Germany, Belarus, Switzerland: Emerging Hockey Nations?

[The Nemesis]

I think Germany and Switzerland especially are on their way up. The Swiss always seem to put together great efforts with minimal NHL talent, while the Germans are gradually increasing the number of NHL calibre prospects that they churn out.

 

[Markov79]

Germany and Switzerland have the wealth to do it. Belarus i'm not too sure about. Sadly money is a huge factor in hockey more so than other sports in terms of cost for a little leaguer.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Switzerland's had a modicum of success at the WJC. They've been in the main pool since the 1995-96 tournament, and have been rarely in danger of relegation. They won a bronze in 1997, and I believe they finished fourth in 2002. While they aren't a perennial hockey power, they're competitive on an annual basis, and have pulled out several upsets in recent years. They have more medals than Sweden since 1996.

I don't know if this is a breakout year of Germany or not. They've been around for a long time, but have been in and out of relegation. They're usually moderately competitive, but not good enough to stick in the A pool. They wouldn't be the first surprise team to advance to the next round.

Belarus has been on the cusp for a while. They served notice with a win over the Americans in Grand Forks. Of the three teams, this would be the one that would best fit the description of a growing hockey country.

A lot of posters cite Belarus and Germany as examples that the tournament should be expanded to 12 teams. I disagree, as there isn't that 11th country that would be competitive on an annual basis. I think the better solution is to revamp the relegation format. Germany and Belarus will likely have better teams than the teams that come out of Division A.

 

[AgentNaslund*]

they've been the same for the past half decade. Germans Swiss and Belarussians. Its just that for years hockey can be a close game, doesent matter how mismatched the teams are. Swiss is still way behind, due to their lack of Swiss players in the NHL. German's have some respect witha handful of NHLers.

 

[Jazz]

For this tournament and the Olympics I'd only invite the big seven plus one of the emerging nations.
Do a round robin where every team plays each other once.
Top four play in the semi-finals.
One final game, no bronze medal game (just awarded based on points).

Every game would be worth watching!

Ah, no!

First of all, this is not an invitational tournament, it is a World Championship (ie, qualfications apply)

The 2nd tier nations need a chance to play the elite. That is how the sport progresses and grows.

If you keep it as as elitest club, then there is no point in the lower division World Championships. Every other sport has at least double the # of teams participating than have a legitimate shot at winning. There is no reason hockey should be any different.

 

[Jazz]

Belarus has been on the cusp for a while. They served notice with a win over the Americans in Grand Forks. Of the three teams, this would be the one that would best fit the description of a growing hockey country.

Except hockey is in a weird situation in that country. The dictator loves the sport, and encourages its growth with rinks being built etc....however, once he is no longer in power, who knows how that will change...

A lot of posters cite Belarus and Germany as examples that the tournament should be expanded to 12 teams. I disagree, as there isn't that 11th country that would be competitive on an annual basis. I think the better solution is to revamp the relegation format. Germany and Belarus will likely have better teams than the teams that come out of Division A.

With teams at the 2nd tier and in an age restricted event, no team will be competitive on an annual basis. As I mentioned in a post above, this is perhaps the best crop of Junior players from that country ever. However, the current IIHF format has 2 teams swapping yearly between the Elite/Div I, Div I/II, and Div II/III. Given this format, Germany and Belarus have been yo-yoing between the elite and Div I for the past few years.

The arguments for expanding the elite division to 12 teams (no more) boil down to these:

• The gap between the original 6 elite teams (going back to the U20s of the 70s) - Canada, Russia, Finland, Sweden, Czech Republic and USA - and the next - Switzerland, Slovakia, Germany, Belarus, Latvia, Denmark, Norway and Kazakhstan* - has closed a bit in the past 10-15 years. This, by itself warrants an expansion.
  
• The present system is really messed up. It is creating the well known yo-yo effect where some teams, Germany and Belarus in particular, (well, well known to those who follow international hockey) bounce up and down between the elite division and division I. Decreasing the number of elite teams to 8 is no solution. This will only cause other teams - Slovakia and Switzerland - to bounce up and down.
  
• An expansion to 12 teams will probably help the 'next' teams to close the gap even further. You always gain experience by playing against stronger teams. It may also help to promote youth development as well as the game in general in the 'next' countries. Further, it will geographically widen the elite nations' scouting of talents.

If the Senior level can have 16 at the elite level, the U20 can accomodate 12.

Denmark and Kazakhstan should not be virtually guaranteed to be relegated after only 1 year. And if one of them do pull off an upset and cause an regular elite nation to relegate to Div I, then that nation will simply make mince-meat of that Div I group the following year, denying the other Div I teams in that group a chance at promotion. This would be IMO worse than having a 12 team elite group were we would see the odd-blowout.

Yes, you will see some blow-outs in the first couple of years, but that is how the sport grows, it worked with basketball, and even hockey's senior World Championships 2nd tier are closer than when it orginally expanded to 16 teams.

*with SUI and SVK at the head of this class, but it is closer than you think. At the U20 tournament in Germany last month, here were the results:
Slovakia - Norway 2-3ot (2-1,0-0,0-1,0-1)
Germany - Switzerland 2-1 (0-1,1-0,1-0)
Switzerland - Slovakia 3:2 (1:1,0:1,2:0)
Germany – Norway 4-0 (1-0,0-0,3-0)
Norway - Switzerland 3:4 (0:1,2:2,1:1)
Slovakia - Germany 2:5 (2:1, 0:4, 0:0)

 

[JVR]

I don't know if this is a breakout year of Germany or not. They've been around for a long time, but have been in and out of relegation. They're usually moderately competitive, but not good enough to stick in the A pool. They wouldn't be the first surprise team to advance to the next round.

This is just a good age group for Germany imo but I don't believe that this is a sign that hockey is going to get bigger or better here.
I don't see any signs for it.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Ah, no!

First of all, this is not an invitational tournament, it is a World Championship (ie, qualfications apply)

The 2nd tier nations need a chance to play the elite. That is how the sport progresses and grows.

If you keep it as as elitest club, then there is no point in the lower division World Championships. Every other sport has at least double the # of teams participating than have a legitimate shot at winning. There is no reason hockey should be any different.

A) Fine, hold a qualification tournament where the winner gets a spot in the big tournament.

B) In the WJC 2nd tier nations get to play 3 or 4 games a year against BIG 7 clubs. Do you really think that is going to have a meaningful impact on their growth? Development has to start at home, not from this tournament.
The sport is what it is, this whole progress and grow thing is delusional. Do you think anyone in Germany is watching?

C) Hockey is elitist, you need snow and ice and money to play. Not a whole lot of countries have got that. Plus the sports market in Europe is already pretty saturated.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Except hockey is in a weird situation in that country. The dictator loves the sport, and encourages its growth with rinks being built etc....however, once he is no longer in power, who knows how that will change...

With teams at the 2nd tier and in an age restricted event, no team will be competitive on an annual basis. As I mentioned in a post above, this is perhaps the best crop of Junior players from that country ever. However, the current IIHF format has 2 teams swapping yearly between the Elite/Div I, Div I/II, and Div II/III. Given this format, Germany and Belarus have been yo-yoing between the elite and Div I for the past few years.

The arguments for expanding the elite division to 12 teams (no more) boil down to these:

• The gap between the original 6 elite teams (going back to the U20s of the 70s) - Canada, Russia, Finland, Sweden, Czech Republic and USA - and the next - Switzerland, Slovakia, Germany, Belarus, Latvia, Denmark, Norway and Kazakhstan* - has closed a bit in the past 10-15 years. This, by itself warrants an expansion.
  
• The present system is really messed up. It is creating the well known yo-yo effect where some teams, Germany and Belarus in particular, (well, well known to those who follow international hockey) bounce up and down between the elite division and division I. Decreasing the number of elite teams to 8 is no solution. This will only cause other teams - Slovakia and Switzerland - to bounce up and down.
  
• An expansion to 12 teams will probably help the 'next' teams to close the gap even further. You always gain experience by playing against stronger teams. It may also help to promote youth development as well as the game in general in the 'next' countries. Further, it will geographically widen the elite nations' scouting of talents.

If the Senior level can have 16 at the elite level, the U20 can accomodate 12.

Denmark and Kazakhstan should not be virtually guaranteed to be relegated after only 1 year. And if one of them do pull off an upset and cause an regular elite nation to relegate to Div I, then that nation will simply make mince-meat of that Div I group the following year, denying the other Div I teams in that group a chance at promotion. This would be IMO worse than having a 12 team elite group were we would see the odd-blowout.

Yes, you will see some blow-outs in the first couple of years, but that is how the sport grows, it worked with basketball, and even hockey's senior World Championships 2nd tier are closer than when it orginally expanded to 16 teams.

*with SUI and SVK at the head of this class, but it is closer than you think. At the U20 tournament in Germany last month, here were the results:
Slovakia - Norway 2-3ot (2-1,0-0,0-1,0-1)
Germany - Switzerland 2-1 (0-1,1-0,1-0)
Switzerland - Slovakia 3:2 (1:1,0:1,2:0)
Germany – Norway 4-0 (1-0,0-0,3-0)
Norway - Switzerland 3:4 (0:1,2:2,1:1)
Slovakia - Germany 2:5 (2:1, 0:4, 0:0)

Don't mistake improvements in coaching with improved player development. The apparent improvement in these nations is due more to the trap than better players. I'm more worried that Slovakia may be slipping out of the picture. Hockey will always be a fringe sport in these other countries, but Slovakia has a history of producing big players.
I think the answer is in keeping players in Europe for as long as possible before they go to the NHL. Even better, how about a Euro Super League:
Moscow, St. Petersburg, Helsinki, Stockholm, Prague, Bratislava might be a good start.

 

[Sanderson]

No, the improvement has nothing whatsoever to do with the trap, as it was used in the past few years as well.

The Germans have improved quite a bit, but the main reason why they are competitive, is that this is simply their best age-group in years, maybe decades.
They won't be quite as good next year, with their whole first line gone. There simply isn't anyone good enough to replace them.


There will never be a real European super league, there is jsut no interest in it. People like tradition, they don't support a new team, if they can support a team in the top national league with lots of history behind it.

 

[Jazz]

A) Fine, hold a qualification tournament where the winner gets a spot in the big tournament.

Why? You are limiting the number of chances these 2nd tier teams have vs the elite.

B) In the WJC 2nd tier nations get to play 3 or 4 games a year against BIG 7 clubs. Do you really think that is going to have a meaningful impact on their growth? Development has to start at home, not from this tournament.
The sport is what it is, this whole progress and grow thing is delusional. Do you think anyone in Germany is watching?

You are missing half the picture. Yes, devolpment does have to start at home, but they also need games vs the elite to guage their progress. Whether anyone in Germany is watching is a different issue and irrelevant to this discussion. European support for the U20s is historically low, that is why this tournament is now in Canada every 3rd year.

C) Hockey is elitist, you need snow and ice and money to play. Not a whole lot of countries have got that. Plus the sports market in Europe is already pretty saturated.

Oh really? Then explain how the Czech Republic and Slovakia have produced hockey stars..
Prague has similar weather to Vancouver (ie, not much snow, and no frozen lakes). You don't need snow and ice, you only need ice rinks. In fact, Vancouver's weather itself is not what some here claim as "hockey-inducing" - that does not affect the people's love for the sport here. As for a saturated market argument - that is a cop-out. Every sport has the opportunity to grow, and usually at the expense of other sports. Basketball's popularity is rising in many European countries now.

 

[Jazz]

With regards to Slovakia, their junior league is in a grave state at the moment. If you are interested in reading about Slovakia's situation further, click here (More troubles ahead for Slovakia's Junior program?)

Don't mistake improvements in coaching with improved player development. The apparent improvement in these nations is due more to the trap than better players. I'm more worried that Slovakia may be slipping out of the picture. Hockey will always be a fringe sport in these other countries, but Slovakia has a history of producing big players.
I think the answer is in keeping players in Europe for as long as possible before they go to the NHL. Even better, how about a Euro Super League:
Moscow, St. Petersburg, Helsinki, Stockholm, Prague, Bratislava might be a good start.

No, the improvement has nothing whatsoever to do with the trap, as it was used in the past few years as well.

The Germans have improved quite a bit, but the main reason why they are competitive, is that this is simply their best age-group in years, maybe decades.
They won't be quite as good next year, with their whole first line gone. There simply isn't anyone good enough to replace them.

There will never be a real European super league, there is jsut no interest in it. People like tradition, they don't support a new team, if they can support a team in the top national league with lots of history behind it.

Yes, part of the answer is keeping the European players in Europe longer.

However, with regards to a Euro-League - that is NOT going to happen. You are superimposing North American thinking to Europe. As Sanderson mentiond - they, they simply don't care about cities outside of their own country. People in Prague don't care to play Stockholm or Moscow. They want to play local teams like Kladno etc. This is the same everywhere in Europe.

 

[Crazyhorse]

Well, i think some people have mentioned it all, more or less, but the biggest problem for the second tier teams, in my opinion, is their reluctant attitude towards offensive play.
Sure, they don't posses the same skill as the "big seven" and it's players, but if they always play defensively, how are they supposed to develop creative players? As long as they lack creative players, they aren't going to handle the puck-possession game, which is vital in order to succeed in modern hockey. Thats why teams like Germany once in a while will get some fluke wins, but in the long run, they can never be competitive.

 

[ts11]

Well, i think some people have mentioned it all, more or less, but the biggest problem for the second tier teams, in my opinion, is their reluctant attitude towards offensive play.
Sure, they don't posses the same skill as the "big seven" and it's players, but if they always play defensively, how are they supposed to develop creative players? As long as they lack creative players, they aren't going to handle the puck-possession game, which is vital in order to succeed in modern hockey. Thats why teams like Germany once in a while will get some fluke wins, but in the long run, they can never be competitive.

I think that's really a problem for our young German players. We produce decent defensive and 2-way-players but nearly no creative forwards with good hands. And if we have these player's they have to often some bad habits...for example Greilinger or Hackert who could be a beast (well, in the DEL), if he would play a more motivated brand of hockey IMO. Thats why I'm so in love with Gawlik, Schuetz and Gogulla. IMO they seemed to be our most complete line at the B-WC in Amiens. We need more of them! But too many of our clubs go with foreign players in the first two lines and with the German players beeing more complementary players with nearly no time on the pp.

 

[JVR]

I think that's really a problem for our young German players. We produce decent defensive and 2-way-players but nearly no creative forwards with good hands. And if we have these player's they have to often some bad habits...for example Greilinger or Hackert who could be a beast (well, in the DEL), if he would play a more motivated brand of hockey IMO. Thats why I'm so in love with Gawlik, Schuetz and Gogulla. IMO they seemed to be our most complete line at the B-WC in Amiens. We need more of them! But too many of our clubs go with foreign players in the first two lines and with the German players beeing more complementary players with nearly no time on the pp.

I agree. I think it was a very good decision on Schütz' part to go to St. John. It helped him develop his attacking game.

 

[SPARTAKUS*]

I think that that more clubs in the DEL should follow they exemple of Berlin, who has a tremandous junior systeme. Seven of this year players playes for Berlin in the DEL. The probleme in Europe is not the skill level of the players but the lack of good coaches.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Why? You are limiting the number of chances these 2nd tier teams have vs the elite.

I find the games are not entertaining. For 50 years we have been trying to grow the sport, and it's still the same 6 or 7 countries that are producing the stars. We would be far better off to figure out how to help Slovakia than worry about these developing nations. Slovakia has produced more stars than all those other countries combined.

You are missing half the picture. Yes, devolpment does have to start at home, but they also need games vs the elite to guage their progress.

What are we gauging here? Player development, or the ability for an inferior group of athletes to play a defensive style which makes them look a lot better than they actually are. A far better barometer is to look at how many good adult players these countries are producing. There are a few, but the list is very short, and I would argue that the WJC had little or zero impact on those who did make it.

Oh really? Then explain how the Czech Republic and Slovakia have produced hockey stars..
Prague has similar weather to Vancouver (ie, not much snow, and no frozen lakes). You don't need snow and ice, you only need ice rinks. In fact, Vancouver's weather itself is not what some here claim as "hockey-inducing" - that does not affect the people's love for the sport here.

Gee, you make a good point. Why don't I check on-line to verify that.....
Wait, Prague on average is 4 or 5 degrees colder than Vancouver in the winter. There are plenty of cheap outside rinks there.

Hockey is not as popular in Vancouver as the rest of the country, and I think that is partly due to the climate. I can give you a list as long as my arm as to why there would be more hockey fans in Vangroovy than Berlin. Starting with you are one city with moderate temperatures, in a cold country that is mad about Hockey, and a large number of your residents are originally from other parts of Canada.

 

[Eisbaerenfan]

I think that that more clubs in the DEL should follow they exemple of Berlin, who has a tremandous junior systeme. Seven of this year players playes for Berlin in the DEL. The probleme in Europe is not the skill level of the players but the lack of good coaches.

I agree with you regarding the coaches. The junior system of Mannheim and Köln are equally well run. And elsewhere in Germany the clubs work on improving their Systems.

I think it's not the case that this U20 generation just happens to be competetive. It's not an exception. Hockey is somewhat booming among kids (especially in the Berlin area) and we will see players of equal talent to Schütz, Gogulla and Gawlik in the coming years. Thomas Oppenheimer of Frankfurt comes to mind right away.

Of course there will be ups and downs but the talent level is gradually improving.

Btw.: According to recent surveys icehockey is the second most popular team sport in Germany (above Handball and Basketball). So it's not that much of a second-rate sport here. And we do have snow every once in a while.

 

[Sanderson]

Well, i think some people have mentioned it all, more or less, but the biggest problem for the second tier teams, in my opinion, is their reluctant attitude towards offensive play.
Sure, they don't posses the same skill as the "big seven" and it's players, but if they always play defensively, how are they supposed to develop creative players? As long as they lack creative players, they aren't going to handle the puck-possession game, which is vital in order to succeed in modern hockey. Thats why teams like Germany once in a while will get some fluke wins, but in the long run, they can never be competitive.

They only play defensively against the top-teams.
The goal in games is to win, you can't win against superior talent by playing like they do. As long as a team is in danger of relegation, they won't go for a shoot-out against teams like Canada or Russia.

You don't see Germany sit back in div I games, as in those games, they are the superior team.

Players don't get creative or not just because of their teams style of play in 6-10 u20-games per year. They develope their creativity over all the years in the junior-leagues. Unless the coaching at younger ages sets it sight more at developing individual skill, that won't change.


Hockey is the no.2 in Germany when it comes to attendance and perhaps overall popularity, but it isn't even close to the other sports when it comes to the number of players. It's way too expensive, so parents rather let their children play football, tennis, handball or basketball.
Apart from that, not all areas of Germany really get all that much snow, some of them are lucky if the lakes are frozen maybe once a year for a few days, if at all.

Last year I got to play hockey only once, and that was on a frozen football-field.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Yes, part of the answer is keeping the European players in Europe longer.

However, with regards to a Euro-League - that is NOT going to happen. You are superimposing North American thinking to Europe. As Sanderson mentiond - they, they simply don't care about cities outside of their own country. People in Prague don't care to play Stockholm or Moscow. They want to play local teams like Kladno etc. This is the same everywhere in Europe.

I hate comparing Hockey to Soccer, but have you ever heard of something called UEFA?

I don't buy that a Euro League with guys like Ovechkin, Jagr, Chara, Selanne, and Forsberg would be a bust. I wouldn't start with a team in Germany by the way.

I agree that it won't happen, but it's because the existing leagues in Europe don't want it, not to mention the NHL, not because it wouldn't work.

 

[Eisbaerenfan]

I wouldn't start with a team in Germany by the way.

Why?

 

[statistics]

I don't buy that a Euro League with guys like Ovechkin, Jagr, Chara, Selanne, and Forsberg would be a bust. I wouldn't start with a team in Germany by the way.

Attendance - European Leagues 2005/2006

Regular season averages:

DEL (Germany) 6076
SM-liiga (Finland) 4997
Extraliga (Czech Republic) 4461

 

[Sanderson]

I hate comparing Hockey to Soccer, but have you ever heard of something called UEFA?

I don't buy that a Euro League with guys like Ovechkin, Jagr, Chara, Selanne, and Forsberg would be a bust. I wouldn't start with a team in Germany by the way.

I agree that it won't happen, but it's because the existing leagues in Europe don't want it, not to mention the NHL, not because it wouldn't work.

The soccer comparison doesn't work, as all the soccer teams still play in national leagues. Only a handful of teams play some CL or UEFA-Cup games in international competition.

They had all kinds of similar competitions in hockey, and it failed miserably every time.

It wouldn't work because fans aren't interested in a league created from scratch, playing against opponents they don't care about. Especially if the teams they follow are still around, which they would be.

Of course it might work, if for some unknown reason the NHL and all the European leagues would cease to exist, but that's not a point worth discussing.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

Why?

I don't want to get to off topic here but I would start with an eight team league:
Stockholm
Helsinki
Prague
Bratislava
Moscow
St. Petersburg
Gothenburg
Omsk

I think there are enough European players to create an eight team league that would easily rival the NHL. I would choose these cities because hockey is popular there, a lot of good players come from these countries, and they have a sufficient population / economy to support a team.

Once the league was established I might consider expanding to Berlin and Zurich, if there was interest.

 

[JVR]

They had all kinds of similar competitions in hockey, and it failed miserably every time.

It wouldn't work because fans aren't interested in a league created from scratch, playing against opponents they don't care about. Especially if the teams they follow are still around, which they would be.

Of course it might work, if for some unknown reason the NHL and all the European leagues would cease to exist, but that's not a point worth discussing.

Exactly.
People in Cologne would rather see their team play local rivals and German teams than Jokerit Helsinki or CSKA.