New IIHF Rankings and 2018 Olympic Groups
- Thread starter Riggins
- Start date
-
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
I guess but if you're going to make this a formula for the entire hockey world it would still matter for top teams too due to ranking/positions in tournaments and as the IIHF says it's supposed to show top to bottom who the best nation is at that time in hockey. Having the WC and Olympics with the same value is as flawed as it gets and they should really change it if they want a better reflection of their system. You have one tournament that basically relies on players who are out of the playoffs and one where it's a true best on best...yet they have the same value. Makes zero sense.
Pandaman11
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2009
- 2,835
- 1,334
BINGO! the Olympics are a IIHF sanctioned event, the IIHF isn't just going to bend over and say "OK here's your World Cup of Hockey" without having something come back to them. I think there will be player participation in 2018 and in 2022. Why can't the IIHF say "ok here's your World Cup of hockey go make millions of dollars, in return we get player participation for the Olympics?
It's interesting how many people have given up on NHL Olympic participation. The NHL is going to talk a tough game and so is the NHLPA, to get the best possible monetary benefit but the reality is that the NHLPA and the players still overwhelmingly want to go to the Olympics so in all likelihood they will go to the Olympics. The IIHF has expressed that it's willing to shell out a lot of money to incentivize participation. Both the NHL and the NHLPA will talk a tough game or else they won't get the maximum monetary gain from the situation, but the NHL is trying to expand it's overseas imprint and many international players have expressed adamantly their support for the event as have Canadian and American players, it's likely not going away.
Also players like Ovechkin are not going to allow the NHL to dictate whether they go over and play. I think a lot of players will be willing to take a suspension/fine and just go over. Who's going to stop them??? the NHL? give me a break. The NHL talks a big game but when it comes down to it all they want is money and if the IIHF can deliver they'll go, but other than that the NHL has no grounds to stop anyone from representing their country.
StrictlyCommercial
Registered User
SanDogBrewin
Righteous bucks!
Bettman does what the NHL owners want him to do. He has raised NHL revenues ever since he arrived, that is his job. He is also the lowest paid of the 4 (MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL) commissioners in comparison.
On the subject of not allowing NHL players, which is just speculation, I like the US chances with scrub College players
i think the individual teams would have to give permission to each player that wants to go if the league chooses not to go.
remember all players are under contract and cant just leave to play for another team. if a player where to leave their team while under contract to go play for another team i'd pretty sure they would not be allowed to participate in any IIHF events.
it is similar to the kolvocheck (spelling) situation. when he "retiried" from the nhl then signed in the KHL NJ had to agree to let him go. if NJ said no your under contract you cant leave to play in russia then he would of been breaching contract. russia would not of cared and let him sign with then anyways but the IIHF would not of let him play in any IIHF event while still breaching his contract.
Basically if a team your signed to say you cant go (assuming the league also says they cant go) then they really cant go.
at least that is how i think it works
True, true, all true. But they're announcing their decision 3 years in advance. Most players adamant on playing in IIHF events in the future would just let their contracts expire and retire to European leagues. Furthermore, that's what the union is for. Right now the union wants the maximum monetary gain for the players so they're staying mum throughout negotiations, but players have expressed a desire to go to the Olympics so it's likely they will or there will be a clause to send the players but not take a 14 day break. If the NHL insists however there could be retribution from the players union, and the owners fear a strike more than the players fear a lockout.
InglewoodJack
Registered User
The WHC serves the entire world, not just the two countries who are most impacted by the NHL's post season. Like it was mentioned earlier, the ranking system is pretty arbitrary for top nations, and mostly serves lower ranked countries who have a chance at relegation, promotion and actually improving as a hockey nation. I feel as though the argument that the WHC shouldn't be worth as much as the olympics is made mostly by people sour on the years that Canada isn't ranked #1. Which yes, there are some years where Canada's ranking falls as low as 4-5 because of a disastrous WHC showing, but your country is only as good as the teams they field. You shouldn't be blaming the tournament, you should be blaming all the players who refuse invitation to the tournament.
