My reaction to the NHLPA's new CBA proposal
http://www.nhlpa.com/Proposal/PDFTransferFile.asp
First let me start off by saying that I'm excited by the NHLPA's latest proposal. It's far from perfect, but it is much better than their previous two offers and should kick start serious negotiations. Hopefully a deal can be done in the next little while and there will be a shortened NHL season to follow.
The NHLPA broke their offer out into 6 main parts:
1) The immediate roll back of salaries by 24%.
The NHLPA's previous offer was a 5% rollback on salaries, so this his a huge move for the NHLPA. Although, the NHLPA has overstated a lot of the immediate savings created by this rollback due to the fact that the 2004-05 season will not be an 82 game season and salaries would likely have been on a pro-rated basis.
But, this does save the NHL money immediately, it does re-set the overall marketplace for future contracts, and will get the NHLPA serious PR points with the fans and media, along with strengthening their case if the NHL tries to go the impasse and implementation route to get cost certainty.
2) The NHLPA offered up a few ways to deflate salaries on an ongoing basis. These are the systemic issues that the NHL has talked about having to address.
Most noticeably, the NHLPA has offered serious cut backs on rookie salaries. The newest offer caps base salaries for rookies at $850,000 per year with only up to $212,500 being in a yearly signing bonus that is guaranteed money for the players. Also, they've added restrictions to Group "A" bonuses to 4 bonuses per year worth $212,500 each for a total of $850,000. This area was unlimited under the previous CBA. Group "B" bonuses for being amongst league leaders in various statistical categories remain completely open to negotiation between the players and clubs.
This area is nice, but I believe the triggers for both the Group "A" and "B" bonuses need to be tougher to obtain for players.
Also, there are changes to the qualifying offer system. The offer would have QOs set at 110% for players making less than $660,000, 105% for players making between $660,000 and $1 million, and 100% for players making over $1 million. Clubs were also given the option to take players to arbitration on a limited basis.
Personally, the QO for players making over $1 million needs to be less than 100% unless the NHLPA wants to remove the limits on the number of players that a team can opt to take to arbitration.
3) The NHLPA made their luxury tax system tougher (20% over $45 million, 50% over $50 million, and 60% over $60 million), but it is still too weak.
Taking the 24% rollback into account, only 3 teams would pay a luxury tax next season. And the total payouts would be less than $2 million.
The current offer sets the bar too high and the penalties are too weak to really put a drag on salaries moving forward. Although, I did like the increasing penalties for repeat offenders.
4) The one area of the proposal that I have to give the NHLPA major kudos for is the area of revenue sharing. The NHLPA wants revenue sharing on a much larger scale than the NHL does. The NHL wants a system set up where the top 10 revenue generating teams pay a total of $65 million. The NHLPA wants that total to be $215 million. Although, in this offer they have three separate thresholds ($65, 124, and 189 million) for the NHL to choose from.
If the NHL is serious about leveling the playing field for all the teams, they should take the NHLPA up on the $189 million revenue sharing pot figure.
5) The NHLPA is asking that a joint NHL-NHLPA effort to look at improving various aspects of the game from marketing to game rules to expansion and beyond. On the heels of the summit held by Brendan Shanahan, I think this is a fine idea that should be implemented for the good of the game and of the league.
At a minimum, it would create more NHLPA ownership of the state of the current game. Right now, the NHLPA likes to lay all the blame for the state of the NHL at the feet of the owners and Gary Bettman. This could help create the partnership that Bettman says he wants with the players and that the league desperately needs moving forward.
6) There are a number of details that the NHLPA would like to change moving forward that appear on the surface to be minor details.
The major one in my mind is the tweaks to the draft that the NHLPA is looking for. I have some concerns about stuff like talk of treating NCAA and European draftees like those from the CHL. If NCAA and European draftees become UFAs two years after they are drafted that will likely create competition issues as players will opt to not go to the teams that drafted them and instead heading to the open market. Personally, I'd rather see it go the other way and have CHLers tied to the teams that draft them longer.
At the end of the day, the NHLPA has made a good faith offer that could kickstart negotiations that could save the NHL season. A deal that could be made off of this proposal will not be the perfect deal for either side. However, I do believe that any deal that could be made off of this proposal will end up being better for each side than whatever happens if the season is lost.
Hopefully this leads to a deal getting done.
The NHL is going to digest the offer and come back with a counter-proposal on Tuesday. Hopefully it is not merely a take it or leave it stance that hinges entirely on the NHL getting cost certainty.
But we shall see............
First let me start off by saying that I'm excited by the NHLPA's latest proposal. It's far from perfect, but it is much better than their previous two offers and should kick start serious negotiations. Hopefully a deal can be done in the next little while and there will be a shortened NHL season to follow.
The NHLPA broke their offer out into 6 main parts:
1) The immediate roll back of salaries by 24%.
The NHLPA's previous offer was a 5% rollback on salaries, so this his a huge move for the NHLPA. Although, the NHLPA has overstated a lot of the immediate savings created by this rollback due to the fact that the 2004-05 season will not be an 82 game season and salaries would likely have been on a pro-rated basis.
But, this does save the NHL money immediately, it does re-set the overall marketplace for future contracts, and will get the NHLPA serious PR points with the fans and media, along with strengthening their case if the NHL tries to go the impasse and implementation route to get cost certainty.
2) The NHLPA offered up a few ways to deflate salaries on an ongoing basis. These are the systemic issues that the NHL has talked about having to address.
Most noticeably, the NHLPA has offered serious cut backs on rookie salaries. The newest offer caps base salaries for rookies at $850,000 per year with only up to $212,500 being in a yearly signing bonus that is guaranteed money for the players. Also, they've added restrictions to Group "A" bonuses to 4 bonuses per year worth $212,500 each for a total of $850,000. This area was unlimited under the previous CBA. Group "B" bonuses for being amongst league leaders in various statistical categories remain completely open to negotiation between the players and clubs.
This area is nice, but I believe the triggers for both the Group "A" and "B" bonuses need to be tougher to obtain for players.
Also, there are changes to the qualifying offer system. The offer would have QOs set at 110% for players making less than $660,000, 105% for players making between $660,000 and $1 million, and 100% for players making over $1 million. Clubs were also given the option to take players to arbitration on a limited basis.
Personally, the QO for players making over $1 million needs to be less than 100% unless the NHLPA wants to remove the limits on the number of players that a team can opt to take to arbitration.
3) The NHLPA made their luxury tax system tougher (20% over $45 million, 50% over $50 million, and 60% over $60 million), but it is still too weak.
Taking the 24% rollback into account, only 3 teams would pay a luxury tax next season. And the total payouts would be less than $2 million.
The current offer sets the bar too high and the penalties are too weak to really put a drag on salaries moving forward. Although, I did like the increasing penalties for repeat offenders.
4) The one area of the proposal that I have to give the NHLPA major kudos for is the area of revenue sharing. The NHLPA wants revenue sharing on a much larger scale than the NHL does. The NHL wants a system set up where the top 10 revenue generating teams pay a total of $65 million. The NHLPA wants that total to be $215 million. Although, in this offer they have three separate thresholds ($65, 124, and 189 million) for the NHL to choose from.
If the NHL is serious about leveling the playing field for all the teams, they should take the NHLPA up on the $189 million revenue sharing pot figure.
5) The NHLPA is asking that a joint NHL-NHLPA effort to look at improving various aspects of the game from marketing to game rules to expansion and beyond. On the heels of the summit held by Brendan Shanahan, I think this is a fine idea that should be implemented for the good of the game and of the league.
At a minimum, it would create more NHLPA ownership of the state of the current game. Right now, the NHLPA likes to lay all the blame for the state of the NHL at the feet of the owners and Gary Bettman. This could help create the partnership that Bettman says he wants with the players and that the league desperately needs moving forward.
6) There are a number of details that the NHLPA would like to change moving forward that appear on the surface to be minor details.
The major one in my mind is the tweaks to the draft that the NHLPA is looking for. I have some concerns about stuff like talk of treating NCAA and European draftees like those from the CHL. If NCAA and European draftees become UFAs two years after they are drafted that will likely create competition issues as players will opt to not go to the teams that drafted them and instead heading to the open market. Personally, I'd rather see it go the other way and have CHLers tied to the teams that draft them longer.
At the end of the day, the NHLPA has made a good faith offer that could kickstart negotiations that could save the NHL season. A deal that could be made off of this proposal will not be the perfect deal for either side. However, I do believe that any deal that could be made off of this proposal will end up being better for each side than whatever happens if the season is lost.
Hopefully this leads to a deal getting done.
The NHL is going to digest the offer and come back with a counter-proposal on Tuesday. Hopefully it is not merely a take it or leave it stance that hinges entirely on the NHL getting cost certainty.
But we shall see............
posted by James W at 5:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home