2017-18 Champions Hockey League

[Jablkon]

Why did they participate then? It can't be mandatory. The Belfast Giants qualified for 2014-15 but they didn't participate because of the issues regarding arena availability so Nottingham participated instead.

I dont the rules exactly but I thought its mandatory based on that IIHF is somehow involved. Unfortunately I dont think they would find spare team easily here.

The paradox is what the club said about participation at Spengler Cup 2017 - "we want to go as far as possible" So they would like to win the Spengler Cup.

I was sure before that they wanted to succeed in CHL. It hought I heard it from their manager. I was obviously completely wrong. Three venues ar too much, but this is just wrong management decision. They shouldnt go Spengler when they knew about their CHL participation. CHL will be here for next 6 years and they wanna win the title. I just wonder what they are supposed to do in next season especially with this statement behind them. They were sitting with CHL ceo on press conference three weeks promising they wanted make results. Three weeks later they appeared to fooled everybody.

August is the worst time to have a Champions League, because its preseason, push it back to October and see if the clubs and fans have the same feeling about it.

It's sad but if the clubs and the fans are not interested in a Champions league then it will be the end of it. When you have clubs saying that the CHL hurt their preparation for the up coming season and when they say that CHL is not a priority, is not important to them it send the wrong signals to fans and potential future sponsors.

Maybe 32 clubs is too much too soon maybe they should have only 16 or 12 clubs participating right now. Me I like the CHL very much, I think it has a great potential in the future but only if all the clubs in Europe are committed to it and right now it is not the case sadly

Thats a point because it does not hurt their preparation, in fact its opposite because they all are welcomming preseason matches against good foreign teams.

I would say they are sly as hell. Most of that teams are organizing international preseason tourneys (like this Mountfield cup with Omsk and Ufa last year). They just dont want to commit anything, it must be exactly according to them, not more, not less. I can imagine they thinking like - great for preseason, too hard and expensive later.

So if CHL is not here, count with half of czech clubs looking for int. preseason compettion. Thats a typicall example of some czech managers short view and nonconstructive cooperation.

Complete opposite is KOmeta manager statement who openly said "I was against it but I dont wanna undermine Petr Briza's work" (typical open czech behaviour I would say). They obviously dont count to go further but they tried to took the best from it and bring back results. It was definetely good preseason for them(I am actually certain it makes some players better and some talents really raise up in this faster competiton, like Vincour for example, he must be bored in czech league, CHL looks to suits him more).

 

[Albatros]

12 is too few as there are already 13 leagues involved, but reducing the number of teams to max. 2 or 3 per league could cut at least some of the worst offenders like Malmö and Hradec Králové. Maybe there should simply be stricter license conditions, disqualifying clubs that are not ready to take the competition seriously.

 

[vorky]

I dont the rules exactly but I thought its mandatory based on that IIHF is somehow involved. Unfortunately I dont think they would find spare team easily here.



I was sure before that they wanted to succeed in CHL. It hought I heard it from their manager. I was obviously completely wrong. Three venues ar too much, but this is just wrong management decision. They shouldnt go Spengler when they knew about their CHL participation. CHL will be here for next 6 years and they wanna win the title. I just wonder what they are supposed to do in next season especially with this statement behind them. They were sitting with CHL ceo on press conference three weeks promising they wanted make results. Three weeks later they appeared to fooled everybody.



Thats a point because it does not hurt their preparation, in fact its opposite because they all are welcomming preseason matches against good foreign teams.

I would say they are sly as hell. Most of that teams are organizing international preseason tourneys (like this Mountfield cup with Omsk and Ufa last year). They just dont want to commit anything, it must be exactly according to them, not more, not less. I can imagine they thinking like - great for preseason, too hard and expensive later.

So if CHL is not here, count with half of czech clubs looking for int. preseason compettion. Thats a typicall example of some czech managers short view and nonconstructive cooperation.

Complete opposite is KOmeta manager statement who openly said "I was against it but I dont wanna undermine Petr Briza's work" (typical open czech behaviour I would say). They obviously dont count to go further but they tried to took the best from it and bring back results. It was definetely good preseason for them(I am actually certain it makes some players better and some talents really raise up in this faster competiton, like Vincour for example, he must be bored in czech league, CHL looks to suits him more).

That is what I said. Not all clubs are "into it". And it is not only Hradec, who said it publicly, but other teams too (who are silent, but do nothing to promote the CHL). I will quote Chernyshenko, what he said about clubs debts a few days ago.

Financial fines were the most effective way of dealing with the problem. Scare tactics, persuasion – they did not work…

This can be applied to the CHL as well. Nice words do not have to work. It is good that the CHL says to the clubs: "Look, take it seriously, we need it to develop." But some clubs simply do not care, others do not know what to do, others do not have money, others do not want to play the CHL because they value domestic league more, etc. It is beyond me how the CHL wants to solve this problem.. especially if they do not have an argument of big prize money.

 

[Slimmy]

We've seen this in years prior that there are clubs that do not commit to the CHL. Their rosters are not deep enough to compete on several fronts and feel the need to focus on the domestic league. Nothing new nor controversial. But for the teams that have the chance to make it to the later rounds it is a welcome addition to the coffers and certainly good PR if you manage to win the competition.

 

[Jablkon]

That is what I said. Not all clubs are "into it". And it is not only Hradec, who said it publicly, but other teams too (who are silent, but do nothing to promote the CHL). I will quote Chernyshenko, what he said about clubs debts a few days ago.



This can be applied to the CHL as well. Nice words do not have to work. It is good that the CHL says to the clubs: "Look, take it seriously, we need it to develop." But some clubs simply do not care, others do not know what to do, others do not have money, others do not want to play the CHL because they value domestic league more, etc. It is beyond me how the CHL wants to solve this problem.. especially if they do not have an argument of big prize money.

Sure price money would solve it. Once you get income even from group stage, things would change.

But its the meaning of the statement what I dont really understand to. I he said "we suffer..." then he should say "B". Is that mean that this competition is wrong and should be cancelled or wat did he wanted to say? He just put a trash on it with no further explanation.

One would just wonder how much travel costs you cover from home matches when you are able to attract around 4000 fans to CHL game, which Hradec is obviously able to. But for them its probably better to play meaningless games in front of empty stands. I mean I would understand if they would be afraid about their players getting injured against Panthers, but again they should say it openly. This vague phrases are just disrespectful to this attempt.

All of these clubs want to compete on int stage. Hradec is organizing its own cup, its going to Spengler for second straight year. So what is wrong with CHL for them? I can say Hradec fans were looking forward to it, they were pissed when Hradec put the B team there. Right now we can probably expect empty stadium against Bern and this project is done there despite interest from fans. Lost opportunity.

Probably not many people care about the name of their club, but true is CHL makes this reputation. Frolunda is considered as the best euro team, everyone knows about Sparta last year performance, that Tappara is very good team and I can go on. Other smaller tourneys do not have such influence on people. This isolation is useless. If CHL fails, they come to this idea soon or later again because they wanna compete.

There migt be just two teams from each country, as it was posted here. But then again there is huge risk, that it will be two uninterested teams again.

 

[Jussi]

]August is the worst time to have a Champions League, because its preseason, push it back to October and see if the clubs and fans have the same feeling about it.[/B]

It's sad but if the clubs and the fans are not interested in a Champions league then it will be the end of it. When you have clubs saying that the CHL hurt their preparation for the up coming season and when they say that CHL is not a priority, is not important to them it send the wrong signals to fans and potential future sponsors.

Maybe 32 clubs is too much too soon maybe they should have only 16 or 12 clubs participating right now. Me I like the CHL very much, I think it has a great potential in the future but only if all the clubs in Europe are committed to it and right now it is not the case sadly

As I said before, the problem is the packed domestic schedule, mainly in Finland. Because it's 60 games, they play a lot on weekdays. there's no room to fit games in there. Right now, the clubs are too stupid to reduce the number of regular season games closer to 55. You're not gonna get erid of international breaks and since the Euro Hockey Tour was expanded, there's more games played during the break.

 

[Albatros]

CHL attendances this season so far, compared to the domestic attendances of last season. Higher than domestic marked green, less than 20 % off orange, worse than that red.

6174 10812 GER Adler Mannheim
6002 16566 SUI SC Bern
5350 4771 SWE Växjö Lakers
4566 9214 SUI ZSC Lions Zürich
4546 5723 GBR Nottingham Panthers
4308 7600 CZE HC Kometa Brno
3871 5629 FIN Tappara Tampere
3702 5878 CZE Bílí Tygři Liberec
3608 3442 FIN JYP Jyväskylä
3566 6436 SUI EV Zug
3370 5085 CZE Mountfield Hradec Králové
3221 7028 FIN HIFK Helsinki
3084 9029 SWE Frölunda HC Göteborg
3053 3390 AUT EC Klagenfurter AC
2912 4004 NOR Stavanger Oilers
2859 5390 FIN TPS Turku
2778 4792 SUI HC Davos
2750 4671 CZE HC Oceláři Třinec
2601 2935 GBR Cardiff Devils
2430 1376 BLR HK Njoman Hrodna
2360 4858 GER EHC Red Bull München
2298 3432 FIN KalPa Kuopio
2200 4135 AUT Vienna Capitals
2164 2688 GER Grizzlys Wolfsburg
2070 5486 SWE Brynäs IF Gävle
2014 6484 SWE HV71 Jönköping
1988 2380 SVK HC 05 Banská Bystrica
1857 1629 POL KS Cracovia Kraków
1852 2130 FRA Rapaces de Gap
1588 2627 AUT EC Red Bull Salzburg
1125 1329 DEN Esbjerg Energy
993 6915 SWE Malmö Redhawks

 

[Jussi]

CHL attendances this season so far, compared to the domestic attendances of last season. Higher than domestic marked green, less than 20 % off orange, worse than that red.

6174 10812 GER Adler Mannheim
6002 16566 SUI SC Bern
5350 4771 SWE Växjö Lakers
4566 9214 SUI ZSC Lions Zürich
4546 5723 GBR Nottingham Panthers
4308 7600 CZE HC Kometa Brno
3871 5629 FIN Tappara Tampere
3702 5878 CZE BÃ*lÃ* TygÃ…™i Liberec
3608 3442 FIN JYP Jyväskylä
3566 6436 SUI EV Zug
3370 5085 CZE Mountfield Hradec Králové
3221 7028 FIN HIFK Helsinki
3084 9029 SWE Frölunda HC Göteborg
3053 3390 AUT EC Klagenfurter AC
2912 4004 NOR Stavanger Oilers
2859 5390 FIN TPS Turku
2778 4792 SUI HC Davos
2750 4671 CZE HC OceláÅ™i TÃ…™inec
2601 2935 GBR Cardiff Devils
2430 1376 BLR HK Njoman Hrodna
2360 4858 GER EHC Red Bull München
2298 3432 FIN KalPa Kuopio
2200 4135 AUT Vienna Capitals
2164 2688 GER Grizzlys Wolfsburg
2070 5486 SWE Brynäs IF Gävle
2014 6484 SWE HV71 Jönköping
1988 2380 SVK HC 05 Banská Bystrica
1857 1629 POL KS Cracovia Kraków
1852 2130 FRA Rapaces de Gap
1588 2627 AUT EC Red Bull Salzburg
1125 1329 DEN Esbjerg Energy
993 6915 SWE Malmö Redhawks

First of all, using green and red is not very helpful to us red-green colourblind folk.

Second, while I realize it'd be harder to find them but it would be interesting too see pre-season game attendances for the non-CHL games as well, whether this year or previous years. I could pretty much guarantee that they'd be much lower.

 

[Albatros]

Thus I invite you to do a colorblind-friendly version with pre-season attendances if you feel that's relevant.

 

[vorky]

CHL attendances this season so far, compared to the domestic attendances of last season. Higher than domestic marked green, less than 20 % off orange, worse than that red.

6174 10812 GER Adler Mannheim
6002 16566 SUI SC Bern
5350 4771 SWE Växjö Lakers
4566 9214 SUI ZSC Lions Zürich
4546 5723 GBR Nottingham Panthers
4308 7600 CZE HC Kometa Brno
3871 5629 FIN Tappara Tampere
3702 5878 CZE BÃ*lÃ* TygÃ…™i Liberec
3608 3442 FIN JYP Jyväskylä
3566 6436 SUI EV Zug
3370 5085 CZE Mountfield Hradec Králové
3221 7028 FIN HIFK Helsinki
3084 9029 SWE Frölunda HC Göteborg
3053 3390 AUT EC Klagenfurter AC
2912 4004 NOR Stavanger Oilers
2859 5390 FIN TPS Turku
2778 4792 SUI HC Davos
2750 4671 CZE HC OceláÅ™i TÃ…™inec
2601 2935 GBR Cardiff Devils
2430 1376 BLR HK Njoman Hrodna
2360 4858 GER EHC Red Bull München
2298 3432 FIN KalPa Kuopio
2200 4135 AUT Vienna Capitals
2164 2688 GER Grizzlys Wolfsburg
2070 5486 SWE Brynäs IF Gävle
2014 6484 SWE HV71 Jönköping
1988 2380 SVK HC 05 Banská Bystrica
1857 1629 POL KS Cracovia Kraków
1852 2130 FRA Rapaces de Gap
1588 2627 AUT EC Red Bull Salzburg
1125 1329 DEN Esbjerg Energy
993 6915 SWE Malmö Redhawks

Very useful information, would be great if you do the same after the season.

Higher than domestic league
- Växjö - they have free entrance to CHL, right? If so, no suprise.
- Grodno/Krakow - small clubs, bad domestic league, so no suprise that CHL has higher attendnace. Btw, have Krakow played at some smaller arena in CHL?

Worse
- have Malmo played at big Malmo Arena in CHL? If so, then it is terrible.

3 teams over 5000
11 teams between 3000-5000
12 teams between 2000-3000
6 teams under 2000

 

[SpinninRodIntoArmpit]

Second, while I realize it'd be harder to find them but it woiuld be interesting too see pre-season game attendances for the non-CHL games as well, weither this year or previous years. I could pretty much guarantee that they'd be much lower.

For Tappara, by eye-test, I'd say their pre-season games usually get like half of that, so something like 2000 or even a little less (except when said game is against Ilves). And it did feel like there was more people in CHL games this year than before, and a better atmosphere (as well as the gameplay's been miles better). A lot of that was probably because season ticket holders got access to the games (I think it was the case last year as well, but am not sure cause I was in conscription). Usually their Liiga games in fall get around 4-5k attendance, so I don't see there being a major drop for CHL anymore. People were most likely enjoying nice weather at their cabins.

At least the team looks to take this competition more seriously than before, thus I see more people coming to later games.

 

[Albatros]

Cracovia used Tauron Arena (cap. 15030) last season and had a fine average attendance of 6667, this season they're back to their usual barn that seats only 2514 as Tauron Arena hosted a volleyball tournament.

Malmö has now used the smaller Malmö Isstadion (4800 seats) which in part explains the low numbers, but even there it has been a sad sight:

 

[VictorLustig]

The attendance for SHL games is also very low in September.

 

[vorky]

Cracovia used Tauron Arena (cap. 15030) last season and had a fine average attendance of 6667, this season they're back to their usual barn that seats only 2514 as Tauron Arena hosted a volleyball tournament.

Malmö has now used the smaller Malmö Isstadion (4800 seats) which in part explains the low numbers, but even there it has been a sad sight:

Thanks for info.

I will give you another example from Russia. Before the MHL (junior) was created in 2009, there was no national junior league in Russia, young prospects used to play 3rd tier senior league (young players & senior guys on one team, some mix) & they played at really bad arenas. The rule of the MHL was to play MHL matches at the same venue as the KHL is played or to repair old arenas (with XY seats). So, Russians wanted to avoid a situation when clubs, to reduce costs, to play at bad & small arenas. This, switching of a venue, is happening in the CHL - now Malmo, last year final in Gotherburg (FINAL) & who knows who else... not a good impression for ordinary fans.

 

[Jablkon]

This is list of Sparta attendance from last year. Quite bad attendance for club which wants to play CHL. Still some interesting facts. Three czech clubs in this year CHL has much higher attendance so far than Sparta had last year. So obviously some clubs can do better marketing or their fans are more interested. Quarter final attendance against Bern became bit closer to league average. Then that was an absolut boom in semifinal against Vaxjo. Final in Prague would be sold out. Major increase was also on Bern side from average around 6000 to 14000 against Sparta.

Based on this and this year attendance I would say poeple are able to find a way to stadium. 4000 average in group stage could be realistic imo. Champions league should probably have higher attendance than league average in all countries except Finnland, Sweden. Soccer rules will probably never work in hockey though.

CHL2, neděle 21. 8. 2016
Sparta - Färjestad
1:2
2962.

CHL3, pátek 26. 8. 2016
Sparta - Krakov
Diváci: 2480.


ŠF1, úterý 4. 10. 2016
Sparta - Kärpät Oulu
2 288.


OF1, úterý 1. 11. 2016
Sparta - HV 71
3 618.



ČF2, úterý 13. 12. 2016
Sparta - SC Bern
4:1
6 073.


SF2, úterý 17. 1. 2017
Sparta - Växjö
4:0
12 136.

 

[Jussi]

The attendance for SHL games is also very low in September.

Same for Liiga. Fans don't warm up until it's colder and darker, as ironic as that is. October-November is when they start showing up.

 

[lakers11]

Very useful information, would be great if you do the same after the season.

Higher than domestic league
- Växjö - they have free entrance to CHL, right? If so, no suprise.
- Grodno/Krakow - small clubs, bad domestic league, so no suprise that CHL has higher attendnace. Btw, have Krakow played at some smaller arena in CHL?

Worse
- have Malmo played at big Malmo Arena in CHL? If so, then it is terrible.

3 teams over 5000
11 teams between 3000-5000
12 teams between 2000-3000
6 teams under 2000

Yea, växjö has free entrance.


The average that were actually in the arena is around 3000

The arena takes 5750, in both matches it was half empty

 

[Filthy Dangles]

why is there a month break in games?

murican whose completely new to this tournament and have no idea how it works

 

[Rigafan]

The CHL still needs less teams. What do we have 5 Swedish, 5 Finnish? Its too many. They should probably take a look at the Euroleague in basketball. 16 teams and its basically the pinnacle of Euro basketball now.

 

[Jussi]

The CHL still needs less teams. What do we have 5 Swedish, 5 Finnish? Its too many. They should probably take a look at the Euroleague in basketball. 16 teams and its basically the pinnacle of Euro basketball now.

Founding members and because of league success. They also need to have some teams from the smaller hockey countries to raise interest. Basketball doesn't exactly need that in Europe.

 

[Urbanskog]

Founding members and because of league success. They also need to have some teams from the smaller hockey countries to raise interest. Basketball doesn't exactly need that in Europe.

There are six founding leagues and founding members no longer qualify for the tournament automatically, no clue what are you talking about.

 

[vorky]

The CHL still needs less teams. What do we have 5 Swedish, 5 Finnish? Its too many. They should probably take a look at the Euroleague in basketball. 16 teams and its basically the pinnacle of Euro basketball now.

The CHL looked at the Euroleague before the launch of the CHL. The CHL copied licence system, founding members system. Google Barcelona hockey forum, where the Euroleague was invited. But the CHL "forgot" to copy very important Euroleague´s rules:

- A licence team signs a long term contract with the Euroleague. The idea is to have the top teams every year (but they can not be in "relegation danger" in their domestic league), because only top teams bring quality & revenues. Yes, the CHL had A licence & three year deal for those teams. OK. But they got rid of them as soon as possible. Bad move. IMO, the CHL should decide, after first 3 years, this and that clubs deserve to have A licence for another 3-6 years. Of course not all teams, one or two teams from top leagues would be enough (+ a rule that these teams must make a playoff in domestic league or so). Instead, they introduced "sport qualification". I can quarantee you that this rule was invited by Swedes. I do not say it is bad in principle. But, a result is no big clubs (who brings money/interest) like Eisbaren or Sparta, to name a few, this season. So, the CHL was inspired by the Euroleague & gave up the idea after 3 years. Btw, the KHL has similar system as the Euroleague with licences. Of course, the KHL does not know "licences", but some important clubs have signed a long-term deal with the league, other teams do not have any deal with the league, they are only approved to participate by KHL BoD every year. To be fair, top teams with longterm deals must be also approved by KHL BoD, but it is formality.

- capacity of arenas. Look at the Euroleague´s rules, they have two standards, one for A licence teams & other for the rest. The same could be applied to the CHL as well, small arenas for smaller leagues & bigger arenas for bigger leagues.

Effective as of the 2012–13 season, EuroLeague clubs with what was at the time an "A License" had to host their home EuroLeague games in arenas that have a seating capacity of at least 10,000 people. This same minimum 10,000 seat arena capacity rule, now currently applies to all EuroLeague clubs with a long-term license.

Previously, in 2008, the Euroleague Basketball had originally decided to increase the minimum arena seating requirement to 10,000, within four years time, in order to force EuroLeague clubs to move into and/or build bigger arenas. This was done in hopes of increasing revenues through more ticket sales. Conversely, associated clubs, must currently play in arenas that seat at least 5,000 people.

The Euroleague had 24 teams, but reduced beause of the IMG deal. When we look at basketball map, this sport is more spread in Europe than hockey. So, maybe 24 is not overexpansion. But the CHL, without Russia, and their 48 and now 32 teams? More than Euroleague had before reduction?

Founding members and because of league success. They also need to have some teams from the smaller hockey countries to raise interest. Basketball doesn't exactly need that in Europe.

I have no problem with smaller hockey countries. But, there is a mechanism called Qualifying Rounds.

 

[Jussi]

There are six founding leagues and founding members no longer qualify for the tournament automatically, no clue what are you talking about.

Yes but but because they're founding leagues, their presence is required.

 

[Jussi]

- capacity of arenas. Look at the Euroleague´s rules, they have two standards, one for A licence teams & other for the rest. The same could be applied to the CHL as well, small arenas for smaller leagues & bigger arenas for bigger leagues.

Nope, you can't just spring up new hockey arenas everywhere in Europe just like that (see how long the new arena project in Tampere has already taken). JYP are one of the top teams in Finland and they're arena holds over 4000. It also needs to be reminded that most clubs in Finland don't own their arena, it belongs to the city that built it. The clubs pay rent to play there (though in most cases it's not big).

 

[Urbanskog]

Yes but but because they're founding leagues, their presence is required.

I'm not following. All founding leagues have a presence in the competition and this is not going to change. The issue was that maybe 5 spots for each of the top two leagues is too many.