NHL could face big backlash if this hypothetical comes true

More On: Coronavirus

So you tell me. In this hypothetical, the NHL is given the all-clear by the proper state health authorities and local governing bodies to resume the season at some point this summer at neutral-site, remote locations with games that would be played without spectators. For the purposes of this discussion, it does not matter whether …

So you tell me.

In this hypothetical, the NHL is given the all-clear by the proper state health authorities and local governing bodies to resume the season at some point this summer at neutral-site, remote locations with games that would be played without spectators.

For the purposes of this discussion, it does not matter whether the league would attempt to complete the regular season in some fashion or move straight to the playoffs, and it does not matter the form of the schedule or tournament.

But in order for the games to be played, all involved in the endeavor — players; coaches; management; doctors; dentists; trainers; equipment people; rink operators; Zamboni drivers and ice-cleaning crews; security people; referees and linesmen; off-ice officials; NHL people; television camera-persons; media relations folks; radio and television announcers, unless they are to call the games off-site (and where would that be?); folks in the TV truck who make the telecast possible; engineers who do the same for radio; perhaps teams’ dot-com people and media; plus, any other subset of required personnel — would have to live for the duration of the season within a veritable bubble.

Of course the only way to gain admission to that bubble would be to have tested negative for COVID-19. Which means that in a country in which millions who need the test have no access to one and almost certainly will be in the same position a month or two from now, priority would be given to what, the 3,000 or 5,000 people essential to maintaining the NHL ecosystem?

How would you feel about that if you don’t know if it’s safe to resume a semblance of normal life, if you cannot get a test, but this subsection of professional athletes has been given priority? Would you be so thankful for the resumption of hockey that you would accept this scenario as the price of entertainment and business darn near as usual in this society?

Or would you resent it? Put aside the fact that the players would presumably be segregated from their families for up to a couple of months, which does seem to be more than a bit of a hardship. Is there a chance that special privileges granted to elite athletes would form a backlash against the league? What if your business hasn’t reopened or is not fully operational?

You’re still social distancing (if not still inside), but the 2019-20 NHL season is churning toward the finish line with hockey players sitting side-by-side on the bench and slamming each other into the boards and breathing on each other and spitting onto the ice.

What if travel restrictions still in effect were suspended so that players out of the country were permitted to fly back to the United States in order to play. What if you can’t visit your mother, but players can come home?

How would you feel?

You tell me.

Sources on both sides of the aisle report that there have been no discussions yet between the NHL and Players’ Association regarding specific systems issues that would have to be addressed if the season is resumed. Those talks, though, have taken place within each party’s own constituency.

“We haven’t had any discussions at the micro-level yet. All our discussions have been at the macro, 30,000-foot level,” deputy commissioner Bill Daly said in an email exchange with The Post. “We certainly have had internal discussions on [these] issues, but I wouldn’t share before discussing with the PA.”

Here’s an issue. Would teams be permitted to sign players to contracts who otherwise might not have been available and add them to the roster for the resumption of the season?

As pertains to the Rangers, for example, they might want to consider adding Nils Lundkvist, the right defenseman who would have been committed to Sweden’s World Championship team, and Morgan Barron, the Cornell junior winger whose team was targeting the national championship.

At this point, though, The Post has been told the answer is that teams would not be permitted to make such adds.

“Right now, no teams can sign players to contracts beginning in 2019-20,” PA executive director Don Fehr said via email.

Once the trade deadline passes, there is no NHL roster limit. Teams, however, are bound by the regulation that limits them to four post-deadline recalls.

One would think that more players would be necessary to help protect against a potential outbreak of injuries that might result under this unprecedented scenario. In that case, relaxation of the four-recall rule would seem to be beneficial to all.

Except that would be economically unfavorable to the NHLPA and to every player. Why? Because adding players means adding contracts and adding contracts means adding payroll and that means an increase in escrow.

It would seem that the NHL would have to agree to relax escrow in some form in order to enact an entirely sensible adjustment to the four-recall rule.

If the season is resumed, or even remains in limbo through, say, the end of May, the offseason calendar would have to be adjusted and so would the end dates of player contracts that expire on June 30. That is logical.

But what about signing bonuses that typically come due on July 1? According to the good folks at capfriendly.com, players are owed a cumulative $445,147,500 in signing bonuses over the course of the 2020-21 season. While all bonuses are not necessarily paid in full on July 1, a substantial portion of that $445 million most assured is due on that date.

Would the PA agree to defer payments? Would the NHL ask?

“Any discussion of that topic would be wrapped up into the resumption of play talks, if we are able to resume play this season,” Fehr said.

Even if the season is not resumed, one should expect the payment of July 1 signing bonuses to become a topic.

Finally, one of the features of MLB’s hypothetical plan to begin the season in Arizona in spectator-free stadia was to have players sit in the stands, rather in the dugout, as a means of observing social distancing.

That obviously could not work in hockey, but I asked Daly whether the NHL had considered expanding benches in order to comply. Absent fans, benches could be on opposite sides of the ice. But Daly said no.

“I don’t think we intend to explore something as out of the ordinary as that,” he said. “I think our hope is by the time we are playing games, some social-distancing will be relaxed. Or at least we will have the blessing of the relevant health authorities.

“If neither is the case, we likely shouldn’t be playing.”