g-manpuck wrote: ↑
Thu May 02 10:06 am
Twitter blowing up this morning from our Women's National Team members
I really, really want them to succeed in this one and develop a good league that is a winner for everyone.
But I think they are overplaying their hand here. A boycott will do nothing but force the folding of both leagues. From there, the NHL will have to determine whether it has the good graces to develop its own model, but what's in it for the NHL? Other than the MN franchise, nobody else was even close to profitable, and the MN franchise sold out a HS-size rink only here. Seems like a simple loser for the NHL, which is why they are only committing a token amount to the effort previously.
The WNBA tried to be the NBA-lite and didn't really find its footing until you started seeing college or hometown stars getting to play in their local franchises, and even then, it is seen as a way to keep their arenas busy in otherwise dark periods of the year. Can a women's hockey league survive by playing summer games in NHL arenas? Does it really want to? Those early WNBA games were brutal at the Target Center, as they couldn't fill half of the lower bowl, which made it a total atmosphere loser.
I suspect the best rationale for NHL participation will be to make hockey more accessible to women in general, which will heighten NHL crowds and atmosphere. I believe there is a great opportunity there-- but the logistics of making that happen are hard, and the ROI is in no way clear. Seems this could kill the goodwill established previously and force everybody to start from scratch because of business reasons. That's bad for the game, in my opinion.