Also, outside of the elite division, the NHL playoffs are essentially a non-factor, as save for one or two countries, no teams have a significant NHL presence. Adjusting the system so that it benefits the top teams who have the best players in the world is pointless in the IIHF's goal of promoting hockey worldwide.
they wont have a lock out over this. not enough players would be willing to forfeit there paycheck fighting for this. if i am not mistaken all nhl players have an equal vote. so Erik Condra has 1 vote and Sidney Crosby has 1 vote.
if your Erik Condra do you vote for a lockout because the nhl does not want to let Sidney Crosby go to the Olympics? or are you voting yes because the nhl has taken the 2 week break your expect every 4 years away.
assuming all 12 teams that qualify use have 25 man roster full of NHL players there would be 300 players going. this season 882 people played in the nhl.
the players might like even love the Olympics but they are not going to go on strike because they cant go. there are simply not enough players with a chance of going for a lockout vote to succeed
First off, just a terminology correction, being picky I guess, players cannot lockout. Players strike, owners lockout. Second, in technicality, you're right. However, look at the MLS strike threat this past offseason when the players negotiated fairly generous free agency terms for the first time in history when it was thought to be impossible. Free agency will affect in the next 5 years of the CBA with the 8 year requirement probably a dozen or two dozen players out of hundreds in the union. Yet the players voted almost unanimously for a strike if free agency was not granted. So why did they, many making less than 50,000 dollars, put their livelihoods on the line for something that would affect so few people? Because every player dreams that maybe right now I'm not good enough to earn a big free agent check, but what if in the future, if I work hard and do everything I should, then I'll earn my money's worth. Same with the Olympics. Many players right now can not play in the Olympics. But the dream is that if I work hard, if I put in my time and effort, I'll be able to play for my country and live the memories of my childhood and live my dreams. Then players will be willing to vote for something that may only effect 100 guys. I don't think it'll come to that but if it were to, I wouldn't be surprised to see the union take retribution measure. In any case, I don't see a strike coming, I think something will be worked out.
KrisLetAngry
MrJukeBoy
I don't see a Crosby going to the KHL but a third liner offered more money to play in the KHL and a chance to play in the Olympics. I would. Komarov did that but he is Finnish
BXA
#53 Bo Horvat
cowboy82nd
Registered User
tmlms13
Registered User
Bettman does what the NHL owners want him to do. He has raised NHL revenues ever since he arrived, that is his job. He is also the lowest paid of the 4 (MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL) commissioners in comparison.
On the subject of not allowing NHL players, which is just speculation, I like the US chances with scrub College players
At 8 figures per year I don't feel too bad for him.
tmlms13
Registered User
They should just move the 2018 World Juniors to February.
Here's Canada's selection camp
http://www.eliteprospects.com/draftcenter.php?year=2017&layout=&nation=3&pos=&ranking=&sort=&con=
Here's Canada's selection camp
http://www.eliteprospects.com/draftcenter.php?year=2017&layout=&nation=3&pos=&ranking=&sort=&con=
Yeah, I can't see any possibilities how they can success in Olympics. CAN/CZE/SUI are gonna beat them even with players from EU leagues.
For example, there were some Korean national team players in Finnish 2nd tier teams a few years ago, and only couple of them barely managed to success well.
Maybe in next five years if those players move to lower European top leagues (France, Italy, Norway) they can be top teams in Division IA, but that needs also good player development.
I don't think it works that way. The NHL is putting on the World Cup using NHL players, they'd like it to be IIHF sanctioned but they can still host it and call it the World Cup without them. Obviously they came to some sort of agreement with the IIHF to get their sanction, but NHL participation in the 2018 Korean is not an equal trade off. For it to be equal you would need the various European leagues shut down and release their players to participate in the World Cup. If I had to guess, the likely 'trade off' could be as simple as the NHL promising a cash pool to the winning team that goes back to its countries hockey federation.
Speaking of the Olympics with no NHL participation though, the NHL would not shut down but I wonder if they would allow teams to release their prospects and farmhands to participate if called. So for Canada/US rather than a Spengler Cup type roster it could like more like an under 23 WJC roster, plus a few vets. It would be interesting watching those teams compete against the European pro's... I guess much like the USA team we just saw.
The rankings serve exactly two purposes:
- set the groups for the next World Championship, for all levels
- define who gets automatic qualification to the Olympics and set the qualification groups for said tournament
As such, the rankings are perfectly fine. They DO NOT in any way try to judge who is the best hockey nation. They merely give the IIHF a tool to get relatively even groups, based on the recent performances of each country.
Since the main purpose is to handle the World Championship, there is nothing wrong with basing the rankings mainly on that tournament.
Ranking the Olympics higher wouldn't really serve a purpose anyway. If you give slightly more points for the Olympics than for the WCH, then it doesn't really make a difference, because the number of WCHs in the rankings dwarf the number of Olympics over the same time-frame, thus making the additional points negligible.
If you give way more points for the Olympics, you end up with one random performance throwing the entire system out of whack, making a number of good performances count less than a single one, which defeats the entire purpose of basing things on an entire time-frame. It makes even less sense when you consider that the rankings primarily exist to help create groups for the WCH.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
2025 Stadium Series Detroit Red Wings vs Columbus Blue Jackets - Ohio Stadium, ColumbusWagers: 9Staked: $9,816.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
