BROOKLYN, NY – OCTOBER 25: An official NWHL puck sits in an ice bucket prior to the game between the New York Riveters and the Connecticut Whale of the National Womens Hockey League on October 25, 2015 in Brooklyn borough of New York City. (Photo by Bruce Bennett/Getty Images)

It has been a rough 24 hours for women’s professional hockey.

Late Thursday night, David Pagnotta of The Fourth Period broke the news that the National Women’s Hockey League – the first paid professional women’s league – would be cutting players salaries in half.

NWHL Commissioner Dani Rylan held a conference call with reporters on Friday to discuss the announcement. We wrote a quick recap of what was covered; however, there is so much more to unpack.

Here are six questions surrounding the NWHL as we try to make sense of what happened.

1. How did this catch everyone off-guard a month and a half into the new season?

According to Rylan the league ‘fell short on some projections’ and ‘had to pivot and make a business decision.’ The decision appeared to come down to folding the league entirely or cut the salaries of the players in order to stay viable; the NWHL chose the latter.

General managers were informed first of the change, followed by player representatives from each team, and finally the group as a whole.

One of the most surprising things to come out of the call was finding out that the NWHL Players Association (NWHLPA) was not consulted at all during the process. Erika Lawler served as NWHLPA head in the league’s inaugural season. Lawler confirmed to Puck Daddy she is no longer serving in the role this year due to time constraints.

Keep in mind, the NWHLPA is nothing like the NHLPA.

The NHLPA has money, lawyers and a seat at the table with the league when it comes to collectively bargaining for their players. The NWHLPA is that in name only. There is no collective bargaining agreement in the NWHL to govern decisions such as this. That’s how the league was able to implement the salary cut without informing the players of their intent or need to make drastic changes.

According to Rylan, players will be given addendum to their current contracts detailing the change in salary. It’s up to the player to decide if she wants to sign it or not. It was not clear at the time what would happen should the player not sign the agreement.

2. Why does this feel oddly familiar?

Jump in the Delorean back to the beginning of the 2014-15 CWHL season.

The Boston Blades were forced to forfeit two games because they would not sign an addendum to their current contract with the CWHL. The addendum increased the player’s contract length and limited the player’s ability to get out of her CWHL agreement despite not being paid a salary for her play.

Other disagreements with the CWHL and the emergence of the NWHL provided a catalyst for players – most notably, those on the US women’s national team – to jump ship from one league to another. It turned into a tense tug-o-war between the two leagues over the rights to the players.

History has a strange way of repeating itself.

One has to wonder if the NWHL’s actions this season and the CWHL’s plan to start paying players will result in another post-season migration.

View photos NEWARK, NJ – MARCH 12: The Boston Pride hold up the Isobel Cup after defeating the Buffalo Beauts during Game 2 of the league’s inaugural championship series at the New Jersey Devils hockey House on March 12, 2016 in Newark, New Jersey. The Pride defeated the Beauts 3-1. (Photo by Andy Marlin/Getty Images for NWHL) More

3. Did anyone else in the league office, coaches, and/or general managers take a paycut aside from the players?

Short answer, no, and if we’re honest, it’s one of the more frustrating aspects of this decision.

“We run an incredibly lean team,” said Rylan. “The player salaries are a significant part of our operating expenses as you can tell by the salary cap times four. It’s the biggest expense that we have.

“Outside of that we have asked our general managers and team staff to double down on their duties to make sure that we can hit our revenue goals; to ensure that attendance is driving…that it might be an opportunity to have the players see a benefit at the end of the season if we reach those goals.”

Three out of four teams have coaches that serve as general managers. In an interview with Puck Daddy in June, Rylan explained the decision for dual roles and expanded personal responsibility for each team:

Story continues