Bolded part is probably true, but in order to get into Team Europe the player would have to be a pretty good player and play in the NHL. Therefore he would already be fairly well known among anyone that could possibly be interested in that player being selected to Team Europe and thus helped out as much in getting people interested in hockey as possible. I have a hard time believing that anyone in for example France who doesn't already follow Bellemare in the NHL would get excited about hockey because he was selected to Team Europe. Same goes for Slovenia and Kopitar.
Better format for next World Cup
- Thread starter Mythras
- Start date
-
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
Bolded part is probably true, but in order to get into Team Europe the player would have to be a pretty good player and play in the NHL. Therefore he would already be fairly well known among anyone that could possibly be interested in that player being selected to Team Europe and thus helped out as much in getting people interested in hockey as possible. I have a hard time believing that anyone in for example France who doesn't already follow Bellemare in the NHL would get excited about hockey because he was selected to Team Europe. Same goes for Slovenia and Kopitar.
Rangediddy
The puck was in
- Oct 28, 2011
- 3,710
- 809
Hockey fans would get excited by it. And I'm not exactly sure this World Cup cause many American to care much anyways?
Right now the issue is that there's no drama. No uncertainty. Whether or not Team Europe actually wins this tournament, it's always just been Canada's to lose. There's no need to hold a tournament to decide who's best when it's already very established who's best.
I'm not saying that every future event should be Canada vs. The World because there will be a point where Canada is just not as dominant as it currently is. But the excitement will come from the spectacle of it all. The most dominant national team in the world since 2010 Olympics vs. a laboratory created mutant team designed to beat them!
This World Cup has had terrible ratings because it's been on too long, people have stopped caring and it's been long assumed that Canada was going to win. I think it's VERY possible that over a best of 7 series, you could get better ratings globally if the series actually is close.
Who wouldn't tune in to watch team Canada (including Seguin, Keith & Benn) vs:
Ovechkin - Malkin - Kane
Panarin - Kopitar - Tarasenko
Gaudreau - Backstrom - Forsberg
Pacioretty - Pavelski - Kucherov
Karlsson - Josi
Ekman-Larsson - Klingberg
Hedman - Shattenkirk
Schneider
Quick
Lundqvist
If you spin the tournament as trying to unseat Canada from it's "throne", then ya, I think it'll get decent interest from around the world.
Rangediddy
The puck was in
- Oct 28, 2011
- 3,710
- 809
Best of 7 series would solve that though. It's not likely Canada's going to have 4 bad games while the opposition has 4 good ones. If Canada loses 4 games, it's because the other team actually is better.
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,790
- 15,438
A best of seven against some other country? Yes, Canada would obviously win. Against the world, who knows.
You get hockey fans. The same ones that watched this. The way you get more interest is actually having teams for people to root for. Nobody is proud of team Europe because it represents nothing. Hence why nobody watches
Rangediddy
The puck was in
- Oct 28, 2011
- 3,710
- 809
That's the point. People would tune in to watch a series that could see a team take down Canada. Even better when that team doesn't have any scrubs on it at all either.
I completely understand that view. But I think that you could get global viewership outside of Canada rooting for Team World not to see them win, but to see Canada lose.
I don't give two ****s about MMA or boxing, but when I see matches like Pacquiao-Mayweather, I do get interested just to witness the hype and spectacle and when there's no clear favourite, it's just that much more entertaining not knowing who's going to come out on top.
Canada vs. The World is only my idea to combat the increased frequency of the usual Best on Best tournaments like the WC & Olympics. That's what get's people to stop caring. I'm a huge hockey fan and I haven't cared much about the WC other than to see how team NA would look. Won't even watch the game tonight I don't think.
best-of-seven series between Canada and World would be awesome. I think that could be the best hockey ever. I think they want to have NA vs Europe, which is very similar, but with having just Canada out there agianst the rest, I think you'd have two things for certain - 1) canadian players would battle for the country and simply for Canada, 2) the other players would have the motivation to take Canada down? Best of seven series would be incredible. NA vs Europe, hopefullly too.
All-Star
Registered User
Maybe they could try splitting Team Canada in two next time and holding a draft between the two teams? The end-result would maybe make Canada more competitive with the rest of the teams. Worse case scenario, you end up with a Canada vs Canada final, so I win either way.
snipes
How cold? I’m ice cold.
- Dec 28, 2015
- 56,205
- 65,502
Nope. We need to be humble and learn. We cannot view Europe as a single continent with one identity. Europeans value their national heritage and take pride in representing their individual countries.
Understanding European history, this shouldn't be a surprise. Europeans are highly nationalistic, this really shouldn't be shocking. They have a deeper ancestral connection to their countries that we must respect.
No more combining countries. Nation v nation is the only way forward.
Canadians need to ask themselves. If MLB and NBA decides to combined USA and Canada to a North America team.... Would you get up to cheer for them?
snipes
How cold? I’m ice cold.
- Dec 28, 2015
- 56,205
- 65,502
That's one good thing about our national character, we are not afraid to self-criticize.
This finale is showing that combining nations does not work. Learn from it going forward, obviously the NHL are aware of what is going on. This will be the end of gimmick teams.
I'm glad I enjoyed Team NA, they were fun. We'll never see them again, what a show they gave us.
Sentinel
Registered User
Actually it works great. Better than the other six teams in the tournament for sure.
Team Europe is my second favorite team in this tourney, and I'm glad they surpassed each and every expectation.
Bomber0104
Registered User
The solution is to mix all players and coaches of all nationalities together and then divide them into 10 teams.
No preparation, just literally sticks in the middle type shiz and let them work it out right from day 1 of the tournament to the final.
No preparation, just literally sticks in the middle type shiz and let them work it out right from day 1 of the tournament to the final.
Lobstertainment
Oh no, my brains.
Best on Best tournaments should not have restrictions on teams. Canada shouldn't need to be divided, Canada and USA should be allowed to take young players(although NA was an exciting team to watch I hate their inclusion in a so called "best on best tournament"). Team Europe I get as a best of the rest is better competition than another country with maybe 1 superstar, a handful of regular NHL'ers and filler from the rest of the professional leagues, that said next time I hope we're back to just the top 8 ranked countries in the world.
How to boost interest in Europe? Only national teams, some games in Europe, games in better times and in free channels and tournament organized regularly every two or four years. Also the success of european teams.
This man gets it
I don't care if Canada at this time is more dominant than others. Maybe they deserve it, for now. I don't think it's going to last forever. E.g. 10 years ago and 1990's when the playing field was much more even. Get rid of the gimmick teams. National teams are the only way forwards. It is also the only way to grow the game. Having gimmick teams will have the exact opposite effect, if you ask me...
It should be named Canada Cup now, as all games are in Canada in Canadian time zone. Imagine if Canada had lost to Russia.
We would have had a Russia-Europe final, played in Toronto at the middle of the night.
If it is to be a real world cup, then countries/cities compete for hosting it, and 2020 could be London/Wembley, 2024 Stockholm/Globen, 2028 Montreal etc.
BruinLVGA
Just got me a Beretta 92XI Squalo!
Could we please sticky this, so that every time someone from North America totally misses what international hockey means to folks in Europe, there's a simple explanation & reminder?
Best post I have seen in here, by far.
Well taking referees that can actually count up to 7 might be good start. What an embarassement to the nation of Canada.
Kasper92
Registered User
My only criticism is what Vanek also commented, the tournament was too long. It started with full excitement then petered out. I'd say it should end by the start of PS.
Rangediddy
The puck was in
- Oct 28, 2011
- 3,710
- 809
I get that, but don't forget that the Olympics will still have hockey and European countries will still go and will likely even have a better shot at competing without NHL players participating. Europeans will still have national teams to cheer for and will see teams like Switzerland, Germany, Latvia have more success when they're not battling against teams of 90% NHL players.
As for a best on best tournament, if the NHL is set on holding one ever X number of years, you cannot just repeat the same 8 team tournament format where only 2 maybe 3 teams can compete.
If the NHL wants to continue to hold this "World Cup" tournament, I don't see a Canada vs The World as setting back European Nationalism. Plus it's not treating Europe as one continent because the USA would be included.
Roland of Gilead
The Gunslinger
As I said in another thread, players are not at their best at this time of the year and there are lots and lots of mistakes because of that. These are the first games for all the players so if World Cup continues to be before NHL season starts, it would be always far away from olympics. Really far away. World cup should be every 4 years, yes, always two years after Olympics and in late january/late february.
This canadian winning streak is not going to last forever. USA, Czech republic and Sweden have won best on best tournaments and Finland won both u20 and u18 world championships this year. There are six competitive teams maybe more. Slovakia was good in the olympics, Switzerland could make an upset Belarus has done it. Future for Germany looks bright and then there are the danes and norwegians. Even the old 12 team world championship format could be competitive or the juniors ten team. Before this winning streak there were many years canadians did not win anything.
86Habs
Registered User
- May 4, 2009
- 2,588
- 420
Some random observations:
- I'm decidedly not a fan of the two gimmick teams, but the air was really let out of the tournament when NA U24 failed to qualify for the semi's. The excitement level started fairly high with the Canada/US exhibition games, peaked at NA U24/Sweden, then fell dramatically. The lack of "buzz" and excitement around the tournament during the playoff round was palpable, around the workplace, bars/restaurants, in the media...anecdotally speaking focus and attention for sports fan turned pretty rapidly to the Blue Jays' wild card run. This lack of buzz, and the empty seats at the ACC and poor turnout for fan events in Toronto became part of the story of this tournament.
- This problem was difficult to foresee, but could have been avoided if they had given a bye to the top team from each group and had the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams cross-over in a QF. The final games for some teams was rendered meaningless as they had no hope of qualifying and only one game mattered on the last of the round robin. You would want better momentum heading into the playoff round.
- The quality of play from the limited amount of action I saw was good, maybe not up to my personal expectations from previous Canada/World Cups and post-Nagano Olympics but certainly not bad. Canada seemed sloppy and somewhat complacent in the final, which is unfortunate.
- Ralph Krueger deserves an NHL coaching gig. Come to think of it, Columbus may be requesting resumes in a few months....
- If the NHL truly wants to host a best-on-best tournament in lieu of the Olympics, the gimmick teams need to go. Drop in the #7 and #8 ranked teams per the IIHF rankings (we all know who they are), and you're done. Allow the teams to name whoever the h*** they want to their rosters - KHLers, Russian wife beaters, 19-year old phenoms...don't limit it to NHLers. Don't put out the possibility of someone playing against their own country, it's not credible. I'd be all for a wider tournament field - 10, 12 teams - but acknowledge it would be tricky to qualify the bottom teams into the tournament unless they went with the straight IIHF rankings. The costs probably outweigh the benefits on that one.
- If the NHL is leery of a bunch of unknown Slovaks and Swiss dirtying up their fine tournament, drop them and go with a 6-team tournament with a round robin, plus semi-finals and finals.
- If the NHL really, really wants the eight teams involved to showcase NHL talent but also sees Switzerland and Slovakia as cannon fodder, then: 1) keep Team Europe (begrudgingly); and 2) keep Team NA U24, but give Team Canada and Team USA right of first refusal on any under-24 players. This is critical in my view. I personally wouldn't attach as much meaning to it as as the previous Canada/World Cups and post-Nagano Olympics, but it would be something I could enjoy and get into. I prefer my other two options above though. Call me a traditionalist.
- I've always been a fan of the best of three finals, but it didn't seem to work this time around. Obviously Canada was the heavy favourite and there was little doubt about the outcome if we're all honest about it, but that's no reason to scrap it. It's worked very well in the past, particularly in 1996. I'd say keep it.
- The exhibition game schedule could be reduced by one game to accommodate the additional QF games under my scenario.
