Bring back the Canada Cup/Reform World Cup.

[Hanji]

2010 Germany 9,799
2009 Switzerland 6,768
2008 Canada 8,834
2007 Russia 5,905
2006 Latvia 5,799
2005 Austria 5,785
2004 Czech Republic 9,858
2003 Finland 8,119
2002 Sweden 5,456
2001 Germany 7,277
2000 Russia 5,686

Embarrassingly low? Let me guess, you were expecting NHL level figures?
WC figures are very strong for a European hockey event; especially considering attendance includes a plethora of Denmark v Slovenia level matches and is predicated on the travel of supporters.

Use this as a comparison:
the average attendance per European league:
SEL 6,255
DEL 5,867
KHL 5,781
Czech Extraliga 5,018
SM Liiga 4,957
Slovak Extraliga 2,840

TV viewership?
I can tell you what the Slovakian viewership for was 2010 WC
(Slovakia - population 5.4 million):
Kazakhstan-Slovakia 722,000
Slovakia-Russia 699,000
Belarus-Slovakia 608,000
Czech republic-Russia 451,000
Slovakia-Denmark 443,000
Denmark-Russia 261,000
Russia-Belarus 128,000
Russia-Kazakstan 84,000

 

[Sokil]

I'd like to see the this infrequent tournament do something creative, like create a European Union team and just have it Canada, USA, EU, and Russia

just have 4 powerhouses duke it out, and because it'd be a shorter tournament, it would be easier to schedule


plus having a EU team would give guys like Vanek and Kopitar (for example) some time to be in a major intl. tournament

 

[Hanji]

Regarding funding models, I'd like to see the WC take a lesson from the NHL's handling of the All-Star Game.

Both events have much the same set of problems:
- Everyone knows they're a money grab, and the "cultural" aspect is largely just promotional hype. Cultural aspect is not promotional hype.
- The games are meaningless outside the hardcore hockey community.Hardcore NA hockey community
- They lack credibility for determining who's "better" at anything.
- Elite players frequently dodge them, making the best-vs-best aspect dubious.
- They take place at an awkward point in the annual schedule. NHL schedule only
- As a result of the above, they are largely ignored and even derided by fans and media.Ingored by North American media and fans

I fixed your post for you.

Remember, very few sports fans in Europe care about the NHL. Your average European doesn't care if a Stamkos or Parise plays at the WC because the event itself supersedes who's playing. The tournament has always been about the symbol on the front - not the name on the back.

OK Great!, considering as such, I'm glad we've established that the WC is very meaningful for the global game.

Now, could the working model be tweaked to maximize profits? Of course, and we saw a glimpse of that at 2010 WC. However, a complete overhaul is not only unneeded but it's not a viable solution to anything. The current working model has helped keep the sport afloat in Europe for decades and (according to attendance figures) is continuing to help increase interest.

 

[Jussi]

I'd like to see the this infrequent tournament do something creative, like create a European Union team and just have it Canada, USA, EU, and Russia

just have 4 powerhouses duke it out, and because it'd be a shorter tournament, it would be easier to schedule


plus having a EU team would give guys like Vanek and Kopitar (for example) some time to be in a major intl. tournament

Worst. Idea. Ever.

 

[Slapshooter]

I'd like to see the this infrequent tournament do something creative, like create a European Union team and just have it Canada, USA, EU, and Russia

That would not work at all. Canada, USA and Russia would have superior team spirit compared to superficial "Team EU" without any identity or national pride. No matter how talented roster this EU team would have, it would be just a silly all star team and get pummeled by Canda/Russia/USA.

[political rant]
Europe nor "EU" is not United States of Europe, no matter if some EU bureaucrats and comissars dream it to be. Europeans do not share any kind of national identity with each other. There is some ethnic kinship between the nations, but that's all.

The whole consept of EU is just a big lie and waste of money.
[/political rant]

 

[Seanconn*]

I'd like to see the this infrequent tournament do something creative, like create a European Union team and just have it Canada, USA, EU, and Russia

just have 4 powerhouses duke it out, and because it'd be a shorter tournament, it would be easier to schedule


plus having a EU team would give guys like Vanek and Kopitar (for example) some time to be in a major intl. tournament

yeah, lets just give the gold medal to the EU then. you're seriously undercutting those teams... if it was even 2002, the EU team would basically be handed the gold medal at the Olympic tournament, regardless of what my fellow countrymen would tell you.

I agree it sucks for the very few players that are good players... if you want to have a Euro team, Finland, Sweden, Czech Republic, and Slovakia can absolutely not be in it. would make a foolery out of their national teams.

reasons why: Since the first "best on best" world tournament,

Finland has won 2 bronze and 1 silver at the olympics tournament, and placed second at the 2004 World Cup.

Sweden won Gold at the 2006 olympics, and placed third at the 1996 World Cup for all intents and purposes.

Czech Republic won their epic Gold Medal at the 1998 olympics, won the 2005 world championship (which was a best on best because of the lockout), and placed third at the 2004 World Cup.

Slovakia has won a world championship (yes not best on best) but I think it's a pretty indisputable fact that Slovakia is the only other country that can currently be classified in the same league as the "big 6 hockey nations"

so yeah, your team EU idea is fine, it's composed of player from countries like Switzerland, Slovenia, Austria, Belarus, Ukraine, Norway... ect. and obviously this wouldn't work for the Olympics at all, and definitely not the world championships.

also take into account that Switzerland and Norway are not part of the the EU. as with many other hockey countries in europe.

So it would have to be called "team Europe" and would include a **** ton of different countries, talk about a confusing dressing room.


I really don't see how the governments of each country couldn't at least organize more international games. You guys are way too nostalgic about cold war animosities if you actually think the current climate of increased globalization wouldn't support more international hockey events...

If single countries host the tournament, it will happen more often, and will end up costing a lot less money. It's just hosting hockey games in the many rinks found in your country... not exactly expensive stuff here, unless you go all out with the celebrations or something. It's not like people are walking in to watch these games for free!

I'm telling you man, almost every other forum usually hear nothing about hockey in the sports section. Olympics roll around and even the WJC's and people are talking about it. but especially the olympics, i've never seen Americans so into, whole tournament long.

If Bettman really wants to grow Hockey in America, he needs to let people cheer on team USA as much as possible... typical New Yorker bias.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

This is how attendance has looked since the tournament was expanded to 56 games:

2010 Germany 9,799
2009 Switzerland 6,768
2008 Canada 8,834
2007 Russia 5,905
2006 Latvia 5,799
2005 Austria 5,785
2004 Czech Republic 9,858
2003 Finland 8,119
2002 Sweden 5,456
2001 Germany 7,277
2000 Russia 5,686

As I said, attendance has not been consistently strong and in most cases is embarrassingly low. It draws under 6,000 as often as over 6,000 per game. And you tell me, why aren't the corporate seats filled? If the point is to raise money for the participating programs, obviously it is underperforming if there are large quantities of tickets going unused and corporations aren't jumping on board. The status quo might be the most comfortable, traditional thing but it is obviously not maximizing your results.



Do you not sense the irony in the above?

The only irony I sense is that you would call the attendance at these tournaments embarrassingly low while being one of the biggest defenders of the NHL southern markets and their embarrassingly low attendance numbers.

As already stated here, people will not attend certain games in large numbers when those games involve two scrub teams that are ranked 12-16 in the world. Those matchups tend to skew the average attendance quite a bit.

Another factor are the sheer number of games played in a short period of time...and in just two cities. You have 56 games played in a 2 week period. Expecting a higher per game average would be unreasonable given the fans' financial constraints and time constraints.

Here's a better way to look at the attendance numbers in recent years:

2010 Germany 548,768
2009 Switzerland 379,044
2008 Canada 477,040
2007 Russia 330,708
2006 Latvia 324,794
2005 Austria 323,974
2004 Czech Republic 552,097
2003 Finland 454,693
2002 Sweden 305,541
2001 Germany 407,547

Drawing 300,000+ fans to a hockey tournament in two weeks is pretty impressive....and has been happening year-after-year at the worlds despite the absence of several of the games biggest stars. And ratings in the Europe have been good, so this tournament does serve a purpose other than financial.......namely providing Europe, and to a lesser degree Canada, with some elite international hockey.

Hell, if this tournamant comes back to Canada, specifically Winnipeg, I will be buying tickets

With regards to the World Cup, we need to have a tournament if the NHL does not allow its players to travel to Sochi in 2014. A mid-September start makes most sense. One way to gain interest in the U.S. for this tournament would be to hold America's first game against Russia at Lake Placid, site of the Miracle on Ice (presuming the arena can still be used). I'm sure if you started off the World Cup with a game like this, Americans would care. Just play off the nostalgia of that famous night 30 years ago. In fact, if the Americans make it too the Finals (best of three) one of those games should be played in that arena. Look at it as a good luck charm if you will.

 

[jekoh]

... if you want to have a Euro team, Finland, Sweden, Czech Republic, and Slovakia can absolutely not be in it. would make a foolery out of their national teams.

Agreed, it just makes it look like CZE, FIN, SWE and SVK need to team up to be competitive with the USA, which is ridiculous considering the USA probably has the worst record of the 5 countries in the last 4 olympics.

I'd rather have 7 powerhouses than just 4.

 

[tarheelhockey]

The only irony I sense is that you would call the attendance at these tournaments embarrassingly low while being one of the biggest defenders of the NHL southern markets and their embarrassingly low attendance numbers.

I don't know why I bother responding to this, as it's obviously a troll at me personally, but you would never see me advocating a southern-market team in the Winter Classic or equivalent big-tent event. I have said that many times in relevant discussions here -- marquee events are not the place to put forth a B-level image. I'm all for widespread distribution of the game to new areas, but there is business sense behind how you present yourself at the annual showcase.

As already stated here, people will not attend certain games in large numbers when those games involve two scrub teams that are ranked 12-16 in the world. Those matchups tend to skew the average attendance quite a bit.

Do they really?

2009 average game - 6,768
2009 median game - 5,621
2009 # of games over-10000/under-5000 ratio - 13/20
2009 qualification game average - 6,279
2009 average of games involving the home team - 10,955
2009 average of games not involving the home team - 6,266

2010 average indoor game - 8,576
2010 median indoor game - 6,466
2010 # of games over-10000/under-5000 ratio - 20/19
2010 qualification game average - 6,432
2010 average of indoor games involving the home team - 16,201
2010 average of games not involving the home team - 7,278

It's noteworthy that even qualifying games between good teams average less than the supposedly "misleading" total average. I'd say the overall average is actually a quite accurate measure, as the games appear to lie on a bell curve with balanced extremes.

The most significant pattern is that there is approximately twice as much interest in home-team games over any other matchup. Setting aside the medal games, even marquee qualifying matchups (such as the Canada/Czech game that drew 6,500 last year) aren't especially well attended compared to an obscure preliminary game featuring the home team (such as Switzerland/France drawing 10,500).

In other words, and we should know this intuitively: fans don't want to see second-rate teams from other countries battling for a meaningless championship. They want to see their country being showcased in front of the world. They will turn out in tens of thousands for that experience, creating a unique and highly marketable atmosphere. THAT is what the IIHF should be aiming for, rather than fighting to maintain an outdated tournament model that has been thoroughly upstaged by the Olympics.

Another factor are the sheer number of games played in a short period of time...and in just two cities. You have 56 games played in a 2 week period. Expecting a higher per game average would be unreasonable given the fans' financial constraints and time constraints.

This is another case of damning them with an excuse. If it's unreasonable to expect the games to be noticed, then the format itself is unreasonable. 56 games in 2 weeks can work at the Olympics only because it's the Olympics. Playing "important" games to less than 2000 fans indicates that the IIHF is overreaching with the scale and format of the tournament. This is the same thing we complain about with the NHL's bloated schedule.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

I like that idea of a 24-team World Cup. Do it the way they used to do in soccer. Would give lesser hockey countries a chance to shine on the international level.

Less the vuvuzelas

 

[Jussi]

One thing about the average attendances, tickets for the pre-playoff stage (could be for the whole tournament as well) are usually sold in packages, e.g. if a Finn wanted to his team play against teams X and Y, he'd also have to buy a ticket to see teams A and B.

 

[Jussi]

Tournament model is also about to be changed from 4 groups of 4 and a pre-playoff to two groups of 8 with top 4 from each group going to quarterfinals. I don't remember exactly when it will change, possibly at next year's tournament.

 

[tarheelhockey]

One thing about the average attendances, tickets for the pre-playoff stage (could be for the whole tournament as well) are usually sold in packages, e.g. if a Finn wanted to his team play against teams X and Y, he'd also have to buy a ticket to see teams A and B.

I was thinking that might have been the case, based on games at the lower end of the spectrum. For example, last year:

Sweden v France - 3,268
Czech Republic v France - 3,132
Italy v France - 3,173
Sweden v Latvia - 3,078
Canada v Norway - 2,670
Czech Republic v Norway - 2,256
Italy v Khazakstan - 1,934
Latvia v Norway - 1,925
Norway v Switzerland - 1,896

If you look closely, there seems to be a pattern with around 3100 tickets sold for France and 1900 for Norway. Arguably, there are similar patterns around Sweden, Latvia, Italy, and the Czech Republic... though it's harder to tell. One gets the sense that a lot of these tickets were sold as add-ons to other packages.

 

[Hanji]

More evidence illustrating how influential and meaningful the WC are:

Most popular sport broadcasts in Russia (2010):
1. Olympic Games (Opening ceremony) - 34 million
2. World Cup Football (Spain-Holland) - 28 million
3. World Championships Hockey (Russia-Czech Rep) - 25 million
4. World Championships Hockey (Russia-Canada) - 23.5 million
5. Olympic Games (Russia-Czech Republic) - 22 million
6. World Championships Hockey (Russia-Germany) - 21.5 million
7. World Cup Football (Spain-Germany) - 20.5 million
8. Olympic Games (Women's biathlon relay) - 19 million
9. World Cup Football (Uruguay-Germany) - 18.5 million
10. Olympic Games (Men's biathlon relay) - 18 million

http://www.championat.ru/football/article-74624.html