WC: I'm speechless... USA to the Relegation Round

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,148
2,588
Northern Virginia
Yes, FIFA as an organizing body is the model that would be ideal for international hockey, but unfortunately the IIHF in hockey has nowhere near the same kind of clout. There is a power vacuum.

The prime issue is that the NHL dominates the money pool and has a whip hand over the other international leagues. You have nothing like that in world football, where you might have the English Premiership, but also strong teams and leagues across Europe, from Spain to Italy to France, to leagues in Central and South America. More importantly, there is money diffused across the leagues. There is no one dominating league to compete with the world body.

FIFA can hold annual UEFA tourneys and a quadrennial World Cup, all of which are hugely successful. The key is that FIFA is the central clearinghouse and holds the undisputed title. In the hockey world, the IIHF and NHL compete, and see each other stealing potential earnings from one another. The NHL's push to go to Europe every year is a deliberate move to expand to Europe, first to develop an avid fan base, and perhaps a European division many years in the future.

I would say that if the dates of the IIHF World Championships were ever flexible, you might see renewed interest and participation from North America. Hard to say, though. The fact that the football leagues are not playing in Summer when the World Cup is played is important in making this comparison.

The main problem is that the situation has created a condition where kids in various countries have alternating priorities. Most kids born in North America want to win a Stanley Cup, then perhaps an Olympic gold. Some may want a Memorial Cup. Some in the US may want to win the local high school championship, or a college Frozen Four championship. In Europe, I get the sense that Olympic gold is #1, then perhaps a Stanley Cup, or perhaps a World Championship — it depends on one's background.

The lack of a single overarching body and stable international competitive structure means that not everyone in hockey wants the same thing, nor values the same trophies in the same order, the way they do in football. You grow up a football player, and you want to win the World Cup more than anything else, whether you grow up in Brazil or England or Spain or Argentina or Ghana or Italy. Hockey, sadly, does not have that unity.
 

hwkn

Registered User
Oct 2, 2005
87
0
Evanston il
Maybe when the world championships take place in an olympic year they ought to combine the two.[if you win the olympic gold medal you're also the world champion]
 

EbencoyE

Registered User
Nov 26, 2006
1,958
5
Maybe when the world championships take place in an olympic year they ought to combine the two.[if you win the olympic gold medal you're also the world champion]

Money runs the world, not logic.

If the IIHF can make money off of the WC, they will hold them.
 

Ribban

Registered User
May 16, 2005
1,511
0
USA
Maybe when the world championships take place in an olympic year they ought to combine the two.[if you win the olympic gold medal you're also the world champion]

The IOC and the IIHF aren't the same governing bodies. It's kinda' like saying, so when we have the Olympics, there is no NHL.

Money runs the world, not logic.

If the IIHF can make money off of the WC, they will hold them.

True, and also, remember, the IIHF system deals with promotion and relegation. So, whereas Canada, USA, Russia, etc. might feel it being redundant and a waste of time to have the WCH in an olympic year, I doubt the hockey fans in Poland, Austria, England, and so on agrees. To not have the Div II championships one year would be a blow to the "emerging" nations there.
 

jekoh

Registered User
Jun 8, 2004
4,416
4
So needless to say, the IIHF is not exactly inviting the NA audience to participate by keeping the tourney in Europe year in and year out,


It's a two way street. The IIHF could schedule a tourney or two in the United States every once in a while,
Countries bid for the right to host the WC. Canada got the WCh on its very first bid and the IIHF is still accused of keeping the tournament in Europe? Give me a break.
 

NeverGoingToWin

Registered User
Jul 24, 2004
3,880
73
The IOC and the IIHF aren't the same governing bodies. It's kinda' like saying, so when we have the Olympics, there is no NHL.



True, and also, remember, the IIHF system deals with promotion and relegation. So, whereas Canada, USA, Russia, etc. might feel it being redundant and a waste of time to have the WCH in an olympic year, I doubt the hockey fans in Poland, Austria, England, and so on agrees. To not have the Div II championships one year would be a blow to the "emerging" nations there.

This is a fair point I have never considered. Fans should not whine when the players do not want to play in an Olympic year though.
 

NeverGoingToWin

Registered User
Jul 24, 2004
3,880
73
Countries bid for the right to host the WC. Canada got the WCh on its very first bid and the IIHF is still accused of keeping the tournament in Europe? Give me a break.

He phrased it wrong but it is a problem that the tournament is in Europe all the time. It is not the IIHF's fault but it does mean that North Americans will not pay as much attention to it as if they were in North America.
 

jekoh

Registered User
Jun 8, 2004
4,416
4
He phrased it wrong but it is a problem that the tournament is in Europe all the time. It is not the IIHF's fault but it does mean that North Americans will not pay as much attention to it as if they were in North America.
Yes and this is exactly why the IIHF will give the tournament to NA at every possible opportunity.
 

Oilmageddon*

Guest
I heard on a canadian radio sport show today that more american kids are registering for hockey every year now than canadian kids. has anyone heard anything familiar. it shocked me.
 

just22

Registered User
Aug 2, 2009
4,463
1,204
I heard on a canadian radio sport show today that more american kids are registering for hockey every year now than canadian kids. has anyone heard anything familiar. it shocked me.

Well USA's population is like 10x larger, not that surprising.
 

Ribban

Registered User
May 16, 2005
1,511
0
USA
I heard on a canadian radio sport show today that more american kids are registering for hockey every year now than canadian kids. has anyone heard anything familiar. it shocked me.

Yes, that's correct. However, you should keep in mind that many of those kids give it up just a year or two after they "tried it out" due to insufficient amount of leaders, facilities, expense and local competition (rec players in U-10, squirt, atom, level have to drive 3-4 hours just to play a game).

The good news for USA Hockey is that more people are at least giving it a shot, and it is growing faster than before.

This development was covered in an article in the Toronto Sun (?!) a while back, I believe. The author was talking about how technology enable kids to enjoy improved infrastructure, which he speculated has led to a decreasing focus on hockey among young Canadians, compared to 25 years ago. He speculated that it had to do with kids having a betteropportunity to get exposed to more options and make their own choices, which is changing the socal landscapes from mono cultures (the term he used) to more multi culture. So Canada see more kids jump into things like snowboarding, soccer, etc., and American kids are going out for hockey, lacrosse, soccer, etc, as opposed to the traditional big three.

Of course he also lamented the ever increasing ratio of kids opting out/left out of sports all together on behalf of video games and two parents working long hours that logistically prevents them from supporting the kids' after school activities.

I've searched for a link, source, for you, but I can't for my life remember the author or the paper, so I apologize for coming up short. Bummer, It was a great article, and I wish I had saved it. I just remember the main points he made, which he had backed up with research and numbers very nicely.
 

Ribban

Registered User
May 16, 2005
1,511
0
USA
This is a fair point I have never considered. Fans should not whine when the players do not want to play in an Olympic year though.

I coudn't agree more with you... and just so you know where I stand on the WCH... The term World Championship is nothing more than a label. It is the world movement to grow hockey globally, which makes it the most important thing we have, IMO. But, like so many people accurately point out, it's not a good indicator of the best hockey nation in the world. JMHO.
 

God Bless Canada

Registered User
Jul 11, 2004
11,793
18
Bentley reunion
This is going to give a lot of ammunition to the people who say that the Worlds shouldn't take place in an Olympic year. Look at that American roster. It's far from their best team. There might be three or four guys who might get consideration to play for the U.S. in a best-on-best tournament. They just don't have the depth to win when their top 15 or 20 players say no. And they certainly don't have the depth when none of their No. 1 NHL goalies (and they have a few) say no.

Americans shouldn't panic. If you use the World Championships as a gage for your hockey progam, you have a problem. It means either a) you've had a down year or two, you're in a drought, and you're having a great WC; or b) you're prone to overreacting.

This is the best year in a long time for American hockey. Silver at the Olympics. Gold at the WJC. Those are the closest we get to best-on-best hockey. The World Championships in an Olympic year? Not that significant.
 

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,148
2,588
Northern Virginia
The key factor, of course, is that the Olympics fill the coffers of the IOC and Olympic hockey committees; the World Championships fill the coffers of the IIHF; and the Canada Cup/World Cup of Hockey fills the coffers of the NHL, its constituent owners, and the NHLPA.

The idea of canceling events or staggering events might make sense if they were run by the same overarching body, but with financial incentives for each side to hold tourneys and reap their share of profits from their own tourney, the chances of that are slim to none.
 

Evil Doctor

Cryin' Hank crying
Apr 29, 2009
2,400
6
Cambridge, ON
Countries bid for the right to host the WC. Canada got the WCh on its very first bid and the IIHF is still accused of keeping the tournament in Europe? Give me a break.

From what I understand, the 2008 tourney was given to Canada to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the IIHF, and Hockey Canada was more than happy to accommodate, not because there was some arbitrary bid that year. Because the scheduling of the tourney coincides with not only the playoffs of the NHL, but of the minors and junior leagues as well makes hosting a tourney like the WC problematic for most cities in North America.
 

Evil Doctor

Cryin' Hank crying
Apr 29, 2009
2,400
6
Cambridge, ON
I heard on a canadian radio sport show today that more american kids are registering for hockey every year now than canadian kids. has anyone heard anything familiar. it shocked me.

