SanDogBrewin
Righteous bucks!
Countries that participate in the WHC as if it were the best and win the most Gold Medals in that tournament
Countries that participate in the WHC as if it were the best and win the most Gold Medals in that tournament
Countries that participate in the WHC as if it were the best and win the most Gold Medals in that tournament
Yikes, SDB. I have read this post 3 or 4 times and I still have no idea what it says/means, buddy.
Please clarify.
Last edited by a moderator:
Normally, your arguments are very strong, but I think he has got you here. Instead of saying that "high passion for hockey exists elsewhere," it would be much more technically accurate to say that "nobody in the World gives a s--- about hockey except Canada." Even in Russia, television outlets get complaints when they broadcast hockey games at times that conflict with football. In every other country except perhaps Finland, it is sad but true that hockey is considered a 4th or 5th rate sport that only niche fans like ourselves truly love. Hockey is a very expensive sport, so a country must be affluent to be competitive, and it is an obvious advantage to have the availability of natural ice to learn to play the game. These conditions rule out about 99% of the World from being competitive in hockey. It makes no sense to compare hockey with football, which 100% of the World's population plays in huge numbers.
I really don't care why or how we are number 1, so spin it anyway you want. We're the best at the world's greatest sport. That is all that matters to me.
First of all, if you look at the regions of the United States that have organized hockey at a sufficient level to produce international-class players, you are looking at a population that is about the same size of Canada's, if not a bit smaller. But even in those hockey playing regions (Minnesota, Michigan, Massachusetts), hockey is a 4th or 5th rate sport that attracts mainly those athletes who got weeded out in football, baseball, basketball, etc. Hockey has never really taken hold in the United States as a mainline sport, and if anything, it seems to be almost be losing ground since the 1990's. They are still good enough to win an occasional tournament, if they put together the right group, but they are certainly not ahead of tiny countries like Sweden and Finland in any way.
If you want to look at United States domination of a sport, look at Basketball. Basketball is a sport of much deeper and wider dimensions than hockey worldwide, but the domination by the United States is beyond measure. In a nation of 320 million people, every school has a gymnasium and a basketball team, and that huge pyramid eventually culminates in the NBA, which, IMO, is the greatest sports league in the World in terms of per capita talent. So when the USA plays someone in the Olympics, the question is, will they have mercy, or will they beat the other team mercilessly, like 130-48. There is no comparable domination by Canada in hockey, as in Norway or Latvia in Sochi.
Posters from other countries just want to take away credit from Canada because they're #1, if it was the other way around I'm sure they wouldn't say anything about Hockey not being popular.
Canada deserves the #1 title even more that way if it's a more popular sport than in a country.
Canada deserves the #1 title even more that way if it's a more popular sport than in a country.
Doesn't matter, it doesn't make it any less true, and the comments/discussion about it has been valid in this thread.
I have ranked Canada #1 as well, so we don't disagree on that. I think the argument advanced by the gentleman from Sweden was that its actually likely that Canada will stay #1, given the disparity in hockey resources that fall in your favor. I think its quite possible that Canada will get knocked off in the next Olympics, if for no other reason than the natural tendency to become mentally complacent when you have won the same prize two times in a row. You lose the mental concept of a potentially different outcome, and that is what is most dangerous for a repeat candidate. Certainly, there is no indication of an avalanche of great new Canadian players appearing on the scene between now and then over and above the players who will no doubt make their 3rd straight appearance. Time will tell.
It shows how ******** alot of the posters are and feel that discrediting hockey should make Canada in hockey less worthful. That's what it shows.
Hockey isn't the biggest sport but countries like Russia, Sweden, Finland, Slovakia, Czechs have a big interest in hockey and only 2 countries can compete for gold.
If you can point out anything that's not true in the above posts you are more than welcome to.
If countries like Russia and USA went all out with hockey as their main sport, I'm sure they'd at the very least be able to give Canada a real run for their money. The more players heavily involved with good development, the higher chance of developing more good players. Do you not agree?
Take Finland then, a country that loves hockey, and is really good at it. They are able to develop some very good players, and if their number of registered hockey players were higher, they'd likely have even more really good players.
It is true that you can do a lot with little, and being the best does not guarantee you'll win every tournament. But one would be crazy to not say Canada is, and will very very very likely be the favourites going into all best-on-best hockey tournaments for a long while.
I personally don't care at all if you feel we are discrediting Canada or whatever. Don't really have much energy to deal with ********. If you can claim what I wrote is wrong and can come with real arguments, feel free.
Besides, if you enjoy the game, why does it matter how anyone else feel about it? When Sweden was guaranteed to play in every handball final a few years ago Sweden still loved it, even though the competition is probably even less than the one in hockey.
Last edited:
It's true but this topic would never come up from you if Sweden was the best hockey country in the world but since Canada you'll use this as a way to discredit Canada.
I don't disagree that having hockey as it's number one sport gives Canada a clear advantage, I'd be foolish to think otherwise. But i just don't think it's as big an advantage as people make it out to be.
It's a niche sport in the U.S overall but it is not a niche sport to those athletes and families that take it up, it is big to them. The U.S has about as many people playing hockey as Canada does now, it is not a lack of numbers that keeps them from being number one.The athletes they have at the NHL level are great athletes, they could have been playing a number of sports at a top level, they just chose to play hockey because they loved it, there is no reason at all a guy like ryan kesler or seth jones or just about any guy from there that is in the nhl had to play hockey, they just liked it. Hell, jones is the son of an ex NBA player, it's not like he got kicked off the high school football team because he had no ability to play any sport other then hockey, why would anyone think that? It is really a lowball argument to have this attitude about the athletes from the U.S that play hockey.
The U.S population is over 300 million, they only need a fraction of it's top athletes playing a particular sport to be very good at it, and this is what happens in hockey, they have a fraction of their top athletes playing hockey. Would they be even better at hockey if all their top athletes played it? of course, but that is not to say that they do not have top athletes playing it now because they do. Not every good athlete wants to play other sports then hockey, not even in the U.S where American football,basketball and baseball are king.
Russia? hey, while it may not be the number one sport let's face facts, it is a BIG sport in Russia, and when you have the population Russia does you can be sure they are getting plenty of their best athletes playing it, just as much if not more then a country like Canada due simply to their size and the fact that it IS POPULAR in Russia. Hockey is not restricted to the back pages of the sports section in Russia, we only had to look at the importance of winning gold in Sochi to know that. but regardless of that, everyone already knows that hockey is big in Russia anyway, it's no secret. Russia is at no disadvantage when it comes to great athletes playing hockey, they get loads.
Ditto Sweden, Finland,Czech Republic,Slovakia. Not big populations and not the number one sport aside from Finland but hockey is very big at about the number 2 sport and they have a long standing and well developed infrastructure system for it.
Hockey is not so simple a sport to be dominant in IMO, numbers can't always do it for you.
The U.S is dominant much more in basketball then Canada in hockey, no argument there.But the main reason for that is something that I won't even get into discussing around here for fear of the can of worms it would open up and that could lead to some very troubling discussions. Take away the advantage they have in this sport that is not population and the U.S comes down to earth very quickly in basketball.
I do agree with you that hockey is a niche sport in the world for guys like us due to it being a cold weather sport.
I cannot disagree completely and never did disagree completely with his original argument that passion for hockey and numbers will make Canada the favourite going into tournaments, I just think it does not play as big a part as he thinks it does and does not ALWAYS garuntee Canada will be number one.
To me, the nature of the sport makes it far from simple to dominate at this time in the games development.
Last edited by a moderator:
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,807
- 15,471
There is a great chance that Canada won't win the next Olympics (assuming NHL participation) but it's mainly due to the nature of hockey, and particularly a single elimination tournament. It's pretty much impossible for Canada to not be the top hockey country in four years. If some other country goes through a great development period and Canada hits a rough patch, I could see it as a possibility maybe ten years down the road. The gap is too large right now.
Put together a 2018 roster for Canada. Then do it for the other top countries and let me know if you still think the gap isn't that large. The gap between Canada and the other countries will be much larger than in 2014.
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,807
- 15,471
In terms of talent? Yes. Canada is stronger now than it has been for a long time, while pretty much every other country is coming out of a talent lull. Canada's best possible team would be comparable to a team composed the best from every other country, talent wise. That likely won't be true several years from now (and wasn't always true in the past), but for now the gap is there.
Interesting thread to page through. I don't think there is any doubt Canada will continue to be the premier hockey country in the world for the foreseeable future. It is a large nation and hockey is so intrinsic to Canadian culture that there is no chance that suddenly hockey will lose interest. Canada should be the best at hockey. In the US, just a tiny percentage of the population even knows what a hockey puck looks like. The European hockey nations are all admirable producers of talent but lack the resources and population to compete. In the US, it is basically MN, Upstate New York, Michigan and New England that produce hockey players.
On a personal level, nothing would make me happier than to see Canada see some real competition for the crown of the greatest hockey nation. Not trying to be a jerk, I just have too many Canadian friends who all refuse to acknowledge that a non-Canadian could actually be good at hockey. In MN, we love hockey. Aside from Southern Ontario and (MAYBE) a handful of other pockets in Canada, there is not a more fertile hockey area on the planet than the Twin Cities. And yet Canadians here act as if we know nothing of the game. It is annoying as heck, but I get it. Minnesotans have a similar cockiness around less stellar hockey states in the US. So believe me, I would love very much to say that Hockey Canada is due for a slice of humble pie, I just don't see it. Sure, you may not win every tournament but sadly you will still be the top dogs.
On a personal level, nothing would make me happier than to see Canada see some real competition for the crown of the greatest hockey nation. Not trying to be a jerk, I just have too many Canadian friends who all refuse to acknowledge that a non-Canadian could actually be good at hockey. In MN, we love hockey. Aside from Southern Ontario and (MAYBE) a handful of other pockets in Canada, there is not a more fertile hockey area on the planet than the Twin Cities. And yet Canadians here act as if we know nothing of the game. It is annoying as heck, but I get it. Minnesotans have a similar cockiness around less stellar hockey states in the US. So believe me, I would love very much to say that Hockey Canada is due for a slice of humble pie, I just don't see it. Sure, you may not win every tournament but sadly you will still be the top dogs.
The U.S.S.R was back and fourth with Canada during the 70s and 80s, that was the last time Canada had a really hard fight against another hockey nation, a great hockey nation.
Whatever talent gap exists is not so wide that it couldn't be overcome as soon as Korea. I say that because it seems as though there has been a falling off of junior age talent in Canada in the last 6 or 7 years, and that could be a factor in replacing some of the older players from Sochi and Vancouver. As you have correctly noted, all it takes in an Olympic tournament is a bad bounce or a bonehead play, and even Canada could fall behind in a critical game such as a Quarter- or Semi-Final. If you fall behind Finland even by a single goal, they have a unique ability to completely close down the ice and force a team to throw everything into the offense, which can easily result in a counterattack that creates a two-goal margin.
Most people retain the last image that they process, so there is a tendency to conclude that because the Gold Medal game in Sochi was a relatively easy win, that the next games will also be pushovers. It isn't necessarily true. If the core of the Vancouver and Sochi Canadian teams are still intact in Korea, its going to be hard for those guys to conjure up the fear of losing which is such an essential and critical part of being motivated to win. I'm not saying that Canada won't win a third consecutive Gold, but its a far more arduous psychological feat to accomplish than the first or second.
Moving forward, I would wager the USA has the best chance to play of the part of the modern Soviets. It seems we are getting better and better, but Canada also seems to be getting better. Sweden would be the next closest IMO. Russia is a dark-horse but I just don't see the two-way stalwarts that the Swedes, Americans have.
Thanks for letting us know that Canada might not win in 2018. But we believe we will. (if there is 2018, because I personally think that World Cup 2016 is much likely)
I was referring to the category of best on best World tournaments. The World Cup, if it is played, is a summer invitational tournament, which doesn't fit into the same category. If the NHL doesn't participate in Korea, then the World Hockey Championships are the only alternative to crown a king of hockey.
Latest posts
-
Rumor: Trade Rumors & Proposals Thread | No More Pacifism For the Oilers?- Latest: joestevens29
-
-
If Bruins Make the Playoffs Does Pastrnak Get Hart Consideration?
- Latest: johnnyonthspot
-
