Why the IIHF WC is important

Maken*

Guest
The only other solution is having a real world cup like in soccer. Maybe each 2 years in between olympics. BUT A REAL ONE . One time in Czech another time in Russia another time in Canada NOT ALWAYS THE FINAL IN CANADA WITH CANADIAN REFS HELPING CANADIAN TEAMS !!!!!!!!!!!! And for it in september august forget it guys are not in shape it's not the time of Cold War when a Canada Cup meant way more than just hockey...

:biglaugh:

I'm gonna guess... 13.
 

discostu

Registered User
Nov 12, 2002
22,512
2,895
Nomadville
Visit site
Given that the idea any new major tournament woudl require buy-in and compromise from various parties, how are the finances relating to the World Hockey Championships handled?

-Who receives the revenue from gate receipts and television contracts (IIHF, host country?) Who pays for use of the arenas?

-Do the players receive any compensation at all?

-Who pays for travel and lodging costs of the players?

Time remains the biggest obstacle for ever having a regular best-on-best tournament, that will be treated seriously by all teams. You have to work around the NHL schedule, where the best players play, and, with a schedule that runs as long as 110 games, in the lengthiest playoff scenario, there isn't much room for more hockey.

There is always the option of shortening the NHL season, but, for the NHL players and owners to go for that, there would have to be a lot of money in it for them to make it worthwhile. With a market of 30 teams, shortening the schedule even by 4 games though (which amounts to about a week) comes at a hefty price. It removes 60 games from the NHL schedule, with, at the average league revenue per game being about $1.5M, that's a $90M shortfall to make up.

I think even in the most ambitious scenario for the success of such a tournament, it would have a hell of a time bringing in that type of revenue in a tournament, when you factor in all streams (TV and gate receipts).
 

Pushkin*

Guest
70 games at 16000 average or 82 games at 15 000 in nhl whats the point ???? Many games are irrelevant even more with so many teams in palyoffs and the 1pts when you loose... What kind of real sport would allow that 2 losses = 1 win ?????????
 

hdw

Registered User
Jul 9, 2006
6,479
0
Stockholm
The only other solution is having a real world cup like in soccer. Maybe each 2 years in between olympics. BUT A REAL ONE . One time in Czech another time in Russia another time in Canada NOT ALWAYS THE FINAL IN CANADA WITH CANADIAN REFS HELPING CANADIAN TEAMS !!!!!!!!!!!! And for it in september august forget it guys are not in shape it's not the time of Cold War when a Canada Cup meant way more than just hockey...

Why do you talk about the World Cup?
Aren't we talking about the IIHF World Championships?
 

discostu

Registered User
Nov 12, 2002
22,512
2,895
Nomadville
Visit site
70 games at 16000 average or 82 games at 15 000 in nhl whats the point ???? Many games are irrelevant even more with so many teams in palyoffs and the 1pts when you loose... What kind of real sport would allow that 2 losses = 1 win ?????????

Actually, even with your entirely fictional numbers, it still results in a 9% loss in total revenue to the league.
 

hdw

Registered User
Jul 9, 2006
6,479
0
Stockholm
Given that the idea any new major tournament woudl require buy-in and compromise from various parties, how are the finances relating to the World Hockey Championships handled?

-Who receives the revenue from gate receipts and television contracts (IIHF, host country?) Who pays for use of the arenas?

-Do the players receive any compensation at all?

-Who pays for travel and lodging costs of the players?

The revenue from gate and part of (most of I think) the arena advertising goes to the host federation who also pays for the arenas.

Other advertising, sponsoring and TV rights goes to IIHF but is then (partly?) distributed to participing federations.

Each federation pays for their own players' travel, lodging and such.
I also think they pay some small salary to the players and in some cases bonuses for certains results.

But one should keep in mind that the national federations and IIHF are non-commercial organisations. Which doesn't stop them form arguing about how to divide the money (and costs).


Time remains the biggest obstacle for ever having a regular best-on-best tournament, that will be treated seriously by all teams. You have to work around the NHL schedule, where the best players play, and, with a schedule that runs as long as 110 games, in the lengthiest playoff scenario, there isn't much room for more hockey.

There is always the option of shortening the NHL season, but, for the NHL players and owners to go for that, there would have to be a lot of money in it for them to make it worthwhile. With a market of 30 teams, shortening the schedule even by 4 games though (which amounts to about a week) comes at a hefty price. It removes 60 games from the NHL schedule, with, at the average league revenue per game being about $1.5M, that's a $90M shortfall to make up.

I think even in the most ambitious scenario for the success of such a tournament, it would have a hell of a time bringing in that type of revenue in a tournament, when you factor in all streams (TV and gate receipts).

Exactly.

The NHL have such a long season because they can get away with it. And because they don't need the extra interest generated by international tournaments like the euro leagues do.

I bet that there where more TV viewers of Sweden - Italy than the final games of the SEL final. So swedish hockey teams, and the league, want the tournaments to hype the game of hockey as such.
 

Ogopogo*

Guest
Sorry if this has been rehashed over and over again but I think is worth to think a bit about.

Since it's played at the same time as the NHL playoffs it doesn't get much media interest in NA, it's a bit of a youth or 'losers' tournament.

But from a european perspective it's covered 10-20 times more than the NHL playoffs. Heaps of live games on TV, massive press coverage, special edition of newspapers and yada yada.

So it becomes the media image of hockey, the big games we see is WC and Olympic ones.

And given that such a large portion of the NHL players of today are european, it actually becomes important for NHL as well.

I think that if you asked the euro players of today in NHL of their most important hockey memories watched while growing up, the majority will list memories from WC and Olympic games.

Everyone (almost) dreams of an NHL career, but much of the drive for the youths comes from watching their national team.

I think.

It's nice that this tournament is important to Europeans.

Because it is a D or E level tournament (Jamal Mayers!?!?) it really doesn't do anything for me at all. As well, the number of international tournaments has really watered things down and made the World Championships relatively meaningless to me.

I suspect that, because European countries are small in comparison to Canada and the USA, and that there are so many of them close together, that this is why international hockey is more important than it is to North Americans.

In 2008, when Quebec City hosts the tournament it will be interesting to see how it plays out. If Quebec still had an NHL team, I suspect there would be very little interest.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,667
16,394
NHL hockey is overrated. Canada - Norway 2:2 in the second period.

Those guys (in the NHL) don't play together in the season... It makes sense they look for individual play. And very few top-end talent (available) guys are there.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,667
16,394
The only other solution is having a real world cup like in soccer. Maybe each 2 years in between olympics. BUT A REAL ONE . One time in Czech another time in Russia another time in Canada NOT ALWAYS THE FINAL IN CANADA WITH CANADIAN REFS HELPING CANADIAN TEAMS !!!!!!!!!!!! And for it in september august forget it guys are not in shape it's not the time of Cold War when a Canada Cup meant way more than just hockey...

I agree.... 86-87 was disgusting.
The tournament is more relevant in Aug/Sep as the NHL'ers are there. The best solution for the World Cup would be to be held in JAN/FEB, but the owners gotta agree on that one -- there were some who were whining after the olympics, due to injuries...
 

hdw

Registered User
Jul 9, 2006
6,479
0
Stockholm
It's nice that this tournament is important to Europeans.

Because it is a D or E level tournament (Jamal Mayers!?!?) it really doesn't do anything for me at all. As well, the number of international tournaments has really watered things down and made the World Championships relatively meaningless to me.
Well I can agree that World Championships most likely would be better if was held every 4:th year, in countercycle with the Olympics.

But I fail the one World Championship per year and one Olympic every 4:th can be considered 'watering things down'.

It's basicly the same for every other sport all around the world. They have one international championship per year.

I suspect that, because European countries are small in comparison to Canada and the USA, and that there are so many of them close together, that this is why international hockey is more important than it is to North Americans.
It's true that it's only 3 timezones to deal with so it's not spread as wide (well 4 if Britain ever qualifies to group A:)).

But counting only the 14 european countries in group-A there's actually more people in those 14 than Canada and US combined (some 390M vs 330M roughly, Canada is big, but there's not very many Canadians).

The difference that matters is actually NHL.

The league is so old, powerful and have so much history that it more or less equals hockey in NA (esp with the old silly amatuer rules in the Olympics).

It's been a bit of "why bother with international tournaments when we can buy all the best players and have them play here?".

But the majority of hockey audience and players (from kids and up) hasn't hardly seen a single NHL game in their life. Their big memories, their historic victories, their big parades are from world championships and olympics.

The euro leagues are picking up and getting more proffessional, the salaries go up, more and more players stay in europe. Accepting a lower salary, but still more than enough for a good and stable life.

I think that's why NHL mgmt is talking so sweetly to IOC and IIHF, they want to maximise their product, so they want the best players.
 

Dave is a killer

Dave's a Mess
Oct 17, 2002
26,507
18
Cumming GA
There are 3 international tournaments that are worth a damn to me ... the Olympics, the World Cup of Hockey & the Under-20's WJC ... everything else can be piled under the who gives a **** stack of trash
 

Ogopogo*

Guest
But I fail the one World Championship per year and one Olympic every 4:th can be considered 'watering things down'.

It's basicly the same for every other sport all around the world. They have one international championship per year..


But the majority of hockey audience and players (from kids and up) hasn't hardly seen a single NHL game in their life. Their big memories, their historic victories, their big parades are from world championships and olympics.

.

Well, with the World Junior Championships, World Cup of Hockey, Olympics, World Championships, and all of the smaller events like the Spengler Cup etc. it does seem to be a bit much for North Americans. I have lost nearly all the passion I had for international hockey. In the 80s, I was glued to my TV, in the 2000s, I will only watch international hockey (Olympics included) if I have nothing else to do.

Perhaps I am in the minority but, it is just too much for me.

You have also identified the big difference between the North American hockey fan and the European hockey fan. Most of the great hockey memories on this side of the Atlantic are of Stanley Cup playoffs and NHL teams. I grew up loving Oilers hockey and no international competition could ever be more meaningful than an Oilers Stanley Cup victory. For Europeans the opposite is true.

Different perspectives. Neither is bad and I suspect it will never change.
 

hdw

Registered User
Jul 9, 2006
6,479
0
Stockholm
There are 3 international tournaments that are worth a damn to me ... the Olympics, the World Cup of Hockey & the Under-20's WJC ... everything else can be piled under the who gives a **** stack of trash

Ah, ok.

I personally don't care much for the World Cup, since it's such wierd construct. It's another evidence of how mighty NHL is in international hockey, as compared with US hockey federation :)

And I watch WJC to look at developing players and prospect, not that much as an 'International Championship'. Winning it means that your country (or country's federation and/or league/teams are good at developing talent). There's no 'whoho, our national team is the best in the world' about it.

But what I've tried to get across is that it's not about how important the tournaments themself are for NA hockeyfans, but how important they are to everyone else, and therefor to the development of the game itself.

And the more talent that comes along, the more talent that enters various leagues, the better will the quality of the NHL get.

Not to degrade in any way but to just make a point.

Canada is the home of hockey and the influence is huge, but there's only 30 million people. The tiny hockey nations Sweden and Finland alone combine at almost 1/2 of Canada's population. Add Czechia, Slovakia and Switzerland and we are about the same (yes, including Switzerland is cheating a bit, but hey).

And that's not mentioning 140 million russians.

The US with it's 300M is of course somewhat larger, but hockey isn't exactly the biggest sport there.
 

Panopticon

Registered User
Apr 20, 2004
4,940
0
Helsinki
That's also my question. Is there a Football World Championship every year? I don't think there is one every year but I'm not sure, can anyone clarify?

No there's not.

Every four years there's the FIFA World Cup, and every four years there are the European/African/American/Asian etc. cups, so basically there's a major competetion every two years.

In the Olympics, countries only send players under 23 years of age (or something like that).

Of course, the club teams play all sorts of international competitions each year, so there's much less need for a yearly World Cup.

There is a major football tournament every 2 years, either the World Cup or the European Cup (which is basically the same sans Brazil and Argentina).

Don't forget the African countries. They may not challenge for the championship, but they're always the fun teams to watch and support. European football is so boring without the color. All tactics and boring winger football (especially the Germans, the Dutch and the English back when they had Beckham). I don't always even watch the European championships, but I never miss a World Cup game.
 
Last edited:

henri2014

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
692
0
The thing is that WHC are never held in north america, the games are broadcast during the day most of us have to go to work or to school. How can I care about a tournament that i can only see games on the weekend. Even on the weekend the games are usually too early.

Next year its gonna be interesting to see it for the first time in Canada. It will be a lot easier to convince Canada's best to go to this tournament. Its about time they bring the world hockey championship back to the cradle of hockey. It should be held in north America once every 4-5 years.

It will surely spark the interest of the north American fan. The tournament will then grow in important and will have better competition.
 

hdw

Registered User
Jul 9, 2006
6,479
0
Stockholm
The thing is that WHC are never held in north america, the games are broadcast during the day most of us have to go to work or to school. How can I care about a tournament that i can only see games on the weekend. Even on the weekend the games are usually too early.

Next year its gonna be interesting to see it for the first time in Canada. It will be a lot easier to convince Canada's best to go to this tournament. Its about time they bring the world hockey championship back to the cradle of hockey. It should be held in north America once every 4-5 years.

It will surely spark the interest of the north American fan. The tournament will then grow in important and will have better competition.

Again.

It's not about how important it is to NA fans, because it isn't.
It's how important it is for hockey.

And while NHL is the best league in the world, NA fans is a huge part, but still a minority of the hockey fans.

Canadian players and fans are of course the loudest and most noticeable.

Yes, european countries are small, except for russia, germany, italy, france, spain and some others, but otherwise quite small.

But remember that Canada is very big, but there's not much people, USA has a lot of people, but hockey isn't that big.

So either way, the game of hockey is more than the best league.

And every sport is based on the available talent, but funded by the available fans.

No fans, no tickets, no sponsors, no advertising, no TV deals.
 

Mr Kanadensisk

Registered User
May 13, 2005
3,013
12
And while NHL is the best league in the world, NA fans is a huge part, but still a minority of the hockey fans.

What are you basing this on? There are more registered hockey players in NA, there are more television viewers of Olympic hockey in NA than in Europe.
Don't forget that Canada has more people than Sweden, Finland, Czech Rep, and Slovakia combined, not to mention that it is by far the most popular sport here.
Relatively speaking hockey is not as popular in the US, but they do support 24 of the 30 NHL teams, and their population is more than double that of Russia.

Yes the World Cup favours the North Americans, and yes the World Championships favours the Europeans. I don't even think it's a stretch to say that the Olympic tournament favours the Europeans, since "international" rules are more or less based on European style hockey.

In the past Canada was so good that they could play by the European rules and still win. I'll be the first to admit that is not true any longer, as we saw in the last Olympics.

What I'd really like to see is a truly international tournament, where games are played in both continents and home rules apply (ie NHL or "International"). Probably will never happen, but wouldn't it be great!
 

Shootmaster_44

Registered User
Sep 10, 2005
3,307
0
Saskatoon
I enjoy the Worlds. I am a Canadian first so any time Canada participates as a nation I rally around them. I also find the games more exciting than the NHL playoffs. The one and done playoff rounds force the international teams to play harder than a 7 game series, where you have to win 4 games. Maybe its because I'm a Kings fan and other than in 92-93, the Worlds always have Kings' players participating, so I have somewhat of a vested interest in it.
 

arrbez

bad chi
Jun 2, 2004
13,352
261
Toronto
I really like the Worlds. I have a feeling that most people who find it worthless don't understand what it's all about.

I mean, why watch your hopelessly uncoordinated child play a houseleague game when you can watch the AAA team play across town instead? It's not just about seeing the top players.

It's not necessarily about the calibre of play (which is still quite high at the Worlds), it's about cheering for your country and the players who have chosen to represent you.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->