World Cup Question

[Canuckistani]

I don't think you have a good grasp on the USA player pool.

Jones
Eichel
Larkin
Saad

all would have a chance at this team.

Geaudreau would be a lock for team USA, with the above players being in the running.

For Canada Ekblad, McDavid and mackinnon would be strong condensers.

 

[xxxx]

What profound point is posting a definition of the word competitive supposed to make?

I don't know, maybe that Slovakia and Switzerland don't quite fit the definition? They are certainly not AS GOOD as the other TOP6 teams, let alone better.

 

[Canuckistani]

I don't know, maybe that Slovakia and Switzerland don't quite fit the definition? They are certainly not AS GOOD as the other TOP6 teams, let alone better.

So? If on-paper competitiveness meant everything then team USA should not have been allowed anywhere near the soviets at the 1980 Olympics.

 

[BilldaCat]

So? If on-paper competitiveness meant everything then team USA should not have been allowed anywhere near the soviets at the 1980 Olympics.

Great. So I may get a fantastic game once every 4 decades. In the meantime, I have to slug through 10-1 blowouts, or 2-0 trapfests on Olympic ice where everyone crowds the slot.

No thanks. The Olympic game, more often than not, is a snooze-fest. I'm excited to see this plays out. Give me stacked all-star top talent on an NHL rink for a few games, should be fun to see.

 

[JackSlater]

I don't know, maybe that Slovakia and Switzerland don't quite fit the definition? They are certainly not AS GOOD as the other TOP6 teams, let alone better.

... and you are speculating that the gimmick teams are more competitive. Considering that Slovakia reached the semi finals of the second most recent best on best and that Switzerland has a 1-0-1 record against Canada in best on best competition in the last decade, they had best do extremely well to prove you right.

If you're interested in definitions, how about this: please explain how the gimmick teams fit inside the definition of an international tournament?

 

[Canuckistani]

Great. So I may get a fantastic game once every 4 decades. In the meantime, I have to slug through 10-1 blowouts, or 2-0 trapfests on Olympic ice where everyone crowds the slot.

No thanks. The Olympic game, more often than not, is a snooze-fest. I'm excited to see this plays out. Give me stacked all-star top talent on an NHL rink for a few games, should be fun to see.

You must love NHL all star games then - where all the best players take part and have the same reasons to give a 100% effort (ie none) as the two joke teams will in September.

 

[SotasicA]

It's a way to add another competitive team to the tournament. I guess they could have gone with something like Team Quebec, but that's probably a little too political.

 

[Theokritos]

Here's an idea for the Stanley Cup playoffs: Scrap the two wildcard teams per conference and replace them with

1) an all-star team made up of the best players of the non-playoff teams, and
2) a youngster team made up of the best players under 23 of the playoff teams.

Exciting as hell. Who cares whether these aren't actual teams...

 

[SotasicA]

1) an all-star team made up of the best players of the non-playoff teams, and
2) a youngster team made up of the best players under 23 of the playoff teams.

Go Non-Playoff Team Go! That'd be a pretty stacked lineup. I bet they'd win the Stanley Cup.

 

[Keram]

Would you rather have a competitive Young Stars team and Europe or two cupcake teams that you know are going to get creamed?

Give me the extra competitive teams.

Soccer world cup have every time at least 10-15 teams which have no chance to qualify for quarters. There are maybe 5 golden favourites every time. They should scratch about 20 teams then and fill it with team Europe leftovers,South America leftovers, Asia team, Africa team, North-Central America team.

This is not helping growing the game. There is still siginificant difference between top six and others but not as much as 15-20 years ago. And world cup should help growth the game. There is no need to have teams with chance of winning only. No world cup of any sport has only those teams.

 

[Barrie22]

For people say this isn't helping the league grow? Just wondering how that is more of a fact then say if 2 random countries were added instead.

Kopitar will be playing in this tournament, something that his country/him would/will never be able to do without this format. That could mean more slovenians get into hockey after seeing a game with a fellow country man involved.

 

[Keram]

For people say this isn't helping the league grow? Just wondering how that is more of a fact then say if 2 random countries were added instead.

Kopitar will be playing in this tournament, something that his country/him would/will never be able to do without this format. That could mean more slovenians get into hockey after seeing a game with a fellow country man involved.

Growing the game and growing the league are two different things. Growing the league doesnt help growing the game IMO. Bottom feeders grown hockey only for reason that WCH change from 12 teams to 16. I dont mean there should be 16 team world cup dont get me wrong. I think when whole national team is involved then it is helping growing the game. And with Kopitar argument I am not so sure. When LA Kings won SC it helped Slovenian hockey though.

 

[SotasicA]

Canada Cup had 6 teams and those tournaments had ultimate hockey being played.

 

[xxxx]

please explain how the gimmick teams fit inside the definition of an international tournament?

involving two or more countries : occurring between countries

made up of people or groups from different countries

I think it fits the definition quite well. You have six countries, plus two teams made up of people from different countries. I know this is debatable though.

 

[FiLe]

I think it fits the definition quite well. You have six countries, plus two teams made up of people from different countries. I know this is debatable though.

I think he meant the definition of term "international tournament", not merely word "international".

 

[xxxx]

Soccer world cup have every time at least 10-15 teams which have no chance to qualify for quarters. There are maybe 5 golden favourites every time. They should scratch about 20 teams then and fill it with team Europe leftovers,South America leftovers, Asia team, Africa team, North-Central America team.

