Article about WC vs. Olympics

[Bubbles]

Kara Yario is the worst hockey writer ever. I remember reading some of her columns on Yahoo and they are all crap.

 

[TORRUS]

I laugh at this. You say Spengler Cup means nothing? Why? The best clubs in Europe losing to minor league Canadians. If these players are so good, they would be in the NHL. This isn't like the seventies or eighties. The truly good players are now over in America. Where is your proof to back this stuff up?

stv11 said it right. Don't make any conclusions from the Spengler cup. European teams go to Spengler to have fun. The tournament comes after a long season and the winners of their leagues aren't motivated and aren't in shape as they were at the end of the previous season in the playoffs. What do you think, how would Tampa Bay team do now in the middle of the summer. They wouldn't be 40 % of a team that beat Calgary in game 7 two months ago...

 

[stv11]

stv11 said it right. Don't make any conclusions from the Spengler cup. European teams go to Spengler to have fun. The tournament comes after a long season and the winners of their leagues aren't motivated and aren't in shape as they were at the end of the previous season in the playoffs. What do you think, how would Tampa Bay team do now in the middle of the summer. They wouldn't be 40 % of a team that beat Calgary in game 7 two months ago...

The Spengler cup is held in the middle of the european season, not after, so shape isn't a problem. My point was, when you are in Davos during the Spengler cup, you can see players skating with fans on the outside rinks, or being out late in the evening. Teams don't prepare seriously for that tournament.


About the main topic, I'd say that altough I'll watch the world cup (in my mind, any hockey is good hockey !), it really looks too much like an exhibition tournament held for marketing purpose. I think nobody outside the IIHF should organise international tournament, and there's no need to add one more. I'd like to see the NHL and the IIHF work together to find a way to have more NHL players at the world championnships (I like them the way they are, but it seems I'm not in the majority) by making the NHL and european league schedules closer in time.

 

[Raimo Sillanpää]

stv11 said it right. Don't make any conclusions from the Spengler cup. European teams go to Spengler to have fun. The tournament comes after a long season and the winners of their leagues aren't motivated and aren't in shape as they were at the end of the previous season in the playoffs. What do you think, how would Tampa Bay team do now in the middle of the summer. They wouldn't be 40 % of a team that beat Calgary in game 7 two months ago...

Even though some teams try to take it seriously, like Jokeri, their players still don't.. and party til late, dont play their best, dont want to get injured and are already thinking about next weeks game vs Kärpät..

 

[Macman]

About the main topic, I'd say that altough I'll watch the world cup (in my mind, any hockey is good hockey !), it really looks too much like an exhibition tournament held for marketing purpose. I think nobody outside the IIHF should organise international tournament, and there's no need to add one more.

I disagree completely. The World Cup and the Canada Cup before it looks nothing like an exhibition tournament, at least from a Canadian perspective. Some of the most intense hockey ever played has come at this tournament. Every time Canada plays Russia it's a war and it's the same now for Canada and the U.S. This tournament wasn't added to anything. It was the first and only best-on-best tournament 20 years before the Olympics decided to become one. I personally don't want to have to wait every four years to see the best players. Every two years is just fine by me. One tournament is on big ice and other on small. What could be better than that?

 

[Freudian]

It is good for hockey and the NHL to have the best players in the Olympics. It exposes hockey to a lot of people that don't follow the NHL. The world cup only gets covered by the usual suspects while the olympics gets covered by a lot of future markets (in the long run, be it 20 or 50 years) for hockey.

Besides, I do think a lot of players feel more pride about winning Olympic Gold than winning the World Cup.

 

[stv11]

I disagree completely. The World Cup and the Canada Cup before it looks nothing like an exhibition tournament, at least from a Canadian perspective. Some of the most intense hockey ever played has come at this tournament. Every time Canada plays Russia it's a war and it's the same now for Canada and the U.S. This tournament wasn't added to anything. It was the first and only best-on-best tournament 20 years before the Olympics decided to become one. I personally don't want to have to wait every four years to see the best players. Every two years is just fine by me. One tournament is on big ice and other on small. What could be better than that?

I agree with you about the Canada cup, but you can't compare this year tournament with those held before the end of the cold war era. Even if officially the world cup is held to decide who is the best hockey team, I can't help thinking its hidden goal is to have as many american as possible watching hockey. (no offence to american fans, I was talking about potential fans here)

 

[Macman]

I agree with you about the Canada cup, but you can't compare this year tournament with those held before the end of the cold war era. Even if officially the world cup is held to decide who is the best hockey team, I can't help thinking its hidden goal is to have as many american as possible watching hockey. (no offence to american fans, I was talking about potential fans here)

The bottom line for me is how the players feel about the World Cup and it's obvious they hold the tournament in high regard. They wouldn't bother playing in it if they didn't. Sure, there are a few Russian no-shows, but that has everything to do with internal politics and nothing to do with the tournament itself. They had no-shows at the Olympics too. Sure, they want to grow the game in the States, and elsewhere too. I don't think that's a hidden agenda at all. And what better way to do that than pitting the best players in the world against each in other in a tournament with world bragging rights on the line?

 

[Malefic74]

IMO the Olympics should not have any professionnals players in any sport. Period. Not if they're trying to stick to the "Olympic Ideal" anyway. However in the last 20 years the Olympics have become driven by money and profit so the pros are in. Fine.

But Yorio does raise a very, very good point about the timing. The World Cup will be better because of the extra preparation time and the fact that far fewer guys are banged up and nursing this or that nagging injury which they would when the Olympics start 40 or 50 games into the season. For that reason alone I have always considered the Canada Cup to be superior to the Olympics.

Also the NHL has made it perfectly clear that the whole Olympic participation is only a marketing decision. It is meant to promote the game. Because of the time difference it didn't work as well in Nagano, but it did in Salt Lake. Italy will re-open the time difference debate. If I'm the IOC it's either in or out. Not just every time the Games come to NA.

The whole debate is product of the culture in the NHL. The players feel they're entitled to millions of dollars for playing a game, and the NHL feels entitled to play in the Olympics whenever it is convenient for their wallet. It's garbage. One or the other. Any other arrangement is pretty obvious ploy to do nothing more than sell jerseys and promote their own interests on the back of legitimate national competition.

 

[Roughneck]

Besides, I do think a lot of players feel more pride about winning Olympic Gold than winning the World Cup.

Well how can you feel proud holding a cup that looks like a cheap flower vase.

 

[Jazz]

IMO the Olympics should not have any professionnals players in any sport. Period. Not if they're trying to stick to the "Olympic Ideal" anyway.

This is all a matter of interpretation....

My Olympic Ideal is to have the Best players on the planet of a given sport to participate....

The whole thing about amatuers participating only came about because the founder of the modern Olympics, Pierre de Coubertain (sp?) was an elitist.

 

[Malefic74]

This is all a matter of interpretation....

My Olympic Ideal is to have the Best players on the planet of a given sport to participate....

The whole thing about amatuers participating only came about because the founder of the modern Olympics, Pierre de Coubertain (sp?) was an elitist.

I understand that, but to my mind the Olympics should feature sports and athletes who do not benefit from the exposure and multi-million dollar contracts that professional leagues or tours get them. These include hockey, baseball, basketball, and tennis.

These sports don't need more exposure than they already have. We don't need the COC or the USOC spending money from their programs to support players who can easily afford to send themselves to the Games. Better to use that money on athletes who have to work at Home Depot to make ends meet.

 

[Lexicon Devil]

Participation in the Olympics by the league is done not for the competition or Olympic ideal, but for the cash and Olympic-sized exposure.

The "Olympic ideal"?

Give me a break. All the top athletes are there just as much for the money and exposure as for "the Olympic ideal".

These sports don't need more exposure than they already have.

Since when was the goal of the Olympics to give exposure to crappy sports that people wouldn't otherwise care about?

 

[Malefic74]

The "Olympic ideal"?

Give me a break. All the top athletes are there just as much for the money and exposure as for "the Olympic ideal".

Since when was the goal of the Olympics to give exposure to crappy sports that people wouldn't otherwise care about?

Always was. Did you ever watch the Olympics pre-professionals? It was great. The sprinters and swimmers have always gotten their glory; but to suddenly really pay attention to downhill skiers or the rowing team and learn what they go through to get there was always fascinating. These people don't dream of paychecks. It's always all about the medal. If you look at every gold medal winner of these games what percentage will get an endorsement deal out of it? Do you think the winner of the shot put is dreaming of a big shoe contract and his face on a Wheaties box?

I'm as cynical as the next guy, usually considerably more; but in the case of the Olympics I can usually put it aside. Until I see a bunch of millionaires becoming the focus of an event that was never supposed to be theirs. These guys have all of our attention for 8 or 9 months of the year. I don't blame them for going, hey their country is calling after all, and I'm pleased to see their willingness to answer the bell. But they'd never be there if the IOC weren't such greedy media whores.

You want to lay claim as the greatest nation in hockey? Have your professionals win the World Cup and have a team of amateur and junior players win Olympic gold. Then you can lay claim to that title. Anything else is marketing.

Just my opinion.