|
Larry Brooks makes an out of the box suggestion to resolve revenue issue |
|
|
|
|
|
With the NHL and NHLPA at loggerheads to a certain point regarding negotiations following the leagues proposal for additional 16% deferral and 5% escrow, Larry Brooks proposes an out of the box solution. No word yet on if those in league brass or the owners are in favor. But Brooks' suggestion is a pretty good indication that he is taking the players' side in this argument.
If the NHL needs another $300 million in order to proceed with the 2020-21 season — and that is essentially what Sixth Avenue has represented to the NHLPA — why don’t Gary Bettman, Bill Daly and the Board of Directors simply ask Seattle to advance up to half of the $650 million expansion fee that is currently due before the Kraken’s inaugural 2021-22 season?
Wouldn’t that take care of it, and more appropriately than the owners approaching the players with hands out claiming that the league had massively miscalculated the impact of the pandemic even though the league ran models calculating the impact of the pandemic before agreeing to a six-year collective bargaining agreement extension four-plus months ago?
Brooks's proposal accelerates the paying of the league fee by Seattle to make up the financial variance. If the difference is just $300 million - not a small amount by any stretch - it's far from the gap that would have been expected to trigger the request for additional deferrals and escrow. By receiving the funds early and plowing what in essence is half the franchise entry fee back to the players, the owners show their commitment above and beyond what the players gave in the prior CBA. In addition, since the deferred payments come without interest, the players are actually giving more than the 10% deferral and 20% escrow based on the present value of money.
Brooks then doubles down on his view:
Regardless, if the league’s request for relief coupled with an implied threat to cancel the season is in violation of labor laws in the United States or Canada, then the PA should file an immediate complaint to the appropriate governing bodies.
If the NHL is committing an unfair labor practice, then Don Fehr should immediately label it as such and seek relief of his own for the union.
But if not, if it’s just smarmy business rather than an illegal operation, then it’s up to the PA to come away with something in return for granting the owners their request. It is up to the parties to renegotiate. Canceling the season over this is not an option. Canceling the 2020 playoffs was no option for the players, so why would this be?
Certainly, if the players defer 26 percent of their pay, they should ultimately be repaid — including the interest teams will earn on their employees’ money. That seems fair, doesn’t it? That shouldn’t be too difficult.
The NHL’s behavior in this matter is as fishy as it gets. That is saying something. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if this had always been the plan, to get the PA to agree to a deal in July with the knowledge the league would soon come back for more. If the NHL truly negotiated such a calamitous deal, then why isn’t their Board outrage directed at Bettman?
If Brooks' proposal isn't enough to show in this case he is pro-union, the above cements that view. As he noted in the column and I have discussed before, the owners should want a season to burn the last year of the current media deal with NBC to pave the way for a multi-network and platform arrangement, adding to the coffers. The players want to play because they want to play and get paid.
Asking employees to give back in what is reportedly a 50-50 arrangements tilts the balance and shows where the power sits. Owners' request is an easy one, but the message it sends is clear - both parties are far from equal partners, regardless of the HRR sharing arrangement. In addition, this suggestion leaves a bad taste in the players' and fan base's mouths. This is especially so if the below column is accurate, where the Alberta government “quietly” gave the NHL $4 million dollars during the pandemic between July 31st and October 1st for “advertising and marketing in partnership with the NHL during the playoffs.”
The league is going to have to make accommodations for an expanded roster and injury list that would incorporate athletes in the “unfit to play” category. This could include a taxi squad, but also figuring out how to handle any cancellations due to the virus. But allowing a season to go by the wayside due to an attempt to renegotiate an agreement signed just four months ago is smarmy at best and a bad look for the NHL.
Both sides started talking again after almost a week off. This is a crucial week. January 1 is a major longshot but January 15 or so might be workable. Anywhere from 48-60 games, depending on regular season end date should be feasible. Brooks' suggestion is one possible option to resolving the revenue issue, regardless of whether the NHL brass likes it, this should be considered.
New York Rangers Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»