The Phoenix Coyotes laid off media relations manager Tim Bulmer on Wednesday due to the NHL lockout. Bulmer stated in an email to Craig Morgan of Fox Sports Arizona that his last day will be on Nov. 5 and later confirmed to Greg Wyshynski of Yahoo! that he was let go due to the lockout. As of this time, it doesn't appear as though the organization has relieved any other employees. With the NHL and NHL Players Association still at odds in collective bargaining, the threat of company employees losing jobs has been a concern since the beginning of the process. The Florida Panthers and Ottawa Senators have already been forced to relieve employees of their duties in addition to the league offices cutting down their business week to four-days and reducing employees' salaries by 20 percent. The NHL and NHLPA have yet to announce any future meetings but the two sides have been in contact via phone and email. Last week, the league announced the cancelation of all regular season games through Nov. 30 and reports have already circulated that the Winter Classic could be canceled sometime this week.
Wednesday, 31 October 2012
Tuesday, 30 October 2012
Islanders move to Brooklyn
Welcome to Brookln were the words uttered on Wednesday by several elated power brokers, chief among them New York Islanders owner Charles Wang and NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, sitting in a row on a podium just inside the main entrance at the brand new Barclays Center. The Islanders put any questions about their future to bed by announcing they will be staying in New York, even technically on Long Island, thanks to a 25-year lease agreement Wang signed to move the team to Brooklyn's newly opened arena beginning with the 2015-16 NHL season. Wang said he plans to honor the team's current lease agreement at Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum in Uniondale, N.Y., through its expiration in 2015. The Islanders have called the Coliseum home since entering the NHL in 1972.
"Our goal from the outset was to have the Islanders play in a local, world-class facility that possesses the amenities our fans deserve," Wang said in announcing the new partnership with Barclays Center. "I'm happy to announce we achieve that goal with today's announcement."
The Barclays Center opened last month and is the home of the NBA's Brooklyn Nets, who ironically started as the New York Nets and were co-tenants with the Islanders at Nassau Coliseum from 1972-77. "This announcement today reunites these two franchises," Wang said.
Wang said he will continue to own the Islanders and called the lease agreement with Barclays Center "ironclad." He added the team will continue to be called the New York Islanders. Wang also revealed that the plan is to move some of the Islanders' business operations to Barclays Center while still keeping ties to Nassau County. He added that the Islanders expect to continue to use Iceworks in Syosset, N.Y., as their practice facility even after the move to Brooklyn.
Barclays Center CEO Brett Yormark said they are already taking deposits for 2015-16 season tickets. Commissioner Bettman said he was elated because the Islanders will be staying on Long Island.
"I know [Wang] has spent the better part of a decade in pursuit of a new local home for the Islanders because he is as passionate about this area," he said. "To finally be in position to say to New York Islander fans you don't have to worry about the future of this club, the club is staying local, you'll be able to get to it easily, for us, for Islander fans, I know for Charles and [Barclays Center majority owner and developer] Bruce Ratner is a dream come true."
As it is currently situated, Barclays Center would have a seating capacity of 14,500 for hockey, making it the smallest arena in the NHL. MTS Centre in Winnipeg holds 15,004 fans. Bettman said Wang, Ratner and Yormark have been discussing a redesign to add at least 500 seats, but the Commissioner did not seem overly concerned about the size of the rink. "We expect the capacity to be about 15,000-plus," he said. "If you keep in mind Winnipeg is doing quite well in a building the same size and the Nassau Coliseum is 16,200. A thousand seats -- we don't think makes a material difference."
Wang started to entertain offers to move or relocate the Islanders last year after voters rejected a referendum to build a new arena in Nassau County. It was the latest of his several attempts to get the funding to construct a new home for the Islanders in the county. Wang said his negotiations with Brooklyn and Ratner began to heat up seven months ago. The deal was finalized Tuesday. Wang and Ratner have a seven-year friendship dating to when Ratner was trying to land Brooklyn as the new home of the Nets and Wang was attempting to get a new local arena for the Islanders in Nassau County.
"Charles got offers to move the team out of our state, and very good offers, and Charles wouldn't do that," Ratner said. "Charles wanted to keep them in the state of New York, local. Charles Wang is the real hero today. He has kept this team in New York state. So we welcome the Islanders. We welcome their fans. We welcome the new Brooklyn fans and we're all going to enjoy hockey here. It's a wonderful thing for everybody."
Wang said he notified a disappointed Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano of the team's decision to move to Brooklyn earlier Wednesday. He said Mangano was surprised -- but not blindsided -- by Wang's decision to move. "I think we have said for many years now there comes a point where you have to make a decision because there is not enough time to build a new arena," Wang said. "We came to that conclusion at the end of last year. We said we would entertain every option. We were elated to have so much interest in what we were doing, but we also said we wanted to keep it local. We have been working at it and things have come to a beautiful ending at the Barclays Center."
Mangano took to his Twitter feed to defend his efforts to try to keep the Islanders in Nassau County. "No one has done more to retain the New York Islanders than my administration, I have supported various proposals to redevelop the HUB including a public referendum in which votes chose not to construct a new sports arena. It's sad and unfortunate that political opponents chose to oppose my plan and instead continued to support the Culture of NO on Long Island."
Essential among Wang's reasons to move the club to Brooklyn is the convenience Barclays Center presents to the Islanders' fan base. The Long Island Railroad runs right under Barclays Center to the Atlantic Avenue station, located adjacent to the arena. There are also 11 subway lines and 11 bus lines that run to the arena. "I took the subway here. It is easy to get here," New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said. "There is more mass transit under this building than any other stadium in New York City, and that makes it more accessible for everybody. The fans from the team's current home in Nassau County can just take the LIRR, it stops just right across the street," he added. "Let's not forget the team is named for the island we are standing on."
Bloomberg, in fact, was so optimistic about the marriage between the Islanders and Brooklyn that he offered MetroCards to Wang and general manager Garth Snow to take the subway from Brooklyn to the Canyon of Heroes in downtown Manhattan for any future Stanley Cup parade, the Islanders haven't won the Cup since their run of four in a row ended in 1983.
"Brooklyn, I'm sure, is going to help them get their mojo back," Bloomberg said. "Who says the rivalry between the Islanders and Rangers couldn't get any bigger? Well, it just did."
"Our goal from the outset was to have the Islanders play in a local, world-class facility that possesses the amenities our fans deserve," Wang said in announcing the new partnership with Barclays Center. "I'm happy to announce we achieve that goal with today's announcement."
The Barclays Center opened last month and is the home of the NBA's Brooklyn Nets, who ironically started as the New York Nets and were co-tenants with the Islanders at Nassau Coliseum from 1972-77. "This announcement today reunites these two franchises," Wang said.
Wang said he will continue to own the Islanders and called the lease agreement with Barclays Center "ironclad." He added the team will continue to be called the New York Islanders. Wang also revealed that the plan is to move some of the Islanders' business operations to Barclays Center while still keeping ties to Nassau County. He added that the Islanders expect to continue to use Iceworks in Syosset, N.Y., as their practice facility even after the move to Brooklyn.
Barclays Center CEO Brett Yormark said they are already taking deposits for 2015-16 season tickets. Commissioner Bettman said he was elated because the Islanders will be staying on Long Island.
"I know [Wang] has spent the better part of a decade in pursuit of a new local home for the Islanders because he is as passionate about this area," he said. "To finally be in position to say to New York Islander fans you don't have to worry about the future of this club, the club is staying local, you'll be able to get to it easily, for us, for Islander fans, I know for Charles and [Barclays Center majority owner and developer] Bruce Ratner is a dream come true."
As it is currently situated, Barclays Center would have a seating capacity of 14,500 for hockey, making it the smallest arena in the NHL. MTS Centre in Winnipeg holds 15,004 fans. Bettman said Wang, Ratner and Yormark have been discussing a redesign to add at least 500 seats, but the Commissioner did not seem overly concerned about the size of the rink. "We expect the capacity to be about 15,000-plus," he said. "If you keep in mind Winnipeg is doing quite well in a building the same size and the Nassau Coliseum is 16,200. A thousand seats -- we don't think makes a material difference."
Wang started to entertain offers to move or relocate the Islanders last year after voters rejected a referendum to build a new arena in Nassau County. It was the latest of his several attempts to get the funding to construct a new home for the Islanders in the county. Wang said his negotiations with Brooklyn and Ratner began to heat up seven months ago. The deal was finalized Tuesday. Wang and Ratner have a seven-year friendship dating to when Ratner was trying to land Brooklyn as the new home of the Nets and Wang was attempting to get a new local arena for the Islanders in Nassau County.
"Charles got offers to move the team out of our state, and very good offers, and Charles wouldn't do that," Ratner said. "Charles wanted to keep them in the state of New York, local. Charles Wang is the real hero today. He has kept this team in New York state. So we welcome the Islanders. We welcome their fans. We welcome the new Brooklyn fans and we're all going to enjoy hockey here. It's a wonderful thing for everybody."
Wang said he notified a disappointed Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano of the team's decision to move to Brooklyn earlier Wednesday. He said Mangano was surprised -- but not blindsided -- by Wang's decision to move. "I think we have said for many years now there comes a point where you have to make a decision because there is not enough time to build a new arena," Wang said. "We came to that conclusion at the end of last year. We said we would entertain every option. We were elated to have so much interest in what we were doing, but we also said we wanted to keep it local. We have been working at it and things have come to a beautiful ending at the Barclays Center."
Mangano took to his Twitter feed to defend his efforts to try to keep the Islanders in Nassau County. "No one has done more to retain the New York Islanders than my administration, I have supported various proposals to redevelop the HUB including a public referendum in which votes chose not to construct a new sports arena. It's sad and unfortunate that political opponents chose to oppose my plan and instead continued to support the Culture of NO on Long Island."
Essential among Wang's reasons to move the club to Brooklyn is the convenience Barclays Center presents to the Islanders' fan base. The Long Island Railroad runs right under Barclays Center to the Atlantic Avenue station, located adjacent to the arena. There are also 11 subway lines and 11 bus lines that run to the arena. "I took the subway here. It is easy to get here," New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said. "There is more mass transit under this building than any other stadium in New York City, and that makes it more accessible for everybody. The fans from the team's current home in Nassau County can just take the LIRR, it stops just right across the street," he added. "Let's not forget the team is named for the island we are standing on."
Bloomberg, in fact, was so optimistic about the marriage between the Islanders and Brooklyn that he offered MetroCards to Wang and general manager Garth Snow to take the subway from Brooklyn to the Canyon of Heroes in downtown Manhattan for any future Stanley Cup parade, the Islanders haven't won the Cup since their run of four in a row ended in 1983.
"Brooklyn, I'm sure, is going to help them get their mojo back," Bloomberg said. "Who says the rivalry between the Islanders and Rangers couldn't get any bigger? Well, it just did."
NHL season over?
They can’t be this stupid, this short-sighted, this selfish, this greedy. Hockey fans are wondering that as the NHL lockout could cause an entire season to be canceled for the second time in nine years. Already 326 games have been wiped out, and the sad fact is losing everything in 2012-13 is entirely possible.
“It has the same feeling as seven, eight years ago. [Owners] try the same system that they did that time, exactly the same way than that time,” Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Kimmo Timonen said. “It seems like they have this attitude that they’re going to do exactly what they did eight years ago.”
Before the lockout began Sept. 15, the prevailing opinion was that even if games were missed, this wouldn’t be like 2004-05. Ex-Washington Capitals right wing Mike Knuble in late August called it highly unlikely because “that would be just absolutely crazy.” Yet logic is not in charge. For those looking in at the lockout from the outside, it might be worth considering that, even if crazy, losing this season is becoming more and more likely. “I wasn’t there in ‘04 and ‘05. There’s a lot of things that you can look at that differentiate the two situations,” Chicago Blackhawks captain Jonathan Toews said. “But at the end of the day, it’s the same ownership group and it’s the same commissioner. You can’t rule that out.”
During the past few months’ worth of negotiations, it has proved hard to rule anything out.
The NHL’s first offer included knocking the players’ share of hockey-related revenue down from 57 percent at the end of the last collective bargaining agreement to something in the neighborhood of 43 percent this time, something that amounts to a 24-percent pay cut. And the NHL Players’ Association’s last foray into negotiating included three proposals that were rejected within 15 minutes. Then, last week, the entire November schedule was canceled. Once the time passed to complete an 82-game season, the league pulled its most recent offer off the table.
Commissioner Gary Bettman said at that time that making a deal “may get more difficult.”
Players’ already bitter feelings toward the owners’ process worsened. “As has been proven over time, they’re just on a timeline and they’re waiting to see how much they can squeeze us for,” Toews said. “I don’t know what’s going to happen in the next week or so, but as players, we’ve stood up, we’ve stood together this whole time. We’ve worked very hard at trying to negotiate. That’s as much as we can do at this point.”
Players have noted time and again their desire to play, first under the old CBA while talks continued and then again last week as several pointed out that if a deal is reached sooner rather than later, those canceled November games could be put back on the schedule. That’s not likely to happen because the sides haven’t even taken part in formal negotiations since Oct. 18. Still, NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr doesn’t want to talk yet about an entire season going by the wayside.
“I hope that’s premature discussion, and we certainly hope it isn’t true,” Fehr said. “As a personal matter, I don’t see any reason for it. But I didn’t see a reason to begin to talk about a lockout last January. And I didn’t see a reason to make a proposal off the bat for another 24 percent in salary reductions or any of the rest of it.”
But here are the players and owners seemingly stalled with little common ground to find anytime soon. The Winter Classic could be canceled Thursday, according to reports, something that would take away the NHL’s signature regular-season event. Fehr said anyone could argue that NHL has been on a similar path as the NBA, but basketball ensured the resumption of the season in time for Christmas Day a year ago.
“I don’t know. You never know. Right now, it doesn’t look too good,” Blackhawks forward Patrick Kane said of losing this season. “Hopefully they can put something together and try to get a season in.” Even in hopes that the sides could bridge the gap and get a deal done, Timonen echoed Toews and Kane’s sentiment that “it doesn’t look very good” right now that there will be a season at all. But not every player has that sense of doom, at least yet. “My stance on it is that I’m trying to remain highly, highly optimistic right now,” Anaheim Ducks forward Bobby Ryan said. “And in the short period of time. It’s so hard to speak for it because things can change in a day. They can have a great meeting and then all of a sudden the optimism comes back and it’s strong.”
If this impasse lasts long enough to get the players and owners there, it wouldn’t be unfamiliar territory. But after the last lockout, the “new NHL” with Sidney Crosby, the shootout and rules to improve the game enticed fans to come back. It stands to reason that might not happen this time around.
“When you cancel a whole month of games, it’s not a good sign for us, it’s not a good sign for the fans,” Timonen said. “I hope they have a big say and that they put a lot of pressure on us and the owners, saying that, ‘OK, we’re not coming to games if this is not done by whenever.’ … As a fan, I would start looking for something else.” Fehr and players are quick to point out that the lockout itself should have been a last resort instead of a negotiating tactic. The same goes for canceling games. But an entire season would be another nuclear winter for the sport.
“I hope that it’s a worst-case scenario,” Ryan said. “And I highly hope we don’t get there.”
“It has the same feeling as seven, eight years ago. [Owners] try the same system that they did that time, exactly the same way than that time,” Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Kimmo Timonen said. “It seems like they have this attitude that they’re going to do exactly what they did eight years ago.”
Before the lockout began Sept. 15, the prevailing opinion was that even if games were missed, this wouldn’t be like 2004-05. Ex-Washington Capitals right wing Mike Knuble in late August called it highly unlikely because “that would be just absolutely crazy.” Yet logic is not in charge. For those looking in at the lockout from the outside, it might be worth considering that, even if crazy, losing this season is becoming more and more likely. “I wasn’t there in ‘04 and ‘05. There’s a lot of things that you can look at that differentiate the two situations,” Chicago Blackhawks captain Jonathan Toews said. “But at the end of the day, it’s the same ownership group and it’s the same commissioner. You can’t rule that out.”
During the past few months’ worth of negotiations, it has proved hard to rule anything out.
The NHL’s first offer included knocking the players’ share of hockey-related revenue down from 57 percent at the end of the last collective bargaining agreement to something in the neighborhood of 43 percent this time, something that amounts to a 24-percent pay cut. And the NHL Players’ Association’s last foray into negotiating included three proposals that were rejected within 15 minutes. Then, last week, the entire November schedule was canceled. Once the time passed to complete an 82-game season, the league pulled its most recent offer off the table.
Commissioner Gary Bettman said at that time that making a deal “may get more difficult.”
Players’ already bitter feelings toward the owners’ process worsened. “As has been proven over time, they’re just on a timeline and they’re waiting to see how much they can squeeze us for,” Toews said. “I don’t know what’s going to happen in the next week or so, but as players, we’ve stood up, we’ve stood together this whole time. We’ve worked very hard at trying to negotiate. That’s as much as we can do at this point.”
Players have noted time and again their desire to play, first under the old CBA while talks continued and then again last week as several pointed out that if a deal is reached sooner rather than later, those canceled November games could be put back on the schedule. That’s not likely to happen because the sides haven’t even taken part in formal negotiations since Oct. 18. Still, NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr doesn’t want to talk yet about an entire season going by the wayside.
“I hope that’s premature discussion, and we certainly hope it isn’t true,” Fehr said. “As a personal matter, I don’t see any reason for it. But I didn’t see a reason to begin to talk about a lockout last January. And I didn’t see a reason to make a proposal off the bat for another 24 percent in salary reductions or any of the rest of it.”
But here are the players and owners seemingly stalled with little common ground to find anytime soon. The Winter Classic could be canceled Thursday, according to reports, something that would take away the NHL’s signature regular-season event. Fehr said anyone could argue that NHL has been on a similar path as the NBA, but basketball ensured the resumption of the season in time for Christmas Day a year ago.
“I don’t know. You never know. Right now, it doesn’t look too good,” Blackhawks forward Patrick Kane said of losing this season. “Hopefully they can put something together and try to get a season in.” Even in hopes that the sides could bridge the gap and get a deal done, Timonen echoed Toews and Kane’s sentiment that “it doesn’t look very good” right now that there will be a season at all. But not every player has that sense of doom, at least yet. “My stance on it is that I’m trying to remain highly, highly optimistic right now,” Anaheim Ducks forward Bobby Ryan said. “And in the short period of time. It’s so hard to speak for it because things can change in a day. They can have a great meeting and then all of a sudden the optimism comes back and it’s strong.”
If this impasse lasts long enough to get the players and owners there, it wouldn’t be unfamiliar territory. But after the last lockout, the “new NHL” with Sidney Crosby, the shootout and rules to improve the game enticed fans to come back. It stands to reason that might not happen this time around.
“When you cancel a whole month of games, it’s not a good sign for us, it’s not a good sign for the fans,” Timonen said. “I hope they have a big say and that they put a lot of pressure on us and the owners, saying that, ‘OK, we’re not coming to games if this is not done by whenever.’ … As a fan, I would start looking for something else.” Fehr and players are quick to point out that the lockout itself should have been a last resort instead of a negotiating tactic. The same goes for canceling games. But an entire season would be another nuclear winter for the sport.
“I hope that it’s a worst-case scenario,” Ryan said. “And I highly hope we don’t get there.”
There have already been 326 games cancelled as a result of the NHL Lockout. Now the Winter Classic, the league’s signature outdoor game, is on the chopping block. Scott Burnside of ESPN.com said the league will move to cancel the event after talks have completely stalled and have little chance of finding success in the near-term. The Winter Classic is one of the biggest events in the NHL season, drawing similar ratings to the Stanley Cup Finals. This year’s game was set to take place on Jan. 1 at Michigan Stadium in Ann Arbor, Michigan, with the Toronto Maple Leafs scheduled to face the Detroit Red Wings. Friday is the deadline for a $250,000 down payment from the league to the University of Michigan as declared in the contract signed for use of the stadium. The league will also be financially responsible to the University of Michigan, if it cancels after Friday, for all “reasonable expenses incurred by the university,” according to Mike Brehm and Kevin Allen of USA Today Sports. There are no scheduled talks planned between the NHLPA and the owners this week, according to Katie Strang of ESPNNewYork.com.
Both sides of the dispute have resulted in pointing the finger at one another for failing to create a workable condition in which to resolve things.
Since the last bargaining meeting on Oct. 18, we have consistently made it clear to the League that we are ready to meet and are willing to discuss all ideas, certainly including their last proposal. The league has unfortunately continued to decline to meet. Their position makes it difficult to move the process forward, as it is obviously hard to make progress without talking.Surely, the ongoing Hurricane Sandy and its after-effects will play a part in delaying any resumption of talks in the coming days, as mass-transit and many other services in New York City are currently inoperable.
Monday, 29 October 2012
Lockout Latest
The NHL is pondering their next step in the collective bargaining negotiations with the NHL Players Association, according to deputy commissioner Bill Daly by email on Monday. Following the rejection of the league's most recent proposal by the union, the NHL announced the cancelation of all games through November and removed the proposal, which contained a 50/50 split of hockey related revenue without salary rollbacks. Now, Daly states the league will spend time thinking about what the next proposal will consist of. Daly continued by discussing the union's unwillingness to discuss the league's most recent proposal and stated that he believes it displays that a considerable gap still remains between the two sides, via the Sporting News:
"No new news. We withdrew our most recent proposal on Friday, and now we are spending time thinking about our next proposal and how best to get closer to a resolution. We hope the union is doing the same thing. Given the fact that the union refused even to discuss our last proposal, it would appear that we still have a large gulf to bridge."In addition to the union's rejection of the league's most recent proposal, the league also rejected three separate proposals from the NHLPA last week. As of this time, no future meetings have been scheduled. NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr reportedly returned to Toronto on Sunday and will be addressing a group of players in Minnesota on Monday. The union has consistently expressed their willingness to meet and continue discussions whenever the NHL is ready.
Friday, 26 October 2012
NHL Confirmation about cancelled games
The NHL lockout has forced the cancellation of all games through the end of November.
One day after a league-imposed deadline passed for a deal with the players' association that would allow for a full season, the NHL announced Friday that 326 regular-season games were lost. That comes out to 26.5 percent of the schedule, from Oct. 11 through Nov. 30.
"The National Hockey League deeply regrets having to take this action," deputy commissioner Bill Daly said in a statement. "By presenting a proposal to the NHLPA that contemplated a fair division of revenues and was responsive to player concerns regarding the value of their contracts, we had hoped to be able to forge a long-term collective bargaining agreement that would have preserved an 82-game regular season for our fans. Unfortunately, that did not occur. We acknowledge and accept that there is joint responsibility in collective bargaining and, though we are profoundly disappointed that a new agreement has not been attained to this point."
The dispute, primarily over the division of revenues, is somewhat similar to the 2004-05 lockout that led to the cancellation of that entire season – the first time a North American professional sports league lost a complete campaign to a labor dispute. Reaching a new deal became even tougher on Friday because the NHL pulled its most recent offer to the players – one that included a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenues – off the table, Daly told The Associated Press.
Whether any of the canceled games can be rescheduled in the event of a quick settlement remains to be seen.
"We obviously want to reach an agreement as soon as possible and when we do, we will try to put together a schedule that will maximize the number of regular season games we can play, subject to reasonable logistical and scheduling parameters we will have to discuss with the players," Daly told the AP in an email. "Having said that, once clubs begin releasing dates and rebooking their buildings, as they will be free to do for the month of November, the process will obviously get more difficult and complicated."
One day after a league-imposed deadline passed for a deal with the players' association that would allow for a full season, the NHL announced Friday that 326 regular-season games were lost. That comes out to 26.5 percent of the schedule, from Oct. 11 through Nov. 30.
"The National Hockey League deeply regrets having to take this action," deputy commissioner Bill Daly said in a statement. "By presenting a proposal to the NHLPA that contemplated a fair division of revenues and was responsive to player concerns regarding the value of their contracts, we had hoped to be able to forge a long-term collective bargaining agreement that would have preserved an 82-game regular season for our fans. Unfortunately, that did not occur. We acknowledge and accept that there is joint responsibility in collective bargaining and, though we are profoundly disappointed that a new agreement has not been attained to this point."
The dispute, primarily over the division of revenues, is somewhat similar to the 2004-05 lockout that led to the cancellation of that entire season – the first time a North American professional sports league lost a complete campaign to a labor dispute. Reaching a new deal became even tougher on Friday because the NHL pulled its most recent offer to the players – one that included a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenues – off the table, Daly told The Associated Press.
Whether any of the canceled games can be rescheduled in the event of a quick settlement remains to be seen.
"We obviously want to reach an agreement as soon as possible and when we do, we will try to put together a schedule that will maximize the number of regular season games we can play, subject to reasonable logistical and scheduling parameters we will have to discuss with the players," Daly told the AP in an email. "Having said that, once clubs begin releasing dates and rebooking their buildings, as they will be free to do for the month of November, the process will obviously get more difficult and complicated."
NHL cancel November schedule
The NHL on Friday is expected to cancel all games through Nov. 30, a move that all but guarantees there will be no 82-game season in 2012-13 because of the lockout. Thirteen more Washington Capitals games are getting the axe in the latest cancellation, bringing the total to 23. If owners and the NHL Players' Association are able to get a deal done to salvage a season, the schedule would now have to be re-drawn, possibly for 66 or 72 games. Friday's move will make official what has been expected for a few days now, since the league said it had no reason to meet with the players given their stance on last week's offer. The NHLPA made three proposals last week that the owners rejected in about 15 minutes.
"The union has chosen not to engage on our proposal or to make a new proposal of their own,” commissioner Gary Bettman said earlier this week. “So unfortunately it looks like the 82-game season is not going to be a reality, although the clock has a little bit of time to run.”
The clock has run out, and even with some speculating that a full season is still feasible, it no longer seems reasonable to expect barring a miracle agreement soon. One reason for the NHL canceling this big block of games is so that arenas can fill up for the month of November instead of having so many dark nights. Verizon Center is losing eight Caps games during the month. The Winter Classic was not set to be canceled Friday, though that could be coming soon given the millions of dollars and hours of manpower needed to put that together. Elliotte Friedman of Hockey Night in Canada was first to report the cancellations.
