WCH - Impressions of the Tournament

[Jablkon]

Gary Nylund:I'm not sure how omitting other teams leads to more income. Is it because including those teams would lead to unsold tickets because they're less competitive and therefore less attractive to ticket buyers?


Exactly. It is like organizining WHC in France in a way " who is our biggest rival. Its probably Germany. Ok they must be there. Hold on, there is also Belarus....Common, who would go to watch Belarus here? Scratch them....."

I dont know what you still dont understand to....We have nice tournament replacing Olympics which is obviously "built" on nice sportif principles like empty seats and level of entertainment.

God bless we were competitive in 87 because there was nobody in our game against Canada so we didnt fulfil half of the criteria - no one cares about CZ in Canada. Darker days are even ahead of us because we are not even that good on paper. Our only chance is to organize it in CZ....

 

[1Gold Standard]

Gary Nylund:I'm not sure how omitting other teams leads to more income. Is it because including those teams would lead to unsold tickets because they're less competitive and therefore less attractive to ticket buyers?


Exactly. It is like organizining WHC in France in a way " who is our biggest rival. Its probably Germany. Ok they must be there. Hold on, there is also Belarus....Common, who would go to watch Belarus here? Scratch them....."

I dont know what you still dont understand to....We have nice tournament replacing Olympics which is obviously "built" on nice sportif principles like empty seats and level of entertainment.

God bless we were competitive in 87 because there was nobody in our game against Canada so we didnt fulfil half of the criteria - no one cares about CZ in Canada. Darker days are even ahead of us because we are not even that good on paper. Our only chance is to organize it in CZ....

I'm not sure how much it equates to on the revenue side of the equation, but eliminating 2 National Federation teams saves the NHL on the expenditure side of the ledger, transportation, insurance. NHL players are already covered underneath the NHL's blanket insurance policy.

 

[KarIgo87]

[/B]
No, what will be stupid is lending your eyeballs to this farce only to have Bettman upon tournament conclusion point to the profits and ratings as justification to A. end Olympic participation and B. continue with the gimmicky teams. In 4 years time McDavid will still be ineligible to play for his country in this case. I would never forgive myself for contributing to this sham of shams, as a TRUE hockey fan. Therefore, I'll be watching and attending Blue Jays baseball instead. Go Jays.

You can always watch it illegally if you are such a proactive person and want to send a message (I don't know to who though). I think it's childish.

Therefore, I'll be watching and attending Blue Jays baseball instead. Go Jays.

Sweat dreams.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Gary Nylund:I'm not sure how omitting other teams leads to more income. Is it because including those teams would lead to unsold tickets because they're less competitive and therefore less attractive to ticket buyers?


Exactly. It is like organizining WHC in France in a way " who is our biggest rival. Its probably Germany. Ok they must be there. Hold on, there is also Belarus....Common, who would go to watch Belarus here? Scratch them....."

I dont know what you still dont understand to....We have nice tournament replacing Olympics which is obviously "built" on nice sportif principles like empty seats and level of entertainment.

God bless we were competitive in 87 because there was nobody in our game against Canada so we didnt fulfil half of the criteria - no one cares about CZ in Canada. Darker days are even ahead of us because we are not even that good on paper. Our only chance is to organize it in CZ....

Well I don't know, there have been many posters saying tickets will be sold no mater what so who knows. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just skeptical is all.

I'm not sure how much it equates to on the revenue side of the equation, but eliminating 2 National Federation teams saves the NHL on the expenditure side of the ledger, transportation, insurance. NHL players are already covered underneath the NHL's blanket insurance policy.

Sorry if this is a dumb question but would the NHL be responsible for covering expenses for non NHL players?

 

[FiLe]

Sorry if this is a dumb question but would the NHL be responsible for covering expenses for non NHL players?

Well, it's not so outlandish to think at least some of that would fall on the tournament organizer. After all, the NHL demands the IOC cover the expenses when the players go to the Olympics...

 

[JackSlater]

No, what will be stupid is lending your eyeballs to this farce only to have Bettman upon tournament conclusion point to the profits and ratings as justification to A. end Olympic participation and B. continue with the gimmicky teams. In 4 years time McDavid will still be ineligible to play for his country in this case. I would never forgive myself for contributing to this sham of shams, as a TRUE hockey fan

Not to mention ads on jerseys and the new gimmicky ads on the boards. It's easy enough to see the NHL's logic. I don't expect most people to ignore the tournament, but anyone who doesn't see that the more successful this tournament is the more likely these gimmicks are here to stay is incredibly oblivious.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Well, it's not so outlandish to think at least some of that would fall on the tournament organizer. After all, the NHL demands the IOC cover the expenses when the players go to the Olympics...

True enough. I was just thinking about it, not sure what's happened in the past and there are many angles to consider.

 

[1Gold Standard]

Well I don't know, there have been many posters saying tickets will be sold no mater what so who knows. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just skeptical is all.



Sorry if this is a dumb question but would the NHL be responsible for covering expenses for non NHL players?

Yes, the NHL is responsible. It is their show. Each National Federation has to be compensated for their participation in a commercial venture + the NHL has to cover the costs of transportation, accommodation and insurance costs. The NHL doesn't want to pay out of pocket for NHL players to jet off to the Olympics, I assure you, no National Federation wants to pay out of pocket to enrich the NHL's bottom line. Non-NHL players contracts have to be insured and that is the NHL's responsibility. Including as many NHLers as possible in the tournament lessens the insurance burden and overall tournament costs, as the NHL already has an existing blanket insurance policy for their players.

This is the reason for creating the 2 gimmick teams and nothing else. And which is why the gimmicks will most likely continue...and which is why I won't be watching.

As a side note, I'd be curious to see how much Hockey Canada is compensated for this nonsense. My guess is not nearly enough.

 

[Gary Nylund]

To refresh my memory, I looked up the results of the last 2 World Cups and yikes! Looking at goal differential, in both cases, the teams that finished in the bottom two spots were far behind the top 6. This certainly helps understand why the NHL may not have liked the idea of inviting 8 national teams, especially when the world ranking indicate that there is indeed a huge gap between 6th and 7th place.

They should have just invited the top 6 and left it at that IMO, oh well.

 

[1Gold Standard]

Not to mention ads on jerseys and the new gimmicky ads on the boards. It's easy enough to see the NHL's logic. I don't expect most people to ignore the tournament, but anyone who doesn't see that the more successful this tournament is the more likely these gimmicks are here to stay is incredibly oblivious.

If the NHL commits to a real best on best (every 4 years) tournament hosted in different cities/countries that includes 8-10 or 12 countries (I prefer 10), I'll be on board. Until I see that, I won't be on board. but, I doubt we ever see that. so, instead we get gimmicky tournaments, Ryder Cup format and no Olympics. I'll have no part of it. I'll survive on a crash diet of World Junior tournament for my international fix. and for ***** and giggles the IIHF's annual spring tournament.

but I'm not even convinced this tournament is a mega success in Toronto, although better than it would anywhere else. My guess is that if this tournament has a lifespan, it will be recycled with variations of gimmicky teams in various Canadian NHL cities. Look out Vancouver, you're next in 2020.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yes, the NHL is responsible. It is their show. Each National Federation has to be compensated for their participation in a commercial venture + the NHL has to cover the costs of transportation, accommodation and insurance costs. The NHL doesn't want to pay out of pocket for NHL players to jet off to the Olympics, I assure you, no National Federation wants to pay out of pocket to enrich the NHL's bottom line. Non-NHL players contracts have to be insured and that is the NHL's responsibility. Including as many NHLers as possible in the tournament lessens the insurance burden and overall tournament costs, as the NHL already has an existing blanket insurance policy for their players.

This is the reason for creating the 2 gimmick teams and nothing else. And which is why the gimmicks will most likely continue...and which is why I won't be watching.

"This is the reason ..." - you forgot to add "in my opinion". I suppose you're right about the costs, it does make sense that the NHL pay up. While this would factor into their thinking, I doubt it's a make or break issue - the costs would be much less than sending all teams to the Olympics. If the 7th and 8th teams were more competitive it would be a lot easier to justify investing money to bring them over, like I say, it's likely a combination of things.

I doubt you'll see the gimmick teams again, no way to know for sure until next time obviously so I guess there's not much point in debating this any more.

 

[JackSlater]

If the NHL commits to a real best on best (every 4 years) tournament hosted in different cities/countries that includes 8-10 or 12 countries (I prefer 10), I'll be on board. Until I see that, I won't be on board. but, I doubt we ever see that. so, instead we get gimmicky tournaments, Ryder Cup format and no Olympics. I'll have no part of it. I'll survive on a crash diet of World Junior tournament for my international fix. and for ***** and giggles the IIHF's annual spring tournament.

All they have to do is remove the gimmick teams. This tournament was great before. That would make this an actual best on best tournament, and there would be little problem. Ideally this tournament would take place regularly, and would be split between North America and Europe 50/50. Whether it has six teams or more doesn't matter that much, provided the teams are actual national teams and every team is playing under the same criteria.

 

[1Gold Standard]

All they have to do is remove the gimmick teams. This tournament was great before. That would make this an actual best on best tournament, and there would be little problem. Ideally this tournament would take place regularly, and would be split between North America and Europe 50/50. Whether it has six teams or more doesn't matter that much, provided the teams are actual national teams and every team is playing under the same criteria.

I prefer 10, but I can live with a 6 team (COUNTRIES) round robin tournament if it has a best of 5 final. That's 8-10 games to crown a true champion. That's plenty.

 

[86Habs]

If the #7 and #8 countries in the world (I'm guessing Switzerland and Slovakia) are really that uncompetitive, the the tournament should have been structured with only the top-6 teams included in the tournament, with an '80s-style round robin format where each team plays each other. Top four in the round robin move on to a semi-final, with a best 2 of 3 final. All games would be competitive, with the finalists playing 8 or 9 games. That would be a tournament I could easily get into and excited for.

Alternatively, broaden the field to 10 or 12, with normal cross-overs, but keep the best 2 of 3 final. Sort of a hybrid between a World Championships and a classic Canada/World Cup.

Either of those would be an improvement over the current format, at least from the perspective of preserving the "best-on-best" lineage of past Canada/World Cups and the 1998--> Olympics. In my view, the NA U24 and Europe teams are an abomination and truly represent a missed opportunity for the NHL to construct and begin entrenching a World Cup. Honestly, I would have preferred a "Canada B" team over the current gimmick teams. To me, it's quite obvious that the tournament was done to get McDavid, Eichel, Matthews, Kopitar, et al into the tournament...which is sensible of course, but seriously taints the tournament. Making matters worse is the Sportsnet coverage, which I find very poor. This is all my opinion, of course.

Personally this is the least excited I've ever been for an international hockey tournament, and I've watched them all since the 1987 Canada Cup. I'll probably try and catch a Team Canada game here and there, but won't plan my schedule around it. The Jays / baseball pennant races and playoffs, early NCAA college football season, and NFL are my sporting priorities for mid-September to mid-October, in that order.

 

[stars33]

To the few supporters of this tournament. The question remains who is standing up and cheering with passion when team N.America and Team Euro scores?

There will be no flags waving for these teams, there will be no fans banging the glass when a penalty should of been called, there will be no oohs and ohs when they miss a chance late in the 3rd., there is no personnal connection to these teams?
The few of you who I are interested to see these teams do not understand that it is a passionate fan base that makes the event exciting. And there will be no passionate fan base supporting these teams when they step on the ice.

 

[jj cale]

To the few supporters of this tournament. The question remains who is standing up and cheering with passion when team N.America and Team Euro scores?

There will be no flags waving for these teams, there will be no fans banging the glass when a penalty should of been called, there will be no oohs and ohs when they miss a chance late in the 3rd., there is no personnal connection to these teams?
The few of you who I are interested to see these teams do not understand that it is a passionate fan base that makes the event exciting. And there will be no passionate fan base supporting these teams when they step on the ice.

I wouldn't go quite this far.

Fans in NA will cheer for them against Russia,Finland,and Sweden......and in Canada quite vocally so against Russia in particular.

And of course there will be ooohs and ahs with a missed chance late in the third, especially in Canada should they be in a must win game against any of those teams, even against Canada.

A missed chance in a tight must win game there are going to be ooohs and aahs. At least in games in Canada there will be.

It's a high level hockey game after all, a team under 23 NA does not change that.

 

[KarIgo87]

To the few supporters of this tournament. The question remains who is standing up and cheering with passion when team N.America and Team Euro scores?

There will be no flags waving for these teams, there will be no fans banging the glass when a penalty should of been called, there will be no oohs and ohs when they miss a chance late in the 3rd., there is no personnal connection to these teams?
The few of you who I are interested to see these teams do not understand that it is a passionate fan base that makes the event exciting. And there will be no passionate fan base supporting these teams when they step on the ice.

I'll be rooting quite hard for Team NA except game with Russia. I think it's gonna be the most exciting team on tournament. I don't care that spoiled north american fans won't support them. I hope they'll go to the Finals and rub it in your face.
Actually I wasn't that psyched about this tournament but the more negative bashing I read here the more I want this World Cup and these 'gimmick' teams to be successful.

 

[Canuckistani]

Actually I wasn't that psyched about this tournament but the more negative bashing I read here the more I want this World Cup and these 'gimmick' teams to be successful.

Indeed it would be an utter humiliation for Bettman to have to stand at center ice and announce to the ACC that the greatest hockey nation on earth is....a collection of Canadians and Americans born before Oct 1 1992.

It's such a horrendous idea that the NHL stuck them in the opposite pool in the hope of avoiding the awful sight of them playing against their own country.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I'll be rooting quite hard for Team NA except game with Russia. I think it's gonna be the most exciting team on tournament. I don't care that spoiled north american fans won't support them. I hope they'll go to the Finals and rub it in your face.
Actually I wasn't that psyched about this tournament but the more negative bashing I read here the more I want this World Cup and these 'gimmick' teams to be successful.

Haha I've been thinking similar thoughts. I don't like the gimmick teams but I like the attitude of some of the bashers here even less. People don't get exactly what they want exactly the way they want it and they start whining like self-entitled spoiled brats. I wonder how they ever deal with any adversity in real life.

That said, I am psyched about this tournament. In some ways, not as much as previous Canada/World Cups (because I don't like the gimmick teams) but on the other hand, it's been so long since the last one that I'm raring to go.

 

[Canuckistani]

They should have just invited the top 6 and left it at that IMO, oh well.

the tournament should have been structured with only the top-6 teams included in the tournament, with an '80s-style round robin format where each team plays each other. Top four in the round robin move on to a semi-final, with a best 2 of 3 final.

That would have made for an amazing event.

One of the best things about the old Canada Cups and the old pre-1992 WHC format is that all teams were in one pool which guaranteed at least one game against every other.

It sucked not being able to play Russia in Sochi or Sweden in Vancouver.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Indeed it would be an utter humiliation for Bettman to have to stand at center ice and announce to the ACC that the greatest hockey nation on earth is....a collection of Canadians and Americans born before Oct 1 1992.

It's such a horrendous idea that the NHL stuck them in the opposite pool in the hope of avoiding the awful sight of them playing against their own country.

I don't doubt that many conversations about this have taken place and the NHL already regrets having the gimmick teams. This is exactly why it's almost a foregone conclusion we won't see them again. JMHO.

 

[Gary Nylund]

That would have made for an amazing event.

One of the best things about the old Canada Cups and the old pre-1992 WHC format is that all teams were in one pool which guaranteed at least one game against every other.

It sucked not being able to play Russia in Sochi or Sweden in Vancouver.

I agree 100%. A 6 team round-robin where everyone plays everyone would be absolutely the best format.

 

[Canuckistani]

Haha I've been thinking similar thoughts. I don't like the gimmick teams but I like the attitude of some of the bashers here even less. People don't get exactly what they want exactly the way they want it and they start whining like self-entitled spoiled brats.

It's not simply a question of not liking the format. The real issue (for me at least) is that it might replace real best-on-best competition.

If the NHL committed to 2018 then I wouldn't care one iota about what the NHL does with its own event.

As it happens I'm looking at this World Cup not as being completely meaningless but rather as a good training ground for the real thing.

 

[Gary Nylund]

It's not simply a question of not liking the format. The real issue (for me at least) is that it might replace real best-on-best competition.

If the NHL committed to 2018 then I wouldn't care one iota about what the NHL does with its own event.

As it happens I'm looking at this World Cup not as being completely meaningless but rather as a good training ground for the real thing.

I think the most likely outcome is that the NHL won't go to the next Olympics for a combination of reasons but the next World Cup won't have gimmick teams. Man I hope I'm right and I hope the next one is a 6 team round-robin (my apologies to the 7th and 8th best hockey nations in the world), that would just be so awesome!!

I also think there's a good chance the NHL will be back for the 2022 Olympics. Then again, maybe the best thing would be if that didn't happen and they just said they will do a World Cup every 4 years (and get the format right of course), some continuity would certainly be nice.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

I'm no fan of this tournament but I tell you what though, the final 2 or 3 game series is going to showcase some incredible hockey. I think it will start out as a bit ho-hum but after the novelty and gimmick wears off, it'll be two great teams going at it. It will be fun.