Champions Hockey League

[Albatros]

The CHL continues the tradition of the IIHF European Cup that was modeled after the UEFA European Cup in soccer, which eventually became the UEFA Champions League and in turn served as a model for the CHL. Only for a couple of seasons since 1965 has there not been such a European competition in some form, the KHL was established in 2008 and has nothing to do with it.

It's true that there's not a lot of money in the competition, but that's the nature of hockey in Europe in general and not about to change anytime soon. There's absolutely no line of serious sponsors with deep pockets behind the door that the IIHF is somehow keeping out. Criticism of the current format is fine, but to be constructive it should come with realistic new ideas.

When it comes to marketing games that's also on the clubs, even primarily on the clubs, they're the ones that must make the experience attractive for their fans. For ordinary regular season games it's enough to turn on the lights and there will always be X number of fans in the building. With the CHL like any less established competition you start with 0 and have to work your way up from there. I can't see the problem with having some games at venues like Frölundaborg or the Wellblechpalast either. If it's popular among the fans then go for it. Frölundaborg just hosted the WJCs as well.

Whether the future is bright or not remains to be seen, but it's not going to be any more bright without the CHL.

 

[vorky]

The CHL continues the tradition of the IIHF European Cup that was modeled after the UEFA European Cup in soccer, which eventually became the UEFA Champions League and in turn served as a model for the CHL. Only for a couple of seasons since 1965 has there not been such a European competition in some form, the KHL was established in 2008 and has nothing to do with it.

Of course, there were such competitions before. The latest version was the Super Six or CHL 2008. If coming back to 2010s, the main driving force for CHL 2014 establishment was the KHL. Swedes, Finns etc were in a hurry to do something, and they did. Fine, their ideological concept was in IIHF European Cup, but their reason for CHL 2014 establishment was different.

It's true that there's not a lot of money in the competition, but that's the nature of hockey in Europe in general and not about to change anytime soon. There's absolutely no line of serious sponsors with deep pockets behind the door that the IIHF is somehow keeping out. Criticism of the current format is fine, but to be constructive it should come with realistic new ideas.

Nice phrases. Have you ever think about something like "change our minds about the nature of hockey in Europe"? By you I do not mean you, but hockey executives.

Constructive format - Super Six worked as well as CHL 2008. Do you know why? There were money & capacibilies of people behind the project. There is another story with external factors doing everything to stop them.

What to do?
1. get rid of ideology

There would be other steps to do, but less realistic. Fans across Europe would welcome the Super Six format. If hockey executives want a season long tournament, they NEED to change the IIHF int schedule. Realistic? Ask them, not me. Without this change you will never have a tournament you dream of. When/If this is done, we can talk other steps. First of all, we need to know what option you chose (week-long tournament VS season-long tournament)

When it comes to marketing games that's also on the clubs, even primarily on the clubs, they're the ones that must make the experience attractive for their fans. For ordinary regular season games it's enough to turn on the lights and there will always be X number of fans in the building. With the CHL like any less established competition you start with 0 and have to work your way up from there. I can't see the problem with having some games at venues like Frölundaborg or the Wellblechpalast either. If it's popular among the fans then go for it. Frölundaborg just hosted the WJCs as well.

Whether the future is bright or not remains to be seen, but it's not going to be any more bright without the CHL.

Marketing is on clubs - true & false. The league, in this case the CHL, needs to be a driving force. You can not rely on clubs what they do or not do.

I am not sure I get your words "for ordinary regular season games it's enough to turn on the lights." If you mean there is no need for off-ice program, I has to disagree. Even in SHL/Liiga etc regular season game.

How do you mean "competition you start with 0"? At the start of your post you claimed about history since 1965.

Wellblechpalast/Frölundaborg - disagree if you have UBER Arena/Scandinavium. Hosting the WJC on Frölundaborg is irrelevant, because it was just a second venue. There is a reason why IIHF hosted the WJC semifinals/final on Scandinavium instead of Frölundaborg ...

 

[Albatros]

The latest version was the European Trophy that was played until 2013 and grew out of the Nordic Trophy. It included 32 teams from 7 countries as of 2013, and the CHL then expanded that to all of Europe under the IIHF.

I don't think there's any ideological reason to rely on Škoda Auto and Engelbert Strauss as sponsors, those are merely the best partners you find on the market. Given their long-term commitment I would say that the IIHF has done reasonably well in this regard. There's not a ton of money, but it's sustainable. The CHL has been played for 10 seasons now, the so-called "super six" ECC lasted for four years and had worse attendances despite consisting of only 6 teams.

The biggest problem with the calendar is that casual fans have no clear idea about when they can expect CHL games to take place other than maybe pre-season (domestic), so developing a clear identity would be good, but that only comes with time.

Scandinavium is a rather lousy venue for hockey and Uber Arena a soulless corporate palace, neither is very popular among the fans and really the only reasons to play in them are capacity and corporate hospitality. So when you don't need the extra capacity then why would you?

 

[vorky]

The latest version was the European Trophy that was played until 2013 and grew out of the Nordic Trophy. It included 32 teams from 7 countries as of 2013, and the CHL then expanded that to all of Europe under the IIHF.

No it was not. By latest version I mean a competition included all relevant hockey nations in Europe & IIHF. European Trophy did not fit this criteria.

I don't think there's any ideological reason to rely on Škoda Auto and Engelbert Strauss as sponsors, those are merely the best partners you find on the market. Given their long-term commitment I would say that the IIHF has done reasonably well in this regard. There's not a ton of money, but it's sustainable. The CHL has been played for 10 seasons now, the so-called "super six" ECC lasted for four years and had worse attendances despite consisting of only 6 teams.

You are a master in nicely worded phrases.

The biggest problem with the calendar is that casual fans have no clear idea about when they can expect CHL games to take place other than maybe pre-season (domestic), so developing a clear identity would be good, but that only comes with time.

Agree. Who is responsible for that "no clear idea"? Do these responsible guys try to fix the problem? I know that it is not easy. But the CHL guys did the easiest thing - just put extra games into calendar for slots, which are not beneficial for CHL to grow. These guys had to know (and they knew) that the IIHF schedule is full. Despite this problem they chose to create what they created. I do not blame them for that. On the other hand I see no desire, no steps, nothing from these guys to fix that problem. It has been a ten years now, plus other years if counting ET. That is a problem.

Scandinavium is a rather lousy venue for hockey and Uber Arena a soulless corporate palace, neither is very popular among the fans and really the only reasons to play in them are capacity and corporate hospitality. So when you don't need the extra capacity then why would you?

To get it, you say that Frölundaborg / Wellblechpalast are on the same level as Scandinavium / Uber Arena in all terms except of capacity?

 

[Albatros]

The European Trophy included the seven best European countries in the IIHF ranking as it is today, Latvia being the first one missing but they also never had a team in the CHL despite the open qualification.

The UEFA Champions League has made matchdays on Tuesdays and Wednesdays a part of their brand, but in hockey that's harder to replicate as domestic competitions aren't restricted mostly to weekends. Maybe there's something to learn from EuroLeague basketball which is now in its 25th season, although it's not like they always have high attendances either. But undeniably they have been more successful and are able to play a full season without neglecting domestic competitions. Never had a Latvian club either though, despite Latvia being the 5th ranked men's team in Europe, thus even higher than in hockey.

But sure, a clearer common vision would be helpful. All the better if even the Czechs find a liking for it.

What I say is that Frölundaborg & Wellblechpalast are more popular among the fans than Scandinavium & Uber Arena. So using those arenas from time to time is more good than bad for fan interest. EuroLeague basketball by the way features various arenas much more often.