How can a solution to the 2012 NHL lockout be reached if the league won't meet with its players to further discuss the matter? That has to be the question on hockey fans' minds after the league refused to meet just ahead of Thursday's deadline that would have still allowed a full, 82-game season to be possible if an agreement was reached. The politics of this situation have been handled poorly, particularly by the league in recent weeks. From what Washington Post reporter Stephen Whyno gathered, the league submitted its latest proposal last Tuesday. Such an amount of time ahead of this Thursday's deadline would seem encouraging—only after that, the league severed communication with the players. NHL Players' Association director Donald Fehr broke down the players' side of things in Whyno's article:
The very next day, the day of the deadline, the NHL announced its plan to withdraw the proposal it had submitted, according to ESPN.com's Pierre LeBrun. Despite Fehr's indication that the players had compromised to the owners' benefit, the league allegedly didn't want to hear it.
Instead of considering the players' adjustments to the league's latest proposal—which was much to their detriment even still—the league allowed the deadline to pass without reviewing what the players recommended. Because the NHL refused to even meet with them. In fairness, all of the blame can't fall on the owners. It takes two to negotiate, but there are two sides to every story.
Buffalo Sabres goalie Ryan Miller had some strong words that were an indictment on both the NHL and NHLPA, in a story by ESPN the Magazine's Craig Custance:
"The union has chosen not to engage on our proposal or to make a new proposal of their own,” commissioner Gary Bettman said earlier this week. “So unfortunately it looks like the 82-game season is not going to be a reality, although the clock has a little bit of time to run.”
The clock has run out, and even with some speculating that a full season is still feasible, it no longer seems reasonable to expect barring a miracle agreement soon. One reason for the NHL canceling this big block of games is so that arenas can fill up for the month of November instead of having so many dark nights. Verizon Center is losing eight Caps games during the month. The Winter Classic was not set to be canceled Friday, though that could be coming soon given the millions of dollars and hours of manpower needed to put that together. Elliotte Friedman of Hockey Night in Canada was first to report the cancellations.
How can a solution to the 2012 NHL lockout be reached if the league won't meet with its players to further discuss the matter? That has to be the question on hockey fans' minds after the league refused to meet just ahead of Thursday's deadline that would have still allowed a full, 82-game season to be possible if an agreement was reached. The politics of this situation have been handled poorly, particularly by the league in recent weeks. From what Washington Post reporter Stephen Whyno gathered, the league submitted its latest proposal last Tuesday. Such an amount of time ahead of this Thursday's deadline would seem encouraging—only after that, the league severed communication with the players. NHL Players' Association director Donald Fehr broke down the players' side of things in Whyno's article:
The players made multiple core-economic proposals on Thursday that were a significant move in the owners direction. We are and continue to be ready to meet to discuss how to resolve our remaining differences, with no preconditions. For whatever reason, the owners are not. At the same time they are refusing to meet, they are winding the clock down to yet another artificial deadline they created.
Instead of considering the players' adjustments to the league's latest proposal—which was much to their detriment even still—the league allowed the deadline to pass without reviewing what the players recommended. Because the NHL refused to even meet with them. In fairness, all of the blame can't fall on the owners. It takes two to negotiate, but there are two sides to every story.
Buffalo Sabres goalie Ryan Miller had some strong words that were an indictment on both the NHL and NHLPA, in a story by ESPN the Magazine's Craig Custance:
The two sides are close enough to a deal that missing the bulk of a season is wrong and missing an entire season is not only insane, it is a blatant disregard for the sport, the fans and the culture we have grown over decades -- just to satisfy egos, not the needs of either side.While it may be true that both sides are trying to satisfy egos, it seems the league was the side with too much pride in the latest test of wills. The fact that Miller says a deal is close enough to have a season is unfair to the fans and the other league employees affected negatively by the lockout. The biggest hangup is over hockey-related revenue (HRR), which used to be 57-43 percent in favor of the players. A 50-50 split is what the league is now proposing, which seems reasonable. Some NHL players aren't exactly light in the wallet, but what about the owners? Do the mega-rich who own hockey teams really need that much more of the HRR cut? The NHL really handcuffed its players by not taking significant time to consider the players' adjustments to the latest proposal. This situation could lead to further animosity as negotiations continue. Here's to hoping egos can be put aside and that the puck can be dropped for the 2012-13 season as soon as possible.
Wednesday, 24 October 2012
Talks put on hold
Forget about a deal to save a full hockey season: the NHL and the players' association can't even agree to get together to talk. The union wants anything and everything open for discussion. The league says if the players aren't willing to discuss the offer the NHL presented last week, and has no interest in presenting something new with that proposal as a framework, then there really is nothing to talk about. It didn't take long for the NHL to fire that message back Tuesday night after the union tried to convince the league to return to the bargaining table on Wednesday.
"I don't anticipate any (talks) taking place for the balance of the week," NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said in an email to The Associated Press. "The union has rejected the proposal we made last Tuesday and is not offering another one. We see nothing to be gained at this point by meeting just to meet."
If that is the case, then there is no reasonable hope that a deal will be struck by Thursday – the deadline Commissioner Gary Bettman set in order to preserve a full 82-game season. Games have already been called off through Nov. 1, and those contests soon could be wiped off the schedule for good. Following a conference call held by the union's executive board on Tuesday night, the players' association informed the NHL it is willing to meet on Wednesday "or any other date, without preconditions, to try to reach an agreement," the union said in a statement.
The NHL's response wasn't what the union had hoped to hear. The sides haven't met since the league turned down three counterproposals from the union on Thursday, two days after the NHL's offer that included a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenue. The players' association hasn't shown an inclination to use that offer as a starting point in negotiations, resulting in a stalemate that could last for a while.
"The league is apparently unwilling to meet," NHLPA special counsel Steve Fehr said in a statement. "That is unfortunate, as it is hard to make progress without talking."
No talks have been scheduled, and no last-minute discussions seem to be on tap. The developments on Tuesday night came hours after more discourse between the sides on the 38th day of the league's lockout. While negotiators for the NHL and union kept conversations to a minimum, club officials had a brief window last week to discuss the league's latest proposal directly with their players. Those secretive discussions didn't produce a breakthrough, but they have inflamed an already unsettled atmosphere. The union hierarchy wasn't informed about the window then, and isn't happy about it.
"Most owners are not allowed to attend bargaining meetings," Fehr said Tuesday. "No owners are allowed to speak to the media about the bargaining. It is interesting that they are secretly unleashed to talk to the players about the meetings the players can attend, but the owners cannot."
The NHL said Tuesday that team officials were allowed to have temporary contact with players and there were parameters regarding what could be discussed. "From our perspective, this is a nonissue and a nonstory," Daly said Tuesday in an email to The Associated Press. "There is nothing – legally or otherwise – that precludes club personnel from communicating with their players." More important is the lack of productive talks between NHL officials and union leaders. Now it seems unlikely that a full season, which was slated to start Nov. 2, will take place.
Last week, the NHL's most recent contract offer was presented to the union and then publicly released in full. The union returned to the bargaining table last Thursday with its various counterproposals, which also would get to an even split of hockey revenue, but each was quickly rejected by the league. There is a major divide between the sides over how to deal with existing player contracts. The union wants to ensure that those are all paid in full without affecting future player contracts. After the NHL released its offer on Wednesday, club officials were given until Friday to speak to players and answer questions they might have about the proposal. In an internal league memo obtained by The Canadian Press, the NHL stated that those discussions must be limited to the contents of the proposal on the table. It also provided examples of questions that shouldn't be asked of players and noted that straying from the rules could "cause serious legal problems."
"You may not ask (a player) what he or others have in mind," the memo stated. "If he volunteers what he has in mind you should not respond positively or negatively or ask any questions but instead refer him to the NHLPA. Likewise, you may not suggest hypothetical proposals that the league might make in the future or that the league might entertain from the union." This was the first time club officials were permitted by the NHL to talk to players since the lockout took effect Sept. 16.
"I don't anticipate any (talks) taking place for the balance of the week," NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said in an email to The Associated Press. "The union has rejected the proposal we made last Tuesday and is not offering another one. We see nothing to be gained at this point by meeting just to meet."
If that is the case, then there is no reasonable hope that a deal will be struck by Thursday – the deadline Commissioner Gary Bettman set in order to preserve a full 82-game season. Games have already been called off through Nov. 1, and those contests soon could be wiped off the schedule for good. Following a conference call held by the union's executive board on Tuesday night, the players' association informed the NHL it is willing to meet on Wednesday "or any other date, without preconditions, to try to reach an agreement," the union said in a statement.
The NHL's response wasn't what the union had hoped to hear. The sides haven't met since the league turned down three counterproposals from the union on Thursday, two days after the NHL's offer that included a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenue. The players' association hasn't shown an inclination to use that offer as a starting point in negotiations, resulting in a stalemate that could last for a while.
"The league is apparently unwilling to meet," NHLPA special counsel Steve Fehr said in a statement. "That is unfortunate, as it is hard to make progress without talking."
"Most owners are not allowed to attend bargaining meetings," Fehr said Tuesday. "No owners are allowed to speak to the media about the bargaining. It is interesting that they are secretly unleashed to talk to the players about the meetings the players can attend, but the owners cannot."
The NHL said Tuesday that team officials were allowed to have temporary contact with players and there were parameters regarding what could be discussed. "From our perspective, this is a nonissue and a nonstory," Daly said Tuesday in an email to The Associated Press. "There is nothing – legally or otherwise – that precludes club personnel from communicating with their players." More important is the lack of productive talks between NHL officials and union leaders. Now it seems unlikely that a full season, which was slated to start Nov. 2, will take place.
Last week, the NHL's most recent contract offer was presented to the union and then publicly released in full. The union returned to the bargaining table last Thursday with its various counterproposals, which also would get to an even split of hockey revenue, but each was quickly rejected by the league. There is a major divide between the sides over how to deal with existing player contracts. The union wants to ensure that those are all paid in full without affecting future player contracts. After the NHL released its offer on Wednesday, club officials were given until Friday to speak to players and answer questions they might have about the proposal. In an internal league memo obtained by The Canadian Press, the NHL stated that those discussions must be limited to the contents of the proposal on the table. It also provided examples of questions that shouldn't be asked of players and noted that straying from the rules could "cause serious legal problems."
"You may not ask (a player) what he or others have in mind," the memo stated. "If he volunteers what he has in mind you should not respond positively or negatively or ask any questions but instead refer him to the NHLPA. Likewise, you may not suggest hypothetical proposals that the league might make in the future or that the league might entertain from the union." This was the first time club officials were permitted by the NHL to talk to players since the lockout took effect Sept. 16.
Thursday, 18 October 2012
Shaun Kippin Goes All Big Time
Since my last post about Shaun Kippin, he has since moved to Cheshire and playing for English National Hockey League Division 2 outfit Deesside Dragons, formerly the Flintshire Freeze. By all accounts the new Welsh team's captain has settled in well and all looks set for the big-spending team to earn promotion to Division 1 at the end of the season.
As part of their media coverage this season they have created their own tv channel called Yankin Off on youtube where you can see a great coast to coast goal by Shaun. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2aiCMzc9kA&feature=youtu.be
And an exclusive interview with him and his coach Steve Fellows here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtoqYuGtkPw&feature=relmfu
|
|
logo to visit the Deeside Dragons |
And an exclusive interview with him and his coach Steve Fellows here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtoqYuGtkPw&feature=relmfu
Important day in CBA talks
The NHLPA will present a counter-proposal to the NHL in CBA talks Today (Thursday), and the direction of that proposal should give us a good sense of the fate of the 2012-13 NHL season. Talks between the league and the union will begin at 1 p.m. ET at the NHLPA's Toronto headquarters, and it won't be long until we learn the details of their counter. Those details will be vital. There's no doubt that the union wasn't completely pleased with the NHL's offer on Tuesday, and in general, they still believe they shouldn't have to give a single dime back to the league's owners on pure principle. But it's widely believed that if the union doesn't at least work off of that proposal, the full NHL season is in jeopardy and huge chunks of games will be canceled - potentially even "marquee events," as the league threatened Wednesday. You can read into that one. No matter which side you believe or support, any further delay in serious negotiations will put hockey in jeopardy, and if the news is all negative after talks Thursday, we could begin hearing about a "drop dead" date for cancellation of the season. For now, the full season is still a possibility, but it's a very fine line between that, the cancellation of games into the New Year and the potential loss of the entire season. The NHL has said that a new deal needs to be negotiated by Oct. 26 for a full 82-game season to begin on Nov. 2, and while eight more days of meetings could bring a resolution if both sides are serious, it seems unlikely that the deadline will be met. Still, November or December hockey could be in the cards if the NHLPA responds Thursday with a proposal that moves the process forward. If Don Fehr & Co. take a step back and fail to put forth a proposal that moves negotiations towards a solution, the optimism of the last several days will float away, and more hockey games will likely go with it.
