[News] IOC and IIHF make big Olympic concessions

[TheIronMaiden]

Is there any reason why hockey can't be in the summer Olympics?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Is there any reason why hockey can't be in the summer Olympics?

Venues play a pretty big part. No arenas in a lot of potential sites (think back to Rio, Athens, Sydney, Barcelona. It's a pretty big ask for those kind of countries to build a suitable hockey arena (heck, arenas since the tourney requires several).

Plus I think the NHLPA would not like it - cuts into the players own time.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Hockey isn’t the same! You can’t compare growth of hockey in other countries in the same conversation as growth of games that need a ball... and that’s it.

Places aren’t just popping up huge refrigerated buildings for a sport when they have 3 other hugely popular sports that can be played with items you can pick up in the forest. You can’t just grow hockey with exposure.

As Canadians, I don't think we really understand how inaccessible ice hockey is to the vast majority of the people in the world. Not only do you need the infrastructure of ice rinks, but with the expensive equipment and highly specialized training, even in Canada it has become a sport for the affluent.

Expecting Olympic hockey to substantially grow participation in places like China is like expecting a high-profile polo tournament to substantially grow participation in that sport globally.

The NHL has correctly discerned that the most promising source of new hockey fans and players is upper-middle-class Americans.

[Chingas]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Venues play a pretty big part. No arenas in a lot of potential sites (think back to Rio, Athens, Sydney, Barcelona. It's a pretty big ask for those kind of countries to build a suitable hockey arena (heck, arenas since the tourney requires several).

Plus I think the NHLPA would not like it - cuts into the players own time.

Your first point is likely most of the issue with going to the summer games.

As for your second point. Do you think that the players only want to go if it's on the leagues time? Seems odd to me. I always thought that the players position was that it should be a personal choice to represent their country and not the leagues.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Chingas

Your first point is likely most of the issue with going to the summer games.

As for your second point. Do you think that the players only want to go if it's on the leagues time? Seems odd to me. I always thought that the players position was that it should be a personal choice to represent their country and not the leagues.

I think the PA is concerned about it moreso than individual players. They are protective of time off. The way it worked, they didn't lose hardly any vacation time. Especially considering many would have been all stars.

[powderjunkie]

The Summer Olympics (IOC) have no interest in hockey.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

As Canadians, I don't think we really understand how inaccessible ice hockey is to the vast majority of the people in the world. Not only do you need the infrastructure of ice rinks, but with the expensive equipment and highly specialized training, even in Canada it has become a sport for the affluent.

Expecting Olympic hockey to substantially grow participation in places like China is like expecting a high-profile polo tournament to substantially grow participation in that sport globally.

The NHL has correctly discerned that the most promising source of new hockey fans and players is upper-middle-class Americans.

Pretty much. Hockey is a middle class sport. Even in Canada it's expensive. Can you imagine the commitment in time and money a parent would have to make for someone in a non traditional hockey country? I don't think you'll ever have the type of global exposure even close to the NBA for hockey. And because the NHL has probably come to that same conclusion, they're now being way more tough in their negotiations with IOC, and only agreeing on their own terms rather than the IOC's.

[DMac]

I too shall extend an offer to the NHL; a financial offer. Accept this offer, allow NHL players to participate in the Olympics and otherwise encourage the IOC to retain its remaining financial profits to better allow the ICO pursue its missions and goals (copied below) and I will continue to buy the NHL's product (tickets / jerseys / etc). Otherwise, as I will not think the NHL has my best interests in mind as a hockey fan/supporter (which is different from just an NHL fan/supporter), I will thus allocate my hard earned $$ to more "charitable" organisations/forms of hockey/other entertainment.



The stated mission of the IOC is to promote the Olympics throughout the world and to lead the Olympic Movement:[9]

To encourage and support the organisation, development and coordination of sport and sports competitions;
To ensure the regular celebration of the Olympic Games;
To cooperate with the competent public or private organisations and authorities in the endeavour to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace;
To act against any form of discrimination affecting the Olympic Movement;
To encourage and support the promotion of women in sport at all levels and in all structures with a view to implementing the principle of equality of men and women;

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DMac

I too shall extend an offer to the NHL; a financial offer. Accept this offer, allow NHL players to participate in the Olympics and otherwise encourage the IOC to retain its remaining financial profits to better allow the ICO pursue its missions and goals (copied below) and I will continue to buy the NHL's product (tickets / jerseys / etc). Otherwise, as I will not think the NHL has my best interests in mind as a hockey fan/supporter (which is different from just an NHL fan/supporter), I will thus allocate my hard earned $$ to more "charitable" organisations/forms of hockey/other entertainment.



The stated mission of the IOC is to promote the Olympics throughout the world and to lead the Olympic Movement:[9]

To encourage and support the organisation, development and coordination of sport and sports competitions;
To ensure the regular celebration of the Olympic Games;
To cooperate with the competent public or private organisations and authorities in the endeavour to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace;
To act against any form of discrimination affecting the Olympic Movement;
To encourage and support the promotion of women in sport at all levels and in all structures with a view to implementing the principle of equality of men and women;

I suspect they call your bluff.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Attracting hockey fans worldwide.

How much money has the NBA made in China? I’m not saying the Olympics are the only way to do that, but it is significant exposure for NHL players and therefore the league. There are a whole lot of people living in other parts of the world.

To me it’s seems too many in the league don’t have the confidence in the game itself to believe that kind of exposure can lead to good things.

The NHL went to the Olympics for two decades. If it doesn't have confidence that the Olympics benefits the NHL brand, it is because it has a great deal of empirical evidence arguing against it.

As far as China goes, keep in mind that there's a reason why the NHL is holding pre-season games there and sending players like Ovechkin to do PR stunts and run camps. The league knows there's value in the market. But it only accesses that value if it can market itself there.

Sending Alex Ovechkin, the Olympic Athletes from Russia captain, does not bring any value to the NHL. Sending Alex Ovechkin, Washington Capital, does.

[getbak]

If you have access to The Athletic, LeBrun goes more in-depth on the issue, including quotes from Bill Daly and NHLPA executive Mathieu Schneider: https://theathletic.com/1596786/2020...2022-olympics/

“It was a really positive meeting,’’ Schneider reiterated.

Specifically, the IOC is willing to cover the very costs it said ahead of the 2018 Olympics that it would no longer include, such a players’ insurance and travel costs, etc.

“Yes, certainly on all the costs, the other big issue is us being able to promote the fact that our guys are over there,’’ Schneider said. “And that’s something else that we’re going to work towards addressing and the IOC has signaled that they’re open to it. I think the word that they used several times was forming a true `partnership’ amongst the NHL players and the IOC; which is music to our ears.

“But there’s still a lot of things that need to be hashed out, worked out. We kind of scratched the surface in that meeting, but it was certainly a big first step.’’

As Schneider subtly pointed out, the Beijing Olympics in February 2022 fall under the current CBA, which doesn’t expire until September 2022.

The Beijing Games, as far as the NHLPA sees it, doesn’t need to be part of the current CBA extension talks as much as just necessitating a separate Olympic agreement between the NHL and NHLPA as soon as possible.

Certainly in a perfect world for the players, the NHL-NHLPA develop a long-term international calendar that sees the Beijing Olympics in 2022, a World Cup of Hockey in 2024, another Olympics in 2026 and a World Cup of Hockey in 2028, instead of having this constant stop and go.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The NHL went to the Olympics for two decades. If it doesn't have confidence that the Olympics benefits the NHL brand, it is because it has a great deal of empirical evidence arguing against it.

As far as China goes, keep in mind that there's a reason why the NHL is holding pre-season games there and sending players like Ovechkin to do PR stunts and run camps. The league knows there's value in the market. But it only accesses that value if it can market itself there.

Sending Alex Ovechkin, the Olympic Athletes from Russia captain, does not bring any value to the NHL. Sending Alex Ovechkin, Washington Capital, does.

What is the empirical evidence you refer to? These arguments seem more like an appeal to authority.

