Puck Daddy: Team Europe World Cup players frustrated with format

[Hardyvan123]

Team Leftovers and Team Young Gunzzzz!!!!! will bring a lot of talent to the tourney, but that doesn't ensure a higher quality of play.

Just look at the NHL's 'international' all-star games from 1998-2002 as an example.
International themed gimmick teams (Euro vs NA) + insanely talented rosters = crappy and sloppy on ice product.

Really comparing a single all star game to a tournament?

Dollars to doughnuts one will be able to see which one has a much higher compete level.

 

[Hardyvan123]

When you have what is supposed to be an international tournament, it is the norm for all participants to be national teams. Any deviation from this formula is an anomaly, and is going to need justification as such. This is a fact you can't overturn no matter how long you keep hands on your ears and naysay.

It's an NHL tournament with the profits being split by the NHL and the NHLPA, why can't they make the rules and with the bonus of young guys like McDavid and Eichel being on the U23 team they add an extra marquee impact and aura around something new.

soccer went U23 for the Olympics for at least while, not sure if they still do it and it's not the world cup but why the outrage is the question I ask here.

The justification needs to be extra strong, if one can add actual NTs that fill the quality requirements of the tournament and yet resorts to veering from the tradition. Such is the case here. And no, "marketing purposes"... or, if we put it more crassly, "some dumb hick from the backwoods can't recognize half the players playing for Slovakia and Switzerland" - the NHL's interpretation, not mine - is very assuredly not a valid reason. If you disagree, then I guess you have a personal stake in the matter.

No personal stake at all here but just a simple observation of there not being enough NHL players to actually make up a team for either the Swiss or the Slovaks and certainly not with the marquee that the rest of Europe and U23 team bring.

The hick argument is simply a huge strawman, it's an NHL tourney, they can make whatever rules they want.

In simpler words, the "quality" of these squads is irrelevant, because they still aren't - and never will be - national teams. Their inclusion was and is a royal brainfart, especially since you could have two fully able and competitive NTs in their stead. If you're unable to see this, well, that only means the joke's on you.

So one needs to make a huge justification and really it's no justification is acceptable because everything has to be national?

that's weak and then things never change, some change in life is exciting and interesting and for those so strongly nationalistic (which comes with it's own wet of problems , see 2 world wars in the 19th century as an example)

[/QUOTE]However, if all the other leagues refuse to support the NHL's attempt at playing a world hockey body (in order to provide enough players for the excluded NTs - and some of the included ones), then I guess they'll need to resort to creative solutions to bring enough teams to the table. Because, for all their might, the NHL can't organize a proper international tournament if they try to do it all alone. Anomalies are required, and therefore they're also at least somewhat justified.[/QUOTE]

I highly doubt that any of the teams will have problems filling their rosters with suitable players when they are making extra cash (and exposure) on top of it.

---

And even if you disagree with all this, you're still in the wrong - and conradicting yourself, to the boot. Because "the quality of play for the Leftovers and YoungGunz is better than Slovakia and Switzerland" is a justification in and of itself. You certainly wouldn't feel the need to parrot that line if you felt the inclusion of said teams is natural and needs no justifications whatsoever. The thing is, it's just not a very good one.

The talent level of the 2 "gimmick teams" is simply much better and makes fro a better draw in Toronto in what is an NHL tournament.

Why is this so hard to understand?

It would be one thing if it was totally replacing the Olympics and WHC, which it isn't but the simple fact is that most hockey fans, and especially paying ones in Toronto and North American television audiences would want to see the U23 and rest of Europe teams than the Swiss or Slovak ones, it's simple economics.

Heck even in countries other than the 2 nations listed above would want to see those teams right?

 

[gib]

...The hick argument is simply a huge strawman, it's an NHL tourney, they can make whatever rules they want...

...The talent level of the 2 "gimmick teams" is simply much better and makes fro a better draw in Toronto in what is an NHL tournament.

Why is this so hard to understand?...

It would be one thing if it was totally replacing the Olympics and WHC, which it isn't but the simple fact is that most hockey fans, and especially paying ones in Toronto and North American television audiences would want to see the U23 and rest of Europe teams than the Swiss or Slovak ones, it's simple economics.

