A very interesting column on the Southam chain today, written by the Edmonton Journal's Dan Barnes, raises a good question. I don't want to breach their copyright by putting the whole thing in, but take a look:
[font=Courier New]"Heck, these Canadians are fast, big, skilled, mature and poised enough to win games, if not medals, at the World Hockey Championships four months from now.
Dare we say they're probably even ready to play in the Olympics.
Come to think of it, they should play for Canada at the Olympics in Turin, Italy, in 2006. The International Olympic Committee could seize a rare opportunity to make a meaningful and logical statement. They should huddle with the International Ice Hockey Federation, agree to scrap the world junior championship just this once and make Turin an under-21 tournament. End what precious little suspense remains and make it clear that NHL players will not be invited or welcome to play in the Olympics this time; lockout or no lockout."[FONT]
He then goes on speaking about the so-called pros this time:
"Because they don't belong in the five-ring circus this time around. Not because they are professionals. Those are a dime a dozen at any Games these days. It's just that greedy, locked-out millionaires who are conspiring with their greedy, stubborn, foolhardy ownership to deny fans a chance to watch NHL hockey should not be representing their country.
Nor should they be celebrated."
Given that the NHL has already apparently said that if the start of next year is delayed in any way by the lockout continuing, plans for pro players to join the Olympics may not be allowed by the owners, what do you think? The only knock would appear to be that we would be seeing a replay of this mis-matched tournament.
No way.
Just because the top league of North America isn't playing, doesn't mean you have to punish Europe, were the top leagues are going on as usual.
I think it is pretty clear that the difference between the top nations and the next few isn't as big in pro hockey as in junior hockey.
Just let the guys who were allowed to play in the Olympics in the past, play in Turin. If the NHLers shouldn't play, well, that's nothing new, happened before.
Given that the NHL has already apparently said that if the start of next year is delayed in any way by the lockout continuing, plans for pro players to join the Olympics may not be allowed by the owners, what do you think? The only knock would appear to be that we would be seeing a replay of this mis-matched tournament.
Lockout or not, the pros will be in Turin. Maybe not NHL pros, but pros nonetheless.
The Olympics should be about the best players available. If the NHL won't let its players take part, well that's too bad, but there's no point in making it an U-21 tournament. There are good players outside the NHL, mind you. Look how many members of this Russian WJC team can't even play in the RSL on a regular basis (let alone star in it).
Lockout or not, the pros will be in Turin. Maybe not NHL pros, but pros nonetheless.
The Olympics should be about the best players available. If the NHL won't let its players take part, well that's too bad, but there's no point in making it an U-21 tournament. There are good players outside the NHL, mind you. Look how many members of this Russian WJC team can't even play in the RSL on a regular basis (let alone star in it).
I agree. And if the NHL doesn't let its boys play, the U.S. and Canada will likely get dominated by teams like Russia and Sweden.
Given that the NHL has already apparently said that if the start of next year is delayed in any way by the lockout continuing, plans for pro players to join the Olympics may not be allowed by the owners, what do you think? The only knock would appear to be that we would be seeing a replay of this mis-matched tournament.
I thought they said before the lockout if it extends into about where we are now (or maybe the whole season, don't remember) that they wouldn't let NHL players play. There is no way the Olympics won't let the Russians, Swedes, Germans, etc bring their European league players just because the NHLers won't be there.
If there is no season next year (05-06) as Gretzky fears, then Canada could still field "NHL" players who are playing in Europe, hence have a fairly strong team.
What if there are replacement players in the NHL next season. Perhaps having no deal IIHF/NHL deal could mean that these replacement players cannot play in the Olympics, while the real "NHL" players could.
It just goes to show the extent of uncertainty the lockout has created in the hockey world.
