|
April 21, 2005
Scott Burnside
Special to ESPN.com
Put away those ECHL depth charts. Cancel that rush order on updated United
Hockey League rosters.
The National Hockey League has seen the light and pulled the plug, at least
temporarily, on the use of replacement players to start the 2005-06 season.
The implication -- or threat, if you will -- always has been that in the
absence of a new collective bargaining agreement, team owners would start
the season with whatever players they could convince to throw on a jersey
and lace up their skates.
Not anymore.
"It's not an option for the start of the 2005-06 season," Bill Daly, the
league's executive vice president said in an e-mail exchange Wednesday after
a four-hour board of governors meeting in New York.
Of all the unappealing elements of the lockout -- and there have been
many -- none has been more revolting than the notion of 700 Rob Ray
look-alikes taking the ice and shouting, "Game On!" And who knows? At some
point if these two sides can't resolve the differences that have already
thrown an entire regular season, playoffs, all-star game and entry draft
under the bus, we still may see some grotesque, mutated version of NHL
hockey performed by replacement players.
"Among the options are continuing to stay shut down -- indefinitely or for
some period of time -- another is playing with new players," commissioner
Gary Bettman told reporters after Wednesday's meeting. "But we're not going
to speculate about that because we want it to be clear our focus is on
making a deal with the players' association."
Certainly the past two days have provided a myriad of messages, mostly
mixed, about whether a new CBA is in the offing. There was little in the way
of optimism reported from Tuesday's bargaining session, one that reportedly
ended with Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs angrily denouncing a union
proposal. But a day later owners were talking enthusiastically about
starting a season with those very same union members back in the fold.
Implied, then, is that owners have come to understand what seemed to be
obvious from the outset -- rebuilding the game must be done with the best
players on the ice.
It also suggests the league is dedicated to negotiating an end to this
disagreement rather than bullying and threatening its way to a conclusion.
Such a strategy might have been more effective last November, but it's a
moot point now.
Instead, the good news is that the future of the NHL seems to have assumed
its rightful place at the top of both side's do-to lists. Such a shift was
first apparent when players were invited to partake in discussions about
rule changes at GMs meeting in Detroit two weeks ago. Wednesday's
developments are further evidence.
While Daly wouldn't elaborate on why replacement players were no longer an
option for the start of next season, he did say it wasn't because the league
couldn't get its legal ducks in a row in time.
"We have decided not to make them an option," he said. "No more complicated
than that."
For the moment, it seems big-market teams that did not want any part of
replacement players have carried the day. Whether the cost of that victory
is giving up a bigger piece of their profits through revenue sharing isn't
yet known.
The use of replacement players was expected to initiate a revolt within the
NHLPA, however, it's a high-stakes gambit for Bettman and the owners, even
higher than the cancellation of the 2004-05 season. While canceling the
season put the financial pinch on both owners and players, fans were left
merely empty-handed. But by following up a lost season with replacement
players, owners run an even greater risk of insulting their fans instead of
just ticking them off.
It is a significant distinction.
A study of 3,300 diehard hockey fans released Wednesday by the NHL Fans
Association showed that almost half (48 percent) would watch fewer games if
the NHL returned with replacement players. The number is significant given
that the group represents 27,000 hard-core fans evenly split between Canada
and the United States.
"I think our members would be the last people on the earth to turn their
backs on the NHL," NHLFA co-founder Jim Boone said. "I think the numbers [of
fans not watching replacement players] would be much, much higher if you
were to sample the general hockey fans."
One NHL coach told ESPN.com recently that using replacement players "was the
worst thing the league could do." He suggested the league might be able to
escape from this with only one black eye, not two blackened eyes and a
broken nose, if replacement players were taken out of the equation.
Perhaps it's an image owners have already considered and found to be
similarly unpleasant.
Scott Burnside is a freelance writer based in Atlanta and is a frequent
contributor to ESPN.com.
| 
