Better concept for the World Cup

[Nordic*]

Just make it a 7 game series between Europe and North America?

That would peak my interest way more than this joke tourny.

Click to read more...

 

[Bob Barker]

Ovechkin-Backstrom-Kuznetsov
Kucherov-Kopitar-Malkin
Forsberg-Barkov-Tarasenko
Landeskog-Zetterberg-Datsyuk

Hedman-Karlsson
Josi-OEL
Markov-Ristolainen

Lundqvist
Rask
Rinne

vs.

Benn-Crosby-Seguin
Gaudreau-Toews-Kane
Stamkos-Tavares-Pavelski
McDavid-Bergeron-Wheeler

Keith-Doughty
Suter-Weber
Vlasic-Burns

Price
Quick
Holtby
Bishop

 

[Nordic*]

Markov and Datsyuk are too over the hill. Swap with Panarin and Lindholm.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

Ovechkin-Bäckström-Kuznetsov
Kucherov-Kopitar-Malkin
Tarasenko-Barkov-Panarin
Komarov-Zetterberg-Datsyuk

Hedman-Karlsson
Strålman-OEL
Hjalmarsson-Ristolainen
Klingberg

Rask
Lundqvist
Rinne

 

[Nordic*]

Ovechkin-Bäckström-Kuznetsov
Kucherov-Kopitar-Malkin
Tarasenko-Barkov-Panarin
Komarov-Zetterberg-Datsyuk

Hedman-Karlsson
Strålman-OEL
Hjalmarsson-Ristolainen
Klingberg

Rask
Lundqvist
Rinne

Komarov over Forsberg (for instance?)

 

[Canuckistani]

Just make it a 7 game series between Europe and North America?

That would peak my interest way more than this joke tourny.

The NHL is in fact planning some sort of "Ryder Cup" event between North America vs Europe and it'll be just as ridiculous as team U-24 and team Europe.

 

[tony d]

Meh, wouldn't work. If you ask me, this is the World Cup. Have national teams from more countries involved. Obviously you wouldn't have Team Canada vs. Team Spain or anything as a game. Still have a preliminary tournament beforehand that would have the 9th to 24 best countries at hockey qualified for a final spot in a World Cup of 16 countries.

 

[xxxx]

In my opinion it's good the way it is, and hopefully will be (Olympics with NHL players + World Cup with 8 best national teams)

Having 16 teams at the world cup is pushing it, when you already have the IIHF World Championships with 16 teams, every year. That tournament would decrease in value even more then. I also think that if we're gonna se best-on-best every two years, it's bad for the IIHF cup enough as it is. If there's no olympics however, it could be a good idea to have World Cup with at least 12 teams and real qualification with NHL players.

 

[xxxx]

The NHL is in fact planning some sort of "Ryder Cup" event between North America vs Europe and it'll be just as ridiculous as team U-24 and team Europe.

while in golf it's not ridiculous for some reason

 

[PNWKingsFan]

Seems like more of a continental cup than a world cup.

Plus, who would get to decide the roster from each team? Joint decision between the hockey associations (how would you distribute that choice?), single coach or GM making those decisions (how would they be picked?)?

Would get pretty messy with so many countries in Europe each jockeying for limited space on the team.

 

[Canuckistani]

while in golf it's not ridiculous for some reason

Because the Ryder Cup is the only time when golf is a team sport.

Imagine a young Tiger Woods being made to play against Team USA as part of some U-24 golfers squad.

 

[Urbanskog]

In my opinion it's good the way it is, and hopefully will be (Olympics with NHL players + World Cup with 8 best national teams)

Having 16 teams at the world cup is pushing it, when you already have the IIHF World Championships with 16 teams, every year. That tournament would decrease in value even more then. I also think that if we're gonna se best-on-best every two years, it's bad for the IIHF cup enough as it is. If there's no olympics however, it could be a good idea to have World Cup with at least 12 teams and real qualification with NHL players.

Once again, the NHL's tournament is intended to be a replacement for their participation in the Olympics.

 

[Gaps]

The NHL is in fact planning some sort of "Ryder Cup" event between North America vs Europe and it'll be just as ridiculous as team U-24 and team Europe.

Agreed. As a Finn I'd have absolutely no allegiance towards a team consisting of random Euro players and 2-3 Finns. Why in the hell should I care about a team like that? That idea's not interesting in the least, it's garbage, just like this version of the World Cup.

