1. #13641
    I'm ok right now, but will really be missing it when football is over.

    I really just think the players need to shut up and concede. I mean, c'mon, they work for the owners...and make plenty of money playing a GAME for a living. There is just as much fault on the player's union as the owners/Bettman.

    Granted, I still think Bettman should die a slow, agonizing death for having 3 lockouts under his belt.

    "There are two types of guys in this world. Guys who sniff their fingers after scratching their balls, and dirty fucking liars." -StylesClashv3
    "Elo Hell is where the Ego is greater than the Elo." -Bystekhilcar

  2. #13642
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Sportsnet has the ancillary details of the NHL's proposal.
    -Free agency is eight years of service or 28. NHL's original offer was 10 years, 30. NHLPA is currently at 7 and 27 I believe.
    -Contracts capped at five years.
    -Arbitration still exists
    -Contracts for NHL players in the AHL count against the salary cap (I imagine this means Wade Redden, et al)
    -Revenue sharing would be around $200 million

    Hard to imagine this deal getting any better for the players.

  3. #13643
    I am Murloc! Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Halifax, NS.
    Posts
    5,822
    Players will hopefully take this one, it's fair for both sides.

    You can tell WoW changed the MMO for good when players started complaining about the amount of time they sink, into a time sink.

  4. #13644
    Quote Originally Posted by conscript View Post
    Sportsnet has the ancillary details of the NHL's proposal.
    -Free agency is eight years of service or 28. NHL's original offer was 10 years, 30. NHLPA is currently at 7 and 27 I believe.
    -Contracts capped at five years.
    -Arbitration still exists
    -Contracts for NHL players in the AHL count against the salary cap (I imagine this means Wade Redden, et al)
    -Revenue sharing would be around $200 million

    Hard to imagine this deal getting any better for the players.
    I like all but the second last, seems silly that the owners would not want to bury their bad decisions

  5. #13645
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennadrel View Post
    I like all but the second last, seems silly that the owners would not want to bury their bad decisions
    Not burying their bad decisions means that they don't have to actually pay out more money than the cap. You can't hide Redden's $6 million from the cap and still be paying the cap meaning you are spending $66 instead of $60 million or w/e the number is. That proposal allows owners to get rid of problems, continue to pay for them, but not essentially be forced to increase their payrolls by moving back up to the cap after moving the player down to the AHL. At least I figure the owners are the ones who support that since at leas tin my understanding it decreases their costs whereas it actually takes salary away from more guys in the NHL if teams can technically exceed the cap.

  6. #13646
    Hopefully they finish the negotiations now. Learned anything about Shared Sacrifice, Gary?

  7. #13647
    Pretty much everything i've seen leads me too believe that if the players dont take this, they pretty much lose all fan backing.

  8. #13648
    We shall find out tomorrow I suppose, they have to review it.

  9. #13649
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennadrel View Post
    We shall find out tomorrow I suppose, they have to review it.
    IIRC they had a NHLPA conference call last night at 5pm EST. So ya we should find out today if they take it or if they try and hold out for more. Once they do get it worked out, I'm intrigued to see how many of the guys currently in the KHL actually come back. If salary is competitive, why not tell the owners to go fuck themselves and refuse to honor the contract that they have refused to honor. They probably retain those contract rights, the owners I mean, so if you ever came back it was to them, but if you are an older player, why not tell the NHL to shove it.

  10. #13650
    If that deal isn't agreed upon so we can move on with playing some hockey, I will lose all faith in the NHL as a whole.

    I just moved from outside of Boston to the Tampa area...I'm really looking forward to $80 tickets that would have cost me $250 up north.

    "There are two types of guys in this world. Guys who sniff their fingers after scratching their balls, and dirty fucking liars." -StylesClashv3
    "Elo Hell is where the Ego is greater than the Elo." -Bystekhilcar

  11. #13651
    Epic! Masqerader's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    1,521
    the new offer wasn't meant with great enthusiasm according to tsn.... basically if the season is gonna be canceled the NHL wants to make sure the players are the one who do it.. good ploy by the NHL

  12. #13652
    At least the deal gives the PA something to work with, because honestly, had they tabled the current offer at the beginning of the negotiations, I would think the season would have started on time. A month late, I don't think they should be doing a full 82 game schedule, the logistics are terrible and hamper next summer off for teams in the playoffs.

  13. #13653
    Glad to see some movement finally. It's been like 2 guys trying to get a deal where one guy offers $100 and the other guy wants a $1000 but each offer has been $101 and $999 instead of $250 or $750. I highly doubt they will take this offer but hopefully they can use it as a framework to get a deal done. I have little sympathy for both sides but so many people depend on the games like ushers. concession people not to mention nearby restaurants and bars that I would like a deal done so they can go back to earning a living.

  14. #13654
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    As of an hour ago the NHLPA has not made any contact with the NHL about the deal. Only thing they have done is openly bitch about the NHL making the stuff public.

    The league’s proposal includes a clause that says all years of existing contracts longer than five years will be charged against the cap regardless of whether or not a player is still playing. If that player is traded, the new team takes on his cap hit, but if he retires, the cap hit reverts back to the team with which he originally signed. That means teams like Chicago, Detroit, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Vancouver and others who signed players to ultralong deals won’t be able to shake them off the books even if the player is retired or traded.

    For example, if Roberto Luongo is traded to Florida in two weeks, his $5.3 million cap hit travels with him to the Panthers. But that’s a deal that extends until 2021-22, so let’s say Luongo plays five more seasons and retires at the age of 38 — a very reasonable long-term plan for the goalie. The Canucks are still hit with a salary cap charge for four more years.
    Interesting.
    Last edited by conscript; 2012-10-17 at 05:17 PM.

  15. #13655
    Epic! Masqerader's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    1,521
    I would laugh opening night if fans just pelted the players with garbage... just a reminder who pays their bills

  16. #13656
    Quote Originally Posted by conscript View Post
    As of an hour ago the NHLPA has not made any contact with the NHL about the deal. Only thing they have done is openly bitch about the NHL making the stuff public.



    Interesting.
    I like this as it's a good reminder to the GM's that retirement contracts are absurd, and that front loading is also no longer acceptable. And the more I think about this, I'd have no problems if Luongo wound up in Toronto and retired in a few years, cause the Canucks would get the shaft with his contract for 4 years. Also, considering the league wants to stop teams from burying contracts in the AHL, which I think they could put a dollar limit on how much a contract is worth that can be buried rather then just outright saying that you can't just bury a 4 or 5 million dollar player for the remainder of their contract without it counting against the cap, but a guy making 3 million or less would be allowed to be sent down and not have it impact the cap. It forces GM's to be more creative with their deals.

  17. #13657
    Bloodsail Admiral Garbles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,017



  18. #13658
    Stood in the Fire Knails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    492
    Just got word that Toews isn't "buying what the NHL is selling..."

    http://www.suntimes.com/sports/15816...s-selling.html

  19. #13659
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    NHL and NHLPA met. No progress. The players will accept an HRR split of 50/50 but they aren't going to accept the owners not honoring their current contracts by rolling back salaries. The current deal the NHL offered up rolled them back through escrow rather than flat out rolling back their number.

  20. #13660
    If that's the only sticking point then toss the owners their own deal with that change and be done with it. Basically all I'm reading is " I don't care as long as i get mine "

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •