooks, obviously:


    "The people out there who wish to interpret this as merely a first proposal from which negotiations can now proceed are kidding themselves. Negotiate off what? Should the NHLPA — which sat through three or four previous days of being told why the current agreement doesn’t work for one team after another — counter by proposing elimination of the cap, a payroll tax at $80 million and free agency after three years?


    This is not an initial good-faith proposal. This is a shot across the bow of the union and at the players by a war machine that went scorched-earth last time and can pledge to do it again any day commissioner Gary Bettman feels like it."


    Per me:


    What cracks me up about all of this is how the owners and management themselves set all the rules after the last CBA expired, cost hockey fans around the world an entire season to get what they wanted, and eventually got the cap they wanted. Then they work around and bend their own cap rules working against each other to sign the players they want.....some of them to long term lucrative contracts that they can obviously afford. Then simply because the CBA expires, they come back like a bunch of whining a$$holes and complain and moan that the system they set up, then manipulated to their teams' benefits, and exploited somehow doesnt work anymore.


    It's not an initial good faith proposal. It's total bull$hit and it's going to lead to another lost season. F**k bettman and f**k the owners this time around. They're shortsighted and greedy and at some point they need to learn to leave well enough alone.


    Im sick of all of this.