With the recession about to have a profound effect on how the NHL operates over the next few seasons, there are many opinions and options available as to how the league will deal with such constraints as declining revenue, disinterest in certain cities, and restructuring the next collective bargaining agreement that is coming up fast.
Whether NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman admits to it or not, the league is in big trouble. Franchises already in despair are risking extinction, and the NHL as a whole will need to tighten their belts.
One solution often offered up for sturdying the NHL across the board involves the contracting of franshises to reduce the size of the league. The thinking here, that the NHL is only as strong as it’s weakest link, has some merit.
Presently, in a revenue sharing agreement, the top ten financially sound clubs assist the bottom third of NHL teams with an influx of cash annually. If all were going according to plan, and it never has, the NHL would be achieving financial stability by sharing it’s capital and propping up teams in weak markets. So essentially, teams like the Canadiens, Maple Leafs, Rangers and Flyers, foot the bill for teams in Florida and Nashville to purchase free agents and cover their losses.
I won’t even delve into all the supposed logistics of placing teams in remote hockey hinterlands in the first place, but in the midst of a recession, does it make continued sense to weaken the stronger clubs with an agreement that forces them to assist their weak sisters? The bailing in out in the next two seasons could have long lasting consequences. You could bet that many NHL owners would like to redo that section of the CBA in particular.
I see the contraction of clubs looming, and I think it could be the best thing to happen to NHL hockey in decades. Since 1990, the NHL has grown by 11 new cities, and in those 18 years, perhaps only half those moves have had any long term success.
It is difficult to compare eras and their inherant issues, but the NHL in fact once had to contract before to assure survival in hard times. The contraction itself, was not a league imposed mechanism, it occured by financial failure, one team at a time during the 1920’s to 1930’s Depression. Back then, the league consisted of up to ten teams. The so called “Original Six” league teams that survived the Depression, date back to the 1942-43 season. Prior to that year, additional teams knows as the original Ottawa Senators, Montreal Maroons, Hamilton Tigers, New York Americans, Pittsburgh Pirates, St. Louis Eagles and Philadelphia Quakers all came and went, some in the blink of an eye.
History recalls that in addition to the Depression affecting these clubs financial woes, travel expenses, player costs, suitable arena size, and sluggish attendence all partook in these teams demise. Initially, all these cities could claim how popular hockey seemed to be at first, but cash constraints made their longevity tenuous at best. Even the Montreal Canadiens came perilously close to folding in 1938. Along the decline in teams, the NHL fought hard to find ways of survival in each viable market, but in the end the bottom line was still the bottom line.
The fact that the NHL continued on as only a six team league for 25 seasons, was due to the fact that it feared expanding again, in case of more financial hard times. The six remaining owners held steadfastly to their ideals and the league prospered because of the tight reign. They feared that expanding too quickly was risky, and it wasn’t until the early 1960’s when they convinced themselves that survival then depended upon expansion in the television era. By 1967, the NHL would double in size. Seven years later it had tripled in size to eighteen teams.
Since 1974 perhaps, logic has eluded the owners senses when it came to growing the league. Greed ruled the day, especially with the rival WHA competing for salaries. It’s hard to believe it looking back, but the NHL felt threatened by the WHA, and made some rash decisions that compromised it’s future.
The similarities between the 1920’s and today point to contraction, or the temporary suspension of franchises, as a valid method of taking some steps back in order to go forward. While it surely is easier said than done, the removal of up to six franchises would create great excitement in the remaining 24 NHL cities. It would amount to transfering all the misery in hockey’s dead zones into a greater balance and parity among the NHL’s strongholds. The benefits to the health of the league would be inestimable.
In order to imagine the positive effects of a six team contraction, have a look at a mock draft distributing close to 130 NHL players among the remaining teams. In order to grasp this ideal objectively, a few simple ground rules are in order.
Let’s suppose that the NHL, for argument’s sake, freezes the current contracts players are on for two seasons. Team salary caps could be readjusted to suit larger rosters temporarily. Teams would choose in reverse order of current standings, with the Stanley Cup finalists selecting 29th and 30th. Teams could select up to three players, with the fourth and fifth rounds becoming optional opt out exercises. They would continue this process for six rounds. Remaining players would then be declared free agents. Team rosters would consists of 26 players, and be frozen until 12 games into the season, at which point a waiver draft would ensue.
Now, for example purposes, I’ll propsose that the teams contracted are Tampa, Florida, Phoenix, Atlanta, Nashville and Carolina. Using the overall standings of December 15, 2008 as a guide, this would be the order of selection:
1 – New York Islanders, 2 – Dallas Stars, 3 – St. Louis Blues, 4 – Ottawa Senators, 5 – Toronto Maple Leafs, 6 – Columbus Blue Jackets, 7 – Colorado Avalanche, 8 – Los Angeles Kings, 9 – Edmonton Oilers, 10 – Minnesota Wild, 11 – Buffalo Sabres,
12 – New Jersey Devils, 13 – Calgary Flames, 14 – Anaheim Ducks, 15 – Vancouver Canucks, 16 – Montreal Canadiens, 17 – Chicago Blackhawks, 18 – Philadelphia Flyers, 19 – Washington Capitals, 20 – New York Rangers, 21 – Boston Bruins, 22 – San Jose Sharks, 23 – Pittsburgh Penguins, 24 – Detroit Red Wings.
