Toggle sidebar

Is a 2-out-of-3 really even a desired Finals format at this point?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
cutchemist42

cutchemist42

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
6,706
221
Winnipeg
Was listening to PTS on Friday where they discussed the WC for about 70 mins.

http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect...3--Prime-Time-Sports---September-23---5pm.mp3

http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect...1--Prime-Time-Sports---September-23---6pm.mp3

Basically the point was brought up that with the most exciting team out that was playing offensive hockey, Canada and any possible finals might not be that fun to watch.

I've always thought a best-of-3 makes it equally as possible that all we watch is a boring matchup twice vs once and didnt automatically think it was a bonus.
Click to read more...
 
lol, didn't know you could determine pregame whether the game coming up was going to be exciting
 
I think they figured Canada would be in the finals and at least two games is a lot of money.
 
Better then 1 and done. I'd prefer 3 games rather than 2 of 3. Bonus that they wouldn't have to worry about refunding a game.
 
1 and done would be better for the team playing against canada, 2 out of 3 kind of ruins the "punchers chance" at beating canada.
 
It is good that they have gone back to best of 3, while it may not work out that great this go round there will come a time in the future that we will get a great series because of it.

And who knows? we may still get it this time.

It's more hockey, always a good thing.

It will pay off, if not this time then at a later date.

Remember the WHC doing it that time with Sweden vs Canada, it was great, wish they would go back to it.
 
1987 and 1996 were both very exciting finals series.

Just because you may not like the match-up doesn't mean the format is wrong.
 
I have tickets to all three and am from the States. If Sweden wins, I am staying and going. If Europe wins, I am selling the tickets and booking an early flight home.

This 2 out of 3 final needed Team NA or atleast Russia bad.
 
I think a 3 game final is great. It should allow the teams to build up a hatred of each other and it will help build rivalries as well in internationally hockey which we've been missing a bit lately because of Canadas dominance.
 
NHLsnipers said:
I have tickets to all three and am from the States. If Sweden wins, I am staying and going. If Europe wins, I am selling the tickets and booking an early flight home.

This 2 out of 3 final needed Team NA or atleast Russia bad.
Click to expand...

What is wrong with sweden as the opponent?

They are generally regarded as the 2nd best hockey country currently.

The final would be the way it should be.
 
If the Final was Russia-Europe, that would be a disaster. All major networks would air that with poor ratings.

At least Canada is in, so complete faceplant was avoided.
 
This is the only thing they did right. Other than holding the tournament in one city, but that's self-evident.

Unfortunately because of the other things they didn't do right, I have to wish Europe is in the final. I want to see Bettman's face during a break.
 
wirelessflyingcord said:
This is the only thing they did right. Other than holding the tournament in one city, but that's self-evident.

Unfortunately because of the other things they didn't do right, I have to wish Europe is in the final. I want to see Bettman's face during a break.
Click to expand...

Why would it bother Bettman? If anything the NHL would use it as vindication that it was better for the tourney to field a team of all stars rather than include a weaker country who would have been blown out of the water.

The fact they made it to the semi's will let the NHL say they made the right choice in order to have a more competitive tournament.

Even if you don't agree,you know that is how it will be spun.
 
It's good to be a reason there is a difference in the tournaments, having them follow the same rule is rather dullard and makes each event less unique and any of them less enticing.
 
2 out of 3 final is a distinct feature of Canada Cup/World Cup so this is here to stay for future World Cup editions. I like it because unlike other World Cup in other sports, it prevents fluke win by a fluke goal. It also produced classics like 1987 Canada Cup final. After first game, it will see other team adjust and can produce a classic in the second game. First game tend to be forgotten often but second and third game tend to produce a classic. So in any World Cup final from other sports, the final tend to be a dud 75% of time. 2 of 3 final can produce a unforgotten moment years from now, we will talk about those moments. If 2 out of 3 didn't happen in 1987, we wouldn't be talking about Lemieux dramatic goal in the dying minute of the game. So leave this alone and this is an important part of World Cup of Hockey.
 
UnrefinedCrude said:
Why would it bother Bettman? If anything the NHL would use it as vindication that it was better for the tourney to field a team of all stars rather than include a weaker country who would have been blown out of the water.

The fact they made it to the semi's will let the NHL say they made the right choice in order to have a more competitive tournament.

Even if you don't agree,you know that is how it will be spun.
Click to expand...
That's what they will probably say and also everyone who thought or still thinks the made up teams were a good idea, however, this is not the final pair they were looking for. These two teams were supposed to be bad and out of the semis. The final pair was supposed to be Canada-USA from the way the groups and format were setup, and if it couldn't be USA then any actual country would have been better. I can't imagine Canadians are as pumped up about the finals as they would be if the opponent was a long time rival.

So, maybe good for proving they in principle made the right choice, but bad for ratings and business.
 
In theory I like a three game final, but in this tournament in particular it just seems odd since there are so few teams and the preliminary round was so short. A lucky bounce in the prelims had a lot more weight than it will in the finals, making the tournament weighted poorly/unfairly. Losing one game in the final is not problem, but losing one game in the prelims means you don't even advance past the first round. I'm also pretty sure the NHL had hoped for a drawn out Canada vs. Russia or Sweden Final. This one-time shot Euro team is not going to draw anywhere near the attention, emotion or excitement, not to mention dollars. And no matter what happens, the entire tournament will just be a needless, forgotten footnote in the pages of international hockey history.
 
Last edited:
Canada Cup used to be 1 game until Soviets won in 81. 3 game series is clearly an advantage to Canada. The irony is it actually cost them the 96 world cup because Canada won the first game. :laugh:

Although Yzerman's OT goal was clearly offside.
 
UnrefinedCrude said:
Why would it bother Bettman? If anything the NHL would use it as vindication that it was better for the tourney to field a team of all stars rather than include a weaker country who would have been blown out of the water.

The fact they made it to the semi's will let the NHL say they made the right choice in order to have a more competitive tournament.

Even if you don't agree,you know that is how it will be spun.
Click to expand...

I was as dead set against the idea of a Team North America and Team Europe as anybody, mostly because they were calling it a World Cup. That said, I've really enjoyed watching both those teams play. I wouldn't mind them keeping the format as long as they changed what they were calling it. I doubt that happens though as it really weakened the American team. I can't see Bettman risking that happening again and having the tournament ignored in the states again like this one has been.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom