Some NHL clubs are worth north of $200 million, but a lot don't come anywhere close. Even with "cost certainty", some clubs now need to find "revenue certainty".

And most clubs up for sale are selling because they can't sustain themselves. Probably not a great place to be negotiating from if you are the owner who wants to stem further losses.

This week, a former governor said that if the Coyotes were offered to him for $1, he'd pass up the chance because he didn't think that there's any way to avoid more massive losses in Phoenix. In some minds, it is clear that some teams simply aren't worth the paper that their logo appears on.

The NHL BOGs meet this week in Palm Beach, Florida to primarily discuss the economic outlook. If NHL Board of Governors do not radically rethink the league's plan of attack, then they are truly Offside.

For those of you unaware that the NHL has its' own version of the Forest Fire Safety Dial, let me run through it briefly for you.

The league's plan of attack over the past 25+ years is obvious:

Dark Green - day-to-day: owner decides to sell, no apparent troubles acting as motivation. (eg. a true purchase where both buyers and sellers come to the bargaining table equally matched. eg. sales of Minnesota and Edmonton post-lockout; Vancouver, New Jersey and Montreal pre-lockout)

Light Green - plan a: business as usual, pile on the denial and hope/pray things work themselves out

(See the Big Red Pointer? The NHL is still on plan "a"!)

Bright Yellow - plan b: club is forced to sell due to owner finance problems (note: its' never the team or market's fault right?unless its' a Canadian market?) Then the NHL moves in to find another dance partner within the local market (eg. Anaheim from Disney Corp., Miami from Blockbuster Video's owner and Islanders all 3 pre-lockout, Nashville from Craig Leipold, Tampa Bay from Bill Davison) And Atlanta would be here already if it weren't for a lawsuit between its' owners, delaying this process.

Fire Orange - plan c: no local buyer can be found by the NHL, therefore the NHL relocates to US city, ensures team is sold for as much as possible, aim for as much as the last expansion, and probably forced to take much less. (eg. Hartford, Winnipeg, Quebec and Nashville to KC just before Boots saves the day. yes, Virginia it was that close to happening last summer.)

Blood Red Ink - plan d: if all clubs can be reasonably assumed to be in "plan a" mode, then consider another round of expansion of 2 teams, you know, just to keep life interesting.

~~~
Severe Warning: "Crossing into Deep DooDoo Country"
~~~

Note: Up to this point, most clubs get sold for a good return. This ensures that all owners are happy since their team's values are maintained by being reflected in these most recent transactions. But from here on, all bets are off as to the amount that a team changes hands for. Why? Because the NHL would no longer be in complete control of the situation beyond plan d:

Coffin Grey - plan e: club owner gives the NHL no notice and goes broke, NHL to find new local dance partner while team is sold via bankruptcy for whatever crumbs it can get. (eg. Pittsburg, Ottawa and Buffalo, all pre-lockout) NHL comes out looking pretty good as it "played its' cards as best it could under the circumstances forced upon it".

Charcoal Black - plan f: club comes forward saying it can't continue, leaving the NHL holding the bag as the team falls into bankruptcy. The NHL will do the same essentially as per plan d, except it will receive even more blame than normal as it "should have saw this coming". No face saving measures can be found for the league brass. (eg. Cleveland Barons are merged with North Stars.)

~~~

Now the thing to remember is that the NHL has had the "luxury", if you can call it that, that only one team at a time has been in this sort of crisis at a time. If the economy is going to be as bad as many fear, it just may be that the NHL will have up to 6 teams going through this all at the same time.

Finding one buyer for one team is tough enough in good times.

But finding up to 6 buyers, who will undoubtingly be looking to "carpet-bag" by playing one team against the other, will make things almost unbearable.

If you're the NHL in this situation, then "beggars can't be choosers"! With recent team sale prices reflecting value back on the rest of the league, this prospect can't make the NHL establishment led by Jeremy Jacobs, Ed Synder and the Ontario Teachers' Pension Fund very happy with the direction the NHL is heading. A fire sale truly hurts the other 29 teams' book values.

If everyone is trying to sell, who would be interested in buying? You would have to think only the hockey-nuts in the millionaires club would be interested during a recession. Who would that be?

Sure Balsillie will be welcomed with open arms to any Southern Ontario town not within 50 miles of the Leafs, Wings or Sabres. Back in Manitoba, Mark Chipman's quiet charm leading his group also deserves a relocated team for Winnipeg, the Heart of the Continent. And while I'm playing Santa Claus: give Toronto a second team too!

But that still has around 3 or more teams looking to vacate their locales. Note to self: This relocation game isn't as easy as it first seems.

Heck, maybe some of the richest hockey players decide that Lemieux and Gretzky shouldn't only be the ones having fun. You might see Lidstrom own the Thrashers (on and off the ice!). Or maybe Sidney Crosby buys the Panthers just to keep a nice winter retreat on the eastern conference schedule?

While the NHL could have started relocations earlier, that might in their minds, make a mountain out of a mole hill, public relations-wise. And this would certainly run against the NHL's history demonstrated through "plan a" as above.

What is clear is that some teams aren't getting better financially and relocations will be required sooner or later. So, the faster the NHL starts the club sales and/or relocations, the easier the NHL will make its' own situation in this or next season's time. By then, the NHL could hope the recession may be over, with a fresh start in new markets. And using the recession as the excuse just may be the best face-saving measure the NHL and Gary Bettman's southern experiment could ever find.

So while the NHL thinks it may go through the fire without scorch marks, the league continues to disregard Smokey Bear's calls being proactive, not negligent!

I wonder if that old bear has run a hockey league before?

You're thoughts are always welcome. Offside or not! Let us know what you think.

Chris
Chair, Manitoba Mythbuters
ManitobaMythbuters.com
~ The Reality May Surprise You! ~