World Cup: 2016 World Cup — Team Europe

[Jablkon]

To tell you the truth, i was hurt by these Anglo-saxon setting the rules and not respecting my nation as a real nation.

So lets move up the sleeves, spit in the hands, and all "small ****y european nations" get together and kick some ass on the rink.

Let's show them who we are.

Still it will not help Switzerland to "qualify" to possible next World cup....

 

[Hardyvan123]

No, you're just happy to be and stay mediocre, that's all. I remember that this is exactly what people were saying about Slovak hockey in the late 1990s, just before Slovakia started winning all those medals, including gold in 2002. People like you kept saying: "We're a weak team, we can't possibly ever compete with Czechs, we should be happy just to play in the top Worlds category, blah, blah, blah, the golden times of Czechoslovakia are over forever and can never be brought back, blah, blah, blah." The typical defeatist Slovak mentality.

It took someone with a winning mentality, like Peter Å ťastný (winning only because he spent decades of his life living and playing in Canada – if he had stayed in Slovakia, he would have ended up being just such a defeatist like virtually all Slovaks), to say it clearly: "Slovakia can and should compete for medals, and it can even win gold." And a few years later, that's exactly what happened.

Again, it's inexcusable to exclude 2002 World Champions from a so-called World Cup of hockey, without even giving them a chance to qualify for the event. They should at least have given both Slovakia and Switzerland, as well as other hockey nations, the opportunity and motivation to join the tourney. That would have been the decent thing to do. They could have used the upcoming World Championships tourney in Russia as a World Cup qualifier, saying that whichever two teams outside of the top 6 nations come up at #7 and #8 in that event, will get the invitation to play at the World Cup. Don't give me those idiotic excuses about "no time for qualifying". There is all the time in the world, and no extra qualifiers are needed, because the World Championships in Russia can serve as a perfectly legitimate qualifying tourney – after all, the Worlds tourneys have always also served as Olympic qualifiers, with no one complaining about it! So don't give us that bull**** about "no time for qualifiers".

So, like someone else in this thread, I'll be rooting for a Slovakia vs. Switzerland final at the upcoming World Championships in Russia, and then I'll be rooting for a united and firm boycott of the Mickey Mouse Cup by all Slovak & Swiss players in September.

sorry but 2002 is almost 15 years before this tournamnet is going to take place.

It's an NHL tournament to showcase NHL talent of whih very little comes from slovakia these days.

Hopefully that will change but the U23 and rest of Europe team will actually give the tournament more actual and real competition.

Slovakia had exactly 11 players take to the ice last season in the NHL and by the time the tournament comes around 2 of those Dmen will be really exposed and alot older as well.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...=gt&c4val=&threshhold=5&order_by=games_played

It would also be another thing if there was going to be a huge push from Slovak and Swiss fans to provide money, ie paying for seats and or advertising to this money making tournament but that isn't happening either, it's the reality of it.

 

[FiLe]

Hopefully that will change but the U23 and rest of Europe team will actually give the tournament more actual and real competition.

Nobody's questioning that the rosters on paper will look more impressive this way. But if you've actually watched any hockey to save your life, you should be aware that "roster on paper" =/= "performance on ice", especially when international play is concerned. Before you pop another can of NHL's marketing kool-aid, please consider the following...

1) Team chemistry and cohesion. National teams and their prospective players train together on constant basis. In most European countries they have yearly gatherings in the off-season where they practice moves even when there aren't any major tournaments in sight. These mickey mouse teams will gather for the first time scant two weeks before the puck drop.

2) Motivation. There are six teams in this tournament who will play for their country. Two that will play... for what? Personal glory, bragging rights and their paycheck?

3) Timing of the tournament. Their actual pay jobs wait just a month away. If there won't be a party back home to make up for it, how many will actually do all it takes to win these games, as in actually play hard and take those extra bruises? The players in these comedy squads should very well know there won't be plenty people in the rafters or behind their screens back home giving a rat's backside whether they win or lose.

4) Tournament format. One saving grace of squads that start with the lack of cohesion is that it tends to improve as the tournament progresses. It's hard to count out a team that plays bad in their opener in a regular WHC because every participant at that point has at least six guaranteed games left, and - with a little luck - even as little as three late wins may be enough to make it to the QF. Even the current olympic format is pretty forgiving, because despite having only four guaranteed games, a team can lose all three during group stage and still collect themselves once the playoff rounds start.

However, this tournament will be VERY brief. Each team has only three guaranteed games and then it's the two best from each group to the semis. This means that there's no finding your sea legs. Leftovers and YoungStarz come into this tournament cold and must win at least one of their first two matchups - and two out of three in total if they wish to feature any further. So yeah, it's built into the tournament format itself that those teams that come into this as ready and cohesive as possible will roll far in it. It's a huge advantage to the traditional NTs whose players all know each other.


So, what kind of narrative does this lay out for these two oddballs?

Team Leftovers' best chance lies in beating USA in their opener, because they may not be same kind of cohesive unit as an European NT that has regular scrimmages together. But their next game will be against the Czechs, who are one of those cohesive euro teams. And finally, they face Canada. I don't think you're even willing to consider they might win that one. So... what are the odds they will be a factor?

YoungStarz will start by facing Finland, which is the country that perhaps banks the most on being as cohesive as they can from the get-go. There's no slow start, figuring out which pieces will go where, or Finland WILL skate in circles around them. Their second game vs. Russia may offer a better matchup, because Russia traditionally trusts less in tactics and just tries to roll with their individual skill. And let's hope facing down Sweden will not be a similar mountain to climb as the Leftovers have when taking on Canada. You know, for the sake of this highly-flaunted "competitiveness".


Sure, upsets can happen in pro sports. But usually they happen because a lesser team manages to beat a supposedly better one because they've prepared better and have a more thought out game plan. It's actually the very reason why most games on international stage aren't blowouts these days. But these mickey mouse teams will enter this show with a huge handicap, and therefore more likely than not it will be U-G-L-Y for them, no matter how hard the NHL tries to flaunt their supposedly "superior" rosters in front of us.

Kinda makes you wonder if the league actually has any people who understand team sports - not just hockey, but any venue. Because if they do and they really wanted to ensure as close competition as possible, they would have invited teams that are as ready as they can be right out the gates, instead of trying to get as many marketable individuals involved as possible.

Well, maybe they do. They're just banking on there being enough dumb shmucks who don't, but are willing to pay regardless. "Those guys can't tell their heads from their own hind sides! We just show them this list of all the big names involved and they'll swallow it, hook, line and the kitchen sink!"

 

[JackSlater]

Nobody's questioning that the rosters on paper will look more impressive this way. But if you've actually watched any hockey to save your life, you should be aware that "roster on paper" =/= "performance on ice", especially when international play is concerned. Before you pop another can of NHL's marketing kool-aid, please consider the following...

1) Team chemistry and cohesion. National teams and their prospective players train together on constant basis. In most European countries they have yearly gatherings in the off-season where they practice moves even when there aren't any major tournaments in sight. These mickey mouse teams will gather for the first time scant two weeks before the puck drop.

2) Motivation. There are six teams in this tournament who will play for their country. Two that will play... for what? Personal glory, bragging rights and their paycheck?

3) Timing of the tournament. Their actual pay jobs wait just a month away. If there won't be a party back home to make up for it, how many will actually do all it takes to win these games, as in actually play hard and take those extra bruises? The players in these comedy squads should very well know there won't be plenty people in the rafters or behind their screens back home giving a rat's backside whether they win or lose.

4) Tournament format. One saving grace of squads that start with the lack of cohesion is that it tends to improve as the tournament progresses. It's hard to count out a team that plays bad in their opener in a regular WHC because every participant at that point has at least six guaranteed games left, and - with a little luck - even as little as three late wins may be enough to make it to the QF. Even the current olympic format is pretty forgiving, because despite having only four guaranteed games, a team can lose all three during group stage and still collect themselves once the playoff rounds start.

However, this tournament will be VERY brief. Each team has only three guaranteed games and then it's the two best from each group to the semis. This means that there's no finding your sea legs. Leftovers and YoungStarz come into this tournament cold and must win at least one of their first two matchups - and two out of three in total if they wish to feature any further. So yeah, it's built into the tournament format itself that those teams that come into this as ready and cohesive as possible will roll far in it. It's a huge advantage to the traditional NTs whose players all know each other.


So, what kind of narrative does this lay out for these two oddballs?

Team Leftovers' best chance lies in beating USA in their opener, because they may not be same kind of cohesive unit as an European NT that has regular scrimmages together. But their next game will be against the Czechs, who are one of those cohesive euro teams. And finally, they face Canada. I don't think you're even willing to consider they might win that one. So... what are the odds they will be a factor?

YoungStarz will start by facing Finland, which is the country that perhaps banks the most on being as cohesive as they can from the get-go. There's no slow start, figuring out which pieces will go where, or Finland WILL skate in circles around them. Their second game vs. Russia may offer a better matchup, because Russia traditionally trusts less in tactics and just tries to roll with their individual skill. And let's hope facing down Sweden will not be a similar mountain to climb as the Leftovers have when taking on Canada. You know, for the sake of this highly-flaunted "competitiveness".


Sure, upsets can happen in pro sports. But usually they happen because a lesser team manages to beat a supposedly better one because they've prepared better and have a more thought out game plan. It's actually the very reason why most games on international stage aren't blowouts these days. But these mickey mouse teams will enter this show with a huge handicap, and therefore more likely than not it will be U-G-L-Y for them, no matter how hard the NHL tries to flaunt their supposedly "superior" rosters in front of us.

Kinda makes you wonder if the league actually has any people who understand team sports - not just hockey, but any venue. Because if they do and they really wanted to ensure as close competition as possible, they would have invited teams that are as ready as they can be right out the gates, instead of trying to get as many marketable individuals involved as possible.

Well, maybe they do. They're just banking on there being enough dumb shmucks who don't, but are willing to pay regardless. "Those guys can't tell their heads from their own hind sides! We just show them this list of all the big names involved and they'll swallow it, hook, line and the kitchen sink!"

Nah, forget this... the NHL says it will be more competitive with gimmick teams, so it must be true!!!

 

[Hardyvan123]

Nobody's questioning that the rosters on paper will look more impressive this way. But if you've actually watched any hockey to save your life, you should be aware that "roster on paper" =/= "performance on ice", especially when international play is concerned. Before you pop another can of NHL's marketing kool-aid, please consider the following...

enough of the koolaid bull****,. I have simply laid out why the NHL is acting in their best interests, as any league or corporation should.

1) Team chemistry and cohesion. National teams and their prospective players train together on constant basis. In most European countries they have yearly gatherings in the off-season where they practice moves even when there aren't any major tournaments in sight. These mickey mouse teams will gather for the first time scant two weeks before the puck drop.

Your use of the term mickey mouse teams really is telling, but alot of these get togethers are informal and over rated. Russia still has the talent but they don't train together year round like they used and most Natioanl teams simply don't either.

2) Motivation. There are six teams in this tournament who will play for their country. Two that will play... for what? Personal glory, bragging rights and their paycheck?

Hockey players in the NHL play to win, although in the past a lot of players from Europe had their motivation questioned in the NHL. do you really want to go down that route?

3) Timing of the tournament. Their actual pay jobs wait just a month away. If there won't be a party back home to make up for it, how many will actually do all it takes to win these games, as in actually play hard and take those extra bruises? The players in these comedy squads should very well know there won't be plenty people in the rafters or behind their screens back home giving a rat's backside whether they win or lose.

I know past late summer tournaments had horrible hockey right?

And I'm sure NHL players will sacrifice everything in the next Olympics in the middle of their NHL seasons as well right?

Typical non argument here by you.

4) Tournament format. One saving grace of squads that start with the lack of cohesion is that it tends to improve as the tournament progresses. It's hard to count out a team that plays bad in their opener in a regular WHC because every participant at that point has at least six guaranteed games left, and - with a little luck - even as little as three late wins may be enough to make it to the QF. Even the current olympic format is pretty forgiving, because despite having only four guaranteed games, a team can lose all three during group stage and still collect themselves once the playoff rounds start.

That's actually going to work against teams with less talent and that rely of team play because the longer any tournament goes on the more likely that the cream rises to the top.

However, this tournament will be VERY brief. Each team has only three guaranteed games and then it's the two best from each group to the semis. This means that there's no finding your sea legs. Leftovers and YoungStarz come into this tournament cold and must win at least one of their first two matchups - and two out of three in total if they wish to feature any further. So yeah, it's built into the tournament format itself that those teams that come into this as ready and cohesive as possible will roll far in it. It's a huge advantage to the traditional NTs whose players all know each other.

Slovakia and the Swiss would suffer under the same format, more skill might actually compensate in a short tournament.

So, what kind of narrative does this lay out for these two oddballs?

Team Leftovers' best chance lies in beating USA in their opener, because they may not be same kind of cohesive unit as an European NT that has regular scrimmages together. But their next game will be against the Czechs, who are one of those cohesive euro teams. And finally, they face Canada. I don't think you're even willing to consider they might win that one. So... what are the odds they will be a factor?

Do you really think the Czechs are going to have a better team than the USA?

you can use the term cohesive all you want but it won't win games, maybe a dominant goal tending performance might.

YoungStarz will start by facing Finland, which is the country that perhaps banks the most on being as cohesive as they can from the get-go. There's no slow start, figuring out which pieces will go where, or Finland WILL skate in circles around them. Their second game vs. Russia may offer a better matchup, because Russia traditionally trusts less in tactics and just tries to roll with their individual skill. And let's hope facing down Sweden will not be a similar mountain to climb as the Leftovers have when taking on Canada. You know, for the sake of this highly-flaunted "competitiveness".

the young stars will do well against all 3 teams, much better than the Swiss or Slovkas could accomplish at this point.

Sure, upsets can happen in pro sports. But usually they happen because a lesser team manages to beat a supposedly better one because they've prepared better and have a more thought out game plan. It's actually the very reason why most games on international stage aren't blowouts these days. But these mickey mouse teams will enter this show with a huge handicap, and therefore more likely than not it will be U-G-L-Y for them, no matter how hard the NHL tries to flaunt their supposedly "superior" rosters in front of us.

What imaginary handicap is this again?

Oh yes the ones shot down above.

Kinda makes you wonder if the league actually has any people who understand team sports - not just hockey, but any venue. Because if they do and they really wanted to ensure as close competition as possible, they would have invited teams that are as ready as they can be right out the gates, instead of trying to get as many marketable individuals involved as possible.

You simply don't understand that people would rather pay money to see actual NHL star players rather than teams with less than half NHLer's and only a couple of good players.

Well, maybe they do. They're just banking on there being enough dumb shmucks who don't, but are willing to pay regardless. "Those guys can't tell their heads from their own hind sides! We just show them this list of all the big names involved and they'll swallow it, hook, line and the kitchen sink!"

People pay money to see what they want, simply go to the enxt WHC and watch the lesser teams play and look at the huge crowds.....oh ya forgot this doesn't happen.

 

[FiLe]

enough of the koolaid bull****,. I have simply laid out why the NHL is acting in their best interests, as any league or corporation should.

Not the point. Of course the NHL is having their best business interests in mind, and nobody's asking them to run a charity, but that's no excuse for people like you to act like complete tools and parrot the company line.

Your use of the term mickey mouse teams really is telling, but alot of these get togethers are informal and over rated. Russia still has the talent but they don't train together year round like they used and most Natioanl teams simply don't either.

Says the guy who mostly follows the NHL to a guy who knows what's going on in the old continent.

Hockey players in the NHL play to win, although in the past a lot of players from Europe had their motivation questioned in the NHL. do you really want to go down that route?

They do play to win while the league is running, true. But this is not the league. It's an exhibition tournament leading up to the league.

I know past late summer tournaments had horrible hockey right?

And I'm sure NHL players will sacrifice everything in the next Olympics in the middle of their NHL seasons as well right?

The hockey was not horrible. But back then, players played for their countries, not for arbitrary motivations. And yes, players in the Olympics DO play hard.

That's actually going to work against teams with less talent and that rely of team play because the longer any tournament goes on the more likely that the cream rises to the top.

Mhm. That was pretty much what I was saying in that paragraph. Nice of you to get that right, at least, even if you obviously deluded yourself into thinking I was saying the opposite.

The World Cup, however, is not a tournament that is not very long and there for not very forgiving.

Slovakia and the Swiss would suffer under the same format, more skill might actually compensate in a short tournament.

You might as well say "does not!" here.

Do you really think the Czechs are going to have a better team than the USA?

Not on paper. But the point was not to believe in paper rosters alone.

you can use the term cohesive all you want but it won't win games, maybe a dominant goal tending performance might.

Arguing against existing evidence, I see.

the young stars will do well against all 3 teams, much better than the Swiss or Slovkas could accomplish at this point.

Again, "does noooottt!" If you don't have anything better, save your breath.

What imaginary handicap is this again?

Oh yes the ones shot down above.

Shot down with blanks. Because you telling "I don't believe you!" or "No, the opposite will happen!" with no exposition whatsoever are still not valid arguments.

You simply don't understand that people would rather pay money to see actual NHL star players rather than teams with less than half NHLer's and only a couple of good players.

People will pay better money for that, yes. But then you should say "bigger names means better money", NOT "bigger names means better competition".

People pay money to see what they want, simply go to the enxt WHC and watch the lesser teams play and look at the huge crowds.....oh ya forgot this doesn't happen.

This is a conversational tactic called "moving the goalposts". Your "better competition" argument was ripped to shreds, so you moved on to excusing it with "it brings in better crowds and more money". Which is a valid argument in and of itself, but does not make the "better competition" one any more true.

 

[JackSlater]

What imaginary handicap is this again?

Oh yes the ones shot down above.

Best comment in the thread. Parroting whatever the NHL tells you does not make your statements true, or allow you to shoot down statements more based on actual evidence.

 

[Jon Riley]

It's simple, this tournament just has the wrong name. It's not a World Cup. If you throw in random stuff like the team leftovers, you get something else, not an international competition. For sure not one "best on best" how I read in here.
This will end up being like a random all star games, matches that end up 87 to 55, without any serious attempt in defense.
Would the KHL, or the Finn and Czech league, release the players for the tournament? If not Finland, Russia and Czech Republic would definitively not have their "best" lineup.
Would USA have Eichel? If not, they would probably not have their best lineup.
Just call it "Toronto Grand Hockey Meeting 2016" and I'm fine with it.
Call it "NHL World Cup 2016", remove the two teams that does not fit in it, keep just the big 6 nations, and I am fine with it.

With this name and this format I can just laugh at people that actually believe that this tournament would show real hockey.

...by the way, if this tournament means that NHL would not release the players for the olympic games, than thank you NHL for killing any possibility of watching some actual best on best international tournament.

 

[mattihp]

...by the way, if this tournament means that NHL would not release the players for the olympic games, than thank you NHL for killing any possibility of watching some actual best on best international tournament.

To be honest that is my only real issue with the World Cup. It is not that hard to ignore the world cup as it is not a big deal over here, but if it means there is no more of the greatest hockey in the world? Makes a huge difference.

 

[Jon Riley]

To be honest that is my only real issue with the World Cup. It is not that hard to ignore the world cup as it is not a big deal over here, but if it means there is no more of the greatest hockey in the world? Makes a huge difference.

Yeah, a lot of words but I agree with you. If NHL decides to release the players for the Olympics, then I do not care about the WC. I may even watch some matches and enjoy it, for what they are worth.

 

[QnebO]

This is more an "invitational tournament" than "international competition".

 

[seventieslord]

wow, I am in the middle of reading this whole thread, I'm currently on post 450. I must really hate myself to put myself through this constant reminder of what a joke this thing is going to be.

As sure as I was that these three teams were gimmicks, I hadn't even begun to consider that it undermines the whole competitiveness of it as well. Is Canada going to really give it their all against the canadian youngstars? Are the youngstars going to be hellbent to get those dreaded "old canadians"? Who in their right mind would want team europe leftovers to win, or care if they do - including the players on the team!?

The more I think about it, the more I am sure this will suck. I was previously one of those "this is stupid, but at least it's best on best, and I can't turn down best on best, and I'll watch it while hating the idea of it." but now, I honestly think I'm going to make a point of not watching. And I'll tell everyone I know not to watch either, and why they shouldn't. But even more so, what this really needs is for the Connor McDavids and Aaron Ekblads and Tyler Seguins of the league to say "no thanks, I don't need the paycheck, I'm not going to risk injury and future earnings/legacy to play in a tournament where my job will be to weaken my home country's chances of winning", and it also needs the Anze Kopitars of the league to simply decline stating they would rather play for their own country or not at all, and honestly if a few surefire picks from the top-6 nations come out and say they think it's pretty stupid that they're going to be playing against their own countrymen and against teams that represents no single nation. There needs to be an organized revolt against this piece of crap if there's any chance of stopping it. But right now, I pledge to not watch it.

No one will ever call this a best on best tournament like previous ones. I wouldn't dream of adding its results to the all-time standings I compiled:

hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1557609

well, back to reading all the different takes on why this is a horrible, horrible idea and the brutal attempts at justifying/defending it by a few unfortunate folks.

 

[JackSlater]

wow, I am in the middle of reading this whole thread, I'm currently on post 450. I must really hate myself to put myself through this constant reminder of what a joke this thing is going to be.

As sure as I was that these three teams were gimmicks, I hadn't even begun to consider that it undermines the whole competitiveness of it as well. Is Canada going to really give it their all against the canadian youngstars? Are the youngstars going to be hellbent to get those dreaded "old canadians"? Who in their right mind would want team europe leftovers to win, or care if they do - including the players on the team!?

The more I think about it, the more I am sure this will suck. I was previously one of those "this is stupid, but at least it's best on best, and I can't turn down best on best, and I'll watch it while hating the idea of it." but now, I honestly think I'm going to make a point of not watching. And I'll tell everyone I know not to watch either, and why they shouldn't. But even more so, what this really needs is for the Connor McDavids and Aaron Ekblads and Tyler Seguins of the league to say "no thanks, I don't need the paycheck, I'm not going to risk injury and future earnings/legacy to play in a tournament where my job will be to weaken my home country's chances of winning", and it also needs the Anze Kopitars of the league to simply decline stating they would rather play for their own country or not at all, and honestly if a few surefire picks from the top-6 nations come out and say they think it's pretty stupid that they're going to be playing against their own countrymen and against teams that represents no single nation. There needs to be an organized revolt against this piece of crap if there's any chance of stopping it. But right now, I pledge to not watch it.

No one will ever call this a best on best tournament like previous ones. I wouldn't dream of adding its results to the all-time standings I compiled:

hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1557609

well, back to reading all the different takes on why this is a horrible, horrible idea and the brutal attempts at justifying/defending it by a few unfortunate folks.

Those results would be significantly different if actual best on best tournaments had been played under these rules. Certainly different winners in 1984, 1987 and 2010. But hey, I'm sure it would have been much more competitive and more tickets would have been sold!

 

[Lepardi]

But even more so, what this really needs is for the Connor McDavids and Aaron Ekblads and Tyler Seguins of the league to say "no thanks, I don't need the paycheck, I'm not going to risk injury and future earnings/legacy to play in a tournament where my job will be to weaken my home country's chances of winning"

Tyler Seguin won't be playing for the U23 team. The cutoff date is October 2nd 1992. Anyone born on that day or later is eligible for Team North America. Seguin was born on January 31st 1992.

 

[patnyrnyg]

before I read this thread, is it about who people think will be on the roster or more moaning about the existence of the team?

 

[Faterson]

The latter, and deservedly so. Here's hoping for a boycott. The overseas Young Gimmicks team won't dare to boycott, so I hope they go all the way and win the Mickey Mouse Cup to show it for the travesty that it is.

 

[patnyrnyg]

The latter, and deservedly so. Here's hoping for a boycott. The overseas Young Gimmicks team won't dare to boycott, so I hope they go all the way and win the Mickey Mouse Cup to show it for the travesty that it is.

OK, good. No point reading anything else in this thread.

 

[Hardyvan123]

before I read this thread, is it about who people think will be on the roster or more moaning about the existence of the team?

that's actually what the thread is about but some people think it's more important to vent their frustrations on the tournament format and tell the rest of us everything wrong about the tournament they admittedly as a group aren't interested in watching.

Yes somehow Team Switzerland and Team Slovakia would be better than combing the best of those 2 teams along with some other very good European players.

But we all know players only try for their country right?

It's an NHL tournament run by the NHL for themselves but yet people want to jump up and down and tell us what it isn't, which doesn't matter does it?

 

[FiLe]

It's an NHL tournament run by the NHL for themselves but yet people want to jump up and down and tell us what it isn't, which doesn't matter does it?

As it has been told you a number of times, even the NHL itself seems to be a bit confused about what it's supposed to be.

Thank god we've got you here to set the record straight.

 

[Hardyvan123]

As it has been told you a number of times, even the NHL itself seems to be a bit confused about what it's supposed to be.

Thank god we've got you here to set the record straight.

Your're welcome, but to be honest one only need to look at the tile of the thread to see the topic right?

 

[xxxx]

As it has been told you a number of times, even the NHL itself seems to be a bit confused about what it's supposed to be.

Thank god we've got you here to set the record straight.

I don't think they're confused and they can call it whatever they want. World Championships is not a true world championships either, when we're at it. If anyone is so eager to get the name right, what were they thinking about certain tournament named "Canada Cup"

 

[FiLe]

Your're welcome, but to be honest one only need to look at the tile of the thread to see the topic right?

Seems to be covering all that's being discussed.

I don't think they're confused and they can call it whatever they want. World Championships is not a true world championships either, when we're at it. If anyone is so eager to get the name right, what were they thinking about certain tournament named "Canada Cup"

It goes beyond the name. They're calling it "international" while it's not solely an NT tournament. And don't give me that crap about an alternate definition of "international". We all know full well what it means and what connotations the NHL wishes for the word to carry. I've said it a dozen times and I say it once again - if these things don't bother you, it's fine. You're free to enjoy the show. But don't try to defend those things to the folks who are bothered. That's intellectual dishonesty. And that stems from either being a willing shill of the league - or simply not being very smart.

And same holds true for the league itself. Either it's deliberately trying to deceive people, or just confused. I'm actually being gracious here when I presume it's the latter.


And there is nothing wrong with the World Championships' name, because it's not the IIHF's fault that the NHL isn't more in line with the schedules of the rest of the hockey-playing world. Unlike the World Cup, which has inbuilt rules to promote inequality, the WHC has none. It accepts any available player from any given league. It would even be a best-on-best without having to change a single thing if all players just were available. But even as it isn't, there is a justification for the moniker.

If I'm throwing a party, and you're invited, but you say you're preoccupied and not coming, whose fault it is that you're not there? Mine or yours?

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

This tournament turns into more of a joke each and every day.

Canadian Paul Maurice is on Team Europe's staff. This is the team that's most likely going to just toy around and not care whatsoever, and can't wait to see it.

 

[xxxx]

If I'm throwing a party, and you're invited, but you say you're preoccupied and not coming, whose fault it is that you're not there? Mine or yours?

That is a very good comparison. But, if you named your party "the best in the town", and you knew that majority of the best wouldn't show up, would you really try to excuse that to your audience? Maybe you would change the name then.

 

[sully1410]

This tournament turns into more of a joke each and every day.

Canadian Paul Maurice is on Team Europe's staff. This is the team that's most likely going to just toy around and not care whatsoever, and can't wait to see it.

Maurice spent considerable time in the KHL, so not so much of a slap in the face.