Depending on HRR, the players may get slightly more or slightly less of the money that was withheld, but that doesn’t generally put a significant dent in the end result being paid to the players. For instance, in 2010/2011, players put 12.4% of their salaries into escrow (about $200M in all). They were already paid the remaining 87.6% as a part of their regular salary throughout the year. The NHL then agreed 8.4% of their salaries went back the players so only 4% of the players contracted salary was given back to the owners, meaning they still were paid 96%.

Here’s a rough table of how it’s worked since the last lockout (‘+’ means the players got more than their contracted salary, ‘-’ means they got less):
2005-2006: +0.40%
2006-2007: -2.76%
2007-2008: +0.48%
2008-2009: -12.90%
2009-2010: -9%
2010-2011: -4.0%

But then you have to factor what’s included in HRR, particularly relating to your argument about 50/50 splits. The owners are allowed to deduct parts of the teams’ overall revenues to come up with the HRR number, so the players are actually getting less than 50% of the teams’ revenues when you factor that in.

So the players asking for a clause that prevents their share from going backwards in any year is done to encourage the NHL to promote growth, and likely won’t be a problem. It’s similar to how in the last CBA, the players share of HRR was actually 54% with a clause that bumped it up to 57% if revenues were higher than expected.

You can’t just blame the players for asking for more when the owners are giving them less.

If that’s really how NHL contracts work it would’ve been nice if that info was out out there from the beginning. That’s why so many people say contracts should be honored and players have offered a fair 50/50 split. If I had known that’s how it works it might have changed my opinion a bit. Although I do think its still B.S. that teams rushed to sign players just says before the CBA expired.

Other than this, we seem to agree. But calling this the players fault only is pretty shortsighted. The owners started this with their offensive and insulting first deal, and it’s continued with the players making nearly every single concession. That being said, I do agree that now, after the past 6 weeks, it’s been Fehr’s hardheadedness that has made the “make whole” provision the major sticking point.

As far as term limits, I side with the players on that. If a team wants to give me 10 years, why shouldn’t I be allowed to take it. I don’t think the league should “save the owners from themselves”, it is the owners job to make sure that he has the right people in place to make those decisions, and if not, replace them.

But to me, all issues outside of the 50/50 split are minor, and can be worked out once the 50/50 split is agreed upon.

It’s not 50/50 if one side is guranteed something. I won’t even say that is simple math, because it is simple common sense.

“fact of the matter is”, you seem to have no idea how NHL contracts work, and apparently think they work the same as all employee contracts. They don’t. Players get a percentage, period.

The strength of the Canadian economy (or the weakness of the U.S. economy, however you want to look at it), is the only thing that gives players a leg to stand on in these negotiations

Further, it’s the owners’ own “idiotic” fault for not putting term lengths on contracts during the last CBA. To say the players signed “those deals because they may not have been available afterwards” is laughably misguided. You’re telling me the Minny contract twins signed because they thought they had to with the CBA expiring?? Puh-lease. They signed because they were the absolute best and most lucrative and long term secure deals being offered to them.

If anything it’s the complete opposite, owners offered and signed those deals themselves because they had no intention of honoring them. Which, I also don’t believe to be the case but it’s far more likely than your scenario. Unless we’re talking Jeremy Jacobs.

thats of course if ……( a big if)……. they resume play anytime soon

sincerely

a redneck from Mississippi

It’s possible that this Player’s Presentation is nothing more than a theatrical exercise designed to cast them in a favorable light ? … or in other words, Bettman throwing them a “sympathetic” bone ? … at least that’s what I’m hoping. Regardless, any announced breakthrough will be more the result of the owners falling into line with Bettman, as opposed to the players doing so with Fehr. It truly is a different world today in 2012, compared to the last lockout back in 2004. Just this morning it was just announced that Canada’s # 2 railroad “CPR” is planning to axe 25% of it’s workforce. That alone is a very stark reminder of just how precarious our economy remains. Hopefully the players can realize that reality.

I don’t get what is so hard to comprehend about that