USA overtaking Canada

[Sergei Bure]

Taking in consideration the expensive prices for kids to play hockey today, how hockey is losing tradition in Quebec (The Meca of Hockey), and how hockey is growing in the United States, do you think that in the next 20 years, the USA national team will became the biggest potence in the international hockey world?

 

[Eye of Ra]

Most likely Yes

 

[1989]

People ask this all the time like it's not just as expensive in the US.

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

People have been saying this for a while now.

USA still hasn't won a best on best since 1996. USA still struggles to be keep up with the elites at the senior world championship level. They're very good at world jr's and u18's but I don't see the depth / commitment to dominate. Canada dominated the u18's this year with players that weren't in the CHL playoffs and even had a few top end prospects reject the invite.

 

[Chainshot]

Did they signal first? Are they in the proper lane? Overtaking in the wrong lane can be problematic.

 

[Old Man Jags]

I am not Canadian and don't live there so I don't have any proper insights into changes to hockey's popularity in Canada, but it would seem unlikely to me. The US has a much larger population, but also very many other sports that are more popular and that hockey has to compete with. Even if hockey is less popular now in Canada than it perhaps used to be, it's hard to imagine that it doesn't remain THE number 1 sport in the country for the foreseeable future. If costs are a factor in Canada they will be a factor in the US as well, so I am not sure that money will be the thing that would flip the status of the two countries and lift the US to number 1.

 

[New User Name]

Yes. It was just a matter of time with US expansion and teams in newer markets getting kids involved in the game with financial incentives, getting out in the community and retired Canadian players getting involved in coaching minor hockey.

The lack of good players from Quebec is concerning and if QC had a team more kids would take up the game. Unfortunately no one in QC can afford the expansion fees for a new franchise.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

Feel like we have been talking about the US over taking Canada for decades now. Start with winning a tournament.

 

[Miro4Norris]

Feel like we have been talking about the US over taking Canada for decades now. Start with winning a tournament.

Well, if you look at the best rosters they can ice these days, they are pretty much equal so i would say it has been not just talking but also actions so far. But then on the other hand, drafts previous years and in the coming years have been dominated by Canada when it comes to top talent, i am not sure if its is going to stay as equal as it is right now.

Bedard, Fantilli, Celebrini, Schaefer, McKenna, Dupont. Pretty dominant 5-year run

 

[TheBeastCoast]

Well, if you look at the best rosters they can ice these days, they are pretty much equal so i would say it has been not just talking but also actions so far. But then on the other hand, drafts previous years and in the coming years have been dominated by Canada when it comes to top talent, i am not sure if its is going to stay as equal as it is right now.

Bedard, Fantilli, Celebrini, Schaefer, McKenna, Dupont. Pretty dominant 4-year run

Yeah I am not trying to say the US hasn't improved....they obviously have. I just don't really buy into the idea of anyone "over taking" Canada. Canada isn't going to stop producing top level talent anytime soon. That doesn't mean Canada will or can win everything...but they will be there.

 

[Mathieukferland]

No, this has been asked many times before and after the 4 nations. The answer I gave then was that the the USA is in the middle of their best generation ever, 96-01 were the strongest years in NTDP history. Ever since then 01, they have failed to produce the type of "match winner" you need to win best on best tournaments, as we saw that the element that put Canada over the top against the USA in the 4 nations was, that despite the USA having very impressive depth, they didn’t have anyone unicorns in the mould of McDavid, MacKinnon, Makar etc. This trend looks set to continue, as even their 1 age group (04) that won u18s since the start of the decade did so because of a deep team, rather than some unicorn superstar that would be a stand out player at a best on best. All that to say, the USA needs to win one of the next two tournaments (26 and 28) whilst they have close to the best roster, because after that it will likely get more difficult with Canada becoming better than their relatively bad 4 nations time and Russia likely being included by that point.


Also, I think the NCAA-CHL agreement will hurt American player development. I don’t know if USA hockey was against it, but taking away spots from the top American kids at NCAA and leaving a weaker USHL for the NTDP to play in is not a positive development for American players

 

[patnyrnyg]

They have been saying this since the 1996 World Cup. Could the US beat Canada at the highest level? Yes. They have, just havent won the tournaments. However, as others have said hockey is expensive in the US. Possibly more expensive than in Canada. And, at the youth level it is still a small sport. Football, Basketball, Baseball, Soccer all have A LOT more participants at the youth level. Could possibly have other sports as well with more than hockey.

 

[Kupo]

 

[patnyrnyg]

People have been saying this for a while now.

USA still hasn't won a best on best since 1996. USA still struggles to be keep up with the elites at the senior world championship level. They're very good at world jr's and u18's but I don't see the depth / commitment to dominate. Canada dominated the u18's this year with players that weren't in the CHL playoffs and even had a few top end prospects reject the invite.

If you are talking about the World Championships still going on, I wouldn't put too much stock into it as a measuring stick. I know it is tremendously popular in Europe. In the US? Nope.

 

[Fatass]

Well, if you look at the best rosters they can ice these days, they are pretty much equal so i would say it has been not just talking but also actions so far. But then on the other hand, drafts previous years and in the coming years have been dominated by Canada when it comes to top talent, i am not sure if its is going to stay as equal as it is right now.

Bedard, Fantilli, Celebrini, Schaefer, McKenna, Dupont. Pretty dominant 5-year run

It’s not equal now though. The USA doesn’t have the elite talent to match McDavid, McKinnon, Makar.

 

[Miro4Norris]

It’s not equal now though. The USA doesn’t have the elite talent to match McDavid, McKinnon, Makar.

It was pretty darn equal from what I saw. Won the first match playing even much better hockey than Canada and second game only Binnington's insane saves kept the title in Canada in a OT win.

Bear in mind, USA was missing their best player Hughes and Best winger Tkachuk. Canada didn't have significant injuries. Usa has much better D, and more depth in a best-on-best roster.

And I am saying this as european, who was rooting for Canada in those games.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

It’s not equal now though. The USA doesn’t have the elite talent to match McDavid, McKinnon, Makar.

Quinn Hughes is in a similar territory as Makar. I know he missed the Four Nations, more assists and than goals but he lives in a PPG dman territory without benefiting from having MacKinnon.

 

[Fatass]

It was pretty darn equal from what I saw. Won the first match playing even better than Canada and second game only Binnington's insane saves kept the title in Canada.

Bear on mind, USA was missing their best player Hughes and Best winger Tkachuk. Usa has much better D, and more depth in a best-on-best roster.

Elite players is why Canada is better. No match for Mcdavid, McKinnon, Makar. Canada produces this level of guys. The USA never has. The best athletes in Canada go to hockey. It’s not the same down south. Too many other sports that the best athletes choose ahead of hockey.

 

[Miro4Norris]

Elite players is why Canada is better. No match for Mcdavid, McKinnon, Makar. Canada produces this level of guys. The USA never has. The best athletes in Canada go to hockey. It’s not the same down south. Too many other sports that the best athletes choose ahead of hockey.

If there is no match for these guys, then explain why USA matched pretty darn well against them without some their best players? I know CAN won final in OT with Binniner carrying, but overall it was Canada who had problems on matching with USA in those 2 games. Therefore your argument doesn't make any sense.

I guess the difference with our opinions is other is watching this with neutral glasses, other one with red and white glasses.

 

[Fatass]

Quinn Hughes is in a similar territory as Makar. I know he missed the Four Nations, more assists and than goals but he lives in a PPG dman territory without benefiting from having MacKinnon.

I live in Van. Hughes is great. But he’s not at the same level as Makar. The USA never has matched Canada at producing these level greatest players. Lots of excellent guys, like Quinn Hughes, but not the top dogs. IMO several Euro countries produce more top dogs than the USA.

 

[SAJ]

Elite players is why Canada is better. No match for Mcdavid, McKinnon, Makar. Canada produces this level of guys. The USA never has. The best athletes in Canada go to hockey. It’s not the same down south. Too many other sports that the best athletes choose ahead of hockey.

Yes, exactly this. In the US the most athletic guys usually play other sports than hockey

 

[Breakers]

Nope
Equipment, and team expenses, travel costs.

No shot.

Substantially cheaper and easier sports for youth. Especially ones marketed better which the NHL has been a joke at for the last 10-20 years

 

[Wildabeast]

I'm in minnesota and while it's insanely popular here, it's still ungodly expensive. There are a ton of great athletes that probably would have been great players, but to get to that next level, the financial impact for the parents to fund such a venture of camps all year and stuff is just too much. For example, i live really close to where chaz and cruz lucius grew up, and their dad literally tried to build an indoor heated hockey rink with a parking lot on their property but the city i think denied him because it's a little rural and come of the zoning laws would have been affected. He might have actually built it but i can't remember. This is an extreme, but this is the type of $ you see in the hockey community where kids have unlimited exposure to training and rink access at all times

 

[le premiere etoile]

I think the U.S should just concentrate on winning the WHC for the first time in like 100 years before thinking they are overtaking anyone let alone Canada.

 

[NyQuil]

It's obviously conceivable given that they have caught up to a great extent since the 1970s and 1980s.

Will that continue, or will hockey interest in the US reach a saturation point? Will Canada continue to face competition from other sports as the cost of playing hockey rises?

Ultimately though, I don't know what "overtaking Canada" looks like:

1. Is it winning a single best-on-best tournament?

2. Is it winning a number of best-on-best tournaments in a row?

3. Is it winning both the Juniors (as a near best on best) and senior Olympics/World Cup best on best?

4. Is it sweeping the major NHL awards (or winning the vast majority) for a number of years?

5. Is it overtaking Canada as the top producer of NHL talent by percentage of active players?

6. Is it winning all the major tournaments (WHC, World Cup, OIympics, World Juniors, U18 etc.)?

7. Some combination of the above?

Other teams have won big tournaments (Czechs in 1998, Swedes in 2006) but it didn't lead to the conclusion that they had overtaken Canada as the #1 hockey country.

I think the closest argument is probably the Czechs in the late 90s and early 2000s when they won numerous international tournaments simultaneously.