How to get the WCOH to appeal to you?

[TheMule93]

How to get it or appeal to you?

Step 1: like hockey
Step 2: dont not like hockey

 

[zeke]

so weird that the most talented tourney in hockey history is fun to watch.

 

[djf]

Unless they play it in europe some years it can never replace the olympics here. The games will alwsys start in the middle of the night in europe if it is always held in NA so only the really hard core who don't have kids/families/jobs will be able to watch.

Make it rotate and play in europe and NA every other year and skip the gimmick teams. I also dislike the best of 3 finals. Much rather have one game.

As it is now it's more of an all-star game that goes on for a week. Sure, it'll be more entertaining but it kind of lacks soul.

 

[Willy Stylez]

I don't like the structure of tournement with NA U23 and Europe teams, this isnt World Cup for me. But I'm just going to enjoy it, its going to be played some great hockey.

 

[ihaveyuidonttouchme]

Stay away from political and business sides, and hfboards and just enjoy watching ur favorite players play...if there r any
Works for me

 

[llwyd]

it's competitive hockey before the regular season starts, i'm looking forward to it

Yeah, it's good fun, excellent entertainment. But I just can't begin to take it seriously compared with the Olympics. It's just not there, at all. I guess I pretty much think about it like I do the IIHF "World Championships", a great, high quality tournament, often very exciting, but not totally serious. But anyway, I'm gladly watching these games, it's certainly great hockey - though a hybrid rink would be better for quality, with this tempo the small rink at times feels like a pinball machine...

 

[John Eichel da GOAT]

The majority of hockey fans are on board with the WCOH. Its the armchair gm's in here that are crying and complaining. The fact that were going to have the best hockey we've seen in years played on ESPN is incredible for our sport.

Tell me how it differs from the Olympics. Its a tournament that is played and then soon forgotten about after. Who won the 1936 Olympics? 1964? 1988? 1994? 2006? 2010? The majority of you will have to look them up because you've forgotten them all outside of the recent ones and 1980.

This is another fun tournament to bring attention to our sport and hopefully legit tv contracts to make hockey more popular. That is something all of us want. That will bring more talent to the NHL and eventually more players playing the game.

Enjoy the best players in the world in competitive games instead of the Canada embarrassing Belarus 10-1.

Also, hockey will not leave the Olympics, only the NHL will. You will still have your national pride to cheer for.

 

[JackSlater]

The majority of hockey fans are on board with the WCOH. Its the armchair gm's in here that are crying and complaining. The fact that were going to have the best hockey we've seen in years played on ESPN is incredible for our sport.

Tell me how it differs from the Olympics. Its a tournament that is played and then soon forgotten about after. Who won the 1936 Olympics? 1964? 1988? 1994? 2006? 2010? The majority of you will have to look them up because you've forgotten them all outside of the recent ones and 1980.

This is another fun tournament to bring attention to our sport and hopefully legit tv contracts to make hockey more popular. That is something all of us want. That will bring more talent to the NHL and eventually more players playing the game.

Enjoy the best players in the world in competitive games instead of the Canada embarrassing Belarus 10-1.

Also, hockey will not leave the Olympics, only the NHL will. You will still have your national pride to cheer for.

It differs from the Olympics because in the Olympics teams are able to select any of the players that they want, and there are no gimmick teams. That's fairly obvious. If the NHL leaves the Olympics, then teams at the Olympics will not be able to select whoever they want and that tournament becomes irrelevant again.

 

[Xokkeu]

The majority of hockey fans are on board with the WCOH. Its the armchair gm's in here that are crying and complaining. The fact that were going to have the best hockey we've seen in years played on ESPN is incredible for our sport.

Tell me how it differs from the Olympics. Its a tournament that is played and then soon forgotten about after. Who won the 1936 Olympics? 1964? 1988? 1994? 2006? 2010? The majority of you will have to look them up because you've forgotten them all outside of the recent ones and 1980.

This is another fun tournament to bring attention to our sport and hopefully legit tv contracts to make hockey more popular. That is something all of us want. That will bring more talent to the NHL and eventually more players playing the game.

Enjoy the best players in the world in competitive games instead of the Canada embarrassing Belarus 10-1.

Also, hockey will not leave the Olympics, only the NHL will. You will still have your national pride to cheer for.

I remember all the Olympic winners going back to 1980 and all the Canada cup results. I could even tell you probably half of the world championship winners of the last two decades.

 

[Claypool]

The NHL isn't going to the Olympics anymore, especially not after how great these exhibition games are. Just deal with it. There's no money to be made and the IOC aren't great business partners. Everyone in the league benefits with the World Cup. The NHL is better off refining the World Cup to make it their own long term.

 

[Past Considerations]

The majority of hockey fans are on board with the WCOH.

Citation needed.

Its the armchair gm's in here that are crying and complaining.

Says someone who in his last post came up with even more dumber ideas for teams, including the Retired Players Team.

Tell me how it differs from the Olympics.

If you can't figure it out yourself just by following any of these threads for a minute which you have done by now, I'm afraid no amount of explaining will help with you.

Its a tournament that is played and then soon forgotten about after. Who won the 1936 Olympics? 1964? 1988? 1994? 2006? 2010? The majority of you will have to look them up because you've forgotten them all outside of the recent ones and 1980.

Speak for yourself, your own ignorance and apparent memory issues.

This is another fun tournament to bring attention to our sport and hopefully legit tv contracts to make hockey more popular. That is something all of us want. That will bring more talent to the NHL and eventually more players playing the game.

These are fine goals, and it is not like IIHF doesn't try to achieve the same in Europe, but these no justifications for the gimmick teams and the unneutral format of the tournament. You said you were sick of hearing "gimmick"? GIMMICK GIMIMCK GIMMICK.

Enjoy the best players in the world in competitive games instead of the Canada embarrassing Belarus 10-1.

You already said this ignorant claim. Then I told you to figure you which are the two most likely teams missing (hint: not Belarus) and to google past Olympics results between those two missing teams and top 6 teams. Apparently you didn't do either, so you're still ignorant and clueless.

Also, hockey will not leave the Olympics, only the NHL will. You will still have your national pride to cheer for.

Are you ok with combining USA and CAN into a single team? What, you aren't ok? Isn't that quite a big double standard since you just said this isn't about competition between nations, national pride is some ancient concept and that this is just about just good fun hockey?

 

[Past Considerations]

I also dislike the best of 3 finals. Much rather have one game.

That's the only thing I like about the format.

 

[Nordic*]

If the NHL are going to include gimmick teams and not make it a serious best on best national team tourny, let's do this.


Ten teams

Canada
USA
Russia
Sweden
Finland
Czechs
U-24 NA
Slovakia/Slovenia (basically Slovakia + Kopitar)
Europe leftovers/snubs (players from all European countries who either didn't make their own national team or who plays for a nation that does not have a team in the WC.)
North America snubs (the best players from North America who did not make either Canada or USA and who are too old to make NA U-24)

North America snubs would have a hell of a team.​

Hall-Johansen-Kessel

O'Reilly-Spezza-Stone

Hoffman-Carter-Simmonds

Huberdeau-Schenn-Okposo


Letang-Seabrook

Giordano-Subban

Yandle-Brodie

Fleury
Jones
Elliot
​

That's a better roster than half the teams in the current WC. Only Canada is clearly superior.

Would also like to see all teams facing eachother once and after that, the top-4 teams face eachother in semis. This would be possible if the NHL season would be shortened to 70:ish games every time there's a World Cup. Doable.

 

[JackSlater]

The NHL isn't going to the Olympics anymore, especially not after how great these exhibition games are. Just deal with it. There's no money to be made and the IOC aren't great business partners. Everyone in the league benefits with the World Cup. The NHL is better off refining the World Cup to make it their own long term.

Unless a person is a stakeholder in the NHL, I don't see why the NHL's business prospects would factor into a fan's opinion on anything. If the NHL makes money from this tournament, good for the NHL. As a fan, I prefer that the NHL doesn't make itself an obstacle to best on best hockey even if the league doesn't directly make money from the tournament. I'm sure you would not have issue with the NHL moving your favourite hockey team, for instance, if the league wasn't exactly profiting from it.

If the NHL are going to include gimmick teams and not make it a serious best on best national team tourny, let's do this.


Ten teams

Canada
USA
Russia
Sweden
Finland
Czechs
U-24 NA
Slovakia/Slovenia (basically Slovakia + Kopitar)
Europe leftovers/snubs (players from all European countries who either didn't make their own national team or who plays for a nation that does not have a team in the WC.)
North America snubs (the best players from North America who did not make either Canada or USA and who are too old to make NA U-24)

North America snubs would have a hell of a team.​

Hall-Johansen-Kessel

O'Reilly-Spezza-Stone

Hoffman-Carter-Simmonds

Huberdeau-Schenn-Okposo


Letang-Seabrook

Giordano-Subban

Yandle-Brodie

Fleury
Jones
Elliot
​

That's a better roster than half the teams in the current WC. Only Canada is clearly superior.

Would also like to see all teams facing eachother once and after that, the top-4 teams face eachother in semis. This would be possible if the NHL season would be shortened to 70:ish games every time there's a World Cup. Doable.

Yes, well once they render the tournament meaningless and not a best on best as you said, might as well go all out. The NHL considered a team Canada 2, though they apparently didn't like the connotation. Team snub isn't too far from that.

 

[John Eichel da GOAT]

Citation needed.

Common sense talking to the average hockey fan not on these boards.


Says someone who in his last post came up with even more dumber ideas for teams, including the Retired Players Team.

You need to head to the store and buy an upgraded sarcasm button if you thought I really wanted Lidstrom to come out retirement to skate with McDavid.

If you can't figure it out yourself just by following any of these threads for a minute which you have done by now, I'm afraid no amount of explaining will help with you.

My point being is that everyone cries national pride, but at the end of the day its just another tournament that most fans will forget about until the next one arrives.

Speak for yourself, your own ignorance and apparent memory issues.

Again, the average hockey fan on the street could not pick Nathan MacKinnon out of a crowd nor can they name you past winners.

These are fine goals, and it is not like IIHF doesn't try to achieve the same in Europe, but these no justifications for the gimmick teams and the unneutral format of the tournament. You said you were sick of hearing "gimmick"? GIMMICK GIMIMCK GIMMICK.

Sorry I like the idea of growing the game to more than diehard fans.

You already said this ignorant claim. Then I told you to figure you which are the two most likely teams missing (hint: not Belarus) and to google past Olympics results between those two missing teams and top 6 teams. Apparently you didn't do either, so you're still ignorant and clueless.

Didn't do either. My guess would be Switzerland and Slovenia which always put up a good fight, but are crap compared to Team Gimmick.


Are you ok with combining USA and CAN into a single team? What, you aren't ok? Isn't that quite a big double standard since you just said this isn't about competition between nations, national pride is some ancient concept and that this is just about just good fun hockey?

No idea what you're babbling about here. The next Olympics will have KHL all-stars vs. AHL All-Stars assuming they are even allowed to go. Russia will win gold. Yippy!!!

Way too much effort on your part to just hate. Armchair GM to a T.

 

[Lacaar]

Unless they play it in europe some years it can never replace the olympics here. The games will alwsys start in the middle of the night in europe if it is always held in NA so only the really hard core who don't have kids/families/jobs will be able to watch.

Make it rotate and play in europe and NA every other year and skip the gimmick teams. I also dislike the best of 3 finals. Much rather have one game.

As it is now it's more of an all-star game that goes on for a week. Sure, it'll be more entertaining but it kind of lacks soul.

I absolutely positively could not agree less than with this.

If Europe could draw a similar crowd with similar prices with similar t.v dollars.

Giddyup.

Fact is though that won't happen.

And you may be the first person I've ever heard say they think hockey lends itself better to a single game championship over a playoff series.

 

[Lacaar]

Unless a person is a stakeholder in the NHL, I don't see why the NHL's business prospects would factor into a fan's opinion on anything. If the NHL makes money from this tournament, good for the NHL. As a fan, I prefer that the NHL doesn't make itself an obstacle to best on best hockey even if the league doesn't directly make money from the tournament. I'm sure you would not have issue with the NHL moving your favourite hockey team, for instance, if the league wasn't exactly profiting from it.



Yes, well once they render the tournament meaningless and not a best on best as you said, might as well go all out. The NHL considered a team Canada 2, though they apparently didn't like the connotation. Team snub isn't too far from that.

You sure don't mind asking the NHL to risk the assets they play millions of dollars to per year for the sake of your viewership.

Everyone wants something for free in this world.

Gimme gimme.. down with the rich!

mine mine

 

[MrOT]

The NHL is doing their best not to make it any bigger World Wide. If I was from Swetzerland or Denmark I would be really pissed off not to even get a fair chance to be cinsidered a legit hockey country, and loose som interest in the sport. Really strange and short term, money making thinking that is bad for the sport of hockey in the long run, that´s obvious.

Since the World Championship is a "serious" tournament organized by an international organisation, with a real and legit ranking and qualifying system that give every team a fair chance, why not make it a World Championship a la soccer every fourth year where the NHL release the players instead of the olympics. Now that would be something!

Hockey needs a strong international organisation like FIFA in soccer. It´s really twisted when a single league can dictate all the rules and everything for everyone. In soccer (and most sports outside NA) everyone knows that international play is >> domestic leagues. In soccer the clubs have to release their players for every single international "friendly" game (as it´s called in soccer) all year long. It´s only in NA everything is all about the money and nothing about pride and actual competition between teams with a history and teams that actually mean somethig. A lot of these posts are simply mind blowing for non Americans.

 

[jason2020]

Unless they play it in europe some years it can never replace the olympics here. The games will alwsys start in the middle of the night in europe if it is always held in NA so only the really hard core who don't have kids/families/jobs will be able to watch.

Make it rotate and play in europe and NA every other year and skip the gimmick teams. I also dislike the best of 3 finals. Much rather have one game.

As it is now it's more of an all-star game that goes on for a week. Sure, it'll be more entertaining but it kind of lacks soul.

You do know that would be the end of the World Championships.

 

[Lacaar]

The NHL is doing their best not to make it any bigger World Wide. If I was from Swetzerland or Denmark I would be really pissed off not to even get a fair chance to be cinsidered a legit hockey country, and loose som interest in the sport. Really strange and short term, money making thinking that is bad for the sport of hockey in the long run, that´s obvious.

Since the World Championship is a "serious" tournament organized by an international organisation, with a real and legit ranking and qualifying system that give every team a fair chance, why not make it a World Championship a la soccer every fourth year where the NHL release the players instead of the olympics. Now that would be something!

Hockey needs a strong international organisaton like FIFA in soccer. It´s really twisted when a single league can dictate all the rules and everything for everyone. In soccer (and most sports outside NA) everyone knows that international play is >> domestic leagues. In soccer the clubs have to release their players for every single "friendly" game (as it´s called in soccer). It´s only in NA everything is all about the money and nothing about pride and actual competition betweem teams with a history and teams that actually mean somethig. A lot of these posts are simply mind blowing for non Americans.

And after all that serious tournament spiel you put together it results in the worst brand of hockey you may ever watch.

International hockey sucks balls. face the fact. Switzerland isn't good at it.. neither is Denmark. No one watches them play.

Why does international hockey have to be a charity case?
For the good of the game.. to grow the game they say.

The game hasn't grown for **** internationally in the last 20 years.
Slovakia is in worse shape. The Chec's are worse now than 20 years ago.

The Olympics hasn't grown international hockey one frigging Iota.

Risk injury and your livelyhood so hockey can gain 5 more swiss fans.. yay.

I don't see the world cup of badmington lining up to get into Canada to grow the game. Could name a hundred more sports.... Cricket, Rugby, Soccer..

 

[jason2020]

The NHL is doing their best not to make it any bigger World Wide. If I was from Swetzerland or Denmark I would be really pissed off not to even get a fair chance to be cinsidered a legit hockey country, and loose som interest in the sport. Really strange and short term, money making thinking that is bad for the sport of hockey in the long run, that´s obvious.

Since the World Championship is a "serious" tournament organized by an international organisation, with a real and legit ranking and qualifying system that give every team a fair chance, why not make it a World Championship a la soccer every fourth year where the NHL release the players instead of the olympics. Now that would be something!

Hockey needs a strong international organisation like FIFA in soccer. It´s really twisted when a single league can dictate all the rules and everything for everyone. In soccer (and most sports outside NA) everyone knows that international play is >> domestic leagues. In soccer the clubs have to release their players for every single international "friendly" game (as it´s called in soccer) all year long. It´s only in NA everything is all about the money and nothing about pride and actual competition between teams with a history and teams that actually mean somethig. A lot of these posts are simply mind blowing for non Americans.

1)I don't think we should use the FIFA as an example how to run the event or events.

2)Soccer teams are not forced to release players yes there asked yes tons of pressure but its not forced on them.

3)A true World Cup in soccer would not be like soccer as we would see some 50-0 scores if not worse.

4)Soccer is just as money as hockey if not more so.

 

[DeadGhost]

It's a preseason warmup tourney with as much meaning as a Prospects Tournament. I'm not going to complain about decent hockey in September but outside of the NHL allowing me to watch hockey a few weeks earlier, this tournament is a gimmick until all of the teams are actual nations.

 

[Jablkon]

If the NHL are going to include gimmick teams and not make it a serious best on best national team tourny, let's do this.


Ten teams

Canada
USA
Russia
Sweden
Finland
Czechs
U-24 NA
Slovakia/Slovenia (basically Slovakia + Kopitar)
Europe leftovers/snubs (players from all European countries who either didn't make their own national team or who plays for a nation that does not have a team in the WC.)
North America snubs (the best players from North America who did not make either Canada or USA and who are too old to make NA U-24)

North America snubs would have a hell of a team.​

Hall-Johansen-Kessel

O'Reilly-Spezza-Stone

Hoffman-Carter-Simmonds

Huberdeau-Schenn-Okposo


Letang-Seabrook

Giordano-Subban

Yandle-Brodie

Fleury
Jones
Elliot
​

That's a better roster than half the teams in the current WC. Only Canada is clearly superior.

Would also like to see all teams facing eachother once and after that, the top-4 teams face eachother in semis. This would be possible if the NHL season would be shortened to 70:ish games every time there's a World Cup. Doable.

Thats not gonna happen again. You would struggle to even find names for that teams. what would be the name of the slovak slovenian team? Team SS? Proper name of team Europe is team Europe without players from....... We all probably agree that building teams in this way is not very practical.

I wouldnt even agree with some posters here that NHL can do whatever they want to do. Sure they can choose only several teams to play and as long as respective federations agree to participate, there is no issue. But for example team Europe does not have so much respect so far. So if they keep them in next tourney I wouldnt be surprised if players start raisining legitimate questions why the should participate in that tourney. I have a feeling that all of team Europe players agreed to play mostly because of politics and because they didnt want to ho against NHL,NHLPA and their employers. It was not probably in a way that they jumped to the ceiling when they found their name in the roster. So unless team Europe transforms to super prestigious elite group where only being part of it would be considered as big appreciation, I dont see it comming again.

Team NA 24 is bit different story as they have some support among fans and they are somehow more proper team because they have all players available within the age limit. Still I dont see the reason why other hockey federations would agree to participate on smth with that team just because somebody was curious how would more canadian or american players compete on top int. level and want to promote its players on int. stage. They would probably start aksing why hockey USA and Canada should have such advantage there and why int stage should promote one league with artificial teams. I mean why not to give such a favour to other federations and allow them to have more teams.....I would be very surprised if smth like this happens again....

 

[Seanaconda]

1)I don't think we should use the FIFA as an example how to run the event or events.

2)Soccer teams are not forced to release players yes there asked yes tons of pressure but its not forced on them.

3)A true World Cup in soccer would not be like soccer as we would see some 50-0 scores if not worse.

4)Soccer is just as money as hockey if not more so.

Yes it's just as focused on money with there tourney but Noone cares about how they don't have a best on best format.

How many teams don't get to try to qualify in soccer ? But don't 30 or so teams make the world cup in that .

But anyways I'm not gonna care if the nhl includes the gimmick teams until the nhl drops the Olympics

 

[MrOT]

1)I don't think we should use the FIFA as an example how to run the event or events.

2)Soccer teams are not forced to release players yes there asked yes tons of pressure but its not forced on them.

3)A true World Cup in soccer would not be like soccer as we would see some 50-0 scores if not worse.

4)Soccer is just as money as hockey if not more so.

That´s what I mean. Even though soccer is just "as money" in the big domestic leagues and the Champions league, there´s still an even more powerfull international organisation (which isn´t exactly runned in a proper way lately byt thats another story) that keeps things a little more conservative if you wanna say and prevents single leagues or companies to let their financial interests affect or change the game too much. We would never see any gimmik teams there. Even new rules and techniques (camera judge and so on) they are very careful with which says a lot. They want to make money for the organisation off course, but just as important it seems to try keep the "soul" of the sport alive. The illusion if you wanna say. The reason why fans are getting nuts if their team win or loose, the reason why people care so much.