‘Dysfunctional’ Business Model Puts the N.H.L. in Peril, Experts Say
By JEFF Z. KLEIN
During the last 20 years, the N.H.L. has lost nearly 10 percent of its scheduled games to labor disruptions, a rate of cancellation more than three times greater than any other major sports league in North America.
With the current lockout in its 88th day, negotiators from the N.H.L. and the players union are scheduled to begin a new round of talks Wednesday at an undisclosed location, with federal mediators in attendance. Even if they make rapid progress, the damage done by the third lockout under Commissioner Gary Bettman is likely to affect the league well into the future, advertising and branding experts said.
“Clearly, its business model is dysfunctional,” said Tony Knopp, the chief executive of Spotlight TMS, a company that manages corporate ticket sales. “Things have to be terrible for them to be willing to throw away two seasons in less than 10 years.”
Bettman was hired 20 years ago Wednesday. Since his first full season as the commissioner in 1993-94, 2,224 regular-season N.H.L. games have been canceled because of lockouts in 1994-95, 2004-5 and 2012. That comes to 9.7 percent of the 22,882 N.H.L. games scheduled from October 1993 through Dec. 30, and including the Winter Classic on Jan. 1.
No other league has nearly as persistent a rate of cancellation over the same period. The next closest is the N.B.A., which also has had three lockouts since 1993 but only lost 3.1 percent of its scheduled regular-season games. Major League Baseball has lost 2.1 percent of its regular-season games and the 1994 postseason to a strike, and the N.F.L. did not cancel any regular-season games last year during its lockout.
“To lose almost 10 percent of your games to lockouts, that’s a chilling number,” said Bob Gutkowski, a partner at the private equity firm Innovative Sports and Entertainment and formerly a member of the N.H.L. Board of Governors as the president of Madison Square Garden.
The N.H.L.’s 2004-5 lockout wiped out the regular season and Stanley Cup playoffs, the only season in North American major league sports to be lost to a labor dispute. At that point, the N.H.L. was a money-losing enterprise that had largely receded from the wider sports consciousness in much of the United States. The league bounced back through rule changes that made the game more exciting, and the Winter Classic and Winter Olympics that helped draw new fans. Fans in the United States returned with the success of teams in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston and New York, and a strong Canadian dollar boosted revenue north of the border.
N.H.L. revenue grew from about $2 billion in 2005-6 to $3.3 billion last season. The league’s profitability made this season’s lockout seem counterintuitive.
But today’s N.H.L. is in many ways as troubled as it was before the previous lockout. The Toronto Maple Leafs, the Rangers and the Montreal Canadiens generate about 80 percent of the league’s revenue, according to Forbes magazine’s valuations, which have been disputed but are the most widely used measure of league finances. The magazine estimated that 13 of the league’s 30 teams are losing money, some more than $10 million a year.
“Missing so many games shows that for some of these teams, it’s better when they’re not playing, because then they’re not losing money,” said Drew Dorweiler, a managing partner of the business evaluation firm Dartmouth Partners in Montreal. “In a nutshell, it’s because there’s a structural nonviability of certain franchises in their current locations.”
Dorweiler cited money-losing clubs in Nashville; Columbus, Ohio; Florida; and Phoenix, a team he called a wounded animal.
Despite a new 10-year, $2 billion contract with NBC, Gutkowski said: “The N.H.L. doesn’t get the kind of national TV money that the other leagues get, which means most of revenue is locally driven.”
Bettman has often explained that like the last lockout, this one is about tamping down players’ salaries to control costs.
“Too many people are forgetting where we were 10 years ago,” Bettman said last Thursday after he rejected the union’s latest offer for a settlement. “We didn’t have a healthy game and we had too many franchises that couldn’t continue. We did what we had to do in 2004 to make it right, and we’re focused with our owners on what we need to make this game healthy for our fans.”
One way to get healthy is labor peace, said Jay Grossman, an N.H.L. player agent.
“Though the routes that baseball and football have taken to labor peace have been vastly different, both realize that labor peace equates to record growth in revenue and franchise values leaguewide,” he said.
Brian Cooper, the president of the Toronto sports management company S&E Sponsorship Group, said the current lockout would hurt the N.H.L’s business.
“To many people, this has become a pattern, an M.O.,” he said. “It’s almost as if consumers and sponsors are getting the message, ‘Enjoy the next six or seven years, because you know we’re going to be out the year after that.’ ”
He added: “What people want from a brand is consistency of product, accessibility and emotional connection that’s uninterrupted. These lockouts interrupt everything.”But the N.B.A. came back from a truncated season last year and had its best metrics across the board, Cooper said.
If the commissioner did his job then yes they could move Phoenix to Hamilton ... He would need to negotiate a deal with Buffalo and Toronto. I don't know enough about Buffalo's fan base, but I highly doubt leaf fans will bolt to become Hamilton fans. The commissioner has to do his job and discuss it with those teams. I've stated before that I didn't think Toronto or Buffalo would let a team in Hamilton without a price ... What that price is, who knows.
I would say Quebec could get a team if they build a new arena ... One of the best rivalries of the 80's was Montreal vs Quebec.
Hamilton is never going to get a team. Pipe dream. I'm 39 and they have been talking about it for 20 years and passed over passed over passed over. Just not going to happen.
‘Dysfunctional’ Business Model Puts the N.H.L. in Peril, Experts Say
By JEFF Z. KLEIN
During the last 20 years, the N.H.L. has lost nearly 10 percent of its scheduled games to labor disruptions, a rate of cancellation more than three times greater than any other major sports league in North America.
With the current lockout in its 88th day, negotiators from the N.H.L. and the players union are scheduled to begin a new round of talks Wednesday at an undisclosed location, with federal mediators in attendance. Even if they make rapid progress, the damage done by the third lockout under Commissioner Gary Bettman is likely to affect the league well into the future, advertising and branding experts said.
“Clearly, its business model is dysfunctional,” said Tony Knopp, the chief executive of Spotlight TMS, a company that manages corporate ticket sales. “Things have to be terrible for them to be willing to throw away two seasons in less than 10 years.”
Bettman was hired 20 years ago Wednesday. Since his first full season as the commissioner in 1993-94, 2,224 regular-season N.H.L. games have been canceled because of lockouts in 1994-95, 2004-5 and 2012. That comes to 9.7 percent of the 22,882 N.H.L. games scheduled from October 1993 through Dec. 30, and including the Winter Classic on Jan. 1.
No other league has nearly as persistent a rate of cancellation over the same period. The next closest is the N.B.A., which also has had three lockouts since 1993 but only lost 3.1 percent of its scheduled regular-season games. Major League Baseball has lost 2.1 percent of its regular-season games and the 1994 postseason to a strike, and the N.F.L. did not cancel any regular-season games last year during its lockout.
“To lose almost 10 percent of your games to lockouts, that’s a chilling number,” said Bob Gutkowski, a partner at the private equity firm Innovative Sports and Entertainment and formerly a member of the N.H.L. Board of Governors as the president of Madison Square Garden.
The N.H.L.’s 2004-5 lockout wiped out the regular season and Stanley Cup playoffs, the only season in North American major league sports to be lost to a labor dispute. At that point, the N.H.L. was a money-losing enterprise that had largely receded from the wider sports consciousness in much of the United States. The league bounced back through rule changes that made the game more exciting, and the Winter Classic and Winter Olympics that helped draw new fans. Fans in the United States returned with the success of teams in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston and New York, and a strong Canadian dollar boosted revenue north of the border.
N.H.L. revenue grew from about $2 billion in 2005-6 to $3.3 billion last season. The league’s profitability made this season’s lockout seem counterintuitive.
But today’s N.H.L. is in many ways as troubled as it was before the previous lockout. The Toronto Maple Leafs, the Rangers and the Montreal Canadiens generate about 80 percent of the league’s revenue, according to Forbes magazine’s valuations, which have been disputed but are the most widely used measure of league finances. The magazine estimated that 13 of the league’s 30 teams are losing money, some more than $10 million a year.
“Missing so many games shows that for some of these teams, it’s better when they’re not playing, because then they’re not losing money,” said Drew Dorweiler, a managing partner of the business evaluation firm Dartmouth Partners in Montreal. “In a nutshell, it’s because there’s a structural nonviability of certain franchises in their current locations.”
Dorweiler cited money-losing clubs in Nashville; Columbus, Ohio; Florida; and Phoenix, a team he called a wounded animal.
Despite a new 10-year, $2 billion contract with NBC, Gutkowski said: “The N.H.L. doesn’t get the kind of national TV money that the other leagues get, which means most of revenue is locally driven.”
Bettman has often explained that like the last lockout, this one is about tamping down players’ salaries to control costs.
“Too many people are forgetting where we were 10 years ago,” Bettman said last Thursday after he rejected the union’s latest offer for a settlement. “We didn’t have a healthy game and we had too many franchises that couldn’t continue. We did what we had to do in 2004 to make it right, and we’re focused with our owners on what we need to make this game healthy for our fans.”
One way to get healthy is labor peace, said Jay Grossman, an N.H.L. player agent.
“Though the routes that baseball and football have taken to labor peace have been vastly different, both realize that labor peace equates to record growth in revenue and franchise values leaguewide,” he said.
Brian Cooper, the president of the Toronto sports management company S&E Sponsorship Group, said the current lockout would hurt the N.H.L’s business.
“To many people, this has become a pattern, an M.O.,” he said. “It’s almost as if consumers and sponsors are getting the message, ‘Enjoy the next six or seven years, because you know we’re going to be out the year after that.’ ”
He added: “What people want from a brand is consistency of product, accessibility and emotional connection that’s uninterrupted. These lockouts interrupt everything.”But the N.B.A. came back from a truncated season last year and had its best metrics across the board, Cooper said.
Thats a good article, but the NHLPA also has to explore different strategy and leadership. They have had 4 executive directors in 6 years, coming off Goodenow who is/was as pig-headed as Bettman and Fehr.
Its obvious they dont trust Bettman. It would be nice if both sides cast aside their leadership and tried to move forward as a partnership. If the league is successful they make money.
Thats a good article, but the NHLPA also has to explore different strategy and leadership. They have had 4 executive directors in 6 years, coming off Goodenow who is/was as pig-headed as Bettman and Fehr.
Its obvious they dont trust Bettman. It would be nice if both sides cast aside their leadership and tried to move forward as a partnership. If the league is successful they make money.
i agree although i believe that for the nhlpa side ... donald fehr is going to absolutely extract the best deal possible under the circumstances for the players ... the owners probably hate him and are gonna hold out just to spite him but in the end - he is going to get the best deal they could have gotten ...
They are meeting today in an undisclosed location. Hopefully something good comes of it.
i see 7 year deal with mutual options for years 8-10 plus 6 and 8 on contract term limits as the meeting point ...
I hope so. They seem to have all the money stuff worked out. Now just have to work out contract length max and the length of the deal. They better not fuck this up. But, knowing the NHL, it wouldn't surprise me on ebit if they did.
I wonder if it would ever be negotiable for the players/NHLPA to acquire some sort of voting rights in league issues. Things such as expansion, relocation, re-alignment, TV Deals, etc... It seems like a reasonable request if their salaries is tied with these decisions. I also believe that if these things were possible, the NHLPA could have gotten some of this while going down to 50/50.
it seems without a hard deadline date - we're not gonna get anywhere ... only on the brink of ANOTHER lost season will we see what kind of deal can be had ...
it seems without a hard deadline date - we're not gonna get anywhere
That's what I would really like at this point. As a fan, I would know when to not get my hopes up any longer. And I would think a deadline would force both sides to actually talk rather than just babble to the media.
drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
...and it appears another day with nothing done. How far away is next September?
280-ish days.
drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
it seems without a hard deadline date - we're not gonna get anywhere
That's what I would really like at this point. As a fan, I would know when to not get my hopes up any longer. And I would think a deadline would force both sides to actually talk rather than just babble to the media.
they cancelled the 04-05 on Feb.16. The 94/95 lockout ended Jan.11.
I'd be surprised if anything changed before the holidays...if there isn't an announcement shortly thereafter...the season's done.
really ... at this stage ... this makes the most sense ... if the owners are gonna stick to their take it or leave it stance ... we won't see hockey ... everyone knows there's a deal to be had ... just make the deal already ...
Many players, agents, governors, coaches, lawyers and pretty much everyone outside the key figures on both sides of the NHL lockout apparently believe it to be so.
But is it true? Is a deal within our grasp or is it merely wishful thinking from a group of people dumbfounded as another season appears ready to go off the labor cliff?
Well according to at least one top-level executive on the owners’ side of the table and a number of key players and agents, yes, the two sides are close.
How close?
One NHL governor provided ESPN.com with the framework for a deal he insisted would be palatable to both sides. Assuming the elements that were discussed last week in New York were still in place -- like $300 million in "make-whole" monies, agreements on free agency and arbitration rights -- the governor said he believes the following elements would represent the middle ground in the outstanding contracting, CBA term and transition issues.
Let’s call it the Do This Deal or Get Coal in Your Stocking for a Thousand Years deal.
-A nine-year CBA with a seven-year out for either side.
-A six-year contract limit with front-load/back-diving protection and eight-year limits for players who have been with a team for five years.
-Some simple buyout option as long as the buyouts are within the salary cap.
The ownership source acknowledged that leaving out the buyout element as part of the transition to a new CBA would be the least contentious way to bridge the gap at least as it relates to the owners’ concerns about funding the transition. The buyouts were introduced by the players’ association last week, the timing of which annoyed the owners -- not to mention the fact the buyouts as the players suggested would be outside the hockey-revenue pie, a significant problem for the owners.
Still, the author of the Do This Deal deal felt that both owners and players would support such a framework.
It appears he’s correct.
When the proposal was described to one high-profile veteran player, he agreed it was the kind of offer that at the very least could be put to a vote by the players’ association.
Another player familiar with the often-tumultuous nature of the negotiations agreed that the governor's offer should prompt a vote. He wasn’t certain it would pass, but at least it would give an accurate gauge of the union membership’s feelings about settling. Such an offer would also show that the owners were negotiating as opposed to merely making demands, which is the perception many players were left with after a second attempt at mediation Wednesday in New Jersey.
“I think it's definitely worth looking at,” another veteran player told ESPN.com. "We'd have to look it over and see what the implications are, but it's something to work with for sure. I think that will get some traction.
“But I would like our people to look at it before we say it's worth a vote. We hire them for these reasons, so I would like to hear their input.”
Several players and agents we spoke to asked to reach out to the deal's author.
A veteran agent agreed that this is the kind of compromise on both sides that is needed for a deal, although he remained skeptical that hard-line owners would go for it.
“That type of movement is needed but with Jacobs in charge, it is doubtful,” he said, referring to the chairman of the board of governors, Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs.
It’s difficult to say how the league might respond to such a framework. Those in charge have insisted that the elements they asked for from the players -- but were rebuffed last Thursday -- are all connected and that to move off the owners’ desires for a five-year cap on contracts would require some give in another area, or to come off the league’s desire for a 10-year term for a new CBA would require movement in another area.
Still, given that this idea came from the ownership side of the table suggests this isn’t all wishful thinking from a group that fears for the game’s very future.
Instead, doesn’t a framework like this suggest that a deal is possible, that it's close? Not to suggest getting there will be easy but that it’s possible, that by talking and moving the pieces around could, should yield a deal.
Sounds almost like negotiating.
Maybe Don Fehr and Gary Bettman would like to try it sometime. Sometime soon, that is.
Fuck 'em. I'm not watching half a season of hockey even if they do come back now.
i will
:oops:
I will, too, because this is totally an abusive relationship that I keep coming back to.
drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Fuck 'em. I'm not watching half a season of hockey even if they do come back now.
i will
:oops:
I will be watching too. Prob go to a bunch of games as well. 3 of my friends have season tickets to the Hawks so I always have opportunities to go.
The thing is that the hardcore hockey fans will come back. It's the casual fans that won't be coming back. That's the thing that they don't seem to understand. Sure, the owners may get a system that is more beneficial to them. But the same teams that were struggling are going to be struggling even more if they even get this nonsense worked out.
Fuck 'em. I'm not watching half a season of hockey even if they do come back now.
i will
:oops:
I will be watching too. Prob go to a bunch of games as well. 3 of my friends have season tickets to the Hawks so I always have opportunities to go.
