For the 2nd Time in Ten Years NHL is Locked Out

For the 2nd time since 2000, the NHL has locked out the players due to the expiration of the last Collective Bargaining Agreement. The lockout took effect this past Saturday at 11:59pm. Before the pointing of fingers begins at who is at fault for this lockout, lets take a look at some of the issues that are in place here.

At issue for the owners is a desire to reduce the players' guaranteed share of 57% of hockey related revenues (HRR), a desire to introduce term limits on contracts, eliminate salary arbitration and change free agency rules. The union's initial offers have focused on increased revenue sharing between owners and a fixed salary cap that is not linked to league revenues. As the deadline for a work stoppage approached, the union challenged the league's ability to lock out players of three Canadian teams - the Edmonton Oilers and Calgary Flames (in the jurisdiction of the Alberta), and the Montreal Canadiens (in the jurisdiction of Quebec).

The owners identified their key issues in their first offer, presented July 13, 2012. Their offer retained the framework established following the 2004–05 NHL lockout but made numerous changes to player salary and movement rights. Particularly: Reduce the players' share of HRR (Hockey Related Revenue) from 57 percent to 46 percent. Proposed modifications to HRR itself would actually reduce the players' share to 43 percent as defined by the expired CBA. Set a maximum term of five years on all new players contracts. Eliminate signing bonuses and set a uniform salary for each year of a contract, thus eliminating "front-loading" of contracts. Extend entry level contracts for players entering the league from three years to five. Extend qualification for unrestricted free agency from seven years in the league to ten. The players waited a month to offer a counter-proposal as it requested additional financial data from the league. When the union tabled its counter on August 14, it retained a salary cap, but de-linked it from revenue. It proposed a fixed cap for three years, followed by a player' option to return to the terms of the expired CBA in year four. NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr suggested their proposal could save the league as much as US$465 million and would feature an enhanced revenue sharing system that would help lower revenue teams.

Now then after looking at the numbers at stake here are some thoughts. The players in this regard are, to a degree, in the wrong. From the player point of view I can understand being angry over not having the long term contracts because you want to guarantee being able to stay and play in one place for you're entire career. But yet at the same time the players are in the wrong here too when it comes to the length of contracts. Look no further then the 15 year contract Rick DiPietro signed back in 2006. After having a good first year of the deal, he has been injury plagued every season since and its starting to cost the Islanders and make them look bad. Granted the Islanders had no idea this would happen to DiPietro when he signed, there are no guarantees that players are going to be able to stay healthy for a long contract and fill their obligations to the deal they signed. Look the owners are in the right by wanting contract length capped it makes it easier for them to do business. Also think about it this way. If a player has a contract for about five years he will still keep playing in order to keep a contract. If you sign a guy for 8, 10 15 years there is no guarantee that the organization will get his full effort every single night, and there is no promise he will be healthy the entire length of the deal. Doing this capped contract would save both the owners and players a lot of headache and worry I feel.

One of the other things I think really needs to get worked out is hockey related revenue sharing. It should be split right down the middle 50-50 no matter what. This would definitely help keep a competitive balance between all teams and help everybody out across the board.

Now I understand that the NHLPA and the NHL Owners are trying to get this thing right and get a system in place that works for everybody for a long time. But here's the thing I don't think anybody really involved with the situation really gets. The longer this debate and lockout takes the more money and more importantly fan support the league is going to lose. You can't have a league run without fans. No way you will be able to play in empty arenas and make money, it simply will not happen. The people who are getting screwed over in this whole situation aren't totally the owners and players. Its the people who rely on NHL games for their source of income. It's the people who work in the arena as security and ticket takers and at the concession stands. They need the NHL to be playing in order to make money. All this right now comes down to money and if the NHL Players and Owners don't come to an agreement soon and save at least part of this season everybody involved in Hockey from owners to players to people who work in the arenas to the fans are going to lose. And at the end of the day that's what really matters not how much a player makes. Players only get payed if they play. Owners only make money if the players and teams are on the ice. Nobody will be making anything if both sides continue to argue over small petty stuff. They really need to get their act together and get this figured out or the NHL will die off and be a lost sport.