Interim CWHL commish makes priority to unite with NWHL

[LadyStanley]

Interim CWHL head says single women’s league a priority

”That’s the goal: to get to a point where we have all the [female] players in one professional league,” Jayna Hefford told The Canadian Press. ”Without too much detail, I think the NHL being involved is the best-case scenario. How soon that can happen … I don’t know if that’s a one-year thing, a two-year thing.”
...
NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman has not indicated the NHL will be proactive in helping set up a single league.

”Having two leagues makes it more difficult for us to get involved,” Bettman said earlier this year on Calgary’s 960-Radio. ”If there were no leagues, we’d probably start one under the NHL umbrella, and I’ve told both leagues that. But I have no interest in competing with the existing leagues.”

NWHL Commissioner Dani Rylan has said only that she is always interested in discussing any proposal to improve women’s hockey.

NHL involvement will be huge for reputation and prestige as well as more fan awareness.

Click to read more...

 

[KevFu]

The big hurdle is Rylan's role in a Women's NHL and integrating her into it.

I feel like it's going to take Bettman or Hefford to be proactive trying to make it work for Rylan in order to come to fruition.

Also, I respect Bettman's position. There's no doubt that if the NHL started their own league, they'd crush the other two simply by having more resources to put behind it. But he has no interest in competing. That's avoiding a jerk move. I still think his best move would be "Anytime you want to get together and talk merger, you're welcome to use the conference room at NHL HQ, because I'd love see your leagues merge under the NHL umbrella with the two of you as chief executives of the new Women's NHL."

 

[Inkling]

In Wickenheiser's recent interview (think it was in The Athletic) she basically said that the CWHL would be happy to fold itself if the result was a single women's league under NHL sponsorship, but the NWHL does not have the same priority and that they either want to be the one league or else want someone to pay them to dissolve or merge.

 

[Ernie]

Rylan isn't in an easy position. She took investor money to start up the NWHL. I don't blame her for not wanting to leave her investors with nothing.

At some point the situation will sort itself out. If the NWHL continues to bleed money it won't have a choice but to shut down. If it becomes financially viable then it won't need to.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

How long does this last?

I think there are a lot of big-entities (like the NHL), that would want to get involved in a league, but are cautious because of the current two-league setup.

 

[snovalleyhockeyfan]

The big hurdle is Rylan's role in a Women's NHL and integrating her into it.

I feel like it's going to take Bettman or Hefford to be proactive trying to make it work for Rylan in order to come to fruition.

Also, I respect Bettman's position. There's no doubt that if the NHL started their own league, they'd crush the other two simply by having more resources to put behind it. But he has no interest in competing. That's avoiding a jerk move. I still think his best move would be "Anytime you want to get together and talk merger, you're welcome to use the conference room at NHL HQ, because I'd love see your leagues merge under the NHL umbrella with the two of you as chief executives of the new Women's NHL."

In Wickenheiser's recent interview (think it was in The Athletic) she basically said that the CWHL would be happy to fold itself if the result was a single women's league under NHL sponsorship, but the NWHL does not have the same priority and that they either want to be the one league or else want someone to pay them to dissolve or merge.

Rylan isn't in an easy position. She took investor money to start up the NWHL. I don't blame her for not wanting to leave her investors with nothing.

At some point the situation will sort itself out. If the NWHL continues to bleed money it won't have a choice but to shut down. If it becomes financially viable then it won't need to.

Sounds like a game of chicken here among all parties and Bettman's wise to not interject the NHL into it. Frankly, the bolded I'd fully agree with. I think there's enough talent to stock anywhere from six-eight franchises out of the gate, and then you can gradually expand from there as you develop more ready talent.

Hopefully this will all work out well for the women's game in the end.

 

[KevFu]

Sounds like a game of chicken here among all parties and Bettman's wise to not interject the NHL into it. Frankly, the bolded I'd fully agree with. I think there's enough talent to stock anywhere from six-eight franchises out of the gate, and then you can gradually expand from there as you develop more ready talent.

Hopefully this will all work out well for the women's game in the end.

I think it's less a game of chicken, and more like "each party is going to focus on their league and no one is going to take the initiative because the status quo is fine for them, for now."

It's going to take SOMEONE (NHL or CWHL) to come up with a proposal that protects Rylan's interests to get anything done.

And it's probably the CWHL commissioner. She should arrange a meeting and literally just ask Rylan questions about various aspects of her thinking with the end result of "what it would take for her to move her organization under the NHL umbrella?"

I'd think you'd need some kind of MLS-style "investor operator" scheme where she's pays nothing but is an "investor" of every WNHL team; because I doubt the NHL just buys her league and names her WNHL commissioner.

