4 Ways to make the Olympics a better tournament

[Dolemite]

Honestly, I think the timing of the Olympics and the first year back in 'the New NHL' are the absolute worst. You have some players who haven't played in a long time and others who are not only trying to adjust their games but their bodies to the rigors of the new NHL. If they could have just settled the CBA last year.

 

[C-J...*]

I´d like to see a straight series with the 8 best teams

Sweden, Canada, Usa, Czech Rep, Slovakia, Finland, Russia & a qualifying-team (most likely Germany...?)


After 7 games, the first 4 goes to the semi´s.

1 Vs 4

2 Vs 3

Final



As a Swede, Belarus shouldnt be alowed to even qualify

 

[RUSqueelin*]

I'm not sure what your point is, but contrary to what the article suggests, Slovakia was knocked out in the first round of the 2002 Olympics, not in a "qualifying tournament".

But yes the format has changed, which is a good thing, the 2002 one was a disgrace.

The article states:

They were turned down and Slovakia finished fourth in its four-team group in the qualifying tournament. Germany won the group and advanced to the final round.

I remember because there was an up roar by teams like Slovakia that didn't get to use the NHL players in the qualifying round.

If that article wasn't good enough, check out this link and the tourney results.

http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Dugout/4128/65olympicstandings.html

Why are we debating this? The original poster said they should have the top 7 counties plus one winner of a qualifying tourny. My point was they tried something like this in 02. It didn't work because of some of the problems of NHL participation like I outlined so that's why they probably changed it to this years format. Although the poster did suggest having a summer qualifying tourney which would solve the previous problems - and I can't really think of any negatives of having a summer qualifying tourney.

 

[MountainHawk]

The number one thing that would make the Olympics better .... give it back to the amateurs.

 

[shawn_kemp*]

The number one thing that would make the Olympics better .... give it back to the amateurs.

And this is supposed to funny, how?

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

The number one thing that would make the Olympics better .... give it back to the amateurs.

Since NHLer's started playing in the Olympics, it has become the first international tournament ever to capture the hearts of hockey fans worldwide. The Canada Cup / World Cup was always much more popular in North America than Europe, and the opposite was true for the World Championships. I'm just glad that ever country is icing the best team they can, and everyone is passionate about winning!

 

[Tokyo Bucks]

8 team tournament would mean that it's the elite 7 + host country (remember, this is the Olympics), there would be no variation from year to year. So a minimum of 10 teams would be needed. It probably won't make a big difference having 10 or 12 teams, in this format of 2 pools.

 

[VladNYC*]

You guys forget that this is the olympics and not the world champion ships. Any country that wants to invest the money, time and risk humiliating them selves by sending a team over should be aloud to play. Look at soccer. How many countries participate in that? Do most of them have a chance to win? Absolutly not. It's still great to see the games though.

 

[Gozer]

The number one thing that would make the Olympics better .... give it back to the amateurs.

How about, no, no and no. And yeah... no.

 

[Lexicon Devil]

You guys forget that this is the olympics and not the world champion ships. Any country that wants to invest the money, time and risk humiliating them selves by sending a team over should be aloud to play. Look at soccer. How many countries participate in that? Do most of them have a chance to win? Absolutly not. It's still great to see the games though.

Look at soccer? You mean the sport that 200 countries play and only 16 qualify for the Olympics?

And yes, every team in Olympic soccer has a chance of winning it, especially with only 16 teams. Look at Greece in Euro 04. Soccer displays much more balanced competition than hockey. When has anybody outside the big 7 ever won a major international hockey tournament?

 

[Gozer]

You guys forget that this is the olympics and not the world champion ships. Any country that wants to invest the money, time and risk humiliating them selves by sending a team over should be aloud to play. Look at soccer. How many countries participate in that? Do most of them have a chance to win? Absolutly not. It's still great to see the games though.

I agree that it may be fun to watch, but a olympic gold in soccer isn't worth much in the world of soccer. I would rather see the best teams, with the best players compete for it.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

8 team tournament would mean that it's the elite 7 + host country (remember, this is the Olympics), there would be no variation from year to year. So a minimum of 10 teams would be needed. It probably won't make a big difference having 10 or 12 teams, in this format of 2 pools.

Don't forget that Canada is hosting the next Olympics, and Russia is in the running for 2014. Also, with this proposed format you don't have to have an even number of teams. If there were 9 teams in the tournament, each team would play 8 games in the preliminary round instead of 7. The only problem is, its gets hard to play that many games in the 16 day Olympic window. It would mean starting the tournament before the opening ceremonies, and an even longer break for the NHL.

 

[jekoh]

The article states:

They were turned down and Slovakia finished fourth in its four-team group in the qualifying tournament. Germany won the group and advanced to the final round.

I remember because there was an up roar by teams like Slovakia that didn't get to use the NHL players in the qualifying round.

If that article wasn't good enough, check out this link and the tourney results.

http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Dugout/4128/65olympicstandings.html

You can call it any way you want, it's still the first round of the Olympics (note that the first round in Turin is called "preliminary"). Why do you think it would even be mentionned in the Olympic standings if it was not part of the olympic games ? The real qualifiers for the 2002 games were played between 1999 and 2001 with 22 teams. They're not mentionned because they were not part of the Olympics.

The bottom line is the 2002 Olympics had 14 teams involved, not 8, which means it was completely different from the format the original poster proposed. And the reason they had 6 teams go through automatically to the second round in 2002 is because the NHL would not release the players long enough to have a Turin-like format.

The problem with a summer tournament is it's not during the season, and there are almost 30 teams taking part. Why would these teams want to play in the summer ? To weaken their chances ?

 

[jekoh]

Soccer displays much more balanced competition than hockey. When has anybody outside the big 7 ever won a major international hockey tournament?

No country outside the big 7 has ever won the soccer World Cup either

 

[TORRUS]

No country outside the big 7 has ever won the soccer World Cup either

But his statement still stands. Greece won the Euro in 2004, Croatia and Turkey won the bronze medal in 1998 and 2002 World cup (Korea finished 4th that year). he is right that football displays much more balanced competiton.

 

[jekoh]

he is right that football displays much more balanced competiton.

Of course he is.

Hockey doesn't have as many countries playing, but reducing the Olympics to 8 teams would only make it worse. And if some people are not interested in Kazakhstan's games they don't have to watch them, it's not like Kazakhstan took Russia's place or something.

 

[LadyJet26]

Look at soccer? You mean the sport that 200 countries play and only 16 qualify for the Olympics?

And yes, every team in Olympic soccer has a chance of winning it, especially with only 16 teams. Look at Greece in Euro 04. Soccer displays much more balanced competition than hockey. When has anybody outside the big 7 ever won a major international hockey tournament?

Slovakia won the World Championships

 

[RUSqueelin*]

You can call it any way you want, it's still the first round of the Olympics (note that the first round in Turin is called "preliminary"). Why do you think it would even be mentionned in the Olympic standings if it was not part of the olympic games ? The real qualifiers for the 2002 games were played between 1999 and 2001 with 22 teams. They're not mentionned because they were not part of the Olympics.

The bottom line is the 2002 Olympics had 14 teams involved, not 8, which means it was completely different from the format the original poster proposed. And the reason they had 6 teams go through automatically to the second round in 2002 is because the NHL would not release the players long enough to have a Turin-like format.

The problem with a summer tournament is it's not during the season, and there are almost 30 teams taking part. Why would these teams want to play in the summer ? To weaken their chances ?

I guess we are on different planets. Not very hard to see "qualifying round" above the standings. 2 teams qualify to make it an 8 team tourney.


Anybody?????Anybody out there like to pipe in.

 

[Metallian*]

I'm a big international ice hockey fan, but I think there are a few things that could be done to improve the Olympic tournament.
Gary Betman should realize that the Olympics are the best advertising his league could ever have, and should do everything possible to help the tournament. This would required strong leadership on his behalf so that individual teams wouldn't try to hold players back. Obviously individual clubs act in their own interest first, and not necessarily in the interest of the league or the game.

1) Shorten the NHL season in Olympic years, say by ten games, and increase the length of the Olympic break. This would amount to each club losing the revenue from 5 home games every four years. Considering the huge upside to the league, this shouldn't be to onerous.

2) Put a clause in all NHL player contracts requiring them to play if they are selected by their country. A lot of countries pay their Olympic athletes bonuses for winning medals, and I wouldn't object to NHLers getting an extra bonus if they are selected to play. This might help appease the union.

3) Have an exchange program with refs from Europe. This gets the NHL refs experience with International rules, and European refs would get exposure to games with players of the NHL caliber.

4)The "Elite Seven" nations of Hockey (Canada, USA, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Czech, Slovakia) have rosters packed with NHL stars. After that the talent level drops off considerably. This years tournament has 12 teams, five of which aren't really competitive with the rest. This year teams that make it to the medal round will play 8 games.
I propose only having 8 teams in the tournament, the "Elite 7" plus one. Hold a qualifying tournament in the summer, with the winner getting the eighth Olympic spot.
Have all 8 teams play each other once, with the top four teams advancing to the semi finals. This way every game would be a highly skilled, competitive match, and medalling teams would play 9 games, only one more than this year.

5) DONT MAKE THE PLAYERS WEAR THESE STUPID TIGHT NIKE JERSEYS

 

[Jazz]

I'm a big international ice hockey fan, but I think there are a few things that could be done to improve the Olympic tournament.
Gary Betman should realize that the Olympics are the best advertising his league could ever have, and should do everything possible to help the tournament. This would required strong leadership on his behalf so that individual teams wouldn't try to hold players back. Obviously individual clubs act in their own interest first, and not necessarily in the interest of the league or the game.

1) Shorten the NHL season in Olympic years, say by ten games, and increase the length of the Olympic break. This would amount to each club losing the revenue from 5 home games every four years. Considering the huge upside to the league, this shouldn't be to onerous.

2) Put a clause in all NHL player contracts requiring them to play if they are selected by their country. A lot of countries pay their Olympic athletes bonuses for winning medals, and I wouldn't object to NHLers getting an extra bonus if they are selected to play. This might help appease the union.

3) Have an exchange program with refs from Europe. This gets the NHL refs experience with International rules, and European refs would get exposure to games with players of the NHL caliber.

4)The "Elite Seven" nations of Hockey (Canada, USA, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Czech, Slovakia) have rosters packed with NHL stars. After that the talent level drops off considerably. This years tournament has 12 teams, five of which aren't really competitive with the rest. This year teams that make it to the medal round will play 8 games.
I propose only having 8 teams in the tournament, the "Elite 7" plus one. Hold a qualifying tournament in the summer, with the winner getting the eighth Olympic spot.
Have all 8 teams play each other once, with the top four teams advancing to the semi finals. This way every game would be a highly skilled, competitive match, and medalling teams would play 9 games, only one more than this year.

From what I see, Bettman does realize the potential of using the Olympics, it is the short-sighted owners who are holding him down.

1 - Agreed - but 10 might be too much. 6 would be enough (thus a 76 game season).

2 - Indifferent - doesn't matter to me either way.

3 - Yes, absolutely.

4 - NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT! What's the point of this? We would have the same 7 teams plus only 1 qualifier (who would be, depending on the year either Latvia, Switzerland, Germany or Belarus). The whole idea of the tournament is the showcase the games to a world audience, and having an essentially a 'closed' tournament with only 8 teams is not the way to go. 12 is a good number, the only team I would ideally change is Italy with Belarus (Italy automatically gets in as the host). 12 teams also increases the chances for an upset to occur, which would only be good for the game worldwide

 

[puck57]

Postpone the start of the playoffs when you decide the regular season schedule and you can find a few free days before and after the Olympics.

I am not in favor of making the playoffs even later than what it is now- for pete's sake it goes almost into the summer anyway if you have a lot of 7 game series in the playoffs. You have to have the draft and all that too. The season is too long as it is now- they should cut off 10 games at least from the 82 games and cut down on the exhibition games they have before the season. You only need a few exibition games- the players stay in shape now year round and you could even shorten training camp I think in the long run. Make the offseason as long as possible is my view.

 

[Jazz]

I guess we are on different planets. Not very hard to see "qualifying round" above the standings. 2 teams qualify to make it an 8 team tourney.


Anybody?????Anybody out there like to pipe in.

Jekoh is correct. There were further qualifications involved before the Olympic tournament of Febuary of 2002, involving teams like Poland, Britain, Japan etc. These were the 'official' Qualification rounds. As far as the Olympics were concerned, there were 14 teams in the '02 games. 8 played in a "Preliminary Round", of which 2 advanced to the "Final Round".

Even for the Turin games, there were 2 Rounds of qualifications to get Switzerland, Latvia, and Kazakhstan involved in these games.

The 1st Round of Qualfications took place in November of 2004.

The 2nd Round of Qualifications took place in Feburary of 2005

You can click on the above links to see the results of these 2 rounds.

 

[RUSqueelin*]

Jekoh is correct. There were further qualifications involved before the Olympic tournament of Febuary of 2002, involving teams like Poland, Britain, Japan etc. These were the 'official' Qualification rounds. As far as the Olympics were concerned, there were 14 teams in the '02 games. 8 played in a "Preliminary Round", of which 2 advanced to the "Final Round".

Even for the Turin games, there were 2 Rounds of qualifications to get Switzerland, Latvia, and Kazakhstan involved in these games.

The 1st Round of Qualfications took place in November of 2004.

The 2nd Round of Qualifications took place in Feburary of 2005

You can click on the above links to see the results of these 2 rounds.

I never argued that there weren't other qualifying rounds prior to the Olympics. Concerning 02, whether you called it preliminary round or qualifying round (which it is was called at the time) the idea is the same. Group of 8 had to qualify to participate in the Olympic "final round". Hence why it was termed qualifying. Guess we are arguing about nothing.

 

[jekoh]

I never argued that there weren't other qualifying rounds prior to the Olympics. Concerning 02, whether you called it preliminary round or qualifying round (which it is was called at the time) the idea is the same. Group of 8 had to qualify to participate in the Olympic "final round". Hence why it was termed qualifying. Guess we are arguing about nothing.

The same is true for '06 then : the 12 teams have to qualify to make it to the Olympic final round.

 

[Jazz]

I never argued that there weren't other qualifying rounds prior to the Olympics. Concerning 02, whether you called it preliminary round or qualifying round (which it is was called at the time) the idea is the same. Group of 8 had to qualify to participate in the Olympic "final round". Hence why it was termed qualifying. Guess we are arguing about nothing.

Semantics..