New proposal coming from ... league?

We're all tired of waiting around.

50-50 revenue split, slight rollback phased in over X amount of years, move the doomed franchises.

Now if only I were 2 feet shorter and spawned of the antichrist.

Both sides reluctant to move????.....maybe that's the road the fans should take if this fiasco is ever resolved.........empty venues might make them think twice in the future.....what a slap in the fans face....

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 08:36 AM ET  10.16 by dannylimes

50-50 revenue split, slight rollback phased in over X amount of years, move the doomed franchises.

Now if only I were 2 feet shorter and spawned of the antichrist.

I'd pay to read your Ancestry.com file.

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 08:36 AM ET  10.16 by dannylimes

50-50 revenue split, slight rollback phased in over X amount of years, move the doomed franchises. Now if only I were 2 feet shorter and spawned of the antichrist.

I have to saym, that while I am for most thingsthat would get this thing back on, the rollback bothers me the most.

QUOTE(#5):

Originally posted 09:38 AM ET  10.16 by Spiny Norman

I have to say, that while I am for most things that would get this thing back on, the rollback bothers me the most.

Perhaps some Walmart marketing would make you feel better.

Maybe they could agree to a thirty day term for the next CBA? Negotiating once a month might get them to be a tad more responsive to making a renewal deal? Probably not I guess. But I miss seeing the anti-Christ (thanks Danny) and the Fearless Leader for months at a time when they are playing the season normally. Don't you?

QUOTE(#5):

Originally posted 09:38 AM ET  10.16 by Spiny Norman

I have to saym, that while I am for most thingsthat would get this thing back on, the rollback bothers me the most.

Yep. Rolling back salaries on contracts already signed should be a no starter for the players. Let it be a reminder to the owners not to do that anymore.

QUOTE(#8):

Originally posted 09:59 AM ET  10.16 by Nobody expects Phantomphan MMT

Yep. Rolling back salaries on contracts already signed should be a no starter for the players. Let it be a reminder to the owners not to do that anymore.

harrumph harrumph!
Howard Johnson is right!

QUOTE(#8):

Originally posted 09:59 AM ET  10.16 by Nobody expects Phantomphan MMT

Yep. Rolling back salaries on contracts already signed should be a no starter for the players. Let it be a reminder to the owners not to do that anymore.

I have never believed, not even for a nano-second, that there would be a roll back on salaries in contracts already signed.

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 10:23 AM ET  10.16 by Slapshot

I have never believed, not even for a nano-second, that there would be a roll back on salaries in contracts already signed.

Of course I have been wrong before. But only 3,796,451 times.

QUOTE(#6):

Originally posted 09:48 AM ET  10.16 by Canuck eh?

Perhaps some Walmart marketing would make you feel better.

Hey that rollback price is more expensive than the regular price sounds like the Wild's business plan

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 10:23 AM ET  10.16 by Slapshot

I have never believed, not even for a nano-second, that there would be a roll back on salaries in contracts already signed.

This is where it gets confusing for me. if the players revenue share is reduced wouldn' the cap be reduced as well meaning all contracts would have to be rolled back?

QUOTE(#13):

Originally posted 12:11 PM ET  10.16 by whale2

This is where it gets confusing for me. if the players revenue share is reduced wouldn' the cap be reduced as well meaning all contracts would have to be rolled back?

These changes would be going forward not retroactive (at least shouldn't be). The greatest effect will be on contracts signed after the CBA is signed. Those will be lower to keep teams under the cap.

QUOTE(#12):

Originally posted 11:38 AM ET  10.16 by Swamp Dragon

Hey that rollback price is more expensive than the regular price sounds like the Wild's business plan

How many Walmart shoppers do you think would be able to figure that out?

QUOTE(#13):

Originally posted 12:11 PM ET  10.16 by whale2

This is where it gets confusing for me. if the players revenue share is reduced wouldn' the cap be reduced as well meaning all contracts would have to be rolled back?

I really don't think that's possible. I don't know for sure about Canadian law, and I'm no expert in the US for that matter. But I think the players would have a pretty easy time of demanding the owners stand behind contracts they have already signed. The only exception might be if the NHLPA was able to negotiate the ability to change those contracts but that sounds a tad screwy to me and I don't see it happening. And, if the owners put a cap on future contracts I can see successful lawsuits being filed, in the US at least, for collusion. I can see a 50-50 split, phased in over time (maybe a 1 point or so a year) so that it's at the 50-50 level by the end of the NEXT CBA. By that time revenue may (should) have grown to the point that the team Cap won't be lower.

QUOTE(#14):

Originally posted 12:27 PM ET  10.16 by Nobody expects Phantomphan MMT

These changes would be going forward not retroactive (at least shouldn't be). The greatest effect will be on contracts signed after the CBA is signed. Those will be lower to keep teams under the cap.

Thankyou. So it would be the contracts signed after the next CBA that would be effected if the cap is reduced. Some of the boys are going to see a big reduction in pay.

QUOTE(#16):

Originally posted 12:29 PM ET  10.16 by Slapshot

I really don't think that's possible. I don't know for sure about Canadian law, and I'm no expert in the US for that matter. But I think the players would have a pretty easy time of demanding the owners stand behind contracts they have already signed. The only exception might be if the NHLPA was able to negotiate the ability to change those contracts but that sounds a tad screwy to me and I don't see it happening. And, if the owners put a cap on future contracts I can see successful lawsuits being filed, in the US at least, for collusion. I can see a 50-50 split, phased in over time (maybe a 1 point or so a year) so that it's at the 50-50 level by the end of the NEXT CBA. By that time revenue may (should) have grown to the point that the team Cap won't be lower.

This is where the owners have the clout. Court is not necessary if they can get the players to agree to a rollback like they did last time. I can see the owners over time rolling back to a 50-50 split but the players will have to give up something. Perhaps the entry level contract being extended to 5 years. Who knows though both parties don't seem to interested to move or get a deal done.

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 08:50 AM ET  10.16 by Canuck eh?

I'd pay to read your Ancestry.com file.

I'm royalty if you go far enough back. Just sayin'...

So the league offered 50-50 to get a full season. This should be over in a few days. After that, I place all blame on the players.