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.

 

[vorky]

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.

Nice try, but without result. As said, ET did not fit the criteria mentioned above.

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.

1. It is not important if the game-day is on Monday or Sunday. The problem is the overal schedule. As said, the CHL guys have done nothing to fix it since 2014 (even earlier).

2. Euroleague basket attendance. Yes, the CHL should follow such examples, like moving to bigger arenas.

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.

From time to time you mean all CHL regular season? Really?

Fine, EuroLeague Basketball clubs play at more venues, but it is a different story. They play at bigger arena as much games as possible (other events), but in CHL you see clubs who do not even try to play at bigger arena. That is a degradation of the competition.

 

[Albatros]

Including Latvia would not have had and will not have any meaningful impact on European club hockey. At this year's Continental Cup their team was eliminated already in the second round by Romania's Corona Brașov.

The current CHL format is very similar to the one also adopted by the UEFA Champions League which has generally been well-received. Whether it's the right one for hockey or not one can debate, but it would be good to commit to something for a number of years and not try something new every other year.

When Eisbären destroys SønderjyskE 8:0 in front of near-capacity crowd you think the arena is the problem? Move it to Uber Arena in front of the same crowd and the experience only becomes worse, not better. You can't realistically have parity between the DEL and the Metal Ligaen, but perhaps the lower-ranked teams should play the highest-ranked at home. That's the one arena change I'd make to improve the competition.

 

[vorky]

Including Latvia would not have had and will not have any meaningful impact on European club hockey. At this year's Continental Cup their team was eliminated already in the second round by Romania's Corona Brașov.

You are a mastermind in your field. Nobody cares about Latvia. I wont repeat myself, so read the post above.

The current CHL format is very similar to the one also adopted by the UEFA Champions League which has generally been well-received. Whether it's the right one for hockey or not one can debate, but it would be good to commit to something for a number of years and not try something new every other year.

I have never talked about CHL format, I do not care. The problem is different and CHL management doing nothing to fix it. If they do not fix it, the CHL will suffer. No other option.

When Eisbären destroys SønderjyskE 8:0 in front of near-capacity crowd you think the arena is the problem? Move it to Uber Arena in front of the same crowd and the experience only becomes worse, not better. You can't realistically have parity between the DEL and the Metal Ligaen, but perhaps the lower-ranked teams should play the highest-ranked at home. That's the one arena change I'd make to improve the competition.

You did not reply my question.

 

[Namejs]

To reply the bold part, I will use the words of the Czech hockey journalist who broke the story/interview with Sparta coach (here): "Even before I heart off-record from clubs participating at CHL statements like CHL is not attractive to fans, CHL does not work. As soon as I started recording the players, coaches, executives switched their mind, presenting one-sided opinion. They talked how interesting & positive the project is for them. Words about lacking of CHL authority & interest from fans have immediately disappeared somewhere." Ask yourself why THIS has happened to this journalist.

I could discuss the CHL history, its backround ... but I think you would not like it. Can I?

First and foremost, the CHL 2014 did not begin as ambition project with resources and power. It started as reaction to KHL. Euros needed to do something, even something not working. Just to stop KHL. The guys behind the CHL were not prepared for the project, they did not have TOP management behind them, they did not have money, they did not have a deep research. Nothing. They just hoped it will work somehow sometimes. As we can see after a decade it has never worked. They even did not realise that the IIHF international schedule will cause them problems! On this forum we have discsussed about it. They have all power within IIHF & doing nothing to change it! I know, not easy, but they do not even try. You can not sit on two chairs at the same time.

OK, I could accept all these, they need to start somehow, they need time. BUT. Their biggest mistake is to prefer ideology over business/sport. They do not try to create some sport league within hockey Europe, they try to promote their ideology. Just do your research on some personalities behind the project. They would like to bring a UEFA CL kind of competition to hockey, but they do not want a big business, big money to be invovled. Because, such money in sports is a bad thing. Here I can use a phrase from one hockey guy saying: "European hockey clubs/leagues are run by former hockey players while NHL clubs & NHL are run by business people."

You will again bring me some pictures with great fans. OK. Still I will say it again. You can not play a CHL game at secondary arena. That is not only about a capacity. It is about the fans. How can you bring the fans to arena if your arena is not good enough? Todays hockey is not only about a game, it is about game-day program inside & outside arena. Older & smaller arenas are not good enough for that. There is a reason why UEFA has some minimal standards on stadiums. I do remember, just a few yrs back, how some team was forced to play its home UEFA CL Q game outside its city, because stadium was not good enough!

I could go on & on with arguments, but I will stop here.

Like it or not, Europe´s future is not bright. The Europeans´ problem is degradation of the leadership is every segment of daily life, including sport executives. Remains to be seen what it will bring to CHL.

You are extremely single minded and completely oblivious about how the world works.

Your only reference points are soccer and russia.

Your judgments are entirely normative and based on wishful thinking. I.e., 'things are bad because they are better in soccer', 'we should make things better by making things better'.

And then you go on to completely arbitrarily define success based on the single only criterion that russia has thrown their state hydrocarbon money at, namely, large arenas, which are economically unprofitable and therefore never going to be built in Europe.

You don't build large arenas to draw more people in, you build large arenas when the demand is already so high building larger arenas would maximize your profits. This is economics 101.

In short, you are a russian zergling incapable of independent thought. Your entire reasoning consists of logically inconsistent, incoherent mental gymnastics with the sole purpose of boosting your own ego. It has nothing to do with CHL and it has nothing to do with hockey or even sports in general.

Sports in Europe and North America are based on market forces. Ice hockey in Europe is only a major regional sport. The total population size in these European countries/regions is about 50-60 million.

Having the expectations of a soccer-like Champions League following in ice hockey is competely unrealistic and economically unfeasible. If you have a basic understanding of economics or sports -- this should be very straightforward and easy to understand.

The issue is that russia has a cargo cult-like culture. They desperately want to be like the West except they have no clue how wealth is being generated or how actual economies are run. The only difference between them and the John From worshippers in Vanuatu is that the islanders don't have billions in petrodollars. If they would, they would probably build a kilometer-tall building in the shape of a Cessna airplane. This is what russia is doing, and not just in hockey.

They actually derive nationalist pride from that. Look at big building, it very shiny!

What is amusing is that vorky probably has no idea how ridiculous he sounds to pretty much anyone reading his drivel.

 

[vorky]

@Namejs

Sorry man, we talk the CHL here. You wrote your comment into wrong thread & forum.

 

[Jumptheshark]

I enjoy going to the games when I can. I always went when the Cardiff Devils were in it and I went to about 10 games last season