|
|
|
Wednesday, November 8, 2000
Canadian teams face several challenges
By Nancy Marrapese-Burrell
Special to ESPN.com
|
|
Running a franchise in Canada, particularly in the West, is perhaps the
most challenging job in the NHL. Teams in Calgary,
Edmonton and Vancouver are perennially having to worry about not just the
bottom line but out-and-out survival. And in the East, Ottawa is no different.
In Toronto, there are deep, deep pockets, but the Maple Leafs still are
dealing with a dollar north of the border that's worth only two-thirds of the
U.S. dollar. In Montreal, the tradition-steeped Canadiens and the
arena are for sale despite Molson's riches, and Cups don't come nearly as
often as they used to.
So, can Canadian teams still be competitive despite the difference in
currency? Is it realistic to think a Canadian team will soon be hoisting the
Stanley Cup?
Al Coates, who spent 20 years with the Calgary Flames, most recently as
their executive vice president/general manager -- and is now vice-president/GM
of Hartford Sports overseeing the Hartford Wolf Pack of the AHL and the Seawolves
of the Arena Football League -- said heading a Canadian franchise has some
unique requirements.
"The obvious problem is the difference in the dollar between the two
countries," said Coates. "You're dealing with roughly a 66- or 67-cent
dollar versus the 24 teams who are in the United States. From a competitive
standpoint, you're behind the eight-ball right away."
The Canadian teams are faced with issues even the most financially
challenged U.S. clubs don't feel as acutely.
The effects of the current collective-bargaining agreement.
Coates said part of the problem is that the horse is already out of the
barn.
"We did a lot of this stuff to ourselves," said Coates. "It wasn't
necessarily the CBA; it was how we used it and how we interpreted it, like
with entry-level salaries. A lot of the Canadian teams are in every bit as
good a shape or in better shape than a lot of the American teams. It's more
than anything else a difference in the dollar."
Coates said clubs in Canada are biding their time until the next CBA ,
which will be hashed out when the current one expires in 2004.
"I should point out that there is help to some extent being given to
the Canadian teams who qualify under the currency equalization plan," said
Coates. "All of the other teams in the league, including Toronto, contribute
to that and that meant $2.7 million or $2.8 million U.S. last year to Calgary.
So there is something being done. But the next CBA is critical. Clearly some
of these teams are going to have to get the same deals that some of the
American partners have either with the buildings, the cities or the states
versus the province."
Minnesota Wild GM Doug Risebrough, who used to serve in the Flames' front office, said he
thinks the rookie cap is a move in the right direction, but it needs to be
even more stringent.
"I think for those teams to stay competitive over the long term, it's going to have to move stronger in that area," said Risebrough.
"There's still too much money being paid to some of our young players
because of their bonus structure and they really haven't earned them yet.
Those are pretty taxing resources on teams in Canada or any team, but they
have a tougher time dealing with it because of the currency."
The U.S. is more star-driven than the team-oriented Canada.
"The star mentality is not the same in Canada as in the U.S.," pointed
out Risebrough. "It's certainly not the same as it is in the southern U.S. ... I think in the South, teams in the NHL have marketed or
tried to sell their game on the name of one or two players. In Canada, I
think they'd like to have that, but I think they understand the importance of
the team so they're more willing to sell the team there. That's another
positive for them. If they can get the team playing really well, you don't
have to have another marquee player. You just have to have a good, competitive
team."
Constant rebuilding because they can't afford to keep the players they
develop once they become stars.
"The other thing we went through the last three or four years was we
basically had to rebuild the team," said Coates. "I think Calgary has a
pretty good team right now and can compete on the ice as long as they can
retain all their players. Our plan was to accumulate 11, 12 or 13 top young
players and keep them together.
"The first thing people always say to you is
you're not going to be able to retain them once their contracts come up. But
you can retain them under the collective bargaining agreement, (so) you're going
to have those players until they're 31 years old, at least. So from that
standpoint, it's certainly more difficult, but it's not impossible. I think
the biggest problem most Canadian teams face is their lack of revenue-generating ability. I know that was certainly the case in Calgary. If there is that one player sitting out there available to you that can make the
difference in your team, you need the wherewithal to be able to go out and get him."
But having said all that, the NHL hasn't necessarily become a place where only the richest franchises win.
"We still have yet to see the top-salaried teams be the difference in
hockey," said Risebrough. "Not necessarily is the highest-salaried team
winning the Stanley Cup. In some cases, some of those teams aren't even
making the playoffs. (The defending champion Devils) are a team that has a
competitive salary that I think most Canadian teams can climb to."
If the Canadian teams can run like the Devils, and what Risebrough says is true about the salary levels, maybe things aren't so bad after all.
Nancy Marrapese-Burrell of the Boston Globe writes a weekly national NHL column for ESPN.com.
|
|
|
|
