[News] Tavares done for the season

[cKy]

Originally Posted by Turner

Who names their kid Garth?

My grandmother. She's awesome.

[flamesfan1297]

Originally Posted by Turner

Who names their kid Garth?

thats the biggest question of all

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

How many Lugers do you think there would be without the Olympics?

Can you name an NHL equivalent for Luge?

The NHL is at a point where the gains from the Olympics - which is basically new fans - isn't enough to justify participating in it, without getting a fair amount of compensation from shutting down their league and risk their superstars not being able to play when the season resumes. The league continues to grow without the Olympics, so the NHL doesn't need it as much as it may have in the past, and can look at alternative methods of showcasing the game on a global scale, while getting some money from it at the same time.

Make no mistake about it though; the NHL wants everyone around the world to have interest in their game. Even though the Olympics will be in East Asia next time, the NHL would like the exposure to new fans which would benefit them in the long term. I'm sure that if the IOC was willing to work with the NHL/NHLPA wishes, then the players will still participate in future games. That's why I view this as posturing; so they can actually follow through with their threat if it comes to the point of not being involved with Pyeongchang 2018.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Joborule

The NHL is at a point where the gains from the Olympics - which is basically new fans - isn't enough to justify participating in it, without getting a fair amount of compensation from shutting down their league and risk their superstars not being able to play when the season resumes. The league continues to grow without the Olympics, so the NHL doesn't need it as much as it may have in the past, and can look at alternative methods of showcasing the game on a global scale, while getting some money from it at the same time.

I don't think any of that is true. I think the NHL needs the olympics much more than they realize. No other team sports gets the kind of exposure from that hockey gets from the winter olympics, because they're the lone major team sport there. I also don't see there being any "alternative methods" that are even on the same ballpark than the olympics.

People talk about the world cup as if it's a comparative. From my experience, in Finland it rates effectively on par or probably somewhat below the World Championships. Most people didn't watch it in 2004, not even the final. And we're pretty much the second most hockey crazy country in the world. Sure, true hockey fanatics made/would make a big deal out of it, but they're a minority even among hockey fans here.

I'm sure that if the IOC was willing to work with the NHL/NHLPA wishes, then the players will still participate in future games. That's why I view this as posturing; so they can actually follow through with their threat if it comes to the point of not being involved with Pyeongchang 2018.

The perspective here is wrong. The olympics don't need the NHL. They don't need to "work with" the NHL any more than they already are. They most certainly are not going to give hockey any special privileges, that would open up such a huge can of worms, with every other sport starting to want things.

The IIHF wants NHL in the olympics in a bad way, but they're just the middleman. And really, I'm sure many in the IIHF, which is mostly a European body, would be just fine if the olympics was about showcasing players from the European leagues. The Finnish League certainly could use the boost.

The NHL is not going to get anything from the IOC. They might get things from Hockey Canada/Finland/US etc. But they don't have anything near the kind of money that the NHL wants, not unless the NHL gives it to them, which is just moving money from one pocket to another.

Or, you could have taxpayers ultimately footing the bill. What a great plan that would be.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Can you name an NHL equivalent for Luge?

The NHL is at a point where the gains from the Olympics - which is basically new fans - isn't enough to justify participating in it, without getting a fair amount of compensation from shutting down their league and risk their superstars not being able to play when the season resumes. The league continues to grow without the Olympics, so the NHL doesn't need it as much as it may have in the past, and can look at alternative methods of showcasing the game on a global scale, while getting some money from it at the same time.

Make no mistake about it though; the NHL wants everyone around the world to have interest in their game. Even though the Olympics will be in East Asia next time, the NHL would like the exposure to new fans which would benefit them in the long term. I'm sure that if the IOC was willing to work with the NHL/NHLPA wishes, then the players will still participate in future games. That's why I view this as posturing; so they can actually follow through with their threat if it comes to the point of not being involved with Pyeongchang 2018.

Is there any evidence to support the bolded statement?

As for your question about luge - look at Slovenia, Austria, Germany and Switzerland now contributing to the NHL. Hockey continues to grow around the world. How much can be attributed to the Olympics is impossible to gauge. But it is indisputable that the game is growing globally.

[Jets4Life]

Great. I guess i could forget about winning my hockey pool, now that Tavares is done for the year...

