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

[Tom ServoMST3K]

It would be nice to see players makeing so much money for playing a game and owners who are all pretty richto give up something for the olympics

 

[AllByDesign]

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.

Not unlike the Red Wings players that were suspended for missing the All Star game. They took it upon themselves to rest up for the final stretch of the season. I can't comment if they were right or wrong, but it is an example of how a player will determine their own priorities as it pertains to their contractual obligations.

If Ovechkin breaches contract to attend the Olympics and is followed by others, it stands to reason they would receive like punishments. Given the level of candle power that he contains, the NHl would not want to suspend him for long.

IF it is that important to the broadcaster and the IOC to have NHL players, they can put their money where their mouths are.

This is my point. The broadcaster and the IOC are assigning their exact dollar value that they attach to having NHL players. 0

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.

I agree. I think that the NHL owners take on a huge risk as it pertains to the Olympics. You take your most prized assets and through them into a combative tournament that is guaranteed to supply some with injury. Its assinine. Not to mention the break in flow to the season.

People already consider the regular season to be rubbish when it comes to NHL hockey. Shutting down the season to go to the Olympics only gives creedence to that line of thinking.

 

[jekoh]

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.

More importantly the NHL will not want for risk that, so it's a moot point.

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.

Malkin, Kovalchuk said the same. I'm sure they're frightened by the threat of a suspension.

They have the luxury of playing for free because they get their NHL paychecks regardless.

They could get a bigger one by forfeiting the games.

They also are in top physical and medical condition thanks to the NHL.

lol, this is obviously not true, they would also be in top shape anywhere else.

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.

You're not trying to say there's less nationalistic fervor in football, are you?

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?

Surely you realise all the other profesional hockey league do stop for the olympics, right? As for the football leagues, they don't stop but whoever is selected still goes. If that was implemented in the hockey world that would mean the NHL would not stop the season but Ovechkin and Crosby would leave their team for a fortnight. That's fine by me.

 

[AllByDesign]

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.

I am hung on this point, Fugu. The importance of a sporting event can be viewed from different angles. The Russians are an interesting case when it comes to international competition. When the USSR was formed, and communism established, the state felt one of the best ways to parade the success of your ideals was to dominate in sport. Dominate they did... for decades. There has been an ingrained culture for generations in this state that compells them to have pride in representing your country at the Olympics. Communism may have been defeated, but the tradition of sport excellence remains.

I agree that ones opinion on being at the Olympics can verge on jingoism, but we have to look on where it comes from. When Canadians refer to international excellence we generally bring out the folklorish stories on ole '72. Prior to that we never took ourselves too seriously when it came to athletics on the world's stage. Since then it has blossomed into something.

American's have always held a high regard for international competition when it comes to the Olympics. Your Olympic training programs are that of envy around the world. The dollar resources that get funnelled into such programs is tremendous. Pro atheletes can get wrapped up into this as well, no?

 

[dafoomie]

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.

What are you talking about? The NHL chooses to have an Olympic break and there is nothing stopping them from choosing not to.

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

New Jersey might jump at the chance to terminate Kovalchuk's deal, it all depends on the situation. Mid tier players and older guys with years left on their deals would have to be concerned. There is also the possibility that someone could get injured during the Olympics, and they would not be paid again until they are healthy. A career ending injury would mean losing the rest of their contract, big star or not.

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

From who? The IOC gives them 0. The NHL pays 54% of their revenue to the players. Anyone who would pay 100% of revenue to players would be out of business the next day.

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 are a big part of the picture as it is only with their consent that their players play. Maybe a few Russians will risk suspension and play in 2014, will that make up for the majority of other players not going? No. The IOC stands to make significantly less money from their US and Canadian TV deals if the NHL doesn't participate.

 

[LadyStanley]

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.

Such payments as these are NOT considered HRR based on current definitions in the CBA. (Nor are expansion or relocation nor territory indemnification payments part of HRR.)

So, the players might get nothing.

Surely you realise all the other profesional hockey league do stop for the olympics, right?

Can't speak for European leagues (as I don't follow them), but the North American AHL, ECHL, CHL pro (minor) leagues continued playing through the Olympics.

 

[jekoh]

The NHL chooses to have an Olympic break and there is nothing stopping them from choosing not to.

Of course there is.

From who? The IOC gives them 0. The NHL pays 54% of their revenue to the players. Anyone who would pay 100% of revenue to players would be out of business the next day.

100% of what the NHL would get from the IOC!

If the NHL somehow gets 46% of what the IOC is willing to pay, despite not having contributed in any way, shape or form I must say they are tremendous businessmen.

Of course this is a moot point since the IOC is not paying anything to anyone.

 

[Preds Partisan]

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.

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.

This is pretty much the way I see it. Vancouver was a confluence of several factors, none of which are going to be repeated in 2014, so it's not going to capture the attention or provide a bump in North America like it did (or is perceived as doing). Making 2010 the last NHL participating Olympics made perfect sense to me before and I still hold that same position. Anything out of season makes the most sense to me. I can't provide a good argument for shutting down the NHL in season, going through the compressed schedule, etc. versus a once per four years out of season world championship. Don Fehr and the MLBPA agreed to the World Baseball Classic to be played every fourth year during spring training, so I don't see why he couldn't shepard in the same thing for hockey during their training camp time frame as well.

 

[King Woodballs]

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).



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.

That is why I said probably (because I dont know how they feel about it) because how could an owner want to shut down his (in most cases) a money making venture for 3 weeks without being compensated by the IIHF and/or the IOC

 

[jekoh]

Can't speak for European leagues (as I don't follow them), but the North American AHL, ECHL, CHL pro (minor) leagues continued playing through the Olympics.

Fair enough. Not every league in Europe stopped, either. But the players still went in any case.

 

[Street Hawk]

Just say screw them already and hold a World Cup every 4 years in the summer.

That's the NHL. Other leagues/countries value the Olympics higher. Russia or Sweden could easily opt not to participate in the NHL's World Cup of Hockey because it doesn't mean the same to them as the Olympics do.

NHL needs to be reasonable here. Don't get greedy, but don't get screwed either. Get something that works.

Treat it like a CBA negotiation. Do you really want a work stoppage and cancel the Cup?

Focus in on getting footage for the NHL Network and NHL.com. Get access to the players for interviews and stuff.

 

[seanlinden]

That's the NHL. Other leagues/countries value the Olympics higher. Russia or Sweden could easily opt not to participate in the NHL's World Cup of Hockey because it doesn't mean the same to them as the Olympics do.

NHL needs to be reasonable here. Don't get greedy, but don't get screwed either. Get something that works.

Treat it like a CBA negotiation. Do you really want a work stoppage and cancel the Cup?

Focus in on getting footage for the NHL Network and NHL.com. Get access to the players for interviews and stuff.

Sure, the Russians & Swedes could miss out on the best-on-best tournament and win a meaningless olympic gold, while any player in the NHL isn't allowed to go.

Everyone needs to be reasonable here, and cut the IOC out of this huge money maker when they bring very little of value, but take all of the money. The NHL needs to work with the IIHF to make the World Cup of Hockey work. There's more money in it for everyone if they do.

 

[Fugu]

More importantly the NHL will not want for risk that, so it's a moot point.

Risk what? Losing a season because the players will want to risk an entire year's salary so some of them can play in a tournament for 3 weeks every four years? Really? Amazing how something the NHL never participated in until the 90's is somehow an absolute requirement worth losing one's salary over. I think not.

(You also ignore the points about the World Cup and the world's favorite sport, Russian and the rest of Europe included.)

Malkin, Kovalchuk said the same. I'm sure they're frightened by the threat of a suspension.

It would be unprecedented, but technically they would be in breach of their NHL contract and I'm 100% certain that Bettman would suspend any players who didn't show up to work. So again, if a player wishes to have his contract nullified or suspended, that is his prerogative, but if the owners decide to not shut down for three weeks for the Olympics, he does face that risk.

They could get a bigger one by forfeiting the games.

This doesn't make sense, but I don't get the impression you're thinking this through very well.

lol, this is obviously not true, they would also be in top shape anywhere else.

Why is important to have NHL players then? Why not choose players who aren't in the NHL? Oh wait.

There must be some "value" to having NHL players in the Olympics or we wouldn't be having this discussion. THe point you keep sidestepping is that the NHL pays for everything while the countries skim off the cream and the IOC keeps all the money-- much of it driven by a broadcaster having something to spotlight as a collection of the best the world has to offer. (Or else we'd still cling to original Olympic "spirit" and send amateurs.)

You're not trying to say there's less nationalistic fervor in football, are you?

I'm pointing out that football has its own spectacle that is a bigger even than the Olympics. If the Olympics was REALLY the only way countries could participate in the nationalistic jingoism, Olympic football would be bigger than the World Cup.

Instead we have an a la carte system of what the best event is for international competition between nations. In football, it's always been the World Cup (at least most our lifetimes). In hockey, the NHL wasn't even included until the the 90's.

Hey! Maybe that amateur tag precluded some things, but I don't see FIFA dropping its tournament to help out the IOC. Even to share.

Surely you realise all the other profesional hockey league do stop for the olympics, right?

Do they really count when anyone who is anyone in pro hockey is in the NHL? How many Russians would come from the other leagues (if politics weren't involved)? Please.

As for the football leagues, they don't stop but whoever is selected still goes. If that was implemented in the hockey world that would mean the NHL would not stop the season but Ovechkin and Crosby would leave their team for a fortnight. That's fine by me.

Oh really? They don't stop. I wonder why that is the case.

Now, how many NHL teams could ice a full squad if the Olympics and NHL played concurrently? And--- would fans really pay to see their NHL team's farm players and prospects for the three weeks that Sid, AO et al were off? Sound business plan.

For kicks, I added up the NHL salaries of the top Olympic teams, but I'm sure that info is still around here somewhere. I think Team Canada had $130m of talent on their squad (and I'm not counting the salaries of Babcock, Holland, Yzerman, Ruff, et al.) US and Sweden were over the cap, iirc. Pretty sure Russia was too.

 

[Street Hawk]

Too Narrow

Sure, the Russians & Swedes could miss out on the best-on-best tournament and win a meaningless olympic gold, while any player in the NHL isn't allowed to go.

Everyone needs to be reasonable here, and cut the IOC out of this huge money maker when they bring very little of value, but take all of the money. The NHL needs to work with the IIHF to make the World Cup of Hockey work. There's more money in it for everyone if they do.

That's a very narrow point of view. World Cup of Hockey in September is competing with the MLB playoffs in the US, the start of the NFL and NCAA College football seasons.

It doesn't have the broad appeal that the Olympics do. Sure, it's a big money maker because the NHL controls the event, but from an exposure point of view, pales in comparison to the Olympics.

I just think the European Federations would rather do the Olympics as opposed to a NHL run World Cup.

 

[Fugu]

Not unlike the Red Wings players that were suspended for missing the All Star game. They took it upon themselves to rest up for the final stretch of the season. I can't comment if they were right or wrong, but it is an example of how a player will determine their own priorities as it pertains to their contractual obligations.

The Wings players could not take it upon themselves, but had to be declared injured by their team. This was Wings mgt decision. By the way, Dats and Lidstrom never got a call from Bettman pointing out that if they just showed up in street clothes, like Sid, they wouldn't be suspended. )

If Ovechkin breaches contract to attend the Olympics and is followed by others, it stands to reason they would receive like punishments. Given the level of candle power that he contains, the NHl would not want to suspend him for long.

I have to disagree in general--- unless he is the only player who makes that choice. You see, if many players decided to follow suit, what would the NHL do? They'd have to say it was okay to breach their SPC's to go "play" hockey for an unauthorized event. If anything, this would probably nullify any insurance they had through the NHL. Remember, we're dealing with lawyers, contracts, money and precedents.

What would stop the players from deciding to go to then next event, also unauthorized, if they felt that their contracts weren't jeopardized.

Don't forget that we are dealing with a collectively bargained document that dictates what the NHL, any team or player can do and remain in compliance. If it's not agreed to collectively, I don't think there's going to be the flexibility some people think.

People already consider the regular season to be rubbish when it comes to NHL hockey. Shutting down the season to go to the Olympics only gives creedence to that line of thinking.

I think if the NHL actually had seen some translation [in terms of revenues] from participating in the event, they wouldn't be making any noise about it. I think you agree, but to reiterate, this was an investment by the owners. If there is NO RETURN that can be measured to the league, and furthermore they are precluded from even using Olympics imagery to help make that linkage in the minds of the public they're trying to cultivate, I cannot fathom one reason why they would continue to do this. I can see them giving in to the players requests for it--- but what does the NHLPA have to give back to entice them? We're dealing with horse traders after all.

 

[Fugu]

I am hung on this point, Fugu. The importance of a sporting event can be viewed from different angles. The Russians are an interesting case when it comes to international competition. When the USSR was formed, and communism established, the state felt one of the best ways to parade the success of your ideals was to dominate in sport. Dominate they did... for decades. There has been an ingrained culture for generations in this state that compells them to have pride in representing your country at the Olympics. Communism may have been defeated, but the tradition of sport excellence remains.

I agree that ones opinion on being at the Olympics can verge on jingoism, but we have to look on where it comes from. When Canadians refer to international excellence we generally bring out the folklorish stories on ole '72. Prior to that we never took ourselves too seriously when it came to athletics on the world's stage. Since then it has blossomed into something.

I don't disagree with anything you say here, and furthermore had professionals been allowed to participate in the Olympics back in the 70's, would the Summit Series really have captivated the imagination as it had? I think the answer is no. It was the Miracle on Ice that built on the rivalry with the Russian from the Summit Series et al., which then translated into the IOC rethinking its stance on amateurism as it related to athletes' status.

Now-- what is in it for the pro leagues in joining in? Unless there is something in it for them, there's no reason whatsoever to join in the Olympic silliness.

(I'd go on about how the Olympics have morphed over this period as well, starting the LA Games and commercialism, but I think everyone can figure that bit out for themselves.)

American's have always held a high regard for international competition when it comes to the Olympics. Your Olympic training programs are that of envy around the world. The dollar resources that get funnelled into such programs is tremendous. Pro atheletes can get wrapped up into this as well, no?

I think this is foolish too, and an outgrowth of the Cold War. I'd be far happier if we celebrated the world's best athletes in competition with each other--- regardless of country of origin. Ban all the flags and the world would be better for it.

I also think sports holds too high of a status in this country as it is and could really blow a gasket about the diversion of resources in academic settings which generally only help an unique and elite group of young people, but yah..... another day.

 

[Killion]

"We can solve some of the issues they had in Vancouver, media access, things like that. These are very (and dont cost a cent of course) easy to organize. The money should not be an issue because the issue is solved. We do not have any money and it is very easy".

Rene' Fasel

 

[Fugu]

Sure, the Russians & Swedes could miss out on the best-on-best tournament and win a meaningless olympic gold, while any player in the NHL isn't allowed to go.

Everyone needs to be reasonable here, and cut the IOC out of this huge money maker when they bring very little of value, but take all of the money. The NHL needs to work with the IIHF to make the World Cup of Hockey work. There's more money in it for everyone if they do.

I agree that while many are arguing an all or nothing venture, there's plenty of money that can be made. It should not be ignored that in the day of digital media rights being increasingly more important that the NHL has hinted about the lack of access and rights on several occasions. IOC simply needs to get its thinking into the 21st century and realize that it's not really gaining much with its previous stances, and really could jeopardize the golden goose, let alone the eggs.

 

[Killion]

IOC simply needs to get its thinking into the 21st century and realize that it's not really gaining much with its previous stances, and really could jeopardize the golden goose, let alone the eggs.

Quail, pheasant or sturgeon?.

 

[Confucius]

So if the NHL gets some payment, are they going to pay the players that go?

 

[Killion]

So if the NHL gets some payment, are they going to pay the players that go?

I wouldnt expect the individual players themselves to be receiving compensation, but should the vaults be opened, the NHLPA collectively should receive, IMHO, 50% of the take with the balance going equally to all 30 team owners.

 

[Confucius]

I wouldnt expect the individual players themselves to be receiving compensation, but should the vaults be opened, the NHLPA collectively should receive, IMHO, 50% of the take with the balance going equally to all 30 team owners.

Ahh isn't that 57%

 

[Killion]

Ahh isn't that 57%

Depends on which set of books the IOC/NHL provides to the PA HH. But sure, why not, 57% is just a number, an equation. Sounds more than fair to me & is not without precedent...

 

[jekoh]

Risk what? Losing a season because the players will want to risk an entire year's salary so some of them can play in a tournament for 3 weeks every four years?

Risk the players leave mid-season without the league's consent.

This doesn't make sense, but I don't get the impression you're thinking this through very well.

What a compelling and eloquently presented argument.

If you really think the players did not have to give something in exchange for the league's participation in the games, and the league can take it away without having to give something else, there's little I can do for you.

They also are in top physical and medical condition thanks to the NHL.

lol, this is obviously not true, they would also be in top shape anywhere else.

Why is important to have NHL players then?

There is no link whatseoever between this and your original claim.

NHL players are not in top medical condition "thanks to the NHL". They would also be in top medical condition had they signed in another league.

There must be some "value" to having NHL players in the Olympics or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Of course there is, but the players are not what they are "thanks to the NHL". They owe the NHL absolutely nothing, just like I owe my employer absolutely nothing: I'd get the same if not better anywhere else.

THe point you keep sidestepping is that the NHL pays for everything while the countries skim off the cream and the IOC keeps all the money-- much of it driven by a broadcaster having something to spotlight as a collection of the best the world has to offer. (Or else we'd still cling to original Olympic "spirit" and send amateurs.)

Profesional clubs pay the player and make sure he's able to work in exchange for his workforce. So that entitles the clubs to exactly nothing.

FYI, the Olympic spirit was always about sending the best.

I'm pointing out that football has its own spectacle that is a bigger even than the Olympics. If the Olympics was REALLY the only way countries could participate in the nationalistic jingoism, Olympic football would be bigger than the World Cup.

That was very interesting, although not very relevant since no one said the Olympics were the only possible stage for what you call "nationalism".

Do they really count when anyone who is anyone in pro hockey is in the NHL? How many Russians would come from the other leagues (if politics weren't involved)? Please.

How many Russians? Well, half of them just as we saw in Turin and Vancouver.

Politics? Oh, you're one of those

Oh really? They don't stop. I wonder why that is the case.

That is the case because they can replace the international players by juniors for a couple of games. That's not very relevant to the subject at hand though.

Now, how many NHL teams could ice a full squad if the Olympics and NHL played concurrently? And--- would fans really pay to see their NHL team's farm players and prospects for the three weeks that Sid, AO et al were off? Sound business plan.

Good thing you agree to shut down the league altogether.

 

[Fugu]

So if the NHL gets some payment, are they going to pay the players that go?

Only if the players negotiate a share. Seeing that they're willing to play for free and even risk nullifying their contracts, I think they'd have a hard time convincing anyone they'd better be paid, or else. That said, duh. Yes, they do get 57% of anything the NHL can count as revenues.


@jekoh.

Pray tell, what exactly did the players give up in exchange for participation in the Olympics? It's nice to say it's obvious, but please elaborate.