If Alex Ovechkin goes to the Olympics and you become a fan of his and the game of hockey, it is to the NHL’s advantage.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

It isn't the NHL job to grow the game. It also isn't their job to make the IOC and IIHF any money.

It is in their interest to do so. And the Olympics presents an opportunity to do so at relatively little cost and it would be a relatively easy negotiation to reduce that cost to next to nothing.

But the NHL is focused on making money directly on the opportunity it seems.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

What is the empirical evidence you refer to? These arguments seem more like an appeal to authority.

If Alex Ovechkin goes to the Olympics and you become a fan of his and the game of hockey, it is to the NHL’s advantage.

As long as we're playing the logical fallacy game, you're arguing - among others - appeal to emotion.

And the empirical evidence I refer to is the reams of data the NHL will have collected on what impact the Olympics has on NHL TV viewership, ticket sales, merchandise sales, fan engagement, etc. Both month to month within a season and comparative in seasons before, during and after Olympic years.

There had been rumblings for *years* about how little value the governors saw in the proposition. Even before the Vancouver Olympics, there was some speculation that 2010 might end up the last time the NHL went - and that was before John Tavares' injury raised the risk profile substantially from their perspective.

[Duffalufagus]

The NHL has all the hand here. Olympic Men's Hockey is the star attraction by a comfortable margin at the Olympics. When it features NHL players. Without them figure skating is top billing, which I think we can all agree does scream big time event.

The IOC needs the NHL'ers and I think they realized it after 2018.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by DMac

I too shall extend an offer to the NHL; a financial offer. Accept this offer, allow NHL players to participate in the Olympics and otherwise encourage the IOC to retain its remaining financial profits to better allow the ICO pursue its missions and goals (copied below) and I will continue to buy the NHL's product (tickets / jerseys / etc). Otherwise, as I will not think the NHL has my best interests in mind as a hockey fan/supporter (which is different from just an NHL fan/supporter), I will thus allocate my hard earned $$ to more "charitable" organisations/forms of hockey/other entertainment.



The stated mission of the IOC is to promote the Olympics throughout the world and to lead the Olympic Movement:[9]

To encourage and support the organisation, development and coordination of sport and sports competitions;
To ensure the regular celebration of the Olympic Games;
To cooperate with the competent public or private organisations and authorities in the endeavour to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace;
To act against any form of discrimination affecting the Olympic Movement;
To encourage and support the promotion of women in sport at all levels and in all structures with a view to implementing the principle of equality of men and women;

it's adorable if you believe the IOC actually follows their own mission statement, or that anything in the mission statement ever comes before first enriching themselves.

as to growing world wide participation, Cliff said it best a couple of posts back, and others had good posts.
it's just not going to happen.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

As long as we're playing the logical fallacy game, you're arguing - among others - appeal to emotion.

And the empirical evidence I refer to is the reams of data the NHL will have collected on what impact the Olympics has on NHL TV viewership, ticket sales, merchandise sales, fan engagement, etc. Both month to month within a season and comparative in seasons before, during and after Olympic years.

There had been rumblings for *years* about how little value the governors saw in the proposition. Even before the Vancouver Olympics, there was some speculation that 2010 might end up the last time the NHL went - and that was before John Tavares' injury raised the risk profile substantially from their perspective.

While this is true, I do think that even in the world of pro sports there is still room for emotions, and I think there is ultimately a deep desire in the hockey world to have a true best-on-best international tournament, and the very "meh" reception the NHL's IMO somewhat fumbled attempt at creating their own World Cup I think showed that the Olympics can offer something people want. While the league itself has likely relatively little to gain, at the end of the day the owners call the shots, and owning a sports team is about a lot of things, not just winning the Stanley Cup or making profit.

I wouldn't be surprised if behind the scenes quite a few team owners are thinking "man, I really want to see Olympic hockey like it was in Vancouver."

Of course the NHL has lawyers and managers to separate the emotions from negotiations, and their side has all the cards, and they will want money out of it this time. Still, I don't think you can completely discount the irrational appeal of the Olympics from the discussion.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

As long as we're playing the logical fallacy game, you're arguing - among others - appeal to emotion.