 

[holyprime]

Just have it between the Olympics and at the same dates, use the WHC average of the last 4 years as qualifier for the last 2 remaining spots (or all of them idc). That would be a perfect tournament for me, the IIHF gets the WHC upgraded and the Olympics guaranteed, the NHL gets the same for their World Cup from them and the european leagues involved, and everybody some best on best hockey every other year.

Win-Win-Win-Win

 

[JackSlater]

Here's a radical concept: Use eight national teams, the top teams from the IHF ranking systm. Divide them into two groups, each team plays each other team in its group. Top team in each group receives a bye to the semi finals, the second place team in one group plays the third place team in the other, and vice versa. Then hold semi finals. Then best of three finals. I know it's a stretch, as it uses actual national teams instead of joke gimmicks, but I think it just might work.

 

[XokkeyGuy]

Here's a radical concept: Use eight national teams, the top teams from the IHF ranking systm. Divide them into two groups, each team plays each other team in its group. Top team in each group receives a bye to the semi finals, the second place team in one group plays the third place team in the other, and vice versa. Then hold semi finals. Then best of three finals. I know it's a stretch, as it uses actual national teams instead of joke gimmicks, but I think it just might work.

Savage! Totally agree!

Edit: Here are 3 concepts I'd like:
1. Well, I liked how Canada Cup, Olympics and the World Championships used to be before the 90's. At least for World Cup of hockey - go back to the top 6 teams playing in a round robin. That is usually the most fair way to decide who is really the best team.

2. Or make it maybe 2 groups consisting of 3 teams in each, best 2 move on to the next round robin to play the 2 other teams.
Alternative to the second suggestion:
3. Or make it maybe 2 groups consisting of 3 teams in each, best 2 move on to semis and play both semis and the final in a best of 3..

What I'm trying to say is that having elimination games in ice hockey... in a tournament that is played so rarely, it is very unfair to go out just because you've had 1 bad game.

 

[cagney]

If you want to watch "Team North America" vs "Team Europe" you're not interested in international hockey. Just stick to the NHL and have a blast watching the all-star weekend.

 

[Zero Pucks Given]

Savage! Totally agree!

Edit: Here are 3 concepts I'd like:
1. Well, I liked how Canada Cup, Olympics and the World Championships used to be before the 90's. At least for World Cup of hockey - go back to the top 6 teams playing in a round robin. That is usually the most fair way to decide who is really the best team.

2. Or make it maybe 2 groups consisting of 3 teams in each, best 2 move on to the next round robin to play the 2 other teams.
Alternative to the second suggestion:
3. Or make it maybe 2 groups consisting of 3 teams in each, best 2 move on to semis and play both semis and the final in a best of 3..

What I'm trying to say is that having elimination games in ice hockey... in a tournament that is played so rarely, it is very unfair to go out just because you've had 1 bad game.

That reminds me of this one concept I'd been thinking of a while ago. Basically just do away with the semifinals and have the top 2 teams (out of 6 teams) play each other in a best-of-7; think of it as a hybrid of the Canada Cup and the Summit Series.

 

[Hockeythoughts101]

I have a bit of an out there concept that I think would make the tourney a lot more competitive and interesting.

Start by scrapping the Czech Republic team as they're the weakest team other than team Europe in my opinion. With them gone that allows the Czechs to be picked to the team Europe which would make them stronger. Now here is where it gets a little funky.

Replace that Czech team with a North American snubs team which could definitely compete at a high level.

On top of that allow team Europe to select snubbed players from all the European teams in the tournament.

If these changes were made I believe not only would it be more competitive but more entertaining for fans. It replaces the weaker Czech team with what would be a strong and motivated snub team which would raise the level of play.

Also the Snub North Americans and the snub Euro's playing on team Europe would be motivated to prove the doubters wrong and raise their level of play.

 

[Seanaconda]

Because the Ryder Cup is the only time when golf is a team sport.

Imagine a young Tiger Woods being made to play against Team USA as part of some U-24 golfers squad.

he was talking about the team north America vs team Europe idea of the original post not the world Cup setup we are doing this year.

 

[JackSlater]

I have a bit of an out there concept that I think would make the tourney a lot more competitive and interesting.

Start by scrapping the Czech Republic team as they're the weakest team other than team Europe in my opinion. With them gone that allows the Czechs to be picked to the team Europe which would make them stronger. Now here is where it gets a little funky.

Replace that Czech team with a North American snubs team which could definitely compete at a high level.

On top of that allow team Europe to select snubbed players from all the European teams in the tournament.

If these changes were made I believe not only would it be more competitive but more entertaining for fans. It replaces the weaker Czech team with what would be a strong and motivated snub team which would raise the level of play.

Also the Snub North Americans and the snub Euro's playing on team Europe would be motivated to prove the doubters wrong and raise their level of play.

Hi Gary. If you're all for more non-national teams in the tournament... why the pretext of even pretending it's an international tournament?

 

[Jopo]

Alleged extra value of trying keep International tournaments strictly for top hockey nations isn't good thing, as they are also good opportunities for weaker hockey nations below top 6-8 to show case their level and material, as well as changes to improve their game. One point of International tournaments is just that, and if only teams that have generally accepted changes for semis and medal games are kept in, that function of the tournament doesn't get fulfilled.

Weaker teams get pretty often wins, just because they are underestimated outright by looking to a paper, not the whole team. It's arrogant approach if thinking that only top 6 best-on-best tournaments have real meaning. For national teams outside top hockey countries, that meaning can be very high, what comes to further development of their corresponding hockey programs, level of play etc. Improving their level of hockey, that in turn improves overall level of The World's hockey,

That shouldn't ever forgotten in the concept of International tournaments. IMO.

 

[Jopo]

Why top level International tournaments formats (as they are now) of Olympics, WCs, and WCHs couldn't form sort of 'league' that time span would be 'rolling', last 4 years' performances counted in, and in way there are no "meaningless games" as every result of a match would've meaning in ranking within that time period. Similar idea that is utilized already in IIHF ranking system, but only tournament outcomes counted in to it via points given using simple formulas.

If that general idea could be extended to cover all tournaments and games national teams play against each others and there would be some kind Elo-ranks that determine value of win and lose between NT 1 and NT 2, based on their performances within last four years. Tournament wins, medal games and playoffs would be still valued higher when determining points to an updated ranking.

"Meaningless" games wouldn't exist as if, for example, Hungary vs Canada game would be still challenging for both teams (to be taken seriously) for it's impact to ranking.

All NTs wouldn't have equal amount of games against each others or even played games, but long time period inwhich relevant games are still counted would statistically lever these asymmetries little bit. Maybe there could be sort of system of decay in rankings, lowering a weight of a result more that older it is...

Different kind tournament concepts could be integrated to that general idea too, particularly if there would be set maximum played games for NT within 4 years that can be included to the counts, preferably 'last X-amount of games' regardless of the tournament.

My 2 cents.

 

[Hockeythoughts101]

Alleged extra value of trying keep International tournaments strictly for top hockey nations isn't good thing, as they are also good opportunities for weaker hockey nations below top 6-8 to show case their level and material, as well as changes to improve their game. One point of International tournaments is just that, and if only teams that have generally accepted changes for semis and medal games are kept in, that function of the tournament doesn't get fulfilled.

Weaker teams get pretty often wins, just because they are underestimated outright by looking to a paper, not the whole team. It's arrogant approach if thinking that only top 6 best-on-best tournaments have real meaning. For national teams outside top hockey countries, that meaning can be very high, what comes to further development of their corresponding hockey programs, level of play etc. Improving their level of hockey, that in turn improves overall level of The World's hockey,

That shouldn't ever forgotten in the concept of International tournaments. IMO.

The way I look at it is this.

The world championships held every year is already a much larger tournament than the world cup and if I'm not mistaken is normally held in Europe almost every year which is helping a lot in building the game over there.

Now with it looking more and more that NHL player won't be allowed to play in the olympics, that tournament becomes another World Championships type tournament with lots of countries represented by the younger players and creating more of a buzz for the game in those weaker countries and helping develop the younger players.

So with 2 international tournaments already showcasing various "lower skill" countries why not take a tournament that is already much smaller in size and try to make it a little more competitive. In a sense it encourages the players in the smaller countries to give it that extra push because it doesn't mean as much to be the top player from your country at an international event anymore.

I guess to sum it all up I think the changes I proposed take away slightly from the nationality side of things but add competitiveness and entertainment value in my opinion.

 

[roto]

To me it's completely fine that NHL has it's own international tournament where NHL can invite the teams that it wants there. World Cup is a NA centric event anyway, so there's no need to use it to spread ice hockey to new countries etc. World Championships and Olympics are more global events and it's fine for me.

World Cup should have only top-6 teams (whatever way is used to determine those), which would play in one group all against each other. Then top two teams could play in the final(s), or if it's too extreme for North American taste, there could be semis among top-4.