WHEN the Tampa Bay Lightning beat Calgary Flames 2-1 in the seventh game of the Stanley Cup finals, the 12 years-old franchise revelled in its ability to take ice hockey's most prized goal from one of the more established sides writes Nigel McFarlane

But amidst the celebrations, there was the downbeat realisation that another, far less savoury battle was about to commence - for the future of the National Hockey League.

NHL owners, desperate to gain control of player salaries, have threatened a 'lockout' if an acceptable deal cannot be worked out with the NHL Players Association before the current collective bargaining agreement expires in September. Minnesota Wild goaltender Dwayne Roloson, the team's player representative, expressed the feelings of fellow union members when he said, "There's no way we will accept a salary cap."

Looking at the gulf that exists between the two sides, it's easy to see why the length of a possible lockout is being measured not in days or weeks, but in years.

The bottom line - the only thing that counts in this argument - makes alarming financial reading.

The average NHL salary has risen from $572,000 in 1993-94 to $1.79 million last season, with average team payrolls escalating from $14.3 million in 1993-1994 to $45.8 million

The league's national TV contract is worth $120 million a year, minuscule compared with the other major US sports, while national television ratings have dipped from a decade-high of 2.1 per cent audience share in 1995-96 to 1.2 per cent last season, by far the lowest of the four major sports.

Should a work stoppage occur, the fallout could lead to a drastically different league when the NHL returns to the ice. Among the possible changes mentioned by people in and close to the league are a shortened regular season, rosters reduced from 20 to 18 players, the loss of established stars who will retire or play in Europe and the eventual elimination of teams.

League officials claim combined losses of $300 million by the 30 teams last year, a figure some business analysts - and players - say is overstated. While NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman has not called for a salary cap, he has frequently used the phrase "cost certainty." The players, however, view it as the same thing.

The players argue the current system is working just fine, and point to the cost-conscious Wild and the big-spending Toronto Maple Leafs - teams at opposite ends of the spectrum that both sell out their buildings and make money - as proof. Forbes Magazine's annual study reported that 10 teams made a profit last season.

"From what I understand there has been a promise made by the commissioner to the owners to deliver cost certainty," said California-based agent Pat Brisson, whose clients include Sergei Fedorov and Chris Chelios. "There are owners out there who will sit back and wait for cost certainty to be put in place because they know the value of their franchise could double or triple."

The last NHL work stoppage occurred in 1994, when the owners locked out the players and half the season was lost. The best estimates from players' advisors suggest they should be ready for a season and a half without hockey.

The players presented a proposal to owners in October 2003 that included a 5 per cent pay cut for all players, a revenue-sharing plan and a luxury tax that would kick in when salaries reach $50 million. The proposal was quickly turned down.

Whatever the merits or otherwise of both arguments, there is a shared popular belief as to how the NHL got into this mess: irresponsible spending.

New York Rangers centre Bobby Holik has emerged as one of the examples of how owners and general managers have grossly overspent. Considered by his peers to be a second-line centre at best, Holik signed a free-agent deal with the Rangers in 2002 worth more than $8 million a year. He has never scored 30 goals in a season in his 13 years in the league.

One of the ongoing disadvantages NHL owners have is the lack of significant leaguewide television revenue. Including Canadian contracts, each team gets from $4.5 million to $5 million - an amount that doesn't even cover the salary of one NHL star.

The NHL's television contract with ESPN and ABC expired at the end of last season. With the issues it is facing, the league is in a very unfavourable position for negotiating a better deal.

Without the hoped-for additional TV revenue, another question to be asked is whether maintaining a 30-team league is feasible.

Lou Nanne, a former player, coach and general manager of the old Minnesota North Stars, says that while the elimination of teams never has been discussed openly by the league, the league might eventually scale back to 24 teams.

"I go to Florida Panthers games, and they give away 6,000 tickets a night," said Nanne, who has a home in Florida. "They advertise, 'Buy one and get one free.' How would you like to be sitting next to a guy who got in free when you've got season tickets?"

ESPN hockey analyst and former NHL goalie Darren Pang reeled off the names Al MacInnis, Nicklas Lidstrom, Steve Yzerman, Mark Messier and Joe Sakic as players who will probably say goodbye to the NHL if there is a prolonged lockout. Some will retire, and others, at the end of their NHL contracts, will sign lucrative deals to play in Europe.

According to Pang, the Russian professional league is making a big push to sign top players in anticipation of a lockout. He has heard that Jaromir Jagr is one player who has expressed an interest.

"Be prepared," Pang said, "because we could end up a glorified American Hockey League."

Similarly, Roloson, 34, knows that a lockout that extends beyond one season could mean the end of his career.

"If I can stand tall now and help the players of the future I'm willing to do that," Roloson said. "Guys did it in '94 who paved the way for us. When there are work stoppages, there always will be someone who has to retire or doesn't come back. But those are the breaks, and guys are willing to take a hit for other union members.

"Our strength will be in our ability to stick together."