In any case, last time the owners were happy with 43% of $2B dollars…how is 43% of $3.2B suddenly not enough? Are the owners (and Bettman) really that bad at business that they miscalculated that much? There is no way non-player costs have increased faster than revenues.

None of the owners requests (except for 57% of HRR and then redefining HRR to include less of the overall revenue) are unreasonable in isolation, but as a collection…the owners are telling the players they will make less money and have fewer rights. There may be some justification for movement on the split of HRR, but there is no basis whatsoever for restricting FA.

Also, there are 30 NHL ownership groups, none of which will own a hockey team if the players just walk away. The entire basis of the value of their franchises is the existence of the players and the fans that root for them.

Feel free to list any of the unreasonable player demands. The owners make all of their money on the backs of the players, not the other way around. The owners have no unique skills (extortion of tax dollars from local governments isn’t particularly unique, every business seems capable of doing it) that generate revenue.

1. Please tell me one demand the league is making thats unreasonable. Players needing to wait an extra year to be UFAs? Guys who make at least $600k (and as much as $12 million) taking a 10% pay cut, and then being paid most of it back over time? Only being allowed 5 year contracts? Those are the bigger sticking points, and while they are far from favorable changes for the player, that doesn’t make them “unreasonable”.

2. Yes, the players did in fact do their part and make an offer that moves more in the direction of the middle…. two months after the lockout started. Perhaps if they did this months ago we would be watching hockey right now.

3. How did the owners take a step back? I’m sure their offer is still the same, and might even get a little more player friendly since the players are finally jogging in the direction of the middle. I would point out that the owners were the only one to move towards the middle since this started… until today.

4. Rip the players off? The NHL is losing money, and there are some clear issues with the old CBA (such as front loaded contracts) that need to be fixed. Those are facts. Since the players are the main cost, it only makes sense they should take at least a small pay cut to help get the league back in the black. Why do so few people consider that perhaps the players have been over paid the last couple years? There are several players making $12 million this year after all.

5. The owners have the upper hand. If the players “stay strong” and the season gets canceled, the owners offer will only get worse for the players. Thats the advantage to being an owner in CBA negotiations… you can hold out far longer then the players, and thus get to make the demands. Nut jobs like Fehr who get off on looking tough might be able to convince the players its a smart idea to try and challange the owners, but thats just because most hockey players aren’t that bright. The reality is the players should just take the best offer the owners give them and run with it now. Otherwise they will just lose a seasons worth of pay, AND get a worse deal.

One final point I would like to make is that there are over 600 full time NHL players, the vast majority of which can’t find jobs overseas. so your advice only applies to the super starts.