293 replies to this topic

[PeteyNice]

The Devils would not be over the cap. The salaries you list do not include the 24% giveback.

[Elias Sports Bureau]

AP Advisory that the NHLPA has made a counterproposal... unfortunately they have a typo, but I'm guessing they mean $49 mill.


I don't see how they think that would get it done, but then again the $42.5 mill has similar ramifications.

[Don]

That's ridiculous. $49M cap?!?

The NHL gave their final offer - which I think gave away the store - this afternoon and said there was no room to negotiate. That was their final offer. And they come back with a cap that is outrageously higher than the one the NHL put forth?

Good night Irene.

[Elias Sports Bureau]

These are not good public numbers.

[LOTCB]

I think this is all just part of the negogiating...I STRONGLY believe the NHL will NOT hold on its "drop dead offer"...that was done to make the other side blink...

THis 49M cap proposal might get the owners to move up their number, it might not...

But just remember this, the closer they get (and they have), I bet someone caves...because if they get somewhat close and one side rejects it, they will look bad, and we all know how important image is to ego maniacs like Bettman, owners, and the players.

Im off to bed, I bet tomorrow morning there is almost a deal in place.

Call me nuts, Ive been called worse

Edited by Legend Of the Clown Banner, 15 February 2005 - 10:13 PM.

[Triumph]

"No room to negotiate" is an absurd phrase in negotiations. So is "this is our final offer", or "take it or leave it". The 42.5 number could go as high as 45, I think.

The NHL cannot afford to lose a season over what is essentially 20 million dollars. Everyone is throwing away far more money if that occurs. If the PA is seriously talking in these terms and not just posturing for the NLRB, they are forcing a final counter-offer from Bettman, which he will then grant. I don't think you understand negotiation, Don. Goodenow has to come away with SOMETHING.. if Bettman and the owners want to break him, he will end up trying to break them.

[Z-Man]

http://www.tsn.ca/

The NHLPA rejected the NHL's offer of a $42.5-million US salary cap and tendered a counterproposal of a $49-million US maximum individual team cap.


Bye bye season. Bye bye next season.

[PeteyNice]

http://www.tsn.ca/nh...y.asp?id=115069

Dear Gary,

Yesterday afternoon, Bill Daly presented us with an offer from the League that, for the first time, was not linked to League-wide revenues. We appreciated your willingness to adjust your position and we worked to respond in kind. By evening, we had fashioned and reached out to you with an offer from the PA that included, for the first time, a team maximum cap. This offer built upon the 24% rollback and other changes in favour of clubs, which were presented by the Players on December 9, 2004.

As you know, and as Ted told Bill, our offer of a team cap represented a radical step for the PA. We took this step because we too believe that our sport will be damaged greatly by the cancellation of this season and the continuation of the lockout through next season.

Click here to find out more!


We wish that the NHL had offered a no linkage proposal before yesterday so that negotiations in that arena could have commenced sooner. However, we recognize that they did not and we agree that time is short.

In that spirit, and in a final attempt to reach an agreement, we are adjusting our offer of yesterday in two respects. First, we are reducing the maximum individual team cap to $49 million in salary, which does not include the $2.2 million per team in benefits due.

Second, we will adjust our exception provision so that it is available to teams only twice during the six year term and for up to only 10% over the limit of $49 million (to $53.9 million), at the tax rate of 150%. The exception provision is important so that a successful team does not have to arbitrarily dismantle its roster after it has achieved particular success or is in a unique phase of its player roster cycle.

I have attached a short summary of the main deal points discussed by Bill and Ted yesterday, as modified above.

I can be reached at the usual phone numbers.

Regards,

Robert W. Goodenow
Executive Director & General Counsel

NEW CBA DEAL POINTS

1. Term - 6 full seasons (through 9-15-11).

2. CBA System Incorporation of NHLPA December 9, 2004 proposal into the recently expired CBA, with indexing of financial provisions (per diems, etc.) at 2% per year, with the following additional changes requested by the NHL yesterday:

(a) Increased salary arbitration rights for Clubs -- to be agreed upon. Salary arbitration available after Player leaves Entry Level System.

