Getting a new CBA without a lockout is bad, actually: The Contrarian returns - The Athletic

The article presents a contrarian perspective on recent NHL developments through its "Contrarian" feature, challenging reader submissions. First, it strongly disagrees with the view that the NHL and NHLPA agreeing on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) quickly and without a work stoppage is a good thing. The author argues this outcome was a one-sided victory for team owners. Players secured only minor concessions like payroll taxes and a larger playoff fund, deemed insignificant "pennies on the dollar." Conversely, owners gained significant advantages: more games played, shorter player contracts, smaller bonuses, and exclusive control over the substantial revenue from future expansion fees. The author attributes the players' apparent lack of resistance to NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman's history of imposing costly lockouts when players push back, referencing a player quote expressing resignation: "What can we do? There can’t be another lockout... It’s better to get it done." While acknowledging this approach ensures labor peace, the author contends it's unhealthy and unfair to the players, comparing the negotiations to a hockey fight where the players "turtled" immediately. They conclude this peace is good for fans wanting uninterrupted hockey but bad for the game overall, as it entrenches owner dominance.

Second, the article counters the submission claiming the NHL's 4 Nations Face-Off tournament was an "overwhelming success." The author flatly rejects this assessment, stating "No, it wasn't." The core criticism is the tournament's limited scope, featuring only four nations (Canada, USA, Sweden, Finland), thereby excluding other significant hockey countries like Slovakia and Switzerland. The author dismisses the event as lacking the prestige or history of tournaments like the World Cup of Hockey, implying its impact and success were minimal.