Proposal breakdown
Here's a look at how the salary cap and salary floor would be impacted by the current CBA along with proposals from the NHL and NHL Players' Association for the 2012-13 season (assuming a fixed $16-million gap is kept in place):
Current
system
Salary
cap: $70.2 million
Salary
floor: $54.2 million
NHL's
proposal
Salary
cap: $55.3 million
Salary
floor: $39.3 million
NHLPA's
proposal (assuming a fixed $16-million gap is kept in place)
Salary
cap: $69 million
Salary
floor: $53 million
— The
Canadian Press
After
Wednesday's session, in which the NHL dismissed the union's initial
proposal, Fehr set off for pre-scheduled player meetings in Chicago.
The union boss will also oversee a session with players in Kelowna,
B.C., before returning to Toronto and resuming CBA discussions on
Aug. 22. At that point, the league and its players' association will
have just 24 days left to reach a new agreement and avoid a lockout.
There is very little common ground between the proposals each side
has put forth and neither seems particularly willing to move off its
current position.
"What
the issues are and how they get solved and how deep the issues go are
something that we're not yet on the same page," Bettman said
Wednesday.
In
simple terms, the owners want to pay players less — much less.
Despite the fact the NHL's revenues grew from $2.2 billion before the
2004-05 lockout to $3.3 billion last season, a number of teams are
still struggling. The financial success of the wealthiest franchises
over the last seven years ended up hurting the poorer ones. That's
because the salary cap was tied to overall hockey-related revenues
and rose dramatically from $39 million in 2005-06 to $64.3 million
last season, bringing the salary floor (the minimum teams must spend)
up along with it. If next season was played under the current system,
the cap would have been set at $70.2 million and the floor would have
been $54.2 million. However, a new deal needs to be put in place
before the NHL resumes operations.
Under
the proposal put forward by the owners in July, the players' share in
revenue would be cut from 57 per cent to 43 per cent — meaning the
salary cap would drop to roughly $55 million next season, or just a
little above where the floor currently rests. The league also called
for the elimination of salary arbitration, contract limits of five
years (with equal money paid each year, essentially eliminating
signing bonuses) and 10 years of service before unrestricted free
agency kicks in. All of those proposed changes are designed to slow
the increase in salaries. The NHLPA estimated the league's proposal
would cost players approximately $450 million per season. Rather than
making a direct counter-offer, Fehr elected to design his own system.
He attempted to appease owners by keeping the hard salary cap in
place and putting a drag on salaries by delinking them from overall
revenues, but called for an expanded revenue-sharing plan that would
see the wealthy teams distribute more than $250 million per season to
the poor. Under the union's plan, the salary cap would fall at
roughly $69 million next season. It would increase to $71 million in
2013-14 and $75 million in 2014-15. In other words, the owners would
only turn significantly more profit if the league continued to grow
at a level beyond the seven per cent it averaged since the lockout.
The offer was designed on the premise that the players would give up
revenue for three years — the system would revert back to the
current rules in the fourth — so that the NHL could work on getting
its struggling teams on stable footing.
"If
there are issues remaining, they are club-specific issues," said
Fehr. "And that if the clubs that don't need assistance are
willing to partner with the players to help get at the issues of the
clubs that may need it we're prepared to do that. But it's not a
circumstance in which the players are just going to say 'OK, take
everything from us."'
The
players are still smarting after being locked out for an entire
season in 2004-05 before eventually accepting a 24 per cent rollback
on salaries and a salary cap. At the time, Bettman repeatedly talked
about the need for "cost certainty" to keep the league
healthy — something the union eventually capitulated to. Now in the
next round of negotiations, the sides appear to be back where they
started and the threat of yet another lockout seems very real. The
league is contending the players need to give up a significant amount
of salary to stabilize the industry while the union maintains that
goal would be best accomplished with the wealthy teams doing more to
help their struggling counterparts. Against that backdrop, the first
signs of animosity are beginning to surface. After
talks wrapped up Wednesday, Fehr hinted the NHL was working from a
"playbook" that involves using the lockout as a negotiating
tactic and called for the owners to present an offer that moved in
the players' direction. Bettman, meanwhile, seemed to suggest that
this wasn't a good time for Fehr to step away from talks and hold
regional player meetings.
"Where
we go from here is I come back next Wednesday to resume negotiations
when the union's ready," said Bettman.
Fehr
contends that he doesn't need to be present for talks to continue.
"As
we go forward ... what we have to do is sit and negotiate until we
get the deal done," he said. "It doesn't mean that every
single person has to be in the room on every single meeting, but the
parties have to be going at it regularly."
No comments:
Post a Comment