The thing is that the hardcore hockey fans will come back. It's the casual fans that won't be coming back. That's the thing that they don't seem to understand. Sure, the owners may get a system that is more beneficial to them. But the same teams that were struggling are going to be struggling even more if they even get this nonsense worked out.
So you think you'll really be done? Not questioning you or anything, but I've said that I'm done to myself a lot but I know once it comes back it will be too hard not to watch.
So you think you'll really be done? Not questioning you or anything, but I've said that I'm done to myself a lot but I know once it comes back it will be too hard not to watch.
Not done with hockey, but I feel too pissed off about it to think I'll bother with them for half a season.
Sigh...
So you think you'll really be done? Not questioning you or anything, but I've said that I'm done to myself a lot but I know once it comes back it will be too hard not to watch.
Not done with hockey, but I feel too pissed off about it to think I'll bother with them for half a season.
Sigh...
I know man. This whole thing just sucks. It's so sad that it has come to this.
I know man. This whole thing just sucks. It's so sad that it has come to this.
3 for Bettman, can't say it wasn't predictable I guess!
Is there any way Bettman stays commissioner after this? Not saying this is all his fault, but how can you keep a guy who has had 3 lockouts under his watch including a full season lost. :fp:
Is there any way Bettman stays commissioner after this? Not saying this is all his fault, but how can you keep a guy who has had 3 lockouts under his watch including a full season lost. :fp:
Hard to say I guess. The owners have got to love him.
Near life-sized bobblehead...
Not done with hockey, but I feel too pissed off about it to think I'll bother with them for half a season.
Sigh...
agreed. and i think the league would lose more fans if they come back midseason than if they were going to cancel the entire season (if that makes any sense).
a lot of angry hockey fans right now. if they start up in the middle of january, a lot of people won't watch out of sheer anger. cancel the entire season, make good things happen over the spring/summer, FIX the sport, MARKET wisely and more people will tune in come october than they would if they start up in january.
if that doesn't work, release bettman's address and phone number to the public and watch the fireworks!
Comments
Hamilton is never going to get a team. Pipe dream. I'm 39 and they have been talking about it for 20 years and passed over passed over passed over. Just not going to happen.
Thats a good article, but the NHLPA also has to explore different strategy and leadership. They have had 4 executive directors in 6 years, coming off Goodenow who is/was as pig-headed as Bettman and Fehr.
Its obvious they dont trust Bettman. It would be nice if both sides cast aside their leadership and tried to move forward as a partnership. If the league is successful they make money.
i agree although i believe that for the nhlpa side ... donald fehr is going to absolutely extract the best deal possible under the circumstances for the players ... the owners probably hate him and are gonna hold out just to spite him but in the end - he is going to get the best deal they could have gotten ...
"Undisclosed location". So cloak and dagger. That makes me
i see 7 year deal with mutual options for years 8-10 plus 6 and 8 on contract term limits as the meeting point ...
I hope so. They seem to have all the money stuff worked out. Now just have to work out contract length max and the length of the deal. They better not fuck this up. But, knowing the NHL, it wouldn't surprise me on ebit if they did.
http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/87400 ... on-process
That's what I would really like at this point. As a fan, I would know when to not get my hopes up any longer. And I would think a deadline would force both sides to actually talk rather than just babble to the media.
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Next!"
280-ish days.
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Next!"
I'd be surprised if anything changed before the holidays...if there isn't an announcement shortly thereafter...the season's done.
*********************
http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/2 ... right-here
We keep saying the two sides are close.
Many players, agents, governors, coaches, lawyers and pretty much everyone outside the key figures on both sides of the NHL lockout apparently believe it to be so.
But is it true? Is a deal within our grasp or is it merely wishful thinking from a group of people dumbfounded as another season appears ready to go off the labor cliff?
Well according to at least one top-level executive on the owners’ side of the table and a number of key players and agents, yes, the two sides are close.
How close?
One NHL governor provided ESPN.com with the framework for a deal he insisted would be palatable to both sides. Assuming the elements that were discussed last week in New York were still in place -- like $300 million in "make-whole" monies, agreements on free agency and arbitration rights -- the governor said he believes the following elements would represent the middle ground in the outstanding contracting, CBA term and transition issues.
Let’s call it the Do This Deal or Get Coal in Your Stocking for a Thousand Years deal.
-A nine-year CBA with a seven-year out for either side.
-A six-year contract limit with front-load/back-diving protection and eight-year limits for players who have been with a team for five years.
-Some simple buyout option as long as the buyouts are within the salary cap.
The ownership source acknowledged that leaving out the buyout element as part of the transition to a new CBA would be the least contentious way to bridge the gap at least as it relates to the owners’ concerns about funding the transition. The buyouts were introduced by the players’ association last week, the timing of which annoyed the owners -- not to mention the fact the buyouts as the players suggested would be outside the hockey-revenue pie, a significant problem for the owners.
Still, the author of the Do This Deal deal felt that both owners and players would support such a framework.
It appears he’s correct.
When the proposal was described to one high-profile veteran player, he agreed it was the kind of offer that at the very least could be put to a vote by the players’ association.
Another player familiar with the often-tumultuous nature of the negotiations agreed that the governor's offer should prompt a vote. He wasn’t certain it would pass, but at least it would give an accurate gauge of the union membership’s feelings about settling. Such an offer would also show that the owners were negotiating as opposed to merely making demands, which is the perception many players were left with after a second attempt at mediation Wednesday in New Jersey.
“I think it's definitely worth looking at,” another veteran player told ESPN.com. "We'd have to look it over and see what the implications are, but it's something to work with for sure. I think that will get some traction.
“But I would like our people to look at it before we say it's worth a vote. We hire them for these reasons, so I would like to hear their input.”
Several players and agents we spoke to asked to reach out to the deal's author.
A veteran agent agreed that this is the kind of compromise on both sides that is needed for a deal, although he remained skeptical that hard-line owners would go for it.
“That type of movement is needed but with Jacobs in charge, it is doubtful,” he said, referring to the chairman of the board of governors, Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs.
It’s difficult to say how the league might respond to such a framework. Those in charge have insisted that the elements they asked for from the players -- but were rebuffed last Thursday -- are all connected and that to move off the owners’ desires for a five-year cap on contracts would require some give in another area, or to come off the league’s desire for a 10-year term for a new CBA would require movement in another area.
Still, given that this idea came from the ownership side of the table suggests this isn’t all wishful thinking from a group that fears for the game’s very future.
Instead, doesn’t a framework like this suggest that a deal is possible, that it's close? Not to suggest getting there will be easy but that it’s possible, that by talking and moving the pieces around could, should yield a deal.
Sounds almost like negotiating.
Maybe Don Fehr and Gary Bettman would like to try it sometime. Sometime soon, that is.
:oops:
I will, too, because this is totally an abusive relationship that I keep coming back to.
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Next!"
I will be watching too. Prob go to a bunch of games as well. 3 of my friends have season tickets to the Hawks so I always have opportunities to go.
The thing is that the hardcore hockey fans will come back. It's the casual fans that won't be coming back. That's the thing that they don't seem to understand. Sure, the owners may get a system that is more beneficial to them. But the same teams that were struggling are going to be struggling even more if they even get this nonsense worked out.
So you think you'll really be done? Not questioning you or anything, but I've said that I'm done to myself a lot but I know once it comes back it will be too hard not to watch.
Sigh...
I know man. This whole thing just sucks. It's so sad that it has come to this.
Is there any way Bettman stays commissioner after this? Not saying this is all his fault, but how can you keep a guy who has had 3 lockouts under his watch including a full season lost. :fp:
Near life-sized bobblehead...
St.John's 9/25/2005
Toronto 9/11/2011
Toronto 9/12/2011
Quebec City 5/5/2016
Ottawa 5/8/2016
agreed. and i think the league would lose more fans if they come back midseason than if they were going to cancel the entire season (if that makes any sense).
a lot of angry hockey fans right now. if they start up in the middle of january, a lot of people won't watch out of sheer anger. cancel the entire season, make good things happen over the spring/summer, FIX the sport, MARKET wisely and more people will tune in come october than they would if they start up in january.
if that doesn't work, release bettman's address and phone number to the public and watch the fireworks!