Well, the NHL's Board of Governors meeting in New York on Wednesday produced the result that some people are confused by. The NHL has gone on record saying the League would not put a product on the ice if they did not have an agreement with the NHLPA. Now, that put to rest, at least for now, the idea of replacement players for the NHL.
Now, the big question is-- who has the leverage??
The NHL is committed to having a deal with the PA, but did they show all their cards too early. I mean, let's face it-- without the threat of replacement players, you have to think that the NHLPA has a reason to stall on getting a new deal done. Now that they don't have to worry about scabs taking their jobs-- they can wait all they want because they won't get a cheque until October. Granted-- the PR idea is a great move for the NHL and they should be commended for showing they want to get something done with the players' union.
On the flip side, there are some people who think that the NHLPA is now behind the 8-ball. I don't see how that is possible, but one can guess how they can be considered it. Many think the "trump card" Bob Goodenow held is now gone with the thought of the replacement players. The Players have been told to wait out the replacement players and the NHL will be back bargaining. Since that's the case no longer, one can think that the NHLPA has the upperhand.
Without hockey, no one has the upper hand. The NHL loses out on sponsorship that was there and the revenue that could have been coming in. The Players lose out on the fact that they would have to go across the world to get a job to play the game they are skilled at playing.
All that aside-- would have people seen replacement hockey?? I'm sure if the price was right and the curiousity grew enough that you just sat in your house and screamed to yourself, "ALRIGHT, ALRIGHT-- I'LL GO SEE A BLOODY GAME!!" Granted, after an outburst like that you could be put into somekind of home.
I think replacement hockey would have been enjoyable to see. Sure, it wouldn't have been the NHL and wouldn't have been the same as having the "real" NHL on the ice, but it would have been fun to watch. With hockey, they have a great minor league system with players talented enough to make the replacement league an exciting one to watch and something people would be curious to go see.
Would it have worked in the long run??
No, not at all. But it would have been fun to see how it went. It could have gone one of two ways: (1) It worked brilliantly and the NHL actually wins out on it or (2) It would have failed horribly and the game would have been destroyed for the future. Either way, it would have been more exciting that what's going on in the boardroom.
So, we just wait out moreso and see what they can do. They can elect a Pope in three days, but can't sort a CBA out in 7 months-- go figure.
This has been ScottyWazz. Take care of yourself and someone else. PEACE!!