NHL Realignment: Why Did the NHLPA Reject the Proposal?

The news was broken tonight that the NHLPA shot down the NHL's proposal for realignment. The NHL issued a statement claiming they were surprised by the action. However, there are not many people who are surprised that the deal didn't go down.

For starters there never was a universal agreement on the terms of realignment. There were four teams that voted no at the Board of Directors meeting and they voiced their disagreement.

Regardless, the realignment plan will not go into effect until terms are agreed upon. With the CBA expiring at the end of this season, fans have a right to be worried about a lockout.

This is the statement that the NHLPA released late on Friday.

"

"On the evening of December 5, 2011, the NHL informed the NHLPA that they proposed to put in place a four-conference format beginning with the 2012-13 season. As realignment affects Players' terms and conditions of employment, the CBA requires the League to obtain the NHLPA's consent before implementation. Over the last month, we have had several discussions with the League and extensive dialogue with Players, most recently on an Executive Board conference call on January 1. Two substantial Player concerns emerged: (1) whether the new structure would result in increased and more onerous travel; and (2) the disparity in chances of making the playoffs between the smaller and larger divisions.

"In order to evaluate the effect on travel of the proposed new structure, we requested a draft or sample 2012-13 schedule, showing travel per team.  We were advised it was not possible for the League to do that. We also suggested reaching an agreement on scheduling conditions to somewhat alleviate Player travel concerns (e.g., the scheduling of more back-to-back games, more difficult and lengthier road trips, number of border crossings, etc.), but the League did not want to enter into such a dialogue.  The travel estimation data we received from the League indicates that many of the current Pacific and Central teams, that have demanding travel schedules under the current format, could see their travel become even more difficult. On the playoff qualification matter, we suggested discussing ways to eliminate the inherent differences in the proposed realignment, but the League was not willing to do so.

"The League set a deadline of January 6, 2012 for the NHLPA to provide its consent to the NHL's proposal.  Players' questions about travel and concerns about the playoff format have not been sufficiently addressed; as such, we are not able to provide our consent to the proposal at this time.  We continue to be ready and willing to have further discussions should the League be willing to do so."

"

What does all this mean? Read on for a full breakdown.

The NHL Rushed the NHLPA into a Decision

The NHLPA was willing to negotiate the terms of the realignment with the NHL in order to work out a fair plan. However the NHL enforced a deadline for a decision that the NHLPA was not even consulted on.

The NHL did not include the NHLPA in any realignment decisions according to Puck Daddy because they didn't have to.

Puck Daddy had this to say about the decision process.

"

According to sources with knowledge of the negotiations, the NHL didn't include the NHLPA in the formation of the realignment plan because there was no mandate in the CBA to do so. So the League created the plan, the Board of Governors passed it and the dare was made: Go ahead, kill off something that the majority of hockey teams, fans and media deemed a positive move for the NHL.

"

The NHL for all intents and purposes tried to pull a fast one on the NHLPA because the current CBA allowed it. Without taking the player's wishes into concerns, the NHL made a papal decree on the matter when they unveiled the new four conference system.

The NHL also tried to use the excuse of having to make up the schedule for the following season due to the massive realignment plans. This excuse is bogus as Michael Russo of the  Star Tribune explained in a blog entry.

Russo explained,

"

As for the deadline being because of the NHL schedule, bogus! The NHL schedulemaker was able to book Winnipeg into the league in June because there were several drafts of the schedule -- just like there could be this time. Don't buy that for a sec either.

"

With the NHL attempting to force the NHLPA into a decision before listening to their concerns, this deal was dead from the start.

Players Didn't Get to Voice Their Concerns About Travel and Playoff System

The NHLPA is a union comprised of delegates that represent every team in the NHL. Each player delegate is usually a veteran who can speak on behalf of his team's needs.

James Mirtle of TSN Radio sent out the following tweets that explain a reason why the players nixed the deal.

The NHL made a decision and basically told the NHLPA to sign on the dotted line. There was no negotiation whatsoever. 

The new realignment plan would increase travel for the regular season. Every team would play in each NHL arena under the new realignment. Road trips would not necessarily be regional. When the Dallas Stars of the Western Conference had a stretch of road games they were grouped. The Stars played the Rangers, Islanders and Devils so travel was minimal between cities.

Without guidelines that address the increased travel and the costs of travel, the NHLPA had no good reason to agree with the proposed plan.

Also without a playoff system in place the players had no reason to agree. No one signs a contract without reading the fine print.

Had the NHL provided some details on scheduling for the NHLPA and a proposed playoff solution, chances are there could have been some progress made before a full breakdown broke out.

Realignment Benefits the Owners and Not Players

The proposed realignment plan not only increases travel for the players, it hugely lines the pockets of owners. How?

Under the current system, teams play their divisional rivals six times a season. After that, teams play conference opponents and some inter-conference match-ups are sprinkled in. Under this system, owners have a good sense on how their books will look since the rotation of teams have been the same since the lockout for the most part.

Under the new system, stars like Steven Stamkos, Alex Ovechkin and Sidney Crosby would play in each arena every year. The star power of these players would draw sellout crowds. With a new team and experience showing up each homestand, fans would get to see premier players in their hometown.

While there is nothing wrong with wanting the sport to grow in popularity, the brutal schedule of back to back games that could be in different time zones is not fair to the players. This goes hand in hand with the fact that the players didn't get a chance to voice their concerns.

The NHL went about this the wrong way. The realignment plan was nothing more than a way to set up parameters for relocation and expansion. To enact a system where there would be teams in a conference of eight teams and others in a conference of seven is not fair. One had to assume that the deficit could be corrected with the relocation of teams or the creation of others.

With teams like Phoenix on the bubble and Winnipeg in an awkward spot based on their relocation from Atlanta, this realignment plan covered the NHL from dealing with individual issues.

The NHL needs to fix problems it already has. Teams in the southern part of the United States aren't the most successful. Instead of trying to fix individual issues, the NHL tried to take a huge bandaid to patch up multiple problems.

If teams are not making money then something needs to be done. Inconveniencing the rest of the league to benefit a few teams in the red is not fair. The teams that are successful on the ice and at the box office would have undergone unnecessary travel in an effort to help the poor teams increase revenue. 

It is not a surprise that the NHLPA wants to have their fair say in what is going to happen. There have already been two lockouts in professional sports this year. The NHL can't afford to be locked out again. To blame the NHLPA in this situation is a sign of bad faith because they weren't even given a chance from the start.

The NHLPA now has some leverage in CBA talks but lets hope that this doesn't lead to another lockout.

This story is in it's earliest stages so stay tuned at Bleacher Report as more information becomes available.  

Tom Urtz, Jr. is an NHL featured columnist. For NHL news, updates and alerts about players: