WCH - Impressions of the Tournament

[Lepardi]

Picture it as though the best players on the best teams couldn't play in the World Cup because they were in Champions League playoffs.

I have no need to picture something like that, cause UEFA would never be dumb enough to hold the playoffs during the World Cup. Why would they have the playoffs in June, when they've got all the time in the world between August and May to figure out who the best team in Europe is. This is how it works in 2016-17:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016–17_UEFA_Champions_League

 

[holyprime]

First of all, the NHL is not "just this one league". The NHL is by far the best hockey league in the world by a massive margin. No other leagues are even close.

So what if it is a business with billionaire owners? The players themselves are compensated well and have a strong players union that they fought for over the years. Players being compensated and sharing in the profits didn't just happen, they fought to earn fair compensation.

The IIHF would rather profit off the backs of players without compensating them. At least NHL players are compensated and have an opportunity to be financial secure for the rest of their lives.

You miss the point. It's not about money and power, it's about the sport.

The IIHF is a Federation, its purpose is not profit, but the growth of hockey (you may argue how good they do their jobs). The money made with the WHC is mostly distributed among its members (Canada too), which run the actual projects in their countries (like youth programs etc).

That concept is not new or exclusive to hockey. In fact, almost every sport on this planet has such a "government". It helps finding a common "calendar" that accomodates both, leagues and international competition.

How much can a player make in Europe? The IIHF has a firm grip over European hockey and who is the one making the real money? Not the players.

Depends highly where you play. Millions in the KHL, less everywhere else. That's a pure guess now, but average salary in NLA is maybe 300k. The IIHF has nothing to say here, this is all national laws and a few international rulings: If you're interested in the topic, look up the "Bosman ruling" (it's football but a good example).
Or the Matthews thing, because normal work laws applied he had to be 18 to be able to get a work permit to actually play for the ZSC.

Maybe the IIHF should stop trying to order the NHL around? How about the IIHF accommodate the NHL? The IIHF needs the NHL more than the NHL needs the IIHF.

The IIHF doesn't order the NHL around (it couldn't anyway). What it tries to do (again, you can argue about their success) is to find a common ground for all the leagues involved.

It's not the IIHF's fault that the NHL has a completely different schedule than anybody else. Every other league on this planet was able to organize themselves, find common ground and have not just the WHC but several other international competitions during the season. There's just this one exceptional league that demands everybody else to bow to it's superiority. Be it the WHC, the Olympics or now the new "world cup". That's what makes people angry, especially as this is no problem at all in any other sport.

 

[lynx]

Got my tix for exhibition in Ottawa -Sept 10th - $30/each. Canada VS United States

 

[holyprime]

Do you really expect the NHL owners to bend over for the IOC?

For all i care, the IOC and the owners can have a danceoff on the "surface" of Jupiter.

What i want is watching the best players of each country playing hockey at the Olympics.

I do not give a damn if some billionaire makes a few bucks less. And while i do understand the point on insurance, that should apply to all the athletes and not just NHL hockey players.

 

[snipes]

What if the European teams just extended the European Hockey Tour prior to the start of the WHC?

Push the WHC back a couple weeks. Outside of the Big 4 European powers, add in Slovakia, Switzerland, and Germany to get more games in. From what I've gathered based on what you guys have shared, nationalism is extremely important to many Europeans. Just play a couple of more weeks of the EHT.

Maybe dedicate the final week or two to the young players. Have the U-23 players from the Big 4 in Europe play each other, it would help develop them for an eventual national team spot. Is that a reasonable idea? Would be interesting to watch, also you guys could get some of your draft eligible players in the spotlight. I'm sure TSN would pick up coverage in Canada. I would watch.

Start the WHC after the 2nd round of the playoffs end. Allow teams to grab players who lose out in the 1st and 2nd round and give them enough time to get over to Europe, practice for a few days and adjust to the time zone before the WHC begins.

It benefits the other hockey powers as well, your best players are in the NHL as well. Thoughts?

 

[snipes]

For all i care, the IOC and the owners can have a danceoff on the "surface" of Jupiter.

What i want is watching the best players of each country playing hockey at the Olympics.

I do not give a damn if some billionaire makes a few bucks less. And while i do understand the point on insurance, that should apply to all the athletes and not just NHL hockey players.

Everyone does. But this is their job and livelihood. You cannot expect them to take all the risks and foot the bill.

I think the IIHF and TV Networks should work together to come up with the insurance money. If the NHL guys don't go, I'm not even blaming the owners. I blame the IOC and IIHF.

How can anyone honestly expect the NHL to take all the risk and pay all the insurance costs?

 

[snipes]

I have no need to picture something like that, cause UEFA would never be dumb enough to hold the playoffs during the World Cup. Why would they have the playoffs in June, when they've got all the time in the world between August and May to figure out who the best team in Europe is. This is how it works in 2016-17:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016–17_UEFA_Champions_League

Right, because the organizers of the World Cup ensure they work around the schedules of the leagues.

The IIHF doesn't work around the best league in the worlds schedule, yet calls it a World Championship.

 

[Bear12Good]

IIHF Worlds Better NHL WHC?

 

[snipes]

IIHF Worlds Better NHL WHC?

No.

This is the best of the best at one venue with only 8 teams. Hockey on NA ice is better as well, the 2010 Vancouver Olympics were way better than the 2014 Sochi Olympics.

The game is faster on NA ice and strategies that work on European ice aren't as effective on NA ice. There is also way more physicality on the smaller ice.

 

[Gary Nylund]

For all i care, the IOC and the owners can have a danceoff on the "surface" of Jupiter.

What i want is watching the best players of each country playing hockey at the Olympics.

I do not give a damn if some billionaire makes a few bucks less. And while i do understand the point on insurance, that should apply to all the athletes and not just NHL hockey players.

Why do I picture you in a sandlot angrily stamping your feet when you say/yell this?

 

[Gary Nylund]

Everyone does. But this is their job and livelihood. You cannot expect them to take all the risks and foot the bill.

I think the IIHF and TV Networks should work together to come up with the insurance money. If the NHL guys don't go, I'm not even blaming the owners. I blame the IOC and IIHF.

How can anyone honestly expect the NHL to take all the risk and pay all the insurance costs?

I've yet to hear a good answer to this question. It's just a petulant chorus of "we want the best players at the OG, why is the NHL so arrogant etc.".

 

[snipes]

I've yet to hear a good answer to this question. It's just a petulant chorus of "we want the best players at the OG, why is the NHL so arrogant etc.".

There are financial realities to consider. Of course we want the NHL players there, I will be livid if they are not.

The NHL should not foot the bill though. Between the IOC/IIHF/TV Networks they need to cover insurance costs. The IOC and IIHF have covered the costs for all of the previous Olympics, that's a major reason why the NHL was willing to participate.

If the IOC and IIHF don't get it together, I blame them.

 

[Canuckistani]

I've yet to hear a good answer to this question. It's just a petulant chorus of "we want the best players at the OG, why is the NHL so arrogant etc.".

Given the revenue and attention the IOC/IIHF generates from NHL participation they should damn well pony up the money.

If the NHL does take part in 2018, I suspect it will come down to a TV network or sponsor coming up with the cash.

 

[snipes]

Given the revenue and attention the IOC/IIHF generates from NHL participation they should damn well pony up the money.

If the NHL does take part in 2018, I suspect it will come down to a TV network or sponsor coming up with the cash.

Exactly. This one would not be the NHL to blame. I will be so pissed off at the IOC/IIHF if they don't get it together.

NBC has been floated around some circles. They are paying $1B for the games. $20-30M is a drop in the bucket to ensure one of the more premier events features the best in the world.

 

[XokkeyGuy]

Hockey on NA ice is better as well, the 2010 Vancouver Olympics were way better than the 2014 Sochi Olympics.

strategies that work on European ice aren't as effective on NA ice.

Come on Snipes, you are starting to sound just like "TrueHockeyFan", if you continue with statements such as these and some of your recent I will have to start skipping your comments as well.
The difference I find especially in this thread is the difference of how NA vs Europeans argue, with many of you from NA just being unreasonable and stubborn, not even trying to have logics/explanations to your arguments, that is just annoying.
You could have said "I don´t like the way the game is played on big ice.." Instead you could give examples like the game is slower etc etc and why everybody would benefit from the NA ice. But you just put it like "NA is best, NA strategies are best, I like this and because of that it should be like that"
I might be sounding a little harsh against you now, this isn´t a rant against you but this type of arguments that are being used throughout here on HFboards and especially in this particular thread as I see it.
Start arguing with more reasoning guys! More explanations, less "I like this"!

 

[snipes]

Come on Snipes, you are starting to sound just like "TrueHockeyFan", if you continue with statements such as these and some of your recent I will have to start skipping your comments as well.
The difference I find especially in this thread is the difference of how NA vs Europeans argue, with many of you from NA just being unreasonable and stubborn, not even trying to have logics/explanations to your arguments, that is just annoying.
You could have said "I don´t like the way the game is played on big ice.. give examples like the game is slower etc etc and why everybody would benefit from the NA ice. But you just put it like "NA is best, NA strategies are best, I like this and because of that it should be like that"
I might be sounding a little harsh against you now, this isn´t a rant against you but this type of arguments that are being used throughout here on HFboards and especially in this particular thread as I see it.
Start arguing with more reasoning guys! More explanations, less "I like this"!

Sorry, I was venting about the IIHF reliving the past . We have lots of bad blood with the IIHF, we're not always reasonable about. That's my bad I could have been more articulate.

The reason why I prefer the small ice is the game is faster. For example, NA ice actually benefits you against the Finns. That collapsing style clogging the middle does not work as well, the play moves too fast and collapsing still leaves open prime scoring areas.

NA ice actually benefits a fast team like Russia better than the bigger ice.

 

[snipes]

You miss the point. It's not about money and power, it's about the sport

I owe you an apology holyprime, I was overly worked up discussing the IIHF.

It comes from a place of passion and love for hockey, I re-read some of my posts and they were over the top and not my usual reasoned self. It's a touchy topic reliving the past relations with the IIHF, Canadians are overly protective of hockey and sometimes our passion clouds our reason.

Hopefully we can have more reasonable chats going forward .

 

[snipes]

They would be highly favorable. There are plenty of people in that poll thread saying how great it would have been to see a real World Cup like we did in 1996 and 2004.

Yeah, the criticisms are legit. I enjoyed the first episode of that series that is covering the lead up to the World Cup, you guys love your hockey over there.

 

[seventieslord]

I recall much more buzz and anticipation in 1996 and 2004 than now.

Agree. It's not even close. No fans that I know are talking about this.

(anymore, that is. There was plenty of talking about how terrible the format is and how no one wants to watch it, but that ended months ago.)

I don't even know when it starts.

 

[seventieslord]

hmmm. what on earth is stopping the IIHF from just pushing the world championships back one month? Then the only players who couldn't play would be the few who are in the stanley cup finals. In theory (assuming we have similar turnout and effort levels to the olympics), we'd have best on best hockey once a year.

 

[Jablkon]

Here's an analogy that might help. I find analogies can help create better understanding when used properly. Many of you Europeans love your soccer (Too much diving and faking injuries for me. Can't stand that crap, antithesis to sport).

Imagine this, these leagues all merged to create the National Futball Super League: Spanish La Liga, English Premier League, Bundesliga, Italian Serie A, and Portuguese Liga. Best league in the world right?

Now imagine FIFA/UEFA or whatever it is called were unwilling to accommodate this league, they would begin qualifying tournaments before their season was done. They tried to order this league around and tell them what to do. They expected this league to lose money to participate in their tournaments and follow their commands. Further, they hold their annual Euro Cup during the Super Leagues playoff, the best players can't even play for their country because they are in the playoffs.

At the same time now imagine, FIFA/UEFA would accommodate all of the lesser leagues like say the MLS and work with them around their schedule and ensure tournaments properly timed up for them. Despite people actually wanting to see the newly formed super league players. Those are the players who bring in the real money, now continue to imagine FIFA was making huge sums of money and were unwilling to compensate these Super League players for their services. Even further, they refuse to cover any costs and expect the Super League to foot the bill themselves while FIFA profited.

Does this analogy sound unjust to the Super League and their players? It does to me. The same thing is going on with the IIHF and the NHL. The IIHF is willing to work around lesser leagues and ensure tournaments time up for them, they expect the NHL to foot the bill and lose money, and they hold their annual tournament at a time when the best players can't even player.

Tell me, how would you feel if you were a fan of this Super League? Would you think highly of FIFA?

As for now There were at least two attempts to set up this Super League outside UEFA jurisdiction.Last time clubs were considering it was year ago. To avoid it FIFA guaranteed four spots in Champions league to each top league . So they bit accommodated to clubs demands. However I dont see any similarities to our case. It was an " public secret" that NHL wanted WC to replace OGs. Now Bettmen said these are two seperate things. I dont know where IIHF should accommodate to NHL. Ok, it might be insurence in OGs but thats all. NHL is certainly fine with WHC timing so I dont know where the issue is. Honestly it seems that you looking for outside enemy even if it might not be there anymore.

If you get rid of this " bipolarity" you can start to judge present NHL activity on int stage. I have to say I am biased. I dont like such utter nonsense as best of best hockey. Its against nature of the sport. Creating artificial teams, ommiting normal teams just in the name best of best hockey? Rider cups? So why there is even Toronto Maple leafs or Oilers? They constantly suck for decade and certainly do not produce best of best hockey. Why not to replace them? Sorry it might not come from you but there are just too many posts irrationally defending NHL even if they decide to play it on Mars with one handed players. We should go over what happened 40 years ago....

 

[snipes]

As for now There were at least two attempts to set up this Super League outside UEFA jurisdiction.Last time clubs were considering it was year ago. To avoid it FIFA guaranteed four spots in Champions league to each top league . So they bit accommodated to clubs demands. However I dont see any similarities to our case. It was an " public secret" that NHL wanted WC to replace OGs. Now Bettmen said these are two seperate things. I dont know where IIHF should accommodate to NHL. Ok, it might be insurence in OGs but thats all. NHL is certainly fine with WHC timing so I dont know where the issue is. Honestly it seems that you looking for outside enemy even if it might not be there anymore.

If you get rid of this " bipolarity" you can start to judge present NHL activity on int stage. I have to say I am biased. I dont like such utter nonsense as best of best hockey. Its against nature of the sport. Creating artificial teams, ommiting normal teams just in the name best of best hockey? Rider cups? So why there is even Toronto Maple leafs or Oilers? They constantly suck for decade and certainly do not produce best of best hockey. Why not to replace them? Sorry it might not come from you but there are just too many posts irrationally defending NHL even if they decide to play it on Mars with one handed players. We should go over what happened 40 years ago....

Yeah sometimes passions run deep man. Some of that was slightly over board, I admit it. It comes from a love of the game, that's my bad I went overboard.

 

[Lepardi]

hmmm. what on earth is stopping the IIHF from just pushing the world championships back one month?

That would be June. Every other year that equals either the World Cup or the Euros. That's not something you want to be up against in Europe.

What on Earth is stopping the NHL from starting their season in early September?

To avoid it FIFA guaranteed four spots in Champions league to each top league

Isn't it UEFA that makes these decisions, not FIFA?

 

[Henkka]

Team Strength by caphits:

1. Canada 144.2 Million
2. USA 124.3 M
3. Sweden 113.5 M
4. Russia 92.0 M
5. Team North-America 88.8 M
6. Team Europe 85.7 M
7. Czech Republic 69.0 M
8. Finland 68.8 M


- Used some "out of the hat" estimates for guys without a contract (Trouba, Lindholm etc.)
- Used former old caphits for some players outside of NHL (Datsyuk, Ehrhoff, Seidenberg
- Used NHL minimun salaries for career non-NHL players (Lepistö, some russians)
- Used caphits with maximum bonuses for some TOP prospects outside of rookie status (McDavid, Eichel, Larkin)
- Used caphits without maximum bonuses for rookies (Laine, Aho, Matthews etc.)
- Used future 7.5M caphit for Aaron Ekblad, because that NA team had so many "too low" caphits, just to push the Total number up to be more realistic.
- Didn't count 3rd goalie on the Team Total.

Czech Republic and Finland could be next expansion teams in NHL...

They will fit under the cap!

 

[Lepardi]

you guys love your hockey over there.

That's what happens when your country sucks at soccer.