CWHL to discontinue operations

[fundmark19]

That’s not how kids are wired. Exact quote from my daughter this week who is 5 “dad why do you only watch guys baseball?” My response “I watch girls as well. Would you like me to turn on a girls game?” One click we are watching ncaa softball tournament. Now she is fired up about going to baseball 2 nights a week because she thinks she can play by Disney World at UCF

I don’t want to answer the question “why can’t I play in the nhl?” “Well hunny it all comes down to economics and a group of billionaires didn’t want to take a chance at growing their sport.” Why are we ok with still not trying to create equality for future generations. There is a lot wrong with NCAA and even with Title IX but at least they are doing something to create equality in sport at their highest level. It wouldn’t be that hard for the NHL to do something similar.

Nba stepped up to do it and it’s time for the NHL

[Locke]

fundmark....are you okay? Your posts are repeating themselves.

[fundmark19]

Nope not ok. Everyday I keep stumbling upon more gender equality issues that I had been ignorant to being a male growing up that I assumed are common sense enough that would be fixed for our future generation of children. I can’t wrap my head around it and it bothers me. This is another example of it.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by fundmark19

Nope not ok. Everyday I keep stumbling upon more gender equality issues that I had been ignorant to being a male growing up that I assumed are common sense enough that would be fixed for our future generation of children. I can’t wrap my head around it and it bothers me. This is another example of it.

How is it inequality if no one is interested in watching womans hockey?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by fundmark19

Nope not ok. Everyday I keep stumbling upon more gender equality issues that I had been ignorant to being a male growing up that I assumed are common sense enough that would be fixed for our future generation of children. I can’t wrap my head around it and it bothers me. This is another example of it.

Fair enough, and I think we're all on that journey together.

Personally, I think a major issue is the wild swings. We're going from a Male-Dominated society and then just swinging hard the other way as opposed to a measured response to meet in the middle.

In this instance though we're also dropping Business into the mix and business, love it or hate it, is largely Gender-Neutral.

If we ask the standard questions of women's hockey from a Business perspective we are probably not going to like the answers.

- Can it make money?
- Does it make sense to fund?

I think, based on the evidence in this thread concerning attendance and marketing that we know the answers to those questions and they're not overwhelmingly in support of women's hockey.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Locke

Fair enough, and I think we're all on that journey together.

Personally, I think a major issue is the wild swings. We're going from a Male-Dominated society and then just swinging hard the other way as opposed to a measured response to meet in the middle.

In this instance though we're also dropping Business into the mix and business, love it or hate it, is largely Gender-Neutral.

If we ask the standard questions of women's hockey from a Business perspective we are probably not going to like the answers.

- Can it make money?
- Does it make sense to fund?

I think, based on the evidence in this thread concerning attendance and marketing that we know the answers to those questions and they're not overwhelmingly in support of women's hockey.

I think the hope here is the NHL funds it similar to the WNBA, but when they don't because they aren't the same sort of business there will be legal challenges in a hope to force them to.

[DiracSpike]

The NHL isn't a charity, it's not their prerogative to start making leagues for a product nobody wants to watch. The NBA did that, and instead of getting props for the charity league they run they instead get blasted constantly for not paying their players enough by the same woke equality brigade. It's comical.

There's lots of opportunity for women to play high level sports, it's called university and college.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I think the hope here is the NHL funds it similar to the WNBA, but when they don't because they aren't the same sort of business there will be legal challenges in a hope to force them to.

Ultimately it just doesnt make sense.

The WNBA needs a flat floor, some uncomfortable shorts, a wife-beater and a ball.

Hockey requires somewhat more, which makes it expensive. And if nobody is buying tickets then it becomes untenable.

Because theres no TV deal, so you have to sell tickets. If you dont sell tickets you dont have a business.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I think the hope here is the NHL funds it similar to the WNBA, but when they don't because they aren't the same sort of business there will be legal challenges in a hope to force them to.

How do you sue to make someone fund your league?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

How do you sue to make someone fund your league?

Well there is Title IX, so I am guessing there is some sort of basis. Not directly related but the US is full of weird things.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Well there is Title IX, so I am guessing there is some sort of basis. Not directly related but the US is full of weird things.

Title IX only refers to sports in educational facilities that receive federal assistance money. It says:

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

So no applicability to pro sports.