The NHLPA is expected to give a counter proposal when the two sides meet at 1 p.m. today in Toronto. Optimism is springing up from the fact that the NHLPA is willing to counter so quickly, and while that is a good sign, how the NHLPA counters is what really is going to set the tone for whether or not there is hockey this season. Or, at least, how soon before we see them on the ice. If Donald Fehr and the NHLPA give an offer to Gary Bettman and the owners today that's within the framework of the offer the NHL gave on Tuesday, then we're going to see seven days of tough negotiations, but progress. That would be an idea situation, one that practically guarantees hockey this year. But if Fehr comes back with another revised offer from the NHLPA's original proposal, well, I have a feeling you can forget about hockey this season at all. The NHL won't take kindly to Fehr spitting on Tuesday's proposal (the first real movement from either side since September) and it will only raise the blood pressure of the negotiations - which is a great way to get nothing done. So what happens now is up to Fehr, the smartest thing Fehr could do is leave the percentages about the same (or maybe give the players a 52% split the first year and 51% the second year before going down to 50-50 for the remainder of the CBA) and in return for taking a significantly smaller percentage wipe out the max contract lengths and years of service before becoming an UFA. There are obviously other big issues on the table, but those are probably two of the biggest when it comes to the NHL's offer. That, and the definition of HRR, but apparently that hasn't changed. We're close to hockey, guys. For now. But if Fehr walks through the door with an offer that essentially rejects the NHL's offer? Get ready for a long winter, because we're not going anywhere soon.
The NHLPA is expected to give a counter proposal when the two sides meet at 1 p.m. today in Toronto. Optimism is springing up from the fact that the NHLPA is willing to counter so quickly, and while that is a good sign, how the NHLPA counters is what really is going to set the tone for whether or not there is hockey this season. Or, at least, how soon before we see them on the ice. If Donald Fehr and the NHLPA give an offer to Gary Bettman and the owners today that's within the framework of the offer the NHL gave on Tuesday, then we're going to see seven days of tough negotiations, but progress. That would be an idea situation, one that practically guarantees hockey this year. But if Fehr comes back with another revised offer from the NHLPA's original proposal, well, I have a feeling you can forget about hockey this season at all. The NHL won't take kindly to Fehr spitting on Tuesday's proposal (the first real movement from either side since September) and it will only raise the blood pressure of the negotiations - which is a great way to get nothing done. So what happens now is up to Fehr, the smartest thing Fehr could do is leave the percentages about the same (or maybe give the players a 52% split the first year and 51% the second year before going down to 50-50 for the remainder of the CBA) and in return for taking a significantly smaller percentage wipe out the max contract lengths and years of service before becoming an UFA. There are obviously other big issues on the table, but those are probably two of the biggest when it comes to the NHL's offer. That, and the definition of HRR, but apparently that hasn't changed. We're close to hockey, guys. For now. But if Fehr walks through the door with an offer that essentially rejects the NHL's offer? Get ready for a long winter, because we're not going anywhere soon.
Wednesday, 17 October 2012
The Remaining Financial Sticking Points
Remember back to July when the NHL made its ridiculous initial CBA proposal? Among a million other points to which the NHLPA objected, it called for a change to the definition of hockey-related revenue.
This change in the definition would have resulted in a further reduction in the players' share of the overall pie -- on top of an immediate roll back on existing, already-negotiated contracts and a drop in the share of HRR from 57 percent to 43 percent. In short, the NHL wanted a lot of money.
The NHL still wants to take some money from the NHLPA, as they're proposing cutting the players' share to 50 percent from the current 57 percent. Look for the union to come back with a number slightly more in their favor than a 50/50 split, but the new proposal can definitely be seen as progress.
The league promises no additional rollback in current salaries as they did before. That's not contended by the NHLPA.
They also say the HRR definition will stay the same, a point that is contentious.
The League Says:
Another sticking point is the NHL's "Make Whole" provision, which acts to "make whole" all existing player contracts despite the proposed seven percent reduction in the players' share of HRR. Or, as the league puts it:
This change in the definition would have resulted in a further reduction in the players' share of the overall pie -- on top of an immediate roll back on existing, already-negotiated contracts and a drop in the share of HRR from 57 percent to 43 percent. In short, the NHL wanted a lot of money.
The NHL still wants to take some money from the NHLPA, as they're proposing cutting the players' share to 50 percent from the current 57 percent. Look for the union to come back with a number slightly more in their favor than a 50/50 split, but the new proposal can definitely be seen as progress.
The league promises no additional rollback in current salaries as they did before. That's not contended by the NHLPA.
They also say the HRR definition will stay the same, a point that is contentious.
The League Says:
We agree to retain the CBA's current HRR definitions. Further, we propose to formalize the various agreements the NHLPA and the NHL have reached, and lived under, during the course of the expired CBA, and to clarify mutually identified ambiguities in the CBA. Importantly, we do not believe any of our proposed clarifications should have any impact either on the amount of the Players' Share or the amount that any individual Player is entitled to receive. None of these clarifications for instance, would have had a material impact on the 2011/12 Actual HRR number. This proposal is all about certainty, clarity and speeding up our complex, end-of-year accounting process.NHLPA chief Don Fehr Said:
"They want to "clarify" HRR definition and rules. It is not immediately clear what this means, but so far all of their ideas in this regard have had the effect of reducing HRR, and thereby lowering salaries."A matter of trust, really. The NHL says one thing and the NHLPA says that they'll believe it when they see it.
Another sticking point is the NHL's "Make Whole" provision, which acts to "make whole" all existing player contracts despite the proposed seven percent reduction in the players' share of HRR. Or, as the league puts it:
The League proposes to make Players "whole" for the absolute reduction in Players' Share dollars (when compared to 2011/12) that is attributable to the economic terms of the new CBA (the "Share Reduction"). Using an assumed year-over-year growth rate of 5% for League-wide revenues, the new CBA could result in shortfalls from the current level of Players' Share dollars ($1.883 Billion in 2011/12) of up to $149 million in Year 1 and up to $62 million in Year 2, for which Players will be "made whole."To do this, the league will repay the players the money lost over the next two years over the course of the remainder of their contracts. The catch, however, is that the money will come from the players' share in those future years. Again, via the league:
Player "make whole" payments will be accrued and paid for by the League, and will be chargeable against Players' Share amounts in future years as Preliminary Benefits.As the union puts it, "it is players paying the players, not owners paying players." That's not going to sit well with the NHLPA, and we can be sure that this part of the league proposal will be altered when the Fehr & Co. make their expected counter on Thursday.
NHL - Lockout announcement
Yesterday the NHL gave a new collective bargaining proposal to the players' association, and today the league released the text in full:
NHL PROPOSAL TO SAVE 82-GAME SEASON
1. Term:
• Six-year Agreement with mutual option for a seventh year.
2. HRR Accounting:
• Current HRR Accounting subject to mutual clarification of existing interpretations and settlements.
3. Applicable Players' Share:
• For each of the six (6) years of the CBA (and any additional one-year option) the Players' Share shall be Fifty (50) percent of Actual HRR.
4. Payroll Range:
• Payroll Range will be computed using existing methodology. For the 2012/13 season, the Payroll Range will be computed assuming HRR will remain flat year-over-year (2011/12 to 2012/13) at $3.303 Billion (assuming Preliminary Benefits of $95 Million).
• 2012/13 Payroll Range
Lower Limit = $43.9 Million
Midpoint = $51.9 Million
Upper Limit = $59.9 Million
• Appropriate "Transition Rules" to allow Clubs to exceed Upper Limit for the 2012/13 season only (but in no event will Club's Averaged Club Salary be permitted to exceed the pre-CBA Upper Limit of $70.2 Million).
5. Cap Accounting:
• Payroll Lower Limit must be satisfied without performance bonuses.
• All years of existing SPCs with terms in excess of five (5) years will be accounted for and charged against a team's Cap (at full AAV) regardless of whether or where the Player is playing. In the event any such contract is traded during its term, the related Cap charge will travel with the Player, but only for the year(s) in which the Player remains active and is being paid under his NHL SPC. If, at some subsequent point in time the Player retires or ceases to play and/or receive pay under his NHL SPC, the Cap charge will automatically revert (at full AAV) to the Club that initially entered into the contract for the balance of its term.
• Money paid to Players on NHL SPCs (one-ways and two-ways) in another professional league will not be counted against the Players' Share, but all dollars paid in excess of $105,000 will be counted against the NHL Club's Averaged Club Salary for the period during which such Player is being paid under his SPC while playing in another professional league.
• In the context of Player Trades, participating Clubs will be permitted to allocate Cap charges and related salary payment obligations between them, subject to specified parameters. Specifically, Clubs may agree to retain, for each of the remaining years of the Player's SPC, no more than the lesser of: (i) $3 million of a particular SPC's Cap charge or (ii) 50 percent of the SPC's AAV ("Retained Salary Transaction"). In any Retained Salary Transaction, salary obligations as between Clubs would be allocated on the same percentage basis as Cap charges are being allocated. So, for instance, if an assigning Club agrees to retain 30% of an SPC's Cap charge over the balance of its term, it will also retain an obligation to reimburse the acquiring Club 30% of the Player's contractual compensation in each of the remaining years of the contract. A Club may not have more than two (2) contracts as to which Cap charges have been allocated between Clubs in a Player Trade, and no more than $5 million in allocated Cap charges in the aggregate in any one season.
6. System Changes:
• Entry Level System commitment will be limited to two (2) years (covering two full seasons) for all Players who sign their first SPC between the ages of 18 and 24 (i.e., where the first year of the SPC only covers a partial season, SPC must be for three (3) years).
• Maintenance of existing Salary Arbitration System subject to: (i) total mutuality of rights with regard to election as between Player and Club, and (ii) eligibility for election moved to five years of professional experience (from the current four years).
• Group 3 UFA eligibility for Players who are 28 or who have eight (8) Accrued Seasons (continues to allow for early UFA eligibility -- age 26).
• Maximum contract length of five (5) years.
• Limit on year-to-year salary variability on multi-year SPCs -- i.e., maximum increase or decrease in total compensation (salary and bonuses) year-over-year limited to 5% of the value of the first year of the contract. (For example, if a Player earns $10 million in total compensation in Year 1 of his SPC, his compensation (salary and bonuses) cannot increase or decrease by more than $500,000 in any subsequent year of his SPC.)
• Re-Entry waivers will be eliminated, consistent with the Cap Accounting proposal relating to the treatment of Players on NHL SPCs playing in another professional league.
• NHL Clubs who draft European Players obtain four (4) years of exclusive negotiating rights following selection in the Draft. If the four-year period expires, Player will be eligible to enter the League as a Free Agent and will not be subject to re-entering the Draft.
7. Revenue Sharing:
• NHL commits to Revenue Sharing Pool of $200 million for 2012/13 season (based on assumption of $3.303 Billion in actual HRR). Amount will be adjusted upward or downward in proportion to Actual HRR results for 2012/13. Revenue Sharing Pools in future years will be calculated proportionately.
• At least one-half of the total Revenue Sharing Pool (50%) will be raised from the Top 10 Revenue Grossing Clubs in a manner to be determined by the NHL.
• The distribution of the Revenue Sharing Pool will be determined on an annual basis by a Revenue Sharing Committee on which the NHLPA will have representation and input.
• For each of the first two years of the CBA, no Club will receive less in total Revenue Sharing than it received in 2011/12.
• Current "Disqualification" criteria in CBA (for Clubs in Top Half of League revenues and Clubs in large media markets) will be removed.
• Existing performance and "reduction" standards and provisions relating to "non-performers" (i.e., CBA 49.3(d)(i) and 49.3(d)(ii)) will be eliminated and will be adjusted as per the NHL's 7/31 Proposal.
8. Supplemental and Commissioner Discipline:
• Introduction of additional procedural safeguards, including ultimate appeal right to a "neutral" third-party arbitrator with a "clearly erroneous" standard of review.
9. No "Rollback":
• The NHL is not proposing that current SPCs be reduced, re-written or rolled back. Instead, the NHL's proposal retains all current Players' SPCs at their current face value for the duration of their terms, subject to the operation of the escrow mechanism in the same manner as it worked under the expired CBA.
10. Players' Share "Make Whole" Provision:
• The League proposes to make Players "whole" for the absolute reduction in Players' Share dollars (when compared to 2011/12) that is attributable to the economic terms of the new CBA (the "Share Reduction"). Using an assumed year-over-year growth rate of 5% for League-wide revenues, the new CBA could result in shortfalls from the current level of Players' Share dollars ($1.883 Billion in 2011/12) of up to $149 million in Year 1 and up to $62 million in Year 2, for which Players will be "made whole." (By Year 3 of the new CBA, Players' Share dollars should exceed the current level ($1.883 Billion for 2011/12) and no "make whole" will be required.) Any such "shortfalls" in Years 1 and 2 of the new CBA will be computed as a percentage reduction off of the Player's stated contractual compensation, and will be repaid to the Player as a Deferred Compensation benefit spread over the remaining future years of the Player's SPC (or if he has no remaining years, in the year following the expiration of his SPC). Player reimbursement for the Share Reduction will be accrued and paid for by the League, and will be chargeable against Players' Share amounts in future years as Preliminary Benefits. The objective would be to honor all existing SPCs by restoring their "value" on the basis of the now existing level of Players' Share dollars.