(b) Cap on Exhibit 5 Individual B Performance Bonuses -- to be agreed upon.

© Replace NHLPA Revenue Sharing Plan with NHL Revenue Sharing Plan to share at least $88M in each year of the Agreement. Clubs may credit any payroll taxes paid against their revenue sharing contribution.

3. Team Payroll Limit - $49M in salary and bonuses

4. Minimum Team Payroll - $25M (each team can fall no more than 10% below only twice during term).

5. Minimum Player Salary - $300K (as per NHL Proposal)

6. Payroll Taxes - $40M - $43M (25%)
$43M - $46M (50%)
$46M - $49M (75%)
$49M - $53.9M (150%) only twice per team during 6 year term

7. Indexing of Tax Rates and Payroll Minimums & Maximums All dollar amounts would be in place for 2004-05 (pro-rated) and 2005-06. Dollar levels for tax rates, payroll minimums & maximums for subsequent years either constant or increased by % change in greater of either hockey related revenues or only the gate receipts and broadcasting segments of hockey related revenues from the 2005-06 base year.

8. 2005 Playoffs 55% of playoff revenues to be paid to Players for the 2005 playoffs.

[NJDevs4978]

Well the players have just confirmed what a-holes they are. I don't even get to go to bed with hope for one lousy night

[Triumph]

This discussion is finally getting to the actual heart of the issue, with the 'philosophical' divide now being viewed in purely monetary terms: the PA doesn't believe the league lost $280 million. This $49 million cap, assuming about 15 teams reach it, provides the players with an extra $105 million over the NHL's plan. If the NHL was lying, they take this offer, if they weren't, they decline it. I still think they decline it and counter-offer with 45.

However, there is a luxury tax here, so maybe we're getting somewhere.

[Z-Man]

I don't think the NHL will counter. $7 million is still pretty significant, especially with only 12 hours to go.

[LOTCB]

This discussion is finally getting to the actual heart of the issue, with the 'philosophical' divide now being viewed in purely monetary terms:  the PA doesn't believe the league lost $280 million.  This $49 million cap, assuming about 15 teams reach it, provides the players with an extra $105 million over the NHL's plan.  If the NHL was lying, they take this offer, if they weren't, they decline it.  I still think they decline it and counter-offer with 45. 

However, there is a luxury tax here, so maybe we're getting somewhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree...FINALLY some on the spot conterproposing...tells me they are getting close...the framework is there, it WILL get done!!! Keep the coffee brewin and get this damn CBA done already!!!!

And that 11am date...dont believe that either....this is classic chess.

Edited by Legend Of the Clown Banner, 15 February 2005 - 10:27 PM.

[NJDevs4978]

If the owners are lying about the drop-dead date and/or the 'final' offer then why would the players believe anything from here on out during what's left of this negotiation? I do think the owners are not budging from $42.5, that doesn't neccesarily mean there isn't something else the owners could give back in the deal, but I think the owners bent as far as they can go on the cap number, remember they only need eight veto votes to cancel a deal so I really don't think they have a lot of flexibility. The PA's got till 11 AM to get their head out of their a$$, I don't think they will though

Edited by Hasan4978, 15 February 2005 - 10:32 PM.

[msweet]

I am so glad I wasn't watching the Internet tonoght and I simply sat back and watched the Devils beat the Phailures in the game that counted most.

I admit it, I get pleasure out of seeing Erica Lindros taken out by the captain. G-d forgive me.

Watching that was therapudic.... I don't care what they settle on... btw, that letter from Bettman is the FINAL offer... players will have to accept or die.

[Triumph]

$7 million is significant; if and only if you regard these as real proposals.

