Players are Ultimately to Blame for NHL’s Labor Woes

I have never supported the players in a professional sports labor dispute. And I’m not about to start doing so with the current NHL lockout.

I have read numerous stories about the greedy owners and how they are asking the players to take a pay cut while the league is supposedly growing its revenues by leaps and bounds. Conveniently omitted from most of those stores are two things; the fact that the players’ salaries have nearly doubled since the last lockout and that according to Forbes Magazine, only five NHL teams made a profit last year (defined as positive earnings before interest, taxes, and depreciation).

Somehow the players keep forgetting to mention this when they act the aggrieved party.

I have tremendous respect for players like Sidney Crosby and Jonathan Toews. They are two of the best players, best leaders, and best ambassadors of and for the National Hockey League. And they are extremely well compensated for this. Crosby just signed a deal that will pay him an annual average salary of $8.7 Million for the next dozen years (on an accelerated pay schedule). Toews currently is working at $6.2 Million per over five years with a huge raise certain to come on his next deal. And every dollar of those contracts is fully guaranteed whether or not they perform to expectations.

In the meantime their employers, arguably the two most successful U.S. based teams in the National Hockey League both failed to make a profit last year; in spite of having three home playoff games each.

Toews is one of several players who has been highly critical of the owners for wanting the players to take a 10 to 12% cut from a wage pool that has nearly doubled since 2005 (based on the mid-point of the minimum and maximum cap). That’s when the NHL rolled out a $39 Million salary cap. A mere eight years later, the MINIMUM cap is now $54 Million (the max is over $70 Million), which means the players have gotten more than their fair of the NHL’s growth.

Sorry if I don’t buy Captain Serious' contention that the owners are killing hockey just to prove they are in charge.

I have no problem with players being paid as long as the league can afford to pay them. I define “afford” as follows; the teams in the league can be reasonably profitable and the league maintains competitive balance. Once that stops, I have issue. To me a league where 25 of 30 teams are not profitable is one that cannot “afford” its current wage structure.

And that’s before we consider that NHL revenues are disproportionately driven by ticket revenue. It bothers me as a die-hard fan that I have to pay $75 for a decent seat at the new energy barn so that the Penguins can generate a manageable net operating loss.

Let’s be clear on something, the NHL is not asking its players to work for minimum wage. The current league average salary is about $2.5 Million annually on FULLY GUARANTEED CONTRACTS. Under a realistic concession plan where the players get 50% of hockey related revenue, the same plan the NFL and NBA players agreed to; the league average would be around $2.2 Million and the highest paid players would still be near $10 Million.

I’m guessing that Shea Webber can still pay his mortgage on that.

I am tired beyond belief of hearing about the concessions the players made in the last lockout. Those concessions were necessary for the NHL to be financially viable. Does anybody really think the owners would have cancelled an entire season if they were not for the most part in dire financial straits? Put it this way, did you ever believe for one second the NFL lockout would last in to the season when that league is minting money? They pushed as hard as they could for a better CBA and then got it done before any football, and any revenue was missed.

Owners cancel seasons when it’s more costly for them to play than not to play. And apparently many of the owners feel they are in the same position now. Why they have to threaten to cancel another seasons before millionaire players get that message across is beyond me.

The players should not be complaining about give backs. They should be on their hands and knees thanking the good lord in heaven that they get paid an average of $2.5 Million per year, in a sport that struggles for acceptance in most U.S. markets. If Chicago and Pittsburgh cannot make a profit selling out a hundred plus games in a row, what do you think is happening in New Jersey, Colorado, Dallas, Tampa, and San Jose? There are at least 10 NHL cities (if not more), where the local team is barely noticed and that’s not going to change any time soon.

The salary cap was necessary to create financial stability and cost certainty for the NHL. Now the cap needs to be adjusted to a figure that allows teams to at least break even during the regular season. There is nothing wrong with that. For my money (which is exponentially less than Crosby’s or Toews’), the players need to get on board with this reality.

I am not saying the owners are blameless here; they are not. I’m on record in this blog as taking them to task for their ridiculous cap circumventing contracts that gained popularity over the last four years. It amazes me that these folks canceled an entire season to get cost certainty and then went out of their way to circumvent the rules in place. I also have issue with them signing guys to big money contracts days before the lockout started. Little or no such activity went on in 2004. I will also concede that their initial proposal to the union was off the deep end and that they cannot expect total victory this time around.

And yes, to some degree the owners need protection from themselves. How is that different than passing rules to protect the players from themselves? Critics say the owners should not overspend even though the minimum cap figure basically forces them to. Well Raffi Torres should not elbow players in the head and potentially ruin their careers. He does so anyway.

Sometimes limits are needed for the greater good.

According to Forbes, three of the five profitable teams, Montreal, Toronto, and NY Rangers generated almost all of the league’s overall profit last year. Those three teams and a few others drive the revenue figures that dictate the cap. The rest of the league cannot keep up with that growth. And it’s not a feasible solution to have Toronto subsidize 20 teams so that Scott Gomez can earn $7 Million annually to score 9 goals.

On top of which, high revenue teams like Philadelphia go on predatory (literally) spending sprees to steal players from small market teams. The goon squad throws some insane contract at Shea Webber in the hope that Nashville cannot financially match it. The Preds then have two choices; match a contract they cannot afford or have their two best players walk away in the same offseason. Good luck selling hockey in Nashville if that happens.

I do not want the NHL turning in to Major League Baseball. And the NHL’s financial model is every bit as untenable at 57% of hockey related revenue as it was before the cap.

There is a popular misconception that the players’ union is stronger now than it was in during the last lockout. The union was every bit as obstinate in 2004 and Bob Goodenow was every bit the Don Fehr clone. The owners ultimately prevailed not because the NHLPA was weak but because after one year of not playing hockey, the players finally got the message; that playing hockey under a $39 Million cap was infinitely better than doing just about anything else. Even after the owners spent a year proving their financial convictions, Goodenow was still screaming at the players not to give in. Does that make any sense to you? Does the union seem like it has the league’s best interest at heart?

It’s not about the strength of the union; it’s about how long it takes the players to face reality. In 2004 it took an entire season. Here’s hoping it takes considerably less time in 2012.

The Steep Price of Excellence for the Steelers’ Defense

I started watching football in 1980.

That qualifies as pretty bad timing if you are a Pittsburgh Steeler fan. I have the vaguest recollections of the Black and Gold’s fourth Super Bowl victory over the then Los Angeles Rams in 1979 but little else. My first true memories of Steeler football are of a 9 and 7 football team in 1980 that kicked off a decade of mediocre football in the Burgh. It was truly the only down period of Pittsburgh Steeler football in my lifetime.

I do not have memories of Joe Green and Jack Lambert eviscerating offenses with ferocity and skill. I do not have memories of Mel Blount blanketing and shutting down the top receivers in the game. I know of that only from books and the grainy highlight videos of that era. My memories are of those proud warriors on the back ends of their career when they were no longer elite players. There were occasions when they could still be great but never again was there the consistency of dominance that existed in the 1970s.

I cannot help but wonder if we are living that again in 2012.

The Steelers of the 70s got old together and the team simply could not replace those great players. That aforementioned decade of mediocrity in the '80s was the price of dominance.  For 4 Super Bowl championships in 6 years that price was a bargain.

The Steeler defense of the 2000s also got old together, again with championship results. You do not break up a dominant group that was the driving force behind an 8 year run of excellence including three Super Bowl appearances and two championships.

Eventually, the run has to end; especially given the NFL’s infinite array of methods to promote parity amongst its members. The question is, are the Steelers about to pay the same price they did in the '80s? Will it take a decade to replace the deep and talented group of stars that drove this recent success?

For what it’s worth, I thought the defense was showing its age in 2009 when the Steelers started regularly blowing 4th quarter leads; often to mediocre (or worse) opponents. To their credit, these proud warriors fought back with another brilliant season in 2010. The defense was the driving force behind an 8th Super Bowl run. That the Steelers ultimately lost that game does not change my view that keeping the unit together was the right move.

And statistically the Steelers had another strong defense last year. They ranked number 1 in the NFL in points allowed; a fairly difficult statistic to argue with. And yet I’m guessing most Steelers fans would say there was something different about last year’s unit. Somehow the defense never seemed as good as the numbers it produced, even before the unspeakable day they were Tebowed in Denver.

The 2011 defense was solid but certainly not the elite, game changing unit we’ve grown accustomed to. There was a shocking paucity of impact, game changing plays; a hallmark of the black and gold for the last 20 years. Worse than that, you got the sense that any truly elite QB was going to pick them apart. It was, adjusting for the philosophical differences of the era; very similar to the 1979 defense; a solid group but one that did not perform to the level of its immediate predecessors.

This results in part from the NFL’s incessant drive to become outdoor arena football. It’s hardly a coincidence that we are seeing record passing and scoring numbers in the league the last few years. It started with liberalized illegal contact rules that made it harder to cover. Then came the reflexive penalty flag pretty much any time a defender dropped a hard hit on a quarterback or receiver. A big component of the Steel Curtain for years was intimidation. Any receiver who went over the middle risked a trip to the hospital; and teams were well aware of that danger. Now those same receivers can run through the middle with impunity.

In short, the NFL has legislated intimidation out of the defensive game plan; a change that damaged the Steelers as much or more than any other team.

Even with the reality of these changes it’s impossible not to notice the aging of this defense. We’ve already seen age and injury take out Aaron Smith and James Farrior. Casey Hampton and James Harrison seem to be on the same path. And it’s slowly but surely taking its toll on the unit’s most indispensable player, Troy Polamalu. It seems only a matter of time before Troy loses that half-step of speed that makes him so dominant, and/or he takes one to many cracks to the cranium (if he has not already).

This transition was inevitable and quite frankly I expected it sooner than now. I’ll be the first to admit I was not overly surprised watching Peyton Manning pick the defense apart last Sunday night; most notably as a result of a complete lack of pass rush from the second quarter on. Certainly the absence of Harrison and Ryan Clark played a factor and hopefully their returns this week (or later) will be impactful. That does not change the fact that both players are aging; and Harrison is now doing so on an injured knee.

I am not suggesting things are hopeless. The Steelers used two first round picks in the last four years on defensive linemen in Ziggy Hood and Cameron Heyward. If either or both become impact players it would make a huge difference. The jury is still very much out but to this point neither has been a true difference maker. Heyward is still very young; the clock is ticking on Hood.

That means that in 2012, the Steelers two most dominant defensive players are the same as they were in 2008; Polamalu and Harrison. Given their age plus accumulated wear and tear, that’s not a sustainable formula for success at their age.

I also wonder if the zone blitz, 3-4 defense can still be effective in today’s NFL. That defense has always been predicated on obliterating the running game and then blitzing from all angles against QBs in long yardage situations. I’m not sure that approach can work in a league where teams play Madden, video game football, willingly abandoning the run and throwing 50 plus quick passes a game. New England and Green Bay have shown definitively how to beat the Dick Lebeau defense. Those same two teams were stymied twice in five years by the NY Giants; a defense built around a dominant from four. The Giants can pressure the elite passing QBs of today while still dropping 7 defenders in to coverage.

That said, any scheme can be effective with the right players. It’s possible the Lebeau scheme is outdated. It’s every bit if not more possible that the Steelers no longer have the depth of elite personnel to be a truly dominant defense. I’m pretty sure the 1974 and 2008 Steeler defenses could have dominated with virtually any scheme.  The players were simply that good.

So am I predicting doom and gloom? ABSOLUTELY NOT! I have tremendous faith in the Pittsburgh Steelers’ organization. No team in sports has been consistently better at rebuilding and retooling on the fly. Few teams in sports do a better job of maximizing the talent they have. The last eight years have been without question the second best era of Steeler football ever behind the 70s; but keep in mind this team has been a consistent championship contender for two decades. I always believe in this franchise and I still believe a playoff berth in 2012 is fully possible.

That said, sustained excellence in the NFL almost always comes at a price. Eventually teams are forced to rebuild or at least retool. I can’t help but think that the Steelers might be on that path, at least on one side of the ball.