Daly: Hope to have World Cup of Hockey 2020

[DDRhockey]

At this point I'd be fine if they simply organized an 8-game Canada vs. U.S. Summit Series some time in the fall. Europeans clearly have little interest in the World Cup as its currently constituted (and rightfully so), and its doubtful that North Americans do either. So simplify it. 4 games each in the U.S. and Canada. Let the animosity build over the two and a half weeks. Like in 1972, the team with the most points after 8 games wins the tournament.

It is us Europeans who wants best of best tournaments.

 

[patnyrnyg]

A good step for the World Cup actually being something people give a damn is actually committing to doing them more then a year or two in advance so people know this is a thing every 4 years. And using national teams/iihf rankings. Make it a true world cup.

I completely agree. As popular as soccer is around the world, if the FIFA World Cup was a random event that happened whenever the organizers felt like doing so, rather than on the 4 year cycle it is on, it would not be the event it is now.

Others have alluded to the structure of the tourney. I would expand the qualification.

Automatic: US, Canada, Russia, Sweden, Finland, Czech Republic. Then, countries like Switzerland, Norway, Slovakia and others have qualification. Would love to see the tourney start as a 12-team with 2 pools of 6. Over the years, you can revisit countries that get automatic qualification or set up a standard. Say top-8 at previous WC or top-8 average over last 3 WC's.

Or, if you want to go out of the box, the top-8 (or 6 or whatever) from the previous year's WC are automatic. Then the rest of the WC teams from the prior year with the top-4 from the WC Div 1 tourney have some kind of qualifying tourney.

Another out of the box is a format similar to the FA Cup. Lowest level teams start and winners advance. So, start with your Div 3 teams. 2 advance (or 1, or 3, doesn't matter) and then the Div 2 teams enter the tourney. From that pool 2 advance to play the Div 1's. The top-4 from that play the bottom of the WC main pool to qualify for the World Cup.

 

[Jahara]

It's insulting to teams like Slovakia, Denmark, Switzerland and Germany to assume that they wouldn't be competitive. They have been.

It is not insulting and it is just the facts. Slovakia and Switzerland might reach a semifinal at best if they do have a good generation but just look at the results from the Olympics and World Cups and realize that they are a level below. Even a country like Czech Republic can barely challenge these days.

Others have alluded to the structure of the tourney. I would expand the qualification.

Automatic: US, Canada, Russia, Sweden, Finland, Czech Republic. Then, countries like Switzerland, Norway, Slovakia and others have qualification. Would love to see the tourney start as a 12-team with 2 pools of 6. Over the years, you can revisit countries that get automatic qualification or set up a standard. Say top-8 at previous WC or top-8 average over last 3 WC's.

What is the point in expanding it with minnow team that can't compete when you do have the Olympics? World Cup should be an alternative to the Olympics with NHL:ers. That is why the World Cup should just be for the best teams.

 

[kabidjan18]

What is the point in expanding it with minnow team that can't compete when you do have the Olympics? World Cup should be an alternative to the Olympics with NHL:ers. That is why the World Cup should just be for the best teams.

Lol, you again. I can only imagine how pointless you find the FIFA World Cup.

 

[Jahara]

Lol, you again. I can only imagine how pointless you find the FIFA World Cup.

What nonsense from you. My point is that the Olympics is like Fifa World Cup where every team gets their chance. Playing a World Cup of Hockey with minnow teams would just be a duller version of the Olympics but on smaller ice with NHL rules.

World Cup must find their niche and that is not by adding a team like Germany.

 

[kabidjan18]

What nonsense from you. My point is that the Olympics is like Fifa World Cup where every team gets their chance. Playing a World Cup of Hockey with minnow teams would just be a duller version of the Olympics but on smaller ice with NHL rules.

World Cup must find their niche and that is not by adding a team like Germany.

Ok... so do you know why there's not a football version of this where only the teams that could contend get to play?

Because that "niche" you refer to doesn't exist...I can't think of a single international sport where only contending teams get to play, because that is market suicide. Maybe I'm wrong, feel free to point out any meaningfully lucrative sport that does such. The closest anyone comes to that are joke exhibition games between continents. There is no "niche" market for your ridiculous exclusivity cup except for exceptional individuals like yourself who don't comprise a large enough market share to be relevant.

 

[patnyrnyg]

It is not insulting and it is just the facts. Slovakia and Switzerland might reach a semifinal at best if they do have a good generation but just look at the results from the Olympics and World Cups and realize that they are a level below. Even a country like Czech Republic can barely challenge these days.


What is the point in expanding it with minnow team that can't compete when you do have the Olympics? World Cup should be an alternative to the Olympics with NHL:ers. That is why the World Cup should just be for the best teams.

For those that want it to be a TRUE World Cup. Soccer World cup has 32 teams and expanding to 48. Reality is only a handful are actually legit contenders to win.

 

[Jahara]

Ok... so do you know why there's not a football version of this where only the teams that could contend get to play?

Because that "niche" you refer to doesn't exist...I can't think of a single international sport where only contending teams get to play, because that is market suicide. Maybe I'm wrong, feel free to point out any meaningfully lucrative sport that does such. The closest anyone comes to that are joke exhibition games between continents. There is no "niche" market for your ridiculous exclusivity cup except for exceptional individuals like yourself who don't comprise a large enough market share to be relevant.

If it is "market suicide", why have the Canada Cup/World Cup done so for several years? You call it my "ridiculous exclusivity cup" but it has been invitational every time.
And I doubt that Fifa, in marketing terms, were happy that teams like Sweden and Panama reached the World Cup this summer when Italy and USA didn't.

By niche I meant that the Olympics should play every year fourth year when hockey nations like Norway, Germany, Denmark, Slovenia and other should have their go against the best teams. Beside that the World Cup should find their niche by just having the best teams in a round-robin group, just like it was during the Canada Cup years. I am even open minded to have Team Europe in future World Cups among the Big Six.

For those that want it to be a TRUE World Cup. Soccer World cup has 32 teams and expanding to 48. Reality is only a handful are actually legit contenders to win.

Yeah, expanding it to 48 teams is so stupid and populistic. Fifa World Cup should be compared to the Olympic ice hockey tournament. World Cup with 6 teams is perfect and would actually a better indicator and the best team unlike the Olympics were a smaller nation might beat a much better team with some luck.

 

[kabidjan18]

If it is "market suicide", why have the Canada Cup/World Cup done so for several years? You call it my "ridiculous exclusivity cup" but it has been invitational every time.
And I doubt that Fifa, in marketing terms, were happy that teams like Sweden and Panama reached the World Cup this summer when Italy and USA didn't.

Every time they've included teams that weren't contenders, so by your own definition those were bloated tournaments, even though they were relatively leaner compared to say the FIFA World Cup. Furthermore, all those tournaments have been resoundingly unsuccessful, leading to discontinuity, so that's hardly a model to emulate.

 

[Past Considerations]

Because that "niche" you refer to doesn't exist...I can't think of a single international sport where only contending teams get to play, because that is market suicide. Maybe I'm wrong, feel free to point out any meaningfully lucrative sport that does such. The closest anyone comes to that are joke exhibition games between continents. There is no "niche" market for your ridiculous exclusivity cup except for exceptional individuals like yourself who don't comprise a large enough market share to be relevant.

I can think of Six Nations Championship - Wikipedia in Rugby union and Rugby League Four Nations - Wikipedia in Rugby league (union and league are two different rulesets), but they are not the only and as far as I've understood not the main international competitions either (unlike NHL's WC, which is intended as the Olympics replacement). This Six Nations tournament happens to be the oldest tournament in rugby, so there's that aspect but it is not the 6 "best" teams (it is just 6 European teams).

