Ideas and suggestions for a true World Cup

[xxxx]

How Finland celebrates Hockey success.


How Sweden celebrates Hockey success.

How Czechs celebrate Hockey success.

How Russians celebrate Hockey success.


I can go on about how Canadians celebrate Olympic success.

Does anyone think that any country will be watching this tournament glued to the television to celebrate their countries success?

Will anyone here go out on the streets and wave their flag and sing their anthem at the top of their lungs?

Is anyone watching the World Cup of Rugby and seeing how a true international tournament is formed. Where an upset of a top team is celebrated in every other Rugby nation on the globe.

IT'S NOT THE PLAYERS ON THE ICE THAT MATTER. IT'S THE CITIZENS OF THE WORLD THAT DECIDE WHAT'S IMPORTANT.

The stage of the event is what makes sports special.
Why are the Olympics special? because EVERYONE cares. (Nearly 4 billion Worldwide viewers for Sochi 2014)
Why is the World Cup of Football,Rugby Cricket special? Because EVERYONE cares. (Over 5 billion viewers for Brazil 2014)


Why is this tournament insulted left right and anywhere you can look.


BECAUSE

NO

ONE

CARES

It is not an international tournament. It is a money making initiative by corrupt people that only works in North America. If they had any balls whatsoever to make this work. You come to Europe first where majority of the Hockey countries play. This league failed again, and will continue to do so like it's done so throughout history. So we wait until 2018 Olympics to see real best on best Hockey.

Come on, I can assure you that when some european team makes the finals and plays Canada it WILL get a big attention in their countries, whether it would be the Czech republic, Sweden, Finland, or Russia, I'm 100% sure of that. Team Russia in best-of-three series with Malkin, Ovechkin, Datsyuk, against Canada's best, and you think they (Russian fans) won't care? yeah, right.

Why are the Olympics special? because EVERYONE cares. (Nearly 4 billion Worldwide viewers for Sochi 2014)

I must strongly disagree with you here. I care because of 1) quality, not because others care so me too, and 2) because I feel interested in it.


I don't watch soccer at summer olympics, because the quality is not there. I wouldn't watch any sport (barring the one I'm a real fan of, which is hockey only) at olympics if the best wasn't there. The only thing that makes me watch sports that I normally don't (tennis, curling, skating, skiing, swimming, athletics, etc.) is that I know they are the very best and it is exciting, entertaining, and prestigious. And why is it prestigious? Because you can see world records, the best performances on this planet, the best athletes, etc. Of course media, TV, and everything made it even bigger, so it's really the biggest stage on Earth, but that's because of those very factors.

 

[patnyrnyg]

This is not something that holds true for the "developing" hockey countries, but established ones as well. Perhaps the NHL is seen as the ultimate goal for any aspiring hockey junior in North America, but elsewhere, Russia, Finland, Sweden and so forth, its more a means to an end. And that end is one day being a venerated national hero. When a kid first ties his skates and takes those first aspiring strides on the ice, he does NOT think about hoisting the cup while wearing the jersey of the Habs, Bruins or the Hawks - but standing on ice and watching his country's flag go up while the national anthem plays. And there is no greater epitome feeding that dream than the Olympic Games every four years or so.

However, to get to that moment, the best way is to become an NHLer. Therefore, many a kid sets the league in his sights regardless. Now, I think the people who claim that the Olympics do nothing to raise the league's viewer market are pretty much right - tuning into olympic hockey does not mean same people will later tune into the NHL. But what the league has obviously not considered, is that by having a clammy stance towards the international game, they're certainly hurting the quality of players available to them in the future.

Best note though, that I'm not implying by this that these kids, when they grow up, will simply settle for the KHL or various other European leagues. Those who do pick up the game will still go where the money is. But if the positive buzz around a country's national team dies, it will mean that many of these kids who could otherwise one day be world class in hockey, simply pick up other sports that seem to offer a more likely road into national reverence.

