So why does the NHL continue to fish for viewers in the US if the national networks aren’t biting? Well, there’s an answer to this question and that answer is sticking out of the back of your television right now.
     Cable TV (CATV) started out in 1956 as a simple technological advancement. A single receiver located a suitable distance from the tall buildings and power lines of the city collect TV and FM signals without interference. These are sent along individual wires contained in one coaxial line, directly to each subscriber’s home. Because the ‘co-ax’ line is insulated, your neighbour’s blender doesn’t affect your signal quality.
     The men behind Cable TV knew that it would improve TV viewing. Little did they know that their little black wire would soon bring about a revolution in television programming — and in sports franchising. Here’s how it did.
     Initially the coaxial lines were designed with 100 circuits to carry 100 signals at once. With only three TV networks in the US (and only two in Canada) and perhaps two-dozen FM stations per market, the remaining 70-odd lines were redundant. To profit by these extra wires, local cable operators entered the ‘narrowcasting’ business. They promoted new networks intended to reach specific niche markets with such gimmicks as old movies or bad sci-fi shows or, the biggest cash cow of them all — sports.
     The effect of cable on the NHL has been obvious. The Sharks, Senators, Lightning, Panthers, Mighty Ducks, Thrashers, Blue Jackets and, ughh . . . the Wild. New sports franchises mean new cable contracts. The locale of the new franchise now is based, not on national coverage as before, but primarily by which local cable company is willing to pay the highest broadcast rights to carry the new local team. Although local, these cable companies have a profitability appeal to the sports leagues that the major national networks cannot offer. The ‘Free-TV’ networks earn revenue only through advertising. Cable has, in additional to this resource, the added profit from subscription rates. This enables cable companies to outbid the nationals for local broadcast rights. And because most cable operations are local, the greater the number of companies available for exploitation.
     Ah, but there’s a hook to all this, and one of the most loyal hockey towns in all the world was caught by it. One is not likely to find a more devout hockey enclave than Quebec City. The junior league Remparts display the banners of their many Memorial Cup victories proudly at Le Colisee. Hometown superstars like Guy Lafleur and Jean Beliveau are revered. Yet in this welcoming climate, Cable TV killed the Nordiques. How? Why?
     The Nordiques were beloved. They were even profitable, despite common misconception. But Denver has twice the population as Quebec City and therefore twice the potential number of cable subscribers. That’s twice the revenue. That’s twice the price the NHL can demand for broadcast rights and twice the money the cable stations can recoup by selling ads to sponsors.

     With Cable TV as a steady, prostrated resource of cash, NHL expansion could have continued ad infinitum, and if avarice had been the only factor involved, it would have. But like that elusive cosmological constant threatening to collapse our universe, the NHL has reached (or gone beyond the point) where it can support its own weight anymore. The failure of numerous NHL franchises since 1978 and the complete collapse of the World Hockey Association in 1979 is tall evidence that there is a limit to the number of franchises the NHL can support.
     Yes, Virginia. There is a Gary Bettman. But he won’t be coming to Norfolk any time soon. There’s no room for new teams. There are only so many days in a year and even less in a hockey season. The length of the season can only be extended marginally before crossing over into dangerous territory — namely the football and baseball seasons.
     The NHL reached its logical limits a quarter-century ago and has struggled with expansion ever since. To keep its season from treading on baseball’s domain, the NHL broke the league into divisions for the 1974-75 season, assigning teams to play most games with others in the same division to reduce travel time and, as a result, the length of the season.
     But, as the number of matches between team pairs decreased with progressive expansions in 1970, 1972 and 1974, so too did the interest in team rivalries. Establishment of divisions did create some fun rivalries but it also fractured the NHL into four individual establishments.
     Time notwithstanding, there are not enough good player out there for new teams. Even with the 30 we have, the talent has thinned to the point where ardent hockey fans like myself can barely stand to watch the game some nights. The optimistic claim is often made that there’s sufficient talent out there to accommodate the NHL now, especially since the fall of the iron curtain. If this is so, where are these players? I see a handful of real talent and lots of goons on the ice today. There certainly weren’t enough for the 17 NHL teams in 1972 when the WHA came by with an additional 12 to dilute the talent pool further. This lack of talent ultimately lead to the demise of the upstart league. Will it do the same to the NHL?