- Hold the tournament in two relatively proximate cities - Calgary & Edmonton, Quebec & Montreal, Montreal & Ottawa, Toronto & Hamilton....Babcock was right when he said that all games should have been played at night, as the non-Canadian/US/NA U24 games happening during the day seemed like a bit of an afterthought.
Overall, I'm hoping the NHL learns from their mistakes this time around and fixes things up in time for 2020. The gimmick teams courted a lot of unnecessary controversy when they were announced, which was a tough way to kick things off for a tournament reboot. The safer play would have been to go with the simpler, traditional format that has worked well in the past.
- I'm decidedly not a fan of the two gimmick teams, but the air was really let out of the tournament when NA U24 failed to qualify for the semi's. The excitement level started fairly high with the Canada/US exhibition games, peaked at NA U24/Sweden, then fell dramatically. The lack of "buzz" and excitement around the tournament during the playoff round was palpable, around the workplace, bars/restaurants, in the media...anecdotally speaking focus and attention for sports fan turned pretty rapidly to the Blue Jays' wild card run. This lack of buzz, and the empty seats at the ACC and poor turnout for fan events in Toronto became part of the story of this tournament.
- This problem was difficult to foresee, but could have been avoided if they had given a bye to the top team from each group and had the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams cross-over in a QF. The final games for some teams was rendered meaningless as they had no hope of qualifying and only one game mattered on the last of the round robin. You would want better momentum heading into the playoff round.
- The quality of play from the limited amount of action I saw was good, maybe not up to my personal expectations from previous Canada/World Cups and post-Nagano Olympics but certainly not bad. Canada seemed sloppy and somewhat complacent in the final, which is unfortunate.
- Ralph Krueger deserves an NHL coaching gig. Come to think of it, Columbus may be requesting resumes in a few months....
- If the NHL truly wants to host a best-on-best tournament in lieu of the Olympics, the gimmick teams need to go. Drop in the #7 and #8 ranked teams per the IIHF rankings (we all know who they are), and you're done. Allow the teams to name whoever the h*** they want to their rosters - KHLers, Russian wife beaters, 19-year old phenoms...don't limit it to NHLers. Don't put out the possibility of someone playing against their own country, it's not credible. I'd be all for a wider tournament field - 10, 12 teams - but acknowledge it would be tricky to qualify the bottom teams into the tournament unless they went with the straight IIHF rankings. The costs probably outweigh the benefits on that one.
- If the NHL is leery of a bunch of unknown Slovaks and Swiss dirtying up their fine tournament, drop them and go with a 6-team tournament with a round robin, plus semi-finals and finals.
- If the NHL really, really wants the eight teams involved to showcase NHL talent but also sees Switzerland and Slovakia as cannon fodder, then: 1) keep Team Europe (begrudgingly); and 2) keep Team NA U24, but give Team Canada and Team USA right of first refusal on any under-24 players. This is critical in my view. I personally wouldn't attach as much meaning to it as as the previous Canada/World Cups and post-Nagano Olympics, but it would be something I could enjoy and get into. I prefer my other two options above though. Call me a traditionalist.
- I've always been a fan of the best of three finals, but it didn't seem to work this time around. Obviously Canada was the heavy favourite and there was little doubt about the outcome if we're all honest about it, but that's no reason to scrap it. It's worked very well in the past, particularly in 1996. I'd say keep it.
- The exhibition game schedule could be reduced by one game to accommodate the additional QF games under my scenario.
- Hold the tournament in two relatively proximate cities - Calgary & Edmonton, Quebec & Montreal, Montreal & Ottawa, Toronto & Hamilton....Babcock was right when he said that all games should have been played at night, as the non-Canadian/US/NA U24 games happening during the day seemed like a bit of an afterthought.
Overall, I'm hoping the NHL learns from their mistakes this time around and fixes things up in time for 2020. The gimmick teams courted a lot of unnecessary controversy when they were announced, which was a tough way to kick things off for a tournament reboot. The safer play would have been to go with the simpler, traditional format that has worked well in the past.
