Comments on: Brooks: NHL not committed to contract term limits, open to amnesty buyouts

By: lostpuppysyndrome

lostpuppysyndrome — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 16:00:54 +0000

Wanna end front-loaded contracts? Put every year’s salary in a contract within 80-95% of the highest paid year. If you wanna sign a guy for 10 yr/$100 mil, go ahead, but you won’t be paying less than $9-10 mil/year for him.

By: valoisvipers

valoisvipers — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:45:03 +0000

Negotiations 101 states you do not make your first offer, your best offer. Everyone knew we were going to go to 50-50 the only question is on how.

By: davebabychreturns

davebabychreturns — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:05:26 +0000

His comments are bad, but I don’t think the league and PA would conspire to allow a work stoppage to ruin a month’s worth of hockey just to discourage them..

By: tmoore4075

tmoore4075 — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:43:54 +0000

This is kinda where I am. Sure the first offer was BEYOND stupid but if something similar to teh deal in October was offered back in July or whenever the NHL put it out I think the PA would have said no and fought for even more. Yes it sucks for the fans but the NHL does need to look out for themselves too. We might not like it but it is what it is.

Also the one thing about contracts that was on the table before was you could only have a 5% difference I think between what the players salary was and the cap number. So Shea Weber couldn’t be getting $14mil and get a cap number of $7.8 or whatever his is. I think that pretty much eliminated the problem of the contracts. No one is going to take the risk of signing a Weber to a 14 year deal where they have to pay him $7.5mil at 39 years old. Charles Wang might but it should stop that problem.

By: id4joey

id4joey — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:22:51 +0000

I have one word for all fans who are wondering why the negotiation process could not have happened sooner. blomfeld.

By: bensawesomeness

bensawesomeness — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 03:59:50 +0000

See, ya jinxed it

By: thankscurt38

thankscurt38 — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 03:23:23 +0000

Yeah, that is a sound strategy.

Negotiation 101 clearly states that, in order to expedite the process you should ALWAYS offer your best offer immediately once negotiations begin.

By: manchestermiracle

manchestermiracle — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 02:34:53 +0000

Hell, 86 hours would have been a vast improvement over months of dithering.

By: stakex

stakex — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 01:24:59 +0000

Thats probably too much to ask. Not because a deal might not be fairly close, but because there is probably a few other big issues to get done before they actually strike a tenative deal. I doubt a couple days of talks will get all the big issues sorted out.

Its not too much to ask that such an announcement might happen at some point in the next few days though.

By: stakex

stakex — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 01:23:10 +0000

Perhaps.

However its also possible such an opening offer by the owners would have been viewed as a sign of weakness by Fehr, and he might have staked out an even harder line position then he already has.

In the end we’ll never know how things MIGHT have turned out if different offers were made. All that matters is where we are now.

By: jimw81

jimw81 — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 01:10:43 +0000

i ment 6 hr. stupid keyboard.

By: jimw81

jimw81 — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 01:09:57 +0000

So this lockout is about the owners can stop circumventing the cap? this issue could of been resolved in 86 hrs max.

By: xaf605

xaf605 — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 01:08:20 +0000

I miss hockey

By: bensawesomeness

bensawesomeness — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 00:53:58 +0000

Don’t Jinx it

By: antkowiak666

antkowiak666 — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 00:50:13 +0000

please let them come out to the media tonight announcing they have a deal in place.is that really to much to ask?!

By: ron05342

ron05342 — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 00:48:03 +0000

Seems to me that if the league had first proposed this deal instead of the lunacy the first offered the players union, we would be playing hockey right about now.