***
And, in full, here's the league's explanation:
We have reached a critical point in our collective bargaining negotiations. In an attempt to save an 82-game 2012/13 season (including the usual schedule of Playoff Games), the NHL is making a substantially revised proposal to the NHLPA regarding the critical issues on which the parties have been separated and which are essential to an agreement with the NHLPA on a new CBA moving forward. We believe that the proposal set forth below is fair to the Players and the teams, and good for the game and our fans.
This proposal is based on what we believe is a fair sharing of revenues as between the Players and the Clubs.
This proposal does not require any roll-back in the salaries of Players, and attempts to recognize and protect prior contractual commitments.
This proposal provides for increased revenue sharing, targeted to those teams that are most in need.
This proposal is our best attempt to save an 82-game 2012/13 season, and is, in fact, the best we can responsibly do.
Our negotiations with the NHLPA have failed to progress on the most critical economic and system-related issues. After considerable deliberation, we have decided to make this proposal because time is of the essence. Specifically, in order to save the full 82-game season, the Regular Season schedule will have to commence no later than November 2, with 7-day Club Training Camps that must open by October 26. As a practical matter, this means we must conclude a new written CBA by October 25. We believe the parties can achieve this and that by working together, we can jointly preserve an 82-game season for our Players, our Clubs, and most importantly, for our fans.
Delay (beyond October 25) will necessarily leave us with an abbreviated season and will require the cancellation of signature NHL events. Failure to reach a prompt agreement will also have other significant and detrimental impacts on our fans, the game, our Clubs, our business and the communities in which we play. All of this will obviously necessitate changes to this offer in the event we are unsuccessful in saving a full season.
Here are the elements of our proposal and a brief explanation:
Term
The term of the CBA proposed by the League -- 6 years, plus a mutual option for a 7th year -- is consistent with the term of the expired CBA. It will allow for our fans, the Players and the Clubs to enjoy a reasonable and extended period of labor peace thereby enhancing the short to medium term business planning of the parties. During this time, the League and the Players can work together to continue to build on the momentum the NHL has experienced over the course of the past 7 years, both on and off the ice.
HRR Accounting
We agree to retain the CBA's current HRR definitions. Further, we propose to formalize the various agreements the NHLPA and the NHL have reached, and lived under, during the course of the expired CBA, and to clarify mutually identified ambiguities in the CBA. Importantly, we do not believe any of our proposed clarifications should have any impact either on the amount of the Players' Share or the amount that any individual Player is entitled to receive. None of these clarifications for instance, would have had a material impact on the 2011/12 Actual HRR number. This proposal is all about certainty, clarity and speeding up our complex, end-of-year accounting process.
Applicable Players' Share
We believe a 50-50 sharing of Actual HRR is a fair allocation and a reasonable compromise as between Players and Clubs. The simple fact of the matter is that it costs Clubs more money now to operate and to generate revenues than it used to. These increased costs include amounts dedicated to the health, safety and enhanced comfort of NHL Players, the increased costs associated with generating ticket and gameday revenues, and the significant capital investments that are regularly being made around the League to enhance the fan experience and to create new revenue streams. The proposed 50-50 sharing arrangement, comparable to the sharing arrangements in the NFL and the NBA, will enable the NHL to protect and promote the long-term future of the game, the financial health and stability of the Clubs and the long-term earning capacity of the Players.
Payroll Range
We propose to set the 2012/13 Payroll Range on the basis of last season's Actual HRR, using the same methodology as used in the recently expired CBA. While this will result in a reduced Upper Limit for 2012/13, we have also proposed to permit the Clubs to exceed the Payroll Range this year, to a maximum of $70.2 million – which was the Cap established prior to this past summer. This will allow a Club that chooses to do so to maintain or enhance its current roster during a full-year transition period.
Cap Accounting
We are proposing that a Club's Lower Limit obligation be satisfied without reference to (or inclusion of) performance bonuses. This will effectively increase the minimum commitment of actual compensation paid by the "Lower Limit Clubs" to Players. The proposal acknowledges the League's agreement to a request made by the NHLPA earlier in our negotiations.
We are proposing that all years of existing long-term contracts in excess of five (5) years be counted against a Club's Cap regardless of whether or where a Player is playing. While such contracts (and Cap charges) can be traded during their terms, in the event a Player subsequently retires or ceases to play, the effective Cap charge would revert to the Club that originally entered into the contract. This proposal is consistent with our other proposals intended to address the harmful effects of long-term, front-loaded, "back-diving" contracts.
We are proposing that the salaries of minor league Players on NHL contracts (above a threshold of $105,000) be counted against a Club's Cap. This provision is intended to prevent Clubs from "stashing" or assigning players to the minors (or any other professional league) for "Cap management" purposes. We are not proposing that any salary paid to minor league Players on NHL contracts be counted against the Players' Share.
Finally, we propose that to facilitate more trades and create increased flexibility in managing Cap Room, Clubs be allowed to allocate portions of a contract's Cap charge (and related salary obligations) in the context of a Player Trade. This will facilitate additional Player movement and trades between teams as they manage their respective Caps and Payroll Range obligations.
System Changes
We also propose making certain modest modifications to existing elements of the current system, none of which will affect the total dollars to which the Players are entitled; they will address instead the allocation of those dollars as among various categories of Players, and we believe should ensure and improve the competitive balance and quality of play around the League as a result.
In our opinion, and as we have expressed in prior bargaining sessions, certain elements of the current system have produced a dynamic that has led to a misallocation of Players' Share dollars in favor of those Players coming out of the Entry Level System at the expense of other, more proven and established Players. We are therefore proposing the following to hopefully address this dynamic:
(1) We have withdrawn our initial proposal that would have provided Clubs with an option to extend the terms of Entry Level contracts, and instead are proposing to reduce the duration of the Entry Level System from three years to two years, thereby allowing entering NHL Players an earlier opportunity to become Restricted Free Agents. This will free up more money currently committed to Entry Level Players in their third years who are no longer legitimate NHL prospects and will also allow talented NHL prospects an opportunity to negotiate non-ELS contracts earlier in their careers.
(2) We have withdrawn our initial proposal to eliminate Salary Arbitration. We are instead proposing to maintain the Salary Arbitration mechanism, and are further proposing that the rights of Players and Clubs to elect Salary Arbitration be made mutual. Moreover, we are proposing to revise the eligibility criteria for Salary Arbitration to five years of professional experience (instead of the current four years), the same criteria as existed under the 1994-2004 CBA.
(3) We have withdrawn our initial proposal to revise the eligibility requirements for Unrestricted Free Agency to 10 Accrued Seasons, and are instead proposing a modest single year adjustment to 28 years of age or 8 Accrued Seasons. This proposal still allows for the possibility of early UFA status for Players -- as early as age 26.
All three of these system proposals are designed to shift the current allocation of Players' Share dollars away from "second contracts" and toward "third and subsequent contracts" to ensure what we believe to be a more equitable and effective allocation of Players' Share dollars to more proven, established Players who are playing in the prime of their NHL careers.
We are also proposing two additional system modifications that are intended to address the recent phenomenon of long-term, front-loaded, "back-diving" Player contracts that we believe has proven harmful to the interests of our Clubs and has clearly had the purpose and effect of circumventing the letter and spirit of our existing system. In addition, these contracts have increased the Escrow obligation and reduced the effective salaries of Players playing under "normal" contracts. In order to mitigate the consequences of these contracts, we have proposed 5-year term limits for SPCs and tighter restrictions on the year-over-year salary variability of contracts.
Due to our proposed change in the Cap treatment of minor league Players on NHL SPCs, we are proposing the elimination of the Re-Entry Waivers provision. The elimination of this provision, coupled with the ability to allocate Cap charges and salary in trades, should lend themselves to fewer NHL-caliber Players being relegated to minor league service for prolonged periods of time.
Finally, in order to help preserve the vibrancy and stability of European professional leagues as a continued source of NHL talent, we are proposing to convert the typical four-year period of exclusive negotiating rights that attach to European Players from the current "two-plus-two" model (with each Player being subject to having to re-enter the Draft) to a straight "four-year" model (with no obligation to re-enter the Draft).
Revenue Sharing
The NHL has proposed to increase the Revenue Sharing pool for 2012/13 to $200 million (assuming League-wide revenues of $3.303 Billion), representing an approximately 33% increase over the amount that will be distributed on account of 2011/12. This enhanced amount is at least comparable to the levels of revenue sharing in the NBA and MLB, and will be adjusted proportionately upward or downward based on Actual HRR results in future seasons.
At least 50% of the Revenue Sharing pool will be funded by the Top 10 Revenue Grossing teams. The remainder of the Revenue Sharing pool will be funded from League- and Playoff-generated revenues.
The Revenue Sharing pool will be redistributed to those Clubs who are in the most need in order to enable those teams to have sufficient resources on hand to compete for and compensate Players within the Payroll Range, and otherwise to provide a basis for their continued financial stability. In this regard, we are proposing to commit for the next two years revenue sharing payments to recipient Clubs that are equivalent to or greater than what those Clubs will receive on account of the 2011/12 season. The effect should be to continue -- and even improve -- the historic and unprecedented quality of play and level of competitive balance we have jointly been able to achieve during the period of the recently expired CBA.
All Clubs in the NHL except the top 10 Revenue Grossing Clubs will now be eligible for Revenue Sharing, including Clubs in large media markets who were previously ineligible (such as Anaheim, New Jersey and the New York Islanders, among others). Further, our proposal eliminates some of the current "business performance" thresholds that had the effect of materially reducing the amounts a Club might otherwise qualify to receive in revenue sharing. Instead, under-performing Clubs will be expected to enhance their business planning capabilities, will be provided on-site assistance to meet enhanced business objectives and will be provided with much greater counseling as to "best practices" in business operations.
In addition, we have proposed the formation of a functioning and active Revenue Sharing Committee, on which the NHLPA will have representation and will have an opportunity to provide input, to determine the best and most effective distribution of revenue sharing funds.
Supplemental and Commissioner Discipline
We are proposing to amend current Player discipline provisions to introduce additional procedural safeguards to protect Player interests, including an ultimate appeal right to a "neutral" third-party arbitrator with a "clearly erroneous" standard of review.
No Rollback; Players' Share "Make Whole" Provision
The NHL is not proposing that current SPCs be reduced, re-written or rolled back. Instead, the NHL's proposal retains all current Players' SPCs at their current face value for the duration of their terms, subject to the operation of the escrow mechanism in the same manner as it has worked under the expired CBA. (In other words, under the expired CBA, the compensation a Player received each year was either higher or lower than the face value of his contract depending upon Club-Player contracting levels and the level and growth rate of HRR.) Under the expired CBA, in two of the seven years Players were paid in excess of the face values of their SPCs and in five of those years they received less than their face values. That process would remain intact under the new CBA.
Under our "make whole" proposal, which is premised upon a 5% anticipated growth of HRR both this year and in future years, every Player will be paid compensation based on the full value of the Players' Share under which his current SPC was signed.
In order to effectively transition from a Players' Share of 57 percent to 50 percent, including importantly to protect Players' current SPCs against an absolute reduction in Players' Share dollars, the new Agreement contemplates, in its initial years, a "make whole" mechanism that will effectively pay each Player currently under contract the difference between 50% of Actual HRR in 2012/13 and 57% of HRR in 2011/12 -- which was $1.883 Billion.
Again, premised upon an assumed 5% growth rate between 2011/12 and 2012/13, the "make whole" amount is calculated to be a maximum of $149 million for the 2012/13 season ($1.883 Billion minus $1.734 Billion (57% multiplied by $3.303 Billion minus 50% multiplied by $3.468 Billion). Similarly, utilizing that formula and our 5% growth projections, the "make whole" amount is calculated to be a maximum of $62 million for the 2013/14 season.
To accomplish the "make whole," each Players' pro-rata "make whole" will be determined for the first two years of the Agreement and will be paid to each Player as a Deferred Compensation benefit over the life of the Player's existing SPC. For those Players whose contracts expire after the 2012/13 season, the benefit will be paid when final HRR is determined for this season (in October/November 2013). Player "make whole" payments will be accrued and paid for by the League, and will be chargeable against Players' Share amounts in future years as Preliminary Benefits.
The "make whole" obligation will be operational only through the 2013/14 season because, beginning in Year 3, the projected growth in League-wide revenues should have resulted in an increase in absolute Players' Share dollars (in excess of the Players' Share of $1.883 Billion in 2011/12). This will effectively restore "full value" to all existing SPCs without any continuing need for a "make whole."
We note in regard to this proposal, that while the NHLPA's August 14 proposal was premised upon a 7% annual growth rate in HRR, we instead used the more conservative growth rate of 5%, consistent with our prior proposals. If the NHLPA's estimate of revenue growth is more accurate, then the amount of money needed to effectuate a "make whole" would actually be less.
* * *
The parties have already reached agreement on many of the non-critical but necessary items needed to complete a new CBA. We hope the NHLPA and the Players will view this proposal in the manner in which it is intended -- an invitation to complete an Agreement in the necessary timeframe so that a full 82-game 2012/13 season can be saved.
Summary
NHL PROPOSAL TO SAVE 82-GAME SEASON
1. Term:
• Six-year Agreement with mutual option for a seventh year.
2. HRR Accounting:
• Current HRR Accounting subject to mutual clarification of existing interpretations and settlements.
3. Applicable Players' Share:
• For each of the six (6) years of the CBA (and any additional one-year option) the Players' Share shall be Fifty (50) percent of Actual HRR.
4. Payroll Range:
• Payroll Range will be computed using existing methodology. For the 2012/13 season, the Payroll Range will be computed assuming HRR will remain flat year-over-year (2011/12 to 2012/13) at $3.303 Billion (assuming Preliminary Benefits of $95 Million).
• 2012/13 Payroll Range
Lower Limit = $43.9 Million
Midpoint = $51.9 Million
Upper Limit = $59.9 Million
• Appropriate "Transition Rules" to allow Clubs to exceed Upper Limit for the 2012/13 season only (but in no event will Club's Averaged Club Salary be permitted to exceed the pre-CBA Upper Limit of $70.2 Million).
5. Cap Accounting:
• Payroll Lower Limit must be satisfied without performance bonuses.
• All years of existing SPCs with terms in excess of five (5) years will be accounted for and charged against a team's Cap (at full AAV) regardless of whether or where the Player is playing. In the event any such contract is traded during its term, the related Cap charge will travel with the Player, but only for the year(s) in which the Player remains active and is being paid under his NHL SPC. If, at some subsequent point in time the Player retires or ceases to play and/or receive pay under his NHL SPC, the Cap charge will automatically revert (at full AAV) to the Club that initially entered into the contract for the balance of its term.
• Money paid to Players on NHL SPCs (one-ways and two-ways) in another professional league will not be counted against the Players' Share, but all dollars paid in excess of $105,000 will be counted against the NHL Club's Averaged Club Salary for the period during which such Player is being paid under his SPC while playing in another professional league.
• In the context of Player Trades, participating Clubs will be permitted to allocate Cap charges and related salary payment obligations between them, subject to specified parameters. Specifically, Clubs may agree to retain, for each of the remaining years of the Player's SPC, no more than the lesser of: (i) $3 million of a particular SPC's Cap charge or (ii) 50 percent of the SPC's AAV ("Retained Salary Transaction"). In any Retained Salary Transaction, salary obligations as between Clubs would be allocated on the same percentage basis as Cap charges are being allocated. So, for instance, if an assigning Club agrees to retain 30% of an SPC's Cap charge over the balance of its term, it will also retain an obligation to reimburse the acquiring Club 30% of the Player's contractual compensation in each of the remaining years of the contract. A Club may not have more than two (2) contracts as to which Cap charges have been allocated between Clubs in a Player Trade, and no more than $5 million in allocated Cap charges in the aggregate in any one season.
6. System Changes:
• Entry Level System commitment will be limited to two (2) years (covering two full seasons) for all Players who sign their first SPC between the ages of 18 and 24 (i.e., where the first year of the SPC only covers a partial season, SPC must be for three (3) years).
• Maintenance of existing Salary Arbitration System subject to: (i) total mutuality of rights with regard to election as between Player and Club, and (ii) eligibility for election moved to five years of professional experience (from the current four years).
• Group 3 UFA eligibility for Players who are 28 or who have eight (8) Accrued Seasons (continues to allow for early UFA eligibility -- age 26).
• Maximum contract length of five (5) years.
• Limit on year-to-year salary variability on multi-year SPCs -- i.e., maximum increase or decrease in total compensation (salary and bonuses) year-over-year limited to 5% of the value of the first year of the contract. (For example, if a Player earns $10 million in total compensation in Year 1 of his SPC, his compensation (salary and bonuses) cannot increase or decrease by more than $500,000 in any subsequent year of his SPC.)
• Re-Entry waivers will be eliminated, consistent with the Cap Accounting proposal relating to the treatment of Players on NHL SPCs playing in another professional league.
• NHL Clubs who draft European Players obtain four (4) years of exclusive negotiating rights following selection in the Draft. If the four-year period expires, Player will be eligible to enter the League as a Free Agent and will not be subject to re-entering the Draft.
7. Revenue Sharing:
• NHL commits to Revenue Sharing Pool of $200 million for 2012/13 season (based on assumption of $3.303 Billion in actual HRR). Amount will be adjusted upward or downward in proportion to Actual HRR results for 2012/13. Revenue Sharing Pools in future years will be calculated proportionately.
• At least one-half of the total Revenue Sharing Pool (50%) will be raised from the Top 10 Revenue Grossing Clubs in a manner to be determined by the NHL.
• The distribution of the Revenue Sharing Pool will be determined on an annual basis by a Revenue Sharing Committee on which the NHLPA will have representation and input.
• For each of the first two years of the CBA, no Club will receive less in total Revenue Sharing than it received in 2011/12.
• Current "Disqualification" criteria in CBA (for Clubs in Top Half of League revenues and Clubs in large media markets) will be removed.
• Existing performance and "reduction" standards and provisions relating to "non-performers" (i.e., CBA 49.3(d)(i) and 49.3(d)(ii)) will be eliminated and will be adjusted as per the NHL's 7/31 Proposal.
8. Supplemental and Commissioner Discipline:
• Introduction of additional procedural safeguards, including ultimate appeal right to a "neutral" third-party arbitrator with a "clearly erroneous" standard of review.
9. No "Rollback":
• The NHL is not proposing that current SPCs be reduced, re-written or rolled back. Instead, the NHL's proposal retains all current Players' SPCs at their current face value for the duration of their terms, subject to the operation of the escrow mechanism in the same manner as it worked under the expired CBA.
10. Players' Share "Make Whole" Provision:
• The League proposes to make Players "whole" for the absolute reduction in Players' Share dollars (when compared to 2011/12) that is attributable to the economic terms of the new CBA (the "Share Reduction"). Using an assumed year-over-year growth rate of 5% for League-wide revenues, the new CBA could result in shortfalls from the current level of Players' Share dollars ($1.883 Billion in 2011/12) of up to $149 million in Year 1 and up to $62 million in Year 2, for which Players will be "made whole." (By Year 3 of the new CBA, Players' Share dollars should exceed the current level ($1.883 Billion for 2011/12) and no "make whole" will be required.) Any such "shortfalls" in Years 1 and 2 of the new CBA will be computed as a percentage reduction off of the Player's stated contractual compensation, and will be repaid to the Player as a Deferred Compensation benefit spread over the remaining future years of the Player's SPC (or if he has no remaining years, in the year following the expiration of his SPC). Player reimbursement for the Share Reduction will be accrued and paid for by the League, and will be chargeable against Players' Share amounts in future years as Preliminary Benefits. The objective would be to honor all existing SPCs by restoring their "value" on the basis of the now existing level of Players' Share dollars.
***
And, in full, here's the league's explanation:
We have reached a critical point in our collective bargaining negotiations. In an attempt to save an 82-game 2012/13 season (including the usual schedule of Playoff Games), the NHL is making a substantially revised proposal to the NHLPA regarding the critical issues on which the parties have been separated and which are essential to an agreement with the NHLPA on a new CBA moving forward. We believe that the proposal set forth below is fair to the Players and the teams, and good for the game and our fans.
This proposal is based on what we believe is a fair sharing of revenues as between the Players and the Clubs.
This proposal does not require any roll-back in the salaries of Players, and attempts to recognize and protect prior contractual commitments.
This proposal provides for increased revenue sharing, targeted to those teams that are most in need.
This proposal is our best attempt to save an 82-game 2012/13 season, and is, in fact, the best we can responsibly do.
Our negotiations with the NHLPA have failed to progress on the most critical economic and system-related issues. After considerable deliberation, we have decided to make this proposal because time is of the essence. Specifically, in order to save the full 82-game season, the Regular Season schedule will have to commence no later than November 2, with 7-day Club Training Camps that must open by October 26. As a practical matter, this means we must conclude a new written CBA by October 25. We believe the parties can achieve this and that by working together, we can jointly preserve an 82-game season for our Players, our Clubs, and most importantly, for our fans.
Delay (beyond October 25) will necessarily leave us with an abbreviated season and will require the cancellation of signature NHL events. Failure to reach a prompt agreement will also have other significant and detrimental impacts on our fans, the game, our Clubs, our business and the communities in which we play. All of this will obviously necessitate changes to this offer in the event we are unsuccessful in saving a full season.
Here are the elements of our proposal and a brief explanation:
Term
The term of the CBA proposed by the League -- 6 years, plus a mutual option for a 7th year -- is consistent with the term of the expired CBA. It will allow for our fans, the Players and the Clubs to enjoy a reasonable and extended period of labor peace thereby enhancing the short to medium term business planning of the parties. During this time, the League and the Players can work together to continue to build on the momentum the NHL has experienced over the course of the past 7 years, both on and off the ice.
HRR Accounting
We agree to retain the CBA's current HRR definitions. Further, we propose to formalize the various agreements the NHLPA and the NHL have reached, and lived under, during the course of the expired CBA, and to clarify mutually identified ambiguities in the CBA. Importantly, we do not believe any of our proposed clarifications should have any impact either on the amount of the Players' Share or the amount that any individual Player is entitled to receive. None of these clarifications for instance, would have had a material impact on the 2011/12 Actual HRR number. This proposal is all about certainty, clarity and speeding up our complex, end-of-year accounting process.
Applicable Players' Share
We believe a 50-50 sharing of Actual HRR is a fair allocation and a reasonable compromise as between Players and Clubs. The simple fact of the matter is that it costs Clubs more money now to operate and to generate revenues than it used to. These increased costs include amounts dedicated to the health, safety and enhanced comfort of NHL Players, the increased costs associated with generating ticket and gameday revenues, and the significant capital investments that are regularly being made around the League to enhance the fan experience and to create new revenue streams. The proposed 50-50 sharing arrangement, comparable to the sharing arrangements in the NFL and the NBA, will enable the NHL to protect and promote the long-term future of the game, the financial health and stability of the Clubs and the long-term earning capacity of the Players.
Payroll Range
We propose to set the 2012/13 Payroll Range on the basis of last season's Actual HRR, using the same methodology as used in the recently expired CBA. While this will result in a reduced Upper Limit for 2012/13, we have also proposed to permit the Clubs to exceed the Payroll Range this year, to a maximum of $70.2 million – which was the Cap established prior to this past summer. This will allow a Club that chooses to do so to maintain or enhance its current roster during a full-year transition period.
Cap Accounting
We are proposing that a Club's Lower Limit obligation be satisfied without reference to (or inclusion of) performance bonuses. This will effectively increase the minimum commitment of actual compensation paid by the "Lower Limit Clubs" to Players. The proposal acknowledges the League's agreement to a request made by the NHLPA earlier in our negotiations.
We are proposing that all years of existing long-term contracts in excess of five (5) years be counted against a Club's Cap regardless of whether or where a Player is playing. While such contracts (and Cap charges) can be traded during their terms, in the event a Player subsequently retires or ceases to play, the effective Cap charge would revert to the Club that originally entered into the contract. This proposal is consistent with our other proposals intended to address the harmful effects of long-term, front-loaded, "back-diving" contracts.
We are proposing that the salaries of minor league Players on NHL contracts (above a threshold of $105,000) be counted against a Club's Cap. This provision is intended to prevent Clubs from "stashing" or assigning players to the minors (or any other professional league) for "Cap management" purposes. We are not proposing that any salary paid to minor league Players on NHL contracts be counted against the Players' Share.
Finally, we propose that to facilitate more trades and create increased flexibility in managing Cap Room, Clubs be allowed to allocate portions of a contract's Cap charge (and related salary obligations) in the context of a Player Trade. This will facilitate additional Player movement and trades between teams as they manage their respective Caps and Payroll Range obligations.
System Changes
We also propose making certain modest modifications to existing elements of the current system, none of which will affect the total dollars to which the Players are entitled; they will address instead the allocation of those dollars as among various categories of Players, and we believe should ensure and improve the competitive balance and quality of play around the League as a result.
In our opinion, and as we have expressed in prior bargaining sessions, certain elements of the current system have produced a dynamic that has led to a misallocation of Players' Share dollars in favor of those Players coming out of the Entry Level System at the expense of other, more proven and established Players. We are therefore proposing the following to hopefully address this dynamic:
(1) We have withdrawn our initial proposal that would have provided Clubs with an option to extend the terms of Entry Level contracts, and instead are proposing to reduce the duration of the Entry Level System from three years to two years, thereby allowing entering NHL Players an earlier opportunity to become Restricted Free Agents. This will free up more money currently committed to Entry Level Players in their third years who are no longer legitimate NHL prospects and will also allow talented NHL prospects an opportunity to negotiate non-ELS contracts earlier in their careers.
(2) We have withdrawn our initial proposal to eliminate Salary Arbitration. We are instead proposing to maintain the Salary Arbitration mechanism, and are further proposing that the rights of Players and Clubs to elect Salary Arbitration be made mutual. Moreover, we are proposing to revise the eligibility criteria for Salary Arbitration to five years of professional experience (instead of the current four years), the same criteria as existed under the 1994-2004 CBA.
(3) We have withdrawn our initial proposal to revise the eligibility requirements for Unrestricted Free Agency to 10 Accrued Seasons, and are instead proposing a modest single year adjustment to 28 years of age or 8 Accrued Seasons. This proposal still allows for the possibility of early UFA status for Players -- as early as age 26.
All three of these system proposals are designed to shift the current allocation of Players' Share dollars away from "second contracts" and toward "third and subsequent contracts" to ensure what we believe to be a more equitable and effective allocation of Players' Share dollars to more proven, established Players who are playing in the prime of their NHL careers.
We are also proposing two additional system modifications that are intended to address the recent phenomenon of long-term, front-loaded, "back-diving" Player contracts that we believe has proven harmful to the interests of our Clubs and has clearly had the purpose and effect of circumventing the letter and spirit of our existing system. In addition, these contracts have increased the Escrow obligation and reduced the effective salaries of Players playing under "normal" contracts. In order to mitigate the consequences of these contracts, we have proposed 5-year term limits for SPCs and tighter restrictions on the year-over-year salary variability of contracts.
Due to our proposed change in the Cap treatment of minor league Players on NHL SPCs, we are proposing the elimination of the Re-Entry Waivers provision. The elimination of this provision, coupled with the ability to allocate Cap charges and salary in trades, should lend themselves to fewer NHL-caliber Players being relegated to minor league service for prolonged periods of time.
Finally, in order to help preserve the vibrancy and stability of European professional leagues as a continued source of NHL talent, we are proposing to convert the typical four-year period of exclusive negotiating rights that attach to European Players from the current "two-plus-two" model (with each Player being subject to having to re-enter the Draft) to a straight "four-year" model (with no obligation to re-enter the Draft).
Revenue Sharing
The NHL has proposed to increase the Revenue Sharing pool for 2012/13 to $200 million (assuming League-wide revenues of $3.303 Billion), representing an approximately 33% increase over the amount that will be distributed on account of 2011/12. This enhanced amount is at least comparable to the levels of revenue sharing in the NBA and MLB, and will be adjusted proportionately upward or downward based on Actual HRR results in future seasons.
At least 50% of the Revenue Sharing pool will be funded by the Top 10 Revenue Grossing teams. The remainder of the Revenue Sharing pool will be funded from League- and Playoff-generated revenues.
The Revenue Sharing pool will be redistributed to those Clubs who are in the most need in order to enable those teams to have sufficient resources on hand to compete for and compensate Players within the Payroll Range, and otherwise to provide a basis for their continued financial stability. In this regard, we are proposing to commit for the next two years revenue sharing payments to recipient Clubs that are equivalent to or greater than what those Clubs will receive on account of the 2011/12 season. The effect should be to continue -- and even improve -- the historic and unprecedented quality of play and level of competitive balance we have jointly been able to achieve during the period of the recently expired CBA.
All Clubs in the NHL except the top 10 Revenue Grossing Clubs will now be eligible for Revenue Sharing, including Clubs in large media markets who were previously ineligible (such as Anaheim, New Jersey and the New York Islanders, among others). Further, our proposal eliminates some of the current "business performance" thresholds that had the effect of materially reducing the amounts a Club might otherwise qualify to receive in revenue sharing. Instead, under-performing Clubs will be expected to enhance their business planning capabilities, will be provided on-site assistance to meet enhanced business objectives and will be provided with much greater counseling as to "best practices" in business operations.
In addition, we have proposed the formation of a functioning and active Revenue Sharing Committee, on which the NHLPA will have representation and will have an opportunity to provide input, to determine the best and most effective distribution of revenue sharing funds.
Supplemental and Commissioner Discipline
We are proposing to amend current Player discipline provisions to introduce additional procedural safeguards to protect Player interests, including an ultimate appeal right to a "neutral" third-party arbitrator with a "clearly erroneous" standard of review.
No Rollback; Players' Share "Make Whole" Provision
The NHL is not proposing that current SPCs be reduced, re-written or rolled back. Instead, the NHL's proposal retains all current Players' SPCs at their current face value for the duration of their terms, subject to the operation of the escrow mechanism in the same manner as it has worked under the expired CBA. (In other words, under the expired CBA, the compensation a Player received each year was either higher or lower than the face value of his contract depending upon Club-Player contracting levels and the level and growth rate of HRR.) Under the expired CBA, in two of the seven years Players were paid in excess of the face values of their SPCs and in five of those years they received less than their face values. That process would remain intact under the new CBA.
Under our "make whole" proposal, which is premised upon a 5% anticipated growth of HRR both this year and in future years, every Player will be paid compensation based on the full value of the Players' Share under which his current SPC was signed.
In order to effectively transition from a Players' Share of 57 percent to 50 percent, including importantly to protect Players' current SPCs against an absolute reduction in Players' Share dollars, the new Agreement contemplates, in its initial years, a "make whole" mechanism that will effectively pay each Player currently under contract the difference between 50% of Actual HRR in 2012/13 and 57% of HRR in 2011/12 -- which was $1.883 Billion.
Again, premised upon an assumed 5% growth rate between 2011/12 and 2012/13, the "make whole" amount is calculated to be a maximum of $149 million for the 2012/13 season ($1.883 Billion minus $1.734 Billion (57% multiplied by $3.303 Billion minus 50% multiplied by $3.468 Billion). Similarly, utilizing that formula and our 5% growth projections, the "make whole" amount is calculated to be a maximum of $62 million for the 2013/14 season.
To accomplish the "make whole," each Players' pro-rata "make whole" will be determined for the first two years of the Agreement and will be paid to each Player as a Deferred Compensation benefit over the life of the Player's existing SPC. For those Players whose contracts expire after the 2012/13 season, the benefit will be paid when final HRR is determined for this season (in October/November 2013). Player "make whole" payments will be accrued and paid for by the League, and will be chargeable against Players' Share amounts in future years as Preliminary Benefits.
The "make whole" obligation will be operational only through the 2013/14 season because, beginning in Year 3, the projected growth in League-wide revenues should have resulted in an increase in absolute Players' Share dollars (in excess of the Players' Share of $1.883 Billion in 2011/12). This will effectively restore "full value" to all existing SPCs without any continuing need for a "make whole."
We note in regard to this proposal, that while the NHLPA's August 14 proposal was premised upon a 7% annual growth rate in HRR, we instead used the more conservative growth rate of 5%, consistent with our prior proposals. If the NHLPA's estimate of revenue growth is more accurate, then the amount of money needed to effectuate a "make whole" would actually be less.
* * *
The parties have already reached agreement on many of the non-critical but necessary items needed to complete a new CBA. We hope the NHLPA and the Players will view this proposal in the manner in which it is intended -- an invitation to complete an Agreement in the necessary timeframe so that a full 82-game 2012/13 season can be saved.
Summary
- 50-50 split of HRR (hockey-related revenues) throughout the deal.
- No salary rollback for players.
- Deal has a term of six years plus a "mutual option for a seventh year."
- HRR definition remains the same from previous CBA
- Salary cap ceiling would be $59.9 million and the floor would be $43.9 million.
- Entry-Level Contracts are now two years in length, down from three years in previous CBA
- Players need to be 28 years old or have eight years of NHL experience to become unrestricted free agents. Under the previous agreement, the numbers were 27 years old and seven years.
- Term limit of five years on all contracts. The previous CBA had no term limits.
- Revenue Sharing total is $200 million, but that number will change depending on how much revenue the league takes in each year.
- Player discipline changes involve the "Introduction of additional procedural safeguards, including ultimate appeal right to a 'neutral' third-party arbitrator with a 'clearly erroneous' standard of review."
Friday, 12 October 2012
Ice Hockey in Lithuania
Lithuania Hockey League
1 - Energija Elektrenai
2 - Galve Trakai
3 - Garsu Pasaulis Vilnius
4 - Juniors Elektrenai
5 - Sparnai Kaunas
6 - Stumbras Kaunas
7 - Tigrai Kaunas
8 - Velniai Kaunas
9 - Kedainiu LRK Kedainiai
10 - SK Skatas Klaipeda
11 - Suduva Marijampole
12 - Nemunas Rokiskis
13 - SK Panevezio LRK Panevezys
14 - Poseidonas Elektrenai
15 - Sporto Centras Energija Elektrenai
16 - Viesulas 86 Vilnius
17 - Vilkai Vilnius
 | |
2 - Galve Trakai
3 - Garsu Pasaulis Vilnius
4 - Juniors Elektrenai
5 - Sparnai Kaunas
6 - Stumbras Kaunas
7 - Tigrai Kaunas
8 - Velniai Kaunas
9 - Kedainiu LRK Kedainiai
10 - SK Skatas Klaipeda
11 - Suduva Marijampole
12 - Nemunas Rokiskis
13 - SK Panevezio LRK Panevezys
14 - Poseidonas Elektrenai
15 - Sporto Centras Energija Elektrenai
16 - Viesulas 86 Vilnius
17 - Vilkai Vilnius
Ice Hockey in Latvia
Latvian Hockey League
1 - HK Ozolnieki Monarhs
2 - HK Jelgava
3 - HK SMS Credit
4 - Juniors
5 - HK Liepajas Metalurgs-2
6 - HK Riga 95
7 - HS Prizma
8 - DHK Latgale
9 - SC Energija Elektenai (Lithuania)
10 - HS LSPA Riga
 | |
2 - HK Jelgava
3 - HK SMS Credit
4 - Juniors
5 - HK Liepajas Metalurgs-2
6 - HK Riga 95
7 - HS Prizma
8 - DHK Latgale
9 - SC Energija Elektenai (Lithuania)
10 - HS LSPA Riga
Ice Hockey in Estonia
NHL Opening night was meant to be tonight!!
It's Oct. 12 and the Washington Capitals were supposed to open the 2012-13 NHL season Friday night at Verizon Center against the defending Eastern Conference-champion New Jersey Devils. They were one game from facing the Devils in the Eastern final last spring, and while this wouldn't have made up for that, opening night is even more special with this kind of game.
It should have been. Instead, the league and NHL Players' Association are engaged in a stalemate during a lockout that already cost the preseason and 82 regular-season games. Seven Caps games and millions of dollars in leaguewide revenue are gone. But on Thursday after a negotiation session, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly struck a cord with some comments to reporters, as quoted by ESPN New York.
"Until we're tackling the major issues, I'm not sure what the urgency is to meet on a 24/7 basis," Daly said. No "urgency?" Sure, from a logistical perspective, owners are getting television revenue from NBC even without a season and many players (over a hundred according to various counts) are receiving paychecks in Europe. But, no really? No urgency? Hardcore hockey fans can't enjoy the best time of the year in sports, and Caps folks in the D.C. area can't join in on the fun as the Redskins are finally exciting to watch and the Nationals are in the playoffs. Verizon Center remains quiet on nights that hockey games were supposed to fill it, cutting into employees' shifts and into area businesses. The Front Page restaurant in Arlington, across the street from the Caps' practice facility, has lost 10-15 percent of its usual business because training camp was canceled. But owner Jorge Fernandez was quick to praise players and members of the organization for coming in still, despite no season. A decline like that could continue all winter if the NHL and NHLPA are unable to solve their "major issues," which start with how to divide up hockey-related revenue. Right now, they're talking about the minor things, like drug testing and player safety, while the NHL empire burns.
"If we had everything else settled, we could go back and solve the remaining issues in six hours," Steve Fehr told reporters in New York. According to a report by TSN, more games will soon be canceled and that move could be significant. The more optimistic folks around hockey considered a Thanksgiving start appropriate if there must a lockout. That could soon fade into December or worse. And after the Toronto Star reported the commissioner Gary Bettman was considering pulling the plug on the Winter Classic as early as November to take it away as a negotiating tool, well, the time for urgency is now.
It should have been. Instead, the league and NHL Players' Association are engaged in a stalemate during a lockout that already cost the preseason and 82 regular-season games. Seven Caps games and millions of dollars in leaguewide revenue are gone. But on Thursday after a negotiation session, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly struck a cord with some comments to reporters, as quoted by ESPN New York.
"Until we're tackling the major issues, I'm not sure what the urgency is to meet on a 24/7 basis," Daly said. No "urgency?" Sure, from a logistical perspective, owners are getting television revenue from NBC even without a season and many players (over a hundred according to various counts) are receiving paychecks in Europe. But, no really? No urgency? Hardcore hockey fans can't enjoy the best time of the year in sports, and Caps folks in the D.C. area can't join in on the fun as the Redskins are finally exciting to watch and the Nationals are in the playoffs. Verizon Center remains quiet on nights that hockey games were supposed to fill it, cutting into employees' shifts and into area businesses. The Front Page restaurant in Arlington, across the street from the Caps' practice facility, has lost 10-15 percent of its usual business because training camp was canceled. But owner Jorge Fernandez was quick to praise players and members of the organization for coming in still, despite no season. A decline like that could continue all winter if the NHL and NHLPA are unable to solve their "major issues," which start with how to divide up hockey-related revenue. Right now, they're talking about the minor things, like drug testing and player safety, while the NHL empire burns.
"If we had everything else settled, we could go back and solve the remaining issues in six hours," Steve Fehr told reporters in New York. According to a report by TSN, more games will soon be canceled and that move could be significant. The more optimistic folks around hockey considered a Thanksgiving start appropriate if there must a lockout. That could soon fade into December or worse. And after the Toronto Star reported the commissioner Gary Bettman was considering pulling the plug on the Winter Classic as early as November to take it away as a negotiating tool, well, the time for urgency is now.
