[News] NHL will not participate in 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by spuzzum

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/spo...beandmail.com&

https://www.nhl.com/news/olympic-fin...years/c-519476

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/spo...beandmail.com&

The numbers and statistics speak for themselves. 16.6 million Canadians waking up to watch the gold medal game in Sochi in the middle of the night. The World Cup of Hockey had 3.3 and 2.1 million viewers for the semi and final games in prime time.

I am still gutted the NHL is not going to Korea. It is the tournament the NHL beefed up every four years and was THE hockey tournament. When an entire country stops and spends three hours watching an ice hockey game, that tells you something.

Yes the World Cups of 30 years ago were magnificent and memorable, but the Olympics is what the NHL went with and the results and excitement are not even close. This last World Cup had very little meaning and the average hockey fan didn't even care.

But if the NHL abandons the Olympics over the next 20 years, the World Cup will be just as prestigious.

You have the added benefit of a tailor-made tournament just for hockey that fits in the the NHL schedule. There's no reason the hockey WC can't be what the World Cup is for soccer. It should be the ultimate tournament. Olympics should be for junior aged players.

[spuzzum]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

But if the NHL abandons the Olympics over the next 20 years, the World Cup will be just as prestigious.

You have the added benefit of a tailor-made tournament just for hockey that fits in the the NHL schedule. There's no reason the hockey WC can't be what the World Cup is for soccer. It should be the ultimate tournament. Olympics should be for junior aged players.

I'll be dead or blind in 20 years. I don't feel like waiting. The mass marketing and commercialization of a World Cup can bend over and enjoy a hot dog.

[Locke]

Heres a curveball regarding the NHL, NHLPA and Olympic Participation in the future:

Say the PA and the League negotiate that the players want to go to the Olympics. Cool.

The biggest reason the NHL pulled the plug on this year's Olympics was because the IOC and IIHF came back to them and said that they werent going to cover Travel, Accommodation or Insurance anymore and were unwilling to concede anything concerning Advertising or Promotion for the NHL.

Can the Players promise to take care of all that?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Owners, who own these teams as a hobby will always win against guys who depend on playing a kids game for a living. Not saying what's right or wrong just telling it like it is. At the end of the day they get no Olympics and a lockout they will lose and never recoup the money.

Smrt

Olympic participation is not the only issue heading into this round of negotiations. The players want the escrow gone and likely want to continue to make improvements on their pension plan. The only reason Olympic participation is the biggest issue being talked about is because the league thought they could get the players to agree to an extension with that one concession and made them an offer. My guess is the escrow issue>Olympic issue from the players' perspective.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Olympic participation is not the only issue heading into this round of negotiations. The players want the escrow gone and likely want to continue to make improvements on their pension plan. The only reason Olympic participation is the biggest issue being talked about is because the league thought they could get the players to agree to an extension with that one concession and made them an offer. My guess is the escrow issue>Olympic issue from the players' perspective.

They will lose a season before escrow is gone. They won't be breaking the salary cap or link to HRR. And I would be shocked if the owners give off more %.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

Heres a curveball regarding the NHL, NHLPA and Olympic Participation in the future:

The biggest reason the NHL pulled the plug on this year's Olympics was because the IOC and IIHF came back to them and said that they werent going to cover Travel, Accommodation or Insurance anymore and were unwilling to concede anything concerning Advertising or Promotion for the NHL.

I don't think that is the biggest reason. My reasoning being that had it actually been that big of an issue I don't believe the league would ever have offered to let the players go under any circumstances. IMO the league making the offer to allow Olympic participation in exchange for an extension of the CBA with no changes to anything else like escrow really speaks volumes to how indifferent the NHL is to the "hardship" that the Olympics has on the season.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Weitz

They will lose a season before escrow is gone. They won't be breaking the salary cap or link to HRR.

Agreed. I really dont know why they'd want to, but either way these seem like topics that arent even up for discussion. We've lost a season and a half already to have them and it would likely take double that to get rid of them.

I like the NHL salary cap, if anything I think more sports should adopt the model.

I think the battle-lines for the next lockout will be ELCs.

[Backlunds_socks]

I think we can unanimously agree that the NHL not going to the olympics is going to suck. The world cup will never replace an Olympic medal game.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Weitz

They will lose a season before escrow is gone. They won't be breaking the salary cap or link to HRR. And I would be shocked if the owners give off more %.

I'd be surprised if they managed to get rid of escrow all together in one round of bargaining, I'm sure that would be the PA's first choice obviously, but realistically I think they will fight for a reduction. I don't think the owners are giving up % or the cap, and removing the escrow doesn't affect the link to HRR, the cap would still be set based on the previous season's revenues, so long as the escalator is removed as well.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I don't think that is the biggest reason. My reasoning being that had it actually been that big of an issue I don't believe the league would never have offered to let the players go under any circumstances. IMO the league making the offer to allow Olympic participation in exchange for an extension of the CBA with no changes to anything else like escrow really speaks volumes to how indifferent the NHL is to the "hardship" that the Olympics has on the season.

I dont think thats true at all.

When the IOC/IIHF covered Lodging, Travel and Insurance it was a crappy deal for the NHL, when they abandoned that and told the NHL to pay for it themselves its easy to see why the League told them to pound sand.

They thought they could away with raking the NHL over the coals, when the League called their bluff they reverted back to the original terrible deal and by then it was too late.

It has little to do with 'hardship' its just not enough payoff in regards to the risk.

Go and look at those Olympic teams and add up the NHL Salaries, they're enormous.

I think it was really easy for the NHL to walk away from these Olympics.

[TheFlamesVan]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

But if the NHL abandons the Olympics over the next 20 years, the World Cup will be just as prestigious.

You have the added benefit of a tailor-made tournament just for hockey that fits in the the NHL schedule. There's no reason the hockey WC can't be what the World Cup is for soccer. It should be the ultimate tournament. Olympics should be for junior aged players.

Olympics > Not the Olympics.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont think thats true at all.

When the IOC/IIHF covered Lodging, Travel and Insurance it was a crappy deal for the NHL, when they abandoned that and told the NHL to pay for it themselves its easy to see why the League told them to pound sand.

They thought they could away with raking the NHL over the coals, when the League called their bluff they reverted back to the original terrible deal and by then it was too late.

It has little to do with 'hardship' its just not enough payoff in regards to the risk.

Go and look at those Olympic teams and add up the NHL Salaries, they're enormous.

I think it was really easy for the NHL to walk away from these Olympics.

But then why would the league have offered participation at all? Despite all the issues with the IOC and IIHF, the NHL still voluntarily offered to agree to allow the players to participate if they extended the CBA. This to me suggests the league is nowhere near as opposed to Olympic participation as they claim to be. All of the risks and costs associated with participation would have remained, it could easily be argued that the league would have put themselves in an even worse position to negotiate a better deal from the IOC since they would not have had the option of not allowing their players to participate.

Bottom line is participating would have had all the same risks, the only thing that would have changed would have been that the CBA would be expiring 3 years later. The league would have no additional benefit or gain from the Olympics.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

But then why would the league have offered participation at all? Despite all the issues with the IOC and IIHF, the NHL still voluntarily offered to agree to allow the players to participate if they extended the CBA. This to me suggests the league is nowhere near as opposed to Olympic participation as they claim to be. All of the risks and costs associated with participation would have remained, it could easily be argued that the league would have put themselves in an even worse position to negotiate a better deal from the IOC since they would not have had the option of not allowing their players to participate.

Bottom line is participating would have had all the same risks, the only thing that would have changed would have been that the CBA would be expiring 3 years later. The league would have no additional benefit or gain from the Olympics.

I think you are underselling the benefit of extending the CBA 3 years and pushing back the expected lockout.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

But then why would the league have offered participation at all? Despite all the issues with the IOC and IIHF, the NHL still voluntarily offered to agree to allow the players to participate if they extended the CBA. This to me suggests the league is nowhere near as opposed to Olympic participation as they claim to be. All of the risks and costs associated with participation would have remained, it could easily be argued that the league would have put themselves in an even worse position to negotiate a better deal from the IOC since they would not have had the option of not allowing their players to participate.

Bottom line is participating would have had all the same risks, the only thing that would have changed would have been that the CBA would be expiring 3 years later. The league would have no additional benefit or gain from the Olympics.

I'm not sure I'm following you.

They wouldnt get any additional benefit or gain other than 3 more years of NHL Product uninterrupted by a Labour Dispute? Thats a benefit and a gain.

Do you trade 2 weeks of NHL play for that? Hell yeah you do.

[Itse]

Last summers cup to me gave a strong feeling that the NHL just doesn't get the appeal of international hockey. The whole thing just never had the right vibe around it. Everything about the marketing screamed "gimmick" to me, even excluding the gimmicky teams. That gives me serious doubts that they'll ever manage to build the kind of international prestige that best-on-best tournaments in other sports have.

Of course all they need is to find someone with the right vision and understanding, but the NHL marketing has never seemed very competent to me, even when they sell their own product. It's very rare for me to see an NHL ad and think "man I want to see that" and it really isn't that hard to get me excited about hockey

The IOC might be a corrupt monster, but they understand their product.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Itse

Last summers cup to me gave a strong feeling that the NHL just doesn't get the appeal of international hockey. The whole thing just never had the right vibe around it. Everything about the marketing screamed "gimmick" to me, even excluding the gimmicky teams. That gives me serious doubts that they'll ever manage to build the kind of international prestige that best-on-best tournaments in other sports have.

Of course all they need is to find someone with the right vision and understanding, but the NHL marketing has never seemed very competent to me, even when they sell their own product. It's very rare for me to see an NHL ad and think "man I want to see that" and it really isn't that hard to get me excited about hockey

The IOC might be a corrupt monster, but they understand their product.

I disagree. I think you're comparing a 'Pilot Project' to an 'International Institution.'

The IOC (Corrupt Monster we agree on) doesnt have to do anything. Its the Olympics and they basically sell themselves. You cant compare the Olympics with centuries of pedigree behind them with the World Cup which, if we're honest, was borrowing a lot of Heritage for legitimacy but was really brand new.

Its a tournament in its infancy.

I think the NHL does 'get' International Hockey. They just want the money from it. And while we can scream 'Greedy Dirtbags' about the NHL at the top of our lungs all we want the truth of the matter concerning the Olympics and the NHL is:

Its the NHL's players (largely), under their contracts (Largely) in the middle of their season and they dont get any of the money.

As much as we may like the rail against Bettman, the owners and the NHL, thus far all Olympic participation has been pretty literally permitted exclusively by the good graces of the League and the Owners.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Locke

I disagree. I think you're comparing a 'Pilot Project' to an 'International Institution.'

No, I'm speaking purely of the way the tournament was marketed. It was bad marketing on its own. The comparisons just make that more obvious.

The IOC (Corrupt Monster we agree on) doesnt have to do anything. Its the Olympics and they basically sell themselves. You cant compare the Olympics with centuries of pedigree behind them with the World Cup which, if we're honest, was borrowing a lot of Heritage for legitimacy but was really brand new.

The IOC puts a lot of reigns on how their product is presented and the games have a very carefully honed image that they update with marketing professionals. They most certainly don't just let it sell itself. If you think that the images that come to your head when you think of the Olympics have not been strongly affected by marketing, you're being naive.

Modern marketing goes far beyond ads. It's books, "documentaries", pushing certain talking points to sports media, it's the whole image of the thing.

Its a tournament in its infancy.

Not really. It's just how they chose to present themselves for some odd reason.

The World Cup of Hockey turned 20 last year, and it was preceded by the Canada Cup which started in 1976. That's 8 tournaments and 40 years of high level hockey history they chose to essentially completely ignore. Sure they had a bit of a hurdle making that connection because the tournament has been on a hiatus, but that should've been a pretty easy sell really for a moderately competent marketing department.

The 2016 World Cup of hockey was probably the first international hockey tournament I completely skipped in 30 years, even though they had the whole season before it to sell me on that thing. The NHL never got me interested, I didn't end up watching it and I've never felt like I missed out on something.

I think the NHL does 'get' International Hockey. They just want the money from it. And while we can scream 'Greedy Dirtbags' about the NHL at the top of our lungs all we want

Which I've never done and it has nothing to do with my point. They can want all the things they want and they can have the best reasons in the world for doing what they're trying to do. That has nothing to do with being good at it.

The NHL doesn't understand marketing very well in general, it's not just that tournament. Blacking out pre-season games is another simple example. How stupid do you have to be to not understand that irritating fans for no good reason is bad? That the pre-season from a marketing point of view is about building hype and they should be happy for every eyeball they can get?

Better marketed leagues have turned the pre-season into something they can sell for good money.

[Resolute 14]

^ The NHL already sold the pre-season for good money. $5.6 billion from Rogers alone.

Originally Posted by spuzzum

The numbers and statistics speak for themselves. 16.6 million Canadians waking up to watch the gold medal game in Sochi in the middle of the night. The World Cup of Hockey had 3.3 and 2.1 million viewers for the semi and final games in prime time.

I am still gutted the NHL is not going to Korea. It is the tournament the NHL beefed up every four years and was THE hockey tournament. When an entire country stops and spends three hours watching an ice hockey game, that tells you something.

Yes the World Cups of 30 years ago were magnificent and memorable, but the Olympics is what the NHL went with and the results and excitement are not even close. This last World Cup had very little meaning and the average hockey fan didn't even care.

You're attempting to use an emotional appeal as a counter to a hard business decision. The number of people that watched the final in Sochi is, frankly, irrelevant, because none of that went toward the NHL's business. Even in terms of residual effects, the league by now has an excellent idea on how much Olympic hype impacts ratings for its own games, and for how long. It knows what impact it has on merchandise sales and ticket sales and all the rest.

And the NHL thinks the deal, as structured, is a bad one. That gives us an indication of what the direct impacts for the NHL are.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

As I and many others predicted the IIHF will not allow NHL players under contract to participate in upcoming games. Ovi had to suck it up.
http://www.tsn.ca/ovechkin-releases-...mpics-1.857171

[dissentowner]

nm