Olympics vs World Cup

[NyQuil]

If you think Olympic football is meaningless, you might want to check out the reactions of the Brazilian players and fans after a scrub called Neymar secured them the gold medal in 2016. Those South Americans seemed to be pretty enthusiastic about a meaningless gold medal, but maybe they just don't understand football quite as well as North American hockey fans.

LOL, you mean a face-saving gesture after being humiliated by Germany on their own ground in 2014.

No one would have cared to that degree if they hadn’t crashed out of the World Cup so decisively two years before and the Olympics weren’t hosted in Brazil.

Who do you think you’re kidding here?

 

[Rob Bowen]

theBRKDWN Sports – World Cup of Hockey 2020 Cancelled

 

[Urbanskog]

theBRKDWN Sports – World Cup of Hockey 2020 Cancelled

Somewhat old but good news, obviously.

 

[Nino33]

The articles says "It appears that the two sides will continue CBA talks as the agreement could be terminated as early as this September. If they chose to terminate, the agreement would end September 15, 2020, right when the World Cup was supposed to take place." - IMO this 100% is what everything's about, CBA talks between then NHL and the NHLPA

This has nothing to do with the Olympics and missing the Olympics, it's all about CBA issues (Fehr has been eyeing the 2020 date since the last agreement was signed & would have wanted to terminate the agreement early even if they'd gone to the Olympics in 2018)



The players have already chosen money/opportunity to try to renegotiate a better deal in NA over playing in the 2018 Olympics, & now the players are doing the same thing regarding the 2020 World Cup - this is twice now the players have chosen their own money making potential over best-on-best international play (given the players still don't seem to understand what 50% and escrow mean, it wouldn't surprise me if some players think they're "winning" just like Charlie Sheen thought he was)

Maybe the NHLPA won't end the agreement and there'll be no labour disruption and the NHLers will return to the 2022 Olympics, and they'll have missed an Olympics and World Cup for.....nothing

I don't understand why NHLers didn't OK the CBA extension to go to the Olympics in 2018, and the fact that they didn't (and the whole OAR thing) really reduces the appeal of "it has to be the Olympics' for me...for me I just want a best-on-vest tournament, it doesn't have to be the Olympics

For those that have only known NHLers in the Olympics I can see how they might feel different, but I've seen all the best-on-best tournaments and that means as many Canada Cups as the Olympics, and when you add in the first two World Cups the Olympics is still "new" (less best-on-bests) so walking away would be preserving another strand of history that for best-on-best goes back further than the Olympics! HaHa......now that they've made a mess of everything, I just want one best-on-best tournament and don't care which it is

I like best-on-best, I don't care what they call it; I do find big ice Olympic hockey to be almost always slow and boring (even when elite teams play)


It's possible we'll never see NHLers in the Olympics again....the elite players of the world quite clearly choose money over international play, so I can't see why they'd want to play in the Olympics for free when they can make the World Cup the premier relevant event for best-on-best and the Olympics essentially meaningless (like it is with soccer/football)

The fact that the last Olympics wasn't best-on-best and was won by "OAR" + ongoing outside/political issues + the Olympics aren't viewed as highly as they once were (corruption, waste, etc/there's little interest in hosting) - maybe this is what will be the end of the IOC being a best-on-best and the IIHF and NHL/NHLPA will come together for a World Cup (as specified in a CBA)


P.S. The writer saying "The team owners probably have similar issues with the World Cup as with the Olympics — the risk outweighs the reward as the possibility of injury to their players runs high" is interesting...they also said "Even players not going to represent their countries probably want the two week break in February just as badly" is something I don't believe at all (the "break" is two weeks long while the condensed schedule lasts the entire season)

 

[Guardian452]

P.S. The writer saying "The team owners probably have similar issues with the World Cup as with the Olympics — the risk outweighs the reward as the possibility of injury to their players runs high" is interesting...they also said "Even players not going to represent their countries probably want the two week break in February just as badly" is something I don't believe at all (the "break" is two weeks long while the condensed schedule lasts the entire season)

The writer is missing a key point. Owners and NHLPA split all the revenue for the World Cup and get the full benefits of the marketing of the event. The IOC gets all the revenue from the Olympics with Owners and players taking all the risks (i.e. injuries, lost revenue from shutting down the league the middle of the season, costs of sending players to the Olympics) and getting diddly squat.

 

[ForumNamePending]

The writer is missing a key point. Owners and NHLPA split all the revenue for the World Cup and get the full benefits of the marketing of the event. The IOC gets all the revenue from the Olympics with Owners and players taking all the risks (i.e. injuries, lost revenue from shutting down the league the middle of the season, costs of sending players to the Olympics) and getting diddly squat.

Sure the owners have control of the WC and make money from it, but it doesn't necessarily mean they are getting enough out of it to make it worth their time. IIRC the last WC made ~$40 million, so the owners share would have been about ~$20 million, meaning each owner would have have made between $600,000-$700,000. For a billionaire who owns a NHL franchise, that generates $150 million/year, and has hundreds of millions of dollars worth of contracts on the books, the money made from the WC is peanuts. If an owner has their $9 million/year franchise player blow out his knee or wreck his shoulder at the WC instead of the Olympics they probably aren't going to feel much better about the situation because they made $700,000 instead $0.

As far as getting the full benefits of the marketing of the event goes... When outside of Canada the tournament draws little interest and test pattern TV viewership numbers, from a marketing standpoint, there probably isn't a whole lot to benefit from to begin with... And even in Canada it wasn't like WC fever was running wild.

As I've said before, I think if the last WC met or exceeded expectations the league and PA would have long ago announced plans for the 2020 WC. We would have probably known everything from the format, to the location, right down to the logo by now. The potential labour issues has just provided everyone a convenient excuse not to bother after the last tournament fell (well?) short of what they hoped it would be.

 

[Nino33]

As far as getting the full benefits of the marketing of the event goes... When outside of Canada the tournament draws little interest and test pattern TV viewership numbers, from a marketing standpoint, there probably isn't a whole lot to benefit from to begin with... And even in Canada it wasn't like WC fever was running wild.

The massive viewership of the Olympics brings in nothing for the NHL/NHLPA (you can't even afford a TV to see a test pattern)

As I've said before, I think if the last WC met or exceeded expectations the league and PA would have long ago announced plans for the 2020 WC.

Fehr would have wanted to open up the CBA for renegotiation regardless of what happened at the 2016 WC

 

[ForumNamePending]

The massive viewership of the Olympics brings in nothing for the NHL/NHLPA (you can't even afford a TV to see a test pattern)

Yes, the league and PA (although they don't seem to care) make nothing from the Olympics. That doesn't mean they think they can get enough out of the WC to make it worth doing again.

Fehr would have wanted to open up the CBA for renegotiation regardless of what happened at the 2016 WC

Sure, but it doesn't mean they couldn't have still pushed forward with organizing a WC if both sides seriously wanted one. They didn't seem to have an issue shoehorning the '04 WC in right before labour armageddon. The owners had been using "no WC" as a threat for a while now. I think it says something that... a) It was pretty much the first thing the league was willing to sacrifice b) The players didn't seem too bothered about it.

I wouldn't be surprised if 5, or 10, or 20 years from now the league and PA try to revive the WC's corpse to give it another go, but I get the impression both sides, at least for the time being, are sorta "Meh... Whatever... No big loss".

 

[member 305909]

Where does this idea come from that it must be a leap-year when the WC can be held? If 2020 is cancelled the next possibility is 2024, not 2021.

 

[Yakushev72]

Don't look for the players to exert any pressure toward participation in the World Cup or Olympics. They could care less. Of the two, they would no doubt prefer the Olympics, but really, its just an extra grind, an extra load to lift, and there is nothing in it for them. Back in the 1970's and '80's, when salaries were around $200 thousand for the average player, the fact that all revenue from the Canada Cup went to the NHLPA pension fund was an incentive to the players, but now, when even mediocre players make $50-60 million over the length of their career, it means nothing!

 

[Nino33]

Yes, the league and PA (although they don't seem to care) make nothing from the Olympics. That doesn't mean they think they can get enough out of the WC to make it worth doing again.

The point of my comment is the international/Olympic audience that you refer to (that didn't watch the WC) is meaningless as a marketing opportunity

The player's do seem to care a lot about money though, more than they care about the Olympics, otherwise they'd have participated in 2018; apparently the millions they make and the lavish lifestyle they live wasn't enough to make it worth their while to go to the Olympic

The players going along with the 2016 WC format is another indication that money is their primary motivation

 

[Nino33]

Back in the 1970's and '80's

The absolute best time for international hockey! I'm so glad I saw it at the time

 

[Urbanskog]

The absolute best time for international hockey! I'm so glad I saw it at the time

Did you watch with "rabidly nationalistic" enthusiasm?

 

[Nino33]

Did you watch with "rabidly nationalistic" enthusiasm?

Nope, thanks for asking (connecting sports success with your nation's value/success seems stupid to me; when I think of Canada I think of things like natural beauty and health care and inclusion and not hockey)

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

Did you watch with "rabidly nationalistic" enthusiasm?

Isn't that how you're supposed to watch a National team sporting event?

 

[ForumNamePending]

The point of my comment is the international/Olympic audience that you refer to (that didn't watch the WC) is meaningless as a marketing opportunity

I haven't said otherwise, so I'm not sure what you are getting at.

My point is the lack of tangible benefit the league gets from going to the Olympics is a completely separate issue from the WC. The NHL owners believe the Olympics offer them nothing of value, and perhaps the owners also feel the WC, while offering more value, still doesn't offer enough to make it worth the effort and risk involved in holding another one in '20 (and beyond).

The player's do seem to care a lot about money though, more than they care about the Olympics, otherwise they'd have participated in 2018; apparently the millions they make and the lavish lifestyle they live wasn't enough to make it worth their while to go to the Olympic

The players going along with the 2016 WC format is another indication that money is their primary motivation

My point was simply the players not seeing a penny from the IOC has never been a sticking point for them when it comes to playing in the Olympics. Anything beyond that and you are reading too much into my comment... But yes, I have no doubt, like most people, the players usually value gettin'paid over most other things in life.

 

[Nino33]

Isn't that how you're supposed to watch a National team sporting event?

The definition of rabid rabid - Google Search
The definition of nationalism (note the latter half of the definition) nationalism - Google Search

No, rabid nationalism isn't a good thing

I really enjoyed the hockey, but I never really cared when Canada lost (which happened regularly in the Worlds back then); I liked things like learning about different countries and seeing different styles of hockey played (it all seemed pretty special in a time with only 2 TV channels and no internet)

Sports victories doesn't make a country anything special to me me (but it's good for a country to exercise regularly and things like teamwork can be learned and sports are entertainment, so they have value, and passionate support is fine, but nationalism most definitely isn't all positive and the negative is really problematic)

 

[Nino33]

My point was simply the players not seeing a penny from the IOC has never been a sticking point for them when it comes to playing in the Olympics.

The owners offered the players a way to go to 2018 and they choose not go (the sticking point was the players saying we choose the CBA renegotiation/money issues over the Olympics)

The reality is the owners were OK with the 2018 Olympics happening, and the players refused the offer that would have let them go

 

[member 305909]

A bit ot but I wonder how in the 1992 olympics after the bresk-up of the Soviet Union there was the team of the Commonwealth of Independent States which won the gold but a couple of months later in the worlds there was already Russia.

 

[ForumNamePending]

The owners offered the players a way to go to 2018 and they choose not go (the sticking point was the players saying we choose the CBA renegotiation/money issues over the Olympics)

The reality is the owners were OK with the 2018 Olympics happening, and the players refused the offer that would have let them go

Which in no way changes my point that "the players not seeing a penny from the IOC has never been a sticking point for them when it comes to playing in the Olympics".

The players not willing to forfeit their right to (re)negotiate the CBA in exchange for the Olympics is a different matter.

 

[member 305909]

If the IOC thought the same way as the NHL does the olympics would be held once every 20 years at most. More regularly would not be profitable.

 

[Nino33]

The players not willing to forfeit their right to (re)negotiate the CBA in exchange for the Olympics is a different matter.

We'll have to agree to disagree; to me it's all about unnecessary greed (on all sides), so same shit different pile IMO

 

[Nino33]

If the IOC thought the same way as the NHL does the olympics would be held once every 20 years at most. More regularly would not be profitable.

The NHL's business is the NHL (it's quite successful, and doesn't need the Olympics) the NHL's business isn't international hockey or growing the game

I don't really see the IOC positively in any way given their ongoing culture of bribery/corruption, billions of debt for host cities/nations, state sanctioned drug cheating (OAR winning!), and more (but this isn't a political board)

 

[Lepardi]

state sanctioned drug cheating (OAR winning!)

That was truly terrible. That probably wouldn't have happened, had they brought in all those clean athletes from the NHL where they haven't even banned human growth hormone and where doping control is a complete joke.

 

[JackSlater]

The owners offered the players a way to go to 2018 and they choose not go (the sticking point was the players saying we choose the CBA renegotiation/money issues over the Olympics)

The reality is the owners were OK with the 2018 Olympics happening, and the players refused the offer that would have let them go

This point is so obviously wrong that I can't figure out if it is an attempt at trolling or just a horrifically ignorant post. The players didn't go because the owners wouldn't release them to go. I've seen the same remarkably stupid point made by the same posters a few times and I really struggle to tell if it is serious or not. That the owners placed a condition on the players going, as referenced in the quoted post, is the very reason we know that the owners were not fine with the players going.