Why the NHL won't work in Europe

Following what was a successful opening weekend in Europe to kick off the 2007-08 NHL campaign, the discussion regarding expansion to Europe has been front and center back in North America. With roughly 30% of the league's players born in Europe and the increased interest shown overseas since the lockout in 2005, it is difficult to avoid the obvious potential for NHL expansion in some of Europe's most prominent hockey countries.

Whether or not the NHL has serious intentions of eventually expanding to Europe remains to be seen. But one thing is for certain, and that is that Gary Bettman is testing the waters. After beginning two successful consecutive seasons across the pond, there is no doubt that it is clear to Bettman that there are both strong markets and strong fan bases in Europe to support permanent NHL franchises. Bettman has to now ask himself the question "Should I stay or should I go" (to quote The Clash).

Although it is easy to get caught up in the hoopla of saying 'yes' to Europe, there are many logistical and economic issues that still have be discussed and resolved before the NHL breaks ground in Europe. And despite the strong interest from the NHLPA, there are too many reasons why the NHL will not be feasible nor sustainable in Europe... whether it is 2013 or 2030.

Assessing the growth and success of the game in North America is where the discussion must begin. Since being appointed commissioner of the NHL in 1993, Gary Bettman has increased league revenues from $400 million to $2.2 billion in just under 15 years. With the increased revenue, Gary Bettman also established six new franchises for the league in non-traditional hockey markets such as Nashville, Florida, and Atlanta. However, despite the increased popularity of the game since 1993, the NHL has been forced into two labor stoppages, terrible television deals, and is now witnessing many of their expansion franchises crumbling with shrinking revenues and declining fan bases. Gary Bettman's attempt to 'Americanize' the game of hockey has resulted in a handful of hockey markets barely hanging on to their NHL lives. Of the four major sport leagues in North America (the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL), the National Hockey League has the smallest total fan base, the smallest revenue from television, and the least sponsorship of the four leagues. In sum, the NHL isn't in the best shape.

Therefore, before the NHL even discusses the possibility of expanding to Europe, the NHL must first solidify the North American game. The NHL should consider going back to strong Canadian markets like Winnipeg and Quebec and fix the game in the Southern states (even if the league must relocate these franchises) . Only once the North American game is strong can Bettman consider expansion overseas. By stabilizing the North American game, the NHL would ensure that it would not fail in both Europe and in North America if it were to attempt expansion.

As for obstacles, another serious problem is the existence of the KHL in Russia. Gary Bettman has previously stated that the National Hockey League will monitor how the KHL project evolves over the next ten years. If the KHL can succeed by establishing expansion teams in Finland, Germany and Sweden, then the NHL might attempt to create a 'European division'. This could result in a full scale war between the KHL and NHL if they both intend on establishing new expansion teams. Not helping the NHL's cause is that the KHL has already established far stronger connections with European nations interested in expanding with the KHL . For the NHL to engage in a competition with the KHL would be a recipe for destruction of the NHL in North America . The NHL has to focus on strengthening their brand domestically, not jeopardize what they have built during these past two decades over a battle with the KHL.

Competing with the other Elite Leagues in Europe will also be another hurdle for the NHL. With countries like Sweden, Finland and and the Czech Republic already having leagues of their own, it won't be easy asking the stakeholders of different leagues to shell out large expansion fees for NHL based European teams that might not work. Going back to the idea of forming a "European Confernce", does the NHL really expect European fans to suddenly stop cheering for the teams they've supported for years and instead root for 'new franchises' established by the National Hockey League? If the KHL came over to the North America, would you expect Leafs or Habs fans to just throw out their jerseys and traditions and cheer for a newly formed team brought in by a foreign league? Please.

It is also hard to ignore the logistical issues of having NHL franchises in Europe. The four main obstacles that the NHL faces with expansion to Europe are the time differential, differences in currency, the traveling during the course of an 8 month schedule, and the possible division that would transpire between North American and European players wanting to stay in their respective continents.

It is clear that if the NHL does decide to expand overseas, organizing the NHL schedule and travel arrangements will be the most obvious challenge the league will face. The league already has difficulty leveling the playing field for teams in 3 times zones in North America, so expanding to Europe and adding more time zones would set the NHL up for failure. Home ice advantage would certainly take a new meaning.

Another issue is that some of the very good hockey markets in Europe do not use the Euro as currency. Countries like the Czech Republic, Sweden and Slovakia (among others) use their own currency, which would create a disaster with respect to the salary cap. As we saw in the past, the NHL had a very difficult time with two currencies dominating the league when the Canadian and American dollars were not as equivalent as they currently are today. Also taking into consideration the lack of stability in both the American and global economy, there would be too many risks involved given the market's uncertainty.

With respect to the fans of the game who will be watching on their televisions, how will the NHL expect fans to watch their favorite team when they are playing in different time zones? Getting fans to tune into games in North America is difficult as it is for the NHL, so expecting 'average Joe' to take an afternoon off work to go home and watch hockey isn't rational. If Bettman thinks he has a bad television deal with American broadcasters now, he won't find it any easier asking them to televise games during the afternoon. One also has to consider that unlike North America, Europe is dominated by one sport (soccer). Given that both the European Football (i.e. soccer) Leagues and the NHL both have the same off-season (during the summer months), the NHL would be in direct competition with the established soccer markets in European countries. If the NHL believes this is a head-to-head competition that hockey can win, they are cheating themselves of the truth.

There is another issue that must also be considered. With expansion, it is very likely that European born players who first enter the league will not have the desire to move to North America when they can stay close to home and play in Europe. Likewise, an 18 year old from North America would rather stay close to home and play for a North American based team. Gradually, the NHL would have teams that are largely European or North American depending on where they are based, which could have an impact on attendance and popularity of the game in North America. For example, many of the best European players in the NHL play an exciting, dynamic game that can be seen by the likes of Malkin, Ovechkin, Zetterberg, Kovalev, etc... the list goes on and on. If players of this caliber were to relocate to Europe, combined with the NHL schedule that would see them make few trips overseas periodically due to traveling issues, many casual NHL fans would not be exposed to some of the best players in the game. The same could be said regarding North American players making few trips to Europe. The variety of the types players seen both overseas and in North America would be restricted. This would make it tremendously difficult for the NHL to market their 'faces of the game', especially with the limited television exposure based on time zone differences.

These are just some of the issues that need to be addressed. Undoubtedly, more will arise (as with any risky endeavor) if the discussions become serious over the next few years. But it is clear that even if the NHL was serious about making a move in Europe, it would take many years before the first NHL franchises are established. Until then, the best option for Bettman (if he is intent on making a bigger splash in Europe) would be to have a European champion (if the Elite leagues agree to such a format) play the NHL champion at season's end to determine who is the world champion. Even that, however, would face challenges from Canadian hockey traditionalists. That being said, Bettman would be the first commissioner to take his league across the ocean in a game that would have the potential to appeal to hockey fans around the world. If it works, it has the potential to put the NHL on the map as the leading global sports league.

Of course the NHL has the potential and opportunity to expand overseas. The interest is there, the money is there, and NHL is certainly on the cusp of what could be jump-starting the future of global sporting leagues. However, the bottom line is that there are simply too many hurdles for the NHL at the present time. And with Gary Bettman barely clinging on to certain non-traditional markets in America (and his own job), it is highly unlikely that he will take a chance on further expansion when many are calling for his firing. Time will tell if the NHL makes their move to Europe in the next decade... but judging by their commitment to fix the game in North America, the league is in no rush.