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

[dafoomie]

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.



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.

If the NHL realizes any significant money out of this thing, unless it was just for insurance, I can't see Don Fehr not going after it in the next CBA. He'd portray it as the league hiding revenue from the players again.


As for Rene Fasel, even if the IOC tells the NHL to pound sand, I could see them approaching the networks bidding on the Olympics and telling them they won't participate unless they pay them x dollars. The networks would adjust their bids accordingly and the NHL still gets their money at the expense of the IOC.

 

[seanlinden]

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.

Of course, there are issues which might make the Olympic hockey touranment potentially more lucrative overall than a World Cup of Hockey, but if the IOC isn't willing to share, then it really doesn't matter how much revenue the Olympic Hockey Tournament brings in.

 

[rojac]

Get the NHL out of the Olympics altogether. If players want to play, they can arrange their contracts so that they're not playing in the NHL in a season where the Olympics occur.

And as for players like Ovechkin jumping ship and playing in the Olympics, I think it depends on how much the IIHF wants to anger the NHL. Essentially, the IIHF gets to write the rules on who is allowed to play and if they wanted they could require professional players to have the permission of their league to be eligible.

But then again, perhaps the IOC should just dump hockey as an Olympic sport. It gets rid of the annoying NHL problem and the issue of the women's tourney not being competitive.

 

[Killion]

If the NHL realizes any significant money out of this thing, unless it was just for insurance, I can't see Don Fehr not going after it in the next CBA. He'd portray it as the league hiding revenue from the players again.... As for Rene Fasel, even if the IOC tells the NHL to pound sand, I could see them approaching the networks bidding on the Olympics and telling them they won't participate unless they pay them x dollars. The networks would adjust their bids accordingly and the NHL still gets their money at the expense of the IOC.

Absolutely Fehr would be pressing, and hard, which is why I floated the 50% split between the PA & the owners at the very least as a starting point. Its a one-off, albeit every 4yrs, not subject to the 57 points, and as for Rene' Fasel; he's already told the NHL to "go pound sand". Numerous times. As recently as 3 days ago. Your suggestion that the NHL interfers with the network bidding process in demanding direct-payment for what is arguably the cherry on top of the cake events at the Winter Olympics is stunning. Gobsmackingly Rich dafoomie. Id pay big money for a seat in that courtroom.

Smersh vs. Kaos.

 

[rojac]

... for what is arguably the cherry on top of the cake events at the Winter Olympics ...

I guess Olympic hockey's big for some people. I'm a big Olympics fan but couldn't care less about Olympic hockey. I don't think the big team sports work all that well in the Olympics.

 

[LadyStanley]

The elephant in the room is that other than a gentleman's agreement of not poaching under-contract players, there (still) is no transfer agreement than includes the KHL.

This was a major starting point for the NHL not wanting to promote much of anything that could benefit KHL, including "holding out" over playing in Sochi trying to use it as a bargaining chip in getting a transfer agreement.

 

[Killion]

I guess Olympic hockey's big for some people. I'm a big Olympics fan but couldn't care less about Olympic hockey. I don't think the big team sports work all that well in the Olympics.

I agree. Their are more than enough players in the CHL, NCAA, the minors, Europe & elsewhere to provide for an entertaining brand of hockey at the Olympics. The IOC has grown dependent upon the elite-pro's from the NHL, maximizing broadcast, sponsorship & merchandising, ticket & new media sales revenues without recompence; simultaneously making a mockery of its' "amateur" status. They need the NHL far more than it needs them. If a players dream is to play for his country in the Olympics, follow Carl Brewer's, Andy Moogs' or any other number of players leads. By all means resuscitate the Canada Cup or a World Cup format every 2-4 off Olympic years provided its owned, managed & executed jointly by the IIHF & the NHL. I wonder how quickly Rene' Fasel would scream robbery if the NHL decided to pull off a series like that on its own with numerous players & countries participating that fall under his jurisdiction as President off the IIHF, taking breaks from league play, shutting down etc?......

 

[Jussi]

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

Fat chance of that happening. They already had a beef with the the first Euro Hockey Tour event staged in September so that was moved to the end of the season. Trust me, they DO NOT like their players taken in the middle odd pre-season which in Europe lasts longer and has much more of a meaning than in North America.

I wonder how quickly Rene' Fasel would scream robbery if the NHL decided to pull off a series like that on its own with numerous players & countries participating that fall under his jurisdiction as President off the IIHF, taking breaks from league play, shutting down etc?......

Wouldn't happen. Even though some federations might have some quarrels with the IIHF from time to time, they won't participate in any event that in not sanctioned by the IIHF. I can see Russia dropping out of a Eorld Cup (if there's no NHL in Sochi for example) in a heartbeat and with Russia, Sweden would follow, and with Sweden, Finland.

 

[MountainHawk]

Maybe there just won't be any international hockey for a while, or the US and Canada will just send college kids/junior kids like they used to.

 

[Fugu]

Maybe there just won't be any international hockey for a while, or the US and Canada will just send college kids/junior kids like they used to.

Honestly, I see nothing wrong with this approach. We see the world's best players in the NHL right now. Because so few countries produce NHL'ers, it always ends up being a case of Davids against Goliaths but never with the fairy tale ending. Only 3-4 countries can produce super teams. I just don't see the point of divvying them by origin at that point.

 

[Dado]

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.

FIFA World Cup is 1000x more important than Olympic soccer gold.

 

[Jeffrey93]

I'm sure the new CBA will change HRR to any money generated off the backs of the players.
Selling your players to the IOC should most definitely count as HRR.

I'm not a Union genius....but couldn't the NHLPA have some influence in if the players go or not? Say the NHL gets a bag of cash to let their players go....could the NHLPA not say 'That money counts as HRR or else we don't go and you don't get your money and exposure'???

It might be a pretty idle threat since most players want to go anyway....but this is an area that doesn't seem to be covered under the current CBA....so would the NHL and NHLPA not have to reach an agreement about it and then add an amendment or letter to the current CBA?

Touchy topic though...since ALL the players would benefit but only a handful are participating. And every 4 years you would see a slight bump in the cap.

I'm sure there is an arrangement than could be made though....and it should be made. Heck...I'd even be cool with the NHL taking the money from the Olympics and starting an arena fund for the future or something of that nature. Simply pocketing it will annoy the players a tad.

 

[dafoomie]

Absolutely Fehr would be pressing, and hard, which is why I floated the 50% split between the PA & the owners at the very least as a starting point. Its a one-off, albeit every 4yrs, not subject to the 57 points, and as for Rene' Fasel; he's already told the NHL to "go pound sand". Numerous times. As recently as 3 days ago. Your suggestion that the NHL interfers with the network bidding process in demanding direct-payment for what is arguably the cherry on top of the cake events at the Winter Olympics is stunning. Gobsmackingly Rich dafoomie. Id pay big money for a seat in that courtroom.

Smersh vs. Kaos.

In this very thread it was mentioned that the networks are going to prepare two bids for the Olympics, one with the NHL's participation and one without. I would imagine the difference is not hugely significant compared to what the entire contract would be worth, but its still something they need to take into consideration given how little room for profit there is, NBC lost money on the Olympics. Losing the potential for a USA/Canada event like the one they had last year, even within the scope of the entire Olympics, is significant enough.

The NHL is also in talks with these same networks regarding their own TV deal coming up. Do you honestly think it would be that far fetched for them to assure those networks of their participation if their bids for the NHL contract reached a certain threshold? They'd be stupid not to use every ounce of leverage they have to secure the most money they can.

I would rather see them leave the Olympics to amateurs and bring back the World Cup but they'll take whichever avenue makes them the most money.

 

[Killion]

Do you honestly think it would be that far fetched for them to assure those networks of their participation if their bids for the NHL contract reached a certain threshold? They'd be stupid not to use every ounce of leverage they have to secure the most money they can.

Without an agreement from Fasel & the IOC nor apparently any willingness on their part to share broadcasting revenues with the NHL, and in light of the exorbitant fees being paid out already with little to no profits to show at the end of the day, and in a market of sharply decreasing advertising & sponsorship expenditures, and based on the absolutely abysmal ratings the NHL has to show for itself, it would seem to me they dont have much ability to "leverage" Olympic participation with a new broadcasting contract. I suppose they could cut a side deal with NBC or whomever , a sort of "appearance/performance fee", but tell you what, the IOC'll be all over that. From a broadcasting perspective, the Olympics, along with the decent ratings of last springs SC Finals & the Winter Classics are just about the only things the NHL has to sing about, to sell. How much that raises the bar or threshold over & above what the leagues currently receiving & how they play it out should be interesting to say the least.

 

[LadyStanley]

It might be a pretty idle threat since most players want to go anyway....but this is an area that doesn't seem to be covered under the current CBA....so would the NHL and NHLPA not have to reach an agreement about it and then add an amendment or letter to the current CBA?

The "current" CBA explicitly shuts down the NHL for 2+ weeks around the Winter Olympics (through 2010) so that players can participate. (And this is in lieu of an ASG break.)

 

[Jeffrey93]

The "current" CBA explicitly shuts down the NHL for 2+ weeks around the Winter Olympics (through 2010) so that players can participate. (And this is in lieu of an ASG break.)

But no mention of the NHL generating revenue off of it or how that will factor into the Salary Cap arrangement, right?

 

[BigT2002]

In the end, the IOC will have to back off varying on a couple things. If I'm wrong please educate myself and the rest of the board with this:

1) Hockey is the main event of the Winter Olympics. IIRC, its the last medal to be handed out as well. They'll want to showcase the best of the best.

2) The didn't also MLB players into the Olympics and the sport was later knicked because it was basically between Japan and Cuba, see next point...

3) What is considered professional? Will it just be the NHL? Or will it include KHL, SEL, DEL, et al? Wasn't the biggest complain against all the Soviet wins during the 60-90's that they were basically a professional team going against amateurs?

The main issues with the Olympics is they are just some greedy ****** who believe the world owes them something because its an international event. If that is truly the case and that is how its going to be. Then there is no reason the IIHF can't pull a FIFA and constitute the World Cup as the premiere award for international hockey then. You can win the Gold Medal in soccer at the Olympics and it won't hold a candle to winning the World Cup. Do the same thing if that is how the IOC wants to play. With the possibilities of skiing, if you lost hockey, the Winter Olympics could potentially go into hiatus because of participation to include ratings. I can't imagine the powerhouse nations being okay with not sending their best players for something they all want, mainly Canada of all of them!

 

[jekoh]

I'm not a Union genius....but couldn't the NHLPA have some influence in if the players go or not?

No, the NHLPA is obviously not part of the CBA negotiations, they just sign where the boss tells them to.

3) What is considered professional? Will it just be the NHL? Or will it include KHL, SEL, DEL, et al? Wasn't the biggest complain against all the Soviet wins during the 60-90's that they were basically a professional team going against amateurs?

The KHL is just as pro as the NHL, but why does it matter anyway? The IOC has not intention to go back to amateurs. Seriously, this obsession with "amateurs" has to stop, it was already outdated 30 years ago.

The main issues with the Olympics is they are just some greedy ****** who believe the world owes them something because its an international event. If that is truly the case and that is how its going to be. Then there is no reason the IIHF can't pull a FIFA and constitute the World Cup as the premiere award for international hockey then. You can win the Gold Medal in soccer at the Olympics and it won't hold a candle to winning the World Cup. Do the same thing if that is how the IOC wants to play. With the possibilities of skiing, if you lost hockey, the Winter Olympics could potentially go into hiatus because of participation to include ratings. I can't imagine the powerhouse nations being okay with not sending their best players for something they all want, mainly Canada of all of them!

You guys are funny with your ridiculous scenarios designed to harm the IOC as much as possible.

You need to come back to earth: the IIHF is not going to go out of the olympics or purposely devalue it to an u-23 tourney, as they have no reason to do so.

 

[Turboflex*]

The IIHF isn't in the driver seat buddy, it's the leagues and the players. The IIHF will go along with whatever the KHL/NHL ultimately decide, even if it's world cups post 2014, if they don't, they will become irrelevant. By sanctioning whatever plan the NHL/KHL/Euro leagues come up with they stay in the picture, and make the process smoother. At the end of the day, the IIHF is working for hockey, if they start stooging for the IOC it will be a black mark against it.

Baseball went through the same issues when setting up the World Baseball classic, there were tensions between the leagues & player unions in the MLB and Japan. Baseball's intl federation (IBAF) helped get it running in the beginning by sanctioning it and arbitrating disputes, but they acknowledge they are in the backseat for this event.

http://www.mister-baseball.com/ibaf-president-fraccari-28-teams-world-baseball-classic-planned/

Fraccari said that the International Baseball Federation (IBAF) is currently talking with professional baseball (MLB and NPB) about the future of the World Baseball Classic (WBC), which will have an influence on all the other tournaments. In discussion is the expansion of the WBC to up to 28 teams, which would be an increase of twelve teams in comparison to the current format. The Baseball World Cup and regional tournaments like the European Championship could be transformed into qualifiers for the WBC, while other tournaments like the Intercontinental Cup will disappear all-together.

While professional baseball is probably going to take over the organization of the major tournaments, the IBAF will focus more on the development of the sport. The first steps are going to be that an Under-21 World Championship will be created and the Under-17 World Championship will be held annually. Talks between the involved parties are still ongoing, but an agreement is supposed to come by the end of the year. These discussions are probably also the reason that there is still not yet known, where the next Baseball World Cup (if there will be one) will be held next year. According to rumors Taiwan, Cuba and the United States are possible destinations.

The federation is not trying to make a power play over professional leagues, it's focusing on developing the sport and running youth tournements. The IIHF will have to learn to accept a similar role, as a sanctioner and arbiter of premier events, and running qualifiers & youth tournaments. End the stupid world championship tourney that has pros but runs during NHL playoffs. Change a tournment like the Spengler Cup into a qualifier for the World Cup for the lower ranked nations (ranks 9 and lower, with 4 or 8 more qualifying?)

 

[Shawa666]

I agree. Their are more than enough players in the CHL, NCAA, the minors, Europe & elsewhere to provide for an entertaining brand of hockey at the Olympics. The IOC has grown dependent upon the elite-pro's from the NHL, maximizing broadcast, sponsorship & merchandising, ticket & new media sales revenues without recompence; simultaneously making a mockery of its' "amateur" status. They need the NHL far more than it needs them. If a players dream is to play for his country in the Olympics, follow Carl Brewer's, Andy Moogs' or any other number of players leads. By all means resuscitate the Canada Cup or a World Cup format every 2-4 off Olympic years provided its owned, managed & executed jointly by the IIHF & the NHL. I wonder how quickly Rene' Fasel would scream robbery if the NHL decided to pull off a series like that on its own with numerous players & countries participating that fall under his jurisdiction as President off the IIHF, taking breaks from league play, shutting down etc?......

Killion, the "amateur" clause just meant that any player in the Olympics had to be playing in an IIHF run league. There was nothing amateur about the Soviet teams during the pro ban.

 

[jekoh]

The IIHF will go along with whatever the KHL/NHL ultimately decide, even if it's world cups post 2014, if they don't, they will become irrelevant. By sanctioning whatever plan the NHL/KHL/Euro leagues come up with

They're highly unlikely to come up with anything though. Only the NHL seems to have a problem with the games, and even then they still take part because the players want to. Get real, Canada Cup/World Cup have existed for a long time and if anything they're becoming less and less relevant.

 

[Jussi]

The IIHF isn't in the driver seat buddy, it's the leagues and the players. The IIHF will go along with whatever the KHL/NHL ultimately decide, even if it's world cups post 2014, if they don't, they will become irrelevant. By sanctioning whatever plan the NHL/KHL/Euro leagues come up with they stay in the picture, and make the process smoother. At the end of the day, the IIHF is working for hockey, if they start stooging for the IOC it will be a black mark against it.


The federation is not trying to make a power play over professional leagues, it's focusing on developing the sport and running youth tournements. The IIHF will have to learn to accept a similar role, as a sanctioner and arbiter of premier events, and running qualifiers & youth tournaments. End the stupid world championship tourney that has pros but runs during NHL playoffs. Change a tournment like the Spengler Cup into a qualifier for the World Cup for the lower ranked nations (ranks 9 and lower, with 4 or 8 more qualifying?)

They can't, due to the promotion and relegation format. World's have to be held every year. Suppose Slovakia is relegated, and the qualifiying tournament is held in the middle of the European and NHL season. Slovakia will have to play without it's NHL players, seriously diminishing it's chances for a promotion. Or it he tournament isn't held every year, they would have to languish all that time in Division 2, seriously damaging the the development of hockey in that country

 

[Killion]

The IIHF isn't in the driver seat buddy, it's the leagues and the players. The IIHF will go along with whatever the KHL/NHL ultimately decide, even if it's world cups post 2014, if they don't, they will become irrelevant. By sanctioning whatever plan the NHL/KHL/Euro leagues come up with they stay in the picture, and make the process smoother. At the end of the day, the IIHF is working for hockey, if they start stooging for the IOC it will be a black mark against it.

If they "start" Turbo?. Horse is out of the barn. Growing fat off the land. Say hello to my little friend Rene' Fasel, who is taking advantage of the dysfunctional relationships (transfer fee's, draft eligibility ages etc) between the pro leagues & governing bodies on both continents. Do you not find it quite appalling to see the President of the IIHF given a priviledged seat on the IOC's board, permitted to retain the former, in what is clearly a conflict of interest?. I sure do.

Killion, the "amateur" clause just meant that any player in the Olympics had to be playing in an IIHF run league. There was nothing amateur about the Soviet teams during the pro ban.

Thats for sure. Any & all pretensions' the Olympic movement once had to being "amateur" in nature are as dated as the Corvair, the Ed Sullivan Show, vinyl records, Harmonium....

 

[Fugu]

No, the NHLPA is obviously not part of the CBA negotiations, they just sign where the boss tells them to.

Let's review. Last lockout happened because the NHLPA would not accept a hard cap, or escrow, or a cap set on getting a fixed percentage of what the NHL [mainly] called revenues. NHL also wanted arbitration to be re-worked. Limits on rookie contracts; and 35+ rule. Bonuses limited to specific conditions. No more options on contracts (extensions).

What did the players sign, keeping in mind that it's in their interest to have as few restrictions on contracts at any point during a player's career as well.

1. A hard cap
2. Escrow
3. A fixed percentage of HRR. The players' share includes pretty much anything that goes to any player for any reason (benefits, etc.). Niiiiice.
4. Rookie contracts have specific limits.
5. There's a strong incentive to not sign 35+ yo players to deals longer than one year.
6. Individual limits for maximum of cap any one player can get (20%)-- hey it is a restriction
7. No bonuses except for rookie contracts; and specific cases (e.g., LTIR)
8. No options on contracts


What did the players get? UFA age was lowered. Can't think of anything else they "won" in that round. Oh, yes. The Olympic participation was "grudgingly" approved by the owners.

Just because the owners were too stupid too valuate free agency properly with regard to how it protects smaller markets and income-challenged teams is beside the point. The NHL did tell them where to sign, when to sign, the color of ink to use, and in script or block print.

 

[Turboflex*]

If they "start" Turbo?. Horse is out of the barn. Growing fat off the land. Say hello to my little friend Rene' Fasel, who is taking advantage of the dysfunctional relationships (transfer fee's, draft eligibility ages etc) between the pro leagues & governing bodies on both continents. Do you not find it quite appalling to see the President of the IIHF given a priviledged seat on the IOC's board, permitted to retain the former, in what is clearly a conflict of interest?. I sure do.

Exactly why they need to be cut down, and it is easily in the league's power to do so. I don't think Gary Bettmen needs a lesson in the nature of IOC/IIHF parasites after dealing with them for a decade. [mod delete]

Like I said, 2014 Sochi will happen, it's too important of a political spectacle to Russia not to. But after that when the olympics are in some Korean or French village, Alexander & Gary will sit down and talk business, they both know they can do a lot better than taking orders from the IOC/IIHF and getting sponged by those two hockey parasite organizations while the NHL & KHL pay all the player salaries, as opposed to getting together and getting the ball rolling on a World Cup that benefits everyone who is not a swiss bureaucrat (better scheduling, flexible/dynamic hosting, leagues keep money & own content).