[Alberta_Beef]

Just curious, why is everyone so set on the perspective that without NHL players hockey doesn't get exposure?

Whether NHL players are there or not, hockey with be the premier sport and the only team sport. Games like the Canada/USA gold medal game for the women do as much to grow the game as having NHL players there. If the games are entertaining, the players play with heart and fight like they did then the game will continue to grow. That will happen with or without NHL players.

[BigTuna]

I don't really think Olympic exposure helps that much.

It's not smart business to shut your season down for a month.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

Just curious, why is everyone so set on the perspective that without NHL players hockey doesn't get exposure?

Whether NHL players are there or not, hockey with be the premier sport and the only team sport. Games like the Canada/USA gold medal game for the women do as much to grow the game as having NHL players there. If the games are entertaining, the players play with heart and fight like they did then the game will continue to grow. That will happen with or without NHL players.

I see it this way. With NHL players you get the best the sport has to offer. The best individual skill, the best unit skill, the best team skill.

New people to the sport will see these players and hopefully seek them out in the NHL to continue watching them display their skill.

When the world is watching don't you want, as a sporting body, to say this is ther best we have.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I see it this way. With NHL players you get the best the sport has to offer. The best individual skill, the best unit skill, the best team skill.

New people to the sport will see these players and hopefully seek them out in the NHL to continue watching them display their skill.

When the world is watching don't you want, as a sporting body, to say this is ther best we have.

And without NHL players fans realize how awesome the game is even without the best players in the world.

They will know they aren't the best players in the world and seek out the NHL to see how great the game can be.

It works either way. IMO NHLers in the Olympics really only makes 1 difference. Jerseys sold with names on them instead of without.

edit: I also want to add this.... If there were no NHL players in the bronze medal game today I doubt you see the US lay the egg they did. Teams like Canada and the US only care about gold, the bronze means nothing to them. They have the Stanley Cup mentality where only 1 prize matters.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

And without NHL players fans realize how awesome the game is even without the best players in the world.

They will know they aren't the best players in the world and seek out the NHL to see how great the game can be.

It works either way. IMO NHLers in the Olympics really only makes 1 difference. Jerseys sold with names on them instead of without.

You maybe correct. However, the Olympics is supposed to be the pinnicale of sport (seperate debate), at the pinnicale you should find thew best the sport has to offer.

I posted earlier in this thread that I can't understand why hockey does not have a regular ( every year, or two, or four) tourney of natioanl teams best on best.

I think it was Girlysports that posted about the money that flows back into the owners of the legues/teams that have players playing in the World Cup.


If they NHL isn't going to go to the Olympics fine. However, if the NHL doesn't support a regular National best on best tourney, they are ####ing stupid IMO.

I also want to add this.... If there were no NHL players in the bronze medal game today I doubt you see the US lay the egg they did. Teams like Canada and the US only care about gold, the bronze means nothing to them. They have the Stanley Cup mentality where only 1 prize matters.

This deminishes the effort of the Finns, and slights them by saying they don't have the goal of winning Gold at the outset, which I think is wrong.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

You maybe correct. However, the Olympics is supposed to be the pinnicale of sport (seperate debate), at the pinnicale you should find thew best the sport has to offer.

I posted earlier in this thread that I can't understand why hockey does not have a regular ( every year, or two, or four) tourney of natioanl teams best on best.

I think it was Girlysports that posted about the money that flows back into the owners of the legues/teams that have players playing in the World Cup.


If they NHL isn't going to go to the Olympics fine. However, if the NHL doesn't support a regular National best on best tourney, they are ####ing stupid IMO.

I would be fine with a World Cup tournament, but I couldn't care less as it has no bearing on my belief that NHLers at the Olympics make little difference on the growth of the game.

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

This deminishes the effort of the Finns, and slights them by saying they don't have the goal of winning Gold at the outset, which I think is wrong.

You took that wrong. If anything what I am saying is a compliment to Finland.

I am saying teams like Canada and the USA don't adjust their goals after they are eliminated from gold contention, they just don't care anymore. Where as a team like Finland still cares about the bronze even though they weren't able to accomplish their overall goal.

