More Olympic Thoughts

Yesterday I gave you my thoughts on Team USA's performance. Today, my random takes on some other Olympic issues:

-With the thoughts and and emotions of yesterday's post a fairly widespread thing right now, how can Commissioner Bettman and his cronies actually be so stupid to consider not having the pros in the Olympics in 2014?!?

First, as we just learned, you never know when you're gonna get an amazing tournament that grabs the nation's attention. Bettman tried to argue that because the Olympics will be in Russia, the games will be at odd hours, people won't watch and therefore won't care. Sure, on some level that's true - viewership will be down.

But that also evidences a very dumb command of how buzz actually works. It's not what people see, it's what people talk about. Think about how many people were talking about the US-Canada prelim match-up (i.e. their first game) - do you really believe all of those people were watching non-medal round hockey on CNBC on a Sunday afternoon?

What actually happened is that the game was amazing, so the diehard fans and media talked all about it, then the masses picked up on the buzz and wanted to be a part. It wasn't just the game itself - people wanted to be part of the energy of the team and the storyline. The games could be played on the moon at 3 AM, but if the US does something noteworthy enough to create buzz, that buzz will spread not much different than if the games were played in primetime in the middle of New York City.

And the thing hockey needs above else, is buzz. Given how dead the sports world always is during February, how the hell can a sport like hockey forfeit it's one chance to get actual national attention? Here's how dumb Bettman is - he used that as an argument AGAINST the Olympics. He claimed that with the Super Bowl over, Baseball not really going yet, and March Madness still off, it was hockey's time to shine. Thus, it was a bit of a hindrance to their ability to draw attention when they have to shut down the NHL season for the Olympics.

WHAT?!? Bettman you ignorant slut. What's going to get hockey more attention:

Option #1 - a couple of weeks of mid-season contests that are part of an 82-game schedule where 16 teams make a four-round playoffs, just the same as every other year

Option #2 - the greatest players competing for their home countries in a two-week event highlighted by essentially eight NHL-All Star teams locked into seven win-or-go-home battles that only occur once every four years

Seriously, Betty? This is even up for discussion?

Second, of all the times to pull out the NHLers, why the hell would you do it when the US team is coming into its own? Miller, fast becoming the top goaltender in the world, is only 29. The rest of the team can't rent cars in most states. The US Juniors just won nationals (in Canada over the Canadians - huge props, by the way... I'm sorry it took me so long to mention it here). Sure, plenty of highly hyped teams fall face-first (see Russia circa 2010) in the Olympics. But plenty don't (see Canada circa 2002, 2010).

You're telling me there'd be anything better for the NHL than having the US team dominate the nation's attention for two weeks in the sports dead zone of February? You don't think the first gold medal since 1980, won by our biggest NHL stars, would have a major impact on the sport's popularity for years to come?

Or that the hype in the lead-up to the tournament wouldn't draw all sorts of attention to the NHL? You don't think after this performance by this American team, that returning the same core of guys to Russia wouldn't be a major story for months ahead of the games? Not a major hockey story, not even a major sports story, but a major news story.

Obviously the players all love playing for their national teams - that was one of the most evident aspects of these games. It didn't matter that they were all knee-deep in the slog of that 100+ game NHL season. Every single team there was made up of guys who wouldn't have traded it for the world. Those two epic battles between the U.S. and Canada proved that.

Ovechkin is so committed he's already said he'll just leave his team in 2014 if NHL players aren't allowed to play - sentiments shared by many other Russian players, who haven't threatened that step, but certainly would be upset if the powers-that-be denied them this chance to play in their home country.

So this call is 100% on the owners to not be short-sighted and dumb as rocks, blowing the only opportunity they have to propel hockey into the national limelight for something positive. Open your eyes, you idiots - do the right thing for the sport, for its fans, and for your own damn pocketbooks.


-So clearly I'm none too happy with the Commissioner and the owners for even considering ending NHL participation in the games. But they are the only ones feeling my wrath these days - all of those anti-Olympic NHL fan whiners can also screw off.

Soccer, a sport with WAY more money, interest, love, death, etc riding on it, manages to play international games all the time. All year long there are qualifiers and friendlies and random tournaments. Every other year all the European countries play in either the Euro or the World Cup, both of which are like March Madness, a Game 7 of the World Series, and the Super Bowl all rolled into one... but going on for a month straight.

Hoops and baseball also have their pros playing internationally. Yes, they don't have to stop their seasons, but is an in-season injury that much worse than a pre-season or off-season one? These people also whine about a compressed schedule - wait, I thought you said you're a fan? So how is having more games more often a bad thing?

I love that the Hawks are playing every other night. Game nights are a highlight of my week - even if I can't watch, it's great to wake up the next day and read about the outcome. So having that more often is bad how? Especially because the "cost" of this is to have even more amazing hockey to follow for two weeks in the form of the Olympics? And not having a pointless, idiotic, worthless all-star break?

Arguing against the Olympics by hockey "fans" and pundits is all nonsense. No true fan and no intelligent pundit actually dislikes seeing games more often, getting treated to an incredible Olympics, and having their sport's profile raised. If you're making these arguments, you're just looking for a reason to bitch or something to fill up air time or column space. And you're a tool.


-So while I don't think much of all these anti-Olympic hockey fans, I actually think even less of anti-Olympic Hawks fans. I saw a bunch of writers and fans whining about how the Hawks had the most to lose in this tournament. How all they wanted was for their fragile little flowers to come home safe and sound.

Holy cow you morons couldn't be more wrong! The Hawks had the absolute most to gain in these games! Of the contenders (Hawks, Was, SJ, NJ, Pit, Van, and Det - come on, those guys always have to be considered), only the Caps and Canucks are anywhere near as inexperienced as the Hawks. And of those teams, only the Sharks and maybe the Canucks will face playoff pressure and expectations as high as the Hawks will.

So what more could you ask for than taking five of the six players most crucial to the Hawks hoisting the Cup (the 6th being whomever is in goal - more on that hopefully later this week) and putting them in the most pressure-filled, expectation-laden series of games they will ever experience? Especially when four of those five - all but Hossa - have never experienced anything even close to that?

You don't think that Kane, Toews, Keith, and Seabrook aren't far, FAR better off to handle the pressure of a Cup run now that they've not only experienced but thrived in a Gold medal run? Kane, Toews, and Keith played some of the biggest roles on their national teams, did so admirably, and now are coming back to the Hawks with the confidence and experience to do it all over again in April and May.

Throw in Seabrook getting the confidence of solidly hanging with the best of the best, Hossa getting a handful more big games to shake off his post-injury rust, and Kopecky getting a nice run away from the struggles of this season to rediscover his game, and the Hawks are coming out of the Olympics all Aces.

Oh, but these young 20-something year old kids are so tired. Sure, Keith and Seabrook looked bad (relative to expectations) for the last month or so before the Games. But how much of that was physical and how much was mental? Isn't it possible getting away from the drag of the NHL season and getting the immeasurable jolt of winning the Gold at home will return them to the Hawks rejuvenated mentally?

On top of that, there is plenty of time to rest those two and everyone else - the Hawks are all but locked into the #2 seed in the conference. Sure they'd like the #1 and they could really screw up and fall to #3, but odds are they'll have plenty of games down the stretch where Coach Q can dial back the minutes of his workhorses.

Whether the Olympics happened this year or not, the key to keeping Keith and Seabrook and everyone fresh is locking into a spot early enough to make April the time to get back your legs. So if you're worried about the youngest, deepest, and most high-energy team in the NHL somehow being tired for the playoffs, focus your concerns on the Hawks taking care of business in March and Coach Q having the foresight to alleviate the demands on his top players.


Well, that's about it for me on the Olympics - from here on out it's all Hawks. I've got a bunch of thoughts rumbling around upstairs, a bunch of half-written posts floating around somewhere. With the trade deadline tomorrow, I'm sure I'll weigh in on the look of the Hawks moving forward. From there, we'll debate how best to handle all the extra skaters (assuming they're all still around), what to do about the goalie spot (assuming the Hawks don't make a trade), and how much fun it'll be if the Red Wings don't make the playoffs (I'm not holding my breath).