Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
There will still be hockey in the Olympics. Does a viewer in Korea or China care or even know if they're watching NHL players? If you watched rugby in the Summer Olympics, would it be more appealing and compelling to you if professionals you'd never heard of were playing instead of amateurs you'd never heard of? Even most Americans who watch Olympic hockey don't follow the NHL. It's something they tune in to every four years to cheer on their team. Like volleyball or rowing. They won't care if Auston Matthews or Ryan Suter don't play.
The people who care about NHLers being in the Olympics are Canadians. The NHL knows this. And we're already a saturated market that isn't going to turn its back on NHL hockey because they didn't participate in the Olympics.
|
I think that's possibly the best argument you could make as far around the best interests of the game still being met with the NHL not going.
I'd still argue that in established markets like Canada and the USA or Europe that the Olympics attracts casual or new fans and not competing with the NHL for TV/eyeball time in pubs and on family TVs, having the reputation of a best on best tournament, plus having a Sidney Crosby or Ovechkin there who those casual fans know all help a lot.
But I agree with the principle that the olympics are still promoting hockey with or without the NHL.