World Cup Boycott

[Xokkeu]

Sure he would. Most of the guys you just listed don't even play the same position as him. Team USA always takes guys that they think will be big players for them in the future. I remember Anthony Davis in 2012 and Emeka Okafor in 2004 for example. I could totally see them bringing along a kid like Ben Simmons or Jabari Parker to these 2016 Olympics.

Mason Plumlee was on the 2014 World Cup Roster... Mason Plumlee. Tristan Thompson could take Mason Plumlees spot and be an upgrade lol

No Jabari Parker has absolutely no chance of going to Rio. The US takes guys like Davis because they are thin on rim protectors and bigs. They are not thin on wings and stretch fours.

You are correct that there used to be some unwritten rule that they always took a college player but that hasn't happened since 2004. Not coincidently when the team took 3rd and the program had to revamp itself to take the competition more seriously.


Mason Plumlee made a World Cup team because he's a rim protector. Tristan Thompson is not that and wouldn't make a US World Cup team. Wiggins might make a World Cup team but it would be tight competition.

 

[PanniniClaus]

I believe when the puck drops all systems will be go for every team as pride will kick in. Personal pride, not the pride that comes from wearing the north american crest.

There is entertainment value, it is just not a World Cup.

 

[FiLe]

A gimmick, lmao. Players obviously don't feel that way so it's not a gimmick, sorry. If Finland or Russia win this tournament it will be possibly the biggest win in their history.

You should only speak for yourself, Canadian.


You're free to give it all the value you want, and go out and wave the Maple Leaf if Canada wins. And if somebody here in Finland wishes to do the same, they're free to do so.

Most of this country, however? Will they go crazy? Nope. Will they loathe it with same verocity as yours truly? Likely not. What they'll do, is say "how nice", and then it's business as usual.

 

[Panteras]

Fans of hockey today are just no fun. Everything sucks and is a gimmick. So much cynicism.

give me an example of a World Cup or international tournament in any sport where a team was taking part and was not representative of a nation or country and which was spontaneously and specifically created for that "international tournament".....so...yeah...gimmick

 

[jj cale]

You should only speak for yourself, Canadian.


That was a rude remark.

We don't address your fans that way, as a matter of fact, most Canadians are big fans of Finnish hockey.

Perhaps you should rephrase your words and attitude.

 

[FiLe]

That was a rude remark.

We don't address your fans that way, as a matter of fact, most Canadians are big fans of Finnish hockey.

Perhaps you should rephrase your words and attitude.

Calling a Canadian "Canadian" is rude now? Sorry, I wasn't aware.

The fact is, he's in no position to tell Finnish or Russian fans what they should think about this tournament. He tries to do that, he's disrespectin'. So there's no reason to play the victim.

 

[jj cale]

Calling a Canadian "Canadian" is rude now? Sorry, I wasn't aware.

The fact is, he's in no position to tell Finnish or Russian fans what they should think about this tournament. He tries to do that, he's disrespectin'. So there's no reason to play the victim.

Ah, File................he will be the first guy to complain about the refs when his team loses. But when they win, the refs will have done their job

Catch it when you can folks, certainly a vanity fair Finnish fan telling us all how how it should work.

They are so hard done by.

I know those guys..................they are drinking as much vodka as anyone else here.

Their head is affected, you cant count on people such as this.

 

[xxxx]

Calling a Canadian "Canadian" is rude now? Sorry, I wasn't aware.

The fact is, he's in no position to tell Finnish or Russian fans what they should think about this tournament. He tries to do that, he's disrespectin'. So there's no reason to play the victim.

I'm not telling anyone what to think. I'm sorry if it looks that way. But it's naive to think that if Russia won the tournament - which would be their first big win since 1981? - it wouldn't be considered as AT LEAST one of the biggest wins since that time. It is absolutely naive. It would definitely be big for the players. The same with Finland. Selanne basically agreed in 2004 that the final game against Canada was - to that point - the biggest achievements in Finland's hockey history, that it was something special. Though I'm pretty sure I would find here posters that don't maybe value the silver from that tournament that much. But I'm 100% sure that the players would feel something similar as Selanne in 2004 - if they won this year - and I tend to value players' opinions more when it comes to which wins matter the most. After all it's them who play the games and it's them who have experienced the tournaments. For example, I could value the World Championships golds anyway I want, but if I know that it's not the TOP for canadian players, neither is for me then. It doesn't really make sense to add value somewhere where the ones who are actually playing don't see it. The same way it doesn't make sense to take value away from something if the players feel otherwise.

btw, not like 20-50 posters here would represent something, but - just from this thread and from last page of Finland's WC thread:

Well there will be the best players in the world playing so yeah winning this would be as great achieve as winning OGs.

