Most dominant era in international hockey history?

[Jablkon]

Summit Series
GPW L T GF GA
-8 4 3 1 31 32 - 1972 – Won (NHL Players)
-8 1 4 3 27 32 - 1974 – Lost (WHA Players)

Canada Cup
GPW L T GF GA
-7 6 1 0 33 10 - 1976 – Champions
-7 5 1 1 37 22 - 1981 – Runners-up
-8 5 2 1 37 27 - 1984 – Champions
-9 6 1 2 41 32 - 1987 – Champions
-8 6 0 2 33 14 - 1991 – Champions

World Cup of Hockey
GPW L T GF GA
-8 5 3 0 26 26 - 1996 – Runners-up
-6 6 0 0 22 8 - 2004 – Champions

Olympics
GPW L T GF GA
-6 4 2 0 19 8 - 1998 Nagano 4th
-6 4 1 1 22 14 - 2002 Salt Lake City Gold
-6 3 3 0 15 11 - 2006 Turin 7th
-7 6 1 - 32 14 - 2010 Vancouver Gold
-6 6 0 - 17 3 - 2014 Sochi Gold

These are the results of the best-on-best tournaments. Though as someone mentioned before, the summit series' weren't really best-on-best, one was against the NHL and one was against the WHA. Certainly though, Canada wasn't dominant in that era, but I don't think you could argue that the Soviets were better.

The only time Canada lost two best-on-best tournaments in a row was in 96 and 98. Finishing 2nd and 4th. Though I don't think you could argue that any team was better in that era. USA won in 96, but finished 6th 98. The Czechs won in 98, but finished basically last of the 8 teams in 96. Russia got 2nd in 98, T-3 in 96. Finland got 3rd in 98, T-5 in 96.

It seems that the most dominant Canada has ever been is in 2014. They were also pretty dominant in 2010, but had a bit of trouble with USA. I would say that this era is the most dominant any team has ever been in best-on-best international tournaments.

To be honest you were quite weak all 90s. That TC was uncomparable to present TC. Year of 96 can not be counted for czechs as it was the moment when it all started for us....If I remember clear,first time you beat us since 1998 was 2004 World cup...

Completely agree that since 2010 it is big domination and 2014 was the biggest dominance what I ever seen. However I dont remember times before 1989

 

[Back in Black]

What a ridiculous post.

Canada didn't "boycott the IIHF & the Olympics in the 70's, 80's & 90's, finally going in 1998", where did you get this BS from?
.

Learn your Hockey history before you flap your gums, because it is fact! Look it up.

 

[jekoh]

Learn your Hockey history before you flap your gums, because it is fact! Look it up.

 

[Crosbyfan]

Learn your Hockey history before you flap your gums, because it is fact! Look it up.

Won Silver in 1994, narrowly missing the Gold in the shootout...

..not bad for a team that wasn't even there...

The correct answer is Canada prior to 1960. In the Olympics, our amateurs would dominate any team that did not have Canadians on their roster.

But the game had started to grow internationally, and it was just a matter of time.

 

[BladesofSTEELwFIRE]

This is the best Canada has ever been and I am truly enjoying it.

However, the Soviets were even more dominant in international hockey back in the 80's.

That Soviet Red Army team went 3 or 4 years without losing a SINGLE game! Watch the "Red Army" documentary that came out in theaters this year.

 

[Theokritos]

That Soviet Red Army team went 3 or 4 years without losing a SINGLE game! Watch the "Red Army" documentary that came out in theaters this year.

For the record, one more time: Red Army team ≠ Soviet national team.

 

[BladesofSTEELwFIRE]

For the record, one more time: Red Army team ≠ Soviet national team.

That's what I said. The Soviet Red Army team.

 

[Back in Black]

That Soviet Red Army team went 3 or 4 years without losing a SINGLE game! Watch the "Red Army" documentary that came out in theaters this year.

Again, pro's playing amateurs!

 

[RandV]

Problem with the OP statement is he's using the word 'era' and including WJC and WC results, in which while we've won the most recent golds they're coming off like 5+ year droughts in each. So the main thing we have going as far as an 'era' goes is back to back Olympic wins, and 3 in the past 4.

That said, I think we could be looking at the start of a big run. Canada almost always has the best team on paper, often by a good margin... but hockey is a team sport. Also most international tournaments are played with European rules on European ice. So while Canada always puts out a great team on paper often they fail to mesh as a team and/or don't adjust properly to the different environment.

Watching team Canada this past Olympics and WC, not only has Canada had the best roster, but they've also been the best team, and has flat out dominated. It gives me the impression that Hockey Canada through it's player selection and coaching has finally figured out the best formula for success at the international game. If that's the case it could be a while before anyone beats us.

 

[Hanji]

That's what I said. The Soviet Red Army team.

What team are you talking about? The Soviet national team or CSKA moscow?

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

So keep this up for another decade and a half and we can start talking about them in relation to the Soviets era. Right now they compare favorably to what the Czech National team did at the turn of the century.

 

[Lobstertainment]

Imagine believing the Czechs were a better team than the Soviets in the 70's

 

[Rob]

I think the Soviets beat Sweden 11-0 for Gold during the 1981 World Championships.

 

[Yakushev72]

Canada was 10-0 in this tournament, 7-0 in the world juniors and 6-0 in the Olympics. The woman are also the current Olympic champions and the men won the previous Olympics (best of the best playing) too.

This year's world championship team was pretty much the Canadian National B-Team with the exception of Crosby and Hamuis who were the only two players from the Olympic team. Substitute Stamkos or a guy like Johansen in for Crosby since neither Stamkos or Johansen played in the Olympics and choose from a number of qualified defense to sub for Hamuis and you'll have a comparable team to this world championship Canadian B-Team. This proves what many people suspected, that Canada could realistically send two teams to the Olympics and compete for both gold and silver.

The string of success that Canada has put together in the past couple years is easily the greatest display of international dominance that hockey has ever seen.

And now, welcome to the McDavid era.

Go Canada Go!

Let the self-love and mirror worship begin full force!

 

[General Zodd]

This is the best Canada has ever been and I am truly enjoying it.

However, the Soviets were even more dominant in international hockey back in the 80's.

The Soviets lost to Team Canada in '87. Most dominant I dunno about that, but yes they were ****ing good!

 

[LaGu]

Again, pro's playing amateurs!

So it does not count as international hockey history?


edit: This is really starting to go off topic. If people want to discuss which team that is the most dominant when all best players are available, and playing, that is another topic. You cannot just erase 30 years of international hockey history because your best players did not play. You can use that information to explain why you were not dominant at the time (even though it is a somewhat hypothetical), but does not change the results in the international hockey events at the time.

 

[XO]

Czech dominance late 90s/early 2000s is way more impressive considering all.

With the amount of players Canada (and USA) have compared to the other hockey nations they should always be medalists. Anything else is a huge failure.

 

[Jablkon]

Imagine believing the Czechs were a better team than the Soviets in the 70's

??? Who said that? I never heard it from anybody....

 

[Mehar]

Canada was 10-0 in this tournament, 7-0 in the world juniors and 6-0 in the Olympics. The woman are also the current Olympic champions and the men won the previous Olympics (best of the best playing) too.

This year's world championship team was pretty much the Canadian National B-Team with the exception of Crosby and Hamuis who were the only two players from the Olympic team. Substitute Stamkos or a guy like Johansen in for Crosby since neither Stamkos or Johansen played in the Olympics and choose from a number of qualified defense to sub for Hamuis and you'll have a comparable team to this world championship Canadian B-Team. This proves what many people suspected, that Canada could realistically send two teams to the Olympics and compete for both gold and silver.

The string of success that Canada has put together in the past couple years is easily the greatest display of international dominance that hockey has ever seen.

And now, welcome to the McDavid era.

Go Canada Go!

Very well said. I agree with this. As for the Soviets, they can be proud of what they accomplished, but their dominance is overstated since they beat up basically amateur teams. If Canada had been sending pros to compete against the Soviets, you better believe that they would have not won all those tournaments. Russia has not won a single Best on Best tournament since the Pros were allowed into the Olympics in 1998. They last won the Olympics in 1992 as the CIS. Canada winning the last 4 out of 5 Best on Best tournaments (2014 Olympics, 2010 Olympics, 2004 World Cup, 2002 Olympics) as well cannot be overlooked as well in this conversation of this being a dominant era for Canada.

 

[Pouchkine]

Myths About Best On Best...

1976 Canada Cup= USSR sent their B team for ideological reasons.
1991 Canada Cup= USSR sent their B team for political reasons.
1972 Summit Series= Czechoslovakia World Champions absent and Canada missing their best player Bobby Orr, best forward Bobby Hull and others WHA.Not to speak about Canada goon tactics when down 1W 3L 1D

Hockey isn't soccer with well organized international competitions in rotating countries...Especially in those days.

You had World Championships that were the closest but Canada didn't come for a time and after that sent strong teams but not their best and always played in Europe. Olympics same problem with Canada.

You had superseries between NHL clubs USSR clubs with USSR clubs winning but Red Army was the best by far and not only played the best nhl clubs...

The hockey was great then the rivalry was great but you didn't have the Olympics like today where everybody plays but the hockey is boring.

And people talking about CANADA Cups as somekind of proof Canada was great is absolute nonsense, that was a home tournament with home refs, home rules and everything that would be like judging greatness of Federer Nadal only with their head to head on CLAY...

In the 60's 70's 80's the closer we got to see actual best on best on "neutral" ice was the Challenge Cup in 1979. If we count Canadian ice it was 1981 1987 Canada Cups when everybody had their best team. We can include 1984 but Soviets missed their best player injured and 4th best forward.

Also incredibly funny for someone not to include the 2005 World Championships in your recent list, that was like a mini olympics in neutral ground as well.

Russia today is very bad well compare to before especially they play as individuals without strong leaders without competent defencemen and without coaching. Canada is better skilled than before overall but they have no all time greats like Orr Gretzky Lemieux.

In the last 20 years or so we had 4 Olympics and 1 big Worlds but the hockey was bad overall with all the dumping trapping and it's too bad but even if the rules were doubtful and all big games in Canada I'd take Canada Cups hockey anytime before boring 1-0 Olympic games.

 

[NyQuil]

With the amount of players Canada (and USA) have compared to the other hockey nations they should always be medalists. Anything else is a huge failure.

I guess it's a good thing they usually win the big tournaments.

 

[NyQuil]

And people talking about CANADA Cups as somekind of proof Canada was great is absolute nonsense, that was a home tournament with home refs, home rules and everything that would be like judging greatness of Federer Nadal only with their head to head on CLAY...

By the same token, the WCs were European refs, European rules and European fans on European ice (with 2008 as the sole exception).

It becomes pretty obvious why we in North America aren't that impressed with WC as proof of greatness either.

This year's WC had a very strong Canada team and a Russian team with an elite crop of forwards.

After that, the competition dropped off quite a bit and I think it is a major reason why Canada was so dominant.

In the last 20 years or so we had 4 Olympics and 1 big Worlds but the hockey was bad overall with all the dumping trapping and it's too bad but even if the rules were doubtful and all big games in Canada I'd take Canada Cups hockey anytime before boring 1-0 Olympic games.

Since 1998, the Olympics raise the least amount of controversy so they are almost the default tournament for determining the best team as a result.

 

[JackSlater]

Won Silver in 1994, narrowly missing the Gold in the shootout...

..not bad for a team that wasn't even there...

The correct answer is Canada prior to 1960. In the Olympics, our amateurs would dominate any team that did not have Canadians on their roster.

But the game had started to grow internationally, and it was just a matter of time.

Yes, Canada before any other country had developed is the correct answer. If we're looking at which national team was the strongest ever I would take the Soviets of the late 70s/80s, but their gap with their peers isn't nearly as big as the earlier Canadian gap. Canada was able to destroy pretty much every team with random amateurs, far removed from the best players who were in the NHL. That dominance was possible mainly because hockey was still in its infancy in other countries, and can never be duplicated.

So keep this up for another decade and a half and we can start talking about them in relation to the Soviets era. Right now they compare favorably to what the Czech National team did at the turn of the century.

Yes, because that is a reasonable comparison. Can Canada compete in IIHF tournaments with its full roster, and with club teams designed to give the national team great chemistry, while other countries are missing some key players (Sweden, Finland, Czechoslovakia) or basically unable to send anything remotely close to their best (Canada, USA)? Give Canada those advantages and I wonder what the result would be. The Soviet national team was great, probably the strongest of all time, but the advantages they had in that era are gone for everyone.

 

[Jablkon]

Yes, Canada before any other country had developed is the correct answer. If we're looking at which national team was the strongest ever I would take the Soviets of the late 70s/80s, but their gap with their peers isn't nearly as big as the earlier Canadian gap. Canada was able to destroy pretty much every team with random amateurs, far removed from the best players who were in the NHL. That dominance was possible mainly because hockey was still in its infancy in other countries, and can never be duplicated.



Yes, because that is a reasonable comparison. Can Canada compete in IIHF tournaments with its full roster, and with club teams designed to give the national team great chemistry, while other countries are missing some key players (Sweden, Finland, Czechoslovakia) or basically unable to send anything remotely close to their best (Canada, USA)? Give Canada those advantages and I wonder what the result would be. The Soviet national team was great, probably the strongest of all time, but the advantages they had in that era are gone for everyone.

Nothing is comparable to soviet training system in that times.No player would accept this methods today. On the other hand I see US team having chemistry all the time because they play the same hockey from youth categories to A team...most of these new development programs are more or less copies of that central communist developing programs....But soviets in that times were machines because they were treated like robots....We didnt loose to them because we missed players.they were just too much good.....

 

[Pouchkine]

I absolutely agree that obviously the Olympics since 1998 are real beat on best tournaments with "neutral" venues. Too bad Russia has been on a steady decline for the past 20 years and the Czechs golden age is way over. Canada has been dominating since they won the last two Olympics that's obivous also. What I was saying is that if people don't want to include all the Olympics and Worlds the Soviet Union won back then they shoud also exclude most CANADA Cups because on two of those the USSR sent a B TEAM and on all of them it was only played in Canada with home refs.

By the way for people who don't know history too much, all of those World Championships played in Poland Czechoslovakia Finland etc. were not "home tournaments" for the USSR...............

The only real best on best on neutral ice was Challenge Cup 1979...
And the only real best on best without top players missing was 1981 Canada Cup and 1987 Canada Cup...

USSR Dominated 60's 70's 80's
Czechs dominated late 90's
Canada now dominates 00's

I think we could all agree on that and also we could all agree that the best of it all would have been USSR teams of old vs. Canada teams of today without hooking and grabbing and with some kind of format we see today in Olympics.