Follow Us on Twitter

Sens Underground
iTunes

Donate

We're all volunteers paying out of our pocket. We operate on a loss.  If you'd like to help, it will be put to use running the podcast and we'll give you huge kudos on the show!

 

Underground Hosts

Russell

Shredder

StooLi

Canuck

Pan

Kardinal

Quick Search

Sens Underground Forums > CBA talks

The NHL fired the 1st shot across the bow. An article on TSN reports that the NHL's 1st proposal to the NHLPA includes the following.

- a reduction of players' hockey-related revenues from 57 per cent to 46 per cent.
- players would need to wait 10 seasons before becoming unrestricted free agents
- contracts would be limited to a maximum of five years
- an end to salary arbitration
- entry-level contracts would be five years instead of three as they are under the current CBA

That's quite the 1st proposal. There's no way the NHLPA will be happy with it.

I wonder when the NHL will play the NTC/NMC card. That's something that needs to be addressed. You can't keep giving players the big money contracts and also a no trade clause. Players have too much power with these no trade clauses.

Other issues that could change from the current CBA are

- Fines. $2,500 fine is a joke. Make it a percentage of a player's salary, if a player is not suspended, then make the fine the equivalent a one game's salary.
- Suspensions should be looked at, but I doubt it will.
- Division, conference alignments and playoff formats.

July 14, 2012 at 12:32 PM | Registered CommenterHomer

" There's no way the NHLPA will be happy with it."

There's no f**king way any sane person would or should be happy with just about any part of that asinine proposal.

July 14, 2012 at 2:30 PM | Registered Commentertjlincoln

Here's Ian Mendes' article in the Citizen about "What fans should hope for in the NHL's new CBA".

The Citizen? When did Ian join the Citizen?

July 18, 2012 at 12:31 PM | Registered CommenterHomer

The owners forgot to ask for one very important clause - The Stupidity Clause. It would protect themselves from their own stupidity.

July 18, 2012 at 12:57 PM | Registered CommenterSunburned Senior

I think that's call a Sanity Clause.

July 18, 2012 at 4:44 PM | Registered CommenterResigned Russell

The owners need to be protected from themselves -- they are the ones finding ways around the cap that they demanded in the last CBA, and now want to close off some of the loopholes they found because they're getting in over their head. Wasn't it Chuck Fletcher who mentioned the 5 year limit on contracts, only days after signing Parise and Suter for 13 years?

I think the NHLPA is playing it smart in not coming out with a rebuttal right away.....it's almost like they saying under their breath "yeah, let's just let this sit for a while and let them come out with something else as a new bargaining position, because we're okay with the current agreement as is and have already said we'll play under it to start the season".

July 18, 2012 at 7:37 PM | Registered CommenterKardinal