Heck even in countries other than the 2 nations listed above would want to see those teams right?

You said it. This "tournament" is made for North-American audience. Why Canada and USA can have their own national teams, but Slovak or Swiss dont?

No one in Europe want's to see team "Europe" or U23.

Plastic, plastic and plastic.

 

[FiLe]

It's an NHL tournament with the profits being split by the NHL and the NHLPA, why can't they make the rules and with the bonus of young guys like McDavid and Eichel being on the U23 team they add an extra marquee impact and aura around something new.

Back to misdirection tactics, I see. Nobody's said the NHL is breaking some set rules by doing things this way, however, they are breaking the international tradition and yet they're marketing it as "international hockey". It's misleading.

soccer went U23 for the Olympics for at least while, not sure if they still do it and it's not the world cup but why the outrage is the question I ask here.

Olympic soccer does not break tradition. It's still all national teams. Player eligibility may be more strictly regulated than usual, but I guess that gets a pass because soccer also has its longstanding marquee event (FIFA World Cup) which isn't going anywhere.

No personal stake at all here but just a simple observation of there not being enough NHL players to actually make up a team for either the Swiss or the Slovaks and certainly not with the marquee that the rest of Europe and U23 team bring.

The hick argument is simply a huge strawman, it's an NHL tourney, they can make whatever rules they want.

It would be a strawman if somebody was complaining about this being against some set of rules or another. No wait, that would still not be strawman. Just plain old lyin'. A piece of advice: Just mentioning the name of an argumentation error does not automatically bring a statement more credibility. It should also be used properly.

You see, nobody still wasn't saying it's against the rules. All that was being done was looking for a simple common sense reasoning for deviating from the true-and-tried formula. And the first good one is that if they can't use players outside the NHL, there simply aren't enough for Slovakia and Switzerland to field full rosters.

You know, discussing the matter with you would be so much more pleasant if you actually responded to the arguments you think you're responding to, rather than repeating some other talking points and pretending you're responding to the thing that was said.

So one needs to make a huge justification and really it's no justification is acceptable because everything has to be national?

that's weak and then things never change, some change in life is exciting and interesting and for those so strongly nationalistic (which comes with it's own wet of problems , see 2 world wars in the 19th century as an example)

It should involve all national teams if there are enough competitive national teams one can invite. It's no rule, but one shouldn't also wonder why people start wondering about it when said formula is broken.

"Not enough players in the pool we have" is a pretty good justification for it. "They're more competitive that way", is not.

And what World Wars in the 19th century are we talking about now? I'm only aware of the two in the 20th, and those were mostly motivated by human greed, with nationalism used as an excuse. Or, so it was in the first one. In the second, they didn't even bother with that, and just used ideology.

And oh, in case it was simple human error: Centuries are numbered by the year they end to, not where they begin from. "19th century" refers to the 1800s, "20th" to the 1900s. We're currently in the 21st. If this was new information, maybe you should spend less time in Internet hockey forums and more in school.

Luckily, they haven't started any wars over hockey, though. And hopefully won't.

The talent level of the 2 "gimmick teams" is simply much better and makes fro a better draw in Toronto in what is an NHL tournament.

Why is this so hard to understand?

It would be one thing if it was totally replacing the Olympics and WHC, which it isn't but the simple fact is that most hockey fans, and especially paying ones in Toronto and North American television audiences would want to see the U23 and rest of Europe teams than the Swiss or Slovak ones, it's simple economics.

Heck even in countries other than the 2 nations listed above would want to see those teams right?

It would still be nice if you actually responded to the points being presented instead of just saying something and pretending it's relevant.

The point here was, that you said "things need no justification" first, and then you say "U23 and Rest of Europe will be more competitive", which IS a justification. You should feel no need to say the latter if you feel the former is true. Which means that either you're a very confused individual, or trying be smart but getting pretty badly mangled up in your own words.


Now, to humor you and respond to what you said... if the NHL just said "we want to have our own tournament using just NHLers, but there aren't enough NHLers of select nationals to have enough teams", I guess this wouldn't be an issue to anybody. But no, the NHL is touting this is as a fully qualified international event, which is bound to raise the eyebrows of those who know what international hockey is traditionally about.

Another troubling thing for people who don't dig this tournament is the talk that hints that the league is trying to use this thing as a pretext for pulling out of the Olympics, which puts what is currently the only true marquee event in hockey in jeopardy. Now, there is nothing wrong with having the NHL World Cup as it is if we only knew that they're also going to go to Pyeongchang and Beijing and beyond. If that's not happening, then the World Cup should be developed into a direction that makes it the marquee event - so that we'll still have one no matter what. It would be pretty much comparable to what FIFA does then.

I figure that in most countries, when they hear words "international hockey", they expect to see a tournament that has national teams in it. Not made-up ones. It would also be really nice if they had a chance to use each and every player available to them, instead of being limited to those playing in a certain market, like Europe or North America.

Now, not every tournament has to be like this, some may be limited to one and one the other. But if there was at least one with no silly limitations or the inbuilt need to get creative - it would be really nice for hockey fans everywhere, would it not?

All the people who are supporting the World Cup as it is are doing is shooting their own legs. Because if the NHL sees this as a successful thing, they won't either bother with the Olympics anymore, nor will they bother developing this into a direction that turns it into a replacement marquee event. All we're left with then are Olympics that features only euro league players and guys from the lesser NA leagues, the World Championship which does not agree with the NHL's playoff schedule (which I consider nobody's fault, really) and finally, this plasticy thing that does not really bring all the world's best players from various hockey nations together either. And in the end, nobody wins. Or at least nobody who has to pay for tickets.

 

[JackSlater]

Back to misdirection tactics, I see.

Having seen plenty of his posts, it's not a tactic. He genuinely doesn't see how weak the arguments being put forward are, or how irrelevant they are to the points he is trying and failing to respond to.

It's all very simple - if some entity is having an international tournament, it should use national teams. Very simple. Any defence of the idiocy being displayed with this tournament is just shameless parroting of the NHL's lame excuses.

 

[FiLe]

Having seen plenty of his posts, it's not a tactic. He genuinely doesn't see how weak the arguments being put forward are, or how irrelevant they are to the points he is trying and failing to respond to.

Right. Well, if it's not intentional, I guess I should apologize then.

Sorry.

 

[xxxx]

Hardyvan123 is right at least at one thing. Why not try something different? Will it hurt you that much? International or not, let's see the actual quality of the tournament. Whether you buy the arguments of Bettman or not, it's very likely it's just for once and then there will be just nations. Why not try it? You ain't excited to try something new? But maybe we should all stick with one simple format for another bilion years.

 

[FiLe]

Hardyvan123 is right at least at one thing. Why not try something different? Will it hurt you that much? International or not, let's see the actual quality of the tournament. Whether you buy the arguments of Bettman or not, it's very likely it's just for once and then there will be just nations. Why not try it? You ain't excited to try something new? But maybe we should all stick with one simple format for another bilion years.

For the umpteenth time... if the NHL ends up making money out of this, there's no guarantee they'll just dump the supposed "one time" idea and go back to doing the hard preparation work, trying to negotiate deals with other leagues to have enough players available to arrange a proper tournament. And if they figure this will make a nice replacement for Olympic hockey, it will be even worse.

Therefore, the issue is not the existence of this World Cup with the gimmick teams as it is, but the threat it's presenting to the true best-on-best competition (as in, nothing but NTs, every player from every league available) - whether arranged in collaboration with the IIHF and IOC, or by the league itself.

But yeah, let it be said that if it is just a fun thing to try and it does not disrupt the usual programming in any manner, there is little reason to complain.

 

[JackSlater]

Hardyvan123 is right at least at one thing. Why not try something different? Will it hurt you that much? International or not, let's see the actual quality of the tournament. Whether you buy the arguments of Bettman or not, it's very likely it's just for once and then there will be just nations. Why not try it? You ain't excited to try something new? But maybe we should all stick with one simple format for another bilion years.

The reason not to do something different in this case is because the 'something' in question is beyond idiotic. They have created a tournament where at the very least half of the teams are disadvantaged by rules that apply only to them. I "ain't" excited by something so stupid, just like I wouldn't be if the NHL decided for one year to change the playoff system so that there was a Young Gunz team or a Leftovers team - because those changes would be just as stupid.

Best on best international hockey has happened only three times in the last decade. People are acting like playing an international best on best tournament with actual nations on even footing is some stale event that we see all the time.

For the umpteenth time... if the NHL ends up making money out of this, there's no guarantee they'll just dump the supposed "one time" idea and go back to doing the hard preparation work, trying to negotiate deals with other leagues to have enough players available to arrange a proper tournament. And if they figure this will make a nice replacement for Olympic hockey, it will be even worse.

Therefore, the issue is not the existence of this World Cup with the gimmick teams as it is, but the threat it's presenting to the true best-on-best competition (as in, nothing but NTs, every player from every league available) - whether arranged in collaboration with the IIHF and IOC, or by the league itself.

But yeah, let it be said that if it is just a fun thing to try and it does not disrupt the usual programming in any manner, there is little reason to complain.

Bill Daly is on record as saying exactly that they see this tournament as a potential replacement.

 

[1Gold Standard]

Hardyvan123 is right at least at one thing. Why not try something different? Will it hurt you that much? International or not, let's see the actual quality of the tournament. Whether you buy the arguments of Bettman or not, it's very likely it's just for once and then there will be just nations. Why not try it? You ain't excited to try something new? But maybe we should all stick with one simple format for another bilion years.

Oh, and if you remember, the poll (survey) I put to a group of coworkers in the Toronto office where 4 out of 12 I asked said they'd consider attending WC depending on pricing...that was before ticket pricing was available. Haven't been back to Toronto since, but as a follow up after pricing became known, I messaged/emailed/texted some of the guys. 1 is planning on buying a tournament package. 2 said a they'll try and land tics for a select few games (Canada vs. _______). The rest are hoping for corporate tickets, freebies. The company is a STH at the ACC and will be buying tournament packages x 4... so, there'll be lots of comp'd tickets to be had. Hell, I could probably land some tics for free. but I won't be asking for one.

 

[roto]

Hardyvan123 is right at least at one thing. Why not try something different? Will it hurt you that much? International or not, let's see the actual quality of the tournament. Whether you buy the arguments of Bettman or not, it's very likely it's just for once and then there will be just nations. Why not try it? You ain't excited to try something new? But maybe we should all stick with one simple format for another bilion years.

Yes, NHL could try something because it can, but 'different' does not need to be same as stupid.

NHL could have invited only top-6 teams, for example. It would've made it possible for all top teams to play against each other, and then there could've been finals for top-2 (or semis for top-4). That would've been a different and interesting tournament.

What we have now is that half of the teams play only three games, and one game is an exhibition game against a joke team, so it's only two proper games in group stage for top-6 countries. Unfortunately NHL doesn't care about arranging a good tournament, but a tournament which is supposed to make most money and visibility for NHL.

 

[Theokritos]

Why not try something different?

Then give it a different name instead of pretending it is a new edition of the Canada Cup/World Cup and don't pretend it's a best on best tournament like the Olympics. "NHL 100th Anniversary International Celebration"? Perfectly fine. "World Cup"? Don't dare to go there.

 

[Jerkini]

If they wanted to do this right, they should have made a qualifying stage where these same players come together throughout the year and compete against one another for a chance to play in the World Cup. But this is hockey. And you have so few competitive countries to begin with so it's not like you can turn any one away.

There's nothing special about this tournament. There won't be bragging rights if you win. There's no prestige. This is just a half baked idea caked up by the people who want to capitalize on the success of Olympic hockey.

Won't be surprised when the real superstars of the NHL all decline to participate.

 

[xxxx]

Then give it a different name instead of pretending it is a new edition of the Canada Cup/World Cup and don't pretend it's a best on best tournament like the Olympics. "NHL 100th Anniversary International Celebration"? Perfectly fine. "World Cup"? Don't dare to go there.

I agree they could name it NHL Cup. Still it's serious hockey though.

 

[therealdeal]

The only thing more silly than this tournament is the incessant bickering you people are doing over it.

Yeah, it's an NHL meant to grow the brand in North America. If you don't like it, TS. If you don't like the NHL, then boycott. The NHL isn't at all obliged to care about Europe, or the Olympics, or international hockey. It's a business. If you don't like their practices then don't buy their product. If the European players were actually concerned about this then they would do the same, but they won't, because they like the paycheque.

Get over it, seriously, this discussion is an embarrassment.

 

[Zine]

The only thing more silly than this tournament is the incessant bickering you people are doing over it.

Yeah, it's an NHL meant to grow the brand in North America. If you don't like it, TS. If you don't like the NHL, then boycott. The NHL isn't at all obliged to care about Europe, or the Olympics, or international hockey. It's a business. If you don't like their practices then don't buy their product. If the European players were actually concerned about this then they would do the same, but they won't, because they like the paycheque.

Get over it, seriously, this discussion is an embarrassment.

'Meant to grow the NHL's brand in North America'? What are you talking about? The NHL is marginalizing the American consumer as well.

-all games in Toronto
-occurs during the jam-packed September/October American sporting season
-Team USA is prohibited from fielding its best roster

The NHL is neglecting its largest fan base with this money grab.

 

[stars33]

I am a die-hard hockey fan living in New York. I speak to many people about hockey. Friends, co workers, etc. I would say there was a 50/50 split on people in favor of having any type of international best on best tournament in my area. I was of course a huge fan of international hockey but many people that i would speak to were always concerned of their teams' players getting injured. Not just there NHL team but there fantasy team. Fantasy sports is huge. Many hockey fans do not even care about the games but how there players performed. The 2010 Olympics in Vancouver i believe turned a few of those naysayers into a group of fans that said "that was pretty cool. Okay, once every 4 years." My buddy had a party believe it or not at 7am for the USA vs Russia game in Sochi. We called it a PUCKS and PANCAKES party. I could not believe how many guys showed up. There was about 15-20 guys. All psyched for a game a few years ago they did not even care to see. Now they were pumped. As for myself a long time proponent of international hockey. I felt Olympic hockey has become a part of the NHL fan culture. I also felt the soccer model of international tournaments was the most exciting way to promote the game. I was thinking that the next logical step for the NHL was to fully commit to the Olympics by taking breaks for the qualifiers and maybe even creating a champions league. If the NHL felt that they should control international hockey by creating a world cup more power too them.
However, when i heard of the two joke teams i felt like i got punched in the gut. My hope for a true world cup with qualifiers was shattered. This is whole concept destroys the very idea of a world cup of international teams. I felt that Gary Bettman was the stupidest person on the planet. How could he have not have figured out the formula of creating a great tournament. Fans are passionate about teams that represent them either by city,state,nation or even college. Yes, you have your radicals that like a team because of there jerseys or the person who says this was the first team they ever saw. But for most of us it is tribal a connection to our fellow neighbor. Sports teams unite us and gives us a common enemy. That is why we love it.
The idea of slapping together two teams that do not represent a people is just plain ignorant. This makes no sense. For the people writing on these boards who are defending these teams or maybe are excited by them. Are you going to have the knot in your stomach when they are losing late in the third period. Are you going to feel complete euphoria when they score in overtime. Let me answer for you. No your not. But in Slovakia, Switzerland, Austria, Belarus, Lativa, and many more. There are plenty of hockey fans our fellow hockey fans who live in yes smaller economic countries that would love to have one chance just one chance (you got it... Braveheart!!!) to have their shot to see there countrymen from there professional leagues (yes they are professional) face the world 's best just once every 4 years. And Gary Bettman said FU i am making my own world cup just Canada and my NHL players. SO F#%k off!!!
How can you be a hockey fan and be cool with this? This World Cup needs to be a colossal failure. To shine a light on how ignorant Gary Bettman is about creating a meaningful international hockey tournament.

 

[xxxx]

Honestly, good story.


But, I definitely will be a hard NAU24Team fan when they play Finland, Sweden or Russia.

I think I'll wait for the actual tournament, games, fans reaction at that time, etc., to really judge this whole thing.

I don't see the future, but I believe it will be one of the best hockey we have ever seen, of course it's based on my belief that the teams and their players will play and take this tournament with the same prestige as any other best-of-best tournament. I guess if some of the critiques are right, and the prestige or attitude is not there as much, we should see it on the ice.

