Olympics: Bettman hints NHL won't play in 2018 and 2022

[Mr Kanadensisk]

You and I have debated this point 100 times in the past, but here we go again. First, you are 100% incorrect in saying that the Soviet team practiced together as a national team 12 months a year. The vast majority of the year they played with their club teams, with a 50-game schedule that involved road trips that were as long or longer than Boston to LA road trips. There were typically 5 or 6 club teams represented on the national team. The schedule was suspended at various times of the year to participate in international tournaments, but it is a clichéd stereotype to say that the Soviets were like robots who practiced together all year - its just not true!

The Soviet league was built from the top down to support the national team. Optimal line combinations were chosen and those lines were spread across 2 or 3 Moscow based teams. They played in the same city to accommodate national team practices and allow inter-national team competition between international tournaments. The Soviet league was part of the national team program.

Secondly, the implication of your false premise is that the only reason that the Soviets were the peers of the best Canadians is that they practiced longer and harder and were in better condition. Let me ask you this, even though I don't skate very often, do you believe that if I practiced 10 months a year and Mario Lemieux or Sidney Crosby only practiced 8 months, that within 5 years I would be superior to and dominant over Crosby and a young Lemieux?? Your argument suggests that I would score over 100 goals in the NHL if I just practiced 2 months longer than they did. I wonder how that would work out in the real world?

These were the top hockey players in the USSR, and comparing them to how you or I would do is just silly.

 

[Yakushev72]

The Soviet league was built from the top down to support the national team. Optimal line combinations were chosen and those lines were spread across 2 or 3 Moscow based teams. They played in the same city to accommodate national team practices and allow inter-national team competition between international tournaments. The Soviet league was part of the national team program.



These were the top hockey players in the USSR, and comparing them to how you or I would do is just silly.

What you are doing is merely reciting in a rote manner all the litany of excuses that Canadian media and NHL outlets made for the humbling experience they had in the 1972 series when the Soviets proved, like it or not, that world amateurs were every bit as good as what was being sold as "the best hockey in the World" to fans who paid way too much money to watch them play. The Canadians and the NHL were forced to create "arguments" that would suggest that Canadian NHL'ers were still the best, and that the only reason it didn't look like it was that the Soviet amateurs had certain "advantages." Like the advantage that I would have over Lemieux if he only trained 8 months and I trained 10.

 

[JackSlater]

What you are doing is merely reciting in a rote manner all the litany of excuses that Canadian media and NHL outlets made for the humbling experience they had in the 1972 series when the Soviets proved, like it or not, that world amateurs were every bit as good as what was being sold as "the best hockey in the World" to fans who paid way too much money to watch them play. The Canadians and the NHL were forced to create "arguments" that would suggest that Canadian NHL'ers were still the best, and that the only reason it didn't look like it was that the Soviet amateurs had certain "advantages." Like the advantage that I would have over Lemieux if he only trained 8 months and I trained 10.

It's not really debatable that the Soviet team had some advantages. They generally played together on their domestic teams far more than Canada's best players did, and they certainly played together internationally far more than Canada's best did. That's a clear advantage when constructing a national team. It's not an unfair advantage, and it doesn't preclude the Canadian teams from having different advantages (because they did) but it's a big advantage.

 

[Yakushev72]

It's not really debatable that the Soviet team had some advantages. They generally played together on their domestic teams far more than Canada's best players did, and they certainly played together internationally far more than Canada's best did. That's a clear advantage when constructing a national team. It's not an unfair advantage, and it doesn't preclude the Canadian teams from having different advantages (because they did) but it's a big advantage.

I agree that playing together frequently on a national team is a definite advantage, but it doesn't by itself explain why the Soviets emerged as the peers of the NHL. My absurd example comparing myself to Mario Lemieux and Sidney Crosby was obviously only intended to illustrate the fact that the Soviets couldn't have put on the show that they did in all the major international tournaments if they were inferior to the NHL in the fundamental skills of the game (e.g., skating, stickhandling, passing, shooting). With everything involving world hockey supremacy on the line, you are not going to challenge the best of Canada/NHL unless you are just as good as they are at executing the fundamentals of the game. And working long and hard to achieve a goal is not the same as cheating, as Kanadensisk seems to contend.