[fundmark19]

Originally Posted by Locke

Ultimately it just doesnt make sense.

The WNBA needs a flat floor, some uncomfortable shorts, a wife-beater and a ball.

Hockey requires somewhat more, which makes it expensive. And if nobody is buying tickets then it becomes untenable.

Because theres no TV deal, so you have to sell tickets. If you dont sell tickets you dont have a business.

Force the TV deal issue. NHL has buying power to have that included in their bargaining. We all are aware every major sports league is having gate driven revenue issue. Take that away from the start. Use the league to test out new innovations much like the AHL.

That in seat gambling application that we all know is coming at some point have it at an Inferno game and see if it works before 18k people show up to try it. Hockey players aren't asking for 77k salaries I am sure you can pay them less give them access to benefits that are already included as part of an NHL club like top of the line training and athletic support.

[BigFlameDog]

Jeez guys, they aren't "expecting" the NHL to come in and save them. The league has basically said if there isn't a league running they are interested in starting one and trying to make it grow. It may work and it may not but they will give it a try and the marketing machine behind the NHL can only help.

The current league has one foot in the grave and they are holding out for the NHL to save them (they won't). That league tried but has broken promises and slashed (already low) pay and support. The players know this and want door #2 so they are trying to help convince them to shut it down so the NHL might try their own thing.

It would likely start with a small league, 6 teams in small buildings and a short schedule. There is a lot of female hockey played in the Calgary and surrounding area (would probably shock a lot of you) and a lot of potential or current fans in those groups. One of the biggest problems with attendance, as far as my circle goes, was game times and days of the week. Because they had to be economical the times sucked and a lot of games fell in prime minor hockey times or later in the evening or games went to outlying communities.

These ladies have and would work tirelessly to build a league but there is only so much they can do for free...they need to work jobs too. They aren't expecting to have a living wage on day one. An actual pro league that can promote, purchase with buying power, pay the bills, pay coaches, support the players and has the NHL marketing machine and sponsorship relationships can only help right?

That is what they are looking for, not handouts. A chance to build something.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by fundmark19

Force the TV deal issue. NHL has buying power to have that included in their bargaining. We all are aware every major sports league is having gate driven revenue issue. Take that away from the start. Use the league to test out new innovations much like the AHL.

That in seat gambling application that we all know is coming at some point have it at an Inferno game and see if it works before 18k people show up to try it. Hockey players aren't asking for 77k salaries I am sure you can pay them less give them access to benefits that are already included as part of an NHL club like top of the line training and athletic support.

First of all, im all about the ladies finding a way to play the game professionally.

However, the NHL cant force the networks to show games if that network chooses not to. TV deals are business deals. If the networks see that airing womens game as a losing proposition, then they arent going to show them, nor should they. They all have shareholders to answer too as well.

If the NHL wants to, of their own volition, start up and fund a female league, then thats what they should do. They should not be forced to in any way though. Again, they are a business. I have no doubt they are interested in getting into it, but they have to implore that there is a limit to how much they can invest before the whole "growing the game" part of things becomes a negative value to them.

As for gender equality...it already exists in this instance. No one is stopping the women from forming leagues and paying players or getting TV deals. This is all about $$$ though as is any pro sports league. Hockey in particular is exceedingly expensive. Its simply unfair to expect a bunch of NHL owners to just fork out money they will never receive in return, in the name of equality. As explained the Title 9 stuff applies ONLY to the NCAA because those schools receive federal and state funding to be in existence.

I can see a scenario where the NHL seeds an 8 or 10 team league, gives the league a budget of whatever they determine can be afforded, allows this new league their marketing and PR expertise, and then kicks them out of the nest to fly on their own....if thats what they want to do. They should in no way be forced too though. And if they determine it isnt working after 3 or 4 years, then so be it.

Unionizing the players is all well and good, but they have to be aware that the $$ is not there to pay them all a bunch until their own game grows and they start selling tickets and getting TV deals etc...thats just how it works in a free market society.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

Jeez guys, they aren't "expecting" the NHL to come in and save them. The league has basically said if there isn't a league running they are interested in starting one and trying to make it grow. It may work and it may not but they will give it a try and the marketing machine behind the NHL can only help.

The current league has one foot in the grave and they are holding out for the NHL to save them (they won't). That league tried but has broken promises and slashed (already low) pay and support. The players know this and want door #2 so they are trying to help convince them to shut it down so the NHL might try their own thing.

It would likely start with a small league, 6 teams in small buildings and a short schedule. There is a lot of female hockey played in the Calgary and surrounding area (would probably shock a lot of you) and a lot of potential or current fans in those groups. One of the biggest problems with attendance, as far as my circle goes, was game times and days of the week. Because they had to be economical the times sucked and a lot of games fell in prime minor hockey times or later in the evening or games went to outlying communities.

These ladies have and would work tirelessly to build a league but there is only so much they can do for free...they need to work jobs too. They aren't expecting to have a living wage on day one. An actual pro league that can promote, purchase with buying power, pay the bills, pay coaches, support the players and has the NHL marketing machine and sponsorship relationships can only help right?

That is what they are looking for, not handouts. A chance to build something.

The first bolded IS a handout if it is not being purchased. Thats OK as long as there is some sort of return down the line and the NHL can see a benefit to do doing so long term. That may or may not be the case, but it's completely unfair to expect them too.....just because.

I can easily see a minimum budget of 1.5 - 2 million a year per team for expenses. How much of that would come back to the investors for the first few years?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by fundmark19

Force the TV deal issue. NHL has buying power to have that included in their bargaining. We all are aware every major sports league is having gate driven revenue issue. Take that away from the start. Use the league to test out new innovations much like the AHL.

That in seat gambling application that we all know is coming at some point have it at an Inferno game and see if it works before 18k people show up to try it. Hockey players aren't asking for 77k salaries I am sure you can pay them less give them access to benefits that are already included as part of an NHL club like top of the line training and athletic support.

The NHL is North American Sports' Redheaded stepchild. They have zero leverage to force anything.

[Scroopy Noopers]

I listened to an interview on CBC radio with one of the players, and her main point was they are trying to force 1 league. They had 2 different leagues and she said it was stretching/dividing their sponsorship opportunities. The main thing they want is 1 league. Which I agree with. I also have said numerous times they need to be in smaller markets (and on TV). Ontario alone could support 3-4 teams, just not in Toronto or Ottawa.

That being said, I keep coming back to the fact we are discussing Professional Sports. No one has a ‘right’ to play professional sports. They are a product of people’s desire for entertainment and willingness to spend disposable income.

This isn’t amateur sports. Equal pay for Olympic athletes? hell yes!
Asking people to support a profession in entertainment is inherently selfish.

[Resolute 14]

With the CWHL going under, they are currently at one league. Now with seven teams. So that argument is a half truth. They aren't just trying to force one league. They are trying to force one league operated by the NHL. That's a key difference. Because killing the existing one league is a necessary step in their view.

This is, as it always is, about money and nothing else. They want to get paid far more than their profession generates in revenue and know that the NHL is the only way it happens. Basically, a small scale manifestation of the same sense of entitlement that the NHLPA had in 2004, and which some members (and agents) still have today.

[fundmark19]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

With the CWHL going under, they are currently at one league. Now with seven teams. So that argument is a half truth. They aren't just trying to force one league. They are trying to force one league operated by the NHL. That's a key difference. Because killing the existing one league is a necessary step in their view.

This is, as it always is, about money and nothing else. They want to get paid far more than their profession generates in revenue and know that the NHL is the only way it happens. Basically, a small scale manifestation of the same sense of entitlement that the NHLPA had in 2004, and which some members (and agents) still have today.

And the way to get paid is have a marketing machine of the NHL behind them for best chance of long term survival. Just like the NBA. How many female pro leagues have come and gone in the last 10 years now? You can't grow without stability

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

With the CWHL going under, they are currently at one league. Now with seven teams. So that argument is a half truth. They aren't just trying to force one league. They are trying to force one league operated by the NHL. That's a key difference. Because killing the existing one league is a necessary step in their view.

This is, as it always is, about money and nothing else. They want to get paid far more than their profession generates in revenue and know that the NHL is the only way it happens. Basically, a small scale manifestation of the same sense of entitlement that the NHLPA had in 2004, and which some members (and agents) still have today.

They are not or could they force this...Bettman has all but said they want to get involved with women's hockey but won't as long as there are leagues operating. Yes, they are trying to kill the dying league to try to open the NHL door.