A big week for hockey north of the border.
The National Hockey League announced May 31 it would return to Winnipeg after a 15-year absence with the conditional move of the Atlanta Thrashers by True North Sports and Entertainment. The Thrashers were the 28th worst market for attendance in the 30-team league.
Commissioner Gary Bettman announced a 13,000-season ticket drive and that a vote on the $170 million purchase would be taken by the board of governors on June 21. More than 7,000 packages were sold before the public sales began and each NHL owner will get a slice of the $60 million relocation fee, so it'll be a done deal.
On June 1, the Stanley Cup final returned to Vancouver for the first time since 1994 -- and began in Vancouver for the first time since the Millionaires were 1921 hosts. The Vancouver Canucks blanked the Boston Bruins 1-0 on Raffi Torres's late, overtime-avoiding goal with 18.5-seconds left in regulation time.
The 5.6 million average audience, with a peak of 7.8 million, was an all-time record for CBC's Hockey Night in Canada. The previous record was in 1994 when 4.96 million tuned-in to see the Canucks battle another Original Six team, the New York Rangers. That was game seven of the Stanley Cup final and the Canucks lost by a goal.
The NBC ratings for game one were the best in 12 years, a 3.2 national rating which translates to approximately 3.708 million viewers. Boston, Providence, R.I. and Hartford, Ct., were three of the top four markets.
The storylines are simple: an Original Six team from a sports-made region with a 39-year Cup drought against the Sedin twins and the rest of the Olympic city kids who are trying for a third time to win the franchise's first Cup since debuting 40 seasons ago.
Before the game, Bettman held his annual state of the league address. Here are highlights from the question-and-answer session:
Q. Can you update where things stand for realignment in lieu of Winnipeg's re-entry, and also the latest on Phoenix?
BETTMAN: With respect to Winnipeg's re-entry, obviously there is a process under the Constitution and Bylaws with respect to ownership transfers and relocation that needs to be complied with. That's on the agenda, will be on the agenda, for the June 21st Board meeting.
In order to do a schedule for next season, it's not possible to do realignment right now. Winnipeg, despite its geographic peculiarities relative to the Southeast Division of the Eastern Conference, will be playing in that division and in that conference, with an assurance that for the following season they will be in the west.
We have a number of clubs that would like to address specific issues on realignment. All those clubs need an opportunity to be heard. That's a process we'll go through the first half of next season, looking at the issues that clubs want to raise, looking at various possibilities, and trying to figure out what will make the most sense moving forward.
If I had to guess anything, and this is purely speculation, as much as I hate to do that, because ultimately it's a Board decision, I think we'll wind up moving towards a slightly more balanced schedule to accommodate the variety of issues I've heard so far from the clubs.
Q. Phoenix?
BETTMAN: Phoenix, as I think you all know, because it's gotten a ton of attention, the City of Glendale stepped up and said they want the team to stay another year while they try to complete the sales process with us and will be funding the losses. Any suggestion that the League is funding this club or carrying the burden is not true. Last season the City of Glendale did it. This coming season the City of Glendale will do it, but hopefully not. Hopefully the club will be sold in due course, and there will be a new owner in there to start turning things around.
Again, we've gotten a number of questions about why this process in Phoenix and why the other process in Atlanta. Atlanta, not unlike Winnipeg in '96, found itself in a situation where nobody wanted to own a club in that market anymore. That's been for me the trigger point on having to deal with a relocation.
With respect to Phoenix, you have a city in Glendale that built the building and has invested in it and wanting the club to stay there. As long as they're prepared to carry the burden of doing this while we try to effectuate a solution, there's no reason to move.
Q. Steroids have obviously run their course through all of the professional sports. Yet your sport, your league, has not had a positive test in years, as I can recall. People who know steroids say if you're not catching anybody, your testing isn't good enough. Is it your belief simply no NHL players are doing steroids now? (Note: NHL players are not tested for drugs during the playoffs or off-season.)
BETTMAN: Well, it's clear that if we're not having positive tests, none of them are getting caught, which means if some are, it's not very many.
I do believe, and we've been in discussions over the last couple of years with WADA, there are ways that we can improve our substance testing, our performance?enhancing testing program. But that's something we need to do with the Players' Association, and that's something, when we actually sit down and begin discussions, we need to address.
I think we have a good program. It deals with education and counseling. It has comprehensive testing, but I think we can probably do more. At the right time we'll have that discussion with the Players' Association.
Q. There's been recent reports of a group in Seattle interested in an NHL team. What are your thoughts on Seattle as a hockey market? With Winnipeg done, do you have a list of cities that are potentials?
BETTMAN: There are no shortage of places that continue to express interest in having a team. I think it was half a dozen, and now it's down to five because Winnipeg comes off the list. My answer is the same. I don't want to raise anybody's expectation. We're hoping not to do relocation. You all know that we don't believe in doing that, except as a last resort. We do everything possible to avoid it, and we're not planning on expanding.
The interest is flattering, but I don't want anyone in any market that doesn't have a team to get their hopes up yet.
Q. Québec City was involved, Pierre Peladeau, the owner of Quebecor, launched a sports channel yesterday. He got 25 games of the Ottawa Senators. Is there some sort of relation there that we can say they are up front to get something in Québec City done or there's absolutely nothing to deal with that?
BETTMAN: I am not going to raise expectations. I'm well aware of Mr. Peladeau's interest and that is gratifying. I am well aware there are plans to build an arena, although we have made no promise of what will happen after that.
At the present time, since I don't have a franchise we're looking to relocate, and as I said, we're not planning on expanding, I don't want to get people's expectations in Québec City raised.
Q. Despite the $3 billion in revenue across the League, a lot of teams are losing money, or at least claim to. Is the gap too large between high and low revenue teams? Especially now that you're in Winnipeg, what adjustments need to be made to revenue sharing and the CBA, the next one, so those clubs can be in the best position to succeed?
BETTMAN: The fact we're in Winnipeg, the agreement is basically self?executing. It will apply to the Winnipeg team as it applied to the Atlanta team, again, assuming Board approval, which everybody is anticipating.
To the extent there are issues in Collective Bargaining, as I said in my opening remarks, the good news is it's too early to discuss it. The discussions I'll have in the first instance on that topic will be with Mr. Fehr. I won't be doing it in this environment.
Q. Is the gap too big?
BETTMAN: We have a system that is dramatically improved from where we were in terms of teams' ability to compete. You've seen it in our competitive balance. There has been dramatic improvement. Whether or not the Players' Association or we are going to be looking for adjustments is something we'll look at quietly and hopefully resolve quietly.
Q. Your office put out numbers on concussions specific to how they were suffered, be it from fighting, be it from hitting, whatever. The number that caught my eye was from fighting. I think it was 8% or somewhere around there. I'm wondering, after you've given out those numbers, has there been added talk, be it from managers, owners, governors, specific to that part and their interest in perhaps ending fighting?
BETTMAN: I don't think the discussion has gotten to the level where there's widespread sentiment to end fighting. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by 'ending fighting.' I assume you mean by increasing the penalties for fighting, because there are penalties now.
The issue is really one about concussions. The reason for releasing the numbers is to make clear that concussions in the game are being caused by a variety of causes. And, in fact, the increase isn't coming, although the conventional wisdom incorrectly was that it was coming from more head hits, it's coming from pucks to the head. Maybe we should be having mandatory visors, something we'll discuss as we have over the years. Sometimes it's collisions with your own teammates, sometimes it's a check where you fall and bang your head.
The number of head hits really hasn't been the cause of the increase in concussions. It's been other sources, and that's what we're looking at in a comprehensive way.
One of the things that I indicated the Blue Ribbon Committee is looking at, as it's been dubbed, is whether or not we want to expand the head?hit rule. Accidents I think are going to happen and we have to deal with that and we do that through the proper diagnosis and treatment of concussions. Nobody has taken the leap that you're suggesting.
Q. Any updates with the next Winter Olympics or the World Cup?
BETTMAN: There is no update. That, again, is something that we will be in discussions with the Players' Association on because the international competitions, be it the conducting of a World Cup, which we're interested in doing, and the participation in the Winter Olympics, is something that we need to discuss and resolve with the Players' Association.
Mr. Fehr has been on the job a relatively short time. He's putting together his organization. He's been doing a lot of homework and catching up. In due course, we'll be having those discussions.
Q. Any more precise indication of where the cap is going?
BETTMAN: Actually, I think Mr. Daly did. I don't remember giving cap numbers. Bill, do you want to venture a guess?
BILL DALY: I think our current projections have the cap being in excess of $60 million, maybe as high as $63 million.
BETTMAN: And, obviously, the new television contract in the United States has an impact on that, bringing it up.
Q. Poignant because of the travel back and forth between Vancouver and Boston being difficult, the format of 2-2-2-1-1-1, any increased talk of going to 2-3-2?
BETTMAN: We periodically raise it with the managers, who when it comes to competitive issues are the heart and soul. There doesn't seem to be much of an appetite. I think people in our game are used to the travel. They like to keep the routine going.
It is what it is. We've been doing it for, oh, at least a couple of decades. I think if you go back to the '80s or '70s, there were a couple of years when it was tried. But this seems to be what the clubs are most comfortable with. What we try to do is make sure we're providing the best environment for them to have the competition and let it all out on the ice.
