Apparently Rene Fasel is just as insane as Bettman

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Canada B could beat the top junior "all-stars" from NA.
Canada B could also, most likely, beat a European leftover all-star concept.

If we want to see best on best hockey , why don't we just have Canada B?

Or, you know, scrap the whole thing and just do Slovakia + Switzerland.

Or, you know, just have the Olympics and maybe do your silly nationalism thing during the equally silly All-Star Game.
 
Initially I hated this idea, but the more I think about it the more I'm intrigued. If they're to make it a 'young guns' team of the leftover guys who are say Under 23, it would make for a really interesting team. 2016 could feature the likes of McDavid, Eichel, MacKinnon, Drouin, Ekblad ect. If it's just young NHLers that'd make for an interesting team.
 
isn't this all because the NHL doesn't want to compensate european leagues (esp the KHL) for making their players available during the targeted mid-september time session (when the euro leagues are already playing)? Of course, I could see the KHL being stubborn and not wanting to send their players at all, but at the same time I wouldn't be surprised if the NHL was just to greedy.

Canada, USA, Russia, Sweden, maybe the fins and czechs. That's the countries that can field a team of NHLers only, and the latter too would probably not even have all their best available. If no other leagues are invovled, you have to either make it a six-team tournament (probably the best solution) or gimmick it up.
 
I've got a bold idea, so hear me out. They could have a hockey tournament and invite the best players from the best hockey nations. Now this is quite bold, but each of these teams should be comprised of players from the same country. Seek out some kind of ranking, like perhaps something the IIHF produces. Take the top eight teams, and have them split into two groups of four. Have each team play each team in its own group. The top seed gets a bye to the semi - finals, and bottom seed is eliminated, and the two middle seeds compete in cross over quarterfinals. This then leads to the semi finals. Then, if differing from the Olympics is desirable and since time would be permitting, have the final be a best of three. Allow for scheduling flexibility so that games end either in regulation or continuous overtime as opposed to shootouts.

Group 1:
Sweden
Canada
Czech Republic
Slovakia

Group 2:
Finland
Russia
United States
Switzerland

Imagine a tournament like that... nah it would probably be too boring for fans.
 
Initially I hated this idea, but the more I think about it the more I'm intrigued. If they're to make it a 'young guns' team of the leftover guys who are say Under 23, it would make for a really interesting team. 2016 could feature the likes of McDavid, Eichel, MacKinnon, Drouin, Ekblad ect. If it's just young NHLers that'd make for an interesting team.

Put yourself in McDavid's shoes.

Would you want to play against Team Canada?
 
I've got a bold idea, so hear me out. They could have a hockey tournament and invite the best players from the best hockey nations. Now this is quite bold, but each of these teams should be comprised of players from the same country. Seek out some kind of ranking, like perhaps something the IIHF produces. Take the top eight teams, and have them split into two groups of four. Have each team play each team in its own group. The top seed gets a bye to the semi - finals, and bottom seed is eliminated, and the two middle seeds compete in cross over quarterfinals. This then leads to the semi finals. Then, if differing from the Olympics is desirable and since time would be permitting, have the final be a best of three. Allow for scheduling flexibility so that games end either in regulation or continuous overtime as opposed to shootouts.

Group 1:
Sweden
Canada
Czech Republic
Slovakia

Group 2:
Finland
Russia
United States
Switzerland

Imagine a tournament like that... nah it would probably be too boring for fans.

In other words, the 1996 World Cup format.

It just might produce a great tournament! Again.
 
Who cares, World Cup is a meaningless event. Anything that's run by the NHL in the International arena means squat.

Hmmm 2004 World Cup was quite successful. Ditto the old Canada Cups, 1987 best of three Canada/CCCP final were some of the greatest games, with all time greats involved, ever played. 1976 Canada Cup was TC's Greatest Ever Team! And Yanks still crow ( and rightly so ) about their 1996 World Cup Victory.

