Lessons learned from the Olympics - Faceoff - Brief Article

Hockey Digest, May, 2002 by Alex Gordon

I'LL ADMIT IT. I WAS AMBIVALENT about the Olympics. Not only did I view them as a major disruption to what has been a riveting NHL season, but after the lackluster performance by the Canadian team and the boorish behavior of Team USA in Nagano in 1998, I wasn't very excited to see the NHL players return for another round of embarrassment on the world stage.

Well, a funny thing happened on the way to Salt Lake City. This year's Olympic hockey tournament was simply riveting. Whether it was the Canadians battling to reclaim their national sport after a 50-year gold-medal drought, a Miracle on Ice rematch 20 years to the date between the U.S. and Russia, or the surprising Belarusian team (which featured only one NHL player) defeating powerhouse Sweden to make it to the semifinals, the Olympics were everything NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and hockey fans could have wished for.

Bettman has not yet committed to an NHL encore for the 2006 games in Turin, Italy, but he'd be a fool not to see the value of the exposure Olympic hockey gives his product. Bettman and the powers that be could also learn a lesson or two from the Olympics to improve the NHL game. Now we can't expect a late March Anaheim-Nashville game to match the intensity of the gold-medal game, but there are some things the NHL could do to make the pro game more thrilling.

For instance, mandate that all future arenas feature the larger international ice surface. While there is simply no way current arenas will be retrofitted--those seats up on the glass are the ones that pay the salaries--the next wave of stadiums could be built with larger rinks, which helps open the game up and places a greater emphasis on speed and skill rather than clutching and grabbing.

We won't even suggest contraction, but the NHL could take a cue from the intensity of the Olympics to rejigger its scheduling. Why shouldn't divisional rivals meet at least eight times a season? Not only would it be good for the bottom line--Chicago-Detroit sells a lot more tickets than Chicago-Vancouver--but familiarity breeds contempt, and contempt breeds intensity.

While changing the ice surface and schedules would be a sea change for the NHL, two elements from the Olympics would be easier to implement the quick-drop faceoff and eliminating the red line.

The Olympic 15-second faceoff rule meant the teams couldn't stop for coffee breaks at every play stoppage. It also meant that the games didn't last as long as your average Kevin Costner-directed epic.

The elimination of the center line would help be a stopgap measure until rinks could be widened. Again it opens up the game, placing an emphasis on stick skills. The NHL is desperate to increase scoring, and opening up the ice to allow forwards more room to roam would be a good start.