can ice hockey history. Also fortunate for the league was that the Winter Olympics was played in 2006, which helped to boost interested for the NHL and ice hockey even more.

This far the only losers seem to be the players. They all got to sign smaller tickets due to the new collective bargain agreement. What I've never understood though, is whether some clubs really were broke prior to the lockout or if the owners just wanted to keep more money to themselves.

But why should we figure so much about that now? Hockey i

In the fall of 2004 the owners of the teams in the National Hockey League locked the players out. This was a chapter in the NHL hockey history all fans sure could have been without. For the first time in ice hockey history an entire NHL season was canceled.

Part of an NHL season has been canceled before due to disputes with the collective bargain agreement, but this time we didn't even get to watch the Stanley Cup finals. And this hasn't happened since 1919, when the Stanley Cup Final was canceled due to a worldwide influenza. That time the final would have been played between the Montreal Canadiens and the Seattle Metropolitans. Who do you think would have played in 2005?

Did you know that Montreal Canadiens' Joe Hall actually died from the flu in 1919?

When the 2004-2005 season got canceled for the first time in NHL hockey history, many people thought that this would be the end for hockey in North America. Especially in the important and wealthy US market. And I am sure this is something that must have troubled the owners of the clubs and the National Hockey League. You sure loose a lot of fans if you don't show up for an entire season and with that comes loss of revenue.

But the owners and the NHLPA kept negotiating and finally the owners came out on top. All the time they had known that they must win the fans back. So they did some serious thinking. And what they came up with was 'A Whole New Game'. Or at least that was the slogan.

For the beginning of the 2005-2006 National Hockey League season, they introduced rule changes that was to benefit the more talented players. In turn this would lead to a faster and higher scoring game, just as hockey is supposed to be played.

Prior to the beginning of the season, many doubted these new rule changes. But soon everyone could see that the new NHL had turned into a huge success. Scoring was up and the fans had returned to the arenas. A lucrative broadcasting agreement was also signed with a new television network.

The NHL had turned the crises around and things were looking better than ever before in North American ice hockey history. Also fortunate for the league was that the Winter Olympics was played in 2006, which helped to boost interested for the NHL and ice hockey even more.

This far the only losers seem to be the players. They all got to sign smaller tickets due to the new collective bargain agreement. What I've never understood though, is whether some clubs really were broke prior to the lockout or if the owners just wanted to keep more money to themselves.

But why should we figure so much about that now? Hockey is

enza. That time the final would have been played between the Montreal Canadiens and the Seattle Metropolitans. Who do you think would have played in 2005?

Did you know that Montreal Canadiens' Joe Hall actually died from the flu in 1919?

When the 2004-2005 season got canceled for the first time in NHL hockey history, many people thought that this would be the end for hockey in North America. Especially in the important and wealthy US market. And I am sure this is something that must have troubled the owners of the clubs and the National Hockey League. You sure loose a lot of fans if you don't show up for an entire season and with that comes loss of revenue.

But the owners and the NHLPA kept negotiating and finally the owners came out on top. All the time they had known that they must win the fans back. So they did some serious thinking. And what they came up with was 'A Whole New Game'. Or at least that was the slogan.

For the beginning of the 2005-2006 National Hockey League season, they introduced rule changes that was to benefit the more talented players. In turn this would lead to a faster and higher scoring game, just as hockey is supposed to be played.

Prior to the beginning of the season, many doubted these new rule changes. But soon everyone could see that the new NHL had turned into a huge success. Scoring was up and the fans had returned to the arenas. A lucrative broadcasting agreement was also signed with a new television network.

The NHL had turned the crises around and things were looking better than ever before in North American ice hockey history. Also fortunate for the league was that the Winter Olympics was played in 2006, which helped to boost interested for the NHL and ice hockey even more.

This far the only losers seem to be the players. They all got to sign smaller tickets due to the new collective bargain agreement. What I've never understood though, is whether some clubs really were broke prior to the lockout or if the owners just wanted to keep more money to themselves.

But why should we figure so much about that now? Hockey i

ubs and the National Hockey League. You sure loose a lot of fans if you don't show up for an entire season and with that comes loss of revenue.

But the owners and the NHLPA kept negotiating and finally the owners came out on top. All the time they had known that they must win the fans back. So they did some serious thinking. And what they came up with was 'A Whole New Game'. Or at least that was the slogan.

For the beginning of the 2005-2006 National Hockey League season, they introduced rule changes that was to benefit the more talented players. In turn this would lead to a faster and higher scoring game, just as hockey is supposed to be played.

Prior to the beginning of the season, many doubted these new rule changes. But soon everyone could see that the new NHL had turned into a huge success. Scoring was up and the fans had returned to the arenas. A lucrative broadcasting agreement was also signed with a new television network.

The NHL had turned the crises around and things were looking better than ever before in North American ice hockey history. Also fortunate for the league was that the Winter Olympics was played in 2006, which helped to boost interested for the NHL and ice hockey even more.

This far the only losers seem to be the players. They all got to sign smaller tickets due to the new collective bargain agreement. What I've never understood though, is whether some clubs really were broke prior to the lockout or if the owners just wanted to keep more money to themselves.

But why should we figure so much about that now? Hockey i

fit the more talented players. In turn this would lead to a faster and higher scoring game, just as hockey is supposed to be played.

Prior to the beginning of the season, many doubted these new rule changes. But soon everyone could see that the new NHL had turned into a huge success. Scoring was up and the fans had returned to the arenas. A lucrative broadcasting agreement was also signed with a new television network.

The NHL had turned the crises around and things were looking better than ever before in North American ice hockey history. Also fortunate for the league was that the Winter Olympics was played in 2006, which helped to boost interested for the NHL and ice hockey even more.

This far the only losers seem to be the players. They all got to sign smaller tickets due to the new collective bargain agreement. What I've never understood though, is whether some clubs really were broke prior to the lockout or if the owners just wanted to keep more money to themselves.

But why should we figure so much about that now? Hockey i

can ice hockey history. Also fortunate for the league was that the Winter Olympics was played in 2006, which helped to boost interested for the NHL and ice hockey even more.

This far the only losers seem to be the players. They all got to sign smaller tickets due to the new collective bargain agreement. What I've never understood though, is whether some clubs really were broke prior to the lockout or if the owners just wanted to keep more money to themselves.

But why should we figure so much about that now? Hockey is on and we all love it...