WJC: Going to 12 teams

[Exarz]

It's fine the way it is. 8 out of 10 teams has brought real quality to the tournament (would've been 9 if Finland didn't have such poor coaching), so I'd say it's a no brainer to keep the amount of teams at 10.

Plus expanding the top tournament with 12 teams would just mean that the next team getting promoted would struggle even more. It's better to keep some decent team in the D1A that at least have some kind of chance against the top teams when they get promoted.

 

[Billy6]

I'd make it less teams. The top six (Can, USA, Fin, Swe, Cze, and Rus). One pool. Everybody plays each other once. Bottom two eliminated, top four advance to a semi final. Every game would be competitive unless one or two countries have a really off year. Would make this tournament much better.

No offence to the other countries but they just can't compete consistently enough to make it worth it to keep them in it. The David vs Goliath games are boring and rarely, rarely, rarely end with an upset. Denmark has had a great tournament this year and good for them but honestly does anyone outside of Denmark really care? Honestly? And does anyone really think that this will catapult Denmark into being a legit contender consistently in the future? Honestly? The notion that competing against the big countries and way more often than not getting slaughtered by them is improving the quality of the smaller countries hockey programs is nonsense. Have similarly talented nations compete against one another until such time that one can prove that it's worthy to advance. If Switzerland or Slovakia can win a bunch of division B's convincingly then talk about increasing the number of teams then. Otherwise let's see the good teams play the good teams and the lesser teams play amongst themselves.

 

[airbus1094]

Expanding the top division would make D1A a joke, with a pair of consistent elevator teams (kinda like at the WC). As much as I would like to see KZ 'play' a top team, it's important to keep a good level of competition at the lower level as well. Maybe in the future as more countries are able to field competitive teams, but team wise I like it as is.

 

[Statsy]

Expanding the top division would make D1A a joke, with a pair of consistent elevator teams (kinda like at the WC). As much as I would like to see KZ 'play' a top team, it's important to keep a good level of competition at the lower level as well. Maybe in the future as more countries are able to field competitive teams, but team wise I like it as is.

Exactly. I think we've achieved a good balance at the moment... in both divisions. For now we should keep it as is.

 

[garbageteam]

I'd make it less teams. The top six (Can, USA, Fin, Swe, Cze, and Rus). One pool. Everybody plays each other once. Bottom two eliminated, top four advance to a semi final. Every game would be competitive unless one or two countries have a really off year. Would make this tournament much better.

No offence to the other countries but they just can't compete consistently enough to make it worth it to keep them in it. The David vs Goliath games are boring and rarely, rarely, rarely end with an upset. Denmark has had a great tournament this year and good for them but honestly does anyone outside of Denmark really care? Honestly? And does anyone really think that this will catapult Denmark into being a legit contender consistently in the future? Honestly? The notion that competing against the big countries and way more often than not getting slaughtered by them is improving the quality of the smaller countries hockey programs is nonsense. Have similarly talented nations compete against one another until such time that one can prove that it's worthy to advance. If Switzerland or Slovakia can win a bunch of division B's convincingly then talk about increasing the number of teams then. Otherwise let's see the good teams play the good teams and the lesser teams play amongst themselves.

I care. I'm not Danish. I bleed the red and white maple leaf, but I skipped most of the Canadian games (only caught CAN-USA) but paid a lot more attention to the Group A games due to group parity. Watching the same "Top 6" nations year in and year out is boring as hell. And "Goliath" Finland this year placed below two of the "David" nations.

Hockey's always going to remain a niche 6 country sport if people keep thinking of 6 countries.

That said, 10's good today. No more no less. If Denmark can be consistently competitive and Latvia/Germany/Belarus/Norway stop getting blown out a couple of years in a row, then we can think about 12.

 

[tmlms13]

The CHL won't like losing their players for another 4-5 days, and if they're doing tournaments in NHL arenas the Teams won't like even longer road trips.

 

[alko]

IMO it will happen in a few years. Money talk. You have more nations in top level, you have more fans, you have more TV, you have more sponsors, you have more money.

Ok, Kanada, Sweden, Russia, USA and maybe Finland and Czechs are level above other countries. But also in soccer, you have Germany, Brasil ... And the "Others".

 

[Jablkon]

I'd make it less teams. The top six (Can, USA, Fin, Swe, Cze, and Rus). One pool. Everybody plays each other once. Bottom two eliminated, top four advance to a semi final. Every game would be competitive unless one or two countries have a really off year. Would make this tournament much better.

No offence to the other countries but they just can't compete consistently enough to make it worth it to keep them in it. The David vs Goliath games are boring and rarely, rarely, rarely end with an upset. Denmark has had a great tournament this year and good for them but honestly does anyone outside of Denmark really care? Honestly? And does anyone really think that this will catapult Denmark into being a legit contender consistently in the future? Honestly? The notion that competing against the big countries and way more often than not getting slaughtered by them is improving the quality of the smaller countries hockey programs is nonsense. Have similarly talented nations compete against one another until such time that one can prove that it's worthy to advance. If Switzerland or Slovakia can win a bunch of division B's convincingly then talk about increasing the number of teams then. Otherwise let's see the good teams play the good teams and the lesser teams play amongst themselves.

I can not agree with anything here. If you play just top six and let two of them get relegated, then you will have two weak teams every second year comming from weak division B. In the same time, two good teams would spend one useless year in weak division from where they would easily advance but wouldn't benefit from it in any way. There are at least two big gaps in juniors - first 5 or 6 teams; Switzerland, Slovakia; the rest. Your system would just support these gaps imo.

 

[jonas2244]

Ok, Kanada, Sweden, Russia, USA and maybe Finland and Czechs are level above other countries. But also in soccer, you have Germany, Brasil ... And the "Others".

Soccer is not a good example, tournaments get extended there, 24 teams in the european championship, there is also talk to do a World Championship with 48 teams. Just to get more markets participating.

 

[Tuoppi]

After watching the first relegation game they should expand to 12 teams. Reigning champion is close to relegation. Three groups of four teams, 2 best from each group and two best number threes to quarterfinals. Last four teams to relegation round. Two worst teams drop.

 

[ViD]

Don't think it would help attendance any. Good luck selling tickets to Latvia vs Belarus.

that's a sell out if played in Minsk or Riga

 

[Marky1999]

This is what the WJC could look like next year if it has 12 teams.
Example,
Group A
Canada
Russia
Denmark
Finland
Slovakia
Latvia

Group B
USA
Sweden
Czech Republic
Switzerland
Belarus
Germany

I am for having 12 teams in the WJC because teams such as Latvia, Belarus, Germany will develop. In the short term this system might not be great, but in the long term it will benefit everyone.

 

[Marky1999]

This is what Division 1 Group A would look like.
France
Kazakhstan
Austria
Hungary
Norway
Poland

 

[jason2020]

This is what the WJC could look like next year if it has 12 teams.
Example,
Group A
Canada
Russia
Denmark
Finland
Slovakia
Latvia

Group B
USA
Sweden
Czech Republic
Switzerland
Belarus
Germany

I am for having 12 teams in the WJC because teams such as Latvia, Belarus, Germany will develop. In the short term this system might not be great, but in the long term it will benefit everyone.

There are reason to 12 teams yes it helps grow the game but it allows them to shorten the schedule

Group A
Canada
Finland
Latvia
Czech Rep

Group B
Usa
Denmark
Slovakia
Sweden

Group C
Russia
Germany
Belarus
Switzerland

Round robin dec 26-29th
Medal round dec 31-jan 3rd