Why the folding of the National Women's Hockey League could be best thing for the sport

[doniceage]

In May, more than 200 female hockey players announced they would be staying out of any professional league in North America until "they got the resources that professional hockey demands and deserves."

https://www.azcentral.com/story/spor...ld/1576703001/

[30ranfordfan]

There was another thread on the women's game a while back.... and I'll say it again:

The NHL buying (or patnering?) with the league, and being willing to lose money annually for 20+ years, is the only way these concerns will get addressed.

There is no mass market for the product, very little gate or merchandise revenue, no TV deal. When the center of the hockey universe (Toronto) frequently had fewer fans in the stands, than players on the bench, there is no way to pay them more - or increase the "perks" (which might be a bad way of phrasing it...... but to "treat them like professional athletes" isn't feasible, if there isn't any money to spend)

[doniceage]

There was another thread on the women's game a while back.... and I'll say it again:

The NHL buying (or patnering?) with the league, and being willing to lose money annually for 20+ years, is the only way these concerns will get addressed.

There is no mass market for the product, very little gate or merchandise revenue, no TV deal. When the center of the hockey universe (Toronto) frequently had fewer fans in the stands, than players on the bench, there is no way to pay them more - or increase the "perks" (which might be a bad way of phrasing it...... but to "treat them like professional athletes" isn't feasible, if there isn't any money to spend)

It definitely true as I believe the WNBA is still not fully profitable as a league and it has a higher profile sport. So, unless the NHL steps in like you mention there is no way a woman hockey league will stay afloat year in year out.

Don

[creasecollector]

The NHL buying (or patnering?) with the league, and being willing to lose money annually for 20+ years, is the only way these concerns will get addressed.

Pretty much this, sadly.

I think the NHL will eventually step up and do just that to grow the game. At some point, possibly due to social pressures or to give the league a better look and "grow the game", I think they'll feel the pressure to partner or outright buy the league in order to support it financially. Because it cannot fully sell itself on it's own accord and be up to par with NHL perks and such. It's not possible financially right now.

Give it another 5-10 years (could potentially be much sooner) and I think the NHL will own, or heavily partner with, the NWHL.

[scottkoz20]

@Pheebs888 - wanna add anything to this

[Pheebs888]

Well, Scott I think you're well aware of my take on this even if you do not agree. I posted a blog on HockeyBuzz in which I propose tackling two issues at once, saving the Women's game and levelling the playing field tax Wise in the NHL: https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?...blogger_id=266

My thinking is, it's Killing two birds with one stone. I have been called a communist for even thinking of such a scheme but the way I see it, it's not that different from the revenue sharing scheme really :)

would be interested to hear what @creasecollector and @30ranfordfan think of the idea :)

[30ranfordfan]

@Pheebs888

It's a neat idea, but I suspect has zero chance of working. Asking players to pay out of their pocket.... in some cases more than a million per season (you did the Numbers for Radulov... I suspect Stamkos, Kucherov, Benn, Seguin, and more... would eat more than a million in taxes).

Killing two birds with one stone is a nice way to do things, but IMO here doesnt work... because the problems arnt related.

If the leauge wants to address the tax issue, I thibk the way to do it would be rewrite contracts so the team pays $X + tax... and the player will get $X no matter where they play. Would make Montreal's actual payroll higher than everyone else's, but would level the playing field.

Having said that, I suspect the league isn't all that worried about, and don't see it as a problem that needs fixing. MON vs DAL is a big gap.... but TOR vs NY isn't nearly as much.

I agree that in a league with a hard cap, the dollars should be equal across the board (the whole point is a level playing field, but teams don't have equal oppertunity) I just don't think it's in the radar for something to be addressed.

The women's league is a differt issue. IMO, the league just needs to buy the WNHL, run an 8 team circuit, and convince the NHLPA that the costs of running that league should be counted against HRR. This would mean a stagnent cap for a few years once implimented, but I bet could work.

I do think the NHL floating a women's league is a good idea. It will be an expensive investment (I would imagine each team would cost 2 or 3 million to run) but I bet over the long term, it will increase the number of women hockey fans, which is something the league should be aiming to do, from a business standpoint. Seeing WNBA numbers on that would be intering... what percentage of men & women in America was NBA? What were the numbers 20 years ago? How much of that is attributed to the WNBA?

The summer thing..... I don't know. Worth a shot, I guess. I suspect it would be a major fail in the USA though.... and likely here too. Are there that many ppl really clammouring for year round hockey? TSN could probably use the content though. Lol.