Is Gary Bettman's Future Tied Up in Phoenix?

When NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman assumed the reigns of power, he was given one overriding assignment by his owner employers:  Get the NHL an American television contract worthy of being one of America's "Big Four" sports.

Bettman's plan to get such a contract was to spread hockey into unfamiliar American markets in hopes that it would become an American "national sport."

To that effect (with the exception of Minnesota), hockey was expanded into Miami, Atlanta, Anaheim and Columbus.

Canadian franchises from Quebec and Winnipeg were allowed to be shifted without much resistance to Denver and Phoenix.  Even a franchise from the northern United States, Hartford, found a new home in Carolina.

But Bettman's strategy has failed.  Hockey coverage in the United States has actually shrunk.  While NBC starts picking up hockey games in January and will broadcast some of the Stanley Cup playoff games, that is no improvement from before.

But what is worse, is that hockey is not broadcast on ESPN any more and now only gets limited coverage on the small VERSUS cable network.

Still worse is that many of the new markets that Bettman has chosen, and even some of the franchises that were around before he was appointed, are losing large sums of money.

While there has been an increase in interest in hockey in some of these markets, it does not provide adequate compensation for the vast sums that the franchise owners are losing. 

Only the gaining of a rich American television contract for the future can justify the money that is being lost now.

The most notorious case is the current Phoenix saga, in which the league now owns the franchise that has not made a single penny since it moved from Winnipeg.

Phoenix has been without an owner for over a year and is now owned and operated by the NHL.

Bettman and the NHL rejected a generous package from billionaire Jim Balsillie to buy the team and move it to Hamilton, Ontario.

Now comes the contrast in policies between the contract poor NHL and the contract rich NBA.

The NBA is prepared to let bad franchises like Vancouver, Seattle and New Orleans walk without resistance; Bettman vows to fight to the death for money-losing franchises.

Bettman will not consider a change of strategy.  He will not end the losses by allowing existing money losing teams to be shifted back to Canada or even to the northern United States.

One can only conclude that hanging on to money losing franchises has become a personal issue for Bettman.

If he is the face of that policy, should he not pay the penalty if it fails?  The captain goes down with the sinking ship because he would not change course.

The longer the Phoenix situation continues, the more the stakes should rise for Gary Bettman.

Because the Phoenix situation has dragged on for so long and has cost the NHL so much money, it will be a tremendous loss of face if he is ever forced to concede to a franchise shift.

If he had admitted failure right at the start of the crisis, he could have shifted the franchise when bankruptcy was first declared with a few negative comments, and not much bother.

For the record, ex-NHL President John Ziegler allowed the Atlanta Flames to be shifted to Calgary with hardly any notice.

But if Phoenix folds or is shifted, it will have cost the NHL millions.  And there may be more financial crises, like Atlanta, Florida, Columbus and the New York Islanders looming.

Bettman keeps pointing to the success of the Chicago Blackhawks, after years of bad teams and low attendance as the reason to stay in Phoenix and other disaster areas.

But the inability to find an owner for the Coyotes, the chronic warfare between potential owners, the City of Glendale and the Goldwater Institute has dragged everything well past the deadline that was legally set to allow bidders who want to shift the franchise to have an opportunity, and cost the NHL ever more large sums of money.

So if the Coyotes get shifted, does Bettman go with them?  Will he be given more chances by the NHL owners?

Or will his choice be termination or resignation?