Let's rank all the competitive leagues

[lakers11]

It helps if you have the most spectators in europe for the 14th time in a row, and can make a profit with the catering for all these people.

50 Mio isnt the budget though, but the total revenue for the entire SCB Eishockey AG. The team has about 20 Mio, for which around 3/5 is used on player salaries.

But yeah, you won't find a single fan of another NLA team that isn't jealous of them and their financial abilities. I know i am

and yet Lugano beats them roster wise

 

[Ola]

1. NHL
2. KHL
3. SHL (SHL-teams dominates in CHL year after year)
4. NLA
5. AHL
6. Liiga
7. DEL
8. Extraliga
9. Allsvenskan (SHL-2)
10. EBEL

Yeah, I agree.

I think the AHL is a bit problematic to rank. In many perspectives that are relevant to "posters at hfboards", you can rank it 2-3. But overall the fact that its a development league/farm league impacts the competitiveness of it so much that its takes a back seat, as does the talent spread out over the number of teams in the AHL. I've watched AHL games for a good 15-16 years, I would also state that the AHL is less competitive now than ever to be honest. Just my impression, but it seems like more effort was put into winning the Calder if you go back 15 years than now.

The SHL tops the NLA for sure, even if the top NLA players are paid the most outside the NHL/KHL.

The SM-liiga has gone from being just about on par with the SHL to distinct behind it after closing it. This is a feature with European hockey that you need to experience to get what it is about. With an open league in today economics were most money come from TV-deals -- an organization that is demoted in Sweden for example goes from having a 10-15m USD budget to 1-3m USD budget over night literary (!). The people in charge for an organization that is bottom 4 in an open league are basically on suicide watch starting on like 1 February every year. If you literary could measure how pressured a hockey player is, the ones playing for teams fighting to not be demoted would probably rank at the top in all of hockey year in and year out. And on the other scale you have teams fighting to go from having 1-3m to spend to having 15m to spend, over night. Which of course is a dream come true.

This of course pushes teams into becoming really competetive.

Lastly, Filip Forsberg is an example of a player jumping directly from Allsvenskan (SHL-2) to the NHL. During the last lock-out a bunch of NHL stars played in Allsvenskan (SHL teams decided to not bring in NHL players before the NHL season was cancelled). Its a really good league. But, there is a distinct difference between roughly the best half of the teams in Allsvenskan and the worst 6-8 teams. In terms of budget, historically the best 6-8 teams would rank right behind the top 3-4 in the SM-liiga. One year not that long ago only Kärpät in Finland had a bigger budget than the top 3 teams in Allsvenskan. There is a lot of money in the top teams in the second tier division in Sweden. Its definitely top 10, hard to rank it exactly though.

 

[Mad Dog Tannen]

Every economist would say that you only need to look at the player salaries to determine the strength of the various leagues...

If every league was an pen market, had no nationality restrictions, and no salary cap then yes.

That idea is true to some extent, where waters get muddied is in feeder leagues to the NHL like the ahl. Nylander left a euro league to play in the ahl, that has hard caps on salaries.

The ordering is clearly,

NHL

Khl

Ahl

The rest.

 

[Jablkon]

Evaluating the european leagues using the CHL is a bit pointless imho, as it's just a gimmick tourney some teams use for pre-season while others take it more seriously.

One of the NLA-represantatives in this "Champions League" had to play its way out of relegation last year, for instance (Fribourg).


Anyway, here's my take:
1. NHL
2. KHL
3. SHL
4. NLA/Liiga (about on par imho, depends on signings every year)
6. AHL
7. Extraliga/DEL
9. EBEL
10. Allsvenskan
11. VHL
12. ECHL
13. Get-Ligaen (trending upwards tough)
14. NLB
15. Mestis
16. EIHL
17. Ligue Magnus
18. All those leagues i forgot in my ignorance

I actually have no clue about the ECHL, i placed it where i'd expect them just from reputation. Also left the NA amateur/junior leagues out, as they are merely for development, which makes it almost impossible to compare.

The position is same for everybody. Some permanent teams plus league champion + those wild cards. Czech teams are definetely from upper part of the Extraliga. i can imagine another 2,3 teams being there but generally its OK.There were some teams in the first year struggling with attitude. however its a completely different story this year, all czech teams are determined.whether Shl or liiga teams are motived is irrelevant as they still winning. I doubt Del teams wouldnt be motivated.there is no sign That Chl is gimmick tourney IMO. its just superinteresting tourney and the evaluation reflects the reality in my opinion

 

[JoeyBeans]

CIS??

http://english.cis-sic.ca/sports/mice/index

 

[QnebO]

Does AHL championship mean much for players, or are they purely just hoping to get lifted up and that being the only thing they care about?

 

[Lataba76]

1. NHL
2. KHL
3. SHL
4. LIIGA
5. AHL
6. NLA
7. Extraleague(CZE)
8. DEL
9. EBEL
10. Allsvenskan

 

[holyprime]

and yet Lugano beats them roster wise

I think Leuenberger is a pretty bad GM, but we have Habisreutinger, a guy that managed 3 first round exits and a playout appearance with an almost unlimited budget and still has his job (to be fair, he also cleaned up some of the mess he took over).

The position is same for everybody. Some permanent teams plus league champion + those wild cards. Czech teams are definetely from upper part of the Extraliga. i can imagine another 2,3 teams being there but generally its OK.There were some teams in the first year struggling with attitude. however its a completely different story this year, all czech teams are determined.whether Shl or liiga teams are motived is irrelevant as they still winning. I doubt Del teams wouldnt be motivated.there is no sign That Chl is gimmick tourney IMO. its just superinteresting tourney and the evaluation reflects the reality in my opinion

Well, gimmick was maybe too harsh, some teams provide us with some good and intense games. Yet, at least to me, some also put up a pretty lackluster performance for the most part.

I just don't the think its a good indicator to rank the leagues, just like in soccer as well (no one's gonna say Ligue 1 is the most competitive, if a team like PSG wins the CL). That doesnt mean it can't help to see some trends (like with the SHL-teams).

 

[Jablkon]

I think Leuenberger is a pretty bad GM, but we have Habisreutinger, a guy that managed 3 first round exits and a playout appearance with an almost unlimited budget and still has his job (to be fair, he also cleaned up some of the mess he took over).


Well, gimmick was maybe too harsh, some teams provide us with some good and intense games. Yet, at least to me, some also put up a pretty lackluster performance for the most part.

I just don't the think its a good indicator to rank the leagues, just like in soccer as well (no one's gonna say Ligue 1 is the most competitive, if a team like PSG wins the CL). That doesnt mean it can't help to see some trends (like with the SHL-teams).

I dont think there are so many teams in Europe with significantly higher budget that would swings them to be cup contender (maybe top EBEL teams or that Bern case?). I would even say that salary conditions in european hockey are much more equal than in soccer (except KHL and probably some teams in NLA).

All I can say is that all czech teams dramatically changed their attitude towards this league and take it 100 percent seriously (who wants to be kicked out in group stage every year? You did not write it directly but I reckon we talking here mostly about swiss teams. Well at least there are some "founding" permanent CHL teams whose attitude should be undisputed. Why would they invest money into it?

 

[Slimmy]

I dont think there are so many teams in Europe with significantly higher budget that would swings them to be cup contender (maybe top EBEL teams or that Bern case?). I would even say that salary conditions in european hockey are much more equal than in soccer (except KHL and probably some teams in NLA).

All I can say is that all czech teams dramatically changed their attitude towards this league and take it 100 percent seriously (who wants to be kicked out in group stage every year? You did not write it directly but I reckon we talking here mostly about swiss teams. Well at least there are some "founding" permanent CHL teams whose attitude should be undisputed. Why would they invest money into it?

All good points and I hope the Swiss will return with a feeling that they have something to prove rather than showing disinterest. European hockey need this competition to grow the interest and status of hockey and the perception of leagues in Europe. The norwegians sure have impressed me in this tourney and I hope their success resonates in Norway to tune up the following.

 

[Aceboogie]

CIS??

http://english.cis-sic.ca/sports/mice/index

Right around CHL or ECHL. Probaly goes ECHL-top CIS- Top CHL- rest of CIS- rest of CHL

CIS are older players who were top on their CHL teams and probaly good enough for AHL/ECHL journeyman careers but choose education. Golden bears for instance would beat any CHL team. The players are too big and strong, and even their smaller guys are tough

 

[Ryker]

Right around CHL or ECHL. Probaly goes ECHL-top CIS- Top CHL- rest of CIS- rest of CHL

CIS are older players who were top on their CHL teams and probaly good enough for AHL/ECHL journeyman careers but choose education. Golden bears for instance would beat any CHL team. The players are too big and strong, and even their smaller guys are tough

Yeah, agreed. You also sometimes get really good players in the CIS, such as Derek Ryan.

 

[lakers11]

All good points and I hope the Swiss will return with a feeling that they have something to prove rather than showing disinterest. European hockey need this competition to grow the interest and status of hockey and the perception of leagues in Europe. The norwegians sure have impressed me in this tourney and I hope their success resonates in Norway to tune up the following.

You mean there's an "ON" switch for SC Bern, by pressing this they'd easily beat Linköping and Hifk? Or with Fribourg-Gotteron easily beating Luleå and Lukko, sending one of them out. Interesting, but somehow I doubt it.

If you've seen Djurgården-ZUG, you could tell that both of the teams really tried to win the match. ZUG just wasn't good enough

CHL=SHL including Kärpät

the other leagues are more than welcome to prove me wrong

 

[Lataba76]

You mean there's an "ON" switch for SC Bern, by pressing this they'd easily beat Linköping and Hifk? Or with Fribourg-Gotteron easily beating Luleå and Lukko, sending one of them out. Interesting, but somehow I doubt it.

If you've seen Djurgården-ZUG, you could tell that both of the teams really tried to win the match. ZUG just wasn't good enough

CHL=SHL including Kärpät

the other leagues are more than welcome to prove me wrong

Yes the NLA and swiss hockey is overrated! But CHL=SHL + Kärpät+Tappara !

 

[BeastoftheEast85]

From what I have seen, the top 10 Men's hockey leagues in the world:

1. NHL
2. KHL
3. AHL - (developmental league so quality varies but overall I have seen AHL players be able to transition into any league world in the world much easier than visa-versa)
4. Elitserien
5. Czech Extraliga (underrated league especially with Lev Praha gone)
6. LIIGA (With Jokerit leaving for KHL, I see NLA surpassing LIIGA in a few years)
7. NLA
8. DEL
9. Slovak Extraliga
10. ECHL

 

[Slimmy]

You mean there's an "ON" switch for SC Bern, by pressing this they'd easily beat Linköping and Hifk? Or with Fribourg-Gotteron easily beating Luleå and Lukko, sending one of them out. Interesting, but somehow I doubt it.

If you've seen Djurgården-ZUG, you could tell that both of the teams really tried to win the match. ZUG just wasn't good enough

CHL=SHL including Kärpät

the other leagues are more than welcome to prove me wrong

I'm talking about the interest for the tourney in Switzerland. You should relax about this stuff.

 

[lakers11]

I'm talking about the interest for the tourney in Switzerland. You should relax about this stuff.

You mean the interest is better in sweden? Attendance wise its lower than DEL, NLA, Liiga

 

[Slimmy]

You mean the interest is better in sweden? Attendance wise its lower than DEL, NLA, Liiga

Give it a rest. I'm not even disagreeing with you. I just hate this talk of 'taking my ball and going home'.
Instead the talk should be of how to be more competitive and how to grow the CHL even further. We need more hype.

 

[lakers11]

Give it a rest. I'm not even disagreeing with you. I just hate this talk of 'taking my ball and going home'.
Instead the talk should be of how to be more competitive and how to grow the CHL even further. We need more hype.

We need the KHL teams, and money. Thats what we need

The 2008 tournament proved to be successful, attendance wise, thanks to that. Also, no free tickets to the tournament. Only the best should play

 

[Slimmy]

We need the KHL teams, and money. Thats what we need

The 2008 tournament proved to be successful, attendance wise, thanks to that. Also, no free tickets to the tournament. Only the best should play

Interest breeds interest. There was a lot of hype for the game between Frölunda and Sheffield because of word that 500 Sheffield supporters would make the trip to Gothenburg. The focal point was the Sheffield supporters and what a great following they have.
Money alone wont solve anything and we can't just sit around and hope the KHL will take part.

 

[lakers11]

and yet only 2732 people showed up, in a arena that takes 12k. Lets be clear here, the smaller leagues and DEL are the ones filling up their arenas. The SHL, NLA and Liiga is where the real problem is at

Money makes a world of a difference. In 08/09 you could win a total of 2 million euros in prize money. That makes a huge difference for any club. Fans would not only look forward to being best in europe, but the money allows their team to further improve itself.

Only the best should play. No one wants to see their team compete against a no name team they should beat 99 times out of 100. The toughest group on paper in this tournament was Linköping, Bern, Helsinki. That should be a regular group, not the toughest.

 

[Jablkon]

and yet only 2732 people showed up, in a arena that takes 12k. Lets be clear here, the smaller leagues and DEL are the ones filling up their arenas. The SHL, NLA and Liiga is where the real problem is at

Money makes a world of a difference. In 08/09 you could win a total of 2 million euros in prize money. That makes a huge difference for any club. Fans would not only look forward to being best in europe, but the money allows their team to further improve itself.

Only the best should play. No one wants to see their team compete against a no name team they should beat 99 times out of 100. The toughest group on paper in this tournament was Linköping, Bern, Helsinki. That should be a regular group, not the toughest.

You miximing more factors. Money does not relate to attendance. Longtime tradition of watching home leagues in Europe causes problem with attendance + I believe fans in Sweden are not so motivated when they ussualy miss the real contender. But appart from swedish case its just matter of time. Most of the teams, including most of finnish teams and all NLa team, do not have anything for granted. I also can not blame 2 norwegian teams and 2 french teams for being in a league as they obviously benefit from it and show some very interesting results.

Btw when we speak about attendance. What is the avarage one in home leagues? I bet it could be mostly around 5-7000? So having 3000 in a preseason stage in second year is not that bad for me. The new format certainly helps as people want to follow their team as further as it is possible. Yes, last year group with LAkers, Sparta, Kalpa and Manheim was great. But who followed the league when those teams were eliminated? I personally didnt....

KHL participation would certainly help. Still I have a feeling that this league causes more troubles than benefits. Firstly they have to decide whether they wanna expand as a general european league or they wanna stay in their territorry and not changing this atittitude according to Putins wish every second year.. Without answering this basic question you can never be certain how many teams, if any, they gonna send you every year...For sure you would need higher budget as travelling to Chabarovsk is bit different than to Vienna....

 

[Slimmy]

and yet only 2732 people showed up, in a arena that takes 12k. Lets be clear here, the smaller leagues and DEL are the ones filling up their arenas. The SHL, NLA and Liiga is where the real problem is at

Money makes a world of a difference. In 08/09 you could win a total of 2 million euros in prize money. That makes a huge difference for any club. Fans would not only look forward to being best in europe, but the money allows their team to further improve itself.

Only the best should play. No one wants to see their team compete against a no name team they should beat 99 times out of 100. The toughest group on paper in this tournament was Linköping, Bern, Helsinki. That should be a regular group, not the toughest.

Frölundaborg doesn't take 12,000 people. Not even close. I'm not saying the money doesn't matter. But it's not the only factor. They have to build it from the ground up not just throw a lot of money at the tourney and hope everything works out.

 

[lakers11]

You miximing more factors. Money does not relate to attendance. Longtime tradition of watching home leagues in Europe causes problem with attendance + I believe fans in Sweden are not so motivated when they ussualy miss the real contender. But appart from swedish case its just matter of time. Most of the teams, including most of finnish teams and all NLa team, do not have anything for granted. I also can not blame 2 norwegian teams and 2 french teams for being in a league as they obviously benefit from it and show some very interesting results.

Btw when we speak about attendance. What is the avarage one in home leagues? I bet it could be mostly around 5-7000? So having 3000 in a preseason stage in second year is not that bad for me. The new format certainly helps as people want to follow their team as further as it is possible. Yes, last year group with LAkers, Sparta, Kalpa and Manheim was great. But who followed the league when those teams were eliminated? I personally didnt....

KHL participation would certainly help. Still I have a feeling that this league causes more troubles than benefits. Firstly they have to decide whether they wanna expand as a general european league or they wanna stay in their territorry and not changing this atittitude according to Putins wish every second year.. Without answering this basic question you can never be certain how many teams, if any, they gonna send you every year...For sure you would need higher budget as travelling to Chabarovsk is bit different than to Vienna....

But again, didn't CHL 2008 prove that Money+KHL+only best teams playing= success

Group stage average 08/09 for the swedish teams=

HV71=6000 avg attendance (it would've been fullhouse if they werent already eliminated before the final home game, meaning 6900 avg)

Linköping= 7400 avg attendance

CHL 15/16 group stage average:

HV71=2209
Linköping=2881

Pretty huge difference.

Last years group stages were pretty BS. As 1st and only the best 2nds were going through. Meaning groups with, for example, sheffield steelers in it pretty much guaranteed free 6 points+ racking up the goal difference. Pretty different from the Lakers group, aye. One of the toughest groups and needing to win 5 of 6 to go through. Which is one of the reasons only the best teams should play, no free cards. Another is, teams like Djurgården, fighting last year to avoid playoffs to SHL gotting free ticket to CHL. Yet we needed to reach atleast semi finals to get a spot

I followed Sparta Prague after the group stages but their journey ended pretty quickly XD

Also saw the final between Luleå-Frölunda, watching Frölunda getting robbed

 

[ForumNamePending]

But again, didn't CHL 2008 prove that Money+KHL+only best teams playing= success

Given the fact the last tournament only lasted a single season I'm going to go a head and say no.

I think one of the things this current tournament is going to have to overcome is the stigma of past failed tournaments, and the only way to do that is by sticking around for a while.