[News] NHL players will not participate in 2018 Olympics?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by getbak

----------------------------
Interesting that Bettman put it on the players, when it's clear the players enjoy going to the Games more than the owners like sending them.

It's the logical thing to do. It's 4 years away, and a bargaining chip. Let them think about it, don't commit, then as it draws close, ask what the players are willing to give up to get to go

[vilzeh]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The World Cup of Hockey will fail because of subjective and biased opinions about who would watch the event?

No, it wouldn't fail, but it won't get a fraction of the buzz it gets in the Olympics.

[Resolute 14]

Absolutely agree. But it would generate considerably more revenue for the NHL. That is what they care about.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

No, it wouldn't fail, but it won't get a fraction of the buzz it gets in the Olympics.

What's more important to an NHL owner? The unmeasurable, unquantifiable 'buzz' the Olympics generates, or the cold hard cash they make when they host their own World Cup in North America during a time that causes no disruption to their schedule?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Of course the NHL can re-launch the World Cup. Why on earth would you think they couldn't?

Of course the NHL can abandon the Olympics. And if the Olympics are nothing without the NHLers, why is that Bettman/the NHL's problem? That's more a problem for the IIHF and IOC. Also, no, the World Cup was not gotten rid of for the Olympics. The 2004 WCH was played after the NHL had been to the Olympics twice.

The World Cup of Hockey will fail because of subjective and biased opinions about who would watch the event?

I'm a believer in history and momentum. Sports-viewing is habit. One repeats what one regularly watches. It would be difficult to get a World Cup started again. It would be a manufactured event and it would take a few editions for people to get back into it again. Especially now that the fans have been subjected to the Olympics, it's a big deal. Everyone here will wake up a 5am on Sunday to watch Canada in the gold medal game if we're in it. Would people abandon a Saturday night in September to watch a new World Cup final? Not sure. Don't think a World Cup would create the necessary buzz that a gold medal game does.

The Olympics shouldn't be Bettman's problem but the players want to go. So much so that they bargain stuff away for it (which is asinine to me). But they want to go, they want to be part of a bigger team blah blah. This would not be the case with a World Cup since most of the players have never played in one. Bettman is a genius, he's posturing so that both the IIHF and the players give the owners something.

I think they did abandon the World Cup for the Olympics, that's why they didn't have one in 2000 after the US won in 96. They were hoping a US victory in 96 would catapult hockey interested for the first Olympics in 98 but it was half the world away. They really should have catapulted it for the 2000 World Cup. Did the US' poor showing in Nagano halt a 2000 World Cup. I don't know.

Then they tried a half-assed one in 2004 but I don't think it was successful because there hasn't been one since.

It seems so difficult to get international hockey going. Is it because of the power of the NHL? Is it because there is both a World Championship and a best-on-best tournament and the NHL calendar has never meshed with those World Championships? It seems ridiculous to me that Team Canada only meets once every 4 years and they have to practice by playing ball hockey. I know that in other sports, teams meet quite frequently. For example, USA Basketball has a summer camp every year to gel. They have Olympics every 4 years and a World Championship every 4 years.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Absolutely agree. But it would generate considerably more revenue for the NHL. That is what they care about.

They clearly care about more than that or they wouldn't mandate teams to go play games in Europe each year.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I'm a believer in history and momentum. Sports-viewing is habit. One repeats what one regularly watches. It would be difficult to get a World Cup started again. It would be a manufactured event and it would take a few editions for people to get back into it again. Especially now that the fans have been subjected to the Olympics, it's a big deal. Everyone here will wake up a 5am on Sunday to watch Canada in the gold medal game if we're in it. Would people abandon a Saturday night in September to watch a new World Cup final? Not sure. Don't think a World Cup would create the necessary buzz that a gold medal game does.

The Olympics shouldn't be Bettman's problem but the players want to go. So much so that they bargain stuff away for it (which is asinine to me). But they want to go, they want to be part of a bigger team blah blah. This would not be the case with a World Cup since most of the players have never played in one. Bettman is a genius, he's posturing so that both the IIHF and the players give the owners something.

I think they did abandon the World Cup for the Olympics, that's why they didn't have one in 2000 after the US won in 96. They were hoping a US victory in 96 would catapult hockey interested for the first Olympics in 98 but it was half the world away. They really should have catapulted it for the 2000 World Cup. Did the US' poor showing in Nagano halt a 2000 World Cup. I don't know.

Then they tried a half-assed one in 2004 but I don't think it was successful because there hasn't been one since.

It seems so difficult to get international hockey going. Is it because of the power of the NHL? Is it because there is both a World Championship and a best-on-best tournament and the NHL calendar has never meshed with those World Championships? It seems ridiculous to me that Team Canada only meets once every 4 years and they have to practice by playing ball hockey. I know that in other sports, teams meet quite frequently. For example, USA Basketball has a summer camp every year to gel. They have Olympics every 4 years and a World Championship every 4 years.

I think you are drastically over estimating the appeal and the history of the "World Cup of Hockey". It is not the historic event that carried the momentum you suggest it had. I think you are confusing what the event meant to you (I'm in the same boat), with it's mass appeal and built up brand. I do however agree with you, that these events require momentum and histroy to build up, and starting it again now would be starting from scratch, and potentially they could have build a much firmer brand with history had they kept it going by now.

The Canada cup only had any history and appeal in this country, and maybe the Soviet Union. The subsequent creation of the World Cup, which only had 2 events held 8 year appart did little to build any brand momentum anywhere for that tournament, and I'd argue only hard core hockey fans in Canada and some in the US even know that tournament existed. Point being, you are right, we are starting from a place of nothing, but it's not like that should be looked upon as an insermountable climb, and it's not like we were once at the top of the mountain with the World Cup and we threw it all away.

And the nice thing is, Canadians will always support events like this, which will give it a meaningful start, because we are starved for hockey, starved for international hockey and starved for best on best and and opportunity to tell people we are the best at this game. You asked if Canadian's would give up a Satruday night in September to watch a World Cup game? Not sure where you've been living the past few decades if you even question that.

If they start a new "World Cup of Hockey", it will be an instant success in Canada, which will have to be it's starting point, but that outcome alone will hardly be enough to justify the existance of this tournament for the NHL. It will be a battle to create relevance in the US and Europe, which is what they will care about, but that was the case with the old Canada and World Cups anyway, and it's not something they'd managed to achieve with those events when they gave up on them.

[getbak]

Here's the full press conference...

[flamesfan1297]

http://sochi2014.iihf.com/men/news/press-conference/
Here is the arcticle

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I think you are drastically over estimating the appeal and the history of the "World Cup of Hockey". It is not the historic event that carried the momentum you suggest it had. I think you are confusing what the event meant to you (I'm in the same boat), with it's mass appeal and built up brand. I do however agree with you, that these events require momentum and histroy to build up, and starting it again now would be starting from scratch, and potentially they could have build a much firmer brand with history had they kept it going by now.

The Canada cup only had any history and appeal in this country, and maybe the Soviet Union. The subsequent creation of the World Cup, which only had 2 events held 8 year appart did little to build any brand momentum anywhere for that tournament, and I'd argue only hard core hockey fans in Canada and some in the US even know that tournament existed. Point being, you are right, we are starting from a place of nothing, but it's not like that should be looked upon as an insermountable climb, and it's not like we were once at the top of the mountain with the World Cup and we threw it all away.

And the nice thing is, Canadians will always support events like this, which will give it a meaningful start, because we are starved for hockey, starved for international hockey and starved for best on best and and opportunity to tell people we are the best at this game. You asked if Canadian's would give up a Satruday night in September to watch a World Cup game? Not sure where you've been living the past few decades if you even question that.

If they start a new "World Cup of Hockey", it will be an instant success in Canada, which will have to be it's starting point, but that outcome alone will hardly be enough to justify the existance of this tournament for the NHL. It will be a battle to create relevance in the US and Europe, which is what they will care about, but that was the case with the old Canada and World Cups anyway, and it's not something they'd managed to achieve with those events when they gave up on them.

I think before the players went to the Olympics, the Canada Cup was the top of the mountain. Wayne Gretzky only played for Canada in these tournaments (81-96), nowhere else. He's not going to play in the World Championships.

I will have to defer to the Europeans in this board, did you guys watch Canada Cups? Did you watch the 2004 World Cup? Or is it all Olympics now.

My main argument is that if the NHL just cared about business and money then they should have never gone to the Olympics and kept the World Cup brand, every 4 years in September forever. People can't crave for something they don't know about (NHLers in the Olympics). But once the NHL goes to the Olympics and disrupts the World Cup cycle, that is the new top of the mountain and they can't go back. Removing something and rebooting something else would be very difficult I think. I don't think the World Cup has any cache

You're saying that Canadians hardly knew the World Cup existed. We're not talking about the hardcore. The non-hardcore are going to get up at 5am this Sunday to watch, they're not going to give up a Saturday Night in September because they might not even know there is a tournament going on.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Americans won't care about a hockey world cup, just like they don't care about the world juniors. The most watched hockey games in US history have all been from the Olympics, and it's one of the only ways you can get people from non-hockey markets down there to tune in. The press conference gives me hope though, as it just looks like more posturing like what we saw after 2010. I think Bettman knows that the Olympics are too important in growing the game to pull out, so hopefully common sense prevails and they get a better deal from the IIHF to sweeten the pot

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Americans won't care about a hockey world cup, just like they don't care about the world juniors. The most watched hockey games in US history have all been from the Olympics, and it's one of the only ways you can get people from non-hockey markets down there to tune in.

Sure. But after they tune in to watch the Olympics, do they become NHL fans? I don't know the answer to that, but I presume the NHL has the marketing data. The fact that millions of American tune in to watch figure skating at the Olympics doesn't seem to have the turned the U.S. National Figure Skating Championships into any kind of ratings success in the U.S.

[troutman]

Instead of World Cups, I'd like to see a summit series (maybe each September, or every two years). One year vs. Russia, then USA, then Sweden etc.

A 7 or 8 game series would be more compelling to me than round-robin knock-out tournaments that don't prove much of anything.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Sure. But after they tune in to watch the Olympics, do they become NHL fans? I don't know the answer to that, but I presume the NHL has the marketing data. The fact that millions of American tune in to watch figure skating at the Olympics doesn't seem to have the turned the U.S. National Figure Skating Championships into any kind of ratings success in the U.S.

Maybe, maybe not. But there's strong evidence for the Olympics growing the game of hockey at all levels in the US

Whatever it’s role in the larger cultural context, one thing is beyond dispute: the Miracle On Ice raised the profile of American hockey, giving it an adrenalin shot that is still felt today.
In 1980, there were 10,490 hockey teams in the United States. In 1990, the total was up to 14,969. Then the game really took off. By 1997, USA Hockey had registered 29,479 teams and 449,168 players. Those numbers have since continued to rise.
The fact that the 1990s were the greatest period of growth for American hockey suggests that the 1980 Olympics did not inspire thousands of kids to strap on the blades right away. But the event certainly took its place in American sports mythology, giving young hockey players a heritage to celebrate and icons to look up to. That kind of legacy is the lifeblood of any sport.
"I was 8-years-old when the U. S. won gold at the 1980 Olympics,” NHL veteran Steve Konowalchuk told ESPN. “I remember watching the games and celebrating each victory. I worked very hard on my game as a result, hoping to one day be a part of something as special as winning an Olympic gold medal."

http://proicehockey.about.com/cs/mir...cle_legacy.htm

[Hemi-Cuda]

Another reason I think that this is just more posturing is that if NHL players aren't allowed to participate in 2018, you're giving an even bigger incentive to Russian players to go back to the KHL. You might even see players of other nationalities start to do the same, since for many Olympic gold is even more important than the Stanley Cup. Hockey Canada and USA Hockey would also put up a huge protest, as with no NHL players you might as well just give Russia the gold medal

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by craigwd

No, before all else, the Olympic Games are about sport.

Where did John Montgomery, Felix Loch etc. make money beyond results and sponsorships? In amateur sport you only get paid based on where you finish. You get paid no matter what in the NHL.

When you need to take 2 jobs to sustain your life as an athlete - you're an amateur.

When you need to take 2 jobs to sustain your life as an athlete, your sport just isn't very popular.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Another reason I think that this is just more posturing is that if NHL players aren't allowed to participate in 2018, you're giving an even bigger incentive to Russian players to go back to the KHL. You might even see players of other nationalities start to do the same, since for many Olympic gold is even more important than the Stanley Cup.

I simply don't believe it. NHL players have only been in the Olympics for 16 years. Before that, all sorts of Swedes and Czechs and Russians happily played in the NHL and shrugged off the Olympics. It's not the be-all-and-end-all of hockey. For anybody.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by troutman

Instead of World Cups, I'd like to see a summit series (maybe each September, or every two years). One year vs. Russia, then USA, then Sweden etc.

A 7 or 8 game series would be more compelling to me than round-robin knock-out tournaments that don't prove much of anything.

I don't see why that would be that interesting to anyone, even Canadians, who are now used to seeing international games regurarly versus many different countries.

Single game knock-outs give a much higher chance of a surprise winner, which is desperately needed in international hockey. A seven game Canada-Finland series would be a waste of everyones time. There's no need to prove to anyone that Canada, a much much larger country with much more hockey players and money to pour into player development will beat Finland in a seven game series.

Besides, with six other relevant countries (Finland, Sweden, Czech, Slovakia, Russia, US) it would simply be too rare for everyone else.

One great upside that the olympics have over the world cup is also the chance for small countries to have their moment in the limelight. Look at tiny Slovenia this year, they're in the top 8, after beating Slovakia, convincingly beating Austria and even giving some tough times to Russia. Even Latvia had their moment of glory by upsetting Switzerland. Doing this in some other arena would never get noticed, but getting to play these games in the olympics is a huge deal for these players and their hockey fans.

Those kinds of stories are needed for hockey to grow. Unless the World Cup would be much more inclusive than it has been in the past, it's just not the same.

[flamesfan1297]

Originally Posted by Barnes

When you need to take 2 jobs to sustain your life as an athlete, your sport just isn't very popular.

Or your just no good

[troutman]

I'm not crazy for wanting to see a seven game series vs Russia or the USA, as opposed to an Olympic style tournament where Canada plays two meaningful games. I admit this is for selfish reasons, and not the best way to grow the game.