Are you interested in the EHT-tournaments?

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Last year I traveled from Vienna to Pardubice to see Sweden take on the Czech Republic and Russia vs Finland, because Shestyorkin, Buchnevich, Andersson and Chytil were playing. It was a memorable day and fun to watch 4 Ranger prospects/players in 1 day so close to home. This year I will probably go again.

 

[Jahara]

World Cup was a failure and the quality of EHT has nothing to do with it. At least the EHT consists of national teams only.

It was a "failure" because everyone seems to get their analysis about it wrong. Playing Slovakia and Germany against the Big Six was a much bigger failure in 96 and 04 in my world. Team Europe and NA actually did contribute something and made it more competetive and fun.

Every good player available doesn't even play every time the EHT is around. That is why it is nonsensical and the big reason it is dull and not that relevant.

 

[EK47]

I never said anything about team Sweden. I was talking about the tournament as a whole. For Russia, Czech and Finland there's usually 10 or even more WC roster spots to fight for. And for Sweden it's usually three or four. The EHT doesn't interested me either, but it's still not a gimmick which was my point. Just because these players doesn't draw our interest doesn't make it a gimmick. The ECHL isn't a gimmic. Allsvenskan isn't a gimmick. Division 5 soccer isn't a gimmick. That's not what the word means. The all star game is a gimmick.

Yeah, whatever it is, my point was that since all European national teams are increasing their NHL depth year by year, the number of players who’ll actually play themselves onto a roster from theese tournaments is decreasing. Making the EHT more exhibiton-like. Might be unfair to call it a gimmick. But its importance is steadily declining.

 

[Jussi]

It was a "failure" because everyone seems to get their analysis about it wrong. Playing Slovakia and Germany against the Big Six was a much bigger failure in 96 and 04 in my world. Team Europe and NA actually did contribute something and made it more competetive and fun.

Every good player available doesn't even play every time the EHT is around. That is why it is nonsensical and the big reason it is dull and not that relevant.

Nope. Ask the Czechs how it went against Germany in 96. Team Europe and NA were so much fun that no f***s were given about the tournament throughout hockey world. Fans didn't care and the media forgot it the next week.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Last year I traveled from Vienna to Pardubice to see Sweden take on the Czech Republic and Russia vs Finland, because Shestyorkin, Buchnevich, Andersson and Chytil were playing. It was a memorable day and fun to watch 4 Ranger prospects/players in 1 day so close to home. This year I will probably go again.

That was World Championship, not Euro Hockey Tour though, and nobody doubts, WHC is pretty popular and interesting. EHT, on the other hand... Well, I love it, when Team Russia is full of young players. And I always watch the last tournament, which is right before WHC.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

That was World Championship, not Euro Hockey Tour though, and nobody doubts, WHC is pretty popular and interesting. EHT, on the other hand... Well, I love it, when Team Russia is full of young players. And I always watch the last tournament, which is right before WHC.

Nope. Euro Hockey Tour (Carlson Games) in Pardubice in April. Chytil played for the Czech Rep and Andersson played for Sweden.

I was at the World Championships as well, in Copenhagen, a month later.

 

[Jahara]

Nope. Ask the Czechs how it went against Germany in 96. Team Europe and NA were so much fun that no ****s were given about the tournament throughout hockey world. Fans didn't care and the media forgot it the next week.

Well, they won game against a broken Czech team were no ****s were given . Otherwise they didn't have a chance against anyone.

If the fans don't care about good and entertaining hockey and prefers a team like Germany get beaten big time it is the fans who misses out on something. And btw, did fans care much more about the 2004 edition? Every team made it to the KO stage and that was a bigger mistake in my book than fielding Team Europe once.

 

[Ciccarelli]

Heavily dependant on the players selected. Washed up KHL'ers like Kontiola, Hietanen and Osala; definately not interested. New kids from the finnish league; yeah, I'll watch.

 

[Jussi]

Well, they won game against a broken Czech team were no ****s were given . Otherwise they didn't have a chance against anyone.

If the fans don't care about good and entertaining hockey and prefers a team like Germany get beaten big time it is the fans who misses out on something. And btw, did fans care much more about the 2004 edition? Every team made it to the KO stage and that was a bigger mistake in my book than fielding Team Europe once.

Far more than in 2016, at least in Finland. It helped that we made it to the final. Of course that was somewhat forgotten two years later when we made it to the Olympic final. In 2016 no one at my work place mentioned the whole tournament once. That doesn't happen with the national team with other international tournaments.

 

[Jahara]

It is unbelievable that two teams that actually did raise the quality affected the interest among people that much.

But some people in Sweden (and probably in Finland too) seem to have bigger interest in a dull and pointless tournament like the World Championship instead of the World Cup that is the real deal.

 

[Elvs]

It is unbelievable that two teams that actually did raise the quality affected the interest among people that much.

But some people in Sweden (and probably in Finland too) seem to have bigger interest in a dull and pointless tournament like the World Championship instead of the World Cup that is the real deal.

The World Cup won't be 'the real deal' until they remove the gimmic teams and replace them with actual national teams. The whole point of an international tournament is to have COUNTRIES comepete against eachother. At least IIHF understands that much.

 

[Jahara]

The World Cup won't be 'the real deal' until they remove the gimmic teams and replace them with actual national teams. The whole point of an international tournament is to have COUNTRIES comepete against eachother. At least IIHF understands that much.

Do you actually think it was better to have Germany in the World Cup compared to Team Europe? I doubt that any golf fan is complaining about the Ryder Cup playing a "gimmick team" like Europe against USA.

 

[Elvs]

Do you actually think it was better to have Germany in the World Cup compared to Team Europe? I doubt that any golf fan is complaining about the Ryder Cup playing a "gimmick team" like Europe against USA.

I think it would have been better to have Switzerland in the tournament, yes. Or just go with six teams if you don't deem any more nations good enough. But both Switzerland and Slovakia has proven to be competitive in best on best tournaments. Though, you seem more concerned with the names on the player's jerseys than actual on ice results.

 

[Jahara]

Though, you seem more concerned with the names on the player's jerseys than actual on ice results.

What do you mean?

 

[Elvs]

What do you mean?

Because with quotes like these: "Do you actually think it was better to have Germany in the World Cup compared to Team Europe?" you come off as someone who thinks any country outside the top six would make an ass of themselves if given the oppurtunity, and that non NHL'ers or fringe NHL'ers aren't worth your time. You're willing to sacrifice two countries (Switzerland and Slovakia) who have proven to be competitive only so you can watch Anze Kopitar play.

 

[Jahara]

Neither Slovakia nor Germany could bring much to World Cup before. I doubt the last World Cup would have been much better or entertaining with Switzerland and Slovakia instead of Europe and NA. No, I don't think they would make an ass but I highly doubt they would challenge enough. That is why I rather see a mixed European team that could spread the hockey interest in other countries.

Team Europe was an interesting idea and proved themself to be good. The problem was the fans that were way to critical about it.

 

[Elvs]

Neither Slovakia nor Germany could bring much to World Cup before. I doubt the last World Cup would have been much better or entertaining with Switzerland and Slovakia instead of Europe and NA. No, I don't think they would make an ass but I highly doubt they would challenge enough. That is why I rather see a mixed European team that could spread the hockey interest in other countries.

Team Europe was an interesting idea and proved themself to be good. The problem was the fans that were way to critical about it.

Slovakia only existed as a country for two World Cup's, so there's not much sample size. They made it to the bronze medal game in the 2010 Olympics, when most of their golden generation was already retired or past their prime. Yeah, these days I don't think they would challenge much either. But I mean, there's probably a maximum of 10 teams that has any legit shot at winning the Stanley Cup in any given year. Should we remove the other 20 teams? Or should there be a draft before the playoffs, where players from non-playoff teams can be selected? Because who wouldn't want to watch all star teams in the playoffs? Yeah, I'm making an extreme comparison here but I think you get where I'm coming from.

I'll admit it was interesting to watch Team Europe as it was a new concept. At least the league had the decency to let the players wear their different flags as an arm's patch. The main reason fans were so critical was the fact that this tournament became a substitute for the Olympics. If the Olympics still had NHL'ers, people could live with the gimmic teams in the World Cup. But really, team Europe doesn't make hockey grow over here at all. If you're from Switzerland, you'll rather watch team Switzerland play. For some reason North Americans tend to lump all us Europeans together as if we we're one big country consisting of different states. While we love our European brother and sisters, that's not what our relationship looks like.

 

[Atas2000]

Neither Slovakia nor Germany could bring much to World Cup before. I doubt the last World Cup would have been much better or entertaining with Switzerland and Slovakia instead of Europe and NA. No, I don't think they would make an ass but I highly doubt they would challenge enough. That is why I rather see a mixed European team that could spread the hockey interest in other countries.

Team Europe was an interesting idea and proved themself to be good. The problem was the fans that were way to critical about it.

Do you seriously think people can get behind a "Team Europe" just because there is one player from their country or so? I think you scare away way more people who want to see Slovakia or Germany or Switzerland and instead get a meaningless mixed bag. It's not about challenging enough. It's about emotional attachment. Every tournament has it's underdogs. Sometimes they surprise. That last time Fake World Cup team Europe was pretty hollow though even as a surprise team. What were they? Just a random mix of players. This is getting political obviously, but some people still fail to realize they can't force such concepts on people's minds just like that.

 

[Jahara]

Slovakia only existed as a country for two World Cup's, so there's not much sample size. They made it to the bronze medal game in the 2010 Olympics, when most of their golden generation was already retired or past their prime. Yeah, these days I don't think they would challenge much either. But I mean, there's probably a maximum of 10 teams that has any legit shot at winning the Stanley Cup in any given year. Should we remove the other 20 teams? Or should there be a draft before the playoffs, where players from non-playoff teams can be selected? Because who wouldn't want to watch all star teams in the playoffs? Yeah, I'm making an extreme comparison here but I think you get where I'm coming from.

I'll admit it was interesting to watch Team Europe as it was a new concept. At least the league had the decency to let the players wear their different flags as an arm's patch. The main reason fans were so critical was the fact that this tournament became a substitute for the Olympics. If the Olympics still had NHL'ers, people could live with the gimmic teams in the World Cup. But really, team Europe doesn't make hockey grow over here at all. If you're from Switzerland, you'll rather watch team Switzerland play. For some reason North Americans tend to lump all us Europeans together as if we we're one big country consisting of different states. While we love our European brother and sisters, that's not what our relationship looks like.

No, teams should not be removed from NHL/Stanley Cup but this is the World Cup. It has always been an invitational tournament with the best teams and should remain so. As I said before, the minnows have their chance at the Olympics.

Do you seriously think people can get behind a "Team Europe" just because there is one player from their country or so? I think you scare away way more people who want to see Slovakia or Germany or Switzerland and instead get a meaningless mixed bag. It's not abot challenging enough. It's about emotional attachment. Every tournament has it's underdogs. Sometimes they surprise. That last time Fake World Cup tem Europe was pretty hollow though even as a surprise team. What were they? Just a random mix of players. This is getting political obviously, but some people still fail to realize they can't force such concepts on people's minds just like that.

No, I don't think people can get behind Team Europe like a Switzerland or a Slovakia. But I don't think any of those are good enough to compete. That is why it is quite meaningless to have a team like Germany filling out a spot. It could be argued that every NHL team is a random mix of players. Or do you think the players in Vegas have strong feelings to the club. Or players from Sweden/Finland that is playing in KHL. They are just mercenary.
They do have the Team Europe mix team in Ryder Cup since it is pragmatic according to the strength in the golf world. I don't think golf fans call it a "gimmick team" like you hear from the hockey fans every time.

Here's an example. I like sports in general but I don't follow basketball on daily basis. If it was like the hockey world where a few countries are clearly superior to the others (like a big 6) and they played a World Cup of Basketball with 6 big countries and 2 minnows, my interest in this tournament would not be that high.
But if they had put together a Team Europe with the best of the rest players from NBA and included Jonas Jerebko from Sweden, it would suddenly become more relevant to me. I would like to think that people that like sports in countries like Slovenia, Austria and Norway felt the same when they tried Team Europe in World Cup. Probably the sport would have got more attention compared to before.

 

[Elvs]

No, teams should not be removed from NHL/Stanley Cup but this is the World Cup. It has always been an invitational tournament with the best teams and should remain so. As I said before, the minnows have their chance at the Olympics.


No, I don't think people can get behind Team Europe like a Switzerland or a Slovakia. But I don't think any of those are good enough to compete. That is why it is quite meaningless to have a team like Germany filling out a spot. It could be argued that every NHL team is a random mix of players. Or do you think the players in Vegas have strong feelings to the club. Or players from Sweden/Finland that is playing in KHL. They are just mercenary.
They do have the Team Europe mix team in Ryder Cup since it is pragmatic according to the strength in the golf world. I don't think golf fans call it a "gimmick team" like you hear from the hockey fans every time.

Here's an example. I like sports in general but I don't follow basketball on daily basis. If it was like the hockey world where a few countries are clearly superior to the others (like a big 6) and they played a World Cup of Basketball with 6 big countries and 2 minnows, my interest in this tournament would not be that high.
But if they had put together a Team Europe with the best of the rest players from NBA and included Jonas Jerebko from Sweden, it would suddenly become more relevant to me. I would like to think that people that like sports in countries like Slovenia, Austria and Norway felt the same when they tried Team Europe in World Cup. Probably the sport would have got more attention compared to before.

Europe and North America become gimmick teams because the environment they are playing in. If the Anaheim Ducks played in the Olympics they would be a gimmick team. If team Sweden played in the NHL it would aslo be a gimmick.

Golf isn't a team sport, so that comparison becomes flawed immediately. What this is, is the same as if the World Cup in soccer only consisted of 10 teams, and then they had 4 extra teams lumped together with the best leftovers. Under these circumstances, Sweden wouldn't be in the tournament, and Zlatan Ibrahimovic would be playing for a gimmick team that you think me and other Swedes should get behind. Sweden made the quarter finals, and I would deem Switzerland's chances of making the finals in a World Cup of hockey equally as big if not bigger.

Ice hockey is a low scoring game with a lot of bounces and luck involved. There's a good chance of upsets happening. That's not nearly as much true with basketball. Team Sweden would get demolished by Team USA in basketball every single time. However, I'd still rather see that than see Jerebko play for some team of leftovers. If I wanna see him play for another team than Sweden's national team, I can watch him play for the Golden State Warriors. Simple.

If you feel like there's only six competitive nations (though previous best on best tournaments show otherwise) just make the World Cup consist of six teams and make it a round robin tournament. Or make the whole tournament consist of mixed teams. Just don't blend national teams with non national teams. The World Cup under it's latest format, when teams can't even pick all the players they want, can never be called a best on best international competition.

 

[Jahara]

Europe and North America become gimmick teams because the environment they are playing in. If the Anaheim Ducks played in the Olympics they would be a gimmick team. If team Sweden played in the NHL it would aslo be a gimmick.

Golf isn't a team sport, so that comparison becomes flawed immediately. What this is, is the same as if the World Cup in soccer only consisted of 10 teams, and then they had 4 extra teams lumped together with the best leftovers. Under these circumstances, Sweden wouldn't be in the tournament, and Zlatan Ibrahimovic would be playing for a gimmick team that you think me and other Swedes should get behind. Sweden made the quarter finals, and I would deem Switzerland's chances of making the finals in a World Cup of hockey equally as big if not bigger.

Ice hockey is a low scoring game with a lot of bounces and luck involved. There's a good chance of upsets happening. That's not nearly as much true with basketball. Team Sweden would get demolished by Team USA in basketball every single time. However, I'd still rather see that than see Jerebko play for some team of leftovers. If I wanna see him play for another team than Sweden's national team, I can watch him play for the Golden State Warriors. Simple.

If you feel like there's only six competitive nations (though previous best on best tournaments show otherwise) just make the World Cup consist of six teams and make it a round robin tournament. Or make the whole tournament consist of mixed teams. Just don't blend national teams with non national teams. The World Cup under it's latest format, when teams can't even pick all the players they want, can never be called a best on best international competition.

In this case I prefer a gimmick team like Team Europe way ahead of a crap team like Germany losing every game by marginal. Golf is not a team sport but it is a team that wins Ryder Cup, just like the World Cup. Football don't need to play tournaments with only the best since a half good team may beat a world class team quite often. A half hockey team can't beat a world class hockey team often enough. Ice hockey is low scoring but football is much more low scoring. The chances of upsets over longer periods is low.

Several people can't stand seeing a combined Team Europe for once. I can do that. People have their chance seing their smaller nations at the Olympics and now they had another chance actually seeing them winning something. Maybe more people should be a little less conservative and a little more progressive instead of just repeating the same thing you have heard thousand times before.

Hockey fans should be much more upset about the wasted 2018 Olympics, the absent tournaments in 2000 and 2012, the uncertainty on the 2020 tournament and the whole future of participation in the Olympics than complain about two mixed teams.

 

[Atas2000]

It could be argued that every NHL team is a random mix of players. Or do you think the players in Vegas have strong feelings to the club. Or players from Sweden/Finland that is playing in KHL. They are just mercenary..

This is exactly why I can't get behind one team in the NHL. No attachment or connection to random mixes of players. And that is exactly the reason why a national team is always much higher on my priority list than any team in any local league. I follow fellow Russians in the NHL. If they go to another team I switch with them, but I sicerely don't care about which team wins the Stanley Cup. But what does the players attitude has to do with it? It's about making a tournament appealing to fans, not players. Vegas players might not care much about Vegas, but people who live in Vegas might actually care. Just as I care for my home town KHL team and I always will. But say Russia is not very good at hockey someday. Do you really think I would watch a Team Eurasia with two Russians on it in some tournament that pretends to be a World Cup? I would sicerely prefer routing for a weak Team Russia that would lose every game, just like I would still support my team if it was relegated to the VHL and not just pick some random other team on a higher level.

They do have the Team Europe mix team in Ryder Cup since it is pragmatic according to the strength in the golf world. I don't think golf fans call it a "gimmick team" like you hear from the hockey fans every time.

Apples and oranges big time. Individual sports vs. team sports. Golf vs. hockey. Golf is lightyears away in terms of tradition. It still is in a way a "privileged people" sport. The audience is quite specific. The popularity is limited to some very select regions of this world.

And if you sicerely think that people from say Germany would not be attracted by a World Cup with Team Germany you are plain wrong. Even if Team Germany loses every single game there is more to it for them than watching Draisaitl and a couple more Germans on Team Territories 12 through 24.

The so calle Miracle on Ice has sparkled the popularity of hockey in the US big time. It could never happen if it was a couple of Amercans on a Team This Part of the World.

 

[Jahara]

This is exactly why I can't get behind one team in the NHL. No attachment or connection to random mixes of players. And that is exactly the reason why a national team is always much higher on my priority list than any team in any local league. I follow fellow Russians in the NHL. If they go to another team I switch with them, but I sicerely don't care about which team wins the Stanley Cup. But what does the players attitude has to do with it? It's about making a tournament appealing to fans, not players. Vegas players might not care much about Vegas, but people who live in Vegas might actually care. Just as I care for my home town KHL team and I always will. But say Russia is not very good at hockey someday. Do you really think I would watch a Team Eurasia with two Russians on it in some tournament that pretends to be a World Cup? I would sicerely prefer routing for a weak Team Russia that would lose every game, just like I would still support my team if it was relegated to the VHL and not just pick some random other team on a higher level.


Apples and oranges big time. Individual sports vs. team sports. Golf vs. hockey. Golf is lightyears away in terms of tradition. It still is in a way a "privileged people" sport. The audience is quite specific. The popularity is limited to some very select regions of this world.

And if you sicerely think that people from say Germany would not be attracted by a World Cup with Team Germany you are plain wrong. Even if Team Germany loses every single game there is more to it for them than watching Draisaitl and a couple more Germans on Team Territories 12 through 24.

The so calle Miracle on Ice has sparkled the popularity of hockey in the US big time. It could never happen if it was a couple of Amercans on a Team This Part of the World.

The players attitude has to do with it since so many people are branding Team Europe and NA as gimmick teams. Starting a NHL in Vegas just like that has a vibe of gimmick around it too. NHL tried Team Europe to make the World Cup better and more appealing to fans. If Sweden became crap at hockey, I would rather see the best players play in a European team than losing every game big time in the World Cup. They could anyway play together at the Olympics.

It is not big time apples and oranges. I am comparing one tournament in sports to another since some other person was talking about it. And what does the tradition and "privileged people" have to to with it? Hockey audience is also quite specific and it is not a big sport globally. Just a few countries even bother and by having Team Europe it raises the chance to spread the interest.
And no I definitely don't that Germans would not be attracted of a World Cup with Germany. Never even said so. But no one outside Germany would miss Germany either since they can't compete. Much better then and more appealing to me be having a Team Europe.

Miracle on Ice happened in the Olympics just like Belarus beating Sweden once in 2002. Olympics have their tradition and should of course continue like that. And Team Europe success would not have happened if it was Slovenia, Norway or any other nation outside the Big Six.

 

[Atas2000]

The players attitude has to do with it since so many people are branding Team Europe and NA as gimmick teams. Starting a NHL in Vegas just like that has a vibe of gimmick around it too. NHL tried Team Europe to make the World Cup better and more appealing to fans. If Sweden became crap at hockey, I would rather see the best players play in a European team than losing every game big time in the World Cup. They could anyway play together at the Olympics.

It is not big time apples and oranges. I am comparing one tournament in sports to another since some other person was talking about it. And what does the tradition and "privileged people" have to to with it? Hockey audience is also quite specific and it is not a big sport globally. Just a few countries even bother and by having Team Europe it raises the chance to spread the interest.
And no I definitely don't that Germans would not be attracted of a World Cup with Germany. Never even said so. But no one outside Germany would miss Germany either since they can't compete. Much better then and more appealing to me be having a Team Europe.

Miracle on Ice happened in the Olympics just like Belarus beating Sweden once in 2002. Olympics have their tradition and should of course continue like that. And Team Europe success would not have happened if it was Slovenia, Norway or any other nation outside the Big Six.

The NHL tried team Europe and Team NA because they want to exclude nations from their Whatever Cup. It was a huge failure with the fans. I haven't watched Team Europe games. Simply not interested. If they won then who would have won?

And as the NHL is sabotaging the Olympics deliberately and the whole idea of the NHL Cup is to create their own "olympics" while killing the real ones. Fortunately for us hockey fans they were dumb enough to come up with the two silly team ideas.

Golf comparison: hockey is vastly popular in those hockey countries. Golf is vastly popular pretty much... nowhere. And again it's an individual sport. Different story entirely as nobody is playing with anybody on a team 90% of the time so nobody cares anyway. The whole discussion point here was team composition. I can tell you with confidence though if say the Davis Cup in Tennis would have some randomly assembled teams of however great and competitive players the interest would be extremely limited. So even in individual sports it does matter and national teams however good or bad are more attractive.

Your arguments are really amazingly illogical. What does it matter if anyone outside Germany wants Germany in the tournament? It's 80 Million Germans that matter as potential audience to follow their team in the tournament. Do you think I am interested in watching all Team Canada games just because you know they are supposed to be good? No, I will watch all Team Russia games in a proper tournament and that's it. And I would watch more games if there were more teams. Against Slovenia and Austria and the UK if they are playing against Russia. I won't watch a 7 game series Canada vs. USA. I will look up the scores.

As for surprise outcomes you don't understand it either. If Latvia just comes close to not losing against Canada it's surprise enough to get people to watch and their fans to cheer. There is no specific need for a surprise contender/winner of the whole tournament. The UK got qualified for the top division at WHC. Their fans will probably celebrate every game regardless of the outcome and the fact that will probably relegated again in May.

 

[Elvs]

Hockey fans should be much more upset about the wasted 2018 Olympics, the absent tournaments in 2000 and 2012, the uncertainty on the 2020 tournament and the whole future of participation in the Olympics than complain about two mixed teams.

People are upset about the Olympics, but it's not a hot topic right now as it's 3 years and a few months until next tournament, and we'll have to await CBA negotiations. You're the one who brought up the World Cup in this discussion.