I personally believe that with every day getting close, there will be more and more fans that will be just hungry to see stacked Team Canada competing against world's best players, on home soil, on NHL ice.

 

[FiLe]

But, I definitely will be a hard NAU24Team fan when they play Finland, Sweden or Russia.

And if they make it far enough to face Canada? Are your sympathies still with them? If not, hope they enjoy playing in front of the most hypocritical audience to date.

I don't see the future, but I believe it will be one of the best hockey we have ever seen, of course it's based on my belief that the teams and their players will play and take this tournament with the same prestige as any other best-of-best tournament.

Now, if only this was a best-on-best... but with two collection teams and potentially five out of the six NTs participating being burdened with technical limitations on player selection, you can really question whether you should call it that. And... boom. There goes the prestige.

Canada and USA may have enough material to work around the meager limitations placed on them by the YoungStarz first dibs, but if Russia, Finland and the Czech Rep are cut off from their regular selection from Euro leagues and have to sub them with AHLers or other fringe players... then this certainly will NOT be something that deserves the "best-on-best" moniker. All it will be is silly exhibition.

 

[Canuckistani]

of course it's based on my belief that the teams and their players will play and take this tournament with the same prestige as any other best-of-best tournament.

So why would Hossa care about "Team Euro Leftover" and why would McDavid feel any sense of pride in playing for his continental age group?

This mickey mouse POS event isn't in the same league as the World Hockey Championships, never mind the Olympics.

 

[xxxx]

So why would Hossa care about "Team Euro Leftover" and why would McDavid feel any sense of pride in playing for his continental age group?

This mickey mouse POS event isn't in the same league as the World Hockey Championships, never mind the Olympics.

"Team Euro Leftovers" is not how they should be called, it's not exactly accurate.

And I think all you need is being motivated as a team. McDavid and the youngsters will certainly have that.

 

[garbageteam]

Heck even in countries other than the 2 nations listed above would want to see those teams right?

Untrue. No evidence supports that. Casual fans I talk to think it's stupid. I've lived 3 decades in Canada and I think it's an embarrassment. "Economics", when viewed from the perspective of generating interest/ticket sales/eyeballs, does not support this model or format - there will be NO ONE hating on a Top 6/Top 8 World Cup format if this U23/Europe Leftovers was never proposed - forum proposals for those ideas would be laughed at moreso than Crosby to Toronto trade proposals and such threads would be immediately locked.

I would hazard a guess and say fewer people are watching this than they would have had they never brought up these imbecilic proposals, but that "fewer" probably isn't enough to prevent sellouts or decent TV revenues unfortunately. It only makes sense economically because the NHL is too cheap to pay for the rights from other leagues and the bean counters decided the savings outweighed the costs of lost viewership, respect and heritage.

Like repeated several dozen times in this thread, the NHL is free to do whatever it pleases with this sideshow - we just won't watch. But we will keep complaining because of the threats it poses to the format that has worked pretty damn well for the past 17 years of Olympics/WCs. If they announced 2018/2022 participation tomorrow, we'll never read this thread or talk about the World Cup again, but until then we'll keep flogging the horse til we damn please.

 

[FiLe]

"Team Euro Leftovers" is not how they should be called, it's not exactly accurate.

"Team Not-Enough-Players-In-This-League-To-Really-Matter"
"Team We Really Shouldn't Be Here But Some of Us Are Regardless"
"Team Nobody Watches In Brussels"
"Team Bettman's Brainfart, Part One"
"Team Anze and Those Other Guys"

Any of these better?

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

2014 Fifa World Cup
Over 1 MILLION + visitors around the World.

2015 Cricket World Cup
Over 300,000 visitors from around the World

2015 Rugby World Cup
Over 500,000 + visitors from around the World.

2016 nhl cash grab invitational cup
0 visitors from around the World.

What's wrong with the above information?

Hockey has only two events where people support their countries

The World championships and the Olympic games.

God can't wait until this event is cancelled in an international tournament, Connor McDavid has to play with his american enemy.

Canadian's must be furious. That's a joke hahahaha.

 

[xxxx]

I don't know, maybe some people are not so serious about everything? Life is also fun, isn't it?