Saying what size rink equates to a better game is an opinion, not a fact. So there is no "period" about it. It's like blond vs. brunette. It is a matter of taste.
While I have never had anything major against the Olympic sheet, I'd argue that the puck movement can actually be slowed down by that size ice sheet because players feel they can lug the puck around more because of the extra time/space they have as opposed to moving the puck more quickly to an open teammate. Personally, I enjoy the playmaking that tends to develop from quick puck movement than I do when guys think they can dangle it around more on their own. To me, this is a major difference between college and pro. Players move the puck more quickly to the open man in the pros because they know they can't waste a lot of time. Things happen faster. Turnovers, etc.
One of the things Lucia always used to remark on when we would be preparing to play at the old DECC (which was even smaller than the standard 200x85 NHL rink) is how quick you have to move the puck and how quickly things can happen if/when you have a break down.
Making remarks on it based on how the NHL looks is misleading because the NHL places far more emphasis on big, physical players that are meant to clog things up. Even then, I'd argue that what has held back scoring in the NHL has more to do with more athletic goalies (and the ridiculous size of the gear they wear).
The Olympic rink is more the exception than the rule with most young players. Most of them spent their youthful development on normal size rinks. I have no problem with them shrinking it to a 200x90 size, etc.