I won’t even delve into all the supposed logistics of placing teams in remote hockey hinterlands in the first place, but in the midst of a recession, does it make continued sense to weaken the stronger clubs with an agreement that forces them to assist their weak sisters? The bailing in out in the next two seasons could have long lasting consequences. You could bet that many NHL owners would like to redo that section of the CBA in particular.
I see the contraction of clubs looming, and I think it could be the best thing to happen to NHL hockey in decades. Since 1990, the NHL has grown by 11 new cities, and in those 18 years, perhaps only half those moves have had any long term success.
It is difficult to compare eras and their inherant issues, but the NHL in fact once had to contract before to assure survival in hard times. The contraction itself, was not a league imposed mechanism, it occured by financial failure, one team at a time during the 1920’s to 1930’s Depression. Back then, the league consisted of up to ten teams. The so called “Original Six” league teams that survived the Depression, date back to the 1942-43 season. Prior to that year, additional teams knows as the original Ottawa Senators, Montreal Maroons, Hamilton Tigers, New York Americans, Pittsburgh Pirates, St. Louis Eagles and Philadelphia Quakers all came and went, some in the blink of an eye.
What you see below isn’t a scientifically researched selection process, but it gives a calculated guess at what such a process would give the NHL’s 24 remaining clubs. There would also be additional players not mentioned below, as well as waivered players to further bolster the lower teams in the standings. Of course, this list will assuredly bring about argument and discussion. I’ll just say it is interesting, and leave it at that.
1 – New York Islanders / Ilya Kovalchuk (ATL) 25 – Joni Pitkanen (CAR) 49 – Vaclav Prospal (TB)
2 – Dallas Stars / Vincent Lecavalier (TB) 26 – Martin St. Louis (TB) 50 – Tim Gleason (CAR)
3 – St. Louis Blues / Steven Stamkos (TB) 27 – Olli Jokinen (PHO) 51 – Gregory Campbell (FLA)
4 – Ottawa Senators / Eric Staal (CAR) 28 – Tuomo Ruutuu (CAR) 52 – Rod Brind’ Amour (CAR)
5 – Toronto Maple Leafs / Shea Weber (NAS) 29 – Kurt Sauer (PHO) 53 – David Booth (FLA)
6 – Columbus Blue Jackets / Peter Mueller (PHO) 30 – *Zack Boychuk (CAR) 54 – Ray Whitney (CAR)
7 – Colorado Avalanche / Jay Bowmeester (FLA) 31 – Keith Ballard (FLA) 55 – Viacheslav Kozlov (ATL)
8 – Los Angeles Kings / *Kyle Turris (PHO) 32 – Ron Hainsey (ATL) 56 – *Colin Wilson (NAS)
9 – Edmonton Oilers / Ryan Suter (NAS) 33 – Viktor Tikhonov (PHO) 57 – Scott Walker (CAR)
10 – Minnesota Wild / Jason Arnott (NAS) 34 – Dan Hamhuis (NAS) 58 – Vernon Fiddler (NAS)
11 – Buffalo Sabres / Shawn Matthias (FLA) 35 – *Keaton Ellerby (FLA) 59 – Matt Cullen (CAR)
12 – New Jersey Devils / Zach Begosian (ATL) 36 – *Chet Pickard (NAS) 60 – Todd White (ATL)
13 – Calgary Flames / Brandon Sutter (CAR) 37 – Derek Morris (PHO) 61 – Bryan McCabe (FLA)
14 – Anaheim Ducks / Niklas Havelid (ATL) / 38 – Bryan Little (ATL) 62 – Justin Williams (CAR)
15 – Vancouver Canucks / Shane Doan (PHO) 39 – *Jonathan Blum (NAS) 63 – Todd Fedoruk (PHO)
16 – Montreal Canadiens / Martin Hanzal (PHO) 40 – *Drayson Bowman (CAR) 64 – *Cody Franson (NAS)
17 – Chicago Blackhawks / Tobias Enstrom (ATL) 41 – Anthony Stewart (FLA) 65 – Niclas Wallin (CAR)
18 – Philadelphia Flyers / Daniel Carcillo (PHO) 42 – Colby Armstrong (ATL) 66 – Jordin Tootoo (NAS)
19 – Washington Capitals / Nathan Horton (FLA) 43 – Joe Corvo (CAR) 67 – Jason Williams (ATL)
20 – New York Rangers / Mikkel Boedker (PHO) 44 – Jussi Jokinen (TB) 68 – Paul Ranger (TB)
21 – Boston Bruins / Ed Jovanovski (PHO) 45 – David Legwand (NAS) 69 – *Riku Helenius (TB)
22 – San Jose Sharks / J.P. Dumont (NAS) 46 – Michael Frolik (FLA) 70 – Steven Reinprecht (PHO)
23 – Pittsburgh Penguins / Ryan Malone (TB) 47 – Noah Welch (FLA) 71 – *Jared Staal (PHO)
24 – Detroit Red Wings / Martin Erat (NAS) 48 – *Brett McLean (PHO) 72 – Joel Ward (NAS)
