2012 NHL Offseason Thread: ROCK OUT WITH YOUR LOCKOUT

**isladar** · 2012-10-17 15:46

LA LA LA STILL BELIEVIN'

**Melena** · 2012-10-17 15:55

Anyone who expects anything less with Fehr heading the NHLPA is delusional. This is the same guy who was in charge of MLBPA when we lost the world series. He was the one who thought going on a strike mid season was the greatest fucking idea ever.

**NynJa** · 2012-10-17 16:01

That piece of fucking garbage is the reason the Montreal Expos no longer exist? Fuck him in the goat ass, I'm siding with Bettman.

**Melena** · 2012-10-17 16:23

Originally Posted by NynJa

That piece of fucking garbage is the reason the Montreal Expos no longer exist? Fuck him in the goat ass, I'm siding with Bettman.

In his defense though, if I owned a team that had to play in Olympic Stadium where you had to play dodge the roof between innings, i'd get the fuck out as well.

**Vaspinne** · 2012-10-17 17:37

This waiting game is awful. I woke up yesterday and was filled with hope after reading the headlines and whatnot. Today, I'm filled with despair. Albeit, there's a full 11 days until the deadline of this proposal, so if they can have enough give and take between now and then, hopefully they can come to an agreement

**isladar** · 2012-10-17 18:45

Originally Posted by Melena

In his defense though, if I owned a team that had to play in Olympic Stadium where you had to play dodge the roof between innings, i'd get the fuck out as well.

Fuck that, the Expos were awesome, I had the coolest hats and shirts when I was a kid

I put rad pins on my expos' hat

**Callisto** · 2012-10-17 18:49

If Fehr managed to drive baseball out of Chicago I'd give him a handy myself.

**Bregor** · 2012-10-17 20:10

Originally Posted by Callisto

If Fehr managed to drive baseball out of Chicago I'd give him a handy myself.

But...

THEO

**Mote** · 2012-10-17 21:33

wrong thread, Bregor :/

**BadKarma** · 2012-10-17 21:39

Broke 3 of my toes in the pit at the Marilyn Manson/Rob Zombie show tonight. I am retarded.

**Hyuudo** · 2012-10-17 22:01

Revenue finally gets to 50-50 (and with an 82 game season no less) and they have to add shit they know the NHLPA won't accept. Another chance to get hockey going fucking ruined. I'm sure the Fehrs (seen below) will give the deal a nice, hard look over, maybe get a clue or two.

http://southparkstudios.mtvnimages.c...ardly-boys.jpg

And no, I'm not siding with Bettman. Both sides are acting like assholes, just in different ways.

**Ratatapa** · 2012-10-18 07:40

Who are you?

**Brill Weave** · 2012-10-18 07:43

lol

**Ratatapa** · 2012-10-18 12:01

I hate people who thinks that the 50-50 is fairs
IT'S NOT FAIR

The problem is if the revenue grows players gets less

It's a fking hidden trap

**Brill Weave** · 2012-10-18 12:09

50/50 is the best they are going to get. I don't know about the NBA, but the NFL definitely has more revenue than the NHL. And they are both at 50/50. The NHLPA needs to understand that 50/50 is pretty much non negotiable. What makes hockey better than the NBA or NFL to the point where it's players should get more than half of the revenue? I mean seriously.

**Brill Weave** · 2012-10-18 12:12

The problem is if the revenue grows players gets less

It's a fking hidden trap

Explain please. From everything I've read there is no dollar cap on how much the players would receive from hockey related revenue. How does more HRR mean they receive less? Unless you're referring to the initial cut from 57% to 50% I think you may be confused.

**Callisto** · 2012-10-18 12:18

Originally Posted by Brill Weave

Explain please. From everything I've read there is no dollar cap on how much the players would receive from hockey related revenue. How does more HRR mean they receive less? Unless you're referring to the initial cut from 57% to 50% I think you may be confused.

I think it's worded funny, but they're still looking to redefine HRR so that it encompasses less than it does now. If overall revenue increases, the portion of that that would be under the current definition of HRR but not in the new one would go directly to the owners and not see the 50% split, so basically the more money that is made, the more is exempt from the players' share, equals the more they 'lost'.

**BadKarma** · 2012-10-18 12:21

GENTLEMAN. TODAY. IS JUDGEMENT DAY.

**Brill Weave** · 2012-10-18 12:54

Originally Posted by Callisto

I think it's worded funny, but they're still looking to redefine HRR so that it encompasses less than it does now. If overall revenue increases, the portion of that that would be under the current definition of HRR but not in the new one would go directly to the owners and not see the 50% split, so basically the more money that is made, the more is exempt from the players' share, equals the more they 'lost'.

Thank you for wording it in non frenchy speak.

**Callisto** · 2012-10-18 13:15

Originally Posted by Brill Weave

Thank you for wording it in non frenchy speak.

Was kind of bored and decided to play with numbers for shits to make an example...let's say that HRR is redefined so that 10% of total revenue is not counted as HRR. This makes the players' share 45% of total revenues(.5 * .9). Given current revenue of $3.3b, this makes the owners' share $330m higher than the players'. If growth kept at the projected 5% annually, that gap would grow by 16.5m in year 1, 17.3m in year 2, 18.2m in year 3, and so on.

If HRR is in fact refined I wouldn't think the amount exempted would come near 10%, but even half of that could payroll three near-cap teams for an entire year, just kind of showing how fast this can add up.

A caveat though, were this type of split to have the exempted amount go directly into a revenue sharing pot, it could easily keep the small-market teams in the black, not like that'd happen though.

Thread: 2012 NHL Offseason Thread: ROCK OUT WITH YOUR LOCKOUT

Thread Tools

Re: 2012 NHL Offseason Thread: ROCK OUT WITH YOUR LOCKOUT