NHL backing still the goal
Public sentiment, more than economics may be best weapon for female players
Meghan Duggan need only look around sports to get excited about what an NHL-run women’s hockey league might look like.
The NBA did it with the WNBA. Soccer leagues in Europe and the U.S. have done it. And that was enough for the 2018 U.S. Olympic gold medal-winning captain and more than 200 fellow players to take a leap of faith by pledging not to play in North America this year to try to get to the point where there is a single, economically viable professional league.
“History has told all of us that startup women’s professional leagues thrive and are very successful when working with an existing professional league,” Duggan said. “That’s definitely something I think that we would be excited about. But this is just the first step in getting there.”
The effective boycott of North America’s only remaining women’s hockey league, the National Women’s Hockey League, sent shock waves through the sport.
Now comes the big question: Will it work?
“I think they have a better chance of succeeding than some of the men’s unions have,” said Matt DelDuca, a labour and employment
attorney with Pepper Hamilton. “Strikes have not been very effective in professional sports for players because it’s hard to maintain them long term. Women’s professional sports are a little different because of the economics. I think there is a tremendous opportunity for them.”
It’s an opportunity equipment giant Bauer Hockey wants to be a part of. Vice president of marketing Mary-Kay Messier said the National Hockey League “must be in an ownership position” for any women’s league.
“I really do believe and we at Bauer believe that that is the only sustainable, viable option for ownership,” Messier said.
The NHL has given $50,000 annually each to the NWHL and the Canadian Women’s Hockey League that recently shut down. It has invited a handful of top players to participate in its All-Star skills competition and invited stakeholders to various meetings.
University at Buffalo sports law professor Nellie Drew wondered what happens next.
“The question is going to be whether the economic demand will be there to drive this,” Drew said. “Right now in 2019, do the women’s hockey players have the economic leverage to make an effective stand on this position? Maybe not. But do they have the capacity to drive public sentiment strongly enough that it will make the (NHL) consider it? Yeah, I think they do.”
NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly said the league backs “the concept of professional women’s hockey and elite women’s hockey players having the ability to play the game at a professional level,” but it is too early to commit to a bigger role.
“What is going on now with the kind of shutdown of the CWHL and now this boycott of the NWHL, it’s not ideal for anybody,” he said. “We’ll see how it all plays out. We certainly want to preserve the ability of women players to play at the highest level.
“So it’s really too early to say how that is going to play out and how the NHL’s role will or won’t be going forward. We’re going to have to be observers.”
The U.S. women’s national team in 2017 threatened to skip the world championships in Michigan and wound up getting an improved benefits package from USA Hockey. Those players will now make $3,000-$4,000 a month with the ability to earn about $71,000 annually.
They can make up to $129,000 in Olympic years with contributions from the U.S. Olympic Committee. It was a big boost for a group of women who were getting $1,000 a month for six months around the Olympics.