The Olympics may not be good for the NHL in a manner that is directly observable, but they are good for the game as a whole. And in the long run, the NHL will also benefit from it. Therefore, it seems quite incomprehensible that the NHL execs favor the quick buck over long-term benefits, especially since the price is extremely light, especially when compared to most other sports around. Instead of having to adhere to regular international breaks multiple times a year as is the case with soccer (and soon will be the case with basketball as well), all that's required of them is to shut down the league and work with the world's governing body for a couple of weeks every other year or so.


And oh, to stay on topic... the true World Cup?

1. Invite the best hockey countries in the world based on the latest international results. NTs only. No gimmicks.
2. Have the participants piece their teams together using whatever players available to them, no matter the league they play in.
3. Let the tournament run its course.

That's it.

Then why did European players come to the NHL prior to 1998 knowing that they would not be able to play in the Olympics? People have been saying "it is good for the game and the NHL will benefit..." I am asking you HOW? They have gone to 5 Olympics and it hasn't meant anything for the NHL.

 

[patnyrnyg]

I do not know why this is such a difficult concept for you to understand, but unless the tournament is in Switzerland, you are not getting 8000 Swiss fans to show up. Same for Slovakia if the tournament is not in Bratislava or Prague.

Fans of Stanley Cup Contending teams show up to see their team play the Sabres because they want to see THEIR team play. Not because the Sabres are really trying hard to become a contender. Again, why is it so hard for you to understand? You want the NHL to work more with the IIHF, great. It is not going to happen, but feel free to waste your time wishing for it. The NHL is a business and like all businesses are going to act in their best interest. Growing the game in Denmark or Belgium is not going to do enough for the NHL to justify it.

Swiss fans travel to every international tournament. In REAL tournaments (Olympics, IIHF Worlds) people travel to support their country. This isn't boring nhl arena's where the arena's are filled with quiet people who don't know what they're watching.

It will be amazing to see that arena in Toronto filled with not one International fan! What a crowd, reminds me of the Stanley Cup final where I've heard alley ways louder then that arena in Chicago or Tampa Bay.

So, NHL fans do not know what they are watching? Basically you want people just yelling and screaming randomly from puck drop til the final buzzer? Got it.

Now, since you do not seem to understand basic math, I will help you. Here again is info about the last Olympic tournament: Scroll down for game results and you will see attendance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_at_the_2014_Winter_Olympics_–_Men's_tournament

Switzerland-Latvia attendance was 5,116. Yup, they flocked to that game, because it was a real tournament. Is this a joke? If an NHL game had only 5,116 people the home team would be mocked unmercifully.

Switzerland-Sweden attendance was 7,968. Still less than the 8,000 Swiss fans the other guy wants and still less than half of what you get at a poorly attended NHL game.

Switzerland-Czech attendance was 10,253. Getting better but still far below a poorly attended NHL game and not even a sell-out.

Rematch against Latvia in the knock-out stage: 7,912. But yeah, Swiss fans flock to REAL tournaments.

 

[FiLe]

Then why did European players come to the NHL prior to 1998 knowing that they would not be able to play in the Olympics? People have been saying "it is good for the game and the NHL will benefit..." I am asking you HOW? They have gone to 5 Olympics and it hasn't meant anything for the NHL.

The answer is right there in the post you quoted, if you read it carefully. The olympic exposure does not mean additional viewership to the NHL, but it will lead to kids around the world (both developing & established hockey countries) picking up the game, which will, in the long run, lead to better and better players available to play in the NHL.

A case in point: Hasn't the amount of Europeans in the NHL grown greatly over the past 20 years or so? I'm not saying it's all because of the Olympic exposure, but that sure is a factor.

As far as players being okay with it pre-1998, let's keep in mind that the meager amount of Europeans crossing over back then had already experienced at least one tournament. Some, a good example being Peter Forsberg, even postponed their transition for a season or two to take part. Another factor might be that in the early 90s few Europeans actually believed they might carve a lifelong career overseas. Many have been quoted saying that they figured they'll do it for a few years and then it's back to Europe. And some simply didn't mind - we don't live on a planet where everyone wears a hat, after all.

Finally, as we all should know, it's easy to give man things, but far harder to take 'em away. Players these days expect to make it to the Olympics even from the NHL. It'll be interesting to see what the reaction will be if that chance is suddenly denied.

No reason to presume it will be uniform, though. Some will be upset and others don't mind. Just like people's thoughts concerning the upcoming World Cup.

 

[patnyrnyg]

The answer is right there in the post you quoted, if you read it carefully. The olympic exposure does not mean additional viewership to the NHL, but it will lead to kids around the world (both developing & established hockey countries) picking up the game, which will, in the long run, lead to better and better players available to play in the NHL.

There will always be more than enough players and talent for the NHL. Maybe 10 kids pick up the game that wouldn't have that become NHL'ers? Even that number is probably stretching it. However, all that would do is bump the bottom 10 players to the AHL. Not enough of an impact to improve the league as a whole.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

At least said players constantly commute back home during international breaks, which are many a year.

I'm sure they are just as resentful towards Europe in terms of soccer as Europeans are towards us in terms of hockey.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

All the NHL clubs would have to do in that case is to stop offering contracts to European players. Why don't they?

First and foremost NA sports fans want to see the best. How marketable they are in NA is secondary.

 

[KriminellPipa]

Then why did European players come to the NHL prior to 1998 knowing that they would not be able to play in the Olympics? People have been saying "it is good for the game and the NHL will benefit..." I am asking you HOW? They have gone to 5 Olympics and it hasn't meant anything for the NHL.

Cash is king. Though there are early examples of europeans that got offers from the NHL in the 70s and 80s that turned them down due to not being able to participate in the olympics, even though their main argument probably were that they had a good job, a family, a house etc.

I think that the NHL needs an olympic victory from the USA to make a participation beneficial. Otherwise it's more or less a preach to the choir. As is the World Cup.

 

[patnyrnyg]

A case in point: Hasn't the amount of Europeans in the NHL grown greatly over the past 20 years or so? I'm not saying it's all because of the Olympic exposure, but that sure is a factor.

Nope.

http://www.quanthockey.com/TS/TS_PlayerNationalities.php

In 2000-01, slightly more than 30% of the league was European. Now, it is down to 25%. The US has seen the biggest increase over the last 20 years.

Now, I know someone is going to bring up the Miracle on Ice and it is totally invalid. It was 35 years ago, so none of the American NHLers are old enough to actually remember it. Secondly, there is a big difference between the American Amateurs beating the Soviet Pros that had already proved they were as good as the NHLers, then what is happening in the Olympics today if you want to claim it is a long-term impact.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

The answer is right there in the post you quoted, if you read it carefully. The olympic exposure does not mean additional viewership to the NHL, but it will lead to kids around the world (both developing & established hockey countries) picking up the game, which will, in the long run, lead to better and better players available to play in the NHL.

A case in point: Hasn't the amount of Europeans in the NHL grown greatly over the past 20 years or so? I'm not saying it's all because of the Olympic exposure, but that sure is a factor.

As far as players being okay with it pre-1998, let's keep in mind that the meager amount of Europeans crossing over back then had already experienced at least one tournament. Some, a good example being Peter Forsberg, even postponed their transition for a season or two to take part. Another factor might be that in the early 90s few Europeans actually believed they might carve a lifelong career overseas. Many have been quoted saying that they figured they'll do it for a few years and then it's back to Europe. And some simply didn't mind - we don't live on a planet where everyone wears a hat, after all.

Finally, as we all should know, it's easy to give man things, but far harder to take 'em away. Players these days expect to make it to the Olympics even from the NHL. It'll be interesting to see what the reaction will be if that chance is suddenly denied.

No reason to presume it will be uniform, though. Some will be upset and others don't mind. Just like people's thoughts concerning the upcoming World Cup.

First of all the number of Europeans in the NHL has steadily declined since 1998, not increased as you claimed and there is no evidence I have seen that the very brief exposure the OG provides leads to any measurable growth in the sport. Secondly boatloads of Europeans came over in the 90's with the expectation of having a full career in the NHL, knowing that likely meant not playing in the OG again. I remember very well seeing Sundin being interviewed and him saying that his goal all along was to play in the NHL and not playing in any further OG was not something he really even thought about. Of course the rules changed and he did play in 98 - 02 - 06, but that is besides the point.

 

[FiLe]

There will always be more than enough players and talent for the NHL. Maybe 10 kids pick up the game that wouldn't have that become NHL'ers? Even that number is probably stretching it. However, all that would do is bump the bottom 10 players to the AHL. Not enough of an impact to improve the league as a whole.

Another unforeseen effect to some Euro kids displaying wariness towards the NHL because crossing over might curb down their chances of international play might be the league in turn displaying wariness towards all Europeans, no matter what they think about it. Same effect in play that causes Russians to fall in the draft.

I'm sure they are just as resentful towards Europe in terms of soccer as Europeans are towards us in terms of hockey.

And where does said resentment stem from? The fact that the NHL is stringent about making the players available on international events. Which is an issue that is nonexistent in soccer - and most other global sports.

First and foremost NA sports fans want to see the best. How marketable they are in NA is secondary.

Is the general quality of play secondary as well?

 

[FiLe]

First of all the number of Europeans in the NHL has steadily declined since 1998, not increased as you claimed

Mm-hmm.

As far Mr. Sundin goes, he's obviously an example who didn't mind. It's still not a planet of hats.

 

[patnyrnyg]

I think that the NHL needs an olympic victory from the USA to make a participation beneficial.

A lot of truth in this statement.

 

[varsaku]

Swiss fans travel to every international tournament. In REAL tournaments (Olympics, IIHF Worlds) people travel to support their country. This isn't boring nhl arena's where the arena's are filled with quiet people who don't know what they're watching.

It will be amazing to see that arena in Toronto filled with not one International fan! What a crowd, reminds me of the Stanley Cup final where I've heard alley ways louder then that arena in Chicago or Tampa Bay.

Wow that is so awesome. Wish NHL teams had supporter groups like many European teams. I would definitely join if a team started one. That is one of the biggest reasons I became an MLS fan was because of the atmosphere at games. Stars and Devils games I have been to were always so quiet and boring. Boston and Montreal were fun, but still nothing in comparison to this video.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

And where does said resentment stem from? The fact that the NHL is stringent about making the players available on international events. Which is an issue that is nonexistent in soccer - and most other global sports.

Is the general quality of play secondary as well?

The NHL has stopped play for 5 consecutive OG now to let players participate and the resentment amongst most Euro fans towards the league are as high as they have ever been, so the evidence is pretty strong that accommodating the OG does nothing for the NHL in terms of gaining acceptance with Europeans.

I'm not sure what you mean by quality of play. If you mean entertainment value then unfortunately I agree that winning (effectiveness) takes precedence over entertainment value too often in the NHL. However I should say that on average NHL games have a much more entertaining style of play than what we had at the last OG. Finland is a good example of a deathly boring team to watch, I couldn't imagine any league surviving if their teams played like that.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Mm-hmm.

As far Mr. Sundin goes, he's obviously an example who didn't mind. It's still not a planet of hats.

Nice chart and it shows that the number of Euros in the NHL has not grown greatly in the last 20 years as you originally claimed.

 

[stars33]

There are many reason why the amount of European players have not grown in the NHL.
Is partly because the Euro leagues are paying much better. There is a huge drop in Russian players because of the KHL. The star European player is going to come to the NHL because the money is to overwhelming. But a possible 4th liner might not because a two way contract may not be worth for him.
Also I do agree the Sochi games were less entertaining than Vancouver. However, I feel the atmosphere at games were not as energetic. One reason was that the NHL waited so long on there decision that fans from other countries did not attend in numbers it could had. The Sweden-Canada game had disgruntled Russian fans in the stands. I remember a small section cheering when Canada scored. Now compare that to Vancouver the place went nuts on a offside.
And finally for people who believe the Olympic Hockey tournament does nothing for the NHL. Than all advertising agencies are fools or you do not believe that Hockey is a great sport. If The millions of people who have been exposed to hockey by the Olympics who may otherwise never even gave hockey a chance. If this has no positive to the NHL than we hockey fans should go follow other sports because our sport sucks. If the Olympics did not get huge ratings than yes I would have to concede it had not worked. But that is not the case. And if the NHL is really not benefiting from all that exposure than someone down at the league office should be fired.
If I own a restaurant and had an advertisement that reached 30 million people and did not see one new customer. I do not think that is possible.

 

[Theokritos]

This thread is asking for ideas and suggestions for a true World Cup, right? Well, some basic ideas have already been brought forward earlier and been embraced by people here from both sides of the Atlantic. In my eyes the crucial point is that a true World Cup would need to be embraced in both halfs of the world of competitive hockey: North America and Europe. Therefore the first suggestion is rather obvious and not exactly an original one: switch the tournament between the hemispheres. Hold it in North America one time, in Europe the next time. Then back to North America and repeat. The whole thing, not just a group stage. Hold it regularly at an interval of not more than four years. Personally I would prefer a World Cup every two or three years, but some might favour the four year interval.
As long as both hemispheres use different sized rinks (small NHL ice vs large European ice plus some medium "hybrid" sizes used in parts of Europe) the differences should be accepted and embraced. They are part of the hockey world and we want a true World Cup, right? Therefore the rink size will also have to change with the switching of the hosts. Small ice when in North America, large and medium ice when in Europe.
The size of the starting field is a controversial issue. When the precursor of the World Cup finally became reality in 1976, it was announced that the field (then six nations) would be expanded considerably over the course of time. After all, the inspiration behind it all was a radio broadcast of the World Cup of Soccer (then 16 participants) back in 1966 that had Alan Eagleson and David Bauer wondering whether hockey couldn't have something similiar. This expansion however has been minimal so far: in the last two World Cup tournaments (1996, 2004) there were just eight nations participating. Like many other Europeans I would prefer an expansion to 12 or even more participants, but there doesn't seem to be any consensus on this question as of now. What everybody should be able to agree on however is that a true World Cup should be an international tournament in the true sense. Therefore participation will naturally be restricted to nations respectively national teams. There is no need for a "Team Rest of Europe" or even a "North American U23 Team".
Another issue that is rather controversial but one that could relatively easy be solved is the refereeing question. As long as there are games officiated by referees from non-partisan countries they're going to be tough to sell to Europe, no matter how non-partisan an individual referee himself might be. On the other hand the objections (mostly from North Americans, but not only from them) that IIHF refereeing often leaves something to be desired doesn't come out of thin air either. As suggested before, the organizers of a true World Cup tournament should identify the best referees of each country (which are not necessarily the ones appointed to the IIHF by the national federations), preferably via polls among the players of the KHL, Elitserien, SM-liiga (etc.) themselves. And, while we're at it, the best refs in the NHL should also be determined in that way. Then, to establish an international elite standard, you start an transatlantic exchange program which sees the top referees from both hemisphere training together in a first step. In a second step North American referees are sent to Europe and European referees sent to North America to work games there for a couple of months. The pool of officials involved in this program is the pool you're drawing the World Cup referees from.

 

[Atas2000]

My point was that I'm sure many, for example, South American soccer fans are equally upset that their best players leave and play for European clubs.

The OP is about a single event, thw World Cup, not where the players spend their regular season. And in football world World Cup is held in different countries to please all fans from different countries and give them the opportunity to maybe watch a best on best even in the sport in person someday. Football is global. Wherever you put the event in will be in a convenient time zone for some and in a horrible one for others, but moving the event helps. If the World Cup in hockey is going to be a "NHL home game", it will stay only worth a shrug by many fans.

 

[patnyrnyg]

There are many reason why the amount of European players have not grown in the NHL.
Is partly because the Euro leagues are paying much better. There is a huge drop in Russian players because of the KHL. The star European player is going to come to the NHL because the money is to overwhelming. But a possible 4th liner might not because a two way contract may not be worth for him.
Also I do agree the Sochi games were less entertaining than Vancouver. However, I feel the atmosphere at games were not as energetic. One reason was that the NHL waited so long on there decision that fans from other countries did not attend in numbers it could had. The Sweden-Canada game had disgruntled Russian fans in the stands. I remember a small section cheering when Canada scored. Now compare that to Vancouver the place went nuts on a offside.
And finally for people who believe the Olympic Hockey tournament does nothing for the NHL. Than all advertising agencies are fools or you do not believe that Hockey is a great sport. If The millions of people who have been exposed to hockey by the Olympics who may otherwise never even gave hockey a chance. If this has no positive to the NHL than we hockey fans should go follow other sports because our sport sucks. If the Olympics did not get huge ratings than yes I would have to concede it had not worked. But that is not the case. And if the NHL is really not benefiting from all that exposure than someone down at the league office should be fired.
If I own a restaurant and had an advertisement that reached 30 million people and did not see one new customer. I do not think that is possible.

They are called as Al Michaels used to say, "Once every 4 years hockey fans". Look at the ratings for all Olympic events. Things like figure skating, swimming when Phelps was winning gold medal for waking up in the morning, same for gymnastics for the Maginificent 7 and the Fab 5. However, what are the ratings for non-Olympic events in those sports? The Olympics brings out a sense of patriotism in people, not necessarily a love of sports. I know people who never attend games or watch sports on tv, except for the Olympics.

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

Global reach of social media for the Rugby World Cup.

Imagine this exhibition cash grab cup. It'll have marks only from Canada and from about the 10,000 people in the States who know about Hockey, while the rest of the world will have question marks, questioning wait, there's a World Cup in september for a winter sport right after the Rio 2016 Olympics.

What timing

It definitely will be laughed at by everyone, will be funny to see how embarassing this turns into as it gets closer. Hopefully one of the gimmick teams wins, so it'll turn into an absolute comedy show for sports fans across the globe lol!

 

[therealdeal]

Global reach of social media for the Rugby World Cup.

Imagine this exhibition cash grab cup. It'll have marks only from Canada and from about the 10,000 people in the States who know about Hockey, while the rest of the world will have question marks, questioning wait, there's a World Cup in september for a winter sport right after the Rio 2016 Olympics.

What timing

It definitely will be laughed at by everyone, will be funny to see how embarassing this turns into as it gets closer. Hopefully one of the gimmick teams wins, so it'll turn into an absolute comedy show for sports fans across the globe lol!

Everyone knows this is a product, get over it man.

So are the Olympics.

So are the World Championships.

If you want to sit back and complain and whine because this one doesn't fit the mold you want it to then go right ahead.

 

[patnyrnyg]

When you say "10,000 people in the States who know about hockey", you pretty much lose any credibility you have left. I could not care less about the Rugby World Cup, and yes on occassion I will watch Rugby on ESPN3, just do not follow it. Could not care less about the Cricket World Cup, didn't even know it existed until you posted about it. Does that mean the tournaments are not legit? We get it, you don't like the idea of a Hockey World Cup. I hate the current format, but I'm confident, the next one will be much better. Would also MUCH rather have the NHL running it than the joke IIHF, but do want countries to be able to use their best players regardless of the league in which they play.

 

[varsaku]

When you say "10,000 people in the States who know about hockey", you pretty much lose any credibility you have left. I could not care less about the Rugby World Cup, and yes on occassion I will watch Rugby on ESPN3, just do not follow it. Could not care less about the Cricket World Cup, didn't even know it existed until you posted about it. Does that mean the tournaments are not legit? We get it, you don't like the idea of a Hockey World Cup. I hate the current format, but I'm confident, the next one will be much better. Would also MUCH rather have the NHL running it than the joke IIHF, but do want countries to be able to use their best players regardless of the league in which they play.

Atleast the IIHF sticks to their rules unlike the NHL who changes rules on the fly.

 

[xxxx]

Global reach of social media for the Rugby World Cup.

Imagine this exhibition cash grab cup. It'll have marks only from Canada and from about the 10,000 people in the States who know about Hockey, while the rest of the world will have question marks, questioning wait, there's a World Cup in september for a winter sport right after the Rio 2016 Olympics.

What timing

It definitely will be laughed at by everyone, will be funny to see how embarassing this turns into as it gets closer. Hopefully one of the gimmick teams wins, so it'll turn into an absolute comedy show for sports fans across the globe lol!

you seem to like comedy too