IOC won't be compensating NHL for using players, but...

[Jeffrey93]

You really shouldn't give the IOC more credit than that -- they don't deserve it. I see that you are Canadian, do you notice that whenever a network like TSN tries to show highlights from the Salt Lake City Olympics, all they can show is pictures? That's because of the IOC, rather than making their content available to everyone (and get people thinking olympics more than once every 2 years), they engage in highly restrictive broadcast deals to squeeze as much money as possible out of the networks. They are consistently operating on antiquated business models.

Yup...they own all the rights to their events. I give them credit for that. Are they properly taking advantage of that? I'm not sure. I don't think they're idiots though....I'm not arrogant enough to assume the IOC is full of baffoons that have no clue what they are doing.
The Winter Olympics have been happening since 1924....so in that 87 years I figure they have been doing something right.

We also know, that they are unwilling to pay the NHL for using NHL players, so while the business case you have made is correct, the fact is, they're not prepared to do it.

How do you know they are not prepared to do it? From what I read they said they won't pay money......they didn't say they wouldn't give up things that earn money....did they? Honest question...I haven't read everything or researched it myself.
They might not be prepared to go as far as what I suggested....but that is what negotiations are for. If they give the NHL a portion of the TV rights to the hockey games...and maybe the arena advertising. Whatever...there are countless ways to get the NHL some money without the IOC cutting them a cheque.

Directly paying to have some athletes attend the Olympics would be awful in my opinion. I'd rather go back to watching our 'National Team' go to the Olympics if that is the case. I'll watch either way and the hockey will be entertaining either way.....I don't need Sidney Crosby, Jarome Iginla, Rick Nash, Steven Stamkos, etc., etc. to be playing to watch a team that represents my country play the game I love.

I'm sure even if the NHL doesn't go the IOC will still be able to get some decent coin from TSN, Sportsnet, CBC or whoever in Canada.

Aside from that....didn't the NHL originally go to the Olympics to 'grow the game'?? Why are they know demanding money? Isn't the "exposure" the NHL gets a great "investment" for the league??

 

[dafoomie]

Aside from that....didn't the NHL originally go to the Olympics to 'grow the game'?? Why are they know demanding money? Isn't the "exposure" the NHL gets a great "investment" for the league??

Its at the point where its a huge money maker for the IOC, the NHL doesn't see a dime, and bears a ton of the burden and expense. The NHL has to shut down their league in the time after football is over but before spring training has started where there is no competition but the NBA. The NHL has to pay the players regardless of whether the Olympics caused them injury or exhaustion. And the NHL apparently has the burden of insuring the players as well.

I don't think the exposure they get from the Olympics is so much more than what they'd get from holding their own tournament to be worth all that. The NHL should use its leverage to get a cut of that TV deal, and if they don't get it, bring back the World Cup.

Hockey might be 4th out of the 4 major sports in America (arguably its 3rd), but its #1 in international competition and its not even close. The gold medal game last year did a 17.6/33, meaning that 1 in 3 American households watched that game, and it wasn't even in prime time. The World Series and NBA Finals are rarely ever that high. If the NHL and the other major leagues can make their World Cup the premier international tournament in the way soccer's World Cup is for them, they could print money and grow their sport at the same time.

 

[Jeffrey93]

Its at the point where its a huge money maker for the IOC, the NHL doesn't see a dime, and bears a ton of the burden and expense. The NHL has to shut down their league in the time after football is over but before spring training has started where there is no competition but the NBA. The NHL has to pay the players regardless of whether the Olympics caused them injury or exhaustion. And the NHL apparently has the burden of insuring the players as well.

I don't think the exposure they get from the Olympics is so much more than what they'd get from holding their own tournament to be worth all that. The NHL should use its leverage to get a cut of that TV deal, and if they don't get it, bring back the World Cup.

Hockey might be 4th out of the 4 major sports in America (arguably its 3rd), but its #1 in international competition and its not even close. The gold medal game last year did a 17.6/33, meaning that 1 in 3 American households watched that game, and it wasn't even in prime time. The World Series and NBA Finals are rarely ever that high. If the NHL and the other major leagues can make their World Cup the premier international tournament in the way soccer's World Cup is for them, they could print money and grow their sport at the same time.

Okay...so the NHL refuses to go the Olympics and they setup their own tourney. They still have to negotiate with the NHLPA to FORCE players to go. The Olympics has NHLers WANTING to go. If it is an NHL created 'make us money' event....I am quite sure a lot of the top talent will choose to stay at home.

Even if nobody on these boards wants to admit it...the 'Olympics' carries a lot of weight just because they are the 'Olympics'.

Picture you are sitting around on a deck....with several generations of your family. Yer old and the kids look at you as a freak because you have 3 inches of ear hair. Would you rather tell those grandkids of yours that you won a Gold at the 'NHL AT&T World Cup' or at the 'Winter Olympics'?

Being an Olympic medal winner carries a tad more weight than that of some tourney created in 2014. Don't ya think???

The best scenario for all involved is for a deal to be reached. Both sides know it.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Okay...so the NHL refuses to go the Olympics and they setup their own tourney. They still have to negotiate with the NHLPA to FORCE players to go. The Olympics has NHLers WANTING to go. If it is an NHL created 'make us money' event....I am quite sure a lot of the top talent will choose to stay at home.

Even if nobody on these boards wants to admit it...the 'Olympics' carries a lot of weight just because they are the 'Olympics'.

Picture you are sitting around on a deck....with several generations of your family. Yer old and the kids look at you as a freak because you have 3 inches of ear hair. Would you rather tell those grandkids of yours that you won a Gold at the 'NHL AT&T World Cup' or at the 'Winter Olympics'?

Being an Olympic medal winner carries a tad more weight than that of some tourney created in 2014. Don't ya think???

The best scenario for all involved is for a deal to be reached. Both sides know it.

The NHLPA would easily agree to a world cup every 4 years if the olympics were off the table. Hell, I think they would agree even if given the choice because the World Cup would put money right into their pockets, whereas in the Olympics they get absolutely nothing except some fat insurance premiums that I'm sure they love paying.

 

[joe89]

After Sochi, I'd like to see the major pro leagues pull out of the Olympics for good and make the World Cup their major international tournament. They can keep the money for themselves and not be dictated to by the IOC.

In theory that sounds good, but you can't expect sportsmen to hold a World Cup(make up event) victory equal to an Olympic gold, it doesn't work that way. Olympics transcends money for hockey players, and especially here in Europe. Olympics is also more than just a hockey tournament, the experience is a memory for life. Some athletes have the goal just to make it to the OG's, go figure. It's the pinnacle of all sporting events and there is no competion.

Remember, an Olympic gold is seen as bigger than a Stanley Cup for the majority in Europe, and you know damn well how much the SC means for North Americans.

I just don't see why NHL should make it NHL vs the rest of the hockeyworld over two weeks every four years, when the players want to go. I know many North Americans only have a big in their heads, but sports is more than money to me and I will argue for the Olympics as far as possible.

 

[loxcane]

isn't that an odd thing to say when it's asking for a piece of the pie that has the NHL at the point it is, and from Europeans? Isn't it odd to say that when it's the Euro leagues holding out their hands for money to allow players to work anywhere they want to in the world?

 

[AllByDesign]

Actually, the 800lb gorilla is NBC (or ABC or Fox or ...) and their $2B in revenue.

They have the pull to dictate event start times.

If the Olympics rights holders also hold the NHL rights they will have incentive and significant leverage to get access.

KDB, its not often that I am going to disagree with you, but this will be one of those times. Sure, NBC is paying 'mucho deniro' for the TV rights, and as such would have some pull in event timing, etc. A business partner generally has some say when they are the customer. Make no mistake on who is the bigger player. If the NBC wants to puch the limits and the IOC doesn't want to play ball, there are 3 other national monsters that would love to offer their billions.

2ndly, I think some are putting way too much stock on NHL hockey being the gem of the games. Does anyone really think the value in TV rights would be mitigated by a lack of NHL players in the grand scheme of the entire Winter games? The average Olympic viewer in the US likely doesn't know Ryan Miller from Miller light.

Why doesn't the IOC just hand over the TV rights to the Hockey events to the NHL for them to sell. NHL takes 80% and IOC takes 20%, or something like that.
Would that tarnish the whole TV package? If you have to flip to one channel for Olympic hockey and another channel for everything else. Would that cut too much into the 'everything else' TV rights value?

Because the IOC can have 100%, regardless of what the NHL wishes to do. It's their perogy.

 

[seanlinden]

Yup...they own all the rights to their events. I give them credit for that. Are they properly taking advantage of that? I'm not sure. I don't think they're idiots though....I'm not arrogant enough to assume the IOC is full of baffoons that have no clue what they are doing.
The Winter Olympics have been happening since 1924....so in that 87 years I figure they have been doing something right.

How do you know they are not prepared to do it? From what I read they said they won't pay money......they didn't say they wouldn't give up things that earn money....did they? Honest question...I haven't read everything or researched it myself.
They might not be prepared to go as far as what I suggested....but that is what negotiations are for. If they give the NHL a portion of the TV rights to the hockey games...and maybe the arena advertising. Whatever...there are countless ways to get the NHL some money without the IOC cutting them a cheque.

Directly paying to have some athletes attend the Olympics would be awful in my opinion. I'd rather go back to watching our 'National Team' go to the Olympics if that is the case. I'll watch either way and the hockey will be entertaining either way.....I don't need Sidney Crosby, Jarome Iginla, Rick Nash, Steven Stamkos, etc., etc. to be playing to watch a team that represents my country play the game I love.

I'm sure even if the NHL doesn't go the IOC will still be able to get some decent coin from TSN, Sportsnet, CBC or whoever in Canada.

Aside from that....didn't the NHL originally go to the Olympics to 'grow the game'?? Why are they know demanding money? Isn't the "exposure" the NHL gets a great "investment" for the league??

They are buffons -- they operate under antiquated business models. They happen to be very successful buffons though.

Giving the NHL access to highlights and such is nowhere near valuable enough to make them go, and that's basically all they are prepared to give up if you read the OP. Giving the NHL a portion of the TV rights is giving them money, because TV rights are money. It's money that would otherwise go to the IOC, and money that they would have in their budget.

The NHL did go to the olympics to "grow the game", and now they obviously feel that the Olympics can't do that enough to make it worthwhile anymore.

Okay...so the NHL refuses to go the Olympics and they setup their own tourney. They still have to negotiate with the NHLPA to FORCE players to go. The Olympics has NHLers WANTING to go. If it is an NHL created 'make us money' event....I am quite sure a lot of the top talent will choose to stay at home.

Even if nobody on these boards wants to admit it...the 'Olympics' carries a lot of weight just because they are the 'Olympics'.

Picture you are sitting around on a deck....with several generations of your family. Yer old and the kids look at you as a freak because you have 3 inches of ear hair. Would you rather tell those grandkids of yours that you won a Gold at the 'NHL AT&T World Cup' or at the 'Winter Olympics'?

Being an Olympic medal winner carries a tad more weight than that of some tourney created in 2014. Don't ya think???

The best scenario for all involved is for a deal to be reached. Both sides know it.

"Olympics" doesn't mean much to soccer players, world cup on the other hand....

All the NHL needs to do is prevent the Olympics from being a best-on-best tournament, and replace it.

 

[Turboflex*]

Some? Try a ton of leverage.

In North America, there were rumours of networks submitting two bids for Olympic Coverage, one with NHL participation in the tournament, and one without NHL participation. Theoretically, the NHL is entitled to the entire difference between the two bids. If they don't have enough money to pay the NHL fair market value for getting their players mid-season, then they don't have enough money to host a best-on-best tournament.

Sure, Russians are going to go, but who's really going to watch the tournament if we're seeing the Russian stars take on the equivalent of Canada's Spengler Cup team? Meanwhile, all the NHL has to do is get the IIHF on board with replacing the Olympics best-on-best tourney with a World Cup of Hockey, and just cut the IOC out of the potential profits.

You also have to look past just 2014. Sure, the Russians care because they were embarassed in 2010. But, the 2018 Olympics are going to be in France, Germany or South Korea.... in that situation, the will of the players to fight the NHL on this issue may be much less.

THIS sums it up nicely.

The NHL will most likely be at Sochi no matter what for hockey geopolitical reasons. It is just TOO important to the Russians to be snubbed, it's going to be spectacle of huge significance to Putin's "New Russia". It will be a long time for Russia to forgive the NHL if it doesn't go, remember the KHL and the Russian Hockey federation are very political beasts, revenge & insults do factor into decision making, it's not just a business.

That said, past 2018 is another story. The players' enthusiasm will probably have worn off a little on that 16-20 hour schlep to Sochi, it will be in a little resort town, not a cool & beautiful metropolis like vancouver, and the hockey significance of playing in France or Korea is lower than Russia & Canada.

After 2014 it will be time for the NHL and the Euro leagues to get together and work out a World Cup, the advantages are tremedous:

-Leagues get the money, money stays in Hockey. Like jfried said, there is a difference between what the IOC gets in rights + sponsership for Olympics with NHL and Olympics without, this is the intrinsic market value of NHL participation. Will the NHL get this in their own tournement? Probably most of it. This money will go directly to hockey leagues, making them stronger, not to the void that is the IOC.

-Better scheduling: Have it in September. Players selected skip their club pre-season training to play in world tournament instead. Extra insurance + wear & tear shouldn't be an issue since they would be playing pre-season anyways.

-Flexible hosting: Not tethered to mysterious host site that best bribed the IOC pontiffs, where Canada vs USA play in a 3000 seat arena in Korea at 4am??? NO!! Canada vs USA can be in New York, Sweden vs Finland can be in Helsinki, Czech vs Slovak in Bratislava, Switzerland vs. Germany in Munich, Russia vs. Belarus in Minsk, all on the same day, all in local prime times, tailored for the interested audience.

Hockey needs to be free from these IOC vampires post 2014, in both the short and the long term it will be best for the sport. Hockey can stand on its own and doesn't need to crutch on the olympics.

 

[King Woodballs]

I think the NHL should demand at least the following:

- Unlimited usage of footage for things like highlights (obviously replays of the entire game would have to be limited to the networks)
- Access to the players/coaches for interviews and what not

I doubt they'll be getting money, and that's not what they should be going after. But it doesn't really help to promote the sport if the NHL can't use content from the events on their website.

And it is not an unreasonable request

This is spot on
If the NHL cant/wont get money
at least get to use what ever HOCKEY related footage they can.

the NHL has the leverage here as far as I am concerned

the IIHF and IOC want NHL players there.... the NHL probably doesnt....
I have a sure Bettman doesnt like shutting his season down for 2- 2 1/2 weeks right before playoffs to make these other guys money when he isnt getting jack **** for it...

 

[dafoomie]

In theory that sounds good, but you can't expect sportsmen to hold a World Cup(make up event) victory equal to an Olympic gold, it doesn't work that way. Olympics transcends money for hockey players, and especially here in Europe. Olympics is also more than just a hockey tournament, the experience is a memory for life. Some athletes have the goal just to make it to the OG's, go figure. It's the pinnacle of all sporting events and there is no competion.

Remember, an Olympic gold is seen as bigger than a Stanley Cup for the majority in Europe, and you know damn well how much the SC means for North Americans.

I just don't see why NHL should make it NHL vs the rest of the hockeyworld over two weeks every four years, when the players want to go. I know many North Americans only have a big in their heads, but sports is more than money to me and I will argue for the Olympics as far as possible.

Its that way for soccer, Olympic soccer isn't even close to the World Cup, the difference is perception and marketing. If you left the Olympics to amateurs and made the World Cup the big international event for professionals, you could reach that level if all of the major pro leagues in the world were in on it. The Olympics did not invent the concept of using each country's top pros, the Canada Cup did, and the World Cup is its successor.

The Olympics are all about money, in that they keep all of it and everyone else has to pay the price. The reasonable thing to do would be to cut the NHL in on the TV contract for hockey, since its an enormous burden on the league to do this and that there is absolutely nothing requiring them to go. But by holding their own tournament, that money would be divided up between the leagues that participate and the players would make more as a result. You'd also have the advantage of hosting it where you want it, when you want it, as frequently as you want it.

 

[jekoh]

The NHL's participation is a feather in their hockey tournament's cap, but will not hamper their bottom line. The Russian players have made it very clear that they will attend in Sochi, regardless of the NHL's thoughts on the matter. The NHL is making a veiled threat, but I suspect the IOC has little concern.

Yeah, the players, not the NHL, have the leverage.

I am sure they want to have a cordial relationship with the NHL,

That should be pretty obvious. Let's not forget that the IOC went out of its way in 98 and 02 to accomodate the NHL, screwing Slovakia in the process with a ridiculous format.

Why doesn't the IOC just hand over the TV rights to the Hockey events to the NHL for them to sell. NHL takes 80% and IOC takes 20%, or something like that.

 

[jekoh]

We also know, that they are unwilling to pay the NHL for using NHL players,

The Olympic break is part of the players contract. There's no reason for the NHL to get any money whatsoever.
Only the players have any case asking for $$.

 

[LadyStanley]

The NHLPA would easily agree to a world cup every 4 years if the olympics were off the table. Hell, I think they would agree even if given the choice because the World Cup would put money right into their pockets, whereas in the Olympics they get absolutely nothing except some fat insurance premiums that I'm sure they love paying.

Huh? The NHL Teams do not pay insurance premiums that cover the players during their Olympic play. (That has been one of the contentions of the NHL **and** NHLPA.) And what insurance there is, does not fully cover all those participating (should they be injured and unable to play in NHL afterwards).

the IIHF and IOC want NHL players there.... the NHL probably doesnt....
I have a sure Bettman doesnt like shutting his season down for 2- 2 1/2 weeks right before playoffs to make these other guys money when he isnt getting jack **** for it...

Need some clarification here KW...

The NHL owners see no positive benefit from shutting down their league for up to 3 weeks. (And therefore Bettman as their front man has been posturing for non-participation.)

The NHLPA-represented players both enjoy representing their countries and those not participating enjoy the time off.

"The NHL" does not capture this dynamic and dichotomy.

 

[LadyStanley]

The Olympic break is part of the players contract. There's no reason for the NHL to get any money whatsoever.
Only the players have any case asking for $$.

Only in the current CBA. (No guarantee after 2011-2012 season)


(Any $$ the players get should be applied first to the insurance premiums covering them while participating in Olympics? FWIW, many national sports federations have paid athletes for winning medals. Both Canada and US did for the 2010 Olympics.)

 

[jekoh]

Its that way for soccer, Olympic soccer isn't even close to the World Cup, the difference is perception and marketing. If you left the Olympics to amateurs and made the World Cup the big international event for professionals, you could reach that level if all of the major pro leagues in the world were in on it.

The major difference is that the world cup is still organized by fifa, as opposed to the w cup of hockey which is organized by a pro league. It will never be regarded as a true world cup if it's organized by pro leagues.

The reasonable thing to do would be to cut the NHL in on the TV contract for hockey, since its an enormous burden on the league to do this and that there is absolutely nothing requiring them to go.

They could also stop paying the players, that's an enormous burden.

 

[jekoh]

Only in the current CBA. (No guarantee after 2011-2012 season)

They have made it very clear that they want it included again. Hell, some even said they're going to go regardless.

I find it funny how most of you act like the NHL decides on its own if the players go or if they don't.

 

[jekoh]

the NHL has the leverage here as far as I am concerned

the IIHF and IOC want NHL players there.... the NHL probably doesnt....

Last time I checked neither "the IOC" nor "the NHL" are actually on the ice. Those who are on the ice have made it clear enough which side they are on.

 

[dafoomie]

Yeah, the players, not the NHL, have the leverage.

You mean the players who have contracts that don't allow them to play if the NHL chooses not to let them go? Those players? They have no leverage unless they negotiate it into the next CBA.

 

[jekoh]

You mean the players who have contracts that don't allow them to play if the NHL chooses not to let them go? Those players? They have no leverage unless they negotiate it into the next CBA.

1- There is currently no such contract. Obviously the point is that they will have it in the next cba as well.

2- they can still go even if the nhl does not allow them to, btw, and some have said that they would (hence pt 1)

3- they are the only ones with a case for more money, either in their nhl contract in exchange for no olympics, or from the ioc since they're basically playing for free at the olympics.

 

[dafoomie]

1- There is currently no such contract. Obviously the point is that they will have it in the next cba as well.

2- they can still go even if the nhl does not allow them to, btw, and some have said that they would (hence pt 1)

3- they are the only ones with a case for more money, either in their nhl contract in exchange for no olympics, or from the ioc since they're basically playing for free at the olympics.

1. They've never had that right and it would be a major change if they got it.

2. As I understand it, they'd be suspended without pay while they're gone and the team could also terminate their contacts. I'm sure Ovechkin isn't afraid of that but other players will think twice. I don't think theres a chance of this happening after 2014 anyway, the enthusiasm will be much less with the games not in anyone's home country. I think the NHL will go to Sochi regardless but not after that.

3. If the NHL received money either from the Olympics or a World Cup, the players would also get more money since they receive 54% of league revenue. The cap would go up, allowing players not under contract to make more money, and players under contract would keep more of their escrow payments.

 

[Fugu]

1- There is currently no such contract. Obviously the point is that they will have it in the next cba as well.

There's nothing obvious about it. I doubt NHL players will forgo their salaries and/or risk losing other benefits just to play in a tournament every four years.

It's a negotiated item between the employer and its employees-- not a basic human right.

2- they can still go even if the nhl does not allow them to, btw, and some have said that they would (hence pt 1)

AO is the only player I've heard say he would go if the NHL wasn't participating. If he did, he'd be in breach of his NHL contract, and "could" be suspended.

3- they are the only ones with a case for more money, either in their nhl contract in exchange for no olympics, or from the ioc since they're basically playing for free at the olympics.

They have the luxury of playing for free because they get their NHL paychecks regardless. They also are in top physical and medical condition thanks to the NHL.

It's not like players have to play in the NHL either. If they'd rather stay home and play in the Olympics freely, they have that choice too. Problem is that the NHL is paying all the freight. IF it is that important to the broadcaster and the IOC to have NHL players, they can put their money where their mouths are.

All this idealistic tripe about playing for one's country and it being the most important thing ever is jingoism. If that indeed were the case, why is the world's favorite sport somehow exempt from the same nationalistic fervor that is solely reserved for the Olympics.

This is a sports business, plain and simple. The IOC may be has the clout with individual athletes whose sports alone never get exposure except at the Olympics, but when you have to shut down a professional sports league to get participation, I think we're into new territory. Heck, I don't see the MLB shutting down so the world's best baseball players can go to the Olympics. Do the soccer/football leagues in Europe or South America shut down during the Olympics so the biggest stars can go off to the summer games?

$$$$

 

[seanlinden]

THIS sums it up nicely.

The NHL will most likely be at Sochi no matter what for hockey geopolitical reasons. It is just TOO important to the Russians to be snubbed, it's going to be spectacle of huge significance to Putin's "New Russia". It will be a long time for Russia to forgive the NHL if it doesn't go, remember the KHL and the Russian Hockey federation are very political beasts, revenge & insults do factor into decision making, it's not just a business.

That said, past 2018 is another story. The players' enthusiasm will probably have worn off a little on that 16-20 hour schlep to Sochi, it will be in a little resort town, not a cool & beautiful metropolis like vancouver, and the hockey significance of playing in France or Korea is lower than Russia & Canada.

After 2014 it will be time for the NHL and the Euro leagues to get together and work out a World Cup, the advantages are tremedous:

-Leagues get the money, money stays in Hockey. Like jfried said, there is a difference between what the IOC gets in rights + sponsership for Olympics with NHL and Olympics without, this is the intrinsic market value of NHL participation. Will the NHL get this in their own tournement? Probably most of it. This money will go directly to hockey leagues, making them stronger, not to the void that is the IOC.

-Better scheduling: Have it in September. Players selected skip their club pre-season training to play in world tournament instead. Extra insurance + wear & tear shouldn't be an issue since they would be playing pre-season anyways.

-Flexible hosting: Not tethered to mysterious host site that best bribed the IOC pontiffs, where Canada vs USA play in a 3000 seat arena in Korea at 4am??? NO!! Canada vs USA can be in New York, Sweden vs Finland can be in Helsinki, Czech vs Slovak in Bratislava, Switzerland vs. Germany in Munich, Russia vs. Belarus in Minsk, all on the same day, all in local prime times, tailored for the interested audience.

Hockey needs to be free from these IOC vampires post 2014, in both the short and the long term it will be best for the sport. Hockey can stand on its own and doesn't need to crutch on the olympics.

Completely agree....everyone rants and raves as to how much of a boost the Vancouver Olympics were for the NHL, but ignore the fact that you basically had the perfect storm. Gold medal game....Canada versus USA, on a Sunday afternoon on the west coast. No, it wasn't prime time, but it was pretty damn close to a perfect storm. Turin was the opposite, the USA and Canada both got knocked out in the quarters (conveniently by the two teams who lost in the semis), players came back jetlagged, people in the states didn't watch because the games were at horrible times. Russia is likely to be more of the same.

If the IOC were willing to guarantee Canada-USA gold medal games to be played at times convenient for the television audience in the United States, then maybe they could go without paying the NHL; but that's not practical.

Like you said, the NHL would be better off cutting a deal with the IIHF to host a World Cup of Hockey in September. Having players miss training camp / preseason games once every 4 years isn't a big deal, especially when they'll have camps with their countries instead. If some teams don't like this idea, they can set up some sort of system to compensate teams for players they lose to the competition.

The Olympic break is part of the players contract. There's no reason for the NHL to get any money whatsoever.
Only the players have any case asking for $$.

Only in the current CBA, the NHL is working with the players to get rid of that. Once you take the emotion of a Russian Olympics out, the players will problably be willing to sacrifice it in favour of more money... and simply put, there is more money available to the NHL/NHLPA in a World Cup than there is in the Olympics, especially if they are unwilling to deal.

 

[jekoh]

1. They've never had that right and it would be a major change if they got it.

What the hell are you talking about? They do currently have the olympic break in the contract, no change is needed, let alone a "major" one.

2. As I understand it, they'd be suspended without pay while they're gone and the team could also terminate their contacts. I'm sure Ovechkin isn't afraid of that but other players will think twice.

Pretty much all of them are star players, teams are not going to forfeit their stars players' rights. Not that they will have to.

3. If the NHL received money either from the Olympics or a World Cup, the players would also get more money since they receive 54% of league revenue.

As opposed to the 100% they could get. Great.

The IOC makes money from the players. At no point does the NHL enter the picture, so it's perfectly natural that they receive nothing. They just sign the players to marginally smaller contracts and that's it.

 

[Fugu]

CBA expires next year. So it's not automatic, and Bettman has already made comments about the owners wishing to reconsider certain aspects. Probably aimed more at the IOC and NBC than the NHLPA. They "will" use it to get relief for the owners.