How to get the WCOH to appeal to you?

[hitmen19]

The overwhelmingly most important thing is to get rid of the gimmick teams. That stuff just isn't acceptable in an international tournament... If you can't take the teams seriously then you can't take the results seriously.

That, and get the best players to show up. No point in having a best-on-best tournament where the top 20 players don't show up.

Fix those things and you've got my full attention.

well if the top 20 players didn't show up, it wouldn't be best on best, and that's why the world championships are a diluted tourney, and is irrelevant in discussions. The world cup might have benn, keith, and maybe Kreji who might be considered top 20 who couldn't play due to injury. Don't know anybody that isn't showing up, not due to injury

 

[Auston Marlander]

Factually it is true. You're talking about whether or not they can beat their opposition, which is not what I said. The Young Gunz can't go against Canada's and USA's best because some of Canada's best and some of USA's best are on the Young Gunz team. Canada's best and USAs best aren't in this tournament.

I see what you are saying now. That said they are playing, just not for team USA or Canada.

I still think this is going to be a ton of fun and NA23 and team Euro only make for better hockey since both are better than the teams left out (the Swiss would be close)

 

[JackSlater]

Yup. They also went to the final of the 2012 WHC and took Russia to a shootout in Sochi.

But apologists for the Bettman Cup format now insist that Slovakia is actually on par with Japan and would get wiped out by 10 or 15 goals if they were allowed to step on the same ice as Canada, USA, Russia, Sweden, Czech or Finland.

Shhh. The Young Gunz are cooler than Slovakia. So many names I recognize, and on playstation they are so fast!

I see what you are saying now. That said they are playing, just not for team USA or Canada.

I still think this is going to be a ton of fun and NA23 and team Euro only make for better hockey since both are better than the teams left out (the Swiss would be close)

I agree that the two gimmick teams are more talented than Slovakian or Swiss teams would be, and that it makes for a more talented hockey exhibition.

 

[Auston Marlander]

I agree that the two gimmick teams are more talented than Slovakian or Swiss teams would be, and that it makes for a more talented hockey exhibition.

I just don't get why people care? We are being given the most talented 8 teams in the world to watch. It will be the most entertaining international hockey one could watch. People just like to find issues instead of enjoying some great hockey after a long summer off.

 

[Auston Marlander]

I just don't get why people care? We are being given the most talented 8 teams in the world to watch. It will be the most entertaining international hockey one could watch. People just like to find issues instead of enjoying some great hockey after a long summer off.

Also wish people would stop calling them gimmick teams to discredit them. They are incredibly talented teams playing against the top nations.

 

[Canuckistani]

I just don't get why people care? We are being given the most talented 8 teams in the world to watch. It will be the most entertaining international hockey one could watch. People just like to find issues instead of enjoying some great hockey after a long summer off.

We'd all be fine with it (or indifferent) if the NHL committed to the Olympics.

The thought of hockey's only "best-on-best" event from now on featuring an endless torrent of Bettman gimmicks is just horrifying.

 

[cutchemist42]

They lost me for the whole tourney with the gimmick teams. Id rather a 6 team tourney with current NTs, and would have been fine with an 8 team NT tourney with qualifications next time.

First WBC didnt have qualification, but baseball still invited teams like South Africa and China. Thats probably like inviting GB/Japan in hockey.

Im honestly not as thrilled with best 2/3 Finals. Depending on matchups, it can just as easily become a boring series that instead could have been over in 1 game. Sometimes the suspense of 1 game in intl. tournaments is a good break from the playoff norm.

 

[Auston Marlander]

We'd all be fine with it (or indifferent) if the NHL committed to the Olympics.

The thought of hockey's only "best-on-best" event from now on featuring an endless torrent of Bettman gimmicks is just horrifying.

But we don't know if that's the case. If the Olympics are a no-go, I am sure the other nations will push to be involved since the WHC are never the best on best.

Also what gimmick does this have other than the 2 teams?

The attempts to discredit are hilarious. Would you rather the WC or no hockey at all?

 

[Gary Nylund]

Over 150 posts right now in a thread for a meaningless exhibition game still in the first period for a meaningless tournament. Yeah, there's no interest in this World Cup.

 

[JackSlater]

I just don't get why people care? We are being given the most talented 8 teams in the world to watch. It will be the most entertaining international hockey one could watch. People just like to find issues instead of enjoying some great hockey after a long summer off.

We are being given eight talented teams, not the eight most talented teams. It's a tournament, not an international one due to the gimmicks, where half of the teams are national teams, two are pseudo national teams with age restrictions, and two are random all star teams. The whole idea is idiotic, like if the NHL introduces all star teams into the playoffs this year or something. They took a formerly great tournament and rendered it a meaningless exhibition. Add to this that the NHL stated that the success of this tournament works against NHL participation in the Olympics and there is ample reason to be against it

Also wish people would stop calling them gimmick teams to discredit them. They are incredibly talented teams playing against the top nations.

They are gimmick teams. They could be the most talented teams in the tournament and they would remain gimmicks. Any team that is not a national team in what is being billed as an international tournament is inevitably a gimmick. That they are gimmicks is not a reflection of their quality. By definition they are gimmicks.

Over 150 posts right now in a thread for a meaningless exhibition game still in the first period for a meaningless tournament. Yeah, there's no interest in this World Cup.

Once again it's pretty bold and incisive to make comments debating something that no one even said. Great work! Not a straw man will be left standing by the time you've finished posting on the topic.

 

[Gary Nylund]

But we don't know if that's the case. If the Olympics are a no-go, I am sure the other nations will push to be involved since the WHC are never the best on best.

Also what gimmick does this have other than the 2 teams?

The attempts to discredit are hilarious. Would you rather the WC or no hockey at all?

Yeah some of the hysterics in these threads are a bit much. I mean I would much rather have had national teams only but geez Louise, like you said, it's still hockey and really good hockey at that. If a World Cup with national teams only would be a 10 out of 10, this is still at least a 7 or something like that and some people are acting like it's a big fat zero. Just ignore them IMO.

 

[Canuckistani]

But we don't know if that's the case. If the Olympics are a no-go, I am sure the other nations will push to be involved since the WHC are never the best on best.

Also what gimmick does this have other than the 2 teams?

The attempts to discredit are hilarious. Would you rather the WC or no hockey at all?

You make it sound as if the two gimmick teams are no big deal. We might well see Canadians and America playing against their own country. That's not a minor flaw - it's a complete disgrace.

The attempts to discredit are hilarious. Would you rather the WC or no hockey at all?

I'd rather a world cup that was an actual best-on-best international tournament and not a Gary Bettman acid trip brought to life.

 

[Auston Marlander]

You make it sound as if the two gimmick teams are no big deal. We might well see Canadians and America playing against their own country. That's not a minor flaw - it's a complete disgrace.



I'd rather a world cup that was an actual best-on-best international tournament and not a Gary Bettman acid trip brought to life.

WOW. You need to take a step back. Deep breaths.

Seriously you are making this into some huge deal that really isn't there. The over hyped nationalism here is hilarious.

 

[Auston Marlander]

We are being given eight talented teams, not the eight most talented teams. It's a tournament, not an international one due to the gimmicks, where half of the teams are national teams, two are pseudo national teams with age restrictions, and two are random all star teams. The whole idea is idiotic, like if the NHL introduces all star teams into the playoffs this year or something. They took a formerly great tournament and rendered it a meaningless exhibition. Add to this that the NHL stated that the success of this tournament works against NHL participation in the Olympics and there is ample reason to be against it



They are gimmick teams. They could be the most talented teams in he tournament and they would remain gimmicks. Any team that is not a national team in what is being billed as an international tournament is inevitably a gimmick. That they are gimmicks is not a reflection of their quality. By definition they are gimmicks.

Then remove the name international, or don't view it as one. Does the name change the entertainment value?

Again, people are looking for things to complain about instead of being happy about extra hockey to watch.

 

[Doctor No]

You make it sound as if the two gimmick teams are no big deal. We might well see Canadians and America playing against their own country. That's not a minor flaw - it's a complete disgrace.

Complete disgrace?

Did I miss something, or are we still talking about a hockey game here?

 

[Canuckistani]

WOW. You need to take a step back. Deep breaths.

Seriously you are making this into some huge deal that really isn't there. The over hyped nationalism here is hilarious.

You might not get the whole concept of international sport, but some people do.

Check out the NHL season if you're put off by the whole "national team" thing.

 

[Canuckistani]

Complete disgrace?

Did I miss something, or are we still talking about a hockey game here?

Let's have Neymar play against Brazil at the 2018 World Cup and tell Brazilians to just chill out and enjoy the soccer.

 

[JackSlater]

Then remove the name international, or don't view it as one. Does the name change the entertainment value?

Again, people are looking for things to complain about instead of being happy about extra hockey to watch.

It isn't international, whether I view it as international or not. People are free to enjoy it or not, and the name certainly doesn't change what happens on the ice at this exhibition. My issue is when things are stated that are factually wrong regarding what this tournament is.

Also funny to see people come into a thread asking how to get this tournament to appeal to others, and then complaining that they don't blindly accept the gimmick exhibition offered to them. That is the premise of the thread.

 

[Doctor No]

Let's have Neymar play against Brazil at the 2018 World Cup and tell Brazilians to just chill out and enjoy the soccer.

Okay, clearly I *did* miss something, like when hockey's World Cup developed the history and status that equates it to what soccer does.

Thanks!

Complete disgrace.

 

[Canuckistani]

Okay, clearly I *did* miss something, like when hockey's World Cup developed the history and status that equates it to what soccer does.

Thanks!

Complete disgrace.

Ah so you do understand how absurd it is to have players vs their own country.

You simply believe that hockey's (likely) only "best-on-best" event is no big deal and can be turned into a complete joke just because it's only been around since 1976 as opposed to 1930.

I suppose this is what separates casual/indifferent hockey fans from fans of the international game.

 

[kabidjan18]

Okay, clearly I *did* miss something, like when hockey's World Cup developed the history and status that equates it to what soccer does.

Thanks!

Complete disgrace.

What is this supposed to mean? The argument is an argument of principle, but you're trying to address it in individual cases. Does a tournament marketed as an Inter-Nation-al tournament need to have a certain level of size or prestige to reasonably be expected to still hold the competition Inter-Nation-ally? Looks like you did miss something, you missed the part where you read the arguments you're addressing smh

 

[syc]

Make a commitment to it.

I am not at all interested because this could very well be a one off. In terms of not seeing the world cup held at a set time every however many years they wish to wait between tournaments.

If the NHL said we are doing this every four years, then it would mean something. But, since they are so wishy washy about the future of the world cup, I won't bother with it.

Exactly is holds no value other then you winning a gimmicky tournament. So the nhl is going to do it again in four years only if they make lots of money? What if that one tanks, is it over then? This could be one of the dumbest tournaments in the history of hockey. Good job bettman, maybe you should stop wasting time on this and maybe work on not having another lockout.

 

[Doctor No]

What is this supposed to mean? The argument is an argument of principle, but you're trying to address it in individual cases. Does a tournament marketed as an Inter-Nation-al tournament need to have a certain level of size or prestige to reasonably be expected to still hold the competition Inter-Nation-ally? Looks like you did miss something, you missed the part where you read the arguments you're addressing smh

I'm arguing that in the grand scheme of things, this isn't a big deal. It's supposed to be a fun exhibition.

No need to shake your head.

And I can assure the other poster that I'm neither casual nor indifferent as a fan of the sport. I have plenty of evidence for that available.

 

[garbageteam]

No mickey mouse teams.
12 team tournament.
Automatic entry for top 6 teams; bottom 6 through a qualifying process .
Open for teams to bring in the best players from any league.

But really, all they needed to do to get me to watch was to not do the BS teams. It's the same as if you've got a conference semifinals and you suddenly decide to replace the two lowest seeded teams with two made-up, one-off teams comprised of the best players of the eliminated teams for the sake of "better entertainment", after decades of history of having these teams play and compete in the league. You'd instantly watch another, more legitimate competition.

 

[kabidjan18]

I'm arguing that in the grand scheme of things, this isn't a big deal. It's supposed to be a fun exhibition.

No need to shake your head.

Haha well played

Yeah if you only look at it as an exhibition. If it were marketed as like "xbox coming to live TV" then I think we'd be happier but the notion that this fantasy hockey tournament could replace the Olympics is worrisome.