Rugby is a pretty good comparison to hockey as in a similar way both are popular only in a handful of countries, way bigger overall than hockey but the amount of competitive nations is limited. Rugby has two different rulesets, union being popular everywhere expect in Australia, so that's a good analogy to hockey's NHL vs. international rules divide too.

 

[Jahara]

Every time they've included teams that weren't contenders, so by your own definition those were bloated tournaments, even though they were relatively leaner compared to say the FIFA World Cup. Furthermore, all those tournaments have been resoundingly unsuccessful, leading to discontinuity, so that's hardly a model to emulate.

And do you mean that every CC/WC has been unsuccessful? Or just the WC?

 

[cg98]

Every time they've included teams that weren't contenders, so by your own definition those were bloated tournaments, even though they were relatively leaner compared to say the FIFA World Cup. Furthermore, all those tournaments have been resoundingly unsuccessful, leading to discontinuity, so that's hardly a model to emulate.

Actually they only added Slovakia and Germany for the 96 and 04 tournaments.

 

[kabidjan18]

And do you mean that every CC/WC has been unsuccessful? Or just the WC?

Is either tournament still ongoing with any continuity?

Actually they only added Slovakia and Germany for the 96 and 04 tournaments.

I told him that even the strictest iterations of the Cups still had teams that were not contenders, which is true of the 6 team Canada Cups as well as the late World Cup,this, still failing his parameters.

 

[Paxton Fettel]

Bring back the Canada Cup so that Canada can legitimately pick only 6 or 7 teams and have a real round robin where all the best teams face each other.

 

[Elvs]

It is not insulting and it is just the facts. Slovakia and Switzerland might reach a semifinal at best if they do have a good generation but just look at the results from the Olympics and World Cups and realize that they are a level below. Even a country like Czech Republic can barely challenge these days.

The Czech's lost to Canada 0-6 in the World Cup. But other than that they won against the U.S. and fell against Europe in overtime. They faced Russia twice in the pregames, won one and lost one with a one goal deficit. They also beat North America in the pregames. Furthermore, many promising prospects are coming out of Czech Republic right now. They have definitely turned things around.

 

[Jahara]

They might be good again soon but this is clearly a weaker Czech team compared to the late 90's and early 00's. Their performance in Sochi was quite flat too. In fact, most of the big teams seemed to have been a bit weaker in 2014 compared to the entertaining 2010 Olympics.
It was only Sweden and Canada (always strong) that didn't was obviously weaker.

 

[Spirit of 67]

Dear NHL.

Either:

A) A true World Cup with nations having to qualify to be in it. (no gimmick teams)

or

B) If you are going to have these silly gimmick teams, you need to rename the tourney. Call it the NHL/NHLPA Fall Classic (or whatever) which is really all it is.

Choose one.

 

[kabidjan18]

I can think of Six Nations Championship - Wikipedia in Rugby union and Rugby League Four Nations - Wikipedia in Rugby league (union and league are two different rulesets), but they are not the only and as far as I've understood not the main international competitions either (unlike NHL's WC, which is intended as the Olympics replacement). This Six Nations tournament happens to be the oldest tournament in rugby, so there's that aspect but it is not the 6 "best" teams (it is just 6 European teams).

Rugby is a pretty good comparison to hockey as in a similar way both are popular only in a handful of countries, way bigger overall than hockey but the amount of competitive nations is limited. Rugby has two different rulesets, union being popular everywhere expect in Australia, so that's a good analogy to hockey's NHL vs. international rules divide too.

Sorry, I missed this.

There are absolutely tournaments exclusively for the top nations in different sports. But as with the ones you mentioned, they aren't primary tournaments in their sports, they're often only a level above friendly tournaments. I'm not a huge rugby guy but I assume those are tour tournaments, whose significance in comparison to the world cup is very small.

Even still, with 6 teams, at least one of them is likely to fall out of the parameter of being a contender, which kinda shows how difficult it is as well to even conceive of a such a tournament where every time present would have a legitimate shot at winning.

 

[patnyrnyg]

If it is "market suicide", why have the Canada Cup/World Cup done so for several years? You call it my "ridiculous exclusivity cup" but it has been invitational every time.
And I doubt that Fifa, in marketing terms, were happy that teams like Sweden and Panama reached the World Cup this summer when Italy and USA didn't.

By niche I meant that the Olympics should play every year fourth year when hockey nations like Norway, Germany, Denmark, Slovenia and other should have their go against the best teams. Beside that the World Cup should find their niche by just having the best teams in a round-robin group, just like it was during the Canada Cup years. I am even open minded to have Team Europe in future World Cups among the Big Six.


Yeah, expanding it to 48 teams is so stupid and populistic. Fifa World Cup should be compared to the Olympic ice hockey tournament. World Cup with 6 teams is perfect and would actually a better indicator and the best team unlike the Olympics were a smaller nation might beat a much better team with some luck.

You do realize teams DO have to qualify for the Olympics, correct? It is not an open invitation.

 

[Jahara]

Why wouldn't I realize that? Of course the teams qualify for the Olympics and that is how it should be. The best teams are good enough to reach the Olympics every time any way and that is not a problem.

 

[tank44]

Back in the 94-95 lockout they had a mini tournament where the were only 4 teams: USA, Quebec, Ontario & Western Canada. Not sure where any Maritime players were slotted if anywhere but would be needed today. As a Canadian, I want to see Canada win all the time but it's getting boring too.

 

[Rob]

It is us Europeans who wants best of best tournaments.

The IIHF doesn't seem to be interested.

 

[Past Considerations]

The IIHF doesn't seem to be interested.

Not many players would be interested if the Worlds were played at the end of June. And neither many fans.

 

[Rob]

Not many players would be interested if the Worlds were played at the end of June. And neither many fans.

More would in September.

 

[Elvs]

It is not insulting and it is just the facts. Slovakia and Switzerland might reach a semifinal at best if they do have a good generation but just look at the results from the Olympics and World Cups and realize that they are a level below. Even a country like Czech Republic can barely challenge these days.

I'm gonna quote your post again, because your "facts" about Switzerland are wrong. This is how they've fared against the top 6 nations in the last three Olympics that had NHL'ers.

green = wins
blue = ot/so losses
red = losses

2014:
Sweden - Switzerland 1-0
Switzerland - Czech Republic 1-0

2010:
USA - Switzerland 3-1
Switzerland - Canada 2-3 (SO)
QF: USA - Switzerland 2-0

2006:
Switzerland - Finland 0-5
Czech Republic - Switzerland 2-3
Canada - Switzerland 0-2
QF: Switzerland - Sweden 2-6

The 2006 Olympics is irrelevant now, I'll admit that. But they beat Canada then, and have become better since. The fact that the only blowout losses came in 2006 is also a testament that they got better. Overall, in the past three Olympics (that had NHL'ers), they come out on top against both the Czechs and Canada after two games against each. In the past two tournaments they didn't lose any games by more than two goals, and in the most recent tournament they went +/- 0 against top six competition.

---

And just for fun, here's Slovakia's results in the same Olympic tournaments:

2014:
Slovakia - USA 1-7
Russia - Slovakia 1-0 (SO)
QF: Slovakia - Czech Republic 3-5

2010:
Czech Republic - Slovakia 3-1
Slovakia - Russia 2-1 (SO)
QF: Sweden-Slovakia 3-4
SF: Slovakia-Canada 2-3
BG: Slovakia-Finland 3-5

2006:
Russia-Slovakia 3-5
Slovakia-USA 2-1
Sweden-Slovakia 0-3
QF: Slovakia-Czech Republic 1-3

Again, 2006 is irrelelvant and in contrast to Switzerland, Slovakia has gotten worse since. But even in 2010, when most of their golden generation was either retired or old and washed up, they beat Russia at the group stage, Sweden in the quarter final and only fell one goal short against Canada in the semi final. Overall, in these tournaments, they got blown out once. No other loss had more than a two goal differential.