When the National Hockey League and the National Hockey League Players’ Association negotiated a new Collective Bargaining Agreement eight years ago, the failure on the part of both parties to reach a new deal resulted in the cancellation of the entire 2004-2005 season. As was well documented, the negative impact of this experience on the league’s reputation was significant. Despite all the bad publicity, the NHL was able to ride out this adverse period on the backs of talented superstars like Sidney Crosby and Alexander Ovechkin. The two entered the league in the following year, boosting the NHL’s popularity. However, should the negotiations for a new CBA result in another lost season, the repercussions from a second lockout in eight years will genuinely hurt the sport’s ability to maintain the positive momentum set by recent seasons.

In the midst of a period when a plethora of young and exciting players exist around the league, cancelling any portion of this year’s schedule would seem counterproductive with regards to what the league should be trying to do: showcasing these up-and-coming athletes.

With that in mind, the negative effect that another lockout could have in non-traditional markets would certainly be detrimental. In particular, it will likely hurt franchises such as the Los Angeles Kings, New Jersey Devils, Phoenix Coyotes, Nashville Predators, and Florida Panthers. All five teams made the playoffs last season—with the Kings and Devils locking horns in the Stanley Cup Final—and gave their fans a reason to be excited. In fact, it can be argued that the fans of these teams have never been more passionate. A work stoppage at this critical time could upset the supporters in these markets so much that any excitement they currently have would be erased by the time a new season finally gets underway. Even though fans in traditional markets will magnetically flock back when the potential lockout ends, the fans of the aforementioned teams are not likely to be as forgiving.

The most devastating effect stemming from another lockout, however, would be damage to the economic well-being in the NHL’s major markets. In big hockey markets such as  Montreal, a vast amount of money can circulate through the economy due in large part to the NHL. A season without hockey in these cities would force thousands of people to lose money that they could have regularly earned. Arena workers, including hot dog vendors and gift shop employees, for instance, will not be able to rely on their sale of hot dogs or team merchandise every time their team plays at home. Moreover, small businesses such as restaurants and bars in the areas surrounding each arena may suffer without the support of its clientele, who purchase services solely when their favorite team is playing. Ultimately, forcing these people out of commission by way of a lockout would turn out to be fundamentally taxing on each hockey-craved city around the league.

As the current CBA expires on Sept. 15, the individuals involved must recognize what is truly at stake. Beyond trying to grow the sport in non-traditional hockey markets, and above the concern that many employees might forfeit income if another lockout becomes a reality, both sides need to do whatever it takes to appease the fans. Without its fans, all the passion surrounding a league is lost.