NHL cautiously optimistic about 2021 World Cup.

[HugoSimon]

2021, huh? So same season as Olympics. Here's a thought, as the World Cup would make the players start earlier as well as delaying the season anyway, how about just starting the season earlier and letting the players play in Olympics instead?

The two shouldn't be connected they are two separate tournaments.

Nationalism is a foreign concept?

I get no sense of pride from Team Canada annihilating team Slovakia. I want my team to beat a run of the best players in the world, I barely care where they are from provided they are a challenge. This is fundamentally why your argument makes no sense.

If I want to watch teams be competitive with no national pride on the line, I just watch NHL.

And who is stopping you? As I said before this tournament is about creating a revenue source for the off season.

People in Toronto/Montreal/Chicago want to watch hockey they want it to be competitive. It is the worlds best of the best, it is entirely pointless to copy the Olympics format.

 

[JackSlater]

Ah so a tournament where people represent their region of the world is a gimmick, and a team where not 1 player grew up in Nevada is perfectly rational?

The NHL is a league, the World Cup is presented as international tournament. No one, other than possibly you I guess, thinks that league teams exist to represent the hockey played in that city and are composed of players from that area. International competition is actually for that purpose, rendering your comparison very ridiculous. I hope that you weren't being serious.

So having most of the worlds best hockey players isn't international enough? This is the part of the argument that makes absolutely no sense. It's not like half of the worlds best players are in the KHL. Not having NHL players in the Olympics makes it far less representative of the worlds best than the WC.

I want to see the best of the best. I want to see the best players from Ontario against the best players from Quebec/Minnesota.

Your argument is entirely based on the premise that all hockey fans are on equal terms with respect to purist nationalism.

A mixed tournament makes sense if it is to present a competition with the best of the best.

You are describing the NHL itself. Fortunately you can see NHL hockey most nights of the year, where the best from Ontario take on the best from Manitoba and the best from Angermanland. They even top it off by having an all star game, and boy is that an exciting time.

There is nothing arbitrary about being from Europe. At best I could concede that making it a EU team might make slightly more sense but that is splitting hairs. In addition it might make sense if they wore some sort of hybrid Jersey where it was more obvious which region a player was from. Maybe call them the spartans or something that has it own mythos beyond the continent.

The problem with Team Europe is a lack of history and tradition not that it is based on a gimmick.

New traditions take time to build, as long as the tournament stays best of the best it is a true world cup.

The biggest mistake the NHL could make is to retcon an existing team. History takes time to build.

Making a team from Europe, minus Sweden/Russia/Finland/Czech Republic but calling it team Europe, and then placing that team in a tournament where it is supposed to play against actual national teams, is quite arbitrary and very stupid. The stupidity of the team is of course the problem with team European Leftovers, not that it didn't have decades of stupidity preceding it. The NHL has already spoken about likely getting rid of the young gunz team, so hopefully the league has wised up enough to get rid of the bad joke that was team European Leftovers.

 

[HugoSimon]

The NHL is a league, the World Cup is presented as international tournament.

An international tournament done entirely by the league.

No one, other than possibly you I guess, thinks that league teams exist to represent the hockey played in that city and are composed of players from that area.

This is a strawman argument of the most absurd type. I'm not the one obsessed with place of birth as a qualifier for a tournament.

International competition is actually for that purpose, rendering your comparison very ridiculous. I hope that you weren't being serious.

"Some" international competitions you mean. There are no consistent terms for what an international tournament is you are almost literally making this up.

The FIFA Club World cup fails any of the definitions you use.

The regular Fifa world cup allows non nations like Scotland to have their own team.

The NHL World Cup has already factually had non national teams.

Do I need to mention the world series or people who like Bret Hull who got to pick and choose which team they played for.

You might have an obsession with rigid rules for what a tournament should be but these lines are not rigid and you are failing to offer any reason they should be enforced for this tournament.

You are describing the NHL itself. Fortunately you can see NHL hockey most nights of the year, where the best from Ontario take on the best from Manitoba and the best from Angermanland. They even top it off by having an all star game, and boy is that an exciting time.

Yes and the NHL doesn't operate in summer and if I don't want to watch a leafs game I have absolutely zero options of seeing any other game.

Making a team from Europe, minus Sweden/Russia/Finland/Czech Republic but calling it team Europe, and then placing that team in a tournament where it is supposed to play against actual national teams, is quite arbitrary and very stupid. The stupidity of the team is of course the problem with team European Leftovers, not that it didn't have decades of stupidity preceding it. The NHL has already spoken about likely getting rid of the young gunz team, so hopefully the league has wised up enough to get rid of the bad joke that was team European Leftovers.

Those leftovers also happened to come in second place.

The young gunz team made no sense exactly because it was a young bloods team. Without a national frame of reference the only thing that will build a legacy in the tournament would be a team history that spans multiple tournaments. With repeat appearances almost impossible it doesn't make sense. A much preferable idea from my perspective would to make team North America a seniors team of players over the age of 35.

 

[JackSlater]

An international tournament done entirely by the league

That's great and has no relevance to what I said. It doesn't make your point less foolish.

This is a strawman argument of the most absurd type. I'm not the one obsessed with place of birth as a qualifier for a tournament.

It is no strawman, it is a response to your ridiculous complaint about Las Vegas' team not having players from Nevada.

"Some" international competitions you mean. There are no consistent terms for what an international tournament is you are almost literally making this up.

The FIFA Club World cup fails any of the definitions you use.

The regular Fifa world cup allows non nations like Scotland to have their own team.

An international tournament is a tournament contested between national teams. Scotland's team is a national team. Your posts consistently seem to convey a struggle with the meaning of several words.

The NHL World Cup has already factually had non national teams.

Yes, that is the problem. It was beyond stupid.

Do I need to mention the world series or people who like Bret Hull who got to pick and choose which team they played for.

The world series has no relevance. It's a dumb name I suppose but it is not presented as an international competition. Hull abided by the rules of international hockey, though I would prefer that the rules regarding eligibility be more strict. There is certainly room for improvement.

You might have an obsession with rigid rules for what a tournament should be but these lines are not rigid and you are failing to offer any reason they should be enforced for this tournament.

Yes and the NHL doesn't operate in summer and if I don't want to watch a leafs game I have absolutely zero options of seeing any other game

I like words to mean what they actually mean and for international competitions to actually be contested between national teams, as the name indicates. I also like for the teams to be placed under the same regulations, which wasn't the case in the idiotic 2016 world cup.

That's nice that the NHL doesn't operate in the summer. Fortunately the league plays over 3000 games per year featuring the random player combinations that you desire to see. There is no need to organize the world cup in a stupid manner, as you seem to desire, just to add two handfuls of games to those thousands of games that are already going to be played.

Those leftovers also happened to come in second place.

The young gunz team made no sense exactly because it was a young bloods team. Without a national frame of reference the only thing that will build a legacy in the tournament would be a team history that spans multiple tournaments. With repeat appearances almost impossible it doesn't make sense. A much preferable idea from my perspective would to make team North America a seniors team of players over the age of 35.

The performance of the leftovers team is irrelevant as to whether or not it was a joke. The NHL could drop a team in the playoffs this year composed of all the best players who missed the playoffs and that team would probably win the Stanley Cup. That team would also be a complete joke and render the playoffs a joke.

The old gunz team is just as bad as the young gunz team. A bad idea that lingers from one tournament to the next is still just a bad idea.

 

[Boonk]

Ah so a tournament where people represent their region of the world is a gimmick, and a team where not 1 player grew up in Nevada is perfectly rational?





So having most of the worlds best hockey players isn't international enough? This is the part of the argument that makes absolutely no sense. It's not like half of the worlds best players are in the KHL. Not having NHL players in the Olympics makes it far less representative of the worlds best than the WC.

