MePutPuckInNet
Registered User
I came across this comment on a message board today and it definitely got me thinking: "I think it's really time to go back to square one and a fresh league is in order if the NHL can't restructure from the top down."
The comment regarding the 'NHL needing to restructure from the top down', to paraphrase...is exactly what I think has been the real issue all along. I believe that's what they've been attempting to do - "restructure from the top down". That's also why I believe the greatest hindrance to finding a solution to the financial situation of the NHL has not only been the haphazard approach to the problem...but, more importantly, in actually defining the problem itself.
Anyone who has ever seen a civil engineering project in progress understands the basic construction process. The Empire State Building, Trump Towers, Boston's Big Dig, The Chunnel, The Great Wall of China, etc., etc. Those projects always have something in common. They always begin at the beginning. Since when is it a good idea to start the creation of any structure in the middle? [I'm sure someone out there is trying to think of an exception to the rule, and although I'm sure they exist, please....try to stick with my point].
My point being, the NHL needs to be restructured from the "ground up" and not from the "top down". What I mean by that is, the basic framework by which it's been put together is rotten. So, why not create a "new frame"?
In my opinion, the solution is to completely restructure the business. Create a corporation in which the NHL is a sole entity and owner of all the teams. Recently, there has been chatter about the NHL purchasing The Ducks. Why can't they purchase all the teams? Why not have the solutions to the financial problems built into the corporate structure itself? Corporations have complete control over what they pay their employees, the employee benefits, who they hire and who they fire. Wouldn't it make sense to incorporate the entire thing under one big corporate umbrella, where ALL employees, including the "manager's" [or those formerly known as "owners"] of each team have to abide by the same rules? Couldn't they sell corporate stock to their employees as a way of having their employees actually invested in the corporation if they chose to purchase shares?
I think if they want to change the financial "building", so to speak, they need to establish a new foundation.
The comment regarding the 'NHL needing to restructure from the top down', to paraphrase...is exactly what I think has been the real issue all along. I believe that's what they've been attempting to do - "restructure from the top down". That's also why I believe the greatest hindrance to finding a solution to the financial situation of the NHL has not only been the haphazard approach to the problem...but, more importantly, in actually defining the problem itself.
Anyone who has ever seen a civil engineering project in progress understands the basic construction process. The Empire State Building, Trump Towers, Boston's Big Dig, The Chunnel, The Great Wall of China, etc., etc. Those projects always have something in common. They always begin at the beginning. Since when is it a good idea to start the creation of any structure in the middle? [I'm sure someone out there is trying to think of an exception to the rule, and although I'm sure they exist, please....try to stick with my point].
My point being, the NHL needs to be restructured from the "ground up" and not from the "top down". What I mean by that is, the basic framework by which it's been put together is rotten. So, why not create a "new frame"?
In my opinion, the solution is to completely restructure the business. Create a corporation in which the NHL is a sole entity and owner of all the teams. Recently, there has been chatter about the NHL purchasing The Ducks. Why can't they purchase all the teams? Why not have the solutions to the financial problems built into the corporate structure itself? Corporations have complete control over what they pay their employees, the employee benefits, who they hire and who they fire. Wouldn't it make sense to incorporate the entire thing under one big corporate umbrella, where ALL employees, including the "manager's" [or those formerly known as "owners"] of each team have to abide by the same rules? Couldn't they sell corporate stock to their employees as a way of having their employees actually invested in the corporation if they chose to purchase shares?
I think if they want to change the financial "building", so to speak, they need to establish a new foundation.
