For the love of the game.

[Bill_Yates]

As far as I can tell there is no difference in watching professionals playing golf in the Ryder Cup or playing hockey in the Olympics. Both are played at a technical and emotional level that transcends their normal workweek at the rink or at the course.

For those of us who love the game, it is fantastic to watch the pros play in these formats that allow them to play - for the love of the game.

Does anyone agree?

[Michael Rossi]

Completely

Just watched the 1st period of Canada vs Russia, the crowd and the intensity on the ice is far better than any regular season game perhaps even the playoffs.

[Richard Phinney]

Hmmm....not sure they are playing for the love of the game at all.  For the love of country yes. For the adulation yes.  For their place in hsitory yes. In the Ryder Cup for the unique feeling of playing on a team.

Love of the game is when they play a casual game out of the spotlight, truly for the love of it.  When a pro hockey player maybe has a go on a frozen pond during the all star break.  Or perhaps when a golfer seeks out a historic golf course he's always wanted to play.

I'm not saying it isn't fantastically fun to watch them play for something a little different than they normally play for.  But their motivations are far more complex I would suggest.

[Sean_A]

Like the Ryder Cup, Olympic hockey is great - because they are both great sports.  Also like the Ryder Cup, Olympic hockey is secondary to club hockey in the NHL.  Why, because these international events really aren't between teams.  They are between individuals grouped together under the guise of a team.  There is no way I would say watching the US win a gold is better than watching your club run through the most gruelling playoff system in sports to win the Stanley Cup.  To be honest, I have been hoping Sweden get knocker out early so Red Wings players can have a much needed rest and I am happy to see Russia go out so Dats can chill.  That said, this is my opinion and some folks from Canada or especially Russia (or any other eastern European power house) may think differently.  I believe among hard core football fans in England, its the same.  Loyalty to the national side takes second seat to loyalty to the club.  Hell, it gets so hardcore that supporters of say Man U would rather see a Euro team beat Liverpool in the final of the Champions League rather than have Liverpool win.  In a large way, the Olympics are a way for the fringe fans to get involved for a few weeks, but this is the case for nearly all the sports as they aren't really followed in the US.

Ciao

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

I think that a few pro golfers would skip the Ryder Cup if it were possible, so I'm not so convinced. You also don't see pros falling over themselves to represent their country in the golf World Cup. When's the last time Tiger, Paddy, Henrik, and Lee represented their country in this competition.

I think sports like ice hockey, football etc. are all about the team, and not the individual, so there is a greater sense of pride in playing for the shirt. When's the last time you saw a Ryder Cup player kiss the badge on his (pink and purple diamond patterned) pullover?

Dónal.

[Dale Jackson]

Like the Ryder Cup, Olympic hockey is great - because they are both great sports.  Also like the Ryder Cup, Olympic hockey is secondary to club hockey in the NHL.  Why, because these international events really aren't between teams.  They are between individuals grouped together under the guise of a team.  There is no way I would say watching the US win a gold is better than watching your club run through the most gruelling playoff system in sports to win the Stanley Cup.  To be honest, I have been hoping Sweden get knocker out early so Red Wings players can have a much needed rest and I am happy to see Russia go out so Dats can chill.  That said, this is my opinion and some folks from Canada or especially Russia (or any other eastern European power house) may think differently.  I believe among hard core football fans in England, its the same.  Loyalty to the national side takes second seat to loyalty to the club.  Hell, it gets so hardcore that supporters of say Man U would rather see a Euro team beat Liverpool in the final of the Champions League rather than have Liverpool win.  In a large way, the Olympics are a way for the fringe fans to get involved for a few weeks, but this is the case for nearly all the sports as they aren't really followed in the US.

Ciao

I am not sure I go along with NHL players from some countries seeing playing for their country as a rung below club play but I can assure you in Canada there is no higher calling!

Ask some retired players who have been part of a national team and I think they will call it the highlight of their career.  In fact, for some playing on those teams made and defines their careers.

[Carl Nichols]

Like the Ryder Cup, Olympic hockey is great - because they are both great sports.  Also like the Ryder Cup, Olympic hockey is secondary to club hockey in the NHL.  Why, because these international events really aren't between teams.  They are between individuals grouped together under the guise of a team.  There is no way I would say watching the US win a gold is better than watching your club run through the most gruelling playoff system in sports to win the Stanley Cup.  To be honest, I have been hoping Sweden get knocker out early so Red Wings players can have a much needed rest and I am happy to see Russia go out so Dats can chill.  That said, this is my opinion and some folks from Canada or especially Russia (or any other eastern European power house) may think differently.  I believe among hard core football fans in England, its the same.  Loyalty to the national side takes second seat to loyalty to the club.  Hell, it gets so hardcore that supporters of say Man U would rather see a Euro team beat Liverpool in the final of the Champions League rather than have Liverpool win.  In a large way, the Olympics are a way for the fringe fans to get involved for a few weeks, but this is the case for nearly all the sports as they aren't really followed in the US.

Ciao

It was great to be able to root against the Russians, both so that Canada would advance and Ovechkin would get some rest (and Crosby would get less!)  

FWIW, I love the Ryder Cup and I'm a much bigger golf fan than hockey fan, but I'd rather watch Olympic hockey than the Ryder Cup -- Olympic hockey is about as good as it gets

[George Pazin]

I don't think Sean is saying the players feel it's less special to play for one's country, I believe he is saying for the fan who loves the game, the level of play for a true team, as opposed to what amounts to an all-star team, and the greater depth of attachment to an annual rite of passage, as opposed to an every 2- or 4-year 2-week funfest, results in a better display of hockey. From what moderate amount of hockey I watch, I'd agree. The Olympics is fun, but the Pens Cup drive last year, that was special. It's definitely true of basketball.

Similarly for me, the Ryder Cup is fun, but I'll take the vast majority of majors any day of the week.

-----

Ovechkin's gonna need the rest... Pens taking out the Caps in the playoffs, now THAT is an annual rite of passage.

[Kalen Braley]

Even as one who is not a hockey fan per se, I can appreciate the hockey in these olympics.  The game last Sunday between the US and Canada was one of the most compelling things I've seen on TV in a long long time, (even over this past years Super Bowl).  The intensity, the passion, the desire....combined with the playoff style hockey and the lack of heavy dosages of TV commericals made it a superb viewing experience.

If both the US and Canada win in the semis, I can't even imagine how big that will be as US Vs Canda Part 1 was epic.  Safe to say I'm rooting hard for The Re-mix. 

[Sean_A]

I don't think Sean is saying the players feel it's less special to play for one's country, I believe he is saying for the fan who loves the game, the level of play for a true team, as opposed to what amounts to an all-star team, and the greater depth of attachment to an annual rite of passage, as opposed to an every 2- or 4-year 2-week funfest, results in a better display of hockey. From what moderate amount of hockey I watch, I'd agree. The Olympics is fun, but the Pens Cup drive last year, that was special. It's definitely true of basketball.

Similarly for me, the Ryder Cup is fun, but I'll take the vast majority of majors any day of the week.

-----

Ovechkin's gonna need the rest... Pens taking out the Caps in the playoffs, now THAT is an annual rite of passage.

George

You right, I am talking about the bread and butter fan.

One other thing I should mention.  The greatest thing about Olympic hockey is very little goon hockey is tolerated.  Its the same players playing with high intensity.  The difference is they are not permitted to go goony.  I wish this was enforced in the NHL as it would hockey a better sport.  I always remember Ken Dryden outlining why goon hockey is bad for the sport in The Game - which btw, is one of the best sports books I ever read and I encourage all to pick it up even if you aren't a hockey fan.  Once you buy into cutting out the goon stuff, it is easy to see why the NHL should go tom the larger European style rink.

Ciao

[Will MacEwen]

I don't think Sean is saying the players feel it's less special to play for one's country, I believe he is saying for the fan who loves the game, the level of play for a true team, as opposed to what amounts to an all-star team, and the greater depth of attachment to an annual rite of passage, as opposed to an every 2- or 4-year 2-week funfest, results in a better display of hockey. From what moderate amount of hockey I watch, I'd agree. The Olympics is fun, but the Pens Cup drive last year, that was special. It's definitely true of basketball.

Similarly for me, the Ryder Cup is fun, but I'll take the vast majority of majors any day of the week.

-----

Ovechkin's gonna need the rest... Pens taking out the Caps in the playoffs, now THAT is an annual rite of passage.

George

You right, I am talking about the bread and butter fan.

One other thing I should mention.  The greatest thing about Olympic hockey is very little goon hockey is tolerated.  Its the same players playing with high intensity.  The difference is they are not permitted to go goony.  I wish this was enforced in the NHL as it would hockey a better sport.  I always remember Ken Dryden outlining why goon hockey is bad for the sport in The Game - which btw, is one of the best sports books I ever read and I encourage all to pick it up even if you aren't a hockey fan.  Once you buy into cutting out the goon stuff, it is easy to see why the NHL should go tom the larger European style rink.

Ciao

The Game is a great read, and it is impressive that Dryden had no co-writer.

I have heard lots of Swedes say that the bigger ice is only a good deal for the Olympics - when the talent level is extremely high.  Vancouver has NHL dimensions for the Games. 

Getting rid of the cheap stuff makes for a better game - there is still some good hitting.  The amount of skill on the ice is really special.

[Mark Luckhardt]

One other aspect of Olympic hockey that adds to the drama is single game elimination, just like playoff football in the medal round. NHL players are more used to having the luxury of 7 games to recover from bad games or moments. In the Olympics poor goaltending is way more transparent than in a traditional 7 gamer.

[Tom_Doak]

The Game is a great read, and it is impressive that Dryden had no co-writer.

Cornell education. 

[henrye]

Just a reminder from the Canadians.

[Will Peterson]

I think the Olympics has lost something when they started to let professionals play in the marquee sports.  The thing I loved most about watching the games was that this was what the participants had been working towards for four years, now it is just a break from the regular season.  I do like the fact the palyers can now make a living from the sports that are not mass market, but having the NBA and NHL players in the Olympics is just wrong.  With the loss of East vs West and inclusion of the pros, the Olympics has lost the majority of its appeal for me.

I know the IOC wants big name players for the golf event in Rio, but I think it would be better if it were ams.

[Michael Rossi]

I think the Olympics has lost something when they started to let professionals play in the marquee sports.  The thing I loved most about watching the games was that this was what the participants had been working towards for four years, now it is just a break from the regular season.  I do like the fact the palyers can now make a living from the sports that are not mass market, but having the NBA and NHL players in the Olympics is just wrong.  With the loss of East vs West and inclusion of the pros, the Olympics has lost the majority of its appeal for me.

I know the IOC wants big name players for the golf event in Rio, but I think it would be better if it were ams.

Each country wants to win, many teams have athletes not native and many athletes just want the chance to compete against the best of the best. For hockey, ice skating, all skiing events you would not have the same caliber of athletes, they are all pros in their respective sports and the best of the best. The Olympics would then become a developmental program, and just another event, as opposed to a competition of the elite.

[Tim Pitner]

I'm only a sometime hockey fan (I didn't grow up with it), but I appreciated the great Avalanche-Red Wings rivalry of a few years ago and I really enjoy Olympic hockey.  How did Canada get away with not playing on the big ice?  That would seem to be a big advantage to the U.S. and Canada.  I thought the big ice was part and parcel of international hockey.  

Edit--here's an article on the topic--http://www.ctvolympics.ca/hockey/news/newsid=23872.html. 

[Michael Rossi]

I'm only a sometime hockey fan (I didn't grow up with it), but I appreciated the great Avalanche-Red Wings rivalry of a few years ago and I really enjoy Olympic hockey.  How did Canada get away with not playing on the big ice?  That would seem to be a big advantage to the U.S. and Canada.  I thought the big ice was part and parcel of international hockey. 

International ice surface is larger and opens up the game. Most of the players usually learn and play on the regular size surface whether minor or pro hockey in Europe or in North America. The elite players from each team are either playing in the NHL or have in the past, and the next level of players usually played semi pro, junior or college hockey on the regular sized ice. I don`t know if it is a big advantage but would change the coaching strategy.

I don`t think there is an Olympic sized ice surface that can handle the crowd`s in Vancouver, they could have built one I suppose.

[Sean_A]

I think the Olympics has lost something when they started to let professionals play in the marquee sports.  The thing I loved most about watching the games was that this was what the participants had been working towards for four years, now it is just a break from the regular season.  I do like the fact the palyers can now make a living from the sports that are not mass market, but having the NBA and NHL players in the Olympics is just wrong.  With the loss of East vs West and inclusion of the pros, the Olympics has lost the majority of its appeal for me.

I know the IOC wants big name players for the golf event in Rio, but I think it would be better if it were ams.

Will

For what it is worth, I agree with you.  I can watch the pros everyday and I would rather see them at club level anyway.  The reason there was a Miracle on Ice was because the US fielded a team of amateurs against what was essentially a team of pros at least for the Russians.  I really don't know what the other teams like Finland were fielding.  IMO. the pinnacle of hockey is the Stanley Cup, but I can see why hockey may get treated a bit differently from the other team sports because there is a long tradition of Olympic hockey and international hockey in general.  

My question for Canadians is, if the international game was top dog, what were folks doing during 1970-1976 and in general once the more modern age of Olympic hockey started - more or less with the Soviets hitting the stage and the end of the top amateur club in Canada representing them in the Olympics?  How did this current all consuming obsession with international hockey get started?  I realize it was a huge wake up call when Team Canada just scrapped by the Soviets in the Summit Series.  Is this crazy international obsession all about the '72 series and trying to prove Canada is the best? 

Michael

You must remember that even the powerhouse teams being jammed with NHLers is quite a reason deal.  When the first Russians came over they all learned (as did all Europeans) on the big ice.  Perhaps, a team like New Jersey would never have rose to prominence because their trap style of hockey would have been harder to employ on big ice. 

Ciao  

[Michael Rossi]

Sean

It was a different time, cold war etc.

Now the elite hockey players go the the NHL. The European pro league has expanded also, watching the best amateurs for hockey you would have to watch the under 16 age group teams. If the players are elite today the play semi pro (junior in N. America is considered semi pro) or pro.

[Bill_Yates]

As you correctly suggest, pros are playing for the love of the Game - Country - NHL team - Major Trophy - Etc., but in the case of the Ryder Cup or the Olympics, I don't believe they are playing for the love of $$$.  Yet, they play with the same or more passion.

Will,
I too would love to see nothing but the ams playing in the Olympics, but years ago when that's the way it was supposed to be, the communist countries competed with the equilivant of professionals, with the statetaking them and training them almost from birth.  Now with pros in the field, the competition has evened out a bit since then.

[Sean_A]

Sean

It was a different time, cold war etc.

Now the elite hockey players go the the NHL. The European pro league has expanded also, watching the best amateurs for hockey you would have to watch the under 16 age group teams. If the players are elite today the play semi pro (junior in N. America is considered semi pro) or pro.

Michael

US college hockey has an awful lot of good players (one of the main reasons the US has a crud load more NHLers than at any time in the past) and in recent years has made leaps and bounds on Cananda's junior system as development/holding tank for future pros.  But to be honest, loads of Euros are being spotted at an earlier age these days.  NHL scouts take the Euro game very seriously as place to find talent - even a lot of talent developing slightly later.  I can still remember when the NHL was something like 95% Canadian.  I would be surprised if it is 50% Canadian these days.  To be honest, its the best thing that has ever happened to the NHL.  There is so much more skill in the league now, that I dare say a guy like Ken Dryden may have struggled to get a starting position on many teams.    

Ciao

[Will MacEwen]

The Game is a great read, and it is impressive that Dryden had no co-writer.

Cornell education. 

McGill as well

[Michael Rossi]

Sean

It was a different time, cold war etc.

Now the elite hockey players go the the NHL. The European pro league has expanded also, watching the best amateurs for hockey you would have to watch the under 16 age group teams. If the players are elite today the play semi pro (junior in N. America is considered semi pro) or pro.

Michael

US college hockey has an awful lot of good players (one of the main reasons the US has a crud load more NHLers than at any time in the past) and in recent years has made leaps and bounds on Cananda's junior system as development/holding tank for future pros.  But to be honest, loads of Euros are being spotted at an earlier age these days.  NHL scouts take the Euro game very seriously as place to find talent - even a lot of talent developing slightly later.  I can still remember when the NHL was something like 95% Canadian.  I would be surprised if it is 50% Canadian these days.  To be honest, its the best thing that has ever happened to the NHL.  There is so much more skill in the league now, that I dare say a guy like Ken Dryden may have struggled to get a starting position on many teams.    

Ciao

You are spot on. The US system is getting much better. I think a lot has to do with the education opportunities. If you play junior in Canada you are no longer eligible for a US scholarship. The junior teams will pay a % towards players education after junior but it isnt close to a US full ride option in D1 at a top notch school. It wouldn't surprise me that you see more Euro's and Canucks attending the US college system in the future.

[Kevin_Reilly]

I'd love to hear Dave Silk on this topic!