Boy, do I miss hockey

I'm sure there are many who will wholeheartedly agree, while others will passionately disagree, but it is in my opinion that hockey is the greatest sport ever to be displayed with the help of cathode ray tubes.

I've watched hockey ever since I was a little boy. I simply adored the Montreal Canadiens, and to this day, I still proudly root for them. Never once did I step foot in the Montreal Forum, but staying up late every Saturday night from about October to about April allowed me to watch a myriad of greats play the game they loved with the heart and soul of the champions that I always wanted to believe they were.

Did I care that I hadn't seen my beloved Habs hoist the Stanley Cup for years on end? Not particularly, because I always believed that next year was going to be our year. In 1989, they lost in the finals in 6 games to play a very impressive Calgary Flames team. I did get to see Lanny MacDonald take a swig out the Stanley Cup, but I also had to wait an entire offseason before I'd get to see the Canadiens try again. Finally, in 1993, we bested none other than the legendary Wayne Gretzky and his Los Angeles Kings, and the cup made its 24th appearance in Montreal. Never before had I been happier for anyone I didn't personally know.

However, what had escaped me all these years was the entire economic side of the NHL. I had always believed that these guys weren't getting paid a lot of money, but played so hard every game because they got to play the game they loved and they got to play for the ultimate prize - the Stanley Cup.

Flash forward to spring 2004. The Quebec Nordiques no longer existed, nor did the Winnepeg Jets. With the Ottawa Senators (re)joining the NHL, there were only 6 Canadian franchises left - and 4 of us were far from rich. The collective bargaining agreement was ending after this season and the players and owners had not settled anything. It's now the last couple days of 2004, but it won't be long before the entire season is wiped out.

Hockey Night in Canada no longer plays on Saturday evenings and now I find little to no incentive to go to the laundromat on Saturdays anymore (yes, the laundromat has a television). The winter feels colder, longer, darker, and emptier. An important part of my life and the lives of other Canadians is missing. If it weren't for the World Junior Hockey Championships, the wait for baseball would feel that much worse. And that's just from a fan's perspective. I really feel sympathy for the referees.

What I and I'm sure many others just don't understand is why can't the players and owners agree on something? Maybe I don't have all the facts, and maybe I shouldn't be pointing fingers, but as a reasonably logical person, I truly believe that the players' association is the cause of our grief. I have read many an article, listened to countless interviews and opinions, and followed a fair number of debates. After all that, I really find the statements made by the PA are ridiculous.

Where to begin?

1) The PA refuses to accept a salary cap. The first question they should ask themselves is "Am I even affected by the cap?" The answer for the vast majority of players is either "Not at all" or "So little that I'd be a fool to lose a season over this". So why don't all these players (who should greatly outnumber those who the cap does affect) just express their views publicly? After all, the players supposedly are not being silenced. Instead, most of them have decided to play in other leagues and/or countries for a small fraction of what they'd make under Gary Bettman's salary cap system.

2) Gary Bettman wishes to tie player salaries to revenues. What a novel idea! Why not? Because it means that players will no longer be able to make more than clubs can afford to pay. Should players make that much money? Well, Bob Goodenow believes they have a right to make as much as the owners are willing to pay them. Well, I believe I would love to be paid more than I make now, but it certainly isn't happening. Although I could go to another company, my salary might not change too much. Why? Because there are many others who could do what I do and there are so many employees and so many companies that nobody is irreplaceable. Since there are only 30 teams in the NHL and only so many top players, having a star go from one team to another often has a huge impact on the league. If I jump ship and go get a job at another company, I doubt it'd make much of an impact. And no company in their right mind would pay me more than they can afford to.

3) So why am I not siding with the players? Because they make so much more money than I do. Take a look at a player who makes $1 million a year. That's about 30% lower than the average player salary that Bettman envisions (about $1.3 million). However, most people may not make $1 million in their entire lives. Player supporters argue that players careers are so short. That's wonderful! If I could work only 1 year and never work again and make more than most people might make their entire lives, I'd be overjoyed. I'd be able to retire at the age of 25! In fact, if I could make about 30% less than the average salary in Bettman's scheme (which will fluctuate, but probably increase with inflation) for 10-15 years, my family will not need to work for generations! And that's assuming I don't bother to make any investments. I mean for crying out loud, I could buy a few houses a year if I wanted to with that kind of money. Do I need to have a lavish lifestyle? I'd be more than happy to live significantly better than I live now and not have to work the rest of my life.

4) The PA offers a rollback of 24% of player salaries. This was definitely a PR move designed to make the PA look good. Anyone can see how this is a temporary solution. Should the PA be forced to have a cap just so that there's a rule that protects owners from themselves? Well, that's a loaded question because it assumes that all owners need protection from themselves. This is simply not true. The owners of the poorer teams need protection from the owners of the richer teams. If all owners simply made an unofficial agreement to not exceed a certain level of spending, there'd be no lockout. A lot of people (such as agents) would complain of legalized collusion, but at least we'd still have hockey. However, it only takes one owner to break that unenforced agreement and destroy the league. Let's say only one team exceeds the agreed spending level. What can the other 29 teams do? They can do nothing and watch as the traitor acquires all the talent and gains an unfair advantage year after year, or they can react and increase their spending to level the playing field. Some clubs have to go into debt to match the rich clubs' spending.

Anyways, enough analysis. Bring in the replacement players! If not, it's going to be a long year...