People wanna argue that today's senior WC ( a very Euro-centric tourney that invited NA players tend to turn up to their noses to, and that even more and more Euros are declining ) is somehow better hockey?!? ...Good luck with that...
 
I really don't get why people are so opposed of these ideas being tossed around.

This isn't meant to be a World Championship tournament, being run with a strict sense of national purity. Its an NHL-organized exhibition tournament being run to both make money, and market the NHL and its players.

If it were up to me, I'd accomplish those goals in two simple ways:

1) Include as many star players from the NHL as possible

2) Include interesting story lines within the tournament to keep the fans and media engaged

Now, lets assume that 5 of the teams will be made up of the 5 'major' hockey nations: Canada, Russia, United States, Finland, Sweden (hypothetical classification, not a political statement, don't want to argue if other countries are 'major' hockey nations right now, etc.). Lets say that leaves 3 more teams for an 8-team tournament. I see two major types of options:

OPTION A: Traditional

This would simply add 3 more countries to the mix, likely Slovakia, Czech Republic, and one of Germany/Switzerland/Denmark/Belarus, etc.

Would this include as many star players as possible?

No, because star players from countries outside the tournament wouldn't be able to play (Kopitar, Ehrhoff, Grabovski, Josi, Neiderreiter, Nielson, Boedker, Vanek, Zubrus, Zucarello, and most importantly, Girgensons :naughty:). How would the tournament be better by excluding most of these players?

Would this encourage interesting story lines?

No, it would just look like every other International tournament where you would have 3 tiers of teams: 1) Teams that have a good chance of winning; 2) Teams that are less likely to win, but could pull an upset; 3) Teams that realistically have no chance.

OPTION B: Non-traditional

This would allow for some of the variation that has been tossed around in discussion. For the sake of this example, and considering the options that have already been brought up, here is how I will fill out my tournament:

1-5) Canada, US, Russia, Finland, Sweden
6) Slovakia & Czech Republic (combined)
7) All-Star Team of remaining countries
8) Young Guns team of players aged 18-22 from every country*
*this would mean that the rosters of teams 1-7 can only consist of players 23 or older

Would this include as many star players as possible?

Yes, it would. The best players in the world would be eligible with no restrictions on nationality. Additionally, the Young Guns team would be a draw for more serious NHL fans that would provide an extra chance to see some of their team's prospects in action. It would essentially be marketing the 'next generation' of NHL stars.

Would this encourage interesting story lines?

Absolutely. First of all, in terms of parity, teams 6 & 7 will have stronger rosters in this scenario for sure, and arguable, so would team 8. Having a stronger pool of teams will create more opportunities for close matchups and unpredictable results. There will also be interesting plotlines to follow with all 3 of these teams.

6) Interviews of players from Slovakia and Czech Republic to talk about their feelings on playing together, get some insight into how their families were affected by the former Czechoslovakia breaking up, human interest, yadda yadda.

7) You'd have to think that the teams from 'rejected' nations might have some additional motivation to prove their worth and be taken more seriously.

8) This team of young players probably have the most to gain from this situation, you would expect these young players to bring tons of energy of having something to prove. I think they are also a team that lots of fans would root for, and that many fans (myself included) would be curious about how well they could perform.


I see a lot more merit to Option B. I think its perfectly fine to disagree, but I don't think either of the two options is 'crazy' or 'insane'.
 
better hockey doesn't equal a legit tournament, esp if everything is just supposed to be framework for an eventual canada-usa final
 
I really don't get why people are so opposed of these ideas being tossed around.

This isn't meant to be a World Championship tournament, being run with a strict sense of national purity. Its an NHL-organized exhibition tournament being run to both make money, and market the NHL and its players.

If it were up to me, I'd accomplish those goals in two simple ways:

1) Include as many star players from the NHL as possible

2) Include interesting story lines within the tournament to keep the fans and media engaged

Now, lets assume that 5 of the teams will be made up of the 5 'major' hockey nations: Canada, Russia, United States, Finland, Sweden (hypothetical classification, not a political statement, don't want to argue if other countries are 'major' hockey nations right now, etc.). Lets say that leaves 3 more teams for an 8-team tournament. I see two major types of options:

OPTION A: Traditional

This would simply add 3 more countries to the mix, likely Slovakia, Czech Republic, and one of Germany/Switzerland/Denmark/Belarus, etc.