 

[JackSlater]

I agree that playing together frequently on a national team is a definite advantage, but it doesn't by itself explain why the Soviets emerged as the peers of the NHL. My absurd example comparing myself to Mario Lemieux and Sidney Crosby was obviously only intended to illustrate the fact that the Soviets couldn't have put on the show that they did in all the major international tournaments if they were inferior to the NHL in the fundamental skills of the game (e.g., skating, stickhandling, passing, shooting). With everything involving world hockey supremacy on the line, you are not going to challenge the best of Canada/NHL unless you are just as good as they are at executing the fundamentals of the game. And working long and hard to achieve a goal is not the same as cheating, as Kanadensisk seems to contend.

Yeah USSR didn't cheat, they just played in a different context than the Canadian players. I remember reading about Tarasov during a tour of Canada in 1965. He said that most of the players in the national team were prepared for games against the best Canadians, except in the goaltending department. He watched a retired Jacques Plante lead the Jr. Canadiens over the Soviets and knew that the goaltending wasn't there yet. The emergence of Tretiak changed things obviously, and shortly after there was a Summit Series that demonstrated just how correct Tarasov was. It's no more unfair that the Soviet players trained more than it is that Canada had a larger player pool and had more hockey infrastructure.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

What you are doing is merely reciting in a rote manner all the litany of excuses that Canadian media and NHL outlets made for the humbling experience they had in the 1972 series when the Soviets proved, like it or not, that world amateurs were every bit as good as what was being sold as "the best hockey in the World" to fans who paid way too much money to watch them play. The Canadians and the NHL were forced to create "arguments" that would suggest that Canadian NHL'ers were still the best, and that the only reason it didn't look like it was that the Soviet amateurs had certain "advantages." Like the advantage that I would have over Lemieux if he only trained 8 months and I trained 10.

Your logic is all over the place here and the only thing I get out of your reply is that you accept that what I said about the Soviet league and national team program was 100% correct since you seem to have no rebuttal to my arguments. I never said what the USSR did was cheating. I'm simply pointing out that conveniently forgetting the massive advantage this system gave to the Soviet national team and then using national team results to claim parity with Canadians, who's primary focus was league play, not national teams, is really silly and complete waste of time. As you have acknowledged in the past any of Canada's national teams would have been much, much, much better than they were if they had the experience playing and practicing together that the Soviet teams had. Furthermore there is no magic as to why Canada's top players were so much more effective individually, it just comes down to more hockey infrastructure, more kids playing the sport and a bigger pool of players to draw from. The Soviets were great hockey players, but in my mind your obdurate goal to make them out to be more than they were actually does their legacy a disservice.

 

[Yakushev72]

Yeah USSR didn't cheat, they just played in a different context than the Canadian players. I remember reading about Tarasov during a tour of Canada in 1965. He said that most of the players in the national team were prepared for games against the best Canadians, except in the goaltending department. He watched a retired Jacques Plante lead the Jr. Canadiens over the Soviets and knew that the goaltending wasn't there yet. The emergence of Tretiak changed things obviously, and shortly after there was a Summit Series that demonstrated just how correct Tarasov was. It's no more unfair that the Soviet players trained more than it is that Canada had a larger player pool and had more hockey infrastructure.

No quarrels or disagreements here with what you say.

 

[Yakushev72]

Your logic is all over the place here and the only thing I get out of your reply is that you accept that what I said about the Soviet league and national team program was 100% correct since you seem to have no rebuttal to my arguments. I never said what the USSR did was cheating. I'm simply pointing out that conveniently forgetting the massive advantage this system gave to the Soviet national team and then using national team results to claim parity with Canadians, who's primary focus was league play, not national teams, is really silly and complete waste of time. As you have acknowledged in the past any of Canada's national teams would have been much, much, much better than they were if they had the experience playing and practicing together that the Soviet teams had. Furthermore there is no magic as to why Canada's top players were so much more effective individually, it just comes down to more hockey infrastructure, more kids playing the sport and a bigger pool of players to draw from. The Soviets were great hockey players, but in my mind your obdurate goal to make them out to be more than they were actually does their legacy a disservice.

Your whole premise is just to discount and minimize the quality of Soviet hockey players and explain away the unexpected mediocrity of the Canadians, so you have to construct an argument that says that the Soviets cheated by working hard and being too motivated, and that that's not fair. Your statement that "Canada's top players were so much more effective individually," but weren't able to show it on the ice because they didn't have "experience playing and practicing together," as if when they are separated from their regular line mates, they have no idea whether they should pass the puck to the Russian guy or the Canadian guy.

I have no more idea than you do as to the motivation of the Soviet hockey brass in setting up a Championship League, but what difference would it make if their No. 1 goal was to win World Championships and Olympic Gold? Bottom line, your argument that Canadian muscles go soft and brains go dead when exposed to an unfamiliar and uncomfortable environment probably doesn't wash.

 

[Urbanskog]

"Kazakahstan" as Bettman calls it, is certainly more of a hockey hotbed than the US.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

"Kazakahstan" as Bettman calls it, is certainly more of a hockey hotbed than the US.

Sometimes I forget and call it that, too

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

"Kazakahstan" as Bettman calls it, is certainly more of a hockey hotbed than the US.

Not in terms of money, players or the number of fans.

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

I say keep the season going and let the people who were invited go to the olympics. It could also open opportunity for prospects to shine.

 

[Urbanskog]

Not in terms of money, players or the number of fans.

Well who would have thought that the total numbers are in favor of a country with 319 million inhabitants over one with 18 million?

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Well who would have thought that the total numbers are in favor of a country with 319 million inhabitants over one with 18 million?

Per capita the USA has roughly four times as many u20 kids playing hockey compared to Kazakhstan. That, along with an economy 80 times the size of the Kaz makes the USA a hockey hot bed relatively speaking.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Your whole premise is just to discount and minimize the quality of Soviet hockey players and explain away the unexpected mediocrity of the Canadians, so you have to construct an argument that says that the Soviets cheated by working hard and being too motivated, and that that's not fair. Your statement that "Canada's top players were so much more effective individually," but weren't able to show it on the ice because they didn't have "experience playing and practicing together," as if when they are separated from their regular line mates, they have no idea whether they should pass the puck to the Russian guy or the Canadian guy.

I have no more idea than you do as to the motivation of the Soviet hockey brass in setting up a Championship League, but what difference would it make if their No. 1 goal was to win World Championships and Olympic Gold? Bottom line, your argument that Canadian muscles go soft and brains go dead when exposed to an unfamiliar and uncomfortable environment probably doesn't wash.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the sport beyond the political aspect of it but at the men's pro level effective team play is the most critical factor in terms of success, and that takes time and a lot of practice to perfect.

 

[Yakushev72]

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the sport beyond the political aspect of it but at the men's pro level effective team play is the most critical factor in terms of success, and that takes time and a lot of practice to perfect.

That argument is easily refuted by the fact that coaches all over the world are constantly juggling lines to find the right combinations, or just to shake things up. That rebuts your argument that sameness is the only sure formula for success.

 

[Rob]

Any chance of NHL Russian players threatening to leave to go play in the Olympics?

 

[Yakushev72]

Any chance of NHL Russian players threatening to leave to go play in the Olympics?

Assuming the KHL continues to grow, I wonder how many Russian players will even be in the NHL by the time 2018 rolls around? I could easily see the total number being somewhere around 16 to 20. Stars like Ovechkin and Malkin will have completed more than 10 years in the NHL, and they will be able to make a lot more money playing for a Russian-based KHL team who can afford them. Russian players who are on the margin end up in the AHL, and if they can't carve out a permanent spot in an NHL lineup, they lose all of their bargaining power to make a much higher salary in the KHL. Their "ace in the hole," so to speak, will have played out. The current trend of reduced numbers of Russians in the NHL will likely not only continue, but accelerate!

 

[Bures Elbow]

We better be going, Canada could have potentially it's best team ever.

 

[TheTwelfth]

I know a term like solidarity is not big in NA, but you'd think the NHL could give something back to the non-US/Canada countries that send stars to their national league every year. The (tax)money these countries invest in creating ice hockey stars (not the sole purpose of the hockey programs, of course), it could be a nice gesture by the NHL to lend them back to the world stage once every four years.

A guy like Nicklas Lidström barely got any recognition in his home country before he scored the GWG in the Olympics final, and only now after retiring people are mentioning how great of a player he was in the NHL, because people were generally never able to watch him play during his prime.

 

[mjlee]

Everyone is talking about how Russian players are pushing for the Olympics, but I'm surprised so little is said about Canadian players. Two of the blandest of the bland, John Tavares and Steven Stamkos, who have been media trained since forever and have possibly never said anything remotely non cliche or controversial in their lives have both said openly (and unusually strongly) they want to go to the Olympics. Sometimes we forget that for all that these guys are pros, team captains and multi millionaires they played in the junior WHC for sheer pride of their country and that all Canadian players have talked about the immense pride they have in putting on the red and white maple leaf and play for their country at the highest level. The Olympics is more than 'just' hockey, it's the Olympic village, cheering on fellow Canadians (and seriously wth were those blow up curling hats Toews and Lou were wearing?!) and being apart of something bigger. While arguably the quality of hockey would be better at a WC, it can never match the atmosphere or global audience of the Olympic Games, or the historical significance of winning an Olympic medal.

You only have to remember Stamkos desperate attempt to recover in time for the Olympics (not to mention the temper tantrum of St Louis for not being selected), Giroux's, E Staal's and Taylor Hall's very public and obvious disappointment to see how much winning an Olympic medal playing for their country means to these guys. Although I think Dallas Eakins' comment about a grieving process was a little over the top.

I bet that behind the scene it's not only Russian players in the NHLPA who are pushing for Olympic participation.

 

[JackSlater]

Everyone is talking about how Russian players are pushing for the Olympics, but I'm surprised so little is said about Canadian players. Two of the blandest of the bland, John Tavares and Steven Stamkos, who have been media trained since forever and have possibly never said anything remotely non cliche or controversial in their lives have both said openly (and unusually strongly) they want to go to the Olympics. Sometimes we forget that for all that these guys are pros, team captains and multi millionaires they played in the junior WHC for sheer pride of their country and that all Canadian players have talked about the immense pride they have in putting on the red and white maple leaf and play for their country at the highest level. The Olympics is more than 'just' hockey, it's the Olympic village, cheering on fellow Canadians (and seriously wth were those blow up curling hats Toews and Lou were wearing?!) and being apart of something bigger. While arguably the quality of hockey would be better at a WC, it can never match the atmosphere or global audience of the Olympic Games, or the historical significance of winning an Olympic medal.

You only have to remember Stamkos desperate attempt to recover in time for the Olympics (not to mention the temper tantrum of St Louis for not being selected), Giroux's, E Staal's and Taylor Hall's very public and obvious disappointment to see how much winning an Olympic medal playing for their country means to these guys. Although I think Dallas Eakins' comment about a grieving process was a little over the top.

I bet that behind the scene it's not only Russian players in the NHLPA who are pushing for Olympic participation.

I don't think anyone believes that Russians are the only players who want to play in the Olympics. It's quite clear that the Canadian players are like everyone else and want to go. Since 1998, Patrick Roy is the only Canadian player that I am aware of who wasn't interested in Olympic participation. The difference with Russians is that some people believe (whether true or not) that they will go to the KHL if the NHL pulls out of the Olympics. There is no way a Tavares or Stamkos is going to the KHL over just Olympic participation.

 

[Yakushev72]

I don't think anyone believes that Russians are the only players who want to play in the Olympics. It's quite clear that the Canadian players are like everyone else and want to go. Since 1998, Patrick Roy is the only Canadian player that I am aware of who wasn't interested in Olympic participation. The difference with Russians is that some people believe (whether true or not) that they will go to the KHL if the NHL pulls out of the Olympics. There is no way a Tavares or Stamkos is going to the KHL over just Olympic participation.

There is rarely common ground between the KHL and the Russian Hockey Federation, but there is probably a realization on the part of Tretiak and the RHF that the KHL would make the ideal staging ground to launch Olympic and World Championship national teams. As the number of Russians in the NHL continues to dwindle, using the Russian-based KHL teams as a springboard to create a coordinated national team makes a lot of sense. Certainly, the Russian public will always be much more attuned to the Winter Olympics than any other event featuring hockey.

 

[Rob]

I have no doubt that the majority of the players want to participate. The problem is that the majority of owners don't.

 

[Tyler Biggs*]

I understand how Olympics started with "amateur" athletes. But it's not longer that way any more. You send your best skiers, best runners, swimmers, etc. now. Why should hockey be any different!?

It very well could end the NHL partnership and that will be so sad because I love seeing the world's best players competing on the world's biggest stage. Typical Gary Bettman to screw things up, again!.