Myself I would keep the offer sheets like they are. IMO what is good for fans is usually bad for players in that sense. They are basically useless now but in bargaining I wouldnt fight them on it as its a give and take.
I think the limit on the 2nd contract is needed. Brian Burke has been saying it for 10+ years and I think he is right. You even the playing field out way more doing this as there is not these massive Matthews type deals (even though I support him being that valuable in all honesty) and the risky team friendly type deals like Mackinnon or Pastrnak. Where drafting and developing your own talent shouldnt still make you gamble on a contract or hope that a player is less greedy than the next. I really have no clue what to do with the 2nd contract but like people have said, limit the term where you still exit it before UFA status (possibly 2 years before) but make the ELC 2 years and not 3, with bending the rules of the slide rule so you always get the benefit of the 2 years in the lineup.
So maybe 2 year ELC the same as we have now, followed by 3 years 2nd deal limit and a limit of salary cap %, then a minimum 2 years of arbitration eligible RFA status of any term to bring you to UFA. That way you have 5 seasons to know a players value and if you want to shell the cash out you can. It also favours the players a bit seeing how they can easily become UFA status and not pushed into a long term deal like the leafs are trying to do with Marner.

Yep. I imagine there is some kind of shake up coming.

Imo the NHL hard cap is not going anywhere, dreams of soft cap or luxury system are not gonna happen.
You can't put the monkey back in the box, it's out, its staying


Really great thoughts in this thread, cheers everyone.

A few of you have said that changing the offer sheet process would cause teams to lose players that have helped develop etc.
I get all that, but part of why I originally created this ACGM was because at least in the last 2 years (and going forward) things may be changing.

So maybe the owners will need to recognize this change with the player base skewing younger and younger. Everyone does have the same voting power in the NHLPA but there's always been players within the PA with major influence and clout.

With the base age of the PA changing and younger players getting way more opportunities than I can remember, I wonder if this time around that the majority of players would want the second contract be the biggest instead of the third.

Basically, pay me what I'm really worth when I'm putting up monster numbers. Perhaps players would make more money this way? Granted there will always be late bloomers which would make a third contract more difficult than the second. There's always exceptions to the standard.