But the NHL can't be seen as bullying the NWHL around, because if the whole point is "growing women's hockey" you don't destroy the pro league. The NWHL has no reason to be pro-active because owning and running a fledgling league is a busy enough job, and you're not going to plan to yield control to the rich guys of the NHL. So it's got to be the non-profit CWHL leading the charge: Their goal isn't profit, but opportunities for women's hockey.

 

[KevFu]

Rylan says one league is "inevitable"

APNewsBreak: Commish: 1 women's hockey league 'inevitable'



Bettman says the NHL is watching, not acting the league because: ''If we're going to get involved, it cannot fail, which means it has to be on us.''

Rylan, who previously worked at the NHL, took exception to the comments. ''What's it like when Gary Bettman tells the media the model for our women's league doesn't work? Of course, it's really disappointing,'' said Rylan, who nonetheless called Bettman a ''gracious adviser.''

''Can we improve? No question about it,'' she added. ''If Gary and more NHL owners want to get involved in women's hockey, that's an awesome an exciting thing. Let's get started now.''

 

[Jeffrey93]

Could the NHL create enough female fans in their league to justify investing/creating/supporting/maintaining a women's professional league?

 

[Ingvar]

Could the NHL create enough female fans in their league to justify investing/creating/supporting/maintaining a women's professional league?

I don’t think the NHL wants to do anything with women’s professional league. While there are a lot rich owners in the NHL, there are enough struggling franchises as is to object against another money drain.

WNBA is a good example. It took close to 15 years and multiple folded franchises until some part of the teams started to turn profit but relocations still happen every two years. The fact that Detroit shock - three time champion owned by Bill Davidson - moved to Tulsa shows that neither success nor shared ownership with men’s team guarantee long-term viability.

My guess is that the NHL would step up only if women’s professional hockey on the whole would be about to fold - that would both maximize marketing gains and protect from accusations of being unsupportive towards women’s hockey. Even then it would be select owners investment with lip service to NHL’s support.

 

[Burke the Legend]

Rylan isn't in an easy position. She took investor money to start up the NWHL. I don't blame her for not wanting to leave her investors with nothing.

At some point the situation will sort itself out. If the NWHL continues to bleed money it won't have a choice but to shut down. If it becomes financially viable then it won't need to.

I can't imagine who is going to bail out her initial investors. Not the NHL. Didn't they have to make massive cuts to player salaries to stay in operation last year?

If the NHL is going to invest in a new unified league they are going to want a stake.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

I don’t think the NHL wants to do anything with women’s professional league. While there are a lot rich owners in the NHL, there are enough struggling franchises as is to object against another money drain.

WNBA is a good example. It took close to 15 years and multiple folded franchises until some part of the teams started to turn profit but relocations still happen every two years. The fact that Detroit shock - three time champion owned by Bill Davidson - moved to Tulsa shows that neither success nor shared ownership with men’s team guarantee long-term viability.

My guess is that the NHL would step up only if women’s professional hockey on the whole would be about to fold - that would both maximize marketing gains and protect from accusations of being unsupportive towards women’s hockey. Even then it would be select owners investment with lip service to NHL’s support.

I think you could see a nice 6-8 team set up work. 31 teams is obviously unsustainable, but if you can get some nice buy in your core region it could work.

 

[LadyStanley]

Paywall

The challenges of the two leagues becoming one are plentiful. But having a premier women’s pro league will pay dividends for the growth of the game. As the chorus of voices calling for one league grows louder, it’s time for the leaders in the women’s game to find a path to make it happen.
...
If Olympic viewership is any indication, there’s an appetite for women’s hockey. The sport’s popularity peaks every four years — almost eight million people tuned into the 2018 Olympic final between Canada and the U.S. on NBC and CBC — but it wavers in between. If a league could replicate Olympic intensity, eyeballs could follow.
...
The biggest obstacle is their differing business models — not-for-profit vs. for-profit. Those opposing philosophies mean simply merging overnight is not an option.

There’s also the matter of which teams stay and which teams go. Between the leagues, there are 11 clubs — four in Canada, six in the U.S. (including two in the Boston area) and one in China. Most observers suggest the league should start with six, possibly eight, franchises in established hockey markets to ensure its viability.

And here's where the NHL might be involved directly:

If the NHL wanted women’s hockey fully under its wing, though, they would want to do so on a “clean slate,” Bettman told the Associated Press. “If at some point the leagues say, ‘We’ve had enough, we don’t see this as a long-term solution, we’d like you to start up and we’ll discontinue operations,’ then we’ll do it. But we’re not pushing it,” he told the AP. “If we’re going to get involved, it cannot fail, which means it has to be on us.”

CWHL seems willing to fold "tomorrow" in favor of NHL branded/supported league, but the NWHL seems to want to be paid for the privilege. Might take the players "walking out" or something to get things happening.

A lot of desire, but not action.