Skip to content

Daly: Players’ 50-50 proposal “is being misrepresented”

Oct 18, 2012, 6:45 PM EDT

Gary Bettman; Bill Daly AP

We’ve heard from NHLPA head Donald Fehr about how their NHL-rejected counter-proposal calls for a 50-50 split in revenue. Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly has some problems with that assessment of their offer.

In a statement issued to the press, Daly says the players’ union offer isn’t all that it appears to be.

“The so called 50-50 deal, plus honoring current contracts proposed by the NHL Players’ Association earlier today is being misrepresented. It is not a 50-50 deal. It is, most likely a 56-to 57-percent deal in Year One and never gets to 50 percent during the proposed five-year term of the agreement. The proposal contemplates paying the Players approximately $650 million outside of the Players’ Share. In effect, the Union is proposing to change the accounting rules to be able to say ’50-50,’ when in reality it is not. The Union told us that they had not yet ‘run the numbers.’ We did.”

Safe to say this is as polite as discourse can be when essentially saying the players’ didn’t do their homework. The NHL certainly broke down the mathematics of the players’ offer in a short time though, 10 minutes by Sidney Crosby‘s count.

  1. jimw81 - Oct 18, 2012 at 6:47 PM

    “is being misrepresented”, ‘50-50,’, ‘run the numbers.’ ‘We did.” focus group words.

    • rogersjd16 - Oct 19, 2012 at 7:38 AM

      Good call. Check out this article on NHL working to repair their PR image and perception. About a Luntz Focus Group: http://deadspin.com/5951872

    • billybou10 - Oct 19, 2012 at 10:40 AM

      The bottom line is just like all other Major sports these players are making way to much money for a game that the would cry thier eyes out kick and scream like little girls if their moms and dads made them stop playing to come in and do their homework or chores. You always hear these players talk about thier love of the game but where’s that love know? The owners are suppose to make money they are the ones laying out all the capital in salaries for players, front office personal, coaches,traing staff, etc, not to mention arenas , travel, hotels and evry damn other thing these so called stars demand. lets be real here it us the fans that should get some of the HRR kicked back to us when our team fails to make the playoffs. An perfect example of what I am talking about is A-Rod of the Yankees guy gets paid 120-130-million Dollars and goes into the playoff and goes something like 1-21 with 12 strikeouts is that what the owner paid for?

      • mjschwartz12 - Oct 19, 2012 at 2:00 PM

        The players are the entertainers, as well as the ones who get injured. You have a player on the back of your jersey not an owner. People watch the game for the athletes not the guys in the office. Thats how I see it.

      • tomnickle - Oct 20, 2012 at 10:57 AM

        Players have to pay taxes, an agent, in a large majority of cases they also have to pay for two residences in major metropolitan areas.

        You would be able to say that players at the top end of the pay scale earn too much if they didn’t generate hundreds of millions of dollars for the league by way of merchandise sales and if their production in the game didn’t contribute to significant television contracts both in their own markets and national markets.

        Players wouldn’t be paid what they have been if they didn’t pay for those contracts and then some in most cases.

        I’m assuming you work for a living. Consider for a moment that your boss or board of directors decides that they will lock you and your colleagues out of the workplace until you’re willing to take a second 24% pay decrease in a ten year time span. And consider for a moment, that if you’re among the best at what you do, you’re generating in the neighbourhood of 500% of your contract’s real dollar value in revenue for your boss or bosses.

        Yeah, I”ll bet you’d be super excited to take a 50% pay cut over ten years and line their pockets even more than you already do.

  2. gp424 - Oct 18, 2012 at 6:58 PM

    Do the players understand that if they don’t play this season they make nothing? How exactly can they win anything that way? The basic’s are pretty simple if Paul Bissonette makes 725,000 this year and this is his last year on his contract, he loses exactly nothing. Because his salary while being reduced by 75,000, he is also protected under the owners CBA proposal to receive the difference of his salary over the course of his contract. If is contract ends at the end of this season he gets the full value this year. Plus now he can negotiate a new contract term next season. If the lockout remains not only does he not get his salary of 725,000 per year, but his salary remains the same next year, when he could of easily gotten a 10 or 15% cost of living increase to say 775,000.00 then in two seasons he would have made over 1.5 million. However holding out and not playing this season he would get 725,000.00 over two seasons. Now tell me which deal is better for him?

    • kyzslew77 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:16 PM

      Do the owners understand that if the players don’t play this season THEY make nothing? The deal that is best for Paul Bissonette is the one that will eventually be signed in the next few weeks, that is better for the players than the one the owners offered earlier this week (but better for the owners than the counteroffers the players made today).

      • sunderlanding - Oct 18, 2012 at 11:51 PM

        You do realize that half of the teams are losing money, so that “THEY make nothing” point you stated doesn’t sound too bad. Making nothing is better than losing millions.

      • kyzslew77 - Oct 19, 2012 at 12:30 AM

        True, but what about the owners that do make money on a year by year basis? How long do you think Toronto and Vancouver and the Rangers want to forgo their profits so that Carolina, Florida and Buffalo can save a few bucks? Further, the reason the owners of the “money losing” teams aren’t desperate to sell is the fact that those franchises are increasing in value every year even as they post operating losses. A brief lockout isn’t going to hurt any franchise’s value, but losing another full season would kill interest in hockey all over the US, hurting future TV contract amounts and torpedoing franchise value. It’s completely silly to act like the owners are happy to sit back and watch the season disappear because it’s not hurting them financially. That’s absurd. Sorry for calling gp424 out on it. The players are losing, too, for sure. But to pretend that the owners have all the leverage is hopelessly wrong.

      • jobuff69 - Oct 19, 2012 at 10:36 AM

        @kyzslew77 Buffalo’s Tery Pegula owner has stated he’s in it for the love of the game.If he needs to make money he will drill another gas well.So don’t worry about the Sabres

      • jobuff69 - Oct 19, 2012 at 11:02 AM

        @kyzslew77 Buffalo’s Ter.Allry Pegula owner has stated he’s in it for the love of the game.If he needs to make money he will drill another gas well.So don’t worry about the Sabres.All these owners have deep pockets and most likely write it off if they lose a couple million

    • chrisvegas - Oct 19, 2012 at 1:12 PM

      Actually they can play overseas and get paid well. The American dollar isn’t worth crap anymore.

  3. trick9 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:01 PM

    Nobody should have expected to see acceptable offer proposed today. Bettman said yesterday that deadline isn’t until the October 25th and knowing that the players know that they don’t need to offer their best deal yet now, and the owners know that they don’t need to accept a deal yet, and if the players offer good deal now they can try to get even better one.

    These proposals must be much better next thursday. NHL must give the players something that they want, either smaller salary reductions or forget those contract and arbitration limits they wanted. They can’t get everything they want now. Players also better start negotiating lower, they will need to accept something between 51-53%.

    • somekat - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:18 PM

      get over it, the owners are done. They gave their best offer, the PA acted like it was an insult.

      The owners, wll not, under any circumstances, offer a deal giving up even more until the pa puts up a real counter offer. This is typical union “negotiating”, keep offering the same deal, and let the other side inch toward you when they actually make changes to their offer. The owners are MUCH smarter than that

  4. kyzslew77 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:03 PM

    Big talk from the side that made its own disingenuous “we’re saying this is 50/50 but it’s not actually 50/50 if you read the fine print” offer earlier this week.

  5. succulentnipples - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:14 PM

    Hornswaggle.

  6. nyrangers1994 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:14 PM

    The players didn’t “do the math?” Come on, they need to focus on being hockey players, not stone-cold, ruthless businessmen. I’m waiting on a statement from the owners, who manage to be so removed from the public, despite having such a firm stance on the matter. Coming off the heels of such a fantastic season, I can’t believe this is happening.

    • nyrangers1994 - Oct 19, 2012 at 10:18 AM

      10 dislikes? Come on guys

    • bigblackzaranek - Oct 19, 2012 at 1:12 PM

      first off, quit whoring around for “likes”. secondly, none of the owners are willing to part with a million dollar fine and loss of draft picks just yet, which is the fine count bettman has told them he will impose if they speak out of line with his “unanimous” decision.

      • nyrangers1994 - Oct 19, 2012 at 2:22 PM

        This is a perfect example of how the lockout has left us all with too much time on our hands, relax man, not a Rangers fan?

  7. gp424 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:38 PM

    I have no problem with the lockout because it is saying me 2000.00 in season ticket money, the owners are losing nothing, and players don’t get paid. And the best part is players such Jagr, Ott and Selanne and others will be a year closer to retiring.

    • kyzslew77 - Oct 18, 2012 at 8:23 PM

      Have you ever wondered how the owners make money? Let’s think about it… something to do with tickets, concessions, and merchandise revenue… But yeah, you’re right, the owners aren’t losing anything.

      • jernster21 - Oct 18, 2012 at 9:02 PM

        Want to talk about how sad the Kroenke family in Denver is going to be over not having to pay 55 million in player salary and I would assume 50+ million out in expenses on players over the course of a season? Well, let’s see. They own the pepsi center which is frequently filled by concerts, shows, etc, the nuggets, the rapids, 1st bank center which frequently has shows, concerts, etc, the Paramount Theatre, the Mammoth, Dick Sporting Goods Park, Altitude, their own tv channel, etc. I’m sure they have numerous real estate investments among things I know nothing about. Point is, this is one of 30 owners. They MIGHT profit 5 million a year after it’s all said in done, which is pretty much chump change when you consider all the money they pay out to fund a single season for the Avalanche. Not to mention all the capital investments they make to the Pepsi Center and all that which comes out of THEIR POCKET. The players WILL NOT win if they want to play hard ball with the owners, the longer it goes on the worse their share is going to be on top of the money that they lose forever. Owners don’t own sports teams because it makes them rich, they are already rich. The players like to think their life is so bad, yet they’re making millions of dollars every year, live a life of luxury on chartered flights, 5 star restaurants and hotels. Cry me a freakin’ river and have fun playing in the KHL or Europe and flying coach!

        What really pisses me off about this whole situation is how the players come off as being bitter for getting “taken” by the last CBA, yet they’re practically begging for a CBA inline with the last one, where they apparently got so fleeced that they have idealistic approach of payback…seems pretty hypocritical doesn’t it?

      • kyzslew77 - Oct 19, 2012 at 12:40 AM

        The last CBA was a big downgrade for the players compared to the CBA before it. The new CBA the owners are proposing is even worse than that. The players would rather take the terms of the 2005 CBA, even though they’re not as good as the terms of the one before that, than be put in an even worse position by the latest owners’ proposal. That is not hypocrisy. That is good sense. You’re right that the players are pointing out that they got their butts kicked in the last CBA negotiations. But to then take that and say “SO WHY WOULD THEY WANT THOSE TERMS AGAIN” when the alternative is a much worse deal is pretty dumb. Sorry.

        Your point about the Kroenkes is fair. Not every single ownership group in the league would be hurt by a missed season. But many of them would be, especially the big moneymakers and the ownership groups that don’t own other pro sports teams and who primarily use their arenas (if they even own them) for hockey.

        As for the “whining players” angle that so many commenters threw around on PFT and PBT a year ago and are now throwing around on PHT this year, yeah, the players are millionaires who play a game for a living and it’s annoying that they are whining and playing hardball like this. But holy moly, why would anyone have any sympathy for the owners? Nearly all of them are substantially richer than the richest players. Why should those owners be whining and playing hardball? They deserve the same criticism, if not more. The players are not blameless but the owners are 10x worse.

  8. gp424 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:38 PM

    That should be Saving me.

  9. stakex - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:43 PM

    If this turns out to be the case, which only time will tell, then I can’t blame the owners for telling the players to stick it up their ass. You don’t say “We’ll split everything 50/50… but then you have to pay my $700 million more out of your share”. That wouldn’t be 50/50.

    I still think the problem here is Fehr. Hes probably telling the players that the owners are desperate to have a full season, and that the players can get a really good deal. Problem is, if that backfires (and it will) the fans are the ones who pay for it.

    • kyzslew77 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:58 PM

      It amazes me how many commenters don’t realize that the league’s proposal on Tuesday said “We’ll split 50/50, but you’re going to pay part of your existing contracts out of your share.” That doesn’t mean I think the counter the players made today is fair. I’m just saying, the owners didn’t actually offer 50/50 either. Somehow people missed this.

      • hockeydon10 - Oct 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM

        Plus, the owners’ definition of HRR is substantially altered (lessened).

  10. trick9 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:45 PM

    ”Fehr on No 3 proposal – players to go 50/50 as long as owners promise to honor all contracts that were signed by players”

    That doesn’t seem so unfair as Bettman seems to think? Atleast not in my eyes. I can only wonder why it was immediately shut down by the league.

    • stangz11 - Oct 18, 2012 at 9:56 PM

      The catch was that the players wanted an additional $700 million worth of non-HRR stuff, and the owners are pretty adamant about cutting salaries immediately. While the $700 million doesn’t have an impact on the HRR split, it does have an impact on the total split. Basically the same thing the owners did when they had the players paying off their immediate rollbacks later on throughout the deal

  11. mattdaddy7 - Oct 18, 2012 at 7:46 PM

    This is worse than the stinkin’ presidential debates!

  12. rpiotr01 - Oct 18, 2012 at 8:11 PM

    So owners agree to contracts all summer, players want owners to honor those contracts, and the owners balk? Really?

  13. ducksk - Oct 18, 2012 at 8:41 PM

    Go read tax codes….the owners write this off as “business losses”. These guys have the best accountants $ can buy! They just don’t own hockey teams as a sole source of their income. Look at a couple of the owners fortunes behind them: wal-mart,sc Johnson. These are some of the biggest fortunes anywhere. You think they are intimated by mostly high school educated players and the “de fuhers”. They will be just fine. I’ve come to the conclusion I know nothing of the the real issues, what I’m told and not told. I’m done with it all now…..my blood pressure and heart for the game cant take anymore. Go big ten hockey! Over and OUT!

  14. nyrangersnation - Oct 18, 2012 at 9:00 PM

    Hey Zach, I’m willing to offer you and Ryan Suter $100M contracts. You’re in? Awesome! Just sign on this dotted line. Okay he’s gone. God I love ripping off the players. He doesn’t know that we are going to ask him to give some of that money back to us.

    EVERYONE is to blame in this.NHLPA needs to understand 50/50 split has to happen now! Not in 5 years! Can somebody tell me why this wouldn’t work:
    Year 1: NHL makes 51%, NHLPA makes 49%
    Year 2: NHL makes 52% NHLPA makes 48%
    Year 3: NHL makes 50% NHLPA makes 50%
    Year 4: NHL makes 49%, NHLPA makes 51%
    Year 5: NHL makes 49%, NHLPA makes 51%
    Year 6: 50/50 split

    Or something like that. Honestly I’m curious why that’s a bad idea. I really don’t care for being spoken down to. We’re all being treated like crap by the NHL and NHLPA. After this BS I don’t care how much of a diehard hockey fan you are. I’m a doormat as well. But I can’t put up with this crap. We need to boycott it because this a joke. And enough with the Fire Bettman crap. THE OWNERS CLEARLY DON’T CARE WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY! THEY EMPLOY BETTMAN! As long as he is making them money (which he has) they are going to keep him employed

    • greatminnesotasportsmind - Oct 19, 2012 at 12:30 PM

      Because the players don’t want an immediate 50/50 split. All of proposals had a split in year 3 or later

  15. yvrmike - Oct 18, 2012 at 9:05 PM

    i wonder how long it will take before we start hearing of a new hockey league

  16. jimw81 - Oct 18, 2012 at 9:19 PM

    The players are the ones that are supposed to agree to contract caps.
    The players are the ones that are supposed to agree to at least 7% reduction in HRR.
    The players are the ones that are supposed to agree to the no rollback that has them losing 12% of their current contracts.

    Where exactly are the owners giving anything up?

    • jernster21 - Oct 19, 2012 at 12:37 AM

      If you would have read the actual CBA proposal they made numerous amendments to the old CBA FIXING the problems with the old one which protects not only the owners from themselves which was part of the problem, but it protects the players to HOPEFULLY prevent these sort of problems going forward (ie: the healthy league the NHL has been talking about). They offered 2 year entry level contracts, that’s better for the players than the owners even though they tacked on an extra year to RFA’s – now rookies can land a way bigger contract a year earlier than they could before. The players were all up in arms about the owners not paying enough into revenue sharing – they came up with a solution that FORCES the top 10 money making teams to contribute to it, but now that they did that, the players aren’t applauding the NHL for the contribution but hammering other things that THEY aren’t getting.

  17. youngs79 - Oct 18, 2012 at 9:21 PM

    Boycott the NHL. Sick and tired of this. Players are ready to play and the owners are to greedy!

  18. gp424 - Oct 18, 2012 at 10:36 PM

    JimW81

    The owners are giving the players the right to earn Millions of dollars playing a game, that millions of people would love to play.

  19. rashardmendenballs - Oct 18, 2012 at 11:44 PM

    I can tell from reading from the previous comments from this article and from other articles, a lot of the posters do not work in environments where you got to engineer/design, negotiate, haggle and sell like I do….I will also venture to guess that the majority of the posters do not make above the average U.S. income and they possibly live at home with their parents.

    If you actually read between lines from both Fehr and vampire man, it is blatantly obvious that this is a one way street in these negotiations. The owners have consistently demonstrated over the last 120 days that they do not want to negotiate with the players. Why can’t the owners advise clarification about the 50/50 HRR split in their proposal? For all we know, the 50/50 split turns into 60/40 by years 6.

    I will actually venture to guess that there are actually 4 owners that are calling the shots while Bettmen and Daly are nothing more then puppets for the owners. These 4 owners will dictate if we actually have season, which I actually doubt will happen.

    The owners claim they are still losing money despite the HUGE concessions in the previous negotiations of 6 or 8 tears ago, and despite from the huge increases in revenues over the last 5 years. So from what the owners are saying I have come to my own conclusion…. MAY BE IT IS YOUR CRAPPY BUSINESS MODEL THAT IS CAUSING YOU TO LOSE MONEY!

    From Licensed merchandise, to $12 beers, to TV AD revenue. How in the hell do you lose money?!?!?

    I am with the players on this one, they have every right to fight and maintain what they have. They don’t need to give in to these outrageous demands. And if they do give in again, just wait until the next negotiations for the new CBA in 2020. we will be back where we are at today. The fans come to watch the players and ONLY THE PLAYERS. The advertisers purchase AD space because of the entertainment that the players provide. The fans don’t come to watch Jeremy Jacobs or Ed Snider.

    As for posters and idiots like Cherry telling players to not go over seas and take other players jobs….last time I check this is a dog eat dog world.

    • mhazz84 - Oct 19, 2012 at 9:22 AM

      You’re like, the smartest guy posting on the whole internet.

  20. footballer4ever - Oct 18, 2012 at 11:50 PM

    For the owners, aka Masters, to come out voicing a 50/50 deal all of a sudden it’s just a sneaky way for PR purposes, but not something that looks genuine at all. You can kiss this hockey season goodbye, not that you can tell much in the sportscasts news either.

  21. bills4 - Oct 20, 2012 at 10:44 AM

    NFL model is the best way to go in any league. You don’t perform, your gone.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. D. Alfredsson (1982)
  2. B. Bishop (1938)
  3. M. Fleury (1761)
  4. J. Schultz (1516)
  5. D. Krejci (1493)
  1. J. Boychuk (1478)
  2. C. Anderson (1470)
  3. E. Staal (1406)
  4. R. Lehner (1300)
  5. D. Setoguchi (1266)