Has your stance on the World Cup changed for the better?

[Ol' Jase]

So if the all star game went from four to eight you would like that better? The all star game is even more elite players because there's less there. Would you prefer an all star week long tournament?

Keep your strawman arguments coming if you wish.

This isn't an all star game because there is no current season going on.

Would I prefer an all star week long tournament during the middle of the season...what an absolutely ridiculous and irrelevant question.

 

[syz]

If people can't tell the difference between the level of competition in an NHL allstar game and this tournament they should probably just not bother watching hockey anymore.

But yea it's too bad that we have to watch snoozers like NA vs. Russia tonight rather than barn burners like Austria and Norway in group B Olympic action. I mean, honestly, how can you call something like this World Cup a "best on best tournament" without Thomas Hundertpfund being there? What a joke.

 

[Six Assets]

World Cup has been great so far. Quality hockey.

The only thing the Olympics has over the WCH is the prestige of winning an olympic medal, which is pretty significant for European players.

 

[zeke]

god bless this tourney.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

I think people are confusing two things:

Enjoyment and meaning.

It's absolutely fine if you think this tournament has no meaning. That's what most people thought before the tournament even started.

But to watch the games and say it's not damn entertaining hockey is just disingenuous IMO. If you don't find something like that NAT-RUS game exciting, I really don't know what you're looking for in a hockey game.

The level of hockey being played in these games has far exceeded what I expected out of this tournament.

 

[serp]

Just don't give this to ESPN ever again . Whenever i find a Sportsnet source its fine but jesus ESPN is awful.

 

[mouser]

So if the all star game went from four to eight you would like that better? The all star game is even more elite players because there's less there. Would you prefer an all star week long tournament?

You understand what a Straw Man argument is I hope?

 

[DanZ]

It's been enjoyable hockey, good fix after the offseason, but I just don't care who wins.

Team USA losing would have no affect on me. It doesn't have the prestige or meaning of the Olympics which everyone knew when it was announced. Like it or not, prestige and meaning have an effect on people's enjoyment of sport. If the stakes are higher, the excitement is higher.

 

[Michael Hockey]

I think people are confusing two things:

Enjoyment and meaning.

It's absolutely fine if you think this tournament has no meaning. That's what most people thought before the tournament even started.

But to watch the games and say it's not damn entertaining hockey is just disingenuous IMO. If you don't find something like that NAT-RUS game exciting, I really don't know what you're looking for in a hockey game.

The level of hockey being played in these games has far exceeded what I expected out of this tournament.

My enjoyment is ruined, if NHL plans to pull out of the olympics and replace them with a World Cup concept that has a couple of fake teams in it.

 

[kabidjan18]

If people can't tell the difference between the level of competition in an NHL allstar game and this tournament they should probably just not bother watching hockey anymore.

But yea it's too bad that we have to watch snoozers like NA vs. Russia tonight rather than barn burners like Austria and Norway in group B Olympic action. I mean, honestly, how can you call something like this World Cup a "best on best tournament" without Thomas Hundertpfund? What a joke.

As an Austrian hockey writer and fan I find this extremely disrespectful and am doubtful you even saw the game or any non-Canada games in Group B. Your mockery is absurd, even if you have opinions please don't be blatantly insulting. Thomas Hundertpfund has scored goals against top goalies in high levels of competition such as a goal against Rask and Finland, you haven't heard of a player doesn't necessitate you throwing extremely disrespectful insults in his and his nation's direction.

People think way too often with their hearts and not their heads. It's good hockey, I watched it I loved it, but the format is conducive to all-star game level profits and I'm sure the NHL does not appreciate that aspect. People way too often think that the best product will get the best market reception when in fact that is rarely the case. Marketing, product distribution, place, price etc all play large and often larger roles in defining success than product quality and in the case of what is marketed an international tournament this is very obviously true. Sorry to those who love this format, for a number in the thousands, tens of thousands of hockey fans in Europe, thousands, maybe tens of thousands in the states, the NHL will not continue this format. International sports is a very defined arena and ways to maximize profits are also very defined. Enjoy this while it lasts.

 

[Seanaconda]

My enjoyment is ruined, if NHL plans to pull out of the olympics and replace them with a World Cup concept that has a couple of fake teams in it.

They are only gonna pull out if the IOC doesn't pay for the costs. The nhl board of governors isn't gonna pay for them to make money and have their players injured

 

[fsanford]

Fun to watch, but if Doughty, Kopitar, Quick, Gaborik, heck even Muzzin get hurt I would be pretty p'od.

The gimmick teams are a good idea, but playing for team continent does not have the same meaning as guys playing for their country.

 

[DanZ]

I think people are confusing two things:

Enjoyment and meaning.

It's absolutely fine if you think this tournament has no meaning. That's what most people thought before the tournament even started.

But to watch the games and say it's not damn entertaining hockey is just disingenuous IMO. If you don't find something like that NAT-RUS game exciting, I really don't know what you're looking for in a hockey game.

The level of hockey being played in these games has far exceeded what I expected out of this tournament.

You don't think meaning affects enjoyment? Why do you think people get so excited for rivalry games? Why is tomorrow's USA/CAN game getting hyped by the ESPN crew so much? Why did 30 million Americans watch the 2010 Olympic final? Because higher stakes make it more exciting. People are more emotionally involved. People enjoy the excitement. If you don't care who wins, what's exciting about it?

Meaning and enjoyment aren't separate things. It's been good hockey, but some people just aren't emotionally invested and that certainly can make it less enjoyable.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

My enjoyment is ruined, if NHL plans to pull out of the olympics and replace them with a World Cup concept that has a couple of fake teams in it.

That's really a separate issue. This tournament has little to do with how hard the NHLPA will push for NHL involvement in the next Olympics.

 

[serp]

Fun to watch, but if Doughty, Kopitar, Quick, Gaborik, heck even Muzzin get hurt I would be pretty p'od.

As a Stars fan that had Seguin and now Faksa get hurt i am pretty pissed off already. Could care less who wins since i don't have a team to root for.

 

[KingsFan7824]

If people can't tell the difference between the level of competition in an NHL allstar game and this tournament they should probably just not bother watching hockey anymore.

But yea it's too bad that we have to watch snoozers like NA vs. Russia tonight rather than barn burners like Austria and Norway in group B Olympic action. I mean, honestly, how can you call something like this World Cup a "best on best tournament" without Thomas Hundertpfund being there? What a joke.

While I'm not against this tournament or how it's set up, you have to say that for countries like Austria or Norway(or whatever country), to have their national team in it, as opposed to a player or two, would have something extra to it for them, no matter how good the team may or may not be.

 

[zeke]

things have meaning if you want them to have meaning.

the players sure seem to care.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

Yeah, I suppose.

I thought i'd blow it off completely and am instead watching games because it's nice to be watching pro-level hockey again. I'm also way more entertained by the games than I would have guessed.

Except for being a homer and wanting Canada to win, I find myself not really caring about the outcome of the games...although w/in the games themselves I get engaged in the play.

But, if nothing else, I perceive the tournament "better" than before it started.

 

[fsanford]

As a Stars fan that had Seguin and now Faksa get hurt i am pretty pissed off already. Could care less who wins since i don't have a team to root for.

Yep, could really screw up the start of the Star's season, in an incredibly tough division.

 

[v-man]

I think people are confusing two things:

Enjoyment and meaning.

It's absolutely fine if you think this tournament has no meaning. That's what most people thought before the tournament even started.

But to watch the games and say it's not damn entertaining hockey is just disingenuous IMO. If you don't find something like that NAT-RUS game exciting, I really don't know what you're looking for in a hockey game.

The level of hockey being played in these games has far exceeded what I expected out of this tournament.

Yup, but I've yet to see anyone complaining about the level of hockey, nor was anyone expecting anything poor, other than perhaps a bit of pre-season rust. People just aren't emotionally invested in it, and that's not going to change whether the hockey is good or not. The tournament needs purpose and credibility for that to happen, and it's not going to happen as long as it's billed as a World Cup with 6 whole nations participating while most of the hockey world already has domestic leagues going on. An exciting, competitive final won't change the fact that this tournament is completely unnecessary to the international hockey schedule, at least in its current form. It's nothing more than a last ditch attempt by the NHL to try and prove that the Olympics aren't necessary, and in that regard, their message is failing on a massive level.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

You don't think meaning affects enjoyment? Why do you think people get so excited for rivalry games? Why is tomorrow's USA/CAN game getting hyped by the ESPN crew so much? Why did 30 million Americans watch the 2010 Olympic final? Because higher stakes make it more exciting. People are more emotionally involved. People enjoy the excitement. If you don't care who wins, what's exciting about it?

Meaning and enjoyment aren't separate things. It's been good hockey, but some people just aren't emotionally invested and that certainly can make it less enjoyable.

I agree they're interconnected, but they're not the same thing. I'm reading people talk about this tournament calling it garbage hockey which is just flat out wrong. That's what I take issue with.

A game can be hugely significant and very boring. A game can be a fun exhibition and be insanely entertaining. It's easier for a meaningful game to be entertaining because the stakes are higher, but it's not automatic and that doesn't diminish the entertainment value of these games.

 

[kabidjan18]

You don't think meaning affects enjoyment? Why do you think people get so excited for rivalry games? Why is tomorrow's USA/CAN game getting hyped by the ESPN crew so much? Why did 30 million Americans watch the 2010 Olympic final? Because higher stakes make it more exciting. People are more emotionally involved. People enjoy the excitement. If you don't care who wins, what's exciting about it?

Meaning and enjoyment aren't separate things. It's been good hockey, but some people just aren't emotionally invested and that certainly can make it less enjoyable.

https://www.nhl.com/news/olympic-final-most-watched-hockey-game-in-30-years/c-519476
A source for his figure. 34.8 million viewers at the highest. It's not difficult math. A few thousand hockey nuts (including myself) are excited and enamored by high level hockey. Tens of millions of other viewers don't even know to turn on the television. We happen to be much less important...

And I think last I heard the IIHF is going around begging sponsors for the insurance money. NHL and IOC really don't need the Olympics as much as the IIHF.

 

[BigHitter67]

World Cup has been great so far. Quality hockey.

The only thing the Olympics has over the WCH is the prestige of winning an olympic medal, which is pretty significant for European players.

Uhh??
so Canada in a WC final matchup with NA - where half of NA are fellow Canadians - would play with that same quintessential Canadian I'd-give-my-left-nut-to-win passion that we see in Olympic gold medal games vs the US or Russia??!! oo-k then

 

[Ainec]

even if you hate the World Cup, watch Team NA

 

[DanZ]

https://www.nhl.com/news/olympic-final-most-watched-hockey-game-in-30-years/c-519476
A source for his figure. 34.8 million viewers at the highest. It's not difficult math. A few thousand hockey nuts (including myself) are excited and enamored by high level hockey. Tens of millions of other viewers don't even know to turn on the television. We happen to be much less important...

And I think last I heard the IIHF is going around begging sponsors for the insurance money. NHL and IOC really don't need the Olympics as much as the IIHF.

I'm really not sure what you're trying to say.