International Tournament Idea (Need Help)

[Nuggets]

Hey guys,

So I have had this idea for a while and wanted feedback on it mainly with rosters. The idea is: The top 48 IIHF Ranked teams in one tournament, the top 12 teams split into 6 groups of 8. Ex. IIHF Ranked #1 is Sweden and they would be placed in the same group with Ranked #12 France. The plan I had to make it a fair tournament for the more non-experienced teams is only allow 5 NHL Players on any team, 1 of which must be a goalie. Many people say that this would be a terribly idea however, how are any teams supposed to get better if they play the same teams constantly?

The question is for the teams who have more than 5 NHL players on their team, who would you put on the teams? Full rosters are my favorite lol.

Click to read more...

 

[JackSlater]

I don't see how that format improves any team. The teams will get better by improving their development domestically, not playing a handful of games against weakened opposition.

For Canada, the players picked would have to feature Price, Crosby, Weber and Doughty. Price is Canada's best goaltender, Doughty and Weber are dominant internationally, and Crosby is used to playing with crappy wingers anyway. I would probably pick Tavares as the final player. Stamkos may be better, but Tavares has more international experience and to me is more likely to carry his line mates.

 

[slovakiasnextone]

No team will get better by getting murdered by being scored on a few dozens of goals per game and never getting out of their deffensive zone. And with 48 teams involved there would be loads of those no matter how many NHL palyers are/aren't allowed. Even teams from Division I would be handing out those to the lowest ranked teams. I'm not quite sure how much you know about the level of hockey in the IIHF member countries but chances are some of the lowest ranked countries would have trouble keeping up with a Canadian house league team yet alone with European professional players.

There's a good reason why the IIHF keeps the levels of the WC separated by divisions. Even withe the divisions there still used to be lots of blowouts withing one division (this has gotten somewhat better with the recent change of splitting one division into two levels).

 

[Exarz]

Having 20 team in the top division feels like a better idea, and then only have division 1, 2 and 3 instead of 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B and so on. Merging the A and B divisions feels like a better choice in the development point of view!

 

[slovakiasnextone]

Having 20 team in the top division feels like a better idea, and then only have division 1, 2 and 3 instead of 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B and so on. Merging the A and B divisions feels like a better choice in the development point of view!

Why? Currently as the divisions are there are teams of aprroximately the same level in each division unlike what they were under the old Div IA/IB/IIA/IIB etc. system. So really what could be the point of merging the teams of a very different level together instead of having them play teams who are at roughly the same/somewhat better level? How will blowouts help any of those teams?

 

[Babula]

Having 20 team in the top division feels like a better idea, and then only have division 1, 2 and 3 instead of 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B and so on. Merging the A and B divisions feels like a better choice in the development point of view!

more boring games before the QFs ?

 

[Exarz]

more boring games before the QFs ?

I've had a thread about this before, but I can summarize it here:

• Four groups of five teams - the winner of each group goes directly to the QFs
• The runner-up and third placed team (seeded like the 2nd placed team in group A plays the 3rd placed team in group B, the 2nd placed team in group B plays the 3rd placed team in group A, the 2nd placed team in group C plays the 3rd placed team in group D and the 2nd placed team in group D plays the 3rd placed team in group C) face each other in the "eight finals" (like in the Olympics)
• The fourth and fifth placed teams in each group play three round of "play out" (with the same seeding system as for the eight finals) to get the one relegated team

It is basically adding the four "elevator teams" to the top division, and then add the third and fourth placed team from Division 1A (this year it would be Japan and Ukraine).

I don't think there would be more boring games, since the amount of games before the QFs would decrease to four (or five if you play the eight finals) instead of having seven games as it is today.

I also believe it is better in the development point of view for the elevator teams instead of getting promoted and relegated every second year!

 

[Exarz]

Why? Currently as the divisions are there are teams of aprroximately the same level in each division unlike what they were under the old Div IA/IB/IIA/IIB etc. system. So really what could be the point of merging the teams of a very different level together instead of having them play teams who are at roughly the same/somewhat better level? How will blowouts help any of those teams?

You have a point in what you say, and the teams are probably not ready for it yet. It is a future thought though!

 

[Raimo Sillanpää]

The plan I had to make it a fair tournament for the more non-experienced teams is only allow 5 NHL Players on any team, 1 of which must be a goalie.

Why this?

Now Canada picks 5 superstars, and a bunch of career-AHL guys. What's the point of rewarding the nobodies by competing internationally? What's to stop the nobodies from being dirty for the sake of 5 minutes of fame?


Rank 46 is Mongolia - SHL Sweden + 5 NHL Stars vs full strenght Mongolia..

*shrug* On the other hand.. Harry Watson's record of 36 goals in a tournament could finally be broken