So they already agreed to go to 50/50 (your words AND their words).

Today is significant because they took the first step?

How is that significant? The first step had to come sometime didn't it.
- Aetherial

The players moved from a guaranteed share to a percentage share. Which is what the Owner's wanted. That is significant. Now there is a definite number that can't be disputed to see the difference between each sides offer. And the owners got the formal offer from the PA that they asked for.

I'm sure the Jays love having the Yankees and Red Sox in their division. When is the last time they made the playoffs? When did that famous CBA get signed?
- Symba007

Orioles and Rays have done it.

Orioles and Rays have done it.
- Atomic Wedgie

How many times since the CBA?

Looks like only 9

Kings $2m
Preds $7.5
Yotes $25
Sharks $8
Blues $3
Pens $0.2
Devils $6
Panthers $7
Caps $7.5
- Canada Cup

So the kings lost two million? The Pens two hundred thousand? Those aren't losses. Those are opportunites for a break on their taxes. The Yotes are the only playoff team that lost significant money. And that is to be expected.

Looks like only 9

Kings $2m
Preds $7.5
Yotes $25
Sharks $8
Blues $3
Pens $0.2
Devils $6
Panthers $7
Caps $7.5
- Canada Cup

Thanks. That Weber deal should help the Preds bottom line.

The Kings won the cup and lost 2mil???...Sorry there no CBA that will fix that problem...
- Fruitcakenipple

The economic model doesn't work. You tie the Devils, Coyotes and Leafs and Rangers into the same salary structure. There is no share of HRR in the world that will make this work.

The players moved from a guaranteed share to a percentage share. Which is what the Owner's wanted. That is significant. Now there is a definite number that can't be disputed to see the difference between each sides offer. And the owners got the formal offer from the PA that they asked for.
- MJL

But they didn't.

They set a floor which their share couldn't drop below.

By definition, that's a guaranteed share.

The Kings won the cup and lost 2mil???...Sorry there no CBA that will fix that problem...
- Fruitcakenipple

That just means they will have fans next season, they can't make up for the other months between October and May that they had no fans.

The Kings won the cup and lost 2mil???...Sorry there no CBA that will fix that problem...
- Fruitcakenipple

You're just stupid leaf fan. Too dumb to realize something or other.

But they didn't.

They set a floor which their share couldn't drop below.

By definition, that's a guaranteed share.
- Atomic Wedgie

According to all the experts I've read so far, they did.

You're just stupid leaf fan. Too dumb to realize something or other.
- weirdoh

Good point.... ..............

So it's Bettman's time to go, even though his bosses are satisfied with his performance?
- Atomic Wedgie

Well I am not sure on a few things. 1. how long is his contract, 2)how the voting works to keep him or to let him go.
That may have a lot to do with why he is still there. And does it mean that the smaller market teams keep him around because it is better to work with the devil you know that the devil you dont. How many of those teams votes count knowing he wont move them.....There is much more to that than just a blanket statement assuming all are satisfied with him.

Logically, if the players had offered a previous proposal that was 50/50, then offered a proposal today that was 55%, then that would be a worse offer.

But how many times have you stated that the players haven't made any real offers? Now you want to pretend, and that's what your doing is pretending. Is that the players put an actual offer on the table previously, that offered an immediate 50/50. That didn't happen. So what they hell are you talking about?

It seems as though your not getting the "in principle" part of agreeing to go to 50/50 in principle. Or your just making another one of your ridiculous arguments with zero substance to back it up.
- MJL

OK, so 50/50 was only in principle and not part of a previous proposal.

Then how is today significant? You mean because they actually agreed to take a small first step towards something they already agreed to?

Uh, that is NOT real significant...

Unless of course, they didn't really mean 50/50 in the first place.

Naw, that couldn't have been true could it?

This offer was a joke. Have the balls to admit it.

That just means they will have fans next season, they can't make up for the other months between October and May that they had no fans.
- trolleytracks

and the CBA is supposed to fix the "No Fan" issue??.....

OK, so 50/50 was only in principle and not part of a previous proposal.

Then how is today significant? You mean because they actually agreed to take a small first step towards something they already agreed to?

Uh, that is NOT real significant...

Unless of course, they didn't really mean 50/50 in the first place.

Naw, that couldn't have been true could it?

This offer was a joke. Have the balls to admit it.
- Aetherial

Have the balls to step up and provide some substance that shows it was a joke!

All I've seen so far is that you have no clue what the offer even was.

But they didn't.

They set a floor which their share couldn't drop below.

By definition, that's a guaranteed share.
- Atomic Wedgie

They also came to a number (which is an increase from last year) for a new cap and can never go below that number.....

They also came to a middle ground (which is an increase frim last year) for a new cap and can never go below that number.....
- hugefemale dog77

Here is what is in the offer.

Our players' share proposal is identical to yours in all material respects except for the amount of the transition payments added to the 50% share. There are no guarantees or fixed targets, other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players' share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season. This proposal allows us to determine players' share regardless of the effects of the lockout and its aftermath.


- The Upper Limit may not fall below 67.25 M in any year of the agreement. This is half way between the 11/12 Upper Limit (64.3 M) and the 12/13 UL (70.2 M).

Have the balls to step up and provide some substance that shows it was a joke!

All I've seen so far is that you have no clue what the offer even was.
- MJL

To paraphrase one of YOUR favourite arguments, I don't have to provide substance, it is my opinion and I already told you I was not about to debate this with you.

... but you still have not explained how today was significant, even if the previous agreement to go to 50/50 was only in principle.

Today was at best, a small first step towards something the PA has already led us to believe they had made huge concession on.

To paraphrase one of YOUR favourite arguments, I don't have to provide substance, it is my opinion and I already told you I was not about to debate this with you.

... but you still have not explained how today was significant, even if the previous agreement to go to 50/50 was only in principle.

Today was at best, a small first step towards something the PA has already led us to believe they had made huge concession on.
- Aetherial

Your not about to debate it with me? What have you been doing then?

I certainly have explained how it was significant. In numerous posts. Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean I haven't explained that.

And a number of the top bloggers and reporters covering the lockout have deemed the offer significant. I can provide that to you if you'd like.

Feel free to provide a credible source that backs up your premise that the offer today was a joke.

Edit: wait, long day, and I'm working off my iPod touch.

Lemme find what I am looking for.

Orioles and Rays have done it.
- Atomic Wedgie

Lots of low salary teams would make the playoffs every year if they had a less restrictive playoff system.

Braves, Nats, Reds, orioles, A's all had more than 90. wins this year.

Salary/standings by year

http://www.salaryadjusted.com/mlb

Your not about to debate it with me? What have you been doing then?

I certainly have explained how it was significant. In numerous posts. Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean I haven't explained that.

And a number of the top bloggers and reporters covering the lockout have deemed the offer significant. I can provide that to you if you'd like.

Feel free to provide a credible source that backs up your premise that the offer today was a joke.
- MJL

They already agreed to 50/50. You admitted this.

So how was today significant? Your assertion.

So answer the question.

That's - by definition -...wait for it...a guaranteed share.
- Atomic Wedgie

It's taking the lockout into consideration, in the HRR offer. That is what the fixed amounts are for. Which is what the Owner's wanted. The players wanted to do that later. The player's don't see it as a guaranteed share.

I haven't quite wrapped my head around this yet, but I believe the below is how they can keep the Cap from never going below 67.25

- +8M/-8M payroll range becomes +/- 20% of midpoint beginning in 2013/14

You're a leafs fan, it's normal you like the baseball system. Ask the bottom 15 teams in revenues if they want that system, they will say no.
- Symba007

Excellent point cause Leafs won so many Cups pre-cap. Tell me how NHL can work with a cap and the list of franchises we have now.

Your not about to debate it with me? What have you been doing then?
- MJL

What I am doing should be crystal clear...

I am making you defend your ridiculous assertion.

While I refuse to defend mine.

It is working