It's possible. There are currently 499,000 registered hockey players in Canada, 465,000 for the US. They are the only two countries with more than 100,000 registered players (number three on the list is the Czech Republic with 95,000). At some point it's reasonable to assume that US might pass Canada at some point in total numbers, but it won't mean anything, it's the quality of the development not the total numbers that count.
 

CantHaveTkachev

Legends
Nov 30, 2004
50,888
31,865
St. OILbert, AB
I heard on a canadian radio sport show today that more american kids are registering for hockey every year now than canadian kids. has anyone heard anything familiar. it shocked me.

there are more registered soccer players in the United States then anywhere else in the world...

yet they stink internationally and have yet to churn out a player of the caliber of Ronaldo, Messi, Rooney or Torres
 

Stats01

Registered User
Jul 12, 2009
20,386
0
Toronto
They haven't been relegated. They're just in the relegation round. They play 3 games against the other teams in that pool. I think the top 2 end up staying in the main group while the bottom two get relegated to Division 2.

I would be SHOCKED !!!! if the U.S ends up being relegated. They get to play France, Italy and Kazahstan.
 

Mr Epee

Registered User
May 12, 2010
4
0
Jyväskylä, Finland
The key factor, of course, is that the Olympics fill the coffers of the IOC and Olympic hockey committees; the World Championships fill the coffers of the IIHF; and the Canada Cup/World Cup of Hockey fills the coffers of the NHL, its constituent owners, and the NHLPA.

The idea of canceling events or staggering events might make sense if they were run by the same overarching body, but with financial incentives for each side to hold tourneys and reap their share of profits from their own tourney, the chances of that are slim to none.

This is true to a certain extent, but there is another issue clouding the waters.

A clear trend has been identified. The 'World Championships' which are held in Olympic years are contested by teams which are not populated by the best players from those countries. This leads to some strange results. There may be an internally held position that extends beyond strict monetary issues.

Hockey has a competitive balance problem. Those countries outside the traditional super-powers of the sport simply do not have a chance to realistically compete against the elite squads. The competitive advantage in terms of culture, developed talent (coaching, trainers and players), facilities and equipment stand as a practically unassailable barrier to entry. A watered down 'World Championships' is the only conceivable scenario in which the lower-tiers can make a run long enough to play in any of the meaningful games.

Case in point: I'm willing to guess that hockey has never been as popular in Denmark as it is right now. Whether or not that success is sustainable is certainly questionable My expertise lies in the area of sports administration - not hockey, per se.

The other side of the coin is that the IIHF (by logical extension) finds it palatable that their 'World Championship' event be spent to purchase hockey ambassadorship rather than (as the name would imply) an elite event designed to showcase the best hockey on the planet.

It's all good. ;-)
 

Dfire

Registered User
Oct 17, 2008
310
1
Hockey has a competitive balance problem. Those countries outside the traditional super-powers of the sport simply do not have a chance to realistically compete against the elite squads. The competitive advantage in terms of culture, developed talent (coaching, trainers and players), facilities and equipment stand as a practically unassailable barrier to entry. A watered down 'World Championships' is the only conceivable scenario in which the lower-tiers can make a run long enough to play in any of the meaningful games.

So which teams exactly are the "elite squads" and the "lower-tiers"? If your taking the Worlds out of the equasion there's not much basis for a comparison like that.
I find it weird to dispute the fact that talent-proportions are able to shift and I'm kinda sick of people belittleling this tournament because the results don't fit in their NHL-defined view of the hockey world.

Keep in mind that the "lower-tiers" are missing players too.
 

DoyleG

Reality sucks, Princesses!
Dec 29, 2008
7,326
889
YEG-->YYJ-->YWG-->YYB
Not that you would have to worry, but just to let you know a little trivia.

USA Hockey were actualyly relegated to the B-Group back in 1984 after losing to Italy amongst others.

The following year, the red/white/blue boys bounced right back up and had no problems attracting people to make sure the sojourn to the B-group was cut as short as possible.

If it ever were to come down to it, I think you'd see all sorts of people crawl out of the wood work to put the US back at Hockey's grown-up table, and maybe even make sure it got one of the end seats for some time to follow. Americans can claim they don't care about the IIHF, but I believe that rethoric only goes so far. It's a proud nation, and Joe Schmoe may not care or know much about hockey, but a great deal of people do, and many of the best players have been to IIHF championships at some level, and they would certainly care if the USA were relegated.

History supports the idea.

It was 1982 that the Americans got relegated and they won promotion in the Pool B tournament in 1983.

There were no WHC in 1984 as they weren't held during an Olympic year at the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad