Players throwing barbs at Gary Bettman should direct them to their own owners…

I have little regard for either “side” in what will likely soon turn into a nasty little bit of business between the greedy NHL owners and the ‘can never quite have enough money or security’ NHL players.  I guess it all makes for nice theater, but when you’ve seen the same play already so many times before, it just doesn’t have the same appeal.

(Quick aside:  I’d be sympathetic if the negotiations were really about important things, like injury prevention and jointly helping old-time players down on their luck.  I know some time is indeed being spent on player safety, and that's a good thing.  But ensuring that guys making 5 million or whatever a year get even more is not an issue worthy of a lockout/strike. If it weren’t for the absolute greed of both sides - and if they really cared about player health and safety -  they would cut back the regular-season to 70 games and end the season in May.  A shorter schedule would add to rest and recovery time and also reduce injuries.  But neither side wants to lose that juicy extra revenue that creates huge profits—and those astronomically high salaries.)

In any event, it struck me over the past couple of days that we are now beginning to see yet another round of verbal missiles sent the way of NHL owner mouthpiece Gary Bettman.  I expect that from fans.  We have the right to express our frustration with the pace of talks, especially with a new season right around the corner.  And if fans (or media folks who follow the NHL) want to blame Bettman, fair enough, I suppose.

Personally, I neither like nor loathe the commissioner.   I know many fans have despised him now for many years and feel he has done nothing to lift up the game.  Whatever your perspective on that front might be, he is just “doing his job”, as is Mr. Fehr is for the players. So - and I raised this on Twitter the other night - when players begin to take shots at Bettman (which we have seen starting to happen again in recent days, just like last time), I guess deep down I really wish those players calling out or criticizing Bettman would have the guts to make the same claims and comments publicly and direct them at their own team owners.  Because, at the end of the day, Bettman is simply doing what the owners want him—and tell him—to do.

I’m not saying Bettman does not advise, or even influence owners.  But that’s part of his job.  He's a highly paid front man who also acts as their key advisor and strategist.  Sure he has his own personal agenda, and no doubt hopes to leave a lasting legacy of his own some day.  (Didn’t one earlier short-lived commissioner/league President get himself elected to the Hockey Hall of Fame years ago- only to have his nomination, quite properly, rescinded?)  But at the end of the day, the commissioner is replaceable.  If Bettman was gone tomorrow, someone else would take his place and do much the same thing, only with a different personality.  (I'm trying to remember the last NHL "president" or "commissioner" that was truly popular.  They are like politicians, easy to dislike...)

The owners, though, are not so easy to replace.  They are the individuals who run league.  It’s their enterprise.  They make the big bucks (in a lot of cases) but they also pay the big bills- and player salaries, partly thanks to us, the fans.  Especially in recent times, new NHL owners have paid huge money just to join the exclusive "club".

We can claim that the league wouldn’t exist without players, and that’s true.  Elite players have star power and high entertainment value, and are rewarded as such.

But it definitely couldn’t exist without the guys who put up the money and take the business risk, eh?  (Side note: if this particular group of players turned their nose up at making millions, surely others would love the opportunity to play at that level.  Now, these "new" players would not be as good as the current guys, we all understand that.  But fair or not, they would no doubt be called “names” by their critics if they dared to “replace” players who weren’t satisfied with the the privilege of playing in the NHL under very favorable conditions.  On that issue, there is no question players were taken advantage of in the 1950s and ‘60s and needed help to build fairness into the “system”.  But the balance in terms of fairness is pretty good right now, I would argue.  There's tons of money for everyone…)

But here's a question:  would players taking the place of previous NHL’ers actually be acting any worse than Chris Chelios did during the last lockout, when he took the job of a guy making a few thousand dollars a year in the United Hockey League (or whatever it was called) because Chelios wanted to stay in shape and have “competition”?  Was he called names? Wasn't he already accepting money from the NHLPA strike fund, yet he took away, as I recall, the employment of a guy who really needed it? Other players did similarly in other leagues.

But again, I don’t intend to engage in a pro-owner or pro-player debate today. There are plenty of "debating points" on both sides of this issue.  I’m just saying, and you may disagree, that it’s easy for players to criticize Bettman during negotiations.  They have the right to do it, of course.  Thankfully we still have free speech.

My question still is:  would any of them dare to say—publicly or privately—the same things to the guy who actually signs their inflated pay check?  That is, their own team owner?

What do you think?