Skip to content

Here’s a CBA framework one NHL governor thinks could get a deal done

Dec 13, 2012, 5:11 PM EDT

Gary Bettman, Bill Daly AP

An anonymous NHL governor has provided’s Scott Burnside with a CBA framework that the governor believes would be “palatable” to each side of the NHL’s labor dispute.

Now, whether this governor has any say in negotiations isn’t clear, but here’s the framework:

Assuming the elements that were discussed last week in New York were still in place — like $300 million in “make-whole” monies, agreements on free agency and arbitration rights — the governor believes the following elements would represent the middle ground in the outstanding contracting, CBA term and transition issues.

-A nine-year CBA with a 7-year out for either side.
-A six-year contract limit with front-load/back-diving protection and 8-year limits for players who have been with a team for five years.
-Some simple buyout option as long as the buyouts were within the salary cap.

In other words, each side would have to ever-so-slightly soften its current demands, aka compromise.

Burnside spoke to one “high-profile veteran player” who believed the framework could at least garner a vote by the union. Other players and agents agreed it had potential.

Again, this may not mean a thing if the governor doesn’t know how far the league’s lead negotiators (i.e. Gary Bettman, Bill Daly and Bob Batterman) are willing to bend. Remember that the owners have given the commissioner’s office extensive power to bargain on their behalf.

Meanwhile, it doesn’t sound like anything got done today.

  1. kiopta1 - Dec 13, 2012 at 5:14 PM

    I had really hoped for some good hockey going into the new year.

  2. windmiller4 - Dec 13, 2012 at 5:15 PM

    This is turning into a joke. It seems everybody but fehr and bettman have a reasonable/logical and fair solution to the lockout.

    • mountainmantride - Dec 13, 2012 at 9:40 PM

      Turning? Turning into a joke? My goodness where ya been boy. This has been a joke for years and only now has reached laughing stock stage swerving quickly into irrelevance and not even worthy of the breath of air from a belly laugh. But, in the end the joke’s on you…the fans. Swipe that credit card ‘ol hockey fan. Give ’em more of that money of yours and watch ’em fight over it. Isn’t this fun…

  3. qpla - Dec 13, 2012 at 5:23 PM

    I was told there would be a car-chase the next time we speak about the lockout.

    • Jason Brough - Dec 13, 2012 at 5:25 PM

  4. coreydm80 - Dec 13, 2012 at 5:33 PM

    Obviously wasn’t Jacobs😀

  5. id4joey - Dec 13, 2012 at 5:37 PM

    Trying to convince myself this will get resolved this year. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there. Hang in there.

  6. rsl22 - Dec 13, 2012 at 5:39 PM

    I can’t take this lunacy.

    Teams are already down 30 games of their season. If they started on January 2, they’d have to add around 15 games just to get to a 60 game season. Realistically, they’d have to be playing regular season games until close to the end May to get to there, plus another two months for playoffs?

    This is all stupid, the season is already done. The NHL cancelled the 2004-05 season in the middle of February 2005. I wish the NHL would just cancel this season already and save us those three months of false hope.

  7. phillyphanatic77 - Dec 13, 2012 at 6:14 PM

    Everyone who thinks Bettman is nothing more than a puppet, and the owners are pulling all the strings, take a look at that last sentence. Bettman is at the heart of this lockout and will continue with that power in future negotiations.

    • stakex - Dec 13, 2012 at 6:41 PM

      Bettman did not vote for the lockout (well, since the NHL currently owners the Phonix he actually did have one of the 30 votes), and hes not the one who decided where the bottom line would be. The owners can stop him at any time, and force him to take a deal on the table.

      Sure, he has a lot of room to move… but at the end of the day the owners are pulling the strings, and can yank them any time they want.

      • phillyphanatic77 - Dec 13, 2012 at 7:03 PM

        Yes but not all of the owners demands are the same. Teams like Phoenix do not have the same needs as the Toronto Maple Leafs. Bettmans job is to collectively interpret what will be best for everyone, and as an extension- what will be best to increase his own salary. Because as the league reached record revenues he was able to up his pay to $8 million a year. He has been the one to decide what issues are major priorities and which are minor, where the league can budge and where they stubbornly hold their ground. Bettman is not a patsy, he acknowledges the owners voice’s then brings to the table his own interpretations.

      • stakex - Dec 13, 2012 at 7:59 PM

        Thats true in part, but again… hes not the one who actually wanted the lockout. That was the owners… so its really not fair to say hes at the heart of it since hes not the one who actually started it. The owners can stop him or force him to accept any deal that they deem acceptable. He operates freely, but he also has to operate within a framework the owners give him.

  8. detroit09 - Dec 13, 2012 at 6:36 PM

    World Jr’s starts New Year’s Eve. Now that is some good hockey.

  9. bcjim - Dec 13, 2012 at 6:46 PM

    Can someone either explain what a “governor ” is? Or stop using the term.

    • blakkjack21 - Dec 13, 2012 at 10:48 PM

      In both the NBA and NHL, a governor is either the principal owner of the team or someone who represents the owner at league meetings. So when you hear about a “Board of Governors” meeting, basically, its the owners getting together.

  10. desertfan - Dec 13, 2012 at 6:49 PM

    Hopefully the wimp owners will step to the plate as Burkie did and GUARANTEE that the Junior team will ALL be allowed to play out the tourney before returning to the NHL.

    In my opinion they would all be better for it as well.

  11. stakex - Dec 13, 2012 at 6:51 PM

    This might very well be what the final deal looks like, but theres a small problem… one that was on full display last week: If either side makes a huge concession, and puts a deal like this on the table, there is a very good chance the other side will mistake that for the smell of blood and demand more. That is exactlly what happened last week when the owners backed off a lot of their contract demands, and put an extra $100 million in “make-whole” money on the table…. the players said “Great, but we want more now”, even though the offer was probably good enough for most of the players to live with.

    So while there is a middle of the road solution to this that both sides can live with, they are both afraid to make that offer. If they do it too soon, the other side is likely to try and get more… even if its acceptable as it. Thats why I don’t see a deal happening till the 10-15th of January when new offers hopefully won’t be seen as weakness, but as last ditch efforts.

    • phillyphanatic77 - Dec 13, 2012 at 7:07 PM

      I agree with all that, it’s just a shame that mid-December is too soon to compromise.

    • youthoughtyouhaditbad - Dec 14, 2012 at 12:20 PM

      Except the extra 100 million they put on the table came with several other things they demanded of the players. The players wanted to negotiate on the new things.

      Besides that I agree with you. A rational offer will just be perceived as a weakness.

  12. sportsfan69 - Dec 13, 2012 at 7:43 PM

    I smell victory tomorrow.

  13. sportsfan69 - Dec 13, 2012 at 8:00 PM

    Gary, make Donald a deal that he can’t refuse tomorrow.

  14. jeb7524 - Dec 13, 2012 at 8:16 PM

    Love hockey…now I hate the NHL. I couldn’t care less if this ever gets resolved. Just keep televising international, college, and junior hockey.

  15. cvgconstruction - Dec 13, 2012 at 8:39 PM

    I don’t think they want to solve it! If they really want it they would come to some kind of compromise and play hockey, it makes no sense anymore.

  16. id4joey - Dec 13, 2012 at 10:25 PM

    Good for Hossa, bad for the league…
    2009-10 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $5,275,000
    2010-11 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $5,275,000
    2011-12 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $5,275,000
    2012-13 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $5,275,000
    2013-14 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $5,275,000
    2014-15 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $5,275,000
    2015-16 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $5,275,000
    2016-17 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,275,000
    2017-18 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $5,275,000
    2018-19 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $5,275,000
    2019-20 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $5,275,000
    2020-21 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $5,275,000

    • valoisvipers - Dec 14, 2012 at 10:09 AM

      Looks like he will be traded to the Islanders in 2017-18 when he is 38 and they want to spend up to the cap floor.

  17. malkinrulez - Dec 13, 2012 at 11:57 PM

    A season I couldn’t wait to begin apparently will never begin. Angry doesn’t begin to describe how I feel. When the NHL comes back I will watch on TV but I don’t know that I trust this league enough to spend my hard earned money to attend a game in person. I am sick and tired of lost games and seasons every 6-7 years. Everyone involved has ruined all the momentum the league had gained over the last few years. F everyone involved in this mess. Wake me when it’s over. Actually don’t

  18. tfaltin - Dec 14, 2012 at 10:25 AM

    Put a bow on this deal and drop the puck. Unfortunately there’s no chance of that with these clowns in charge, on both sides.

  19. atteckus - Dec 14, 2012 at 12:29 PM

    I like the parameters of the suggested deal, but I think the hangup, at least from the players’ perspective, is that there isn’t enough revenue sharing in the deal. The owners are the ones who took the hundreds of millions of dollars in admission fees for adding these failing franchises, like Phoenix, and stuffed them in their pockets. Now, when those franchises are in trouble, the owners are suggesting that the players be the ones who take the paycut to make up the difference for the owners’ poor business decisions. Upping the revenue sharing portion of the agreement would mean that future shortfalls wouldn’t disproportionately fall on the backs of players.

    There’s no doubt, the NHLPA benefits through expansion by adding jobs. But that is far outweighed by the benefit to the owners of pocketing their shares of admission fees and licensing revenues.

    • valoisvipers - Dec 15, 2012 at 9:58 AM

      atteckus The players got 57% of those hundreds of millions of admission fees that the league took in.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1587)
  2. P. Kane (1521)
  3. M. Richards (1323)
  4. P. Datsyuk (1175)
  5. N. Backstrom (1064)