Do you care that the NHL isn't going to the olympics

[StrangeVision]

I'm more excited.

 

[sandysan]

20 years is now immediate? Respect your commitment to the long game.

It was a nice idea that was tried for two decades and the return was never therem time to cut bait.

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

No, I don't care at all. If there was a "World Championship" I wish the NHL went to the Olympics. I find the those "World" tournaments held pre NHL season, really kinda of meaningless now.

 

[Canadian Finn]

20 years is now immediate? Respect your commitment to the long game.

It was a nice idea that was tried for two decades and the return was never therem time to cut bait.

"the return".

what return are you referring to, specifically?

 

[sandysan]

"the return".

what return are you referring to, specifically?

no economic benefits for the league. Not increase attendance or TV ratings after the games.

the fact that the NHL was contractually forbidden from using its players that participated in the olympics to market the NHL, probably had something to do with that.

The NHL viewed the olympics and an investment that would at some point generate returns ( by whatever metric you would like). They never did. time to move on.

 

[Canadian Finn]

that's the thing. You can't properly quantify the economic benefit, at least not easily. (certainly not as easily as you suggest).

I don't disagree with your second point - absolutely.

The NHL should not view the Olympics as an investment. Or if they do, it should not be viewed as an economic investment.

 

[D Wakaluk]

I wish I could wave the corporate flag that hard but all the past great olympics have formed me into a human being

 

[GodEmperor]

It's a regular game though. People also just want the pre-season to be over, with no injuries, because the games don't count.

An American Islanders fan gets nothing out of the Olympics if Canada wins gold, and Tavares gets hurt. More likely than not even more importantly, the Islanders owner gets nothing if Canada wins the gold and Tavares gets hurt. He does still have pay Tavares, even though he got hurt playing in a jersey that doesn't have the Islanders logo on it. It is true that the Islanders owner agreed to let Tavares go play, so he took the risk of his employee getting hurt outside of the job he's paid to do, but this time the collective ownership of the NHL said no.

I don't know, Matthews is injured for us right now and we get "nothing" out of it either.

The point is that injuries happen, the small increase in volume of games played can be mitigated by starting earlier and ending later, however the argument of injuries just ignores the reality that they can happen in regular season games and what compensation do you get for those?

Also no offense to the Islanders, but it's not like they had any shot of going deep or doing any damage that year, I'd be sympathetic to the argument if we had some massive all star injuries on great teams that derailed the player's and team's season, however we don't. The Olympics have injuries, but it could be said that due to the skill level increasing and goonery going down, they could actually be safer than regular season games.

I'd love to see some stats on this, but I just doubt that playing vs more skilled players who don't hit as hard as say the 3rd and 4th line scrubs who need to bring things outside of offense/defense to the game is more dangerous.

 

[sandysan]

that's the thing. You can't properly quantify the economic benefit, at least not easily. (certainly not as easily as you suggest).

I don't disagree with your second point - absolutely.

The NHL should not view the Olympics as an investment. Or if they do, it should not be viewed as an economic investment.

Its a private league if they dont view the gifting of their talent under contract for free as an investment, what they hell are they doing it for ? it was a nice idea that could have worked, that increased exposure to the best players on the planet would have increased demand by any metric you would like. it did not domestically nor internationally. it was a complete waste of time.

its funny how private institutions are actually quite adept ay properly quantifying the economic benefits. Getting more peeper for two week every 4 years and not a day in between doesnt add anything to the leagues bottom line. or if it does, its not worth the costs of interupting the season, risking the talent and enriching a third part " partner" who doesnt give a crap about growing the nhl game.

 

[GodEmperor]

I also don't really like some Americans assuming that Canada has it wrapped up, I think the skill gap is closing and with non-Canadian superstars (or super really really good stars) like Kucherov, Karlsson, Gaudreau, Bobrovsky, Hedman, Klingberg, Barkov, Laine and Matthews emerging since 2014, I think all teams can do very well vs Canada.

I'm not saying they would win for sure, but I don't think Canada would AT ALL roll over teams as they have in past years.

 

[sandysan]

I also don't really like some Americans assuming that Canada has it wrapped up, I think the skill gap is closing and with non-Canadian superstars (or super really really good stars) like Kucherov, Karlsson, Gaudreau, Bobrovsky, Hedman, Klingberg, Barkov, Laine and Matthews emerging since 2014, I think all teams can do very well vs Canada.

I'm not saying they would win for sure, but I don't think Canada would AT ALL roll over teams as they have in past years.

its a short tournament so anything could happen. someone else said it better than I could have, canada is about even money against the field but likely favored against any specific opponent. And canada doesnt get the nod on top end talent, it gets the nod on depth. our fourth line players could very likely play 1/2 lines on other teams. we can roll 4 lines of superstars ( or players with world class specific skills) all night long.

Even teams that have been close to canada have players on the third and fourth lines that would have exactly zero chance of cracking the lineup for team canada. but in a short tournament, anything can happen. over long periods, canada's depth will come through.

We dont have to " roll over " other teams. as sochi showed, once we get up we are more than comfortable winning by essentially preventing all scoring chances with our deep defense knowing that in the off chance they make a mistake that our goalie will likely stop them. The canadian D in russia was suffocating and an example of efficiency.

 

[b in vancouver]

That's a horribly faulty defense to say that NHLers should go to the Olympics. Owners making a lot of money unrelated to the Olympics doesn't mean that they should absorb such risks and costs to send NHLers to the Olympics just out of the goodness of their hearts.

I'm agreeing with you. I mean, some nights I wake up in cold sweats worrying about Daryl Katz's net worth and liabilities and calm myself down thinking about his 1000's of drugstores and it eases me back to sleep. One of my favourite sports memories ever was how he threatened to move the Oilers and held the city of Edmonton 'hostage' until they finally ponied up hundreds of millions of dollars to build him a new arena so he could raise prices and make more money and I was like - Yeah, way to go Daryl! You won! They lost! - was a great day. Why should anyone care about McDavid making his Olympic debut and representing his country in a best on best tournament when I can go to Rexall and talk to people making minimum wage about how important it is that Daryl Katz makes a bit more money. I would never put Daryl Katz in such a tenuous position that one of the people that work for him might get injured while doing something that wasn't directly involved in making him money. That would just be silly. And goes against the whole ideal of sports. Go Daryl! -

 

[TNT87]

I do not.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I'm agreeing with you. I mean, some nights I wake up in cold sweats worrying about Daryl Katz's net worth and liabilities and calm myself down thinking about his 1000's of drugstores and it eases me back to sleep. One of my favourite sports memories ever was how he threatened to move the Oilers and held the city of Edmonton 'hostage' until they finally ponied up hundreds of millions of dollars to build him a new arena so he could raise prices and make more money and I was like - Yeah, way to go Daryl! You won! They lost! - was a great day. Why should anyone care about McDavid making his Olympic debut and representing his country in a best on best tournament when I can go to Rexall and talk to people making minimum wage about how important it is that Daryl Katz makes a bit more money. I would never put Daryl Katz in such a tenuous position that one of the people that work for him might get injured while doing something that wasn't directly involved in making him money. That would just be silly. And goes against the whole ideal of sports. Go Daryl! -

Just repeating the same thing over again doesn't make your point valid. You're point is wrong, the wealth of owners outside of the Olympics is 100% irrelevant to the NHL getting shafted in any deal for the Olympics. You'd be a terrible businessman if that's how you operated, "I have a ton of money already so I'll just take massive losses and risks for no reward just out of the goodness of my heart".

 

[b in vancouver]

Just repeating the same thing over again doesn't make your point valid. You're point is wrong, the wealth of owners outside of the Olympics is 100% irrelevant to the NHL getting shafted in any deal for the Olympics. You'd be a terrible businessman if that's how you operated, "I have a ton of money already so I'll just take massive losses and risks for no reward just out of the goodness of my heart".

The idea of whether the owners are getting a great deal - as your #1 concern is simply ridiculous. If you're worried more about the financial well-being of NHL owners more than being able to watch a best-on-best tournament of hockey players around the world representing their country... I don't know what to say. Forbes has a website - I'd think you'd be on there. The players will go risk their careers for free but - you're worried about the owners bottom line? Insurance payments? Having to rent hotel rooms? (y'know they stay at Olympic Villages?) Food (once again - Olympic villages) and that the owners still would've gotten 82 games.

Off chance someone gets hurt and they have to pay their insurance premiums.

 

[b in vancouver]

Also - The NHL will simply have less people watching it during the Olympics anyways as - yes, I'd rather watch the biathlon with my kids every for years, or bob-sledding for a change, or snowboarding, etc. - and I'm not alone in that. I probably won't watch the NHL for two weeks as I only have so many hours and I enjoy the Olympics. - but the owners never got a perfect business deal? f*** them.

 

[Kyndig]

I think it sucks!! To me watching the Winter Olympic always had a bit of magic feel to it, that feeling you had when you were a kid and the world was a massive place and the possibilities endless..maybe its the snow, maybe its all the fancy colorful flags..idk. Without the NHL going I feel like the Winter Olympics loses a big part of that magic.

I can understand why people from Canada could care less since they usually win but for European countries and to a lesser degree the US (since a majority of teams are from the US) I feel like they would prefer gold over a Stanley Cup. Representing your country every 4 years should have more meaning to it than representing a city you're probably not even from.

Really feel bad for the players though, I know a lot of them have a dream of winning gold and now they won't have that chance...4 years is a long time in sports. This may have been the only chance we had to see Crosby+McDavid on the same team in the Olympics..or P.Kane+Eichel+Matthews...etc.

The Olympics is supposed to represent the best of the best..whoever wins gold now are they really going to be considered champions? Nope.

 

[Merya]

I don't think you know what athletic means. You can be 450 pounds and be incredibly athletic.

No you can't. Perhaps 300lbs, but not much higher.

 

[mikeyp24]

No you can't. Perhaps 300lbs, but not much higher.

Ever see sumo? And Andre the Giant? There's also 350lb football players who are incredibly fast and flexible and deceptively athletic.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The idea of whether the owners are getting a great deal - as your #1 concern is simply ridiculous. If you're worried more about the financial well-being of NHL owners more than being able to watch a best-on-best tournament of hockey players around the world representing their country... I don't know what to say. Forbes has a website - I'd think you'd be on there. The players will go risk their careers for free but - you're worried about the owners bottom line? Insurance payments? Having to rent hotel rooms? (y'know they stay at Olympic Villages?) Food (once again - Olympic villages) and that the owners still would've gotten 82 games.

Off chance someone gets hurt and they have to pay their insurance premiums.

You obviously don't know how to run a business, then. These players are assets for them, they're risking their assets for literally no reward. You don't know what to say because you're not thinking logically about it.

The owners aren't going to say yes to NHL players going to the Olympics if they assume all of the risk for the NHL players going. The fact that you think that is ridiculous just shows how naive you are with the real world. The NHL is a business, that's priority number 1. You thinking it is something different, which is obvious by you saying it's ridiculous for NHL owners to want some sort of benefit by putting their assets on the line, just shows you're not realizing that.

Let's make an analogy here. Let's say you own $5,000 on a stock that is relatively consistent in value. Your friend wants to take that stock and invest it in their own endeavors. They'll either lose the money and you lose your $5,000, or they get rich and you just get your money back. Do you think it would be ridiculous for you to say no to that deal? If you say it wouldn't be ridiculous to say no to that deal, you're a hypocrite for complaining about the NHL owners not wanting NHLers going to the Olympics.

 

[Merya]

Ever see sumo? And Andre the Giant? There's also 350lb football players who are incredibly fast and flexible and deceptively athletic.

I almost wrote that, but then I thought it would be too stupid. Sumo wrestlers and NFL linemen aren't exactly athletic. They have mass and couple seconds to use it. They're still about 100lbs short of your 450. As for Andre, c'mon. Who next, Santa Claus?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Yes. It was so much fun watching Olympic hockey. I will watch, but I am disappointed.

 

[mikeyp24]

I almost wrote that, but then I thought it would be too stupid. Sumo wrestlers and NFL linemen aren't exactly athletic. They have mass and couple seconds to use it. They're still about 100lbs short of your 450. As for Andre, c'mon. Who next, Santa Claus?

You do know that because it's scripted doesn't mean they magically can float and lift each other right? They are basically a combo of gymnasts and stunt actors...

Not to mention you must not k ow anyone who ever play college football because those guys can go a lot longer then those few second spurts of extreme exertion.

 

[b in vancouver]

You obviously don't know how to run a business, then. These players are assets for them, they're risking their assets for literally no reward. You don't know what to say because you're not thinking logically about it.

The owners aren't going to say yes to NHL players going to the Olympics if they assume all of the risk for the NHL players going. The fact that you think that is ridiculous just shows how naive you are with the real world. The NHL is a business, that's priority number 1. You thinking it is something different, which is obvious by you saying it's ridiculous for NHL owners to want some sort of benefit by putting their assets on the line, just shows you're not realizing that.

Let's make an analogy here. Let's say you own $5,000 on a stock that is relatively consistent in value. Your friend wants to take that stock and invest it in their own endeavors. They'll either lose the money and you lose your $5,000, or they get rich and you just get your money back. Do you think it would be ridiculous for you to say no to that deal? If you say it wouldn't be ridiculous to say no to that deal, you're a hypocrite for complaining about the NHL owners not wanting NHLers going to the Olympics.

Do you own a team? I don't.
Could've sworn the question was - Do you care that NHL players aren't going to the Olympics - not - let me explain my Economy 101 class to everyone about why the owners are right.

Let me make an analogy. You own a small automotive shop and have done really well through the people in your community allowing you to expand and make a good living. Every once in awhile the local hockey team will ask you for new sweaters (allowing you to put an ad on there) - and you know the ad won't do anything in bringing in clients - but you do it anyway to keep the goodwill and a bit of payback to the people whom have actually allowed you to carve out a pretty good living as the cost of sweaters really is just a drop in the bucket to what you've actually made from and will continue to make from these people.

It's like buying employs drinks every once in awhile or throwing a Christmas party.

And yes. I do work for myself and pay people and have partnerships and have for a long time - and yes sometimes I don't run things perfectly and could definitely make more money - but one thing you don't screw around with are loyal customers and strong partnerships because even if you lose a few bucks in a transaction or two - you tend to come out ahead as you're all happy.

But go back to teaching me your Economy 101 - the owner's are the besest - and I'll continue to be disappointed that I won't get to see the Marchand-Crosby-Bergeron line or McDavid wearing the Maple Leaf this winter.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Do you own a team? I don't.
Could've sworn the question was - Do you care that NHL players aren't going to the Olympics - not - let me explain my Economy 101 class to everyone about why the owners are right.

Let me make an analogy. You own a small automotive shop and have done really well through the people in your community allowing you to expand and make a good living. Every once in awhile the local hockey team will ask you for new sweaters (allowing you to put an ad on there) - and you know the ad won't do anything in bringing in clients - but you do it anyway to keep the goodwill and a bit of payback to the people whom have actually allowed you to carve out a pretty good living as the cost of sweaters really is just a drop in the bucket to what you've actually made from and will continue to make from these people.

It's like buying employs drinks every once in awhile or throwing a Christmas party.

And yes. I do work for myself and pay people and have partnerships and have for a long time - and yes sometimes I don't run things perfectly and could definitely make more money - but one thing you don't screw around with are loyal customers and strong partnerships because even if you lose a few bucks in a transaction or two - you tend to come out ahead as you're all happy.

But go back to teaching me your Economy 101 - the owner's are the besest - and I'll continue to be disappointed that I won't get to see the Marchand-Crosby-Bergeron line or McDavid wearing the Maple Leaf this winter.

No it's not, that's an absolutely asinine comparison. What risk do you have from buying coworkers drinks? What risk do you have by throwing a Christmas party? Relatively nothing? Your analogies completely fall apart because you're blatantly ignoring the massive amount of risks NHL teams make by letting their players go to the Olympics. Giving a hockey team sweaters is a no risk move for you, that's ridiculous. You have shown either you completely lack an understanding of how to run a business or you're so naive that you'd believe that owners would take risks and pay out of their pockets just out of the goodness of their hearts. It's absolutely illogical.

If you're mad the NHL isn't going to the Olympics, be mad at the IOC for being greedy ****s and refusing to compensate the NHL at all for the players it wants to profit off of. This isn't even "economics 101", it's literally basic asset management. If teams aren't going to get anything out of letting players go to the Olympics, and they face risks doing so, they won't do it. And that is the absolute correct answer, they shouldn't do it. Let's me use the scenario again, would you give your friend $5,000 so he can profit off of it, while you possibly lose your money?