The NHL gains more than it loses when players participate in the Olympics

[Osprey]

"growing the game" by the Olympic participation of NHL players is a myth especially in America. If you seriously think that people in Alabama start watching N.Y. Rangers games on TV because they saw hockey in the Olympics you are kidding yourself. There is a very large portion of the American public who will never watch any hockey except in the Olympics.

I suppose that my interest in hockey is a myth, then, too. I didn't watch hockey, and certainly not the NHL, until the 1998 Winter Olympics in Nagano. I was hooked by how good those NHL players were and how exciting watching them was, and, when the Games ended, I followed them back to the NHL and the rest of the '97-'98 season. I've been a regular watcher and follower of the NHL ever since. I doubt that that would've happened without NHL players participating (and it certainly wouldn't have happened with a World Cup of Hockey, which I wouldn't have tuned in for at all). The fact that most of the players were from the NHL was brought up frequently during those Games, and I learned who all of the best players in the league were, so when I started watching the NHL, it was easier to follow.

That wouldn't have happened if countries had sent teams of college kids. I have memories of the '88, '92 and '94 Winter Olympics, and the hockey apparently had zero impact on me. Perhaps the hockey just wasn't that exciting or it didn't become a bigger deal until the best players in the world started competing. Either way, and it's probably not coincidence, NHL players participating in the Olympics caught my attention and I've been a strong NHL follower ever since.

I'm just one person, but me getting into the NHL helped my brother to get into it, and he's gone on to get his wife watching, and their kids will probably like hockey when they're old enough. I'm sure that there are other people like me who began following the NHL after seeing NHL players in the Olympics, and who have since infected others with the bug. Who knows just how great of a number that is, but suggesting that the game hasn't been grown because of Olympic participation is not correct.

I have been asking for anyone to produce one iota of evidence that having the NHL players in the Olympics has resulted in one more person becoming a season ticket holder or spending more money on the NHL because of a direct link to what they saw at the Olympics. Haven't seen any proof yet.

Well, there you go. Consider me an iota.

 

[Wildcarder]

It's your not so classic Prisoner's Dilemma. In a general sense anything you do to grow the game and provide exposure for the NHL is a good thing, but you're advertising for the game of hockey as a whole and the NHL may not be the only one that benefits. You're basically advertising your players and your league but putting them in the Olympics, instead of paying for advertisements or commercials. Keep in mind too that the Olympics as opposed to a World Cup of Hockey would expose the game to more than just hockey fans. I normally don't watch curling but watch it avidly during the Olympics.

I can speak for myself that having watched the World Cup in South Africa and getting an MLS team in Vancouver that I've become much more of a soccer fan and have spent money on the MLS.

I think anything that helps grow the game anywhere is utimately a good thing for the NHL in the long run. I want to see more players like Kopitar, Vanek, Grabner, Zucarello, etc and see countries like Latvia, Switzerland, and Slovenia continue to grow and develop.

 

[Urbanskog]

If the NHL players are such a big draw in the Olympics, then why so many empty seats in the Gold Medal game?

Something I found very disappointing. Are there more hockey fans in northern Russia, that might have come to the games?

Oh lawdy lawd, you really think that the gold medal game wasn't sold out months in advance already? Some ticketholders just didn't arrive to the arena, for some reason.

 

[Cawz]

The NHL would be better off doing its own World Cup every two years during the summer. That would get more attention that anything the Olympics could offer.

No it wouldnt

 

[Cawz]

Hockey should be played in hockey season. Hence, a midseason NHL-run World Cup held every two years would be great.

Maybe they should have a NHL mid-season World Cup run seperate but concurrently with the Olympics. They could piggyback off the Olympic fever but recoup all the benefits.

 

[Forsberg21Sakic19]

The core premise at the heart of the argument for not sending NHL players to the Olympics is flawed. It states that the NHL has nothing to gain by sending players to the Olympics because it could host its own best on best tournament for greater financial gain. However that is operating under the assumption that the only league of note in the hockey world is the NHL. If you follow the growth of the sport in general, it has become quite obvious that this is no longer true. The KHL, while not on the level of the NHL, has become a significant factor in Ice Hockey globally. The other European leagues cannot be ignored either. The NHL needs to understand that it isn't the only actor in the play anymore.

I will follow up with specific numbers (breakdown of NHL v non-NHL players at Olympics and World Cups of Hockey)

 

[FuriousSenator]

This. All those European NHL fans, don't they need to buy a center ice package to watch their favourite team / players? People are fooling themselves if they think this doesn't help the NHL. They get tons of exposure and they don't pay a dime for it, the only thing the NHL loses out on is profit from the All-Star game.

Uhhh except the potential MILLIONS of dollars they could have if they staged their own World Cup in place of the Olympics....

We're talking HUGE potential money here.

 

[FuriousSenator]

No it wouldnt

Yes it would. It would be financially better for the NHL to host a World Cup themselves than it is to give away their players to play for free essentially.

 

[Astoria]

So when would this "World Cup" take place? In the summer? Winter? Every four years coinciding with the WOG's...? If it coincides with the WOG's, will non-NHL'ers, those that have a choice, choose to represent their country at the World Cup or at the Olympics? If given the choice, which tournament do you think the players would choose?

Is this "World Cup" the NHL's baby or is the NHL willing to make this a partnership and share revenues/merchandising/etc. with the KHL, SEL, and other European Leagues? Do you think if they don't get a cut, they'll even come to play?

What about the IIHF's World Championships... would they still take place?

How much money does the NHL actually lose when they shut-down for a few weeks to allow their players to participate in the Olympics? Aren't they still getting a regular 82 game schedule/season? Aren't they still getting the playoffs?

 

[v-man]

One important aspect I think the NHL is forgetting in all this is that most people tend to ignore local sports while the Olympics are going on, no matter where they're being held. I completely forgot about basketball for the last three weeks, it was essentially non existent, likewise for my friends. A lot of hockey fans won't be concentrating on or going to NHL games if they run congruent to the Olympics. The possibility of losing a few players every four years to injuries is far outweighed by the positives hockey and the NHL gain from the increased exposure.

 

[FuriousSenator]

So when would this "World Cup" take place? In the summer? Winter? Every four years coinciding with the WOG's...? If it coincides with the WOG's, will non-NHL'ers, those that have a choice, choose to represent their country at the World Cup or at the Olympics? If given the choice, which tournament do you think the players would choose?

Is this "World Cup" the NHL's baby or is the NHL willing to make this a partnership and share revenues/merchandising/etc. with the KHL, SEL, and other European Leagues?

What about the IIHF's World Championships... would they still take place?

The one that pays them better. The World Cup.

 

[LiveeviL]

I wonder what the players would say if you asked them which would mean more to them:

Winning a Gold Medal (or Trophy… or some other chachka) in the World Cup or winning a Gold Medal in the Olympics.​

You would get a Family Guy answer:
Peter: You remember that time I was supposed to get that boat? A BOAT'S A BOAT, but the mystery box could be anything. IT COULD EVEN BE A BOAT. You know how much we wanted one of those.

 

[SJGoalie32]

In the Olympics, the NHL basically gets 29 games x 2.5 hours of free publicity in America, and that doesn't even include all the extra publicity (as already mentioned) that comes from NBC running highlights in primetime, nor all the other major networks, sports networks, news networks, and so forth mentioning the names of their players names and showing highlights and referencing the NHL teams. That is tons and tons and tons of free national/international publicity for the sport and the league itself, which the NHL then follows up with an exciting postseason (unlike a World Cup which, even if it generated some interest, could quickly be lost with 2+ months of inaction).

Hundreds of hours of free publicity and name recognition for your sport and league to casual fans who you are trying to expand the game to is extremely valuable. The NHL would be very shortsighted to forfeit that.

Furthermore, the NHL's primary broadcasting partner NBC benefits tremendously from having NHL players in the Olympics that they also broadcast. I have to believe that (a small) part of the calculation of what the NHL broadcasting rights are worth to NBC reflects having the NHL players in the Olympics and the value to NBC of being able to cross-promote both their Olympic coverage and NHL coverage. That is a bottom line issue.

Another bottom line issue is the exposure overseas. Not just in who watches the NHL in foreign countries, but in attracting current and future talent in those countries to come over to North America and play in the NHL. The relationships between the various international leagues also will have an effect. SEL, KHL, and other European leagues are not as likely to make contractual concessions in their relationships with the NHL (much less join some NHL-centric World Cup) if the NHL thumbs their nose up at the Olympics. And if NHL player participation helps grow future viewership of the sport in Korea/Asia, the NHL only stands to reap the long-term profits from that.

In every conceivable way, NHL participation at the Olympics benefits the NHL financially and (other than some logistical hassles) comes with little to no cost. The NHL pays nothing for the free international publicity, brand recognition, and goodwill. The sole potential cost is a few potential temporary injuries, in a sport where injuries are commonplace. The flip side is that other injured NHL players who didn't go to Sochi have had an extra 3 weeks of recovery time. And for every team whose playoff position may suffer due to an Olympic injury (like Detroit) another team will simply take its place and see an increased benefit (Washington).

 

[JoeyBeans]

The NHL gains more cash flow when NHL games are played..

 

[SJGoalie32]

Uhhh except the potential MILLIONS of dollars they could have if they staged their own World Cup in place of the Olympics....

We're talking HUGE potential money here.

Where do you think that money is coming from?

It isn't coming from attendance figures, given that the last time Canada hosted the World Championships in 2008, average attendance was less than 9k per game. It isn't going to come from TV ratings given that a Hockey World Cup has none of the cache or interest that the Olympics do. It sure isn't going to generate much domestic interest in the years when the games are played overseas (at midnight-4am), and it probably won't generate much international interest if the games are being played at insane hours for European audiences.

If the NHL has to pay players/foreign leagues/federations to play, that just further increases costs and cuts into profits.

At best the tournament would generate a minor profit (while potentially risking losing money), would fail to generate 1/10th of the exposure of the Olympics, and would run roughly the same risk to player long-term health (I'm sure Garth Snow would be so much happier to lose his star player Tavares for several months at the beginning of the season). Minimal short-term profit, with not even close to a fraction of the national or international exposure that the Olympics. The benefits don't sound that HUGE to me. Certainly not in place of the Olympics.

 

[SJGoalie32]

The NHL gains more cash flow when NHL games are played..

Same number of NHL games are going to be played. 82 games per team, plus playoffs. NHL loses not one dime overall.

 

[Crymson]

Yeah, **** the Olympics. Instead of continuing to rehab, Datsyuk came back early to play two games before the break---presumably so that he wouldn't piss off the management---and, as a result of his early return and participation in the Olympics, is still just as injured now as he was before the Olympics. And with Zetterberg out, this is a guy whom the Red Wings absolutely need to be healthy.

I can understand Datsyuk being unwilling to miss these Olympics, given that they were played in his own nation and he was the captain of the team. Still, it's annoying. These guys are paid to play for their team, not to throw prudence to the wind because of a desire to play in an outside tournament. Yzerman received the same flak in 2002, and it would have been perfectly justified had he not performed so well in that year's playoffs.

 

[sandysan]

The core premise at the heart of the argument for not sending NHL players to the Olympics is flawed. It states that the NHL has nothing to gain by sending players to the Olympics because it could host its own best on best tournament for greater financial gain. However that is operating under the assumption that the only league of note in the hockey world is the NHL. If you follow the growth of the sport in general, it has become quite obvious that this is no longer true. The KHL, while not on the level of the NHL, has become a significant factor in Ice Hockey globally. The other European leagues cannot be ignored either. The NHL needs to understand that it isn't the only actor in the play anymore.

I will follow up with specific numbers (breakdown of NHL v non-NHL players at Olympics and World Cups of Hockey)

At the risk of offending some, poppycock. The KHL is not a threat to the NHL anymore than the AHL is.

I can guarantee you that if the NHL decided to not allow its players to participate in the olympics, the rag tag collection of the players it would use would make it LESS appealing ( I never thought this was even possible) than the world championships.

The appeal of the NHL is not that it has the dollars behind it nor is it that the league is N/A based. Its appeal is that by leaps and bounds it has the overwhelming majority of the best talent in the world.

And I dont think that fans of a league, that has essentially zero NHL caliber players are going to wake up in the middle of the night to watch players from another continent.

If the trend continues to be that the teams in the olympics are increasingly populated by NHL players, I dont see how this helps these lower leagues at all. Even the teams that didnt have a lot of NHL players, the majority of the players they did have plied their trades in N/A leagues, at least for a while.

The only way this changes is if we go NHL europe, otherwise any other league is at best an also ran.

 

[sandysan]

Where do you think that money is coming from?

It isn't coming from attendance figures, given that the last time Canada hosted the World Championships in 2008, average attendance was less than 9k per game. It isn't going to come from TV ratings given that a Hockey World Cup has none of the cache or interest that the Olympics do. It sure isn't going to generate much domestic interest in the years when the games are played overseas (at midnight-4am), and it probably won't generate much international interest if the games are being played at insane hours for European audiences.

If the NHL has to pay players/foreign leagues/federations to play, that just further increases costs and cuts into profits.

At best the tournament would generate a minor profit (while potentially risking losing money), would fail to generate 1/10th of the exposure of the Olympics, and would run roughly the same risk to player long-term health (I'm sure Garth Snow would be so much happier to lose his star player Tavares for several months at the beginning of the season). Minimal short-term profit, with not even close to a fraction of the national or international exposure that the Olympics. The benefits don't sound that HUGE to me. Certainly not in place of the Olympics.

As a life long hhockey fan, I dont know anyone who considers the world championhips ( best against best whose team didnt make the playoffs) worth watching. I'm convinced that the IIHF doesnt care much because if they did they wouldnt hold it during the nhl playoffs.

 

[onlyalad]

Why is everyone set on (or).
I think the NHL wants their World Cup but knows that the rest of the world wont care. So what they will do is threaten to pull out of the Olympics unless everyone also sends players to the World Cup.
The NHL each year does something different
Olympics
All Star game
World cup
All star game( ok repeat)
This way the NHL gets some money evey 4 years and the Olympics get to keep the NHL and we get 33% less All Star Game

 

[Astoria]

Yeah, **** the Olympics. Instead of continuing to rehab, Datsyuk came back early to play two games before the break---presumably so that he wouldn't piss off the management---and, as a result of his early return and participation in the Olympics, is still just as injured now as he was before the Olympics. And with Zetterberg out, this is a guy whom the Red Wings absolutely need to be healthy.

I can understand Datsyuk being unwilling to miss these Olympics, given that they were played in his own nation and he was the captain of the team. Still, it's annoying. These guys are paid to play for their team, not to throw prudence to the wind because of a desire to play in an outside tournament.

A player can just as easily get hurt in the World Cup as they can in the Olympics. If a player is that injured, then perhaps he should spend his time resting during the Olympic break instead of playing. Yeah, the games are being played in Russia... yeah, you really want to play... but sometimes in life you have to make difficult decisions... It's part of being a grown-up.

 

[sandysan]

A player can just as easily get hurt in the World Cup as they can in the Olympics. If a player is that injured, then perhaps he should spend his time resting during the Olympic break instead of playing. Yeah, the games are being played in Russia... yeah, you really want to play... but sometimes in life you have to make difficult decisions... It's part of being a grown-up.

unless its a tavares level injury and the world cup is played at the end of the season, what's the big deal ? The olympics are in the middle of the season, if we have a world cup it wont be in the middle of the season, for obvious reasons.

I'm not saying that players have to go, I super respect what Stamkos did to try and make it and I'm sure it killed him not to be able to go.

 

[sandysan]

Why is everyone set on (or).
I think the NHL wants their World Cup but knows that the rest of the world wont care. So what they will do is threaten to pull out of the Olympics unless everyone also sends players to the World Cup.
The NHL each year does something different
Olympics
All Star game
World cup
All star game( ok repeat)
This way the NHL gets some money evey 4 years and the Olympics get to keep the NHL and we get 33% less All Star Game

So the appeal of having the best players in the world square off against each other is because they do in the shadow if the 5 rings ?

For me the appeal of the olympics is the talent and has nothing to do with the olympics itself. If the nhl didnt break and didnt send players to the olympics and we had the olympics on at the same time as the NHL, I know which channel my thumb hits on the remote.

 

[Astoria]

unless its a tavares level injury and the world cup is played at the end of the season, what's the big deal ? The olympics are in the middle of the season, if we have a world cup it wont be in the middle of the season, for obvious reasons.

I'm not saying that players have to go, I super respect what Stamkos did to try and make it and I'm sure it killed him not to be able to go.

I'm not sure I understand the question (the "what's the big deal" part)? I was responding to the post below:

Originally Posted by Crymson
Yeah, **** the Olympics. Instead of continuing to rehab, Datsyuk came back early to play two games before the break---presumably so that he wouldn't piss off the management---and, as a result of his early return and participation in the Olympics, is still just as injured now as he was before the Olympics. And with Zetterberg out, this is a guy whom the Red Wings absolutely need to be healthy.

I can understand Datsyuk being unwilling to miss these Olympics, given that they were played in his own nation and he was the captain of the team. Still, it's annoying. These guys are paid to play for their team, not to throw prudence to the wind because of a desire to play in an outside tournament.

All I was trying to say was that Datsyuk or any other player for that matter could get injured during any tournament... Olympics, World Championships, World Cup. And if certain players are fighting an injury before a tournament begins, then perhaps they should do what Stamkos and H. Sedin did, graciously bow out of the games/tournament and spend the next few weeks resting/rehabbing.

 

[Cawz]

Yes it would. It would be financially better for the NHL to host a World Cup themselves than it is to give away their players to play for free essentially.

Of course it would. I was referring to the opinion that the World Cup would get more attention. Thats laughable.