Even if this ended up being the most competitive tournament in hockey history the boo birds would say that it was crap because it was not a "real" international tournament.

So now for the first time ever there is a unique tournament that promises to be possibly the most entertaining tournament ever put together but some feel that it sucks and it is not worth watching because it does not meet someones rule book of how a tournament should be constructed, unbelievable. People really seem to try their best not to like the tournament and come up with the most imaginative reasons for not liking it. However I am sure that once the games start and you see that surprise surprise it is better than any other tournament, like who saw that coming, most will change their minds real quick.

Also there is no definition what a World Cup should be like. The rules of a tournament can be changed every time, there is no right way. Only thing that should matter is that the on ice product is as good as it can get and the decisions behind this tournament certainly allow this to happen.

I guess some countries like Slovakia could be pissed as they dont have their national team participating but it is a tournament where only the best participate and Slovakia has no chance of winning. Hockey only has a few good countries and therefore in order to create a competitive tournament you have to cut the fat.

I am very excited about the tournament and it certainly has the potential to end up being one of the best tournament ever. If that does not please a hockey fan then I dont know what to say. Do you not want to watch good hockey??!?!?!?!?

 

[BayStreetBully]

I'm not telling anyone what to think. I'm sorry if it looks that way. But it's naive to think that if Russia won the tournament - which would be their first big win since 1981? - it wouldn't be considered as AT LEAST one of the biggest wins since that time. It is absolutely naive. It would definitely be big for the players. The same with Finland. Selanne basically agreed in 2004 that the final game against Canada was - to that point - the biggest achievements in Finland's hockey history, that it was something special. Though I'm pretty sure I would find here posters that don't maybe value the silver from that tournament that much. But I'm 100% sure that the players would feel something similar as Selanne in 2004 - if they won this year - and I tend to value players' opinions more when it comes to which wins matter the most. After all it's them who play the games and it's them who have experienced the tournaments. For example, I could value the World Championships golds anyway I want, but if I know that it's not the TOP for canadian players, neither is for me then. It doesn't really make sense to add value somewhere where the ones who are actually playing don't see it. The same way it doesn't make sense to take value away from something if the players feel otherwise.

You're relying on what company employees say about their own company's project. You are taking Selanne's comments at face value, without considering the context under which his comments were made.

A better way to determine the importance of a tournament is to see how the people of a country feel about a tournament. Because if it doesn't mean anything to the people, it won't mean anything to the players. And you have actual Finns telling you how they feel about the tournament. Finns, people of a hockey-mad country just like Canadians, don't care. They're telling you straight up.

 

[FiLe]

Lemme tell you how big of a win it would be for the Republic of Finland or the Russian Federation:

Exactly as big as it would be for the United States of North American Young Guys or the Kingdom of European Leftovers.

 

[Exquisite]

Isn't the World Cup exactly the same as the All-Stars Tournament? It's going to be a huge failure when none of the players give a **** and are motivated.

With the playoffs you got the Stanley Cup, and the Olympics Gold Medal for your country. This is a gimmick I don't see how anyone can say otherwise

 

[Gaps]

I'm not telling anyone what to think. I'm sorry if it looks that way. But it's naive to think that if Russia won the tournament - which would be their first big win since 1981? - it wouldn't be considered as AT LEAST one of the biggest wins since that time. It is absolutely naive. It would definitely be big for the players. The same with Finland. Selanne basically agreed in 2004 that the final game against Canada was - to that point - the biggest achievements in Finland's hockey history, that it was something special. Though I'm pretty sure I would find here posters that don't maybe value the silver from that tournament that much. But I'm 100% sure that the players would feel something similar as Selanne in 2004 - if they won this year - and I tend to value players' opinions more when it comes to which wins matter the most. After all it's them who play the games and it's them who have experienced the tournaments. For example, I could value the World Championships golds anyway I want, but if I know that it's not the TOP for canadian players, neither is for me then. It doesn't really make sense to add value somewhere where the ones who are actually playing don't see it. The same way it doesn't make sense to take value away from something if the players feel otherwise.

btw, not like 20-50 posters here would represent something, but - just from this thread and from last page of Finland's WC thread:

Yes, it definitely seems that you're telling people what to think.

As for the comments regarding 2004, I'm sorry, but this year's tournament is in no way comparable to that one. I'm sorry if you don't see any difference there, because we certainly do. In 2004 The tournament had some issues that diminished its value in the minds of Finnish hockey fans, but as far as hard-core fans are considered, making it to the final is one of the biggest achievements in Finnish hockey history. However, there's considerably less excitement for this year's tournament than there was back in 2004 and there's no way it doesn't affect the players in some way as well.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

As a Finn it's hard to rank up these tournaments. WHC 2011, WC 2004, Olympics 2006 and WJC 2016 were all special for Finns.

 

[Chimpradamus]

If the kids team or the European team wins it, where are they going to put the trophy? I'm rooting for one of the Mickey Mouse teams to win it. But it's of course not meant they're going to medal and I'm sure the NHL will take care of that in their own way, if they have to.

I certainly won't hold this Mickey Mouse tournament in much esteem. It's a glorified PR show for the NHL to earn $$$ for their owners. A way of saying "look, we can't let our players be in the olympics for 2 weeks every 4th year, but we can hold a Mickey Mouse tournament to make up for it."

 

[JackSlater]

I'm not telling anyone what to think. I'm sorry if it looks that way. But it's naive to think that if Russia won the tournament - which would be their first big win since 1981? - it wouldn't be considered as AT LEAST one of the biggest wins since that time. It is absolutely naive. It would definitely be big for the players. The same with Finland. Selanne basically agreed in 2004 that the final game against Canada was - to that point - the biggest achievements in Finland's hockey history, that it was something special. Though I'm pretty sure I would find here posters that don't maybe value the silver from that tournament that much. But I'm 100% sure that the players would feel something similar as Selanne in 2004 - if they won this year - and I tend to value players' opinions more when it comes to which wins matter the most. After all it's them who play the games and it's them who have experienced the tournaments. For example, I could value the World Championships golds anyway I want, but if I know that it's not the TOP for canadian players, neither is for me then. It doesn't really make sense to add value somewhere where the ones who are actually playing don't see it. The same way it doesn't make sense to take value away from something if the players feel otherwise.

btw, not like 20-50 posters here would represent something, but - just from this thread and from last page of Finland's WC thread:

The 2004 World Cup was an actual international best on best tournament. This one is not. Pretty big difference.

 

[Jablkon]

Canada basically is eliminated from most World Cups on their own.

The WBC is a joke so who cares if Canada participates or not.

Soccer we are awful in so your plan doesn't change anything.

Basketball is an awful sport so I really don't care if we go or not and US will win anyways whether you allow 2, 10 or 100 teams. So not much of a change there.

Rugby is the only one I care about but really it isn't like we are doing much there anyways so our exclusion doesn't really change the tournament much. Maybe a two tier tournament is needed as the top 6-8 teams are so much better than the rest it is really all that competitive.

Sorry, but this is such shallow point of view. Int competition makes sport better. And no one has right to choose which sport should be prefered. As to hockey, god knows where NHL would be if Canada didnt face Russians in 70s or without european influence in 90s. European leagues might seem to you crappy, but that just because top end talent from that leagues is floating to NHL. Still not that crappy for Matthews who prefered it instead of NA junior leagues. If you dont care, you dont have to, just remember that this top talent must be developed somewhere.

You are exactly member of the group which is targeted. It will be great tourney for you and NHL, but not for hockey generally...

 

[Jablkon]

I'm not telling anyone what to think. I'm sorry if it looks that way. But it's naive to think that if Russia won the tournament - which would be their first big win since 1981? - it wouldn't be considered as AT LEAST one of the biggest wins since that time. It is absolutely naive. It would definitely be big for the players. The same with Finland. Selanne basically agreed in 2004 that the final game against Canada was - to that point - the biggest achievements in Finland's hockey history, that it was something special. Though I'm pretty sure I would find here posters that don't maybe value the silver from that tournament that much. But I'm 100% sure that the players would feel something similar as Selanne in 2004 - if they won this year - and I tend to value players' opinions more when it comes to which wins matter the most. After all it's them who play the games and it's them who have experienced the tournaments. For example, I could value the World Championships golds anyway I want, but if I know that it's not the TOP for canadian players, neither is for me then. It doesn't really make sense to add value somewhere where the ones who are actually playing don't see it. The same way it doesn't make sense to take value away from something if the players feel otherwise.

btw, not like 20-50 posters here would represent something, but - just from this thread and from last page of Finland's WC thread:

It probably will be. But thats just because of situation in int. hockey. Russians havent won BOB since 1981, as you mentioned, and Canada clearly dominates int. stage right now. So it will be basically great achievement for any team to win it and get in front of Canada. Me personally, as a fan of country which sucked in last two OGs, I would be super mad if our management dont take it 150% seriously. Luckilly they do. Still it does not change my opinion on structure of this tourney....

 

[Lataba76]

Hockey is a marginal Sport in World!

Only Hockey has the big problem to create a serious tournament.
The dominance of NHL ist too big.
Only the Olympic tournamanent is a great official BOB benchmark.
All other tournaments you can t count it.
The world cup of hockey is not an official tournament. The IIHF-WC is not a measure.

All other Sports like Football,Basketball,Handball,Rugby,Field Hockey etc. has great functional tournaments. Only Hockey has a complicate situation.

 

[Xokkeu]

Funny how MLB and the NHL went entirely different directions with their tournament.


MLB includes ridiculous teams like Italy and South Africa. Why? Because they want to grow the game in other continents and countries. Now I personally don't think having a bunch of Americans with Italian great grandparents play for Italy helps Italians like baseball but regardless, that was their idea.

MLB takes their main competitor in Japan and makes them a partner in the venture despite disagreements and demands from the other side.

The NHL excludes legitimate international competitors like Switzerland and Slovakia. Instead it invents a farcical North America team based on age restrictions. It actively seeks to exclude it's main competitor the KHL and even minor competitors in the other European leagues.

 

[Lepardi]

Lemme tell you how big of a win it would be for the Republic of Finland or the Russian Federation:

Exactly as big as it would be for the United States of North American Young Guys or the Kingdom of European Leftovers.

Winning this tournament would certainly mean more to Finnish people than it would to Danes, Norwegians, Germans, Slovenians, etc. There would be a party of some sort but it wouldn't be awfully massive cause the final games end at around 5 AM Finnish time and the players wouldn't be able to come here for the celebrations. They'd have to go straight to their NHL teams.

 

[FiLe]

Winning this tournament would certainly mean more to Finnish people than it would to Danes, Norwegians, Germans, Slovenians, etc. There would be a party of some sort but it wouldn't be awfully massive cause the final games end at around 5 AM Finnish time and the players wouldn't be able to come here for the celebrations. They'd have to go straight to their NHL teams.

No. If the Kingdom of Leftovers or the USNAYG wins this, they should receive exactly the same party as the rest of them. Fighter jets should escort their flight to the country's capital, there should be thousands of people on the Market Square, a speech by their federation's president, plus of course cake.

But will there be such? No, because those countries obviously don't exist and the cake is a lie. It also means that there are two participants in this supposedly "international" tournament who don't get a legit treatment should they happen to win. In fact, you have to cross your hands and pray that they don't win so that things wouldn't get all awkward.


So, anybody who thinks this is a good idea, please answer me this... what kind of a sick, twisted joke of a tournament is that?

And if you don't care, simply because your country is still in it and there will be a party if they happen to win, well... all I've got to say is that you should be utterly ashamed of yourself, because you are nothing but a navel-gazing boor.

 

[Xokkeu]

No. If the Kingdom of Leftovers or the USNAYG wins this, they should receive exactly the same party as the rest of them. Fighter jets should escort their flight to the country's capital, there should be thousands of people on the Market Square, a speech by their federation's president, plus of course cake.

But will there be such? No, because those countries obviously don't exist and the cake is a lie. It also means that there are two participants in this supposedly "international" tournament who don't get a legit treatment should they happen to win. In fact, you have to cross your hands and pray that they don't win so that things wouldn't get all awkward.


So, anybody who thinks this is a good idea, please answer me this... what kind of a sick, twisted joke of a tournament is that?

And if you don't care, simply because your country is still in it and there will be a party if they happen to win, well... all I've got to say is that you should be utterly ashamed of yourself, because you are nothing but a navel-gazing boor.

Hmmmm, a nation of North Americans under 23. I think Bernie Sanders is President with Trudeau as VP.

 

[JackSlater]

In fact, you have to cross your hands and pray that they don't win so that things wouldn't get all awkward.

Funny thing is that a few months ago Friedman that the NHL was hoping that the Young Gunz would not cross over and have to play against either Canada or USA, considering it would be Canadians against Canadians or Americans against Americans in a supposedly international tournament. Terrible optics.

 

[Xokkeu]

Funny thing is that a few months ago Friedman that the NHL was hoping that the Young Gunz would not cross over and have to play against either Canada or USA, considering it would be Canadians against Canadians or Americans against Americans in a supposedly international tournament. Terrible optics.

Holy hell that takes a special level of stupid to come up with that idea.


My favorite is looking at other Team North America's.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_North_America

 

[Bure80]

Only Hockey has the big problem to create a serious tournament.
The dominance of NHL ist too big.
Only the Olympic tournamanent is a great official BOB benchmark.
All other tournaments you can t count it.
The world cup of hockey is not an official tournament. The IIHF-WC is not a measure.

All other Sports like Football,Basketball,Handball,Rugby,Field Hockey etc. has great functional tournaments. Only Hockey has a complicate situation.

In my opinion they should take football/soccer as an example.
Its a problem for the NHL to have a best on best tournament every year.
Why not play WHC every four years before (maybe after) the NHL season. So you have a best on best tournament every two years (Olympics/WHC). This tournament should be switched between NA and Europe.