World Cup 2016: Best On Best?

[Elvs]

There is no "problem" with afternoon games, they just put games that there's less demand for in those slots. There's nothing that "forces" the final games to start at 8PM, but as I've said several times, that's when they'll get the most viewers.

In Toronto, hockey is a night time thing. That's the way it has always been, the occasional afternoon game non-withstanding and that's why Team Canada games are always in the evening. If that means Euros aren't interested that's just life I guess. When the Olympics are in a time zone that makes watching hard for me I deal with it. Whether that means watching when I would normally be sleeping, taping the games and watching them later or not watching at all, that's up to me but I deal with it. Same thing for Euros and this tournament. If people decide not to watch, that's their decision but there's no reason to expect to the schedule to be re-arranged for your benefit.

Haha, I've watched Ducks hockey starting 4 AM for the last 11 years. The games starting 8 PM ET / 2 AM CET is no challenge for me at all. I just happen to think of others, and the casual fans are needed for tv ratings and for growing the game.

"We have your best players in our league all year. And now we're gonna make sure the only time they play on your national teams is every 4th year in the middle of the night. Eventually it might kill hockey where you live, but you should like it and not complain".

This seems to be a common idea by several posters here. Surely makes you feel appreciated as a European fan of the NHL.

I'm done with this discussion now. It's gone way off topic anyway.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Haha, I've watched Ducks hockey starting 4 AM for the last 11 years. The games starting 8 PM ET / 2 AM CET is no challenge for me at all. I just happen to think of others, and the casual fans are needed for tv ratings and for growing the game.

"We have your best players in our league all year. And now we're gonna make sure the only time they play on your national teams is every 4th year in the middle of the night. Eventually it might kill hockey where you live, but you should like it and not complain".

This seems to be a common idea by several posters here.

I'm done with this discussion now. It's gone way off topic anyway.

It may be a good thing that you're "done" as you seem to have gone way off track now.

1)
Casual fans in Europe are not needed for NA TV ratings. And some of the things you've suggested would lead to a drop in ratings - having the final games in the afternoon may lead to a small bump in European viewers but there would be a huge drop in NA viewers. Do you see how this idea is a non-starter?

2)
People often leave their home country for better work opportunities elsewhere. That doesn't mean that the countries they work in change things around to accommodate their desires of those of their fellow countrymen and frankly, expecting them to do so is beyond ridiculous.

3)
This won't kill hockey where you live. And if it does, there isn't much to kill to begin with.

4)
Complain all you like, that is your right. Don't expect a lot of sympathy though if your demands are excessive.

 

[xxxx]

Haha, I've watched Ducks starting 4 AM for the last 11 years. The games starting 8 PM ET / 2 AM CET is no challenge for me at all. I just happen to think of others, and the casual fans are needed for tv ratings and for growing the game.

"We have your best players in our league all year. And now we're gonna make sure the only time they play on your national teams is every 4th year in the middle of the night. Eventually it might kill where you live, but you should like it and not complain".

This seems to be a common idea by several posters here. Surely makes you feel appreciated as a European fan of the .

I'm done with this now. It's gone way off topic anyway.

Any event in this world is for the "home" audience FIRST. Whether it's FIFA World Cup, World Cup of Hockey, the Olympics, Athletics, anything. As far as I know, a few games, mainly the european ones, will start in a very good time for Europe, around 8/9/10 pm in Europe I think, I would say that's pretty solid, isn't it?

5 out of 6 games in group B start at 3 pm here, which is like 8/9/10pm in Europe. I'm not sure what are you complaining about. Thinking about it, that's maybe another reason why they don't have Canada/US in different groups, because they want both, to give Canada/US favorable tv time, and the same for the big european nations Russia, Finland, Sweden. So actually it seems like they actually care about Europe and did something to ensure the fans in Europe are able to watch those games.

 

[Elvs]

It may be a good thing that you're "done" as you seem to have gone way off track now.

1)
Casual fans in Europe are not needed for NA TV ratings. And some of the things you've suggested would lead to a drop in ratings - having the final games in the afternoon may lead to a small bump in European viewers but there would be a huge drop in NA viewers. Do you see how this idea is a non-starter?