Would this include as many star players as possible?

No, because star players from countries outside the tournament wouldn't be able to play (Kopitar, Ehrhoff, Grabovski, Josi, Neiderreiter, Nielson, Boedker, Vanek, Zubrus, Zucarello, and most importantly, Girgensons :naughty:). How would the tournament be better by excluding most of these players?

Would this encourage interesting story lines?

No, it would just look like every other International tournament where you would have 3 tiers of teams: 1) Teams that have a good chance of winning; 2) Teams that are less likely to win, but could pull an upset; 3) Teams that realistically have no chance.

OPTION B: Non-traditional

This would allow for some of the variation that has been tossed around in discussion. For the sake of this example, and considering the options that have already been brought up, here is how I will fill out my tournament:

1-5) Canada, US, Russia, Finland, Sweden
6) Slovakia & Czech Republic (combined)
7) All-Star Team of remaining countries
8) Young Guns team of players aged 18-22 from every country*
*this would mean that the rosters of teams 1-7 can only consist of players 23 or older

Would this include as many star players as possible?

Yes, it would. The best players in the world would be eligible with no restrictions on nationality. Additionally, the Young Guns team would be a draw for more serious NHL fans that would provide an extra chance to see some of their team's prospects in action. It would essentially be marketing the 'next generation' of NHL stars.

Would this encourage interesting story lines?

Absolutely. First of all, in terms of parity, teams 6 & 7 will have stronger rosters in this scenario for sure, and arguable, so would team 8. Having a stronger pool of teams will create more opportunities for close matchups and unpredictable results. There will also be interesting plotlines to follow with all 3 of these teams.

6) Interviews of players from Slovakia and Czech Republic to talk about their feelings on playing together, get some insight into how their families were affected by the former Czechoslovakia breaking up, human interest, yadda yadda.

7) You'd have to think that the teams from 'rejected' nations might have some additional motivation to prove their worth and be taken more seriously.

8) This team of young players probably have the most to gain from this situation, you would expect these young players to bring tons of energy of having something to prove. I think they are also a team that lots of fans would root for, and that many fans (myself included) would be curious about how well they could perform.


I see a lot more merit to Option B. I think its perfectly fine to disagree, but I don't think either of the two options is 'crazy' or 'insane'.

I think this is fine if the tournament is just supposed to be a gimmick for fun (and money) and is recognised as such. I think what people think will happen is that the NHL sees it as the new equivalent to the soccer world cup, pulls out of the olympics and hockey fans are left without a legitimate best-on-best tournament.
 
I really don't get why people are so opposed of these ideas being tossed around.

This isn't meant to be a World Championship tournament, being run with a strict sense of national purity. Its an NHL-organized exhibition tournament being run to both make money, and market the NHL and its players.

Fans however, actually want to see high-quality hockey featuring the best national teams.

The Canada/World Cups of 1976-2004 were amazing events and there's no reason why 2016 has to be any different. Yet the NHL seems determined to destroy it.
 
Wasn't in 2004 and I would bet a few teams from overseas would do great once again in the next World Cup.

of course it's not always going to happen, and I don't mean to say that the NHL actively rigs these games, but if the post I quoted complained that the WHC is euro-centric... this tournament would be even more NA-centric.
 
Just forget this horrible tournament and commit to going to the Olympics. And while you're at it only hold the World Championships every second year.

I only have faint memories of the 2004 World Cup.
 
OPTION B: Non-traditional

This would allow for some of the variation that has been tossed around in discussion. For the sake of this example, and considering the options that have already been brought up, here is how I will fill out my tournament:

1-5) Canada, US, Russia, Finland, Sweden
6) Slovakia & Czech Republic (combined)
7) All-Star Team of remaining countries
8) Young Guns team of players aged 18-22 from every country*
*this would mean that the rosters of teams 1-7 can only consist of players 23 or older.

Heck, why don't we just make it like this:

1. British Empire
2. Kalmar Union (Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland)
3. Soviet Union
4. USA
5. Czechoslovakia
 
Germany has weakened in recent years but Leon Draisaitl will be great when he develops. Ehroff, Goc, Greiss, Holzer, Seidenberg. Grubauer in AHL, and Alexander Sulzer in DEL.

More and more Germans are drafted every year. It's not that Germany has weakened, the other countries have just gotten better.
 
Heck, why don't we just make it like this:

1. British Empire
2. Kalmar Union (Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland)
3. Soviet Union
4. USA
5. Czechoslovakia

Hell, just replace Czechoslovakia with Austria-Hungary, then you get the Czechs and Slovaks, Rendulic from Croatia, Kopitar from Slovenia and Vanek, Grabner and Raffl from Austria.
 
I think this is fine if the tournament is just supposed to be a gimmick for fun (and money) and is recognised as such. I think what people think will happen is that the NHL sees it as the new equivalent to the soccer world cup, pulls out of the olympics and hockey fans are left without a legitimate best-on-best tournament.

If people are worrying about discussing step 1 because in their minds it might lead to hypothetical steps 3 and 4, then they are just being irrational.

Fans however, actually want to see high-quality hockey featuring the best national teams.

The Canada/World Cups of 1976-2004 were amazing events and there's no reason why 2016 has to be any different. Yet the NHL seems determined to destroy it.

I guess I just don't get why 'changing' automatically means 'destroying'. Especially coming from a sport that revisits and tweaks its rules more than any other in North America. How will not including 'Team Switzerland' or 'Team Germany' make the World Cup into a farce, exactly? I'm also not definitely advocating for the World Cup to be changed, just saying that its worth discussing ideas that could make it more exciting for the fans and worthwhile for the NHL/players.
 
I guess I just don't get why 'changing' automatically means 'destroying'. Especially coming from a sport that revisits and tweaks its rules more than any other in North America. How will not including 'Team Switzerland' or 'Team Germany' make the World Cup into a farce, exactly?

Tweaking rules is different than tweaking teams.

The problem isn't so much that Switzerland, Germany or Slovakia won't play (even though at least two of them should) - it's that they're being replaced by some Mickey Mouse all-star teams that render the tournament a complete joke.
 
also germany with 1942 borders, could compete imo

I can see the first practice already... Wait, Sergei, you were born within 20km of Leningrad. Get out of here and back to the Russian team. Cristobal, our goaltending needs are not so poor that we need to overlook that fact that you were born in what was considered Vichy France.

OK, I am done with my attempts at WW2 humor.

One more... Where is Vanek? Is he trying to pretend again that the Anschluss never happened?
 
Last edited:
Tweaking rules is different than tweaking teams.

The problem isn't so much that Switzerland, Germany or Slovakia won't play (even though at least two of them should) - it's that they're being replaced by some Mickey Mouse all-star teams that render the tournament a complete joke.

I think it depends on what the goal is for this tournament. Again, if the idea is to have essentially a replica of the Olypics and World Championships, then sure, some of these suggestions go against the essence of that kind of tournament. If the goal is to market the NHL and its players, maybe something different could be as good or better. Its arguable that the allowing teams like Germany and Switzerland to compete in a tournament agains Canada/Russia/US, etc. is also a 'complete joke' from a competitive point of view.

I'm just saying that we already have tournaments like that, so what is the harm in not having a 3rd tournament do exactly the same thing?
 
I can see the first practice already... Wait, Sergei, you were born within 20km of Leningrad. Get out of here and back to the Russian team. Cristobal, our goaltending needs are not so poor that we need to overlook that fact that you were born in what was considered Vichy France.

OK, I am done with my attempts at WW2 humor.

I like Team Axis vs Team Allies, with Russian players crossing over from one team to the other midway through the tournament, and with US players joining the squad soon after.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad