Why I hope the NHL ditches the Olympics
- Thread starter Canuckistani
- Start date
The 'clowns' in Zurich are far from infallible but to their credit over the past 18 years they have managed to organize more than a single 8 team international tournament. They have also managed to hold these tournaments without shuttering their organization for nearly a year immediately afterwards.
Canada vs Canada for the right to be ranked 1st through 2nd!
I think everyone would rather see 'play until someone scores' format but selling rights to an international event is easier if you can sell it in 2 or 3 or etc hour blocks of programming. Not every TV network out there is going to be totally cool with preempting Republic of Doyle to accomadate a game going into triple OT.
Not that it matters what I think but I am totally cool with the big tournament in hockey being something other than the Olympics. I'm just not sure what the NHL has done up to this point that would make anyone want them to be in control of the thing.
In medal rounds of best-on-best events, yes.
The IIHF really seems to be run by people who hate hockey.
Last edited:
Very few games go that long. The vast majority of games would be decided in 20 minutes of extra time, yet for some reason the IIHF doesn't even want to allow for that.
They seemed to have done the 1996 and 2004 World Cups quite well.
Jussi
Registered User
Shootouts exist due to tv contracts. Games are on from afternoon to early evening or prime time in European countries and games have a certain time allotted in the tv schedules. Not every tv station can keep bumping programs due to a hockey game running "too long". Remember you're dealing with multiple countries. The shootout is not going away, period. To suggest otherwise shows complete lack of understanding on how international tv contracts work.
I understand it quite well, thanks.
I also can't help but notice that NHL-run tournaments are somehow the only ones in which TV networks appear willing to tolerate some extra hockey.
So let's have the best players play in those events (so that they're allowed to decide the winner by actually playing the game), while the Europeans can continue watching shootouts at the worlds lest the game interrupt a soap opera or the evening news. That's fair.
It's also worth noting that European hockey leagues (just like the NHL) decide their playoff games with OT until someone scores. So apparently European networks are willing to sign up for sporting events that might run a little long. Yet as soon as its an IIHF world hockey event, those eight key playoff games simply MUST end at a designated time - so soon in fact that there's not even time for a 20 minute OT. Give me a break.
Last edited:
Don't knockout games already include a 20 minute period before a SO? I know for sure finals do.
...and the 2000, 2008, 2012 World Cups not so much.
Even the '96 and '04 tournaments really didn't seem to generate a ton of interest or establish much credibility outside of Canada. Luckily for the NHL as long as at least Canada cares the thing will probably be pretty lucrative. Hockey is by no means the world's biggest sport but I think things have got to the point were it needs something a bit more ambitious than a 8 team invitational tournament.
Only the finals are 20 min OT. Quarters and Semis are 10 minutes, which makes it a lot easier to "play for the shootout," as the Czechs did in 98.
- Feb 23, 2014
- 27,925
- 87,561
Who was Finland playing back in the day against in that 102 minute or so international game that went on until someone shot the GWG? Because that had an awesome sports event feel to it. "I'm so watching how this ends, sleep be damned!"
I say people whose TV won't show the overtime can read the scores from the internet and write angry letters to the broadcasters afterwards. Finland was quite capable back in the day to fill the broadcast time following the regular game time with some negligible programming with the actual explicit caveat of "if the game goes overtime this will not be broadcast".
Sports really get ruined by playing with the TV broadcasters imposed rules and trying to make certain sports like cross country skiing more TV friendly rather than sports friendly.
it's not plausible to have the games go on until someone scores.. these tournaments often have game right after each other in the same rink
ozo
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2010
- 4,523
- 571
I hate shootouts as much as you do, but this is silly. It's ok to "gimmick" your way into medal rounds, but no further? Legitimacy should be tarnished already, no? I could make rant that for past years NHL champions are not real champions as some teams doesn't even get to play "real hockey" in playoffs, but are left without post-season because they lost one or two skills competition challenges more during the season.
You mean the travesty that the self declared best hockey players in the world looked like bums and couldn't even score once on a breakaway situation?
capebretoncanadien
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2008
- 3,946
- 0
I'd rather that shootouts be taken out of medal round games than the Nhl'ers be taken out entirely.
1Gold Standard
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,986
- 317
I dislike the shootout as well (and dislike is understating it) but that is not the reason to drop the Olympics in favor of the World Cup. In fact we should have both and even further than that, I don't think we can have one without the other. If the NHL "dumps" the Olympics what motivation do any of the European countries have to participate in a World Cup? It's an NHL and NHLPA show with NHL rules predominately played to N. American audiences for N. American broadcasters where the vast majority of the revenues fall into the pockets of the NHL. The NHL wants a tournament and if that tournament has any chance of succeeding as a permanent fixture on the international calendar, the NHL owners have to plug their noses and close down for 3 weeks every 4 years to play an Olympic tournament. I just don't see how we can have one without the other.
Then schedule the games to allow for at least one 20-minute OT. Not an ideal arrangement, but it would allow the vast majority of games to be decided without a shootout.
Last edited:
They'll have the same motivation that brought them to the Canada Cup back in the day.
No Olympic trade-off required.
You mean the travesty that the self declared best hockey players in the world looked like bums and couldn't even score once on a breakaway situation?
Irrelevant. It's not hockey.
It's like a US baseball team losing a home-run derby. Doesn't prove a thing about who the better team is.
1Gold Standard
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,986
- 317
I wouldn't be so sure of that. It was a different era back then. But I hope we have both.
As others have said, shootouts really aren't a valid reason for not wanting to be in the olympics. There's very legitimate reasons for it, although I would like to see it out of the Gold Medal / Bronze Medal games.
To me, it's about the lack of control the NHL gets over scheduling. The league goes through significant hardship to send players to the olympics, for the purpose of growing the game and attracting new audiences... yet in Sochi, games were scheduled in the mornings, or during the middle of the work day for the majority of the NHL's target for growth. Sure, people will watch, but those people watching are likely fans to begin with. The NHL has little to gain from Europeans getting more into it, they need North Americans, and specifically, the casual American fan to tune in.
Personally, I'd like to see a condition to the NHL's participation being that they dictate the timeline for games. Games can be held at 6pm ET, or 9pm ET. The time in Korea shouldn't matter -- the Olympics isn't about selling tickets, it's about selling ads.
Don't like it? NHL doesn't participate, and nobody tunes in anyways.
To me, it's about the lack of control the NHL gets over scheduling. The league goes through significant hardship to send players to the olympics, for the purpose of growing the game and attracting new audiences... yet in Sochi, games were scheduled in the mornings, or during the middle of the work day for the majority of the NHL's target for growth. Sure, people will watch, but those people watching are likely fans to begin with. The NHL has little to gain from Europeans getting more into it, they need North Americans, and specifically, the casual American fan to tune in.
Personally, I'd like to see a condition to the NHL's participation being that they dictate the timeline for games. Games can be held at 6pm ET, or 9pm ET. The time in Korea shouldn't matter -- the Olympics isn't about selling tickets, it's about selling ads.
Don't like it? NHL doesn't participate, and nobody tunes in anyways.
ResilientBeast
Proud Member of the TTSAOA
As well as the semifinals of the 2007/2009 WJC (both of which Canada won). It's not about winning or losing; it's about a skills competition tainting otherwise amazing games.
What made 1998 so especially unbearable was that it was a best-on-best tournament. It's one thing to tarnish the world championships with that silliness, since Canadians tend to see the worlds as little more than a training camp for top-level events.
But the best should be allowed to decide the winner by playing hockey, which isn't guaranteed when you play by IIHF rules.
jekoh
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2004
- 4,416
- 4
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Props Alex Ovechkin to Record 895th Career Goal During 2024/25 Regular SeasonWagers: 12Staked: $21,883.00Event closes - 2 days from now- Updated: