On Monday a piece of NHL news broke. It was a huge story, surely set to be the biggest Canadian sports story the next morning. It was the talk of the press box at the Leafs-Blue Jackets game. Every sports radio stations and TV networks scrambled to get experts from the hockey and legal worlds to weigh in.
Then, a few hours later, a totally different story blew that first right out of the water. Rogers’ game-changing deal with the NHL put everything backburner. But after the Rogers deal was digested, that first big story has come off the backburner. From the looks of it, it’ll burn pretty brightly in the hockey press for a long time to come.
On Monday, a group of 10 ex-NHL players filed a claim that the NHL purposely concealed the risks of brain injuries to players, exposing them to unnecessary dangers. The idea of such legal action had been brewing for months, but the actual filing caught most ex-NHLers by surprise. The makeup of the group is rather curious, including two ex-Leafs Rick Vaive and Gary Leeman and a slew of NHL journeyman (at best): Brad Aitken, Darren Banks, Curt Bennett, Richard Dunn, Warren Holmes, Bob Manno, Blair Stewart and Morris Titanic.
The initial reaction from other ex-NHLers was surprisingly mixed and hinted at the challenges the plaintiffs face. Greg Millen was angry on behalf of those he considers fortunate to have played “the greatest game in the world.” Bob McGill talked about it being a different era and how as a player he was always on the bubble, and would deliberately conceal an injury so as not to pass up an opportunity to play. Jeremy Roenick, in an interview on Sportsnet 590 The Fan, talked about the vast improvements in treatment he received and how teams became more enlightened by better medical information and technology. My own broadcast partner, Ric Nattress, is like many who are very aware of what is going on, but less sure how much it’s worth getting involved.
The intial reaction from other former NHLers: it’s about time. The suit’s ranks have swollen by hundreds of other ex-NHLers adding their names to the action over the past 48 hours.
The best-case scenario for the ex-players would be the league offering a settlement commensurate with the NFL’s $765-million deal with ex-players in response to a similar suit. That said, the immediate response of the NHL via deputy commissioner Bill Daly is they feel the charges are without merit and will be defended vigorously. They’re not in the mood to settle.
With a legal battle brewing, here are the main challenges ex-players face:
1) How do they challenge their own understanding of the possible injuries and ramifications from when they first started to play hockey, and particularly when they started playing at the highest levels? Injuries are a part of the game. Everyone knows that. Can the league be held accountable for that?
2) Players themselves felt the “code” was that they had to hide injuries in order to play. What accountability does the NHL have here?
3) The medical advances in the sport mirror what we have experienced in society. Almost 50 years ago, the surgery on Bobby Orr’s knee did more damage then the injuries themselves. Nowadays, Steven Stamkos can walk onto the ice in a pre-game ceremony in Tampa without any help just weeks after suffering a comparable injury. The teams were not withholding those services and treatments to their players — those treatments simply didn’t exist.
4) The often-lovable old-time trainers are, in some cases, taking a hit on this. In most cases that is unfair. They were what they were: they weren’t medical experts, but by-and-large they were passionate about the welfare of their players and their team. These weren’t guys who denied available treatments to players and forced them to go back into a game when they lacked medical clearance.
5) The scales of economy from different eras differ vastly. While salaries are in the millions of dollars now, that certainly wasn’t the case years ago. Those players who played for $150,000 or so dollars might feel that they were unfairly compensated by today’s standards.
Consider: today’s NHL teams are routinely sold for hundreds of millions of dollars; in 1983, when Ralston Purina put the St. Louis Blues up for the sale, there was not a single legitimate offer for months. The team was looking at moving to Saskatoon when Harry Ornest moved in and bought the Blues for $6 million. While individuals can make cases for being unfairly treated come contract time, fact is they weren’t getting “screwed” out of hundreds of thousands of dollars, so to look back now and try to apply current big-money standards on a different era is pointless.
But let’s be clear: I feel very badly for those players who continue to suffer long-term pain and disability from their playing days, especially if they are also experiencing financial duress as well. I hope those guys can benefit from any possible settlement of judgement. For those simply looking to score a “win” by riding the coattails of the ex-NFL players and their financial compensation…well, I wish them all the best, but they will have some work to do.