Far too often, we hear about pay-to-play teams folding—taking families’ money, refusing refunds, and claiming the money has already been spent. Yet in many cases, those explanations appear less like legitimate accounting and more like excuses designed to keep an owner from being the one left holding the bill.
Recently, I have had to counsel multiple families regarding their right to seek a refund from one such owner. Families have paid an average of $16,000 per player to this team.
The team’s report date was September 1. More than a week later, only eight skaters are reportedly in town. Players who are now looking to leave are being told their money is gone.
Let’s stop and think about that.
There is simply no reasonable scenario in which well over $100,000 of player money has legitimately been consumed by a team that has barely begun operating—particularly when the roster reportedly has only twelve skaters listed to begin with.
Anyone think this is a problem?
Anyone honestly believe more players are simply going to miraculously fall from the sky and fill out this roster?
You can answer those questions for yourselves.
The owner continues to refuse refunds, insisting that he will get a team on the ice. He says he has never had a team fold.
But eventually, reality has to enter the conversation.
You cannot build a viable roster without players. And you certainly cannot operate a program while somehow covering another $300,000 in projected operational expenses without the players, families, or revenue necessary to support it.
This is what happens when an owner begins to believe he is bigger than the game—and more important than the players and families who are actually being affected by his decisions.
Frankly, at this point, no one should be surprised.
The bottom line is simple: eventually, the truth about who is involved and what happened will get out. At that point, the game becomes bigger than the individual.
Unfortunately, that will be little comfort to the players and families who have already lost time, money, and opportunity.
And perhaps the most frustrating part is that this situation may have been avoidable. The right decision could have been made. Players could have been released. Families could have been treated fairly. And everyone could have moved forward.
Instead, money appears to have made one person short-sighted.
For this particular team, it may have made a coach completely blind.
