Thirty years ago

was the Miracle on Ice. What a great story of the collegiate US Hockey team beating the 'professionals' from the Soviet Union to advance to the gold medal game.

Yesterday the US played Canada and won. It was a good game and quite compelling. Olympic hockey is anticipated by many and for a lot of viewers, it is looked at as something much better than what is typically played in the NHL. I think that is only somewhat true.

The rosters of the US and Canadian teams were composed entirely of NHL players. And these NHL players were not fourth line checking wingers. The rosters are all-star quality, so when you get the best of the best, the quality is going to improve. You may have moments of great hockey in a Minnesota-Tampa Bay regular season game, but you'll have to look much harder for those moments.

What makes Olympic hockey better is not entirely the players. What makes Olympic hockey better is the emotion. USA-Canada, Russia-Czech Republic, USA-Russia, Czech Republic-Slovakia. Those are great matchups with lots of emotion. Putting a sweater on with the USA shield across the front is a little different.

The NHL has that emotion at times, and that emotion is seen when the rivalry teams play frequently. Blues-Blackhawks is not always a 'great game' because for several years the rosters were second rate. But those games were emotional games because the teams played each other frequently. Friday night in Chicago is followed by Saturday night in St. Louis. The memories and the bruises were still fresh. When months lapse with no rivalry games with teams in your division, then the hockey gets a little cold or stale.

Before we think that the NHL should be more like Olympic hockey, perhaps the scheduling of games should be looked at as a way of increasing the 'quality' of play. Or perhaps there should be fewer teams, thereby increasing the number of skilled players on the professional teams and weeding out those that are less-skilled.