I received a phone call this evening with some extremely dark information specific to the situation in Phoenix, and how it relates to the on-going NHL/NHLPA CBA battle.

It has been suggested around a million times by people, including myself, that the Coyotes could be moved to cities like Seattle, Markham or Quebec City. As my source pointed out tonight, those rinks aren't built yet and won't be ready for a few years. The city perhaps closest to being ready is Kansas City, but the NHL is not sure if that would be a viable market. In time, there absolutely will be NHL teams in Seattle, Markham and Quebec City.

Over the last number of years, the Coyotes have been losing money somewhere in the $40mil - $50mil per season range. The City of Glendale and the NHL itself have stepped in to save the team numerous times from financial disaster. Both sides have been working to keep the team in Phoenix, and part of what's required for that to happen is a viable CBA between the NHL and the NHLPA.

Without an NHL season comes more financial hardship for the Coyotes, but the news gets worse. An upcoming election in Glendale could determine the fate of the city's support for the club. Aside from some candidates supporting the team more than others, there is an initiative on the ballot that would defeat a sales tax increase that would see funds channeled to maintain the team. Election day is November 6, and word is, current members of city council are already working to clawback elements of the deal they made with potential arena manager Greg Jamison to save the Coyotes.

With no immediate new home for the Coyotes available , defeat of the sales tax increase could be a death nail to the franchise. We're not talking relocation here. We're talking the end. Contraction. A 29 team NHL.

While all of this is going on, the NHL and NHLPA continue to not talk yet argue at the same time. You may have noticed I lean more towards supporting the owners at this point. As my source and I discussed this evening, Fehr's agenda may include a push towards forcing the NHL to use replacement players, opening the door to an antitrust lawsuit to be filed by the NHLPA. The NHL has absolutely no intention of using replacement players, nor do they have interest in the tactics being employed by the NHLPA. Both sides are trying harder to win the battle in the media than trying to win the battle at the negotiation table, and that's just sad. It's believed the entire November schedule will be cancelled on Friday, and the December schedule including the Winter Classic could be cancelled next week. My gut tells me the entire season will be lost, because neither side is demonstrating any urgency to save an 82 game season, regardless what fans are feeling. Again with the sad.

Getting back to the Phoenix situation, the NHL could take a serious look at killing the franchise as a way to send a message to the NHLPA. Keep in mind there is no CBA, and the league absolutely can end franchises without input from the players. What would this actually mean?

1. A dispersal draft would take place. The 29 other teams in the NHL would have a draft to divide up 29 assets from the Coyotes organization. The draft order would likely be in reverse order of how teams finished last season. Worded another way, Columbus would draft Oliver Ekman Larsson 1st overall, and the Oilers would get to pick between defenseman Keith Yandle, Center Martin Hanzus, or star defensive prospect Brandon Gormley. I'm a gambler, so I'd likely look at Gormley. He'd also fit with the timeline existing in Edmonton.

2. Teams could be allowed to "exchange" a contract during this process. Remember all my talk about an "Amnesty" clause in the new CBA? Try this on for size: Every team can have only so many contracts, right? So say hello to Keith Yandle on the Oilers, and goodbye to Shawn Horcoff. I'm serious, friends. Every team could use this situation as a way to dump off one ugly, ugly contract. How happy would Montreal be to trade Scott Gomez for Gormley?

I don't see how any rules are being broken here. Keep in mind there's no CBA, teams can deal contracts, and the PA cannot block the folding of a team. How much would it scare the hell out of the NHLPA if 29 teams could dump off 29 oversized contracts, and the team would fold, killing those contracts, just for laughs?

As much as I don't want to see any teams in the NHL fail, I personally find this entire suggestion hilarious. It would completely serve the NHLPA right if 50 player jobs were lost due to their unwillingness to work with the NHL and their "make whole" clause. People who still support the NHLPA and feel the NHL should just listen to their "counter-offers" have not been paying attention to the actual realities of professional sports. Every other league runs near a 50/50 revenue share.

And for those of you having a panic attack at the suggestion of teams dying, it gets worse. What's to say the NHL won't use this as an opportunity to nuke several failing franchises and to allow teams to eliminate numerous bad contracts? A number of Russian players have come out and said they'd rather play in the KHL. So give them what they want. Make the league smaller, more successful, and free of players who only see this as a cash cow. In the words of Homer Simpson, "if you don't like it, go to Russia."

The really painful part in considering all of this is, the NHL was growing leaps and bounds, especially in the US. The longer the lockout, the more damage will be done to the sport, especially in soft markets. The more damage done, perhaps the fewer teams. Fewer teams means less jobs for players. Less jobs equals a CBA loss for the NHLPA, regardless what the revenue share looks like.

Always keep in mind the owners have the bigger pile of money. They will win the CBA debate eventually no matter what the players do.

I'll have a blog tomorrow talking about the disgusting, horrifying situation that is unfolding in Edmonton. It's an absolute witchhunt in Edmonton now for Daryl Katz. The media making a big deal about his political donations. Really?

I can't wait...I need to say something now before my blog tomorrow: People have a right to donate to political parties. LOOK IT UP!!! Katz hasn't done anything wrong here at all. He has a right to donate to the party of his choice. His donations are in the public record. Meaning, if anyone looked hard enough, they'd see he gives big piles of money from the Conservative Party. So what?

Hey, I'm not even a Conservative; I'm a Liberal, and I think this is disgusting. Canadians rich and poor donate to political parties all the time. It's their right to do so. Get off the man's balls.

And some people are saying, "Katz is trying to buy influence." Duh. Doing that is older than Moses. Why else would someone donate to a political party? If you're going to slaughter Katz's donations for the purpose of developing relationships with people in power, you better be ready to turn your back on the entire energy industry in Alberta, who constantly donate to the Conservatives. OMG, do you have any idea how much money people donate for access? WAKE UP! Why is the mainstream media so completely irresponsible and abusive at times like this?

Katz gave $400,000+ to the PC party; fine. Oh, and BTW, didn't Katz give $500,000 or so to the downtown art gallery? Here's a challenge for Katz's people: Put out a list of all the people and causes he's donated to. Maybe it will shut people up if they see how much good he's brought to the city.

Join the Discussion: » 123 Comments » Post New Comment

» Goodbye and Good Luck

» Ranking Top 5 Roster Groups - Blog #1

» Mods and Rockers

» The Reverse Psychology Blog

» The 10 Least Interesting Teams in the NHL