kevin allen with the nuts & bolts:http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nh ... n/1754971/
Players know if they want to get this show on the road, they can accept a 10-year CBA, with an eight-year opt-out clause, and a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenue. Plus, there is a five-year cap on contract lengths with an exception granted for teams trying to re-sign their own restricted and unrestricted free agents. Team can sign those players for seven years. Also, owners insist on a maximum 5% year-to-year variance on multi-year contracts to prevent teams from back-diving contracts. Players would also get $300 million back to ensure that those with previously signed contracts are made whole or somewhat whole.
Now obviously I know that the NHL has officially withdrawn that offer, but I would be willing to bet some of my hockey-related revenue that if Fehr called Bettman tonight and said he would now take that deal the owners offer would would miraculously reappear. Call it a hunch. However, there is definitely an expiration date on the miraculous reappearance
Players will have to decide whether the reality is more important than the principle, especially with regard to the five-year cap. It affects a smaller percentage of players, but the vast majority of players it affects are stars.If I had a son just starting out in the NHL, I don't know how I would advise him about the contract cap. But I would tell him that I think players should embrace the owners' plan of a 10-year CBA. I think a 10-year CBA is actually in players' best interest.