Toggle sidebar

2014-2015 Champions Hockey League

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
  • We're expecting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
Status
Not open for further replies.
vorky said:
more russian clubs. I am sure KHL woudl not agree with your formula (all non russian khl clubs and one russian)
Click to expand...

Medvedev idea was 4 best overall teams in the league plus 3 best foreign teams.
 
Slimmy said:
The quality of hockey is good in the CHL. When it comes to the top teams in the KHL, sure, the quality of hockey is better. But the bottom half? Not a chance.
Click to expand...

Yes, you right, Nottingham panthers would totally demolish Medvescak and Slovan.:sarcasm:
 
alce said:
Yes, you right, Nottingham panthers would totally demolish Medvescak and Slovan.:sarcasm:
Click to expand...

Of the remaining teams in the CHL, all of them would be more than a match for the majority of teams in the KHL. You have a few very good teams in the KHL and then there's a big drop off in quality. There's plenty of teams in the SHL and Finnish Liiga that would give these teams a run for their money, no doubt.
 
Vicente said:
Apparently next season will even see a total of 48 (!) teams in CHL.

That's crazy. I always thought Champions League was best on best and not everyone vs everyone... no wonder this can't be taken serious anymore.

http://www.championshockeyleague.net/news/chl-to-play-with-48-teams-in-2015-16/674/
Click to expand...

I agree with you. It makes sense to have 48 clubs, if KHL joins (these new 4 spots would be for KHL.), but what will they do if KHL does not join? Will they invite Spain, Serbia, GB etc? Joke
 
vorky said:
I agree with you. It makes sense to have 48 clubs, if KHL joins (these new 4 spots would be for KHL.), but what will they do if KHL does not join? Will they invite Spain, Serbia, GB etc? Joke
Click to expand...

It has no sense in any case. Even if KHL joins. They've made that stupid system to give even crappiest teams at least 4 games to play. It's probably good for fans of those teams, but sucks for all others. I really hope that there will be no KHL in that joke of a tournament. At least until they do something like UEFA did, where crappy teams should fight their way to the group games.
 
alce said:
It has no sense in any case. Even if KHL joins. They've made that stupid system to give even crappiest teams at least 4 games to play. It's probably good for fans of those teams, but sucks for all others. I really hope that there will be no KHL in that joke of a tournament. At least until they do something like UEFA did, where crappy teams should fight their way to the group games.
Click to expand...

That is true. My opinion is, and I am not alone, that there are idiots in CHL management. So, having 48 clubs with KHL teams is less stupid idea than to have 48 clubs without KHL. Of course both models are bad.

It was idea of Medvedev to have "64" teams league in EuroAsia. I am not so sure that Timchenko is fan of KHL joining CHL, but we have to wait for more news. KHL wants famous euro clubs to join KHL, so it is appropriate to play CHL to have a contact with these clubs.

IMO there are two scenarios
1) KHL will consist of russian clubs - KHL joins CHL
2) KHL will consist of russian clubs and a few euro ones - I am not sure that KHL would join CHL.
 
vorky said:
I agree with you. It makes sense to have 48 clubs, if KHL joins (these new 4 spots would be for KHL.), but what will they do if KHL does not join? Will they invite Spain, Serbia, GB etc? Joke
Click to expand...

It's amazing how many times people refer to GB along with these other countries. I hope people do realise that hockey in GB has a massive history (GB won gold in the olympic ice hockey in 1936, the Stanley Cup was made in England, history of spengler cup etc) and there is a genuinely a lot of interest in the sport in the United Kingdom.

Example of history of sport in UK. England vs Switzerland in 1947 at Wembley Arena - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5u6EBQoqlM

Ice Hockey is the number one attended indoor sport in the UK. During the Winter only football & rugby are attended better. In Scotland now, ice hockey is the 2nd most attended sport, getting even more people than rugby...only football has better attendances. The Nottingham Panthers who played in the CHL have more fans that over half the teams in the KHL and they charge about 3 times the price for a ticket. Not even that long ago 2 of the top 5 attended teams in Europe were British. There is a lot of interest as well in the NHL in the UK, it was no surprise that when the NHL hosted games in London a few years ago between LA & Anaheim, that both games were sold out (18,500 capacity).

Standard wise, sure the domestic players aren't great, mainly due to a lack of facilities, a joke of a governing body plus the fact the sport gets no funding from the government. In saying that though the British League is just as good as the leagues in Italy, Denmark, France, Norway etc. and its better attended. Don't forgot as well in the CHL, Nottingham beat Hamburg. Sure they got trounced by Lulea but your never going to get better unless you play teams from a better level. In the old EHL the Scottish team Ayr beat the RSL champions Ak Bars Kazan home & away. Manchester also drew I believe with Dynamo Moscow.

Hockey has huge potential in the UK, especially in Scotland & a competition like the CHL helps a lot in increasing awareness. It's mind-boggling that people can think that the problem with the CHL is due to their being 1 British team despite the fact there are EIGHT (!!) Swedish & Finish teams in the competition.
 
@frank16

I have nothing against british hockey. The point was to show that CHL management does poor job.... honestly, do you think that next edition of CHL will be more attended? Will level of play be higher if there is 48 clubs (no KHL, more 2nd tier euro leagues)?
 
vorky said:
@frank16

I have nothing against british hockey. The point was to show that CHL management does poor job.... honestly, do you think that next edition of CHL will be more attended? Will level of play be higher if there is 48 clubs (no KHL, more 2nd tier euro leagues)?
Click to expand...

I think the more teams from countries like Norway, Denmark, Great Britain, France etc. play against teams from DEL, Liiga etc. then the better they will get. Also the attendances from the clubs in these smaller hockey nations in the CHL have been relatively good in comparison to what they get in their domestic leagues.

In terms of what the attendances will be like in Sweden, Finland, Czech next CHL, its hard to tell but I don't think attendances will be up that much if at all. The biggest problem is there are far too many teams from these countries in the competition and the fact they are guaranteed a spot. It's too early to judge the CHL though IMO. In 2/3 years time no team will be guaranteed a spot in the CHL and that will improve the competition a lot & I hope then they take the chance then to lower amount of teams from Scandinavia.

If in the future there is say 32 teams in competition (all there on sporting grounds), some form of KHL involvement & decent prize money I see no reason why the CHL could not be a good & interesting tournament
 
vorky said:
tell me a source of this money....
Click to expand...

I said 'if' :)

It's important to remember though that some of the countries participating in the CHL are extremely wealthy nations (Germany, Switzerland, UK, Sweden etc). I read somewhere that each team in SHL receives €3 million just from tv money. IF the CHL can improve the tournament there is no reason why they can't find better sponsors and increase money from TV and thus improve prize money
 
JJTT said:
This is just means less games per team, which is good. 4 group stage games is a lot better than 6 as they can played before the club's domestic season starts..
Click to expand...

Of course they could have also 8 groups with 3 teams and 24 participants total as its the case in CONCACAF Champions League.

It would be a lot more competitive.

Something like:
3 Teams (Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Cech Republic)
2 Teams (Slovakia, Germany, Austria)
1 Team (UK, France, Norway, Denmark, Italy, Qualifying team of lower countries)
 
frank16 said:
It's amazing how many times people refer to GB along with these other countries. I hope people do realise that hockey in GB has a massive history (GB won gold in the olympic ice hockey in 1936, the Stanley Cup was made in England, history of spengler cup etc) and there is a genuinely a lot of interest in the sport in the United Kingdom.
Click to expand...

I personally would prefer a thousand times a highly motivated UK based team with full stands in a real European Champions League than some Finnish bottom side playing in front of 800 fans because nobody cares...

And the level of EIHL is not really that bad. They have tons of decent foreigners from North America.
 
Just make the schedule more engaging (that is to say, spread it around the year so people actually feel there is some championship going on, not just another NT brake of sorts).
 
Fragmuffin said:
Just make the schedule more engaging (that is to say, spread it around the year so people actually feel there is some championship going on, not just another NT brake of sorts).
Click to expand...

Scheduling it around the domestic leagues can be difficult with some leagues (ie. Finnish league) not having set dates for rounds but instead games spread all over the place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom