I too am a major hockey fan. I was introduced to the sport in ~94-95 with the Stars and grew to love the sport by 96-97 from which point I have become an addict. I used to attend upwards of 20 games a season (before tickets got out of hand in pricing) and make a concentrated effort to watch every Stars and Flyers game that airs, plus several other key match ups throughout the year and the entirety of the playoff run.
That said, I have a vested interest in seeing the NHL return, but in its full glory. If you think the AHL and college hockey is lacking then what good will it be to take players from those leagues and stick them on NHL ice where tickets will still likely cost an exorbatant amount? I can go to a very nearby AHL team here for about 1/4 of the cost of a Stars game if I want to see those guys play. Not to mention Vancuver and Montreal, I have read, have labor laws in place that wouldn't allow for replacement players.
I am not blinded by my interest in the sport however. I know we are going to lose some, if not several, of the key talents in the league after all of this. Bettman is pressing hard for a cap that many of the best players don't have to accept. If they saved any money at all they can gladly retire millionaires at this point and a few are likely to do so, but that is sports in general. No player stays in the game forever and for every player that leaves there is a growing amount of minor league and college players ready to take his place.
The flip side of this coin is that some positions are more important than others, ie goalies. It takes quite a bit of time to mold a solid NHL goal tender. If Kolzig, Khabibulin, Cujo, Brodeur, and Hasek (again) retire because they have enough cash there will be a void in net. Realistically, I think Brodeur and Nik would stay; Brodeur has records on the line and Khabibulin just got back to playing not too long ago after a protracted contract issue with Pheonix, but you must admit losing 3+ premier net minders would hurt the cause. Losing a prime goalie ends the chance at a cup run for a team in today's NHL.
Now, I am not a hard liner for either side in this debacle, rather I try to look at what we know objectively. I agree that being payed $5-9 mil a season to play a game is ludicris to the average working stiff who makes $30-40k a year with a college degree, but lets face it, the owners are the problem here. Look at it this way, you go to work for a company; said company offers you $40k a year for 3 years to do some lengthy temporary project, but at about year 2.5 they decide you are a valuable asset and want to keep you. On the other hand, you have gained some notoriety in the field with your work experience and are being offered higher salaries with competing offices for $70k a year. Your company steps up and offers you competitive wages for the market and extra job security, but doing so puts them under some financial strain. Who's fault is that if you take the contract?
That is what has happened in the NHL on a massive scale. Some owners can't compete with others' spending potential and that leads to the same few teams making the playoffs and heading into the cup game potentially. Now, I as stated above, I am a Stars fan. That said, I don't want them to make the finals every year for a decade because they outspend their competition (not likely to occur; this is just an example) because that makes the game boring to me. On the other hand, I know there is nothing worse than being the team that has no chance at all because you have 1 all star who only made it due to NHL mandate that each team must be represented pitted up against the Red Wings who are sporting half the all star west's line up. Then, to make matters even worse, you know at the end of the year, when the trade deadline looms, that one key player will end up getting sent to a top contender's 2nd or 3rd line so the team can free up funds to sign a new talent in the draft and get a couple warm bodies to fill the holes because otherwise he would just leave to free agency.
All these things in mind, yes, I think the NHL should shut down this year. Furthermore, I firmly believe in firing both Goodenow and Bettman (the latter has made SEVERAL piss poor choices that have hurt the game from trying to restrict fighting, which seems to have added intentional injuries, to his attempts to stop net minders from playing the puck behind the net.) then working a luxury tax based soft cap and restarting the game next year. This way the lesser teams can still compete and the high rollers can have an all star lineup if they want to fastlane themselves straight to a rebuilding year for spending $46 mil on salaries and an addition $15-20 mil in taxed penalties. I would hope that few teams would opt to chance the second choice, though I know at the onset some would simply because they are already over the cap so why not push to win a cup before you implode. With any luck that concensus would die off after a year or 2 and some more balanced teams might hit the ice. Well, except for the Rangers, who would likely spend $60 mil a season in player salaries and penalties only to not even make the playoffs. Some things in the NHL are now customary.
And, in closing, I feel it is important to mention two other things about Bettman's contract proposals.
1. His latest offering that mimicked the NHLPA's 24% salary roll back with luxury taxes implemented and the option of going into a hard cap if the league is in a rough position at the end of the agreement changed the terms in such a way that the owners could instantly cause the contract to be reverted to a hard cap just by spending as they already are. So, all that contract offer was is an easy out for Bettman who can instantly decide to have a hard cap as soon as the 3 most financially viable teams spend a set percentage more than the 3 most limited in funds. In effect, he can even find just 6 owners interested in a hard cap and they can make this happen on purpose.
2. To balance team salaries out Bettman has decided the NHL would be best served with a draft style player distribution method where teams who are over the hard cap must offer up enough players to drop them below the cap. The remaining teams would be able to pick these players up WHILE THE ORIGINAL TEAM PAYS THE MAJORITY OF THE SALARY. Yeah, tell me that isn't horse shit. At least giving teams a luxury tax would allow a franchise to put players on waivers and let whoever picked said player up pay the bill for doing so or let them keep the player and just pay some extra getting benefit of the player contributing to THEIR TEAM. I wish I could find the article I read on this point, but its lost to the internet at this point. If anyone can find something on this post it up.
As for the WHA, I wish them the best of luck. If the old regime of hockey players decide to go over I will surely give it a watch, but frankly it would have to be a very limited number of teams because the hockey talent pool is already struggling to fill the NHL with all the expansion teams of the last 6 years or so.