Both sides A: do not want to accept the first offer that comes their way and B: do not want to be the party that effectively cancels the season by rejecting a proposal without offering a counter-proposal. Again, it's going to be a lot more than $105 million that the players (and owners) will be losing if they blow up the season, so the elements for a deal are all certainly here.

Has, you can't say "this is our final offer" and expect someone to accept it. The PA has already bent over backwards in capitulating to the cap, and doing so in a real way. Both sides need to be able to declare a victory for this to work. If the NHL says "f-off, 42.5 was as high as we will go", they will have given the PR victory right over to the players, which is unacceptable when they've been winning from Day One.

Edited by Triumph, 15 February 2005 - 10:35 PM.

[SueNJ97]

The actual active rosters are 23 players, not 20. The number of players who are scheduled to play on any particular night are 20, 18 skaters and 2 goalies. Did someone plan to change that to 20 under the new CBA...is that why people suddenly working off of 20 players here?

When we have talked about contracting teams we have always calculated the number of jobs lost off the 23 roster spots, as far as I know.

[Z-Man]

$7 million is significant; if and only if you regard these as real proposals. 

Both sides A:  do not want to accept the first offer that comes their way and B:  do not want to be the party that effectively cancels the season by rejecting a proposal without offering a counter-proposal.  Again, it's going to be a lot more than $105 million that the players (and owners) will be losing if they blow up the season, so the elements for a deal are all certainly here.

Damn, I hope you're right Tri.

You'd think cooler and more sensible heads would prevail at this point and say "Let's just split the difference and go with $46 million. Anything over $40 million is taxed dollar for dollar."

IS THAT ASKING TOO FREAKING MUCH?????

Teams that reach a $46 million cap would have an average salary of exactly $2 million per player on their roster. The NHLPA can't have a beef with that.

Edited by Z-Man, 15 February 2005 - 10:39 PM.

[NJDevs4978]

Tri, both sides bent yesterday, the owners came off of THEIR big thing (or at least one of the two) which was linkage and upped the cap number ever so slightly. I think at this point PR's irrelevant, if the season gets canceled now most people will say a pox on both their houses.

Sue, I think the only real way you can increase roster spots is if you upped the total roster to 24 and had four scratches per game instead of three. I really don't think having a 13th forward or a 7th d or a 3rd goalie dress for games would be prudent.

[Derek21]

You're all deluded.

Eighteen teams were below the cap but what this does is it throws the brakes on any salary growth.  I hardly think it's a white flag - you've been believing the Bettman party line far too much if you think it's a surrender.  With inflation, assuming this cap does not ascend in any significant way in the next ten years, the NHL will be fine.  It's not like every team is going to throw themselves up to the threshold of the cap, or has to.  The point is to destroy NHL player salary growth and provide some measure of cost certainty, which this does.  If teams that can afford players are up to the cap, and teams that can't aren't, where do the free agents go?  Where's the market for them?  There is none.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I do believe I agreed that I don't think $42.5 is a surrender either. And presuming this deal also includes the rollback, teams' losses will be cut just by that alone and they'll stay cut because of the cap. But of course we don't know WHAT this deal includes other than the headline.

And Derek and 7, $46 million isn't a 'compromise'...not when the players' $52 million cap is a soft cap with a luxury tax and could go as high as $57 million in any given year.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes it is Has. They agreed to a cap. And now they came down to $49 million while the NHL still stays firm at $42.5.

Like JD said on MSG before, both sides' offers aren't good enough. Unless they find a way to get to $45 million, there won't be an agreement.

[redruM]

That's ridiculous. $49M cap?!?

The NHL gave their final offer - which I think gave away the store - this afternoon and said there was no room to negotiate. That was their final offer. And they come back with a cap that is outrageously higher than the one the NHL put forth?

Good night Irene.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don :

First rule of negotiating... no offer is final until there are signatures on the document....