I want to see the best of the best. I want to see the best players from Ontario against the best players from Quebec/Minnesota.

Your argument is entirely based on the premise that all hockey fans are on equal terms with respect to purist nationalism.

A mixed tournament makes sense if it is to present a competition with the best of the best.

There is nothing arbitrary about being from Europe. At best I could concede that making it a EU team might make slightly more sense but that is splitting hairs. In addition it might make sense if they wore some sort of hybrid Jersey where it was more obvious which region a player was from. Maybe call them the spartans or something that has it own mythos beyond the continent.

The problem with Team Europe is a lack of history and tradition not that it is based on a gimmick.

New traditions take time to build, as long as the tournament stays best of the best it is a true world cup.

The biggest mistake the NHL could make is to retcon an existing team. History takes time to build.

I immediately stopped taking this seriously after the first paragraph. I would write paragraphs disproving all of your ridiculous points you were trying to make but it appears @JackSlater already beat me to it. Have fun trying to scramble together whatever argument you have. Heres your L.

 

[HugoSimon]

It is no strawman, it is a response to your ridiculous complaint about Las Vegas' team not having players from Nevada.

An international tournament is a tournament contested between national teams. Scotland's team is a national team. Your posts consistently seem to convey a struggle with the meaning of several words.

Fifa's Club World Cup is not this, and yet virtually everyone excepts that it is an international tournament.

The world series has no relevance. It's a dumb name I suppose but it is not presented as an international competition. Hull abided by the rules of international hockey, though I would prefer that the rules regarding eligibility be more strict. There is certainly room for improvement.

I like words to mean what they actually mean and for international competitions to actually be contested between national teams, as the name indicates. I also like for the teams to be placed under the same regulations, which wasn't the case in the idiotic 2016 world cup.

And yet this is not what Fifa's Club World Cup does. You don't like the way the NHL does business fine but don't pretend like its my crazy and wild idea.

That's nice that the NHL doesn't operate in the summer. Fortunately the league plays over 3000 games per year featuring the random player combinations that you desire to see. There is no need to organize the world cup in a stupid manner, as you seem to desire, just to add two handfuls of games to those thousands of games that are already going to be played.

Except for . . . . Money!!

You're acting like this is some fantasy hockey tournament. This was a factual tournament.

Of those 3000 games only 41 occur in Southern Ontairo, where roughly 10 to 30 percent of the worlds paying hockey fans live.

The performance of the leftovers team is irrelevant as to whether or not it was a joke. The NHL could drop a team in the playoffs this year composed of all the best players who missed the playoffs and that team would probably win the Stanley Cup. That team would also be a complete joke and render the playoffs a joke.

These weren't players who missed the playoffs they were the best representatives from Slovakia, Austria, Switerland and Germany. The joke would be stringing together a team with 3 NHLers and a roster of AHLers for each of those countries.

The old gunz team is just as bad as the young gunz team. A bad idea that lingers from one tournament to the next is still just a bad idea.

Problem is you don't have a better idea.

 

[JackSlater]

Fifa's Club World Cup is not this, and yet virtually everyone excepts that it is an international tournament.

And yet this is not what Fifa's Club World Cup does. You don't like the way the NHL does business fine but don't pretend like its my crazy and wild idea

I honestly didn't read the word "club" in your previous post. That's my mistake.

Except for . . . . Money!!

You're acting like this is some fantasy hockey tournament. This was a factual tournament.

Of those 3000 games only 41 occur in Southern Ontairo, where roughly 10 to 30 percent of the worlds paying hockey fans live.

There is not a shred of relevance in any of this part of this post.

I think that we can agree that the 2016 world cup was a "factual" tournament. It was not an international tournament, and it was certainly stupid, but it was a tournament.

These weren't players who missed the playoffs they were the best representatives from Slovakia, Austria, Switerland and Germany. The joke would be stringing together a team with 3 NHLers and a roster of AHLers for each of those countries.

Problem is you don't have a better idea.

I have a much better idea. Use literally any format from previous editions of the tournament.

 

[HugoSimon]

I honestly didn't read the word "club" in your previous post. That's my mistake.

I think that we can agree that the 2016 world cup was a "factual" tournament. It was not an international tournament, and it was certainly stupid, but it was a tournament.

These two sentences do not run together. The Club World Cup proves that a international tournament requires players from multiple nations not necessarily teams.

I have a much better idea. Use literally any format from previous editions of the tournament.

On a base level sure, I'm open either way. But it is not remotely a necessity and I think there is far more potential for growth with some experimentation.

 

[JackSlater]

These two sentences do not run together. The Club World Cup proves that a international tournament requires players from multiple nations not necessarily teams.



On a base level sure, I'm open either way. But it is not remotely a necessity and I think there is far more potential for growth with some experimentation.

The fifa club world cup is no more an international tournament than exhibitions between NHL teams and European teams are international games, which is to say that it isn't. By the same extension even games between the Canadian and American NHL teams would be considered international hockey.

The is no "necessity" in the world cup. If it is to be an actual international tournament then it has to stick to using national teams, and if it is to avoid being a bad joke of a tournament it has to not use gimmick teams. It's very simple. There are endless variations that can be used but the base requirements are clear.

 

[holyprime]

It is even literally in the name.

Club World Cup: A Cup to determine the best Club every year, or more accurate, the annual "is the South American team strong enough to provide a challenge for the Champions League winner" event almost noone cares about. If you take this as a definition for international competition, then the Champions League (both in football and in hockey) or even the Spengler Cup (an invitational club tournament) and, as posted above, games between Canadian and US NHL franchises would be "international competition" too.

 

[Elvs]

But seriously no one expects either Switzerland or Slovakia to fare very well in a complete best on best tournament do they?

Of course Switzerland and Slovakia wouldn't keep an even record against Canada and USA in the long run. But people suggesting that they would get annihilated don't know what they are talking about. It was only six months ago Slovakia beat USA 4-1 at the Worlds. Yeah, it wasn't best on best, but this was a U.S. team which featured Patrick Kane, Jack Eichel, Dylan Larkin, Johnny Gaudreau and Alex Debrincat up front. Slovakia were without Zdeno Chara and Jaroslav Halak, most notably.

But as far as best on best goes, this is what we know from the last three Olympics which featured NHL'ers (results against the big 6):

Slovakia:

2014:
Slovakia-USA 1-7
Slovakia-Russia 0-1 (SO)

2010:
Slovakia-Czech Republic 1-3
Slovakia-Russia 2-1 (SO)
QF: Slovakia-Sweden 4-3
SF: Slovakia-Canada 2-3
BG: Slovakia-Finland 3-5

2006:
Slovakia-Russia 5-3
Slovakia-USA 2-1
Slovakia-Sweden 3-0
QF: Slovakia-Czech Republic 1-3

Overall record: 5-5-1


Switzerland:

2014:
Switzerland-Sweden 0-1
Switzerland-Czech Republic 1-0

2010:
Switzerland-USA 1-3
Switzerland-Canada 2-3 (SO)
QF: Switzerland-USA 0-2

2006:
Switzerland-Finland 0-5
Switzerland-Czech Republic 3-2
Switzerland-Canada 0-2
QF: Switzerland-Sweden 2-6

Overall record: 2-6-1

 

[Jahara]

Are you dense? In no way is an expansion team a gimmick. Vegas plays against other NHL teams, on an NHL schedule, in the NHL. "Team Europe" is a gimmick all star that played in an event passed off as an "international tournament". Team Europe didnt have to abide by NHL salary cap restrictions, Vegas does. Vegas has to qualify for the playoffs the same way every team has to, it was very annoying seeing them go to the finals in their first year of existence but that doesnt make them a gimmick. They rightfully earned their spot in that final.

You may as well consider every NHL team outside of the Original 6 teams gimmick teams since they were expansion teams. What a stupid argument.

Team Europe played against international teams, on a World Cup schedule, in the World Cup. Other teams in World Cup didn't have to abide by NHL salary cap restrictions. Team Europe had to qualify for the final the same way every team has to. Some people might find it was very annoying seeing them go to the finals in their first tournament of existence. But it could be said it proved their ability and would have been much more unlikely to happen with Slovakia, Germany or Switzerland.

You may as well consider every national team as a gimmick teams since they were nations made up by quite much coincidence. Finland could have been just like Latvia or Ukraine during the USSR days. Now they are sovereign nations. They compete on their own since communism and dictatorship fell out of fashion. You could say that nations as a concept is a gimmick since we are all the same and just happened to be born on some place on this earth. Anyway I liked the idea of Team Europe and it didn't "ruin" my view of the World Cup 3 years ago. They tried something new and if people just might think a little more outside the box, all this nonprogressive whining might not exist.

Expansion teams aint gimmick. Absolutely 100% not comparable.

Btw, you never answered this:
Do you think it would have been much more emotion and hitting if Germany and Slovakia would have been there instead?

 

[Boonk]

Team Europe played against international teams, on a World Cup schedule, in the World Cup. Other teams in World Cup didn't have to abide by NHL salary cap restrictions. Team Europe had to qualify for the final the same way every team has to. Some people might find it was very annoying seeing them go to the finals in their first tournament of existence. But it could be said it proved their ability and would have been much more unlikely to happen with Slovakia, Germany or Switzerland.

You may as well consider every national team as a gimmick teams since they were nations made up by quite much coincidence. Finland could have been just like Latvia or Ukraine during the USSR days. Now they are sovereign nations. They compete on their own since communism and dictatorship fell out of fashion. You could say that nations as a concept is a gimmick since we are all the same and just happened to be born on some place on this earth. Anyway I liked the idea of Team Europe and it didn't "ruin" my view of the World Cup 3 years ago. They tried something new and if people just might think a little more outside the box, all this nonprogressive whining might not exist.


Btw, you never answered this:
Do you think it would have been much more emotion and hitting if Germany and Slovakia would have been there instead?

Its absolutely hilarious how youre trying to mock me and still prove your stupid point that has already been disproven. The fact that youre still trying to compare club franchise teams against international teams as if its even comparable just tells me that youre dense and you lose. Buh bye.

 

[Jahara]

Its absolutely hilarious how youre trying to mock me and still prove your stupid point that has already been disproven. The fact that youre still trying to compare club franchise teams against international teams as if its even comparable just tells me that youre dense and you lose. Buh bye.

What point has been disproven? This ain't even facts but opinions. I am trying to think in a broader way and seeing things from outside the box.

 

[Elvs]

USA or any North American country playing in the FIFA World Cup is a joke.

They should lump together the best players from USA, Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama and Honduras onto one team etc. And if the Danes are nice, maybe they'll lend you some guy from Greenland too.

 

[JackSlater]

USA or any North American country playing in the FIFA World Cup is a joke.

They should lump together the best players from USA, Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama and Honduras onto one team etc. And if the Danes are nice, maybe they'll lend you some guy from Greenland too.

Now that is some progressive, outside the box thinking!

 

[Elvs]

You may as well consider every national team as a gimmick teams since they were nations made up by quite much coincidence. Finland could have been just like Latvia or Ukraine during the USSR days. Now they are sovereign nations. They compete on their own since communism and dictatorship fell out of fashion.

Sure, if you think wars are matters of coincidence. Of course, everyone knows Finland held off the Soviets by rolling around in four-leaf clovers, even though it was a winter of extreme cold and waist-deep snow.

You could say that nations as a concept is a gimmick since we are all the same and just happened to be born on some place on this earth.

I'd like to see your concept of how a world without borders could work. Let's hear your progressive, outisde of the box thinking.

Anyway I liked the idea of Team Europe and it didn't "ruin" my view of the World Cup 3 years ago. They tried something new and if people just might think a little more outside the box, all this nonprogressive whining might not exist.

You should say this to the people of Slovakia, Germany and Switzerland. Can you give them a reason why they should care about this "Team Europe" and celebrate if they win the tournament?

You'd have an equally good chance trying to convince the people of Toronto and Ottawa to get behind a team called the Ontario Maple Senators. Both their teams kinda suck right now, so they should be happy to see their teams combined for the rest of the season which increases their chances to win, right? I'm sure the people of Toronto and Ottawa get along just fine aside from hockey. Similar to the people of Switzerland and Slovakia. In fact, they should have even more in common. So what's the harm? It's perfect.

 

[Elvs]

Now that is some progressive, outside the box thinking!

Thanks! But honestly, all I did was steal Gary Bettman's idea.

 

[member 305909]

The problem is that there is no good time for having a best-on-best tournament. September is bad but yet much better than any other time.

Olympics in the middle of the season in February is very bad.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

It is even literally in the name.

Club World Cup: A Cup to determine the best Club every year, or more accurate, the annual "is the South American team strong enough to provide a challenge for the Champions League winner" event almost noone cares about. If you take this as a definition for international competition, then the Champions League (both in football and in hockey) or even the Spengler Cup (an invitational club tournament) and, as posted above, games between Canadian and US NHL franchises would be "international competition" too.

Agreed. This Hugo poster seems very confused as to what the definition of an international tournament is.

 

[garbageteam]

I thought there were actual updates to the WC in this thread but it ends up being a couple of delusional posters who haven't the slightest clue or understanding of what an International competition is. If one had any clue of how major sports around the world worked, from rugby, soccer, basketball, cricket, field hockey, volleyball etc., they are played between nations.

Ice hockey does not have the clout or global following to change the paradigm and have it accepted as not a complete joke, which WC2016 is. Granted, there are some exceptions - see Scotland in soccer, the island of Ireland (rather than republic of Ireland) in Rugby, West Indies in cricket - but they all make sense and have decades of history and provenance on their side.

Garbage like "North America U23" and "Europeans that are not from Sweden, Finland, Czech and Russia" make absolutely no sense and are completely arbitrary fabrications, and make a mockery of professional and international sport. What's even more insulting is North America U23, without any sense, takes away players that are perfectly eligible and competitive in their respective teams (Canada and USA). The USA would have been less of a joke had it had access to all its players.

I don't know why this is so difficult to understand and why it's even debateable. These are the same hypocritical guys that think there is some sort of sanctity to preserving the rules of the league. Why don't we just combine the entirety of the rosters of all of the teams on the eastern seaboard in a single game vs. the St. Louis Blues and call that the 2020 Stanley Cup Finals, but take away all over-23 European player from the eastern conglomerate because "reasons"? Lunacy.

The only arguable POV is recognizing - and enjoying - that the WC2016 teams are a complete joke and a clownshow, but it's mindlessly entertaining as an All Star Game - and that's fine. But to suggest that should be repeated - and should be treated as an actual international tournament - is a complete farce.

 

[Zine]

Not that it should surprise anybody, but Ovechkin just gave an interview to sport-express saying the World Cup is a boring regular tournament in no way comparable to the olympics.

 

[member 305909]

Should the world cup be binned for good?

 

[JackSlater]

Should the world cup be binned for good?

No, just the most recent format. It's just short of six years since there was best on best hockey. With a reasonable format and some consistency the tournament could be great and grow in popularity.

 

[Zero Pucks Given]

No, just the most recent format. It's just short of six years since there was best on best hockey. With a reasonable format and some consistency the tournament could be great and grow in popularity.

I've said and thought about it many times but the WCH should've been held regularly (every 4 years) from the beginning. Waiting 8 years between the 1st and 2nd editions was, in itself, already dumb enough on so many levels. And then of course the gimmicky format in 2016...