And the empirical evidence I refer to is the reams of data the NHL will have collected on what impact the Olympics has on NHL TV viewership, ticket sales, merchandise sales, fan engagement, etc. Both month to month within a season and comparative in seasons before, during and after Olympic years.

There had been rumblings for *years* about how little value the governors saw in the proposition. Even before the Vancouver Olympics, there was some speculation that 2010 might end up the last time the NHL went - and that was before John Tavares' injury raised the risk profile substantially from their perspective.

You really believe the NHL collects reams of data on the popularity of hockey in markets outside of North America? I haven't heard of any of it, if they have. And remember the world is certainly different than in the 1990's and 200's in terms of accessibility.

I knew someone would bring up the injury risk. So one injury of note in 5 Olympics. Does it actually make a difference whether Tavares is injured in game 52 of the regular season vs. the Olympics? Isn't the impact to the NHL the same?

I believe you're saying that the NHL doesn't see sufficient value in order to participate in the Games. You don't know exactly what data and information they are using to come to this conclusion (how could anyone), but you trust in their decision making process. While I agree with your take on the NHL's position, I don't have the same confidence in their ability to see the big picture. Hockey will likely never have the same appeal of games like soccer or basketball but that doesn't mean the NHL shouldn't be trying to capitalize on global growth opportunities in the most cost efficient way possible.

So in the limited data I have available to me, I can't really support the NHL's perspective on this.

[Resolute 14]

I believe the NHL collects reams of data on what makes them money, where, and how, Strange Brew. And yes, that will include foreign revenue sources. And if you don't think a nearly $5 billion business does this, then there is going to be no point whatsoever in engaging you further on it.

And yes, I am saying the NHL doesn't see sufficient value in its continued participation. And whether or not you "trust in their decision making process" is irrelevant. That is their position. They are the ones putting their pocketbooks on the line, and they are the ones who get to decide if there is enough value.

And at the risk of repeating myself, the NHL knows how much the Olympics helps to "capitalize on global growth opportunities". You're still trying to make a business decision into an emotional one. As a fan that's certainly your prerogative, but it remains utterly irrelevant to the business side of the debate.

Originally Posted by Itse

I wouldn't be surprised if behind the scenes quite a few team owners are thinking "man, I really want to see Olympic hockey like it was in Vancouver."

Of course the NHL has lawyers and managers to separate the emotions from negotiations, and their side has all the cards, and they will want money out of it this time. Still, I don't think you can completely discount the irrational appeal of the Olympics from the discussion.

On the first paragraph Itse, I'd be very surprised, personally. From what had been said around the Sochi Olympics, the support for going in 2014 was already low - only agreed upon as part of the settlement with the union in 2013 - and dropped even lower after Tavares' injury. Certainly as fans, the owners would likely love to see another scene like 2010. But as businessmen, they don't find much value in such scenes for their business.

On the latter, I agree somewhat. But the 'irrational appeal' from the owners' perspective came in the early 1990s when they decided they wanted into the Olympics and has pretty obviously been exhausted. What they are after now is rational appeal - read: something they believe can translate into tangible, financial benefit. Where irrational appeal will be relevant is from the players' perspective. What are they willing to give up if they want to go?

[Zarley]

As a fan, this is positive news and I really hope Olympic participation can be worked out.

I remember Burke mentioning at the JCC dinner that had the local organizing committee covered insurance and related costs we would have had Olympic participation in 2018.

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

As Canadians, I don't think we really understand how inaccessible ice hockey is to the vast majority of the people in the world. Not only do you need the infrastructure of ice rinks, but with the expensive equipment and highly specialized training, even in Canada it has become a sport for the affluent.

Expecting Olympic hockey to substantially grow participation in places like China is like expecting a high-profile polo tournament to substantially grow participation in that sport globally.

The NHL has correctly discerned that the most promising source of new hockey fans and players is upper-middle-class Americans.

This is an astute post and as Canadians we should be concerned about the ridiculous costs for minor hockey - especially for younger kids. I agree that most growth for the NHL will occur within the middle class, however it’s important to note that Olympic participation furthers that goal.