    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NHLPA is more likely to reject #NHL&#8217;s 50-50 offer than counter it</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/</link>
	<description>NHL  - Hockey Trade Rumors, providing NHL Hockey Trade Rumors since 1996</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 15:08:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: 93killer93</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367591</link>
		<dc:creator>93killer93</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2012 13:44:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367591</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This was posted on TSN


Option 1: This is a revision of a previous proposal. We would see a fixed player share the first three years of 1.92 Billion, 1.98 Billion and then 2.06 Billion. After that, the players share is frozen until revenues reached $4.12 Billion (that is, when 2.06 Billion is 50% of HRR). After revenues reach $4.12 Billion, the players share is 50% of HRR (plus a small increment if yearly growth exceeds the predicted 5% -- 57% of revenue above 5% and 61% of revenue above 7.2%).

Option 2: Option 2 is similar in its effects. Simply, the players share will grow each year by 24.7% of any HRR increase (down from the current 57%). If HRR growth is at the 5% rate the owners predict, then the players share falls to 50% in year 5. At 7.2% the share falls faster. (After revenues reach 4.216 Billion, the players would also receive the same small increment of yearly growth as in Option 1.)

Option 3: This idea proceeds from an entirely different approach. We take two principles of this negotiation: the owners stated desire to reduce the players share to 50% of HRR, and the Players position that there is no reason to go backwards. This proposal bases that second principle on existing player contracts, not the players&#039; share. Here is how it works:

 A reduction to 50% from 57% of HRR is a 12.3% cut (that is, 7/57), but the loss in an individual player&#039;s salary would be about 13%. (This is because benefit costs do not fall and these come off the top.)  The owners honor all existing player contracts. We do this by dividing an existing contract, on a yearly basis, into two separate parts: the 13% and the remaining 87%.  The 13% is paid to the player in any event, and it is not counted in the players share and is also off the cap.

- The remaining 87% of existing contracts, plus all new contracts, go into the players&#039; share (plus all benefits). Thus constructed, the players share will become 50% of HRR, immediately.

- This means that an individual player under an existing contract would receive the 13% segregated, plus a normal payment, subject to escrow, of 87% of his salary. A player with a new contract would have 100% of his salary subject to the 50/50 split. However, since the 13% of existing contracts are off the cap, this should create more cap space, which will be important as the cap will be squeezed.

- Over time, the existing contracts expire, and the share will fall towards 50%. Below is a chart showing the anticipated savings, but these could be greater if there are a significant number of buyouts.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was posted on TSN</p>
<p>Option 1: This is a revision of a previous proposal. We would see a fixed player share the first three years of 1.92 Billion, 1.98 Billion and then 2.06 Billion. After that, the players share is frozen until revenues reached $4.12 Billion (that is, when 2.06 Billion is 50% of HRR). After revenues reach $4.12 Billion, the players share is 50% of HRR (plus a small increment if yearly growth exceeds the predicted 5% &#8212; 57% of revenue above 5% and 61% of revenue above 7.2%).</p>
<p>Option 2: Option 2 is similar in its effects. Simply, the players share will grow each year by 24.7% of any HRR increase (down from the current 57%). If HRR growth is at the 5% rate the owners predict, then the players share falls to 50% in year 5. At 7.2% the share falls faster. (After revenues reach 4.216 Billion, the players would also receive the same small increment of yearly growth as in Option 1.)</p>
<p>Option 3: This idea proceeds from an entirely different approach. We take two principles of this negotiation: the owners stated desire to reduce the players share to 50% of HRR, and the Players position that there is no reason to go backwards. This proposal bases that second principle on existing player contracts, not the players&#8217; share. Here is how it works:</p>
<p> A reduction to 50% from 57% of HRR is a 12.3% cut (that is, 7/57), but the loss in an individual player&#8217;s salary would be about 13%. (This is because benefit costs do not fall and these come off the top.)  The owners honor all existing player contracts. We do this by dividing an existing contract, on a yearly basis, into two separate parts: the 13% and the remaining 87%.  The 13% is paid to the player in any event, and it is not counted in the players share and is also off the cap.</p>
<p>- The remaining 87% of existing contracts, plus all new contracts, go into the players&#8217; share (plus all benefits). Thus constructed, the players share will become 50% of HRR, immediately.</p>
<p>- This means that an individual player under an existing contract would receive the 13% segregated, plus a normal payment, subject to escrow, of 87% of his salary. A player with a new contract would have 100% of his salary subject to the 50/50 split. However, since the 13% of existing contracts are off the cap, this should create more cap space, which will be important as the cap will be squeezed.</p>
<p>- Over time, the existing contracts expire, and the share will fall towards 50%. Below is a chart showing the anticipated savings, but these could be greater if there are a significant number of buyouts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 93killer93</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367589</link>
		<dc:creator>93killer93</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2012 02:07:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367589</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ya apparently its from a credible source.  There is also a rumor going around that at the draft Vancouver rejected Schenn for Luongo. I think with the new rules that are being proposed in the CBA, Luongo is the ideal fit for Toronto. If there is a full season lockout I would rather wait and see if we can get a goalie through free agency, but his contract isn&#039;t looking so bad right now.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ya apparently its from a credible source.  There is also a rumor going around that at the draft Vancouver rejected Schenn for Luongo. I think with the new rules that are being proposed in the CBA, Luongo is the ideal fit for Toronto. If there is a full season lockout I would rather wait and see if we can get a goalie through free agency, but his contract isn&#8217;t looking so bad right now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: toronto77</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367588</link>
		<dc:creator>toronto77</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2012 01:14:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367588</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I heard on the Fan today, that apparently the leafs have made a deal to acquire luongo and the trade will be announce once the lockout is over. BS?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I heard on the Fan today, that apparently the leafs have made a deal to acquire luongo and the trade will be announce once the lockout is over. BS?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shoelesshobo</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367586</link>
		<dc:creator>Shoelesshobo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 18:27:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367586</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If they want me to believe they settled for 50/50 then I want to see the changes they purposed in writing. The NHL had the decency to post to the public what they asked for the NHLPA can do the same. Until I see this so called &quot;acceptance&quot; I am considering it false.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If they want me to believe they settled for 50/50 then I want to see the changes they purposed in writing. The NHL had the decency to post to the public what they asked for the NHLPA can do the same. Until I see this so called &#8220;acceptance&#8221; I am considering it false.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dumbassdoorman</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367584</link>
		<dc:creator>dumbassdoorman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:40:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They offered a 50/50 split eventually, with no loss of salary ever. meaning the almost 2 billion in salary they are paid as a group can never go down. They are both still wrong and greedy. For the most part the rest of the world is taking a step back to keep jobs, but not these guys. I understand they struggle to get by and feed there families but sometimes it has to be done. Both the NFL and NBA PA&#039;s realized that this had to happen, but not the weaker league of the NHL....lol. And The NHLPA still doesn&#039;t or ever will have my support in these matters as it is them that refused to start talks on a new CBA way back in Febuary. However pricks like Gionta like to say thungs like well if they want a whole season so bad where was this offer i July? Hey Gionta, where the FAWK was the NHLPA for the last 9months. Also the NHL, while doing nothing spectacular has at least moved a bit the PA has only ever stayed true to the proposal they first submitted.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They offered a 50/50 split eventually, with no loss of salary ever. meaning the almost 2 billion in salary they are paid as a group can never go down. They are both still wrong and greedy. For the most part the rest of the world is taking a step back to keep jobs, but not these guys. I understand they struggle to get by and feed there families but sometimes it has to be done. Both the NFL and NBA PA&#8217;s realized that this had to happen, but not the weaker league of the NHL&#8230;.lol. And The NHLPA still doesn&#8217;t or ever will have my support in these matters as it is them that refused to start talks on a new CBA way back in Febuary. However pricks like Gionta like to say thungs like well if they want a whole season so bad where was this offer i July? Hey Gionta, where the FAWK was the NHLPA for the last 9months. Also the NHL, while doing nothing spectacular has at least moved a bit the PA has only ever stayed true to the proposal they first submitted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thisgamewelose</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367583</link>
		<dc:creator>thisgamewelose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:06:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367583</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So, apparently the NHLPA did offer a 50/50 split as long as the contracts were honored. They were against the NHL&#039;s proposal of reducing a later year salary to help pay for the first year. And used the quote of a player saying &quot;So, they&#039;re saying that in my 3rd year, my salary is going to be reduced to pay for my first year?&quot;  The NHLPA offered 3 legit proposals. However, all the interviews I saw involving the NHLPA resulted in a blame game.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, apparently the NHLPA did offer a 50/50 split as long as the contracts were honored. They were against the NHL&#8217;s proposal of reducing a later year salary to help pay for the first year. And used the quote of a player saying &#8220;So, they&#8217;re saying that in my 3rd year, my salary is going to be reduced to pay for my first year?&#8221;  The NHLPA offered 3 legit proposals. However, all the interviews I saw involving the NHLPA resulted in a blame game.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thisgamewelose</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367580</link>
		<dc:creator>thisgamewelose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 21:39:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367580</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wanted to smack Gionta. Dude really annoyed me.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wanted to smack Gionta. Dude really annoyed me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dumbassdoorman</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367579</link>
		<dc:creator>dumbassdoorman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 21:16:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[shocker, no hockey, I truly hated listening to Toews and Gionta in their interviews, arrogant little pricks]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>shocker, no hockey, I truly hated listening to Toews and Gionta in their interviews, arrogant little pricks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thisgamewelose</title>
		<link>http://hockeytraderumors.com/nhlpa-reject-nhls-50-50-offer-counter/comment-page-1/#comment-367578</link>
		<dc:creator>thisgamewelose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 21:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hockeytraderumors.com/?p=23899#comment-367578</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They gave a few counter proposals which apparently weren&#039;t close to what NHL proposed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They gave a few counter proposals which apparently weren&#8217;t close to what NHL proposed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
