NHL Not Participating in the 2018 Winter Olympics

BREAKING: NHL says it will not participate in 2018 Winter Olympics in South Korea. https://twitter.com/AP_Sports/status/848986251604758529/photo/1

Via zipay, ap_sports and others on twitter

Disappointing... I wonder if players like Ovechkin will attempt to follow through and play in the Olympics

http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/17555953/alex-ovechkin-washington-capitals-intends-play-2018-olympics-regardless-nhl-participation

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-will-not-participate-in-2018-winter-olympics/c-288385598

Fuck

Back to back WJCs!

The Bentley Generals go to Korea!

Amazing how much they managed to destroy International hockey in one calender year.

:tweet: @BrandonPrust8

Way to ruin the sport of hockey even more Gary #Olympics

My guess is there will be no league mandate going forward. This will be left to individual players and team owners to allow or disallow. Effectively making it a "states rights" issue.

Global marketing takes a hit, but Owners like Ted Leonsis have already spoken at length about their willingness to acquiesce to players who want to play. Namely Ovechkin, B?ckstr?m, and Holtby.

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

My guess is there will be no league mandate going forward. This will be left to individual players and team owners to allow or disallow. Effectively making it a "states rights" issue.

 

Global marketing takes a hit, but Owners like Ted Leonsis have already spoken at length about their willingness to acquiesce to players who want to play. Namely Ovechkin, B?ckstr?m, and Holtby.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Link for Leonsis supporting Oveckin to the Olympics from December.... hope he keeps this stance

https://www.nhl.com/news/capitals-owner-supports-ovechkins-plan-for-2018-olympics/c-284545546

Little reason to think he won't. He's even mentioned being OK with being fined by the league for doing so.

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Another option, though I'm sure it's a logistical nightmare, is to move hockey to the Summer Olympics. Doing so would sidestep this issue entirely.

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Another option, though I'm sure it's a logistical nightmare, is to move hockey to the Summer Olympics. Doing so would sidestep this issue entirely.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Or the IOC just let the NHL market with the Olympic rings.

The greed in all parties involved, other than the players, is the only reason that the players aren't going.

Or the IOC just let the NHL market with the Olympic rings.

 

The greed in all parties involved, other than the players, is the only reason that the players aren't going.

It's greedy for franchises that pay the best players in the world millions of dollars to win hockey games, don't want them to suffer season ending/career altering injuries playing for some other team?

It's greedy for franchises that pay the best players in the world millions of dollars to win hockey games, don't want them to suffer season ending/career altering injuries playing for some other team?

No. But couldn't USA Hockey now say that they don't want their players to play in the NWHL, since they're paid as full-time employees? Same thing, would that be greed?

But that's not why owners do it anyways. They don't want to do let players go because the league can't market it so they can't make any money off of it. Owners couldn't care less if players get hurt other than the fact that it might reduce jersey and ticket sales. The biggest issue is that the IOC won't let them use the Rings, but it's owners wanting to profit Olympics that's why the players aren't going.

No. But couldn't USA Hockey now say that they don't want their players to play in the NWHL, since they're paid as full-time employees? Same thing, would that be greed?

 

But that's not why owners do it anyways. They don't want to do let players go because the league can't market it so they can't make any money off of it. Owners couldn't care less if players get hurt other than the fact that it might reduce jersey and ticket sales. The biggest issue is that the IOC won't let them use the Rings, but it's owners wanting to profit Olympics that's why the players aren't going.

Yes USA hockey could do that, and since the highest salaries in the NWHL are about $25k, the players wouldn't care.

So you truly believe that the Isles would gladly have Tavares suffer another season ending injury for a few $$ of 'Olympic Money'? Or the Oilers would be happy to risk McDavid for the chance to put the Olympic rings on a billboard? That's almost laughable. The cost/benefit analyse does not at all support risking a players long term health for a few months of Olympic advertising every four years.

Yes USA hockey could do that, and since the highest salaries in the NWHL are about $25k, the players wouldn't care.

 

So you truly believe that the Isles would gladly have Tavares suffer another season ending injury for a few $$ of 'Olympic Money'? Or the Oilers would be happy to risk McDavid for the chance to put the Olympic rings on a billboard? That's almost laughable. The cost/benefit analyse does not at all support risking a players long term health for a few months of Olympic advertising every four years.

So if a player makes 25k in the NWHL and 75k from USAH, they wouldn't care about giving up a quarter of their yearly salary? lol

A "few $" is more like millions and millions, and the risk of a guy getting hurt in the Olympics and missing more than a few weeks is woefully low. You're badly overestimating how much owners care about winning.

Using Tavares as an example - the Isles owners would be just as well off losing him for a season because they don't sell tickets anyways and tanking could allow them to get a new top draft pick to generate buzz. The only franchises that would be impacted financially by losing a single player a fringe playoff teams who need their star to get in and generate playoff dollars. There's only maybe 4-5 teams in the entire league who fall into that category.

So if a player makes 25k in the NWHL and 75k from USAH, they wouldn't care about giving up a quarter of their yearly salary? lol

 

A "few $" is more like millions and millions, and the risk of a guy getting hurt in the Olympics and missing more than a few weeks is woefully low. You're badly overestimating how much owners care about winning.

 

Using Tavares as an example - the Isles owners would be just as well off losing him for a season because they don't sell tickets anyways and tanking could allow them to get a new top draft pick to generate buzz. The only franchises that would be impacted financially by losing a single player a fringe playoff teams who need their star to get in and generate playoff dollars. There's only maybe 4-5 teams in the entire league who fall into that category.

It's not their yearly salary. It's two different jobs. If the job that pays more tells you to quit the other job, you quit the other job. Or you can keep the lower paying job and the higher paying one can let you go, your choice.

In the last Olympics 4 players suffered season ending injuries (Tavares, Zetterberg, Barkov, and Kopecy), Paul Martin missed 18 games, Tyutin missed 8 and Zucc missed 4. Out of at most 6 games played, hardly woefully low.

With out receiving a payout from the IOC, how do NHL owners stand make millions and millions by using the rings?

Zetterberg didn't get hurt during the Olympics, he'd already missed a dozen games before that. JT is really the only good example.

How would the NHL make money? The same way they always do. TV rights, sponsorhips, merchandise, ticket revenue. Basically, exactly what they did with the World Cup.

Zetterberg didn't get hurt during the Olympics, he'd already missed a dozen games before that. JT is really the only good example.

 

How would the NHL make money? The same way they always do. TV rights, sponsorhips, merchandise, ticket revenue. Basically, exactly what they did with the World Cup.

That has nothing to do with...

Or the IOC just let the NHL market with the Olympic rings.

The IOC supposedly gives 90% of its revenue (corruption aside) back to the National Olympic Committees. 2,873 athletes from 88 countries competed in the 2014 Olympics. If the 31 NHL owners that have 149 Olympic athletes under contract want to negotiate with the IOC our the hockey playing countries for some revenue sharing, they can, but that's not greed, that's business.

If you owned a thorough breed racehorse, would you let someone else run it in a race without receiving any compensation? Would you be greedy for not doing that?

That has nothing to do with...

Uh, it's a direct correlation. The NHL can't market the Olympics if they aren't allowed to.

No, and that's not my point. I said from the beginning that the biggest issue was the the IOC won't let the NHL use the Rings. No, they're not greedy for not letting players go. Yes, they are greedy because they can't find a middle ground, but the IOC is the bigger issue.

Uh, it's a direct correlation. The NHL can't market the Olympics if they aren't allowed to.

 

No, and that's not my point. I said from the beginning that the biggest issue was the the IOC won't let the NHL use the Rings. No, they're not greedy for not letting players go. Yes, they are greedy because they can't find a middle ground, but the IOC is the bigger issue.

Ok, so I'll ask again, how does "using the Rings" make the NHL money?

Ok, so I'll ask again, how does "using the Rings" make the NHL money?

I already answered this.

You're answer was

How would the NHL make money? The same way they always do. TV rights, sponsorhips, merchandise, ticket revenue.

Which is revenue sharing with the IOC. Revenue sharing is a much different negotiation than 'using the rings' which is the term you keep going back to.

According to Reuters the IOC saw $53.15 million in profit for the 2014 Olympics.

Let's say the NHL got 5% of that for NHL players making up 5% of the participating athletes. That would be $2,657,500. Divide the among the 30 owners $88,583.33 each. That's worth risk your star player to injury?

You're answer was

 

 

 

Which is revenue sharing with the IOC. Revenue sharing is a much different negotiation than 'using the rings' which is the term you keep going back to.

 

According to Reuters the IOC saw $53.15 million in profit for the 2014 Olympics.

 

Let's say the NHL got 5% of that for NHL players making up 5% of the participating athletes. That would be $2,657,500. Divide the among the 30 owners $88,583.33 each. That's worth risk your star player to injury?

It's not revenue sharing if the NHL can do it's own marketing.