This is not helping growing the game. There is still siginificant difference between top six and others but not as much as 15-20 years ago. And world cup should help growth the game. There is no need to have teams with chance of winning only. No world cup of any sport has only those teams.

Growing the game.......oh sweet potato. Sorry you won't be able to put skates on your children's feet, Spain parents, because you haven't been able to see the best NHL players at the olympics! Oh wait.

Please explain what difference would it make, in growing the game, if there was SVK and SWI or whoever, instead of Team NA and Team Europe. Do you mean growing the game among casual fans, non-hockey countries, or among teams themselves?

Because I don't think we should invite Korea to World Cup just to promote the hockey there, and neither I think Norway or Slovakia will see a fall of interest in hockey because their countries were not invited here. If you mean growing the game among actual teams, how does Slovakia losing 1-7 to the States help them to get better? Actually I think the IIHF Whc is good enough for growing the game. You see how much of a progress teams like France or Norway made in the past ten years. All that without playing the star-loaded teams.

 

[xxxx]

For people say this isn't helping the league grow? Just wondering how that is more of a fact then say if 2 random countries were added instead.

Kopitar will be playing in this tournament, something that his country/him would/will never be able to do without this format. That could mean more slovenians get into hockey after seeing a game with a fellow country man involved.

Absolutely. And the same could be said about Norway, Austria, Belarus, or France, ..or even Denmark that has never had the chance to ice their best team.

 

[xxxx]

I'll quote this post from the other thread, that I wholeheartedly agree with:

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.

 

[BayStreetBully]

I'll quote this post from the other thread, that I wholeheartedly agree with:

"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."

Then shouldn't we have a Canada B instead of Finland?

Or a 4 team tournament, between Canada, USA, Scandinavia and Eastern Europe?

Why stop at 6 national teams a 2 gimmick teams?

 

[JackSlater]

Here's an idea for the Stanley Cup playoffs: Scrap the two wildcard teams per conference and replace them with

1) an all-star team made up of the best players of the non-playoff teams, and
2) a youngster team made up of the best players under 23 of the playoff teams.

Exciting as hell. Who cares whether these aren't actual teams...

Of course this example is essentially the exact same thing as the NHL is doing with the World Cup. People blindly parroting the NHL won't admit that though.

I think it fits the definition quite well. You have six countries, plus two teams made up of people from different countries. I know this is debatable though.

It's not debatable, it's idiotic. By your definition the NHL playoffs are an international tournament. Apparently all hockey is international hockey and I never knew it.

 

[xxxx]

Of course this example is essentially the exact same thing as the NHL is doing with the World Cup. People blindly parroting the NHL won't admit that though.



It's not debatable, it's idiotic. By your definition the NHL playoffs are an international tournament. Apparently all hockey is international hockey and I never knew it.

I disagree it's anything similar to the NHL. I guess we agree to disagree.

 

[FiLe]

I disagree it's anything similar to the NHL. I guess we agree to disagree.

What he meant is that the NHL in itself fully matches this definition of "international".

made up of people or groups from different countries

You disagree?

 

[Keram]

Growing the game.......oh sweet potato. Sorry you won't be able to put skates on your children's feet, Spain parents, because you haven't been able to see the best NHL players at the olympics! Oh wait.

Please explain what difference would it make, in growing the game, if there was SVK and SWI or whoever, instead of Team NA and Team Europe. Do you mean growing the game among casual fans, non-hockey countries, or among teams themselves?

Because I don't think we should invite Korea to World Cup just to promote the hockey there, and neither I think Norway or Slovakia will see a fall of interest in hockey because their countries were not invited here. If you mean growing the game among actual teams, how does Slovakia losing 1-7 to the States help them to get better? Actually I think the IIHF Whc is good enough for growing the game. You see how much of a progress teams like France or Norway made in the past ten years. All that without playing the star-loaded teams.

Ok then. World championships should grow the game which really are and world cup should only entertain hockey fans and it will. But there is no need to add two teams. It could be six team tournament then. IMO Europe team will not atract fans from Slovenia, Denmark, Belarus, Germany etc. It is really different to cheer for national team and for some team similar to NHL team. Canadians maybe dont understand that.

 

[xxxx]

What he meant is that the NHL in itself fully matches this definition of "international".

made up of people or groups from different countries

You disagree?

Out of 8 teams, 6 represent countries. One team represents North America, with some restrictions, and the other represents Europe, again with some restrictions. What NHL teams represent any continect or a country or even a US state or canadian province? They don't even represent their "cities", because it's totally random group of players thrown together. Team North America consists of the best U-24 players born in North America. The Anaheim Ducks have no restriction based on nationalities or continents. The Ducks are a league team. Team NA is an international team with clear restriction.

 

[xxxx]

Ok then. World championships should grow the game which really are and world cup should only entertain hockey fans and it will. But there is no need to add two teams. It could be six team tournament then. IMO Europe team will not atract fans from Slovenia, Denmark, Belarus, Germany etc. It is really different to cheer for national team and for some team similar to NHL team. Canadians maybe dont understand that.

In ideal world we would have both olympics and world cup, while the latter would be just for the best of the best (8 teams or so) that scenario would probably satisfy everyone.

I can be easily wrong about the amount of interest this tournament can get in France or Denamark, but still it's possible the fans will at least get to see the best hockey on the planet with some of their best players. It's possible that some kid would look up to this tournament and say, "I wanna play with those great players too!" knowing that only one or two players from his country are that good. I know it would inspire me.