Thursday, 11 October 2012
Slovak Extraliga
Slovak Extraliga is the name of the highest-level ice hockey league in Slovakia. As of 2009, it is ranked by the IIHF as the fifth strongest league in Europe. The name of the league is leased to sponsor and changes frequently.
1 - HC Kosice - The team is nicknamed Oceliari, meaning Steelers.
2 - HC '05 Banska Bystrica - The team is nicknamed Barani, meaning Rams.
3 - HK 36 Skalica - Founded in 1936.
4 - HK Dukla Trencin - The team is nicknamed Vojaci, meaning Soldiers.
5 - HK Nitra - Founded in 1931.
6 - HK Orange 20 - Due to a disappointing performance in the previous world junior competition, beginning in the 2007/2008 season, the Slovak U20 team will be playing in the Slovak Extraliga. This is partially due to nervousness after the Czech U18 team was relegated and the Slovak U20 team came very close.
7 - HK Poprad - The club is nicknamed Kamzíci, meaning Chamois.
8 - HKm Zvolen - The team is nicknamed Rytieri, meaning Knights.
9 - MHC Martin - Founded in 1932
10 - MsHK Zilina - The team is nicknamed Vlci, meaning Wolves.
11 - SHK 37 Piestany - Founded in 1937.
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
_logo_as_at_September_2012.jpg "ŠHK 37 Piešťany (Slovak ice hockey club) logo as at September 2012.jpg"){kind=logo} | |
Interesting Article from the Toronto Star
The owners and players in the National Hockey League have no idea how much they are hated by Canadians and how little we care about the details of their current contract dispute. “Greedy billionaire owners fighting greedy multi-millionaire players,” is how many of us think about the owners’ lockout of players that threatens the entire NHL season. Indeed, the gap between the owners and the players is so wide and the pressure to resolve the feud so weak that the NHL could easily be shut down for two to three years. In recent days, I’ve seen players on my adult hockey teams, guys who once were diehard hockey fans, simply shrug and sigh when asked if they are mad about the lockout, which has already resulted in the cancellation of the first two weeks of the season. The players don’t believe either the owners or the players care about the fans and they completely tune out when either side talks of rollbacks, salary caps, hockey-related revenues, entitlements, targeted revenue-sharing plans, cartels or union decertification.
What’s clear is that the NHL brand is in tatters in Canada. It’s in even worse shape in the U.S., where hockey badly trails football, baseball, basketball and auto racing in terms of fan interest. Outside of a few northern states, few Americans would care — or notice — if hockey disappeared forever. Through it all, the rich owners seem oblivious to the long-term impact the lockout is causing to the brand, acting as if they don’t need to pay attention to fans because they are operating a continent-wide pro hockey monopoly. And it’s hard to feel much sympathy for the players, who average $2.5 million a year playing a kids’ game. Given that the NHL is so dysfunctional, greedy and uncaring to fans, it’s time to consider a radical approach to solving this mess. One solution is to form a new, independent pro hockey league. Crazy? Not when you realize the NHL lockout may last several years. Impossible? Not when you figure lots of rich guys in North America and abroad are itching to own a sports team. Come on down, Jim Balsillie! The former RIM boss tried for years to buy an NHL team and move it to the Hamilton-Kitchener area. In Europe, rich Saudi princes and Russian billionaires are buying up soccer and basketball clubs. Maybe they could buy a hockey team and spend millions in TV ads to support locally and nationally televised games.
The league could be in operation fairly quickly, launching with up to 12 teams. Teams could easily be placed in major cities: Toronto-Hamilton, Quebec City, Philadelphia, Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Houston, Atlanta, San Francisco, Cincinnati, Seattle, Kansas City and elsewhere. All have large arenas that aren’t owned by NHL teams or that don’t have leases that forbid other pro hockey teams from using them. For excitement, the new league could play an interlocking schedule with the Russia-based KHL, considered the second-best league in the world, with a World Series of Hockey as its ultimate championship. The forerunner to such a new league was the old WHA, which ran from 1972 to 1979. In its inaugural year, some 65 NHL players jumped to the WHA, including star Bobby Hull, who signed a then-unprecedented 10-year, $2.75-million contract. If and when the NHL resumed play, the two leagues could play against each other and have a joint championship. Some fans may argue with some credibility that a new league would only water down hockey even more than it is now and could quickly fold once the NHL reopened.
But while it’s true that the WHA struggled in the 1970s through numerous ownership and franchise shifts, the former league had a profound impact on pro hockey. It brought about huge pay raises for players, dramatically more freedom for players to choose the team they wanted to play for, and shut down any talk of NHL lockouts or strikes because of the sheer presence of a competing league. With rich owners and hard lessons learned from the WHA experience, a new league now could emerge better financed and better managed than the old WHA and provide an on-ice product close to level of NHL teams, with NHLers who jumped leagues and European players. And such a league would send a message to the 30 NHL owners that their days of monopoly control of pro hockey were over. If that happened, then the ultimate winners would be hockey fans who are now so fed up with the NHL that they don’t give a damn if the owners and players ever reach a deal.
What’s clear is that the NHL brand is in tatters in Canada. It’s in even worse shape in the U.S., where hockey badly trails football, baseball, basketball and auto racing in terms of fan interest. Outside of a few northern states, few Americans would care — or notice — if hockey disappeared forever. Through it all, the rich owners seem oblivious to the long-term impact the lockout is causing to the brand, acting as if they don’t need to pay attention to fans because they are operating a continent-wide pro hockey monopoly. And it’s hard to feel much sympathy for the players, who average $2.5 million a year playing a kids’ game. Given that the NHL is so dysfunctional, greedy and uncaring to fans, it’s time to consider a radical approach to solving this mess. One solution is to form a new, independent pro hockey league. Crazy? Not when you realize the NHL lockout may last several years. Impossible? Not when you figure lots of rich guys in North America and abroad are itching to own a sports team. Come on down, Jim Balsillie! The former RIM boss tried for years to buy an NHL team and move it to the Hamilton-Kitchener area. In Europe, rich Saudi princes and Russian billionaires are buying up soccer and basketball clubs. Maybe they could buy a hockey team and spend millions in TV ads to support locally and nationally televised games.
The league could be in operation fairly quickly, launching with up to 12 teams. Teams could easily be placed in major cities: Toronto-Hamilton, Quebec City, Philadelphia, Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Houston, Atlanta, San Francisco, Cincinnati, Seattle, Kansas City and elsewhere. All have large arenas that aren’t owned by NHL teams or that don’t have leases that forbid other pro hockey teams from using them. For excitement, the new league could play an interlocking schedule with the Russia-based KHL, considered the second-best league in the world, with a World Series of Hockey as its ultimate championship. The forerunner to such a new league was the old WHA, which ran from 1972 to 1979. In its inaugural year, some 65 NHL players jumped to the WHA, including star Bobby Hull, who signed a then-unprecedented 10-year, $2.75-million contract. If and when the NHL resumed play, the two leagues could play against each other and have a joint championship. Some fans may argue with some credibility that a new league would only water down hockey even more than it is now and could quickly fold once the NHL reopened.
But while it’s true that the WHA struggled in the 1970s through numerous ownership and franchise shifts, the former league had a profound impact on pro hockey. It brought about huge pay raises for players, dramatically more freedom for players to choose the team they wanted to play for, and shut down any talk of NHL lockouts or strikes because of the sheer presence of a competing league. With rich owners and hard lessons learned from the WHA experience, a new league now could emerge better financed and better managed than the old WHA and provide an on-ice product close to level of NHL teams, with NHLers who jumped leagues and European players. And such a league would send a message to the 30 NHL owners that their days of monopoly control of pro hockey were over. If that happened, then the ultimate winners would be hockey fans who are now so fed up with the NHL that they don’t give a damn if the owners and players ever reach a deal.
Wednesday, 10 October 2012
Czech Ice Hockey
The Czech Extraliga was created by the 1993 split of the Czechoslovak First Ice Hockey League following the breakup of Czechoslovakia, and is the highest-level ice hockey league in the Czech Republic. In 2008 the IIHF ranked Extraliga third among the top 7 European teams for seeding purposes in the 2008-2009 Champions Hockey League season. Many Extraliga players leave every year on transfers to the NHL and KHL. 14 teams compete in the league, with the top 6 teams at the end of the regular season play qualifying for the playoffs to determine the league champion, known as the Česká pojišťovna play-off Tipsport extraligy. The teams that finish 7th through 10th play a play-in series (best-of-five) to determine who will join the top six into the playoff quarter-finals (best-of-seven). The four lowest ranked teams (11–14) after the regular season play in a play-out goup (12 games, all regular-season matches are counted into the ranking). The last-place team after the play-out group plays with the winner of the First League playoff series (best-of-seven), with the winner of that series being qualified to play in Extraliga the following season while the losing team plays in the First League. Since the 2006-07 season, 3 points have been awarded for a regulation win and 2 points for an overtime victory, while the defeated team in overtime gets 1 point. If necessary, penalty shots are used to decide games after overtime. From the 2006-07 season through the 2007-08 season there was only one assist credited for each goal instead of the standard two that other leagues credit. This rule change affected league statistics in a negative manner, and so the rule was changed back to the standard two assists starting in the 2008-09 season. During the 2011-12 season the association of Czech Extraliga managers attempted to close the league to prevent any relegations to or promoting from the second tier national league and also set a maximum salary cap similarly to the NHL system. However, after some legal difficulties and strong opposition by the public the whole proposition was scratched.
1 - HC Kometa Brno - The club was founded in 1953 as an army ice hockey club with the name Rudá hvězda Brno ("Red Star"). The majority of players were transferred from 2 hockey clubs in Brno (TJ Spartak Brno Zbrojovka and TJ Spartak GZ Královo Pole). In 1962 the club changed its name to ZKL Brno (ZKL is abbreviation of "Ball Bearing Factory") and stopped being an army team. In 1976 the name was changed to Zetor Brno. Shortly after the 1994 revolution, the club changed its name to HC Kometa Brno. "Kometa" was the team's nickname since 1950's (opposite to official "Red Star") and the team was commonly referred to by this name since it was founded. They are the Second most succesful Czech team with 11 titles.
2 - HC Ceske Budejovice - On 10 of January 1928 AC Stadion were founded by merging two clubs in the town - Viktoria and Slovan. AC Stadion České Budějovice became a vital part of the league and produced many international players. In just their first season they finished third behind LTC Praha and AC Sparta Praha. The league included 8 teams and each team played 7 matches. In the 1950/51 season the club won their only league title.
3 - Pirati Chomutov - Founded in 1945, they play in Blue & White.
4 - HC Karlovy Vary - The club planned to create an independent expansion team for the 2009-10 KHL season. They would have attempted to operate as a national team of sorts for the Czech Republic by luring top players from the Czech Extraliga, in the same way as Dinamo Minsk and Dinamo Riga do in their respective countries. It is now unclear when or if they ever will. Energie's junior team will join the MHL, KHL's junior league, for 2012–13 season.
5 - HC Kladno - Kladno was a particularly strong team in the late 1970s, when it won four consecutive league titles (1975–1978), and again in 1980. The team's star, Milan Novy, was league MVP in 1977, 1981, and 1982, and won 6 scoring titles. Frantisek Pospisil was league MVP in 1971 and 1972. Jaromir Jagr played for his hometown Kladno for parts of four seasons, including during the work stoppages in 1994, 2004, and 2012.
6 - HC Bili Tygri Liberec - nicknamed the Tigers. Their home is the Tipsport Arena in Liberec. Their current captain is Petr Nedved, and club president is Petr Syrovátko.
 | |
1 - HC Kometa Brno - The club was founded in 1953 as an army ice hockey club with the name Rudá hvězda Brno ("Red Star"). The majority of players were transferred from 2 hockey clubs in Brno (TJ Spartak Brno Zbrojovka and TJ Spartak GZ Královo Pole). In 1962 the club changed its name to ZKL Brno (ZKL is abbreviation of "Ball Bearing Factory") and stopped being an army team. In 1976 the name was changed to Zetor Brno. Shortly after the 1994 revolution, the club changed its name to HC Kometa Brno. "Kometa" was the team's nickname since 1950's (opposite to official "Red Star") and the team was commonly referred to by this name since it was founded. They are the Second most succesful Czech team with 11 titles.
 | |
 | |
4 - HC Karlovy Vary - The club planned to create an independent expansion team for the 2009-10 KHL season. They would have attempted to operate as a national team of sorts for the Czech Republic by luring top players from the Czech Extraliga, in the same way as Dinamo Minsk and Dinamo Riga do in their respective countries. It is now unclear when or if they ever will. Energie's junior team will join the MHL, KHL's junior league, for 2012–13 season.
 | |
 | |
6 - HC Bili Tygri Liberec - nicknamed the Tigers. Their home is the Tipsport Arena in Liberec. Their current captain is Petr Nedved, and club president is Petr Syrovátko.
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
7 - HC Litvinov - Founded in 1945
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)