CBA Update 8/29/2012

This is what we know after today’s negotiations – the NHLPA is not at all thrilled  with the NHL owners latest proposal. Donald Fehr also said that the NHLPA will have their own counter proposal of their own – that could happen as soon as tomorrow.

So the new buzzword to out of the CBA negotiations this afternoon is Hockey-Related Revenue and Gary Bettman wants to change the definitions what a HRR is - to me that looks like they owners are moving the goal posts on the players.

Apparently, NHLPA head Donald Fehr isn't all that thrilled with that because the NHL owners made 3.3 Billion in revenue last season. "Our preference is to keep the same definition of (hockey-related revenue)," Fehr said.

Sean Gentille Sporting News --- After about 90 minutes of meetings between the sides in New York on Wednesday, Fehr told reporters that the league proposed what currently represents a 46 percent share of hockey-related revenue for players. That's up from the initial offer of 43 percent, which was presented on July 13, but down from the 57 percent the union currently receives.

According to multiple reports, the NHL proposal had three years at a fixed salary cap starting at about $58 million—a drop of about $12 million—before returning to a system where the cap is based on overall league revenues with a 50-50 split; and no rollbacks for current contracts.

That, at least according to Fehr, was not entirely accurate due to league-proposed changes to the definition of hockey-related revenue; the players might be getting 50 percent in the latest proposal, but it would come from a smaller pie.

"Our preference is to keep the same definition of (hockey-related revenue)," Fehr said.

Also, Fehr said, players would pay more in escrow in the early years of the deal, which would essentially function as a salary rollback. The union, according to multiple reports, projects to pay 15-20 percent in escrow off the top of each paycheck, compared to about 8 percent currently. That money is held out to guarantee appropriate division of revenue, then paid back at a later date—assuming the league meets its projections.

Also, Garry Bettman had this zinger today, saying the players should have no "entitlement" to 57 percent revenues.Yeah, that comment is going to win Bettman friends with the fans and players.

While that condescending comment from Bettman is actually on it's face is true -  then why are the owners paying the players these exuberantly huge contracts? Don't pay players 110 million dollars over 10-12 years and then in the next breath say that you're broke.

I am not sure how these owners can look at us with a straight face and say that the NHL players are being paid too much - especially after the deals that they signed this summer. Does Gary Bettman and the NHL owners expect Suter, Parise and Weber to have their deals cut down?

I just don't see how they can walk these contracts back and get the players down to 58 million when the current cap is at 70 million, there are 16 teams currently over that mark.

Then it appears the owners aren't being honest about the revenue split as well - it apparels that the actual revenue split that the owners are proposing now is about 54.1 to 45.9 - which is really not much of a move from 57 - 43 split that was proposed in the June 13, 2012 proposal from the NHL owners.