World Cup of Hockey 2020
- Thread starter Kshahdoo
- Start date
-
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
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,788
- 15,435
It has been said that the NHL won't hold it if there is an impending lockout (by various reporters, I can't remember if the NHL has officially commented) so... probably not. It they use gimmick teams again then it's better off just not taking place. If they plan to make it a legitimate international best on best then it is too bad if it is cancelled.
All I know is that I don't want it to happen. They aren't going to do it properly anyway so better not do it at all.
I hope so. Everyone wants more international best-on-best hockey. However, if the players want to go to war over, among other things, the right to play with the Olympics I side with them whole-heartedly because that (among other issues) is more important. However, no one doesn't want more international hockey. Even just a 10 team tournament, top 4 go to the playoffs would be fine by me, even if one was a U24 team (but please no more Europe is a country nonsense). Then you get one serious international tournament and another tournament which can also get bragging rights.
International hockey is the best hockey. More of it is fine by me, just don't take what we already have.
International hockey is the best hockey. More of it is fine by me, just don't take what we already have.
Team Europe is a way better idea than Team U24. Team U24 means no Matthews, Eichel, Boeser, Tkachuk, Werenski or Jack Hughes for Team USA. Team Europe means that Hischier, Draisaitl, Kopitar etc. get to compete. Yeah it doesn't generate any faux-nationalism but it produces better hockey than watching Switzerland play the trap for 60 minutes or Latvia lose by 5 goals every game.
Rob
Registered User
Nope.
US lost a lot of players, and that's why I don't prefer any gimmick teams to having some. However, it is definitely the better concept.
It generated way more excitement than "Team Europe" did. I don't know if you watched those games but those were probably some of the best hockey we've ever seen.
This whole "get to compete" thing, really? This isn't a rec league game where every kid is mandated to play. Team Europe generated very little fan interest because *gasp* they had no fanbase. You talk about this delta in interest, it's not a delta that exists. The people who would watch Canada vs. Latvia are probably about the same in number as the people who would watch Canada vs. Europe, ie. 99% Canadians and 1% miscellaneous. This large base of german fans who would just watch because Draisaitl was in there, and Slovenian fans who would just watch because Kopitar is in there, firstly I know german hockey fans and slovenian hockey fans, some would watch regardless because they just love hockey others wouldn't be interested regardless. None of the fanbases of these players thought "oh, I wasn't interested but a player of my country is in there so now I'm interested." That's the faux-nationalism bullshit you're talking about, no one's like that. There are people who just love hockey and then there is a majority of people who aren't crazy enough about it to wake up at 3AM just because "muh country has the one guy". If anything it's even worse because the team without a fanbase made it to the finals and so instead of having two teams with solid fanbases you had one team with a solid fanbase, better that a weaker team gets killed so the market is better explored.
Paxton Fettel
Registered User
- Mar 3, 2006
- 7,255
- 324
2016 was a complete joke, I don't know anyone who even cared to check out the highlights from the final. No more gimmick teams please, and more round robin games please à la Coupe Canada.
JETZZZ
Registered User
If its going to be like the 2016 World Cup, I hope it gets canned for good. If it became a true best on best tournament with no gimmicks and took place in February instead of August, annnnnd if it was held every 4 years with no interruptions, then It would make a fine replacement for Olympic hockey. Who knows. Over time, such a World Cup could become the most prestigious international hockey tournament to win and the players and fans could forget about Olympic ice hockey for good...I just dont think the NHL is capable or even willing to give it a legit try.
So than by your logic why not make it only a 5 team tournament. Usa, Canada, sweden, finland and russia? Those are the only teams who stand a chance to win the tournament. And really the only teams who will compete with each other. So why even have the others there? Even finland and russia get lit up on occasion.
You're argument addresses the argument I was addressing, not my argument, so I assume this is a misquote. That or you're a little confused.
No I’m addressing what you said. You are aruguing against team Europe. And I am saying that team Europe is a better idea than having those 7 or 8 Nations lose 8-1 every game. Those nations have no chance so why should they play than. So why not just have 5 top teams play? What kind of tournament would you want to see or are u against the tournament altogether?
There's no need to invite teams outside of TOP 6. Just play round robin with 6 teams(Can, Swe, Rus, USA, Fin, Cze)and then playoffs or just straight to the finals with 2 best teams.
You are a confused man.
You literally take a stance and then argue against it two sentences later.
I can't tell if you're joking or being sarcastic at any point, because reading it straight this is an incredibly confused post. Let's break it down. 1. Team Europe is preferable to individual national teams because it avoids blowouts.
2. Extend the argument teams that have no chance to win and/or get blown out should not be in the tournament with the rhetorical device thar takes the position to absurdity to make distinct the weakness of the position that teams should play iff they are competitive.
So which side are you arguing?
The first. And the argument that only the top 5 or so teams should play is valid. There is simply no point in having lesser teams get blown out every game. The reason I like team Europe is that it gives a chance for smaller nations to have a meaningful representation. Only the top 5 teams have any chance to win anything. But if team Europe was included again they could have another chance at almost winning like in 2016. why should the small nations even be involved if not in team Europe? they have no chance of doing anything but play trap for 60 mins and still get blown out. At least Europe gives a chance to smaller nations for a metal. Even the Czechs and Finns are getting blown out. Only the teams who have any chance of winning should play.You are a confused man.
You literally take a stance and then argue against it two sentences later.
1. Team Europe is preferable to individual national teams because it avoids blowouts.
2. Extend the argument teams that have no chance to win and/or get blown out should not be in the tournament with the rhetorical device thar takes the position to absurdity to make distinct the weakness of the position that teams should play iff they are competitive.
So which side are you arguing?
Isaac Nootin
Registered User
- Sep 28, 2017
- 7,891
- 12,406
Team NA was the best thing to come from the WCoH in 2016, but I don't want to see it again.
Imagine that team today, McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, MacKinnon, Scheifele, Johnny Hockey etc.
They win if the tournament is played tomorrow, IMO.
Imagine that team today, McDavid, Matthews, Eichel, MacKinnon, Scheifele, Johnny Hockey etc.
They win if the tournament is played tomorrow, IMO.
Ah, well at least you're consistent.
I would warn you however that in the realm that is international sport, individuals who hold opinions like yours are few and far between...
Maybe you don’t understand it if your from a larger country , and especially hockey the smaller teams just don’t stand any chance. I bet a lot of people from smaller nations would rather see a team Europe almost win than to see their individual team lost every game 10-1
Harvey Birdman
…Need some law books, with pictures this time…
I agree with getting rid of team North America, that's just nonsense. We already have team USA and Canada there is no reason at all for team NA. I understand the purpose of team Europe though. For players from smaller countries to stand a chance. I fully get that. But its the only gimmick team that should be part of this. Just drop the team NA and I would like the WC format a lot more.
It doesn't give smaller nations a chance for a medal, since, you know, the team doesn't represent any nation. And yeah, even teams which are more or less on the same level in terms of talent sometimes get blown out by others, like Brazil by Germany in the previous FIFA World Cup so that seems like an irrelevant thing to mention. Unless you'd argue that Finland regularly gets blown out by other top teams which would be a ludicrous claim.
No I’m not saying that they get regularly blown out, but just look at last World Cup. Finland was just not very good. And the Czechs were even worse. And once again, finland is a top 5 Nation so you really have no say in what constantly being on the bottom is like lol. So your opinion on winning a medal as team Europe and not being important is irrelevant. And smaller nations will never medal of top dogs are at full strength. So once again points out that they than should not be In the tournament if they are individually represented.
So you think German or Latvian fans would rather see themselves lose by 7 or 8 goals every game. And once again you probably are from one of the top 5 countries in terms of hockey strength so of course you wouldn’t know what it’s like to lose by such a large margain every game
