Last week, through the efforts of our crack undercover investigative team, we brought you the first excerpt from the pages of NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman’s private diary. Today, the exposition continues…
Last week, I presented to the owners my brilliant divisional realignment idea. Those narrow-minded ingrates refused to see it for the stroke of genius it surely is. There was lots of whining. “Our travel costs would triple!” “What about traditional rivalries?” “Who wants to play in the ‘Abstract Ideas’ division?” and even “You can’t contract me!” Fools. Some of them even laughed, like the time I suggested making the goals 10 feet wide to increase scoring. They just don’t get it–it’s about excitement.
But does the Commissioner sit around moping over minor setbacks? No he does not. He comes up with new, even more brilliant ideas. I will admit that the point about tradition is a good one. The NHL has a ton of tradition. I wish there was some way to capitalize on that tradition, and combine it with my division-realignment plan, which I am convinced is a sound idea for re-generating fan interest once we’ve broken the player’s union.
Shouldn’t there be some way to combine history with innovation? I feel like I am on the cusp of a truly brilliant idea, even better than the last one. I just can’t quite put my finger on exactly what I’m trying to say. What if there were some way to re-figure the divisions while honoring some of the true founders and pioneers of the league? You know, guys like Lester Patrick, James Norris, Conn Smythe or Charles Adams?
Bah. It’d probably never work. I can hear the whining already: “Why can’t it be the ‘Wang division’?” and “Oh, I guess Ambrose O’Brien isn’t good enough to have a division named after him.” Morons, all of them. Except that Bill Wirtz. He seems like a decent fellow.