Why I hope the NHL ditches the Olympics

[xxxx]

The problem with the 'NHL World Cup' is that it's viewed as a joke by many. And with the emergence of the KHL, who knows if they'll release players for a rival league's tournament.

only World Cup - no
World Cup plus Olympics - Sure
only Olympics - yes +++

define 'many'


Why should the IIHF hold a World Cup type of a tournament when we all know the tournament should be played on NHL ice and with NHL referees and NHL rules. Yes, it's a nonsense really to ask the NHL to hold such a tournament.


There are strong arguments for me for NHL referees and NHL type of ice and NHL rules. Number one and foremost, 95% of the world's best players play here. I know the NHL referees are not percect, but they are still a better option than the IIHF refs IMO, especially when you want them to be on NHL ice.

 

[Theokritos]

Why should the IIHF hold a World Cup type of a tournament when we all know the tournament should be played on NHL ice and with NHL referees and NHL rules. Yes, it's a nonsense really to ask the NHL to hold such a tournament.

There are strong arguments for me for NHL referees and NHL type of ice and NHL rules.

One is not like the other.

 

[Zine]

define 'many'


Why should the IIHF hold a World Cup type of a tournament when we all know the tournament should be played on NHL ice and with NHL referees and NHL rules. Yes, it's a nonsense really to ask the NHL to hold such a tournament.


There are strong arguments for me for NHL referees and NHL type of ice and NHL rules. Number one and foremost, 95% of the world's best players play here. I know the NHL referees are not percect, but they are still a better option than the IIHF refs IMO, especially when you want them to be on NHL ice.

"Many" applies to everybody.....even Canadians.

Did Canadians take to the streets en masse in celebration the 2004 World Cup or even 76, 84, 87 or 91 Canada Cups? I don't remember you guys doing so.
However you certainly did for Olympic victories......especially 2002 and 2010.

 

[Canuckistani]

Did Canadians take to the streets en masse in celebration the 2004 World Cup or even 76, 84, 87 or 91 Canada Cups? I don't remember you guys doing so.
However you certainly did for Olympic victories......especially 2002 and 2010.

Not sure if street parties are a good indicator of how Canadian fans view a given tournament. But for the record there were celebrations in 2004 in Toronto and Montreal (not sure about elsewhere).

The hype surrounding Salt Lake 2002 and Vancouver 2010 made for a huge celebration upon victory. Things after Sochi were much more subdued, as they would have been in Turin as well had we won.

 

[Canuck21t]

"Many" applies to everybody.....even Canadians.

Did Canadians take to the streets en masse in celebration the 2004 World Cup or even 76, 84, 87 or 91 Canada Cups? I don't remember you guys doing so.
However you certainly did for Olympic victories......especially 2002 and 2010.

We would have celebrated more this year too if the final wasn't on so early for us. I know that many woke up to watch the game, but like me went back to sleep after the game because I was so tired.

Anyway, you're right, nothing beats the Olympics in hockey. The World Cup CAN become something big like it is with soccer but for that, it has to be run by a more neutral organization and the NHL is definitely not neutral. North Americans can whine all they want, but the IIHF is still more neutral than a professional league.

 

[Canuck21t]

Not sure if street parties are a good indicator of how Canadian fans view a given tournament. But for the record there were celebrations in 2004 in Toronto and Montreal (not sure about elsewhere).

The hype surrounding Salt Lake 2002 and Vancouver 2010 made for a huge celebration upon victory. Things after Sochi were much more subdued, as they would have been in Turin as well had we won.

I disagree. People are just not THAT into the World Cup. Only hockey fans watch the World Cup, but the Olympics attract non-fans too. That automatically makes the Olympics a bigger tournament. The Olympics is really the only international tournament that Americans are interested in. I don't remember TV personalities talking much about the World Cup.

 

[An Argument For]

We would have celebrated more this year too if the final wasn't on so early for us. I know that many woke up to watch the game, but like me went back to sleep after the game because I was so tired.

Anyway, you're right, nothing beats the Olympics in hockey. The World Cup CAN become something big like it is with soccer but for that, it has to be run by a more neutral organization and the NHL is definitely not neutral. North Americans can whine all they want, but the IIHF is still more neutral than a professional league.

So we all know it will never sniff the levels of success that the World Cup has. I mean the world cup is one of those things that has value along the lines of the Super Bowl or the Olympics.

However, if the IIHF honestly wanted to create a significant world championship the first thing they need to let the annual WHC die. They can create annual tournaments for juniors and still have the divisional championships for lower levels but the actual World Championship has to go. Soccer, Basketball, Rugby, Cricket etc. all utilize a 4 year format for their world cup. The IIHF is just saturating it's own market. A bit of withdraw might help create some anticipation.

 

[Xokkeu]

So we all know it will never sniff the levels of success that the World Cup has. I mean the world cup is one of those things that has value along the lines of the Super Bowl or the Olympics.

However, if the IIHF honestly wanted to create a significant world championship the first thing they need to let the annual WHC die. They can create annual tournaments for juniors and still have the divisional championships for lower levels but the actual World Championship has to go. Soccer, Basketball, Rugby, Cricket etc. all utilize a 4 year format for their world cup. The IIHF is just saturating it's own market. A bit of withdraw might help create some anticipation.

First you say the IIHF has no idea what it's doing, next you want them to kill their most profitable asset!?

 

[An Argument For]

First you say the IIHF has no idea what it's doing, next you want them to kill their most profitable asset!?

Sigh. What does that have to do with anything?

Reading comprehension. Not even one.

The question at hand is how do you improve the value/quality of the Hockey World Cup. My response was to follow a very standard template that has been proven among many sports.. decrease availablity = increase demand.

Not once did I attempt to maximize revenue streams.

Of course, as you clearly stated, you wouldn't like the IIHF if they were only about maximzing revenue.. like some team owners. Right?

 

[Xokkeu]

Sigh. What does that have to do with anything?

Reading comprehension. Not even one.

Maybe you don't even read your own posts. I don't really know.

 

[SlingshotVv]

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.

No, this shows a complete lack of understanding on how international tv contracts are negotiaited. You go with the station that will allot the necessary requirements to broadcast an event. These days stations will bump all sorts of stuff, as they know they're competing in an internet world, where they can be bypassed for major event programming easily enough.

Internet site are often surpassing the advertising dollars that can be generated by tv commercials in smaller market nations anyway. They can pony up at higher offerings to sponsor and pay for the events.

 

[chokei]

Sigh. What does that have to do with anything?

Reading comprehension. Not even one.

The question at hand is how do you improve the value/quality of the Hockey World Cup. My response was to follow a very standard template that has been proven among many sports.. decrease availablity = increase demand.

Not once did I attempt to maximize revenue streams.
Of course, as you clearly stated, you wouldn't like the IIHF if they were only about maximzing revenue.. like some team owners. Right?

One does not go without the other. The IIHF needs the World Championship to survive. No IIHF, no serious international competition. The format as is isn't perfect, but I don't think promoting the World Cup, a tournament nobody outside Canada cares or - among non-hardcore hockey fans - has even heard of, is the way to go. That is, if you think in a "Hockey is a global sport" kind of way.

Maybe the IIHF finds a way to gain money from different sources than mainly the WC and the WC as an annual tournament can go away. Until then, we have the Olympics every 4 years to look forward to, and I think February is a good time for a hockey tournament. It's difficult to find a non-summerish month for a hockey tournament when the NHL plays until mid-summer and the European leagues start again in September.

Concerning the shootouts: I have a feeling that the NHL/NHLPA would be the first ones to complain if every game was decided by sudden death until the end. They already refuse to accept the Olympics as a full 2-week tournament, imagine if there was even more wear and tear because you got rid of the shootout.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

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.

For the elimination games tv stations would bump programming in a heartbeat to carry overtime games. The odds of the regular programming having a bigger audience than the overtime game would is very small.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

The iihf could increase their revenue substantially if they got rid of the annual World Championships and held a proper best on best tournament of their own once every four years. The revenue potential in North America alone is massive.

 

[Xokkeu]

The iihf could increase their revenue substantially if they got rid of the annual World Championships and held a proper best on best tournament of their own once every four years. The revenue potential in North America alone is massive.

That doesn't seem likely. Perhaps if they took the long view: sure we will lose money for the next three decades, but eventually this will pay off!

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

That doesn't seem likely. Perhaps if they took the long view: sure we will lose money for the next three decades, but eventually this will pay off!

It really wouldn't be that hard, all you have to do is have it four times more popular than an average World Championship, plus the operating costs would be ~75% less. In Europe I think it would easily be 2 to 3 times more popular than a WC and in NA (which is a much larger revenue source) 10 times or more would be pretty much a given. It would take time for the tournament to gain recognition in the USA, but the WC has zero popularity there now, so the growth potential is huge.

 

[Xokkeu]

It really wouldn't be that hard, all you have to do is have it four times more popular than an average World Championship, plus the operating costs would be ~75% less. In Europe I think it would easily be 2 to 3 times more popular than a WC and in NA (which is a much larger revenue source) 10 times or more would be pretty much a given. It would take time for the tournament to gain recognition in the USA, but the WC has zero popularity there now, so the growth potential is huge.

I'm not sure there's much hard evidence that Europeans would find a hypothetical IIHF World Cup significantly more popular than the current World Championships. To me the European market seems pretty saturated. I don't see a lot of growth potential for a hypothetical IIHF World Cup in Europe and getting it off the ground in the US would seem to be a long term strategy, made even longer by the four year intervals.

If I were running the IIHF, and it's obvious that I'm not, I'd look to leverage any potential World Cup with the NHL to:

A: secure further NHL participation in the Olympics
B: secure significant funding from any World Cup goes to the national federations involved
C: continue to host an annual World Championships because frankly, it's profitable

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

I'm not sure there's much hard evidence that Europeans would find a hypothetical IIHF World Cup significantly more popular than the current World Championships. To me the European market seems pretty saturated. I don't see a lot of growth potential for a hypothetical IIHF World Cup in Europe and getting it off the ground in the US would seem to be a long term strategy, made even longer by the four year intervals.

If I were running the IIHF, and it's obvious that I'm not, I'd look to leverage any potential World Cup with the NHL to:

A: secure further NHL participation in the Olympics
B: secure significant funding from any World Cup goes to the national federations involved
C: continue to host an annual World Championships because frankly, it's profitable

If it was a tournament organized and sanctioned by the iihf it would be embraced by Europeans. The WC does not hold the prestige it once did in Europe and the Olympic tournament is much much more popular over there. I don't think the tournament would be as popular as the OG right off the ground, but still much more popular than the WC.

 

[Jussi]

No, this shows a complete lack of understanding on how international tv contracts are negotiaited. You go with the station that will allot the necessary requirements to broadcast an event. These days stations will bump all sorts of stuff, as they know they're competing in an internet world, where they can be bypassed for major event programming easily enough.

Internet site are often surpassing the advertising dollars that can be generated by tv commercials in smaller market nations anyway. They can pony up at higher offerings to sponsor and pay for the events.

In Europe we have this thing called "sports events of national importance" which are required to be available for everyone on free tv. Each country can make their own lists for events by which the tv companies having the rights will have to abide. In Finland the Worlds are now owned by MTV3 which operates only on advertisement revenue (and pay tv services). The law requires them to air all of Finland's games and the medal round games on free tv. They do not air any other live sports on their free channels. They have a notoriously strict schedule and supposedly can't bump certain shows. E.g. the 1996 SC final they didn't show the final to live because their morning shows could not be bumped. That is why there are time limits to how long a game can last max. European tv is a whole another mess compared to North America.

 

[Jussi]

If it was a tournament organized and sanctioned by the iihf it would be embraced by Europeans. The WC does not hold the prestige it once did in Europe and the Olympic tournament is much much more popular over there. I don't think the tournament would be as popular as the OG right off the ground, but still much more popular than the WC.

The WC never had much prestige in Europe. To state otherwise is delusional.

Hockey is too small a sport in Europe to not have an annual World Championships. It needs to be on every May. It's our May Madness.

There is also zero chances of national federation from gaining the kind of money they make from hosting the Worlds than from a World Cup held every 4 years. There's no way Finland could make 8 million € from a World Cup. It's not realistic to think The NHL/PA would give always such money to any outsider. Any person who suggests they would, has not witnessed the greed of those two entities in the last 20 years.

 

[Canuck21t]

So we all know it will never sniff the levels of success that the World Cup has. I mean the world cup is one of those things that has value along the lines of the Super Bowl or the Olympics.

However, if the IIHF honestly wanted to create a significant world championship the first thing they need to let the annual WHC die. They can create annual tournaments for juniors and still have the divisional championships for lower levels but the actual World Championship has to go. Soccer, Basketball, Rugby, Cricket etc. all utilize a 4 year format for their world cup. The IIHF is just saturating it's own market. A bit of withdraw might help create some anticipation.

I don't see why the IIHF need to eliminate the WHC to boost the World Cup. North Americans can just ignore the WHC like usual and put more attention on the World Cup like we are with the Olympics. Hockey's markets are still too small to not have a WHC every year. Unlike soccer, it needs this yearly tournament like others have said.