NHL cautiously optimistic about 2021 World Cup.

[HugoSimon]

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.

You mean international teams that are entirely from the NHL?

You seem to be sliding past this point. This is an NHL tournament.

 

[HugoSimon]

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.

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.

You mean those examples where players are born on one side of the border but in fact grow up on the other side? Go through NHL rosters the number of Canadian-American players is huge.

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?

Because Team Europe still represents the best players from each nation.

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.

This is a false example as Civic teams are already based on a random assortment of nationalities. What would be truly absurd would be assembling a Leafs Team with Canadian only players.

Your argument is based on the idea that there are only two types of competitions. Those between civic franchises and nations. Clearly the NHL is creating something different as they are only using NHL players.

 

[HugoSimon]

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.

Yes delusional people who agree share the same viewpoint as that of the NHL's. You seem to be confusing observable reality with a deeply held belief. Observable reality states the NHL has in fact had "gimmick teams". Your deeply held belief is the element detached from observable reality.

Ignoring the "gimmick teams"

The cold hard fact is only including players who currently have jobs in North America will never satisfy your definition of an international tournament.

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.

This doesn't negate the existance of the Club World Cup. And if you need to tag a word on front of the World Cup like the NHL World Cup, you might have a better chance of getting your way.

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'd agree that the team North America makes less sense. But that doesn't change what team Europe is.

If there was a team Atlantic Canada, you can bet your ass that pretty much everyone I know would be jacked to see the best players from my province play together on a team that is actually competitive.

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.

It's already happened you can scream until you're blue in the face but this isn't a progressive fantasy it is a fact of recent history. Lunacy is getting up and arms about something that has already happened.

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

It's putting a piece of rubber in a laundry basket lets not get ahead of ourselves here.

Regardless if you think all star games shouldn't exist maybe you should be arguing up with the higher ups in the sports world.

- and that's fine. But to suggest that should be repeated - and should be treated as an actual international tournament - is a complete farce.

I've been pretty open about what this is from the start. It's an NHL cash grab to get more money out of Canadians.

I consider this to be a possible step up from the Spengler Cup, to me it fits the definition of an international tournament perfectly.



I'd be all for an traditional international tournament if it synced up with Olympic hockey on alternating 2 year cycles. But the NHL appears to have no interest in this.

 

[member 305909]

The old Canada-cup had a good format; a correct number of teams, suitable number of matches/team and reasonable duration of the tournament.

OK, I agree that from the commercial pov it would be important to include a team like Germany but the Germans just aren't good enough.

 

[tony d]

I'd like to see an actual Big 6 tourney again. A best on best of Canada, the US, Sweden, Russia, Finland, and the Czechs would be great to see.

 

[Elvs]

You mean those examples where players are born on one side of the border but in fact grow up on the other side? Go through NHL rosters the number of Canadian-American players is huge.

Whether Canada and USA gets along is not the issue. I was talking about the concept of countries in general, it was a "sub plot" and not meant to be elaborerad further. But again, feel free to tell me about your concept of a complete borderless world where USA, North Korea and Syria are under the same rule. There's probably a few Czech and Slovak posters here who can tell you good some good reasons for their countries breaking up in two, even if they get along just fine.

Because Team Europe still represents the best players from each nation.

No, it doesn't. It doesn't represent the best players from Sweden, Finland, the Czech Republic or Russia.

But okay, let's accept that this team is "best of rest of Europe". Again, why should someone from Slovakia get behind this team? Sure, some of the biggest die hard fans are likely to tune in because they like anything hockey-related, but what makes you think the wide public should care for this team?



If team Europe wins the World Cup, where does this celebration take place?

Europe is not a country. It's many countries with different languages and cultures, who does not share any history of shared teams. Your idea seems to be that the wide slovak population should get behind "best of rest of Europe" because they have Chara and Halak. Is your idea also that the wide slovak population should be Boston Bruins fans?

This is a false example as Civic teams are already based on a random assortment of nationalities. What would be truly absurd would be assembling a Leafs Team with Canadian only players.

The example isn't false, you simply didn't understand the point I was trying to make. People who defend the idea of these gimmic teams, are using the argument that "best on best" means having all the best players on the ice, no matter what team they are playing for. By the same token, one could argue that Anze Kopitar should be allowed to join a playoff team in april. Because who wouldn't rather see Anze Kopitar in the Stanley Cup playoffs over some 4th line plug on the Washington Capitals? Better players = better product. Am I right?

Your argument is based on the idea that there are only two types of competitions. Those between civic franchises and nations. Clearly the NHL is creating something different as they are only using NHL players.

Cool. Do a new thing, but then don't sell it as a national team tournament or a best on best.

 

[member 305909]

Eight teams is a bad number because obviously you put them into two groups of four and if there are teams eliminated only three games is too few for a team.

The system where you have two groups of four deciding only the QF-line up is simply stupid.

If you don't put the eight teams into two groups a seven game round robin is too long.

 

[Maverick41]

I am not speaking on behalf of anyone but myself, but as a supporter of one of those countries whose top players would be grouped into "Team some European countries with good hockey players but not enough to get their own team" I would not care if that team got blown out every game or won the whole damn tournament. I would check the boxscore to see if any German players had scored and maybe I would bother to look up some highlights, but that would already be a stretch.

 

[member 305909]

Indeed, it would have been nice to hear that meeting where they decided that having those two gimmick-teams would be a good idea.

 

[koyvoo]

 

[DJB]

Absolute bull crap . Bettman at his finest. The players want to do the World Cup and Olympics . What better way to grow the game then these two tournaments???

NHL is out of touch on this decision

 

[BlueDream]

This league is so incompetent it’s hilarious

 

[JackSlater]

So since 2014 we have a bad joke of a tournament in the 2016 world cup, a bad joke of a tournament in the 2018 Olympics, and nothing but uncertainty going forward when it comes to best on best. The IOC gets some blame but the vast majority certainly goes to the NHL.

Lebrun also said:



Truly an exciting time for hockey.

 

[robertmac43]

It's just so hard to believe that the league actually cares about growing the game after all of the let downs they bring us in terms of international play.

 

[BigBadBoar]

It's just so hard to believe that the league actually cares about growing the game after all of the let downs they bring us in terms of international play.

Personally, I sort of understand why they killed the Olympics. The IOC wanted money from it, the NHL wanted money from it, they were not able to come to any compromise, and that's it. What I don't understand is why the NHL has not been willing to even try reach a much smoother compromise with the IIHF about a best-on-best tournament which would not be a complete gimmick with "Team Europe" (do they even understand what's the point of international hockey there?), the "NA Youth Team" respectively. If there is something in 2024 as proposed, I really hope it will be a regular international tournament. I don't really think that Canada beating, say, Denmark say, 9-2 or so would "detract the tournament" in any sense. In rugby, there always are several games at the World Cup where New Zealand, France, England etc. smash some underdog, and it is not "detracting the tournament." The same with basketball, and at the end with football/soccer as well. Rather to the contrary, games where an underdog does a great job to resist a favorite often become the most memorable moments of any tournament. Just remember the Canada - Latvia game in Sochi 2014. Plus, there really are quite a lot hockey fans in, say, Germany, who will support their guys even if they fall badly to Canada or Sweden. And it will be still more exciting for them than watching Draisaitl and Kahun in some "Team Europe" together with players from six other countries. I understand 16 countries at the World Championship as it stands now is probably too much, but I would be completely OK with 12 countries. Sometimes the underdog would get smashed, sometimes there would be chance for an exciting surprise, it would be a celebration of the game over the world, like the soccer or rugby World Cups are.

 

[Toro2017]

There is not enough time for world cup in 2021, but there is time for all-star weekend? Why not change "world cup" more like all-star weekend?

Make them play 3 vs. 3 and every game is as long as in all-star event. So every team needs only 6 forward, 3 defence and 2 goalies.

So six team in two groups will play group stage on friday and saturday. Then two best teams from both group will play sunday for victory.

Group A
Canada
Russia
Finland

Group B
USA
Sweden
Czechia

Friday:
Can-Rus
USA-Swe
Rus-Fin

Saturday:
Swe-Cze
Fin-Can
Cze-USA

Sunday:
Semifinal1 (A1-B2)
Semifinal2 (B1-A2)
Final (winner of semifinal1-winner of semifinal2)

Edit. and if they would go with this format, then they (NHL) could bring this "all-star" event to Europe for new customers

 

[Toro2017]

There is not enough time for world cup in 2021, but there is time for all-star weekend? Why not change "world cup" more like all-star weekend?

Make them play 3 vs. 3 and every game is as long as in all-star event. So every team needs only 6 forward, 3 defence and 2 goalies.

So six team in two groups will play group stage on friday and saturday. Then two best teams from both group will play sunday for victory.

Group A
Canada
Russia
Finland

Group B
USA
Sweden
Czechia

Friday:
Can-Rus
USA-Swe
Rus-Fin

Saturday:
Swe-Cze
Fin-Can
Cze-USA

Sunday:
Semifinal1 (A1-B2)
Semifinal2 (B1-A2)
Final (winner of semifinal1-winner of semifinal2)

Edit. and if they would go with this format, then they (NHL) could bring this "all-star" event to Europe for new customers

Or, if there is not enough stars on that previous format, then just bring in more teams.

Group A
Canada East
USA West
World

Group B
Canada West
NA U23
EU

Group C
Quebec
Sweden
Czechia

Group D
USA East
Russia
Finland

Ofcourse with this there would be more games, but it could work like this

Friday:
Can E - USA W
Can W - NA U23
Que - Swe

Saturday:
USA E - Rus
USA W - World
NA U23 - EU
-----------------
Swe - Cze
Rus - Fin
World - Can E

Sunday:
EU - Can W
Cze - Que
Fin - USA E
----------------
Semifinal1 (winner of group A - winner of group D)
Semifinal2 (winner of group B - winner of group C)
Final (winner of semifinal1 - winner of semifinal2)

Edit. or should NHL try to spice things up and instead of USA East and USA West, there would be teams USA Trump and USA Obama. US players can then decide which teams they want to represent and then NHL would select 11 best from both groups.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Personally, I sort of understand why they killed the Olympics. The IOC wanted money from it, the NHL wanted money from it, they were not able to come to any compromise, and that's it. What I don't understand is why the NHL has not been willing to even try reach a much smoother compromise with the IIHF about a best-on-best tournament which would not be a complete gimmick with "Team Europe" (do they even understand what's the point of international hockey there?), the "NA Youth Team" respectively. If there is something in 2024 as proposed, I really hope it will be a regular international tournament. I don't really think that Canada beating, say, Denmark say, 9-2 or so would "detract the tournament" in any sense. In rugby, there always are several games at the World Cup where New Zealand, France, England etc. smash some underdog, and it is not "detracting the tournament." The same with basketball, and at the end with football/soccer as well. Rather to the contrary, games where an underdog does a great job to resist a favorite often become the most memorable moments of any tournament. Just remember the Canada - Latvia game in Sochi 2014. Plus, there really are quite a lot hockey fans in, say, Germany, who will support their guys even if they fall badly to Canada or Sweden. And it will be still more exciting for them than watching Draisaitl and Kahun in some "Team Europe" together with players from six other countries. I understand 16 countries at the World Championship as it stands now is probably too much, but I would be completely OK with 12 countries. Sometimes the underdog would get smashed, sometimes there would be chance for an exciting surprise, it would be a celebration of the game over the world, like the soccer or rugby World Cups are.

NHL will probably want all the money from such a tournament, and why should IIHF help it?

 

[BigBadBoar]

NHL will probably want all the money from such a tournament, and why should IIHF help it?

Because the participating countries would still be IIHF members. Plus, some teams would rely heavily on players from European leagues. Of course you can "solve" this by saying the national teams are in fact not official national teams but just some groups of independent players invited by NHL. But this would only lead to the conflict between NHL and the IIHF, ergo to deeper division of the hockey world - which would be not good for the game at all. Look at boxing and their several "world associations."

 

[BOS358]

Because the participating countries would still be IIHF members.

They were in 1996 and 2004, but that doesn't mean the IIHF had any say in the tournament. If it did, then Petr Nedved would have been unable to play for Slovakia in 1996 due to his Canadian citizenship.

Plus, some teams would rely heavily on players from European leagues.

And that is a great way to make sure the NHL has nothing to do with the event. No way the NHLPA is disbursing proceeds to non-members.

 

[vorky]

They were in 1996 and 2004, but that doesn't mean the IIHF had any say in the tournament. If it did, then Petr Nedved would have been unable to play for Slovakia in 1996 due to his Canadian citizenship.



And that is a great way to make sure the NHL has nothing to do with the event. No way the NHLPA is disbursing proceeds to non-members.

As I know, Peter Nedved has never played for Slovakia.

 

[JETZZZ]

Hold one in 2024 and then wait until 2036 to do it again. That way, they keep the pattern going of once every decade, in a year ending in 4 or 6.

 

[BigBadBoar]

They were in 1996 and 2004, but that doesn't mean the IIHF had any say in the tournament. If it did, then Petr Nedved would have been unable to play for Slovakia in 1996 due to his Canadian citizenship.



And that is a great way to make sure the NHL has nothing to do with the event. No way the NHLPA is disbursing proceeds to non-members.

Petr Nedved never played for Slovakia, and there was team Germany in both 1996 and 2004 with almost no NHL-ers.

 

[alko]

So since 2014 we have a bad joke of a tournament in the 2016 world cup, a bad joke of a tournament in the 2018 Olympics, and nothing but uncertainty going forward when it comes to best on best. The IOC gets some blame but the vast majority certainly goes to the NHL.

Lebrun also said:



Truly an exciting time for hockey.

What is this: ....trying to organize full fledged World Cup?

 

[BigBadBoar]

What is this: ....trying to organize full fledged World Cup?

Hopefully it means something like "actual international tournament, not a gimmick like in 2016."