Olympics

osh

Well-Known Member
Thread starter #1
Looks like the NHL decision not to allow any of their players to a play in the Olympic men’s hockey has well and truly backfired on them and won’t be popular in either USA or Canada.
Canada were beaten by Germany 4 - 3 they could well have done with a couple of Devils players to help them out ( as suggested by Steve King )
Looks like a good final between Germany and OAR coming up.
 

ASHIPP

Well-Known Member
#2
Brule being thrown out didn't help Team Canada resulting in a 5 min pp for Germany. Canadians didn't really start responding until p3.

I can understand the NHL decision. It's getting towards the business end of the NHL season. Many teams still battling for playoff positions.Some the divisions are so tight that several teams are on the same points.
They don't want consistency interferred with....or injuries to players. These guys are paid $millions by their NHL teams to perform.

It will be refreshing to see other nations in the gold/silver medal games this year
 
Last edited:

Kevlar68

Well-Known Member
#3
Let's look at it from Devils owners, team and supporters. If we were on this run were on now and our key players went to olympics, would we as supporters be happy? Would the owners be happy that a potential league winning team has been broken up? Would the team be happy that it could cost a championship? At the end of the day its a business and its all about winning leagues and silverware. That's how I see it and I think NHL did right.
 

Vartel

Active Member
#4
I am surprised there wasnt a compromise along the lines of allowing one player per team to go to the Olympics from the NHL, with both the player and team having the ability to veto the first choice. That would still have given USA/Canada a much higher level of players without massively compromising any individual nhl teams
 

Gazza272

Well-Known Member
#5
Let's look at it from Devils owners, team and supporters. If we were on this run were on now and our key players went to olympics, would we as supporters be happy? Would the owners be happy that a potential league winning team has been broken up? Would the team be happy that it could cost a championship? At the end of the day its a business and its all about winning leagues and silverware. That's how I see it and I think NHL did right.

But our owners actively put forward our players for selection. So I think it's safe to say they would be happy with it. :)
 

osh

Well-Known Member
Thread starter #6
I am surprised there wasnt a compromise along the lines of allowing one player per team to go to the Olympics from the NHL, with both the player and team having the ability to veto the first choice. That would still have given USA/Canada a much higher level of players without massively compromising any individual nhl teams
Not forgetting it wasn’t just USA/Canada who were missing NHL players, I haven’t checked, but probably the majority of other teams were also missing their NHL players.
 

Kevlar68

Well-Known Member
#7
Just my opinion but if I owned a team and I had a choice to let my key playmakers leave to play for national teams in Olympics or stay with the team I own to push for a title at a crucial point in season I would keep my players. Potentially losing the league would also lose European spot so lots of factors come in to play when you release players.
 
Last edited:
Top