Why not do a 32 team world cup?

[Jersey Fan 12]

Why? In the soccer world cup there's also a huge difference between the best teams and worst teams.

In soccer nobody is winning 32-1. That would be a very real possibility if say Canada played Mexico.

More importantly, given the physical nature of the sport the likelihood of injury is significant.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Why doesn't hockey do a 32 team world cup? I know there will be a huge difference in parity but they would be more interest and would grow the sport imo.

There aren't 32 teams worthy of being there.

 

[voyageur]

There aren't 32 teams worthy of being there.

There are scarcely 16 teams worth being there...I think the number of teams should be 12

 

[Number 57]

I have said it for a while, the key to any international tournament is a top-8, with the rest competing in a second division.

This is already somewhat in place, but not in a World Cup format. My idea for the tournament is that the first and second divisions competes at the same time. Amongst the top-8, the last place team gets relagated to the second division in the following year.

The second division could feature, 20, 24 or 32 teams, whatever. But the champion of the 2nd division gets promoted to the first division the following year to compete with the big boys (Canada, USA, Sweden, Finland, etc.)

The interesting part? The two divisions play at the same time in the same tournament. Meaning, on any given day, you might watch a titanesque matchup between CAN-USA or an extremely important matchup between Denmark and Latvia to decide who goes up next year. Exciting hockey for everyone!

Of course, the money, experience and exposure in the first division would mean the world to a smaller nation, so the second division matchups would always be intense and important. You may even discover little-known players from remote places!