So the NHL wants 10% varriance and the Players were asking for 20% and all of a sudden the NHL is offering 30% ?

I think the real question that everyone ignores is what do they care about MORE.

I am quite certain nobody in the NHL wanted the PA leadership to file a DOI last night. What they cared about MORE though was not signing a bad deal.

The only question that matters now is where is the fiscal line the NHL has drawn in the sand.

Bettman et al, know exactly what the owners will and won't accept. They are HIGHLY motivated to play a season, but they already know under which conditions they will torch the season.

Does playing matter to them? Of course. At some point though, we really do need to remember, a significant number of teams lose money every year AND the owners of all teams made hundreds of millions or billions elsewhere in the first place, or they would not own teams.

They want to play, but not "at any cost".

What the PA is still asking for is worth hundreds of millions AND still leaves the door open for some cap circumvention, AND significant uncertainty of future costs associated with pensions.

We aren't talking nickels and dimes.
- Aetherial

I agree there is alot still at stake.

The main issue the way I see it, is not the big money making teams but rather the ones that are losing are struggling.

Law of the jungle time........ let the weak be eaten.

According to SportsNet’s Nick Kypreos and confirmed by other sources, the union’s executive board approved another vote from the membership for filing the disclaimer if a CBA agreement is not reached by the end of Thursday’s negotiations in Manhattan.

The voting was expected to begin Thursday and could be completed by Friday in time for a filing.

Needless to say, such a move could seriously stall whatever momentum and traction has been gained to this point in the discussions. Both sides admit they are close to a deal but apparently, neither is willing to move anymore on certain issues that continue to divide them.

It remains unknown exactly what kind of reaction this will draw from the league’s owners but it can’t be good.
- faceto27

If the players decide not to take a deal, they are simply choosing not to get paid for 2 years. How does that make them more money in a career with a short lifespan? It wont.

If the owners decide not to make a deal they are essentially deciding to stop doing business as the National Hockey league and they are toast.

Who wins here? No one. This wont happen.

And don't assume a loss of 2+ seasons. There's nothing to say that it couldn't be dealt with quickly, and training camps open in September.

What would likely happen, though, is the NHLPA would re-form.

And let's be honest: they are never, ever going to disband. They know it means the end of guaranteed contracts.

They will never, ever risk that.
- Atomic Wedgie

Isnt that almost the next stop though? The next thing the Owners will demand and put a season on the line for? Do we really believe that its not an eventuality and that it may be why the PA isnt willing to roll over so easily? Maybe thats why the pension means so much to them now? I dont know, im just guessing and trying to look at both sides to understand whats going.

From my understanding, time just ran out on the old one. Doesnt mean they abondoned it. It just meant both sides felt they may have been really close to a deal and just let it slide. Im not saying I agree with the PA stance, im just trying to rationalize it.
- Gunslinger

It is kinda silly though. It is clearly a ploy. The NHL didn't blink the first time. They are less likely too blink now.

The calendar is the only thing motivating the owners now.

If it goes that way again, I think the moment they file the DOI, the owners have decided to torch the season and go to court.

Anyone want to bet that the crybaby Players will leave all cranky today and we wont have talks and will lose the season bc of someones ego

Any takers??

This looks like a job for the Final Fantasy Hockey League:

http://uncyclopedia.wikia...le_J/Final_Fantasy_Hockey

And don't assume a loss of 2+ seasons. There's nothing to say that it couldn't be dealt with quickly, and training camps open in September.

What would likely happen, though, is the NHLPA would re-form.

And let's be honest: they are never, ever going to disband. They know it means the end of guaranteed contracts.

They will never, ever risk that.
- Atomic Wedgie

I cant see the upper end teams risking a court battle....Going into the courts for an extended battle almost guarantee's the lost of the lower end teams so why not take there chances with the PA's proposal...

We shall see i guess but the NHL could be gone for a very long time..

We about to find out if the upper end owners are willing to run that risk..

Having a union doesn't mean you will have guaranteed contracts. The NFL doesn't have guarnateed contracts and they are unionized.
- faceto27

Yes, but to borrow a phrase from the NHL, that's a hill the NHLPA is willing to die on.

If the NHL were ever to put that on the table in a CBA negotiation, it would be a nuclear winter.

So the NHL wants 10% varriance and the Players were asking for 20% and all of a sudden the NHL is offering 30% ?






- Cfser

If thats the case I have to assume its because they cut back on another one of the issues. So they gave more on this one?

Isnt that almost the next stop though? The next thing the Owners will demand and put a season on the line for? Do we really believe that its not an eventuality and that it may be why the PA isnt willing to roll over so easily? Maybe thats why the pension means so much to them now? I dont know, im just guessing and trying to look at both sides to understand whats going.
- Gunslinger

Don't do it Guns!

and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.

