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

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
My interest in this thing may have risen a bit because the play has been a bit better than I expected - I didn't think it would be bad, but I had expected at least a few guys to take it down a gear or so - but the stakes in this are still not as high for me as the Olympics, or even the world championships. A 4-team tournament, with two teams not even being having access to all of their players, it lacks prestige, and that's part of the draw for these kinds of events.

I had a personal attachment to those previous tournaments. I celebrated and re-watched the wins and the losses were devastating. With this event, I've watched parts of two games and I may watch the final. But who wins and loses doesn't matter a ton, because it's a made-up, slightly watered down event.
 
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.
So, this was pretty much answered today by Russ and Johnston

Inside Quinn Hughes chaos: What we know about Team USA’s scramble to add him for 4 Nations final

The GMs of the competing teams asked for 25 man rosters in November in order to to avoid these situations, but the brilliant NHLPA didn't want the poor, poor players in the press box to miss out on their vacations. The shared cost of adding extra players was also mentioned. The article also goes into some details on the Hughes situation (NHL decided he would need to wait like Harley did, Hockey Canada apparently called US Hockey and the NHL in support of Hughes' situation, Vancouver not medically clearing him is what ultimately decided things) and a few other tidbits.

So yeah, NHLPA is the dumbest culprit here
 
As opposed to those other events that naturally occur with the moon's cycles.
Made up, as opposed to well-established, how about? A tournament pitting the best of the top nations, under certain strictures, and not actually allowing the nations to bring all their preferred players, with an aim primarily intended to appeal to the host nations.

It's a fun event. The hockey has been good. But similar to the Challenge Cup in '79, it lacks the import that a more established tournament would have. That's the piece that would draw me in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grifter3511
NHLPA should have just demanded if its a 25 man roster, every player gets minimum a game excepting goalies. Is that too difficult an idea to process?
How ****ing stupid are these people?

I still can't understand how Swayman didn't see playing time in yesterday's
meaningless Sweden game.
 
I wasn't excited at all about the 4 Nations and I'm still not a fan of the 4 team format - that said, the games that I've seen have been fantastic. Clearly the players care about the result and it shows on ice.

Ultimately, I don't think anyone will care who won this event 10 years from now, but it's been great to see best-on-best again after far too long without it. If anything, the 4 Nations has me absolutely stoked for the Olympic tournament next year! Milan is only 2.5 hours away from me - really hoping I can make it down for a couple games in person.
 
NHLPA should have just demanded if its a 25 man roster, every player gets minimum a game excepting goalies. Is that too difficult an idea to process?
How ****ing stupid are these people?

I still can't understand how Swayman didn't see playing time in yesterday's
meaningless Sweden game.
Because playing time is never going to be anything other than the coach's decision. They are not the ones being stupid here.
 
I think the NHL landed on something at just the right time and broader interest in hockey has picked up a bit because of it. The play has been better than I expected it to be so it's a good showcase for people who are only watching clips of it on social media. My main criticism is the same one I have for all of these tournaments - there's no stakes except for the sports bettor at home watching the games.
 
I think the NHL landed on something at just the right time and broader interest in hockey has picked up a bit because of it. The play has been better than I expected it to be so it's a good showcase for people who are only watching clips of it on social media. My main criticism is the same one I have for all of these tournaments - there's no stakes except for the sports bettor at home watching the games.
National pride means a lot to people. 10 million North Americans watching on Saturday proves that.
 
National pride means a lot to people. 10 million North Americans watching on Saturday proves that.
Last year, for the first time in a long time, the Olympics had a viewership increase. National pride isn't a predictable or tangible stake. Two nations being a little spicy enhances the moment but that doesn't incentivize individual effort. If there was more individual recognition to both highlight a narrative and give players a notch to compete for, you can make something more sustainable than banking on one country booing another's little theme song each time.
 
Those are club competitions, not international.

Apples and hand grenades.
Don't blame them because where you work isn't with the times.

It was President's Day. Don't blame them because where you work isn't with the times.

Also Family Day in Canada.

Only about 1 in 5 workers in the US have President's Day off
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad