Toggle sidebar

World Cup: Best on Best: Canada is too good (solution?)

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Canada can have their "World Cup" but rename it Canada Cup again.

We stick with IIHF World Championships a tournament that actually means something.
 
Spawn said:
The solution is for other nations to get better. Get better coaches, develop better players. Neutering the best team in the world just to create artificial competition for other nations? No thanks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, even if the competition is tough, it is only meaningful if same rules apply for everyone.

Also, the smaller countries will hardly catch up by being denied from the international competition.
 
What about the territories? Aren't they part of Canada?

If I was dividing Canada into teams I would do East, West and Ontario. if you divide it East and West like 66% of the population lives in the East. Even if You split Ontario from the East they still would have a population advantage(albeit a small one)

You probably could do one step further and divide the US into East and West of the Mississippi(or in other words Minnesota vs Michigan and Boston). Technically I would extend the Mississippi(ie West) Borders to Wisconsin and Illinois.

By the way here is a split of American players by state

http://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/state-totals/nhl-players-2015-16-stats.html

Beyond the 3 states I mentioned(well 2 States and Boston), seems like NY and Wisconsin are the next group of US hockey hotbeds
 
Last edited:
source said:
A lot of notable U-20 players were missing for Canada in those years.
Click to expand...

For 2 of those years, yes I would agree. (2011 and '12) but in 2013 nobody was missing...and other than 2015, the rest were just down years in the development cycle...and we are currently still in that down cycle that looks to be continuing for the next 2 years at least.

So, enjoy this Golden Era, as 2018 will most likely be its end. For a while at least, until Hockey Canada holds another summit and reworks things a bit.

And creating 2 Team Canadas at the senior level would be a colossally stupid mistake.

It's fine for development purposes for 16 and 17 year old players...but that's where it should stay.
 
This thread is so Canadian. We are essentially apologizing for being too good at hockey.

Enjoy it Canada, hockey is our game. We are in a Golden Era and are once again confirming our hegemony over our game.

Even American Presidents jokingly trade barbs over hockey with our Prime Minister. Do not feel ashamed for being the best at our game.
 
I think Canada best team in World.
But team Canada often play badly in World Junoirs
WJC Team Canada play awul in WJC16
 
Bear12Good said:
I think Canada best team in World.
But team Canada often play badly in World Junoirs
WJC Team Canada play awul in WJC16
Click to expand...

They were not good.

However, at the Mens level we have a 10-15 year talent pool to pick from.
 
Karjala takaisin said:
Canada has McDavid but who else they have to replace older vets?
Click to expand...

Many other support players(Domi, Duclair, Lazar, etc etc etc) I can mention but I am guessing some guys from this list will fill those top tier slots


2013: Mackinnon, Drouin, Monohan
2014: Reinhart, Bennett
2015: Strome, Marner
2016: Dubois
2017: Patrick
 
snipes said:
This thread is so Canadian. We are essentially apologizing for being too good at hockey.

Enjoy it Canada, hockey is our game. We are in a Golden Era and are once again confirming our hegemony over our game.

Even American Presidents jokingly trade barbs over hockey with our Prime Minister. Do not feel ashamed for being the best at our game.
Click to expand...

I see it as a sign of arrogance and I'm apparently not the only one. Canadians want to have 2 teams/team NA/teams for different regions to make the tournament more interesting to them.
 
Jon Riley said:
Trying to slow them down has only one effect: the loss of meaning of the whole thing.
Click to expand...

People that only want an all star exhibition, ie fans of the recent world cup, do not grasp that putting teams under different restrictions leaves the tournament meaningless. This proposal leaves a tournament with no winners, other than maybe Canada. If Canada wins, Canadians can laugh about winning a tournament with only half a team. If Canada loses, whoever won can't even claim that they beat Canada.

umwoz said:
As stated above... If Canada's recent WJHC performances are any indication, competition is coming.
Click to expand...

I'm not sold on how big the WJC is as an indicator of best on best success. Canada generally wins such tournaments, so it is difficult to make any conclusions there. When USA won its only best on best, none of those players had ever won the WJC. When Czech Republic won its only best on best, none of its players had ever won the WJC. The Czechs who won the WJC twice in a row have never come close to winning a best on best. When Sweden won its only best on best, none of its players had won the WJC.

Intuitively it seems obvious that WJC success indicates future success at the top level, and I agree in general, but history doesn't indicate that it is a big factor.
 
GeneralOddball said:
Becoming actual world champion of course.
Like the Olympic champion.
Click to expand...

Becoming World Champion is nowhere near the accomplishment of Olympic Champion. Let's be real here. Canada is World Champion for the last two years and as a Canadian it's nice but really it's meh when compared to our Olympic success.
 
GeneralOddball said:
Becoming actual world champion of course.
Like the Olympic champion.
Click to expand...

I couldn't take much pride in winning a tournament where many of the worlds best players are playing elsewhere at the time. The only ones that matter in that sense are ones where the best players are all available like past Canada/World Cups and Olympics when NHL players are taking part.
 
People complain about gimmicks, then, some want to "fix" Canada's domination... with more gimmicks!

The only way to "fix" things (if things really need to be fixed) is for other countries to get better. The USA are getting better, Finland is getting better. Sweden is still good. Russia has declined. Many smaller countries have gotten much better.

These things take time. Canada is in the middle of a golden generation and will always be the favorite because we have the most depth and do not depend on 5-6 players to be healthy to field a team that can compete for gold. Other countries have to develop similar depth (which is unlikely) and invest in the sport like we do (which is even more unlikely). Finland does and for a 6M-people country, they are regularly having great results.

This is not rocket science. It is about the grassroot level and the organisation of the elite. The real question is: is hockey important enough outside of Canada for countries to invest the necessary resources in making their program better? If the answer is no, then, what has to be "fixed" is the global presence of hockey. That would be the real challenge. However, the NHL doesn't give a **** about that, let us be honest and an NHL sanctionned tournament will never be designed to grow the game, it is designed to maximized the NHL profits (hence the gimmicks).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom