I read with interest your article concerning the distinct advantage that the NHL presently has over the NHLPA in regards to the ongoing labour negotiations. Although there is a lot of interest in the present negotiations or lack thereof, I believe that there is another part of this story that is not receiving the same level of coverage, and that is the lack of interest by young amateur hockey players, the next generation of fans.

Presently I coach a Major Midget A hockey team and in conversation with the members it became apparent they had little or no interest in the present labour dispute. In general they feel as if the lack of NHL games is easily replaced and has been replaced by other interests. I sometimes wonder if the present situation will assist in alienating a generation of young fans much like the CFL did previously.

Thomas Eastwood


I'm not an owner or a lawyer, but the two things that bother me are:

1) The NHLPA has never taken up the owners' offer to audit their books. Likely for good reason. However, doesn't Goodenow embarrass and discredit himself when he questions the financial figures but then doesn't accept an invitation to look at the books, or to sit down with the 'arm's-length' auditor?

2) Even when owners lose money, the NHL still ensures the players ultimately get paid (i.e. historically in Ottawa, Buffalo, etc. (if I recall correctly)). However, it's unfair of the players to want such a large portion of the pie that the chance of profitability for the owners becomes less and the owners put themselves right on the thin, risky line between profitability and loss. Are the players then willing to give money out of their salaries if the owners (or the owner of any one team on which a player plays) lose money? With the incredible financial risk of being a pro sport team owner should also come an equal chance of 'spoils.' On this last point, the most successful business people in the NHL owners group are going to hold Bettman accountable here.

I agree with you - from here on in it gets a lot worse for the PA. They should have gone for the 42.5 since it's not going to go that high again, or stay that high.

Kev Wood
Winnipeg, Man.


A premium price on a substandard product always leads to trouble.

Hector Wright


I agree with everything that you say except for your assertion that it is "... ultimately fans who are responsible for huge salaries ..."

Are you serious?

Since you go on about the singular power of the owners over the players and their union, how can you suggest that these scandalous salaries are the fault of the poor fans, whose average income is about $25,000 per year and who can no longer afford to take in the odd game?

Give me a break!

Harry Black


With all due respect and in regards to your article entitled, "Imbalance of Power," I must disagree with your perspective on the recent NHLPA/NHL negotiations. In fact, it occurred to me that perhaps you should consider becoming a sportscast announcer in Communist North Korea. I think you'd feel more comfortable there. There are very few "billionaires" in North Korea that can exploit national athletes like the poor, neglected, exploited and underpaid professional athlete's of North America. Where's Don Cherry when I need him?

Goodenow and the top 40 players need to eat some crow after the damage that their last agreement wreaked on Canada's national treasure, albeit ratified by Bettman who has had his hand in diluting the talent, quality, Canadian influence, and entertainment in this glorious sport.

Ron, let's let the NHL owners and trustees get this sport back in action with the very, very generous CBA that [Ted] Saskin helped table so that we can all enjoy our game again, not to mention you and Don on Coach's Corner. Stop stirring the pot by misleading your readers into thinking that the players are somehow cheated by the last, generous offer by the NHL. Use your influence to get the players back on the ice.

Lawrence P. LeBlanc
Leesburg, VA


I believe Mr. MacLean slapped the puck head-on. The session was saveable and the union cracked. If only the owners negotiated, then we would have a season.

I also believe that the NHL did not negotiate in good faith. Negotiation is just that, a discussion and meeting on middle ground. Now think of the beginning position of NHLPA and the NHL. The NHLPA gave ground, altered viewpoints and tried to find a middle ground. The NHL — nothing — no movement or discussions. It was all or nothing. I'm disgusted by the lack of professionalism.

Scott Hardie


Normally, I couldn't care a whit about what you, or those like you in the entertainment industry, think about things. You are paid to talk, and what you say seldom matters. Heck, I do not mean offence, as I'm sure you'd care equally as little about what I'd have to say.

Especially on something as ultimately pointless as professional hockey.

That said, I stumbled accross your online piece of Feb. 17 about the strike.

I used to think you were a mindless "rah rah" company man. Hockey shines out your butt. But this column confirmed that not only are you intelligent, but you can be realistic and cynical.

It is the clearest and best analysis of the lost season I have read. And ... it shares my views (flattering myself, I guess.)

John Mundie


Ron MacLean must be sprinkling something funny on his pancakes ... of course, as the host of HNIC, he does have a vested interest, does he not?

Charles Tapp


I'm surprised you presented a view that the owners were out to "get" Goodenow and considered "the carnage of a lost season" a small price compared to getting a "total knockout" of Bob Goodenow.

You suggest it was the NHL's call. Had they wanted a season, they would have closed the deal. Exactly the same could (should) be said of the union--in fact even more so because the union clearly knew this was the best deal they were going to get.

Your wording suggests that the owners were more interested in "getting" Goodenow as opposed to sincerely trying to fix a broken system. That comes across as terribly naive, cynical and even a little awkward. We all know you are none of those things.

You've got such strong credibility in the hockey world, it's a shame to see you using poorly contrived spins and vague suggestiveness because of an allegiance with the players. It's an important issue, you're an important voice, you should try a little harder.

Michael Davie
Calgary, AB


I completely disagree with Ron regarding the hockey fiasco. I blame the owners and that horrible little man - Gary Bettman. The players deserve all they can get and I don't see any owners starving. By the way, how much does Mr. Bettman get paid?

Maxine King
Toronto


How can you say that Goodenow has done a good job? I think he is really to the one to blame for the state of the game. It is the PA that is saying you can't adjust players equipment (i.e. making goalies' pad smaller). He was the one who broke the owners 10 years ago. The owners agreed to a bad deal, but at the time salaries weren't at the ridiculous amount that the are at now. I mean, to pay a role player over $1 million when this sport is nothing more than a niche and does not have the popularity of the NFL or NBA?

I love hockey, I want them back. I can't keep shelling out the big bucks to support these salaries. The owners recognize the problem, but the PA leadership does not. The players have no idea how good they have it and how good it can still be under the owner's proposal, even with "linkage." Mr. Goodenow has taken them to the cliff and now he should be held responsible for this.

Matt Alpert
Buffalo, NY