Skip navigation
Favorites
Sign up to follow your favorites on all your devices.
Sign up

Lightning defenseman Carle argues against one of Bettman’s assertions

Matt Carle

Matt Carle #25 of the Philadelphia Flyers celebrates his first period goal against the Pittsburgh Penguins in Game Five of the Eastern Conference Quarterfinals during the 2012 NHL Stanley Cup Playoffs at Consol Energy Center on April 20, 2012 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. (April 19, 2012 - Source: Justin K. Aller/Getty Images North America)

The CBA proposal that the NHL presented on Tuesday would have provided the players with 46% of revenues. That’s, as the Montreal Gazette put it, a $460 million improvement from the NHL’s initial offer when they asked the players take 43% of the pie.

As you probably already know, the talks ended up stalling after Friday’s negotiating session.

“Somebody needs to be in a position to offer or say something new,” said Gary Bettman. “And considering that we made such a large move on Tuesday, to have gotten the response that we got is disappointing.

“We’re not in a position to go back and offer more and negotiate against ourselves.”

The owners did make substantial concessions compared to their original offer, but Tampa Bay Lightning defenseman Matt Carle argued that it’s really all about context.

”...if we’d absurdly asked for 71% of revenue in our first offer and then came down to 68%...make sense?” Carle tweeted.

It’s worth noting that under the expiring CBA, the players were getting 57% of hockey-related revenues, so both of the NHL’s proposals represented a substantial reduction from their perspective. Either way, for now we’re in limbo while we wait to see who will make the next move.

Related:

Reaching a new CBA is a negotiation, not an exercise in fairness

Video: Bettman, Fehr speak out after Friday’s talks

What they’re saying about Friday’s disappointing negotiating session

Dreger: Real negotiating won’t start until or around Sept. 10