A year ago, the HP Pavilion ice was the center of the Bay Area
sporting universe. Packed with a raucous crowd, the Shark Tank
positively quivered with excitement as the hometown team powered
past the perennial power Colorado Avalanche in the Stanley Cup
playoffs, assuring the team of its first appearance in the Western
Conference finals.
A year ago, the HP Pavilion ice was the center of the Bay Area sporting universe. Packed with a raucous crowd, the Shark Tank positively quivered with excitement as the hometown team powered past the perennial power Colorado Avalanche in the Stanley Cup playoffs, assuring the team of its first appearance in the Western Conference finals.
As disappointing as San Jose’s loss to the Calgary Flames in the Western Conference finals was, hopes were high for the organization’s future. After more than a decade, there was real hope for a triumphant draught from the Cup in the near future.
That’s all gone now. There’s been no ice, nor rabid fans, at the Shark Tank this season at all, let alone in the high-intensity glare of the postseason. In fact, there’s now a very real feeling that the Sharks’ ice is melting into the sands of time.
The National Hockey League has allowed itself to become the first American sport to lose an entire season to a strike or lockout after failing, very publicly, to reach any kind of collective bargaining agreement.
The sport hasn’t been lower. So what to do?
Here’s an idea, one that could turn the NHL’s PR nightmare into a coup.
The NHL has a real opportunity to position itself at the forefront of the most important issue facing the world of sports in nearly a century – steroids.
With Congress extending its review of performance-enhancing drugs to all major sports, the NHL has a chance to get out in front of the issue in a way other sports have failed to do.
So far, NHL officials and spokespeople have reacted to the steroids issue by pointing to the apparent dearth of use in their sport, the implication being that no major changes to the league’s nearly non-existent testing policy is necessary. The argument seems to be that because size isn’t as crucial in hockey as it is in other sports, there’s less incentive for players to use steroids.
That’s an entirely backward approach to becoming part of the solution. Rather, the NHL should take the high road, and grab much-needed headlines in the process, by agreeing to the most stringent and sweeping testing program in the history of sports.
First of all, the sport should take care in relying too much on its “hockey players don’t need steroids” argument. As the sport becomes increasingly competitive, the pressure on current and prospective players to get bigger, faster and tougher rises exponentially. Just like any other sport, the short-sighted allure of steroids is seductive. And, NHL players are as susceptible to the potential short-term recuperative benefits of steroids as athletes in any other sport.
Besides, if the NHL is as free of steroid use as it claims, that’s any even better argument for keeping it thusly unsullied through extensive testing. If there’s very little steroid use now, then there should be little risk of destroying the sport’s reputation through an embarrassing revelation regarding widespread use of performance-enhancing drugs. (Several other sports probably wish they had the same luxury.)
Of course, the ubiquitous argument against extensive steroids testing always seems to be that neither the owners, who are apparently scared about what the potential bad public relations, nor the athletes, who profess concerns about the presumption of guilt presented by regular testing, really want it.
This might seem to make it more difficult for the NHL and its poor negotiative track record to reach a consensus between owners and athletes. But no matter what differences they have, both sides should set them aside in the quest to take the lead in steroids testing.
It may very well be their sport’s salvation.