2)
People often leave their home country for better work opportunities elsewhere. That doesn't mean that the countries they work in change things around to accommodate their desires of those of their fellow countrymen and frankly, expecting them to do so is beyond ridiculous.

3)
This won't kill hockey where you live. And if it does, there isn't much to kill to begin with.

Just gonna give short answers to these.

1)
TV ratings are important no matter where they come from. Ratings here could likely be higher than you think. I wouldn't complain about the format of the tournament if I didn't think there was a market here. Ice hockey is the #1 or the #2 sport in several countries here.

2)
The USA and Canada doesn't have monopoly on international ice hockey. They do not make the rules regarding national teams. If Swedish players leaves to play in the NHL, I expect them to still be allowed to represent my country in international events. I don't think it's all that ridiculous.

3)
I don't know how to answer this. Somehow you don't think it hurts countries if their best players aren't showcased to to their audience? If it wasn't for Peter Forsberg, Mats Sundin and Daniel Alfredsson being showcased to me on the international stage several times in the early 2000's, I would never have gained much interest in the NHL. And maybe Filip Forsberg and Hampus Lindholm wouldn't have gained much interest in ice hockey either.

Any event in this world is for the "home" audience FIRST. Whether it's FIFA World Cup, World Cup of Hockey, the Olympics, Athletics, anything. As far as I know, a few games, mainly the european ones, will start in a very good time for Europe, around 8/9/10 pm in Europe I think, I would say that's pretty solid, isn't it?

5 out of 6 games in group B start at 3 pm here, which is like 8/9/10pm in Europe. I'm not sure what are you complaining about.

Yes, and that is great! These are reasonable times. Even a little later would still be ok for most. But I'm talking about the final games here, with game 1 and 2 starting at 2 AM CET and a potential game 3 starting 1 AM on a saturday.

I get it, Canada is hosting the event and so their audience becomes most important. I'd be fine with the finals starting when they do if I just expected it to be a one time thing. But currently I'm expecting no more Olympics, and the World Cup to be held in Canada every 4th year with the finals being played in the middle of the night every time. And so (aside from the World Championship that few cares about anyway), I'm never gonna be able to watch my national team with family or friends again. And so maybe you can see why I'm a little bummed?

 

[hitmen19]

I'm not suggesting the games should start at 1 PM ET. I'm saying playing the finals at 4 PM or 5 PM makes a huge differance for the European audience, versus starting them at 8 PM. Clearly this shouldn't be problem, when several games in this tournament starts 3 PM and one starts 3.30 PM.

It's just obvious that the NHL is using this tournament to promote the NHL in North America before the season starts. I'll live with it if NHL players will remain part of the Olympics. Because right now, that's the only tournament where we (hockey fans of European countries) can watch our best players.

Sweden is able to ice its best team and it has outside of any injury that has occurred. So has Russia, the Czech's, and Finland.

The countries that are hurt by the NA team are Canada and the USA, which both signed off on the premise. Canada and the USA if anybody, has a reason to complain not the European countries

 

[JackSlater]

Ummmmm, no. What's laughably wrong is NOT considering the WJC a best on best at the JUNIOR level. The best JUNIORS form a team to represent their NATION.

Not a province or territory or state within a nation. The entire NATION.

You already gave your definition, which was laughably bad. You said it was best on best as long as the team took the best players available to them, so basically any hockey tournament other than the World Championships is best on best according to you. I'm not surprised that you would try to change your laughable definition though.

You also seem to be implying that representing a nation is an element of a best on best tournament, which is correct. Now, take a moment to think about if all eight teams in this tournament represent nations.

Now I'm sorry that team Germany or team Kazakhstan or France or Italy don't have enough players to form a team to represent their nation and have any HOPE of being a competitive in this tourney.

That's nice that you're sorry. I really couldn't care less about Germany, Kazakhstan or any of the countries that you mentioned, or their teams, so whatever point you are trying to make is far off the mark.

Because that's what was clearly very important to the NHL who organized the event. It was important that all teams competing have the best chance possible at winning games and being competitive. Be it the Hockey Stronghold Nations (only six in the world really do exist), the best future stars, or the best players scattered around the rest of Europe.

What is important to the NHL is not relevant when we are discussing what a best on best tournament is. I am impressed that the posters who are obviously quite young (an assumption given your poorly thought out posts and fondness for CAPITALIZING your words to make a point) are so interested in the NHL that they care more about what the NHL wants than what actual terms mean.

The bolded also made me laugh. The NHL was certainly not concerned about USA having its best chance at winning, considering it refused to let the American GM pick some American players that he wanted to select.

No, you're right. It isn't a best on best tournament. It's even better. Give your head a shake.

It may be better for those, like yourself, who just want an all star exhibition. I'm sure that the players will skate very fast and that you will be very excited by that.

Your still laughably wrong.

My laughably wrong what? If you are attempting to say that I am wrong, then you can simply answer these questions: Can Canada select all of the best Canadian players? Can team USA select all of the best American players? Can North America select all of the best North American players? Can team Europe select all of the best European players?

The answer, since I am guessing that you won't answer it yourself, is no. Thus, it is not best on best, since half of the teams cannot bring their literal best. Is it good on good? Absolutely, which is what some of you are confusing with best on best. I understand that you want it to be best on best, and that may be due to your inability to understand what the term means, but wanting something doesn't make it so.

 

[Elvs]

Sweden is able to ice its best team and it has outside of any injury that has occurred. So has Russia, the Czech's, and Finland.

The countries that are hurt by the NA team are Canada and the USA, which both signed off on the premise. Canada and the USA if anybody, has a reason to complain not the European countries

I was talking about television times. If you remove the Olympics and just play the World Cup in Toronto every 4th year, television times must stay reasonable for the European audience, or the European audience will never get to see their countries best players.

Television times have been even earlier than expected though so I'm not complaining there. I just hope the WCH isn't the only big tournament I'm gonna get, if it means the finals are going to be played 2 AM CET every time.

 

[Seanaconda]

I was talking about television times. If you remove the Olympics and just play the World Cup in Toronto every 4th year, television times must stay reasonable for the European audience, or the European audience will never get to see their countries best players.

Television times have been even earlier than expected though so I'm not complaining there. I just hope the WCH isn't the only big tournament I'm gonna get, if it means the finals are going to be played 2 AM CET every time.

Let's wait until they are out of the Olympics first. But if the iihf and the nhl make peace they could do offset tourneys so one every 2 years one in Europe one in North America. Stop having the whc every year and move the date it starts and you will probably get all the best players for that.

 

[TLeafsFan]

The answer, since I am guessing that you won't answer it yourself, is no. Thus, it is not best on best, since half of the teams cannot bring their literal best. Is it good on good? Absolutely, which is what some of you are confusing with best on best. I understand that you want it to be best on best, and that may be due to your inability to understand what the term means, but wanting something doesn't make it so.

I'll just cut through the rest of your useless drivel and get right to the point.

Yes, Canada can select the best Canadian players that are men over 23 years of age.

Ditto for the US.

Europe (which is not a country on its own) can select the Best European players, not selected by countries that have their own teams that can put together national European teams good enough to compete.

North American can select the best North American players 23 and under as per the criteria.

It doesn't MATTER if you think its laughably bad or not.

The MEDIA identifies it as a best on best.

The PLAYERS identify it as a best on best.

The COACHES identify it as a best on best.

The NHL itself identifies it as a best on best.

It FITS all the criteria for all these industry PROFESSIONALS to identify it as such.

Rendering this poll as to whether its justified as being called one and your opinion on the matter as well as anyone who votes no completely meaningless.

 

[hitmen19]

I was talking about television times. If you remove the Olympics and just play the World Cup in Toronto every 4th year, television times must stay reasonable for the European audience, or the European audience will never get to see their countries best players.

Television times have been even earlier than expected though so I'm not complaining there. I just hope the WCH isn't the only big tournament I'm gonna get, if it means the finals are going to be played 2 AM CET every time.

ok, I get your reference but not your predicament. We had the same times in Sochi, We have the same times for the people that watch the world championships here in Canada here every year. When your team is on, and you are playing best on best, it is worth the sacrifice once every four years to get up on Saturday night at 2 and watch the game. You are doing it every 4 years. Canadians have had to do that for Nagano, Turin and Sochi, and SK if it happens. No one in Canada complains about not having the medal game earlier to fit our time slot

 

[Gary Nylund]

In red:

Just gonna give short answers to these.

1)
TV ratings are important no matter where they come from. Ratings here could likely be higher than you think. I wouldn't complain about the format of the tournament if I didn't think there was a market here. Ice hockey is the #1 or the #2 sport in several countries here.

I don't think you understand. The games people want to watch the most will always be shown in the evenings here if at all possible. This will never change no matter how many Europeans are unhappy about it.

2)
The USA and Canada doesn't have monopoly on international ice hockey. They do not make the rules regarding national teams. If Swedish players leaves to play in the NHL, I expect them to still be allowed to represent my country in international events. I don't think it's all that ridiculous.

Actually it is ridiculous. Take the WHC for example, that's an international tournament that NHL players can't play in if their NHL teams are still active. This applies across the board to all nations. It seems like you're asking for special treatment for Swedish players which is just silly.

Of course there's no monopoly. Please correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I know there is nothing preventing any league in the world from holding their own tournament be it the SEL, SM, KHL or whoever else.

3)
I don't know how to answer this. Somehow you don't think it hurts countries if their best players aren't showcased to to their audience? If it wasn't for Peter Forsberg, Mats Sundin and Daniel Alfredsson being showcased to me on the international stage several times in the early 2000's, I would never have gained much interest in the NHL. And maybe Filip Forsberg and Hampus Lindholm wouldn't have gained much interest in ice hockey either.

But there was hockey in Sweden before Forsberg though wasn't there. There was even hockey in Sweden before Salming. The NHL didn't bring hockey to life in Sweden and it won't kill it either.

The NHL is a business, expecting them to anything other than what they consider to be in their best interest (making money) is just naive, sorry but it is. And if you're so worried about the best Swedish players being showcased to your audience, perhaps you should put pressure on them to spend their careers in Sweden? After all, it's their greed and the desire to make more money that motivates them to play in the NHL isn't it?

The NHL is a big business whether you like it or not and that means that their decisions are motivated by money. The players are no different, their decisions are also motivated by money. That means that like it or not, your players will not stay home to play where you can watch them as long as they can make more money playing somewhere else. Again, like it or not, that's just life. There are things I would like to be different about the NHL that I understand will never happen because of money (less teams, shorter season). I don't like it, but I'm a realist so I understand that my choices are to watch or not, it's that simple. Whining and complaining about the way things are is just a waste of energy.

Yes, and that is great! These are reasonable times. Even a little later would still be ok for most. But I'm talking about the final games here, with game 1 and 2 starting at 2 AM CET and a potential game 3 starting 1 AM on a saturday.

I get it, Canada is hosting the event and so their audience becomes most important. I'd be fine with the finals starting when they do if I just expected it to be a one time thing. But currently I'm expecting no more Olympics, and the World Cup to be held in Canada every 4th year with the finals being played in the middle of the night every time. And so (aside from the World Championship that few cares about anyway), I'm never gonna be able to watch my national team with family or friends again. And so maybe you can see why I'm a little bummed?

OK you're bummed, I get it. I was bummed too when I had to get up super early to watch the Gold Medal game in Sochi. I dealt with it, now it's your turn.

 

[KingsFan7824]

The USA and Canada doesn't have monopoly on international ice hockey. They do not make the rules regarding national teams. If Swedish players leaves to play in the NHL, I expect them to still be allowed to represent my country in international events. I don't think it's all that ridiculous.

If their boss, the owner of the franchise, allows them to go. It goes both ways. Players from Sweden, Finland, etc, they don't have to sign NHL contracts. If they get drafted, or become RFA's or UFA's, they're free to sign anywhere.

I get it, Canada is hosting the event and so their audience becomes most important. I'd be fine with the finals starting when they do if I just expected it to be a one time thing. But currently I'm expecting no more Olympics, and the World Cup to be held in Canada every 4th year with the finals being played in the middle of the night every time. And so (aside from the World Championship that few cares about anyway), I'm never gonna be able to watch my national team with family or friends again. And so maybe you can see why I'm a little bummed?

I would say just wait on that. All sides are trying to get the best deal they can from Olympic participation.

 

[hitmen19]

In red:

I think its also that they want to play in the Best league in the World that is a driving force

 

[needle]

How cool would a Team Europe vs. Team North America final be? An international final where almost everyone would have a rooting interest.

I'm a proud North American!

 

[TLeafsFan]

Okay. Time to dumb things down into the most basic terms. New question.

Is this a best of the rest tournament? Is it an international tournament where the BEST players of the world were otherwise committed?

No? Very good.

Are the best players of the world playing with and against each other?

Yes? Very good.

That is all you need to concern yourself with as to whether to view this as a best on best tournament, which it most certainly is.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I think its also that they want to play in the Best league in the World that is a driving force

Yes, very true. But money will always be a big part of it. Playing with the best is a motivating factor but so is playing at home. We've seen that with the KHL over the last few years, how big the salary gap between the KHL and the NHL is a factor when Russians decide where they want to play.

 

[Elvs]

Actually it is ridiculous. Take the WHC for example, that's an international tournament that NHL players can't play in if their NHL teams are still active. This applies across the board to all nations. It seems like you're asking for special treatment for Swedish players which is just silly.

I'm not asking for special treatment. I'm not asking the NHL to let go of its players to the World Championship while they are in the postseason. I'm simply asking the NHL to let the players represent their countries when they are available. Or in the case of the Olympics, take a break during the season to make sure they are available. I don't get what's so ridicioulus with this idea, when every other sport does this. Even the NHL have been doing this.

Of course there's no monopoly. Please correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I know there is nothing preventing any league in the world from holding their own tournament be it the SEL, SM, KHL or whoever else.

Nope, but if they were to hold a international tournament, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't put Canada and USA together on a gimmick team. None of those leagues are preventing their players from participating in the Olympics either. If they were, I'd have the same problem with them.

But there was hockey in Sweden before Forsberg though wasn't there. There was even hockey in Sweden before Salming. The NHL didn't bring hockey to life in Sweden and it won't kill it either.

Forsberg and Salming had Swedens best players showcased to them on the national team all the time. Thus their dream was to play for the national team. And this is why the national team is important.

The NHL is a big business whether you like it or not and that means that their decisions are motivated by money. The players are no different, their decisions are also motivated by money. That means that like it or not, your players will not stay home to play where you can watch them as long as they can make more money playing somewhere else. Again, like it or not, that's just life.

Again, many sports leagues are big bussinesses. But that doesn't make them prevent their players from participating in big international events. I'm not asking the players to stay in Sweden, I'm asking them to represent my country if they are healthy. Leaving the SHL shouldn't mean = leaving the national team. It doesn't in any other sport.

OK you're bummed, I get it. I was bummed too when I had to get up super early to watch the Gold Medal game in Sochi. I dealt with it, now it's your turn.

You should re-read what I wrote. If this is a one time thing, I'm fine with it. But from the looks of it, NHL'ers will no longer be part of the Olympics and the World Cup may be hosted in Canada every time. Thus I'll forever be robbed of the chance of watching best-on-best hockey (or the closest thing to it) with friends and family who are more casual fans than myself. That's not the same thing as having to get up early in the morning for the most recent Olympic tournament, something I've already dealt with in 2002 and 2010. And I missed the gold medal game in 2014 due to work, and I choose to deal with the NHL on a every night basis.

If they had just chosen a different name for the World Cup I wouldn't have had any expectations as a European fan. But with the "World Cup" as its name, I thought they were trying to make something that would appeal to more people than just the NA fans and the hardcore NHL fans in Europe. I'll just start accepting it for what it is. It's a glorified "NHL Cup".

 

[hitmen19]

I'm not asking for special treatment. I'm not asking the NHL to let go of its players to the World Championship while they are in the postseason. I'm simply asking the NHL to let the players represent their countries when they are available. Or in the case of the Olympics, take a break during the season to make sure they are available. I don't get what's so ridicioulus with this idea, when every other sport does this. Even the NHL have been doing this.



Nope, but if they were to hold a international tournament, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't put Canada and USA together on a gimmick team. None of those leagues are preventing their players from participating in the Olympics either. If they were, I'd have the same problem with them.



Forsberg and Salming had Swedens best players showcased to them on the national team all the time. Thus their dream was to play for the national team. And this is why the national team is important.



Again, many sports leagues are big bussinesses. But that doesn't make them prevent their players from participating in big international events. I'm not asking the players to stay in Sweden, I'm asking them to represent my country if they are healthy.



You should re-read what I wrote. If this is a one time thing, I'm fine with it. But from the looks of it, NHL'ers will no longer be part of the Olympics and the World Cup may be hosted in Canada every time. Thus I'll forever be robbed of the chance of watching best-on-best hockey (or the closest thing to it) with friends and family who are more casual fans than myself. That's not the same thing as having to get up early in the morning for the most recent Olympic tournament, something I've already dealt with in 2002 and 2010. And I missed the gold medal game in 2014 due to work, and I choose to deal with the NHL on a every night basis.

If they had just chosen a different name for the World Cup I wouldn't have had any expectations as a European fan. But with the "World Cup" as its name, I thought they were trying to make something that would appeal to more people than just the NA fans and the hardcore NHL fans in Europe. I'll just start accepting it for what it is.

Huge misconception here. Every league doesn't do it

Every league doesn't shut down there own leagues for weeks. In basketball, the NBA lets its players go because the Olympics are always in the summer after there season is over. Lets see the Olympics get scheduled in May or June and see if the NBA will let its players go.

I know football/soccer is going to be the big example your going to use, but guess what. Fifa world cup is always scheduled after the main seasons are over in all the main leagues. Guess what is happening with the Qatar world cup. If you haven't been following, the summer is way to hot to play soccer in Qatar and they were hoping to move it into another month where it wouldn't be so hot. I'll give you one guess what all the Euro football leagues said. They said no, they are not interrupting their seasons to play the world cup during their seasons even if the players playing in that desert heat is to their detriment. The fact they did now, because after so much pressure for player safety and fan safety doesn't show how much they were against the idea of interrupting there season

On top of that, the IOC wants the NHL to shut down its business, earn all the revenue off the Olympic tournament, and still have the NHL pay for travel and insurance. Come on, im sure you can see where the NHL is thinking "what for"

I of course want them to go to the Olympics, as I think its the highest tournament in terms of prestige and global significance, but the IOC has to shoulder some thing in this situa

 

[Jablkon]

Okay. Time to dumb things down into the most basic terms. New question.

Is this a best of the rest tournament? Is it an international tournament where the BEST players of the world were otherwise committed?

No? Very good.

Are the best players of the world playing with and against each other?

Yes? Very good.

That is all you need to concern yourself with as to whether to view this as a best on best tournament, which it most certainly is.

I dont know why you asking this question. But anyway to answer, there are not best players of the World. I am sure that you can find more interesting players than someones who are in WC in some teams, for example Hall, Okposo, Spezza etc. But who cares? Who the the hell would built team on best players? You built team on most suitable players to your plan and system. There are some of best players in the world and there are best hockey nations in the world. Unfortunately someone decide to have more best players so they created two other teams.

But if you asking whether you can call it best of best.When people dont reasonably find WHC as best of best tourney because of limited possibility of players you can pick, you can logically hardly find this tourney as best of best when US and CAn are limited by age restrictions. I mean I dont care, its not important. But In both cases some teams are limited in players who they can choose. WhC is much more affected by this. But strictly saying its the same. For some reason, its even the rule in WC....

This is more linguistic and logic exercise. But its like this and you would hardly find arguments against it.

But I might dont understand to difference between best of.... and best on.....

 

[holyprime]

Huge misconception here. Every league doesn't do it

Every league doesn't shut down there own leagues for weeks. In basketball, the NBA lets its players go because the Olympics are always in the summer after there season is over. Lets see the Olympics get scheduled in May or June and see if the NBA will let its players go.

You are correct with one thing. It is only a problem if a league in NA has the best players in the world. It works with every other sport.

I know football/soccer is going to be the big example your going to use, but guess what. Fifa world cup is always scheduled after the main seasons are over in all the main leagues. Guess what is happening with the Qatar world cup. If you haven't been following, the summer is way to hot to play soccer in Qatar and they were hoping to move it into another month where it wouldn't be so hot. I'll give you one guess what all the Euro football leagues said. They said no, they are not interrupting their seasons to play the world cup during their seasons even if the players playing in that desert heat is to their detriment. The fact they did now, because after so much pressure for player safety and fan safety doesn't show how much they were against the idea of interrupting there season

No.

Football teams have several interruptions to their season for national teams, qualification for WM/EM and even friendlies. Top teams also have to integrate Champions League (they love that bc big money) and the Euro League.

The problem with Qatar (outside of political things) is that to actually be able to play a tournament in the desert, they had to put a working concept on its head. The qualification has to change as well etc which brings a huge rescheduling just so the most corrupt sports organisation on this planet can have its will.

That's a bit different then it's in hockey, where basically everybody agreed to a schedule, except the biggest kid, fully aware it has the shyniest toys, which always has to make a fuss.

 

[TLeafsFan]

I dont know why you asking this question. But anyway to answer, there are not best players of the World. I am sure that you can find more interesting players than someones who are in WC in some teams, for example Hall, Okposo, Spezza etc. But who cares? Who the the hell would built team on best players? You built team on most suitable players to your plan and system. There are some of best players in the world and there are best hockey nations in the world. Unfortunately someone decide to have more best players so they created two other teams.

But if you asking whether you can call it best of best.When people dont reasonably find WHC as best of best tourney because of limited possibility of players you can pick, you can logically hardly find this tourney as best of best when US and CAn are limited by age restrictions. I mean I dont care, its not important. But In both cases some teams are limited in players who they can choose. WhC is much more affected by this. But strictly saying its the same. For some reason, its even the rule in WC....

This is more linguistic and logic exercise. But its like this and you would hardly find arguments against it.

But I might dont understand to difference between best of.... and best on.....

Well there are always going to be people questioning why player X was left off a team. Even one that uses its best players to represent their country.

It only subjective opinions of fans that question if the team formed was the "best" team possible or not, like Subban for Canada and Kessel for the US being left off.

The semantics around this tournament being a best on best tournament are just mind boggling to me. Instead of Canada or the US having a U23 on their team or against them is irrelevant. the best U23's of North America are still playing in the tournament, which still makes the tournament a best on best.

 

[Elvs]

Huge misconception here. Every league doesn't do it

Every league doesn't shut down there own leagues for weeks. In basketball, the NBA lets its players go because the Olympics are always in the summer after there season is over. Lets see the Olympics get scheduled in May or June and see if the NBA will let its players go.

I know football/soccer is going to be the big example your going to use, but guess what. Fifa world cup is always scheduled after the main seasons are over in all the main leagues. Guess what is happening with the Qatar world cup. If you haven't been following, the summer is way to hot to play soccer in Qatar and they were hoping to move it into another month where it wouldn't be so hot. I'll give you one guess what all the Euro football leagues said. They said no, they are not interrupting their seasons to play the world cup during their seasons even if the players playing in that desert heat is to their detriment. The fact they did now, because after so much pressure for player safety and fan safety doesn't show how much they were against the idea of interrupting there season

On top of that, the IOC wants the NHL to shut down its business, earn all the revenue off the Olympic tournament, and still have the NHL pay for travel and insurance. Come on, im sure you can see where the NHL is thinking "what for"

I of course want them to go to the Olympics, as I think its the highest tournament in terms of prestige and global significance, but the IOC has to shoulder some thing in this situa

Not only soccer. I can't think of any sport besides ice hockey where my national team is not allowed to select any player it want for any major sporting event. I think that's true for pretty much every nation.

Whatever the reasons may be, the NHL remains as one of the few (if not the only) league to stop its athletes from participating in the Olympics. Even the SHL, KHL, Liiga and the Czech League take breaks for the Eurohockey Tour, four times per season. And that's a tournament that barely anyone even cares about. Those leagues are bussinesses too.

 

[psycho_dad*]

It's best on best but it holds no prestige. Yes there are more stars in this than there would be in Olympics but the cost of having these fake teams is loss of legitimacy. I voted for yes, but it's still a joke tournament because of these two all star compilation teams.

 

[hitmen19]

Not only soccer. I can't think of any sport besides ice hockey where my national team is not allowed to select any player it want for any major sporting event. I think that's true for pretty much every nation.

Whatever the reasons may be, the NHL remains as one of the few (if not the only) league to stop its athletes from participating in the Olympics. Even the SHL, KHL, Liiga and the Czech League take breaks for the Eurohockey Tour, four times per season. And that's a tournament that barely anyone even cares about. Those leagues are bussinesses too.

Please provide examples of leagues that shut down there seasons? im sure you can find an Euro hand ball league or something that does, but go ahead, im listening.

In regards to the NHL being the only sport that stops its athletes from participating in the Olympics first of all is incorrect. The NHL did before the NBA, FIFA doesn't even allow them besides 3 I think, no baseball players from the major countries such as japan, usa go. Before 98, when it was supposed to be amateurs, NHL wasn't in a position to send its players. 98 and beyond when professionals have been allowed, it has sent them to 5 straight Olympics at its own expense and shutting down its businesses. So the one that you are having a problem will be the one going forward. It hasn't even said no, but to keep slamming the NHL is not based on any evidence.

The leagues shut down for the eurohockey tour because they get a financial interest to do so. They each get a percentage of revenues.

 

[JackSlater]

I'll just cut through the rest of your useless drivel and get right to the point.

Yes, Canada can select the best Canadian players that are men over 23 years of age.

Ditto for the US.

Europe (which is not a country on its own) can select the Best European players, not selected by countries that have their own teams that can put together national European teams good enough to compete.

Ahhh, so you chose not to answer. The reason you didn't answer is because it proves that you are wrong, and this is not a best on best. I am amused that you even replied. Changing the question is a pathetic strategy, since it demonstrates that you couldn't answering the question without demonstrating exactly why you are wrong.

Once you start claiming that it is a best on best even with the age restrictions, you imply that the WJC is a best on best. Since you are the poster who already claimed that the WJC is a best on best, I can at least give you credit for keeping your poorly thought out logic consistent. Consistently wrong of course, but consistent.

North American can select the best North American players 23 and under as per the criteria.

It doesn't MATTER if you think its laughably bad or not.

The MEDIA identifies it as a best on best.

The PLAYERS identify it as a best on best.

The COACHES identify it as a best on best.

The NHL itself identifies it as a best on best.

It FITS all the criteria for all these industry PROFESSIONALS to identify it as such.

Rendering this poll as to whether its justified as being called one and your opinion on the matter as well as anyone who votes no completely meaningless.

I can find media that identify it as best on best, and some that don't. I haven't seen the opinions of all player or coaches to conclude that they think it's best on best. The NHL calls it best on best, which is predictable as the NHL is trying to sell the tournament. None of that is relevant though. The fact remains that best on best is a term that already existed, and this tournament does not match what the term means.

The word best basically means this - "that which is the most excellent, outstanding, or desirable". It does not mean "that which is the most excellent, outstanding, or desirable over the age of 23" or "that which is the most excellent, outstanding, or desirable outside of Sweden, Czech Republic, Russia and Finland". This tournament does not feature Canada's best team by definition. It does not feature USA's best team by definition. It does not feature North America's best team by definition. It does not feature Europe's best team by definition. Regardless of whining about what the NHL claims, this tournament does not qualify. It is a high level exhibition, absolutely. It might have the most entertaining hockey in history and be very popular, absolutely. It is not best on best. A basic understanding of English or hockey history conveys that.

Okay. Time to dumb things down into the most basic terms. New question.

Is this a best of the rest tournament? Is it an international tournament where the BEST players of the world were otherwise committed?

No? Very good.

Are the best players of the world playing with and against each other?

Yes? Very good.

That is all you need to concern yourself with as to whether to view this as a best on best tournament, which it most certainly is.

So the all star game is best on best. The NHL itself is best on best. Perfect. You once again demonstrate that you don't know what the term means. Of course you haven't defined what best on best has always meant, but it's better than your previous attempt that claimed that simply selecting the best players available to a team, regardless of anything else, was a best on best.

There is no need to be so self-conscious about supporting the all star exhibition. I'm sure you're very excited to see your favourite players playing against each other (like in the NHL) and see how fast they can skate. There is no need to post these embarrassing attempts at defining a best on best that though. The tournament will probably fulfill its goal of entertaining you even though it is not a best on best.