Who else has very little interest in the Four Nations tournament?

[vorky]

According to one poster... this is absolutely false. Apparently the NHL and KHL agreed about a decade ago to a schedule that would involve shutting down for international tournaments in February and it's the IIHF that's the roadblock to the agreement.

@vorky care to provide the details?

You are right, Tawnos. Try to google "the 2012 Barcelona Hockey Forum", unfortunatelly I am not able to find anything now, original pages at IIHF website are not working anymore.

The point is as I wrote in multiple posts, for example HERE & HERE.

I do remember the NHL´s stance to pause a season ONLY for Olympics & NHL World Cup, not IIHF World Championship´s years. Yes, NHL & KHL wanted to change the international schedule as proposed, but it has never happened due to IIHF & Euros position. Despite the crowded international calendar Europeans decided to pack the international calendar with extra matches of the Champions Hockey League. That CHL is a huge victim of status quo.

 

[Nakawick]

Who doesn’t have interest? Probably large portions of North Africa and the Middle East. India, South America, etc.

 

[Bonin21]

No interest and no interest in Olympics if Russia is not there.

Boy was I wrong

 

[koyvoo]

There seems to be some confusion here among many posters about those who said prior to the tournament that they were not too interested in it. Lots of "this has aged like milk" type comments. But why? I doubt many of those who were not that interested in the tournament thought that the games would be terrible. I certainly didn't - why would anyone think that, many of the best players were going to play, and they were going to play for their countries. They all have some pride so nobody should have expected them not to try. But: it's a new exhibition tournament with no tradition limited to four nations only, a somewhat artificial construct replacing the also artificial all star event, and in my case my interest is automatically a bit lower if my own country does not participate in the event. Does't make the games less fun (and certainly does not diminish the quality - all of these four teams are currently better than my own country (Czech Rep)), but I am just less invested emotionally in a tournament which the team I support has no stake in. This doesn't relate to the quality of the contest - I am hugely emotionally invested in the world championships, even though no team in those championships is as good as these four teams composed of top NHL talent. All that said, after the emotions of the Canada - US game, it is pretty cool that those two will play again in the final, and I cannot deny a passing curiosity about which of the two will win

My replies have strictly been to the lot of genius’ who claimed it would be all star game level competitive.

I agree that not having interest and commenting on the level of competition are two different things. I’ve specifically called out the latter, myself.

 

[wetcoast]

They absolutely can – the NHL just prefers to sabotage international hockey, that's all.

There's the annual World Championships, you know, instead of this gimmick tournament.

The World Championships could absolutely be moved from May to February, so that we could have true best-on-best hockey every February like this. (The World Championships would not take place in Olympic years, obviously, as was usual in the past.)

The only entity that is an obstacle to this solution is the NHL, of course – no one else. The entire rest of the hockey world including the IIHF would welcome it with open arms.

Yes there is exactly zero reason for the NHL to shut down to accommodate this fantasy.

 

[StrangeVision]

I've enjoyed it a lot more than expected. It's pretty undeniable that this is way better than the All-Star weekend stuff, and I haven't really minded the break from the regular season. Regarding all the "fake tournament" talk, meh, every tournament had to start somewhere.

 

[NyQuil]

They absolutely can – the NHL just prefers to sabotage international hockey, that's all.

There's the annual World Championships, you know, instead of this gimmick tournament.

The World Championships could absolutely be moved from May to February, so that we could have true best-on-best hockey every February like this. (The World Championships would not take place in Olympic years, obviously, as was usual in the past.)

The only entity that is an obstacle to this solution is the NHL, of course – no one else. The entire rest of the hockey world including the IIHF would welcome it with open arms.

I have no real interest in best on best hockey ever year.

I think it will lose a lot of the spectacle.

Imagine if they held the World Cup of Football Finals every year (yes I know they play qualification matches throughout).

A lot of the excitement is the anticipation and the rarity of it.

I think you'd start to see a lot of the best players skip out on the World Championships if they tried to make them best on best every year.

You can't have four best-on-best tournaments every four years.

Every 2 years (Olympics-World Cup of Hockey) matches the Euro-World Cup rotation which I think is about as often as you can have high-quality international play involving the world's best players.

As it stands, I think the World Championships suit a general purpose of exposing younger players to international hockey as well as guys who might not ever make a best-on-best team.

 

[NVious]

I have no real interest in best on best hockey ever year.

I think it will lose a lot of the spectacle.

Imagine if they held the World Cup of Football Finals every year (yes I know they play qualifications matches throughout).

A lot of the excitement is the anticipation and the rarity of it.

I think you'd start to see a lot of the best players skip out on the World Championships if they tried to make them best on best every year.

You can't have four best-on-best tournaments every four years.

Every 2 years matches the Euro-World Cup rotation which I think is about as often as you can have high-quality international play involving the world's best players.

As it stands, I think the World Championships suit a general purpose of exposing younger players to international hockey as well as guys who might not ever make a best-on-best team.

I agree that 2 years is good, but honestly if this replaced the ASG it would be WAY better.

Personally I find the injury talk dumb, sometimes it's going to be your player getting injured and that sucks, but what about when an injury favors you, i.e someone on your rival teams gets injured, doesn't that benefit your team?

In any case, players get injured playing for teams, should they be rested more to prevent that? It's a moot point for me because injuries can always happen, injuries can always be worse and sometimes injuries of other teams' players benefit you, so it's not like this is a tournament where any team is gaining an advantage, all players are going hard for their country.

 

[NyQuil]

I agree that 2 years is good, but honestly if this replaced the ASG it would be WAY better.

I'd need to see more of these tournaments with the Olympics and World Cup within the rotation.

Personally, I think a lot of the excitement and intensity is exacerbated by the fact that a fair number of the guys on the ice have never even played for their country in a best-on-best tournament of any kind in their senior-level careers.

If they started happening every year, I don't know if they'd be as enthralling. I'm wary to assume that it's the tournament itself and not the absence of tournaments for many years that is the compelling part.

The format might still be better than an ASG (even if they took it down a few notches during play), but it still excludes a lot of top NHL talent who don't play for the four nations involved.

 

[Grifter3511]

I agree that 2 years is good, but honestly if this replaced the ASG it would be WAY better.

Personally I find the injury talk dumb, sometimes it's going to be your player getting injured and that sucks, but what about when an injury favors you, i.e someone on your rival teams gets injured, doesn't that benefit your team?

In any case, players get injured playing for teams, should they be rested more to prevent that? It's a moot point for me because injuries can always happen, injuries can always be worse and sometimes injuries of other teams' players benefit you, so it's not like this is a tournament where any team is gaining an advantage, all players are going hard for their country.

10 Craziest All-Time Non-Hockey NHL Injuries

www.sportsnet.ca

 

[majormajor]

There seems to be some confusion here among many posters about those who said prior to the tournament that they were not too interested in it. Lots of "this has aged like milk" type comments. But why? I doubt many of those who were not that interested in the tournament thought that the games would be terrible. I certainly didn't - why would anyone think that, many of the best players were going to play, and they were going to play for their countries. They all have some pride so nobody should have expected them not to try. But: it's a new exhibition tournament with no tradition limited to four nations only, a somewhat artificial construct replacing the also artificial all star event, and in my case my interest is automatically a bit lower if my own country does not participate in the event. Does't make the games less fun (and certainly does not diminish the quality - all of these four teams are currently better than my own country (Czech Rep)), but I am just less invested emotionally in a tournament which the team I support has no stake in. This doesn't relate to the quality of the contest - I am hugely emotionally invested in the world championships, even though no team in those championships is as good as these four teams composed of top NHL talent. All that said, after the emotions of the Canada - US game, it is pretty cool that those two will play again in the final, and I cannot deny a passing curiosity about which of the two will win

That's all very understandable for a Czech. But there were hordes of people in here from the US and Canada saying they couldn't care less, and it did indeed flip in a matter of seconds as soon as they saw the action. Those same people became very invested - it really was a matter of folks somehow not understanding or remembering what best on best looks like and the passions that would be involved.

That and even for a Czech - like yeah US and Canada aren't your team but the Stanley Cup finalists usually aren't your team either. Certainly not my team. People still get into it. And I think you'll still be watching Canada vs USA. Frankly for me it will be more compelling than Vegas vs Florida or whatever in the cup final.

 

[red devil]

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

I'll say it, this is borderline exhibition hockey to me. The 2026 Olympics will be a blast. I can't wait. I don't like the idea of Russia not playing in it as it takes away what could be such great hockey, and it penalizes a lot of players that have nothing to do with anything going on in the world. Too many great players in the NHL on Russia not being able to showcase their talent or play for their country either in the 4 Nations in 2025 or possibly even the Olympics. Not good. So that alone makes it less competitive for me and I for one have never liked boycotting and not allowing a country to compete in things like this.

Secondly, how much of an exhibition-like feel will this have? Is McDavid going to go full out for this tournament? Will Makar and MacKinnon play hard against Rantanen two days after playing together in Colorado? I think there is more to lose with the Olympics but my thought is that this won't be the competitive tournament in 2025 that some might think it will be. The Olympics is the Olympics. Mario and Yzerman certainly cost themselves a bit healthwise by playing in 2002. But it was worth it. Would anyone do this in 2025?

Thoughts?

Has your view changed, as we turn to the final....?

 

[JackSlater]

I have enjoyed the event but I will say that the injury replacement system is another great example of the NHL not being able to help itself from screwing up. You would think that with all of the people involved they would think of a protocol for injured players, and a firm rule that exists. It was a farce when Canada lost Theodore and then Makar was sick. Canada was allowed to bring in Harley, but he could not be on the ice at the same time as Makar. Then he played a game, which locked him into the tournament... but now they can both play. It's so stupid. And now if I understand correctly, McAvoy is out for USA and so they brought in Quinn Hughes just in case someone becomes... sick I guess.... and so he is there just in case.

It is amazing how little foresight the league has. There was no reason to not have 25 man rosters, which would have prevented both farces. It doesn't make the event less enjoyable, but it makes it look somewhat ridiculous.

 

[NyQuil]

It is amazing how little foresight the league has. There was no reason to not have 25 man rosters, which would have prevented both farces. It doesn't make the event less enjoyable, but it makes it look somewhat ridiculous.

It would be neat if some journalist could unearth how the roster size came about.

Was it an NHLPA thing to protect their players from spending the break in the pressbox?

Was it the owners who didn't want extra players around the team potentially getting hurt in practice?

Surely someone is going to end up getting the finger pointed at them after this strange series of substitutions.

 

[JackSlater]

It would be neat if some journalist could unearth how the roster size came about.

Was it an NHLPA thing to protect their players from spending the break in the pressbox?

Was it the owners who didn't want extra players around the team potentially getting hurt in practice?

I have to think it is the NHL/NHLPA and the dumb concern they trot out for some players having the horrible shame of sitting in the press box or being picked last for the all star game or whatever else. Would be a lot easier to let the players decide whether or not they agree to be the 8th defenceman or 14th forward heading into the event, but this is the NHL and the NHL is a dumb league. This still does not touch the stupidity of the 2016 world cup though.

 

[jj cale]

I can't believe loads of people didn't think they would play hard.

Cmon.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

I don’t understand the weirdly negative attitudes. To me this is the best possible gimmick to fit into a mid season break. Certainly better than the all star game. I remember people being negative about the World Cup a decade ago and that ended up being pretty fun too. This could be the best version of Canada vs USA we’ve seen in quite awhile.

At least the ASG was only a couple days. No (or little) chance of injury.

 

[red devil]

 

[Golden_Jet]

... while all the other nations are miserable.

(Still haven't watched a single minute of this, and don't intend to. Just like I boycotted the 1998 and 2002 Olympics. You prevent other nations from fairly participating in an event – then keep it to yourself & don't shove it down our throats.)

Well that’s your loss then, tournament has been fantastic.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Clearly I was talking about the part where you claimed it wasn't absurd to disallow Russia.

It wasn’t absurd,

 

[JKG33]

Still little interest. I'm watching because there's no other real sports on, they planned the timing of that perfectly. But I'd much rather see the real NHL given the spotlight