What hillarity with these anagrams. So clever I am. As you Yoda said just the other day: "clever you are." Anyway, this was in the Globe this morning:
Levitt, a former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission was hired by the NHL in 2003 to review its finances". In a report released a year ago, he concluded the NHL was in "catastrophic" financial condition and the league's 30 teams lost more than $273-million (U.S.) on operations in 2002-03....Levitt said the NHL and its players will suffer in the short term by the cancellation of the season. "Of course it's going to impact the clubs and it will impact the players. But the clubs probably will lose less money closed than they would operating under a reasonable contract..." he said.Bigger loses operating reasonably than not operating at all? Is this saying that the NHL as we know it is simply not viable and that the lock-out, if it is to have any effect, must see the shaking out of a significant number of teams as well as a lowering of wages. The article concludes with this sobering fact: "A source familiar with NHL finances said about six teams are in such poor financial condition that the clubs' owners have had to make personal guarantees to lenders." That kind of problem is not a problem of wages but a problem of market. WHy isn't this the story for the newspapers in this lock-out? Is the goal to achieve an NHL where a team can be competative supported by an average of 10,000 in the stands and 30 dollar tickets? Isn't that the AHL?
Maybe it's time again for a 12 team NHL.
Comments
Alan - February 16, 2005 11:53 AM
Great quotation from Damien Cox in this morning's <i>Toronto Star</i>:<blockquote class="smalltext">...if Gary Bettman stands before a news conference in Manhattan today and cancels the season despite having won this battle over the union in convincing style, he will be remembered as the sports executive who wouldn't take yes for an answer and instead flushed an entire season down the toilet because he wanted it all.</blockquote>"...wouldn't take yes for an answer..." is perfect. As I said, I think he does not want it all, that the real battle is between the big teams and the small but this is still a great characterization of where we are.
Alan - February 16, 2005 12:03 PM
The <i>Globe</i> is reporting that Bettman responded to last night's 49 million offer from the players with the line "It was disappointing to receive the fax of your 'final' offer" as in it was not the player's place to offer anything after Gary the Great has stated his final offer. No wonder the players responded: "You willl receive nothing further from us..." <p>See you in 2007 with Wayne Gretzky as Commissioner of the NHL.
Nils Ling - February 16, 2005 12:37 PM
The more I see of Gary Bettman ... and the longer this goes on ... the more I believe that he sees himself as Commissioner of a 12 team Super League with perhaps 20 other teams who toil in smaller markets feeding premier players into the "new majors".
Alan - February 16, 2005 12:48 PM
I think he sees himself as a retired guy saying to everyone else who will listen to him that he tried, he really tried.
Alan - February 16, 2005 3:08 PM
More bad facts in the Star's fine print:<blockquote class="smalltext"> The owners invested in a $300-million lockout fund that would ensure they could last an entire year without hockey. The players, in turn, are receiving between $5,000 to $10,000 a month in lockout pay and thereâ??s enough from the initial rollout to last through November 2006. And thereâ??s more in the coffers if necessary.</blockquote>February 2007 will be the next real deadline. Can't wait for Bettman brand scab hockey and the NHLPA-WHA. Actually, I can't wait. It would be interesting to see the collapse of something as major as the NHL and its replacement with a player-owned structure. The killer for the NHL is that 13 teams share arenas with the NBA and they will lock-out for 2006-07, I understand. Unions together taking out the owners. Sounds like a return to the days of Moscow Dynamo and Red Army.