Free Stanley? VERY long

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
Published January 17, 2005
http://www.freep.com/sports/redwings...e_20050117.htm

HOCKEY'S HIGHEST HONOR: Free Stanley, Canada cries

BY JOHN MASSON
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

So it seems like salvaging an NHL season is about as likely now as finding a
smooth sheet of ice in the sixth circle of hell. But that doesn't mean there
won't be a scrap for the Stanley Cup anyway.

Three Edmonton, Alberta, men say they're disgusted with both sides in the
league's dispute over how to split up the ridiculous amount of cash at its
disposal. So they launched Free Stanley, a whimsical but not entirely
quixotic effort to wrest control of the world's most famous trophy from the
cold, dead clutches of the NHL and return it to its original home: Canada.

It used to be a point of pride for the NHL that its championship trophy
wasn't like those of other major sports. After all, the Stanley Cup predates
by several decades the league that now controls it.

But that storied history may help those who now say the cup should return to
its roots as the prize awarded to Canada's best hockey team -- regardless of
what league that team plays in.

The Free Stanley movement and its Web site, freestanley.com, also provide a
therapeutic outlet for angst-ridden Canadians in a country where hockey
passion is supposed to barrel across the country like an Alberta clipper the
moment the first puck of the NHL season is dropped.

Mark Suits, a Web designer and artist who helped found Free Stanley, said
the cup belongs to the fans.

"It's ridiculous that they're going to cancel the whole season and not have
the Stanley Cup because they can't figure out how to divide up hundreds of
millions of dollars," he said. "Well, if you guys don't want to play for the
Stanley Cup, that's up to you, but you can't just hold it hostage from
hockey fans."


Lord Stanley's revenge
At the root of Free Stanley is the belief that the cherished chalice doesn't
belong to the National Hockey League at all. History -- and possibly the
law -- may be on Free Stanley's side.

Suits got together with cofounders Michael Payne and Tom Thurston, who toil,
respectively, as a historian and as exhibitions director at the Alberta
provincial museum. They read up on the history of the Stanley Cup, including
much of the fine print -- available, ironically enough, on the NHL's own Web
site.

They found that Lord Stanley, Canada's sixth governor general, expressly
donated the trophy in 1892 as a challenge cup. That meant that the top team
in any hockey league in Canada could challenge the defending cup champions
for the trophy.

It has never been a secret. The words "Dominion Hockey Challenge Cup ...
>From Stanley Of Preston" are carved right into the bowl that forms the top
of the trophy.

"Long before the NHL came along, the Stanley Cup had a tremendous history as
a challenge cup," Thurston said. "There were a large number of leagues in
those days, and if all things went well and the stars aligned, you could
challenge for the Stanley Cup. It was kind of a romantic dream."

Lord Stanley -- Queen Victoria's personal representative in Canada --
appointed two trustees to sort through the applicants. The trustees were
given "absolute authority in all situations or disputes over the winner of
the cup."

It wasn't until 1947 that the trustees formally ceded control of the cup to
the NHL, provided, in part, that the NHL continued "to be the world's
leading professional hockey league as determined by its playing calibre."

Free Stanley proponents argue that turning over control of the trophy to the
league was a breach of the original trust agreement.

"Oh, we've got a good brew stewing on the legal front," Thurston said. "We
have a lawyer on contract. ... They've prepared a substantial legal opinion
based on the history of the cup and the formation of the trust."

Thurston and his fellow revolutionaries aren't willing to share that legal
opinion just yet. And since some Canadian legal experts say statutes
covering a trust formed in the 19th Century were enacted by Queen
Elizabeth -- the first one -- in 1601, any legal battle could get more than
a little murky.

"I think they have a realistic shot at it," said Moe Litman, an associate
dean and professor of trust law at the University of Alberta. Litman
certainly has reservations, but "it seems to me that the argument is there
that this year, the NHL is not the best league. They can't be, because
they're not playing. It's not an abstract requirement."

Trust lawyers would also want to track the history of each amendment to Lord
Stanley's original trust document, Litman said, especially on fundamental
changes -- like how, for example, American teams ever came to compete for
something called the Dominion Challenge Cup.

"It's as if in my will I leave everything to my nephews, and the trustees
decide to also add my nieces," Litman said. "It's been awarded to Boston,
Philadelphia and Detroit all those years. Was that an illegitimate awarding
of the cup?"

Of course not, said Tom Everett, who has spent the winter pining for the Red
Wings to return. The lifelong NHL and Red Wings fan chuckled when he heard
about the dustup in Edmonton. And he wondered why the energy isn't being
spent on getting the players back to the ice, not the Stanley Cup back to
Canada.

"You win the cup, it's a celebration of the whole year," said the Ferndale
resident, who has watched hockey for more than 50 years.

Because of the lockout, he said, the cup will just have to stay with Tampa
Bay -- last year's champions -- a little longer.


Step up to the ... skate
While there's no indication that anyone at NHL headquarters is staying up
nights worrying about losing the league's signature trophy, the official
response to the Free Stanley kerfuffle, as the Canadians would call it, is
not completely dismissive.

"The NHL is not concerned about a potential challenge for the Stanley Cup,"
said Bill Daly, the league's chief legal officer, in a statement. "If or
when it were ever to happen, we would review the relevant documentation and
make an appropriate determination. We choose not to deal in hypotheticals."

That's not the case for tens of thousands of Canadian hockey fans, who are
already wondering what a hypothetical Stanley Cup matchup between the
country's top amateur or minor league teams might look like.

That leaves the league trying to find a bright side to look on.

"It speaks to what the Stanley Cup represents. It speaks to the more than
100-year history of the cup and how it has really come to be something that
hockey fans ... around the world relate so closely to," said league
spokesman Gary Meagher. "It just adds to the lore of the cup. ... That's the
lure of the cup."

That's also how freestanley.com managed to rack up more than 70,000 hits in
its first four weeks of existence.

Because according to the founders of Free Stanley, plenty of Canadians have
soured on the NHL. But no good Canadian would ever admit to souring on the
Stanley Cup.

* * *

STANLEY'S SAGA



1892: Lord Stanley, governor general of Canada, decides "it would be a good
thing if there were a challenge cup which should be held from year to year
by the champion hockey team in the Dominion" of Canada. He arranges the
purchase of a silver bowl for 10 guineas, or about $50.

1893: Montreal Amateur Athletic Association wins first Dominion Hockey
Challenge Cup -- known to posterity as the Stanley Cup.

1910: Cup now awarded exclusively to pro teams.

1914 to 1918: About 60,000 Canadians and 118,000 Americans are killed in
World War I. Carnage doesn't prevent the Stanley Cup from being awarded each
year: to the Vancouver Millionaires, the Montreal Canadiens, the Seattle
Metropolitans (the first American Cup champions), and the Toronto Arenas.

1919: Influenza pandemic kills 20 million to 40 million worldwide, and for
the only time -- so far -- the cup isn't awarded. But not for lack of
trying: The series between the Montreal Canadiens and the Seattle
Metropolitans ends after several players come down with the flu. One player
later dies of it.

1927: NHL assumes control -- although not ownership -- of prized silver
trophy.

1936: Detroit Red Wings win first of 10 Stanley Cups.

1939: Germany invades Poland, plunging Britain's Commonwealth, including
Canada, into World War II. The war also fails to stop competition for the
cup in each of the next five dismal years.

1941: United States enters war. Red Wings contend for cup at end of
1941-42 season, but Toronto Maple Leafs hoist the chalice.

1947: Ownership of cup finally transferred, more or less legally, to NHL.

1967: NHL expands for first time in modern era, from six teams to 12.

1994-95: Owners lock out players for more than 100 days, but sides come
together to salvage short season. New Jersey Devils sweep Red Wings in cup
finals.

2004: In September, owners again lock out players in labor dispute. Owners
demand what they call "cost certainty." Players unequivocally reject what
they call "salary cap." In December, three Albertans spearhead Free Stanley
movement to pry the cup from what they call the greedy clutches of the NHL.
About 70,000 fans flood the movement's Web site, freestanley.com, in its
first four weeks of operation.

2005: Business Week magazine names NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman one of the
worst corporate managers of 2004. Hope for an NHL season fades almost
completely.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Shajen]

Hockey??

Isn't that that game they used to play for a couple weeks in late February?

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Hockey?? Isn't that that game they used to play for a couple weeks in late February? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think so. A bunch of toothless Canadiens right? I mean eh?

[IndieMatty]

Are you kidding? Jesus, I thought the hockey season was somehow longer then our calendar year.

It's a pleasure to not see it on TV.

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you kidding? Jesus, I thought the hockey season was somehow longer then our calendar year.

It's a pleasure to not see it on TV.

[/ QUOTE ]
BLASPHEMY!

[AngryCola]

I'm not a hockey fan, but I feel bad for the guys who are really into the sport.

Both sides should stop their bickering and work to get the league going again.
It's in both their own and the fans interests.

Perhaps they should hire me to get in the middle of those discussions. I'm very well known on this forum for never getting into silly disputes and always keeping a cool head.

[CrazyEyez]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps they should hire me to get in the middle of those discussions. I'm very well known on this forum for never getting into silly disputes and always keeping a cool head.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sarcasm = funnier than semantics.
[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not a hockey fan, but I feel bad for the guys who are really into the sport.

Both sides should stop their bickering and work to get the league going again.
It's in both their own and the fans interests.

Perhaps they should hire me to get in the middle of those discussions. I'm very well known on this forum for never getting into silly disputes and always keeping a cool head.

[/ QUOTE ]
I too feel sorry for both hockey fans that still exist. It occurs to me that this is just a natural death. Hockey sucks. There are therefor few fans and not enough money to support it. It's just economics.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
There are therefor few fans and not enough money to support it.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I understand, the league overstepped itself and expanded too much.
They can't support the size of the league which they have created.

The only real answer for the NHL that I hear about is contraction. The NHL will be back eventually, but it's going to have fewer teams.

By the way, not only am I not a fan, I also hate hockey. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
It's in both their own and the fans interests.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the thing that was brought up last night on PTI. The two guys who are orchestrating this whole thing, NHL Commish Gary Bettman and NHLPA Exec. Director Bob Goodenow, really don't have any money at stake and it's almost purely a personal thing now between the two of them that dates back to the 1994 lockout/strike. I guess one of the players and one of the owners met the other night on their own and had some encouraging discussions, which I think is great. Personally, I think both sides should fire their respective jackasses and hire someone who can work through this.