Let's be honest here if Canada lost on Friday we wouldn't care half as much because in the words of Ricky Bobby, "If you ain't first, you're last." Quite frankly it's gold or bust for Canada and the USA.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I would be fine with a World Cup tournament, but I couldn't care less as it has no bearing on my belief that NHLers at the Olympics make little difference on the growth of the game.

So explain how you see the Olympic involvment differently than the World Cup?

You took that wrong. If anything what I am saying is a compliment to Finland.

I am saying teams like Canada and the USA don't adjust their goals after they are eliminated from gold contention, they just don't care anymore. Where as a team like Finland still cares about the bronze even though they weren't able to accomplish their overall goal.

Let's be honest here if Canada lost on Friday we wouldn't care half as much because in the words of Ricky Bobby, "If you ain't first, you're last." Quite frankly it's gold or bust for Canada and the USA.

Ah sorry

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Itse

I don't think any of that is true. I think the NHL needs the olympics much more than they realize. No other team sports gets the kind of exposure from that hockey gets from the winter olympics, because they're the lone major team sport there. I also don't see there being any "alternative methods" that are even on the same ballpark than the olympics.

The NHL no doubt knows that it is beneficial to be part of the Olympics, but they have gone enough times that continuing to go without any type of compensation for shutting down their league and risking their valuable players to injury, which could end up hurting a team by the end of the season, may not be worth it if they don't get some return from it. Exposure can only get you so far.

At the end of the day, it's up to the NHL to make their game more noticeable around the world. Not the Olympics, since it's only active for two weeks every four years. How's that momentum going to carry over the next four years?

People talk about the world cup as if it's a comparative. From my experience, in Finland it rates effectively on par or probably somewhat below the World Championships. Most people didn't watch it in 2004, not even the final. And we're pretty much the second most hockey crazy country in the world. Sure, true hockey fanatics made/would make a big deal out of it, but they're a minority even among hockey fans here.

It's been noted that the World Cup doesn't have the prestige, and will take a while to build up, but the NHL wouldn't mind if they're getting money in return, and the schedule works on their terms. The execution of the World Cup hasn't been good either since the consistency of the event has been very sporadic. You can't build up hype for an event if it's all over the map on when it occurs.

The perspective here is wrong. The olympics don't need the NHL. They don't need to "work with" the NHL any more than they already are. They most certainly are not going to give hockey any special privileges, that would open up such a huge can of worms, with every other sport starting to want things.

They don't need the NHL, but they much prefer to have the best players available if they can get them, because it will develop more hype and interest in those events. I'm sure the Olympics would love to have the best soccer players for their games, but I'm assuming FIFA prefer to keep those player for the World Cup and not take anything away from it.

The IIHF wants NHL in the olympics in a bad way, but they're just the middleman. And really, I'm sure many in the IIHF, which is mostly a European body, would be just fine if the olympics was about showcasing players from the European leagues. The Finnish League certainly could use the boost.

I'm sure the IIHF would prefer to have their European players that are playing in the NHL participate in the Olympic games though; since some take part in the annual World Championships if their season is over. The IIHF wants to put on the best hockey possible, since it will yield the best results for them.

The NHL is not going to get anything from the IOC. They might get things from Hockey Canada/Finland/US etc. But they don't have anything near the kind of money that the NHL wants, not unless the NHL gives it to them, which is just moving money from one pocket to another.

Or, you could have taxpayers ultimately footing the bill. What a great plan that would be.

I don't know what the NHL really wants. Possible money may be involved, but I'm assuming they also want more access and rights to content, so the NHL can continue to interact with their players for their marketing, and use the Olympic content in the future.

The NHL owners are viewing this as a bad investment currently, which is why they have had and owner speaking out publicly against it, executive using an injury to a marquee player as an platform, and the commissioner threatening to not go to future Olympic games. The IOC/IIHF is going to have to give them more if they want to have NHL participation continue.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Is there any evidence to support the bolded statement?

As for your question about luge - look at Slovenia, Austria, Germany and Switzerland now contributing to the NHL. Hockey continues to grow around the world. How much can be attributed to the Olympics is impossible to gauge. But it is indisputable that the game is growing globally.

Your question was how many lugers there would be without the Olympics, and my question was what sport structure is there that is the equivalent to the NHL, that engages people interest outside of two weeks every four years? The pinnacle of the sport itself is the Olympics, and there nothing else in comparison; at least as far as I know.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

So explain how you see the Olympic involvment differently than the World Cup?

I am not sure what the Olympic involvement vs World Cup matters. My point was that I don't believe NHL players in the Olympics help grow the sport any more than a great game with non-NHLers.

For what it matters I think the only reason a World Cup could help grow the game is because there would be an additional tournament for people to support their countries. More hockey is better for the game IMO. The players playing is largely irrelevant

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I am not sure what the Olympic involvement vs World Cup matters. My point was that I don't believe NHL players in the Olympics help grow the sport any more than a great game with non-NHLers.

For what it matters I think the only reason a World Cup could help grow the game is because there would be an additional tournament for people to support their countries. More hockey is better for the game IMO. The players playing is largely irrelevant

I agree the more hockey the better, but I disagree that if doesn't matter if NHL players are involved.

You want to grow you sport, put your best players on display. I would say that is matter significantly which players are playing.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

1) this is not an argument against the Olympics

I'm not against the Olympics at all. I'm responding to posts here claiming an NHL pull-out from the Olympics would be some kind of catastrophe. It wouldn't. Those of us who remember fantastic elite international hockey in the Canada/World Cup aren't stuck on the notion of the Olympics as the only vehicle for that kind of tournament.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I find this whole debate fascinating. Basically, the argument for a World Cup instead of the Olympics is that the Olympics don't really accomplish anything so what's the point?

Where did I say that? The Olympics elevates the prominence of sports, including hockey. Sure. But I have doubts about how much the Olympics results in more people playing hockey competitively, or improves the quality of play in the NHL. Let's take your luge example. Despite the elevation of the sport that the Winter Olympics provides, have you personally ever gone to live luge event? Spent any money as a fan of the sport? Encouraged your kids to participate in luge? Probably not. It's probably just a once-every-four-years curiosity. The same way hockey is to 80 per cent of the people who watch it at the Olympics (and another 15 per cent are already hardcore fans).

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I agree the more hockey the better, but I disagree that if doesn't matter if NHL players are involved.

You want to grow you sport, put your best players on display. I would say that is matter significantly which players are playing.

We will have to agree to disagree. I think quality pros (AHL, KHL, SHL.. etc) would do just fine promoting the game for us. And if Canada is able to re-implement their National team program (pre-1998) and they you would see more chemistry on the Canadian team which can be just as good to see as high skilled players with little/no chemistry.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

We will have to agree to disagree. I think quality pros (AHL, KHL, SHL.. etc) would do just fine promoting the game for us. And if Canada is able to re-implement their National team program (pre-1998) and they you would see more chemistry on the Canadian team which can be just as good to see as high skilled players with little/no chemistry.

Agree to disagree.


I can't see a National team working, those are players that can't make it pro, ECHL and lower or maybe take Senior AAA players, LOL.

We both agree that more hockey is better.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Itse

I don't think any of that is true. I think the NHL needs the olympics much more than they realize. No other team sports gets the kind of exposure from that hockey gets from the winter olympics, because they're the lone major team sport there. I also don't see there being any "alternative methods" that are even on the same ballpark than the olympics.

There will be hockey in the Olympics whether NHLers participate or not. And 90 per cent of the viewers wouldn't know the difference, just as most of us wouldn't know the difference if we were watching second-tier long-track speedskaters at the Olympics.

Originally Posted by Itse

The perspective here is wrong. The olympics don't need the NHL. They don't need to "work with" the NHL any more than they already are.

I disagree. The only way to cover the enormous expense of hosting modern Olympics Games is through hundreds of millions in sponsorship and broadcasting rights. NHL participation brings a lot of viewers to the Olympics. The IOC would be very displeased if the NHL pulled out, because NBC etc. would be very displeased.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

As for your question about luge - look at Slovenia, Austria, Germany and Switzerland now contributing to the NHL. Hockey continues to grow around the world. How much can be attributed to the Olympics is impossible to gauge. But it is indisputable that the game is growing globally.

In my opinion, global participation in hockey isn't growing so much as elite dedication to hockey is growing. And that's because of the prospect of earnings many millions of dollars playing in the NHL and KHL.