Anyone want to bet that the crybaby Players will leave all cranky today and we wont have talks and will lose the season bc of someones ego

Any takers??
- Flyers_1488

The first part, maybe.

Today is over anyway though.

There is still posturing going on.

Don't do it Guns!

and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
- Aetherial

I just want hockey back

The first part, maybe.

Today is over anyway though.

There is still posturing going on.
- Aetherial

the PA will be posturing 6 weeks after the deal is signed. that's their thing now.

I cant see the upper end teams risking a court battle....Going into the courts for an extended battle almost guarantee's the lost of the lower end teams so why not take there chances with the PA's proposal...

We shall see i guess but the NHL could be gone for a very long time..

We about to find out if the upper end owners are willing to run that risk..
- Fruitcakenipple

But for a lot of the lower teams, they are currently losing money. Ceasing operations for a year or two isn't as scary a thought as you might think - hell, some of them may be better off financially.

Player salaries are currently 57% of revenues - and for some of the smaller teams, that number is higher.

And then you cut out the plane fares and hotel rooms and insurance and everything else.

Laying fallow for a year or two might be a good thing.

If they signed the first offer from the league back in the fall they would have lost loads for years to come....They win in the long run..short term pain for long term gain...Get in the know..
- Fruitcakenipple

Uhhh....no...

If they had negotiated off of the October full season offer rather than being a bunch of pussies then they would have come to a very similar deal and not lost much salary or HRR going forward. Anyone that looks at it differently is delusional!

I agree there is alot still at stake.

The main issue the way I see it, is not the big money making teams but rather the ones that are losing are struggling.

Law of the jungle time........ let the weak be eaten.
- faceto27

On one hand I am tempted to agree.

On the other hand, I feel the PA is fighting for 10% of its members and the expense of the other 90%. I have to wonder if the *rich* owners are really running the show and the league is doing exactly the same thing the PA is doing.

It seems that the NHL is giving concessions that are creeping them closer and closer to the old CBA. (we don't know that for sure). If that is true though, then it looks like the bottom feeder teams will be thrown under the bus again with a CBA they cannot continue to operate or compete under.

It's no leverage whatsoever for the players.

Owners completely outmanouvered them.

It's a completely hollow threat - you can see Bettman and Daly chuckling inside when they discuss it.

No union = no guaranteed contracts. It's a non-starter for the players.
- Atomic Wedgie

Your right ...big picture. But I have to believe that 2 years of litigation isn't what some of these owners want ...even if they know they'll win in the end. It's a little bit of leverage in that sense.

Uhhh....no...

If they had negotiated off of the October full season offer rather than being a bunch of pussies then they would have come to a very similar deal and not lost much salary or HRR going forward. Anyone that looks at it differently is delusional!
- Iggysbff

I dont think there is any way this wouldnt have come down to the wire, no matter when negotiations started. Dont you?

I dont think im delusional.

Isnt that almost the next stop though? The next thing the Owners will demand and put a season on the line for? Do we really believe that its not an eventuality and that it may be why the PA isnt willing to roll over so easily? Maybe thats why the pension means so much to them now? I dont know, im just guessing and trying to look at both sides to understand whats going.
- Gunslinger

Are we talking about loss of guaranteed contracts?

Maybe.

But let's be realistic - signing a 10 year CBA means almost every current player will be gone by the time the next one is up.

And I'd hesitate to predict the landscape 8-10 years from now. Meaning drawing a line in the sand now about something that may happen a decade from now would be stupid.

the PA will be posturing 6 weeks after the deal is signed. that's their thing now.
- DoubleDown

Your avatard needs a little more posturing.

aside from the obvious reasons, i want the lockout to end so i can laugh at vantel when luongo doesn't get traded for CLOWE + HAVLAT

I agree there is alot still at stake.

The main issue the way I see it, is not the big money making teams but rather the ones that are losing are struggling.

Law of the jungle time........ let the weak be eaten.
- faceto27

Except neither the NHL (loss of teams) nor the NHLPA (loss of jobs) wants that.

Are we talking about loss of guaranteed contracts?

Maybe.

But let's be realistic - signing a 10 year CBA means almost every current player will be gone by the time the next one is up.

And I'd hesitate to predict the landscape 8-10 years from now. Meaning drawing a line in the sand now about something that may happen a decade from now would be stupid.
- Atomic Wedgie

Yea, guaranteed contracts. I can see the owners eventually locking out to get that too. I sure hope im wrong. I agree also that a 10 year deal, or as long as possible, will be the best thing for the players.

Uhhh....no...

If they had negotiated off of the October full season offer rather than being a bunch of pussies then they would have come to a very similar deal and not lost much salary or HRR going forward. Anyone that looks at it differently is delusional!
- Iggysbff

let me guess...

U jumped last night missed the sidewalk and landed in a dumpster.....

Try again...