Canuck21t
Registered User
Uh... I meant in each respective level. Of course I'm not comparing junior teams with senior teams. Many of us like the WJC because most of the best under-20 are present whilst the WCh is missing many of the top players.
How do you rate the international tournaments?
- Thread starter Nordic*
- Start date
Doesn't it always?
Sweden had one Olympian (Eriksson), and he was playing injured.
As seen so many times in international tournaments (whc & olympics) having the 'top players' present has never guaranteed top level games. Having all the NHL's finest present does not magically translate into superior plays on ice. Sure big stars can be clutch players but its the teams that win.
mattihp
Registered User
Agreed. Every olympic game except the ones were Canada won would have been very different otherwise.
Lainlight
Hands down AINEC
On a pure hockey point of view I agree.
Before Finland won I may have put WC number second though, now it's just to painful.
It's very close between WC and WJC though, it depends. This years WJC was great but Sweden's loss vs the Russians in the semifinals extremely painful. :-( :-( Not to talk about Landeskogs injury.... :-(
My favorit games watching on an international level is between Canada and Sweden, it's so fun and exciting, both Olympic, WC and WJC, it's the kind of hockey I prefer.
(Sweden - Finland is more of a rivarly thing.)
The one single problem with WC is that the quality is very fragmented because of the ongoing Stanley Cup Playoffs. :-(
The most fun hockey on all levels to watch is right now in The Stanley Cup Playoffs.
#1 Olympics - Not much to add here..
#2 A toss up between the WC and the WJC. It's always fun and interesting to watch the minor hockey nations improve year after year in the WC where teams like Denmmark, Germany and now Norway dish out big upsets. It's good hockey and a yearly tradition.
The WJC on the other hand has a much more interesting roster and the hockey is more exciting to watch. The rivalry between Sweden - Canada makes it that much more of a nerve-wrecker.
#3 Other than that, I'll occationally watch the EHT.
#2 A toss up between the WC and the WJC. It's always fun and interesting to watch the minor hockey nations improve year after year in the WC where teams like Denmmark, Germany and now Norway dish out big upsets. It's good hockey and a yearly tradition.
The WJC on the other hand has a much more interesting roster and the hockey is more exciting to watch. The rivalry between Sweden - Canada makes it that much more of a nerve-wrecker.
#3 Other than that, I'll occationally watch the EHT.
1) Olympics
2) Worlds
3) WCJ
4) FEL
5) SEL
6) NHL
Since FEL is in decline i've found international hockey to be most interesting for me.
It's hard to compare Worlds and the Olympics since the WHC is more like a spring carnival where losing doesn't hurt so bad ("there's always next year"). Also the speculation with possible NHL-players attending is always fun and clearly a part of this tournament.
For Olympics it's like a different world. It's impossible to watch the games at ease. If you fail badly it's 4 years after you can "wash your face", so to speak. I still haven't got completely over the Turin final loss, first period against the USA in Vancouver will haunt me for the rest of my life and the name Pavel Bure will always give me chills.
edit. The World Cup of hockey is somewhere between the Olympics and the Worlds. Finland's 2nd place in 2004 is still in my mind the second best achievement in this country's hockey history (after Turin). I wont rank the tournament since it's not played regularly.
2) Worlds
3) WCJ
4) FEL
5) SEL
6) NHL
Since FEL is in decline i've found international hockey to be most interesting for me.
It's hard to compare Worlds and the Olympics since the WHC is more like a spring carnival where losing doesn't hurt so bad ("there's always next year"). Also the speculation with possible NHL-players attending is always fun and clearly a part of this tournament.
For Olympics it's like a different world. It's impossible to watch the games at ease. If you fail badly it's 4 years after you can "wash your face", so to speak. I still haven't got completely over the Turin final loss, first period against the USA in Vancouver will haunt me for the rest of my life and the name Pavel Bure will always give me chills.
edit. The World Cup of hockey is somewhere between the Olympics and the Worlds. Finland's 2nd place in 2004 is still in my mind the second best achievement in this country's hockey history (after Turin). I wont rank the tournament since it's not played regularly.
Jacksonbobson
Registered User
- Feb 2, 2009
- 1,638
- 513
The clear consensus for No. 1 is the Olympics, as it should be, but after that, it is a "party line" vote between Europeans and North Americans. Europeans truly care very little and pay little attention to the WJC, except when they win it. Victory has a way of elevating the importance of matches. At the same time, North Americans have very little interest in the WC, unless, as in 2007, they are in a position to win it. Then, it suddenly becomes a very big deal. In truth, Europeans as a whole will never be that interested in the Stanley Cup or the WJC, and North Americans will never be that interested in the WC. What's wrong with different sides of the world having their own hockey traditions?
As for the WJC, ranking it No. 2 is too high. The argument that it is a best on best tournament loses strength when you consider that these are young kids, and so many are really good as juniors but then never advance to become good professional or senior players. Its not the same as accomplished pros going head to head.
mattihp
Registered User
That is a huge exaggeration. I think few european countries care about it even then.
I agree with your point that few Europeans care about the WJC, but if Finland or Sweden won it, I think there would be a lot of rejoicing. Maybe not crowds out on the street, but there is pride in winning any international tournament, whatever it's ranking.
mattihp
Registered User
Winning a WJC is huge for any country's hockey community....but why would your average citizen care about a bunch of kids?
Forgive me for not being more specific about it. I meant the hockey community in each country, and not necessarily the church ladies. In any country, the church ladies are not going to know what the hell a hockey puck is.
World Cup? Give me a break! First of all, since the last Canada Cup was in 2004, and there isn't another one planned to my knowledge for any time in the future, it doesn't make sense to consider a tournament that takes place every 10 years or so. Because the main purpose of the Canada Cup is to provide funds for the NHL Players Association Retirement Fund, it makes the tournament strictly an internal NHL matter, rather than contriving some "international" connection to it.
Before you correct me that the proper name of the tournament is World Cup, keep in mind that the so-called World Cup came about as a result of some cosmetic changes that allowed the following: (a) when Sweden plays Finland, the game is held in either Stockholm or Helsinki, instead of Canada, and (b) all games involving the United States and any opponent EXCEPT Canada (all Canadian games are required to be played in Canada) are held in the United States. Eastern European "Commie" countries like the Russians, Czechs and Slovaks are required to play all of their games in Canada or the US. Magically, it becomes the World Cup instead of Canada Cup.
The Soviets got screwed so badly in the 1987 Canada Cup, a tournament that they would have won were there any fairness or justice to it, that in the unlikely event that there ever is another Canada Cup, the Russians won't participate. They'll just get screwed again!
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
The IHWC has (until 2008) always been held in Europe.
Using your logic, it means that it's hardly a "World Championships" but rather a "European Championships" at which you'll see participation from Canada and the US.
European ice, European rules, European referees, hostile fans - Canada always had their own problems with fairness and justice, but managed to win a few regardless.
Using your logic, it means that it's hardly a "World Championships" but rather a "European Championships" at which you'll see participation from Canada and the US.
European ice, European rules, European referees, hostile fans - Canada always had their own problems with fairness and justice, but managed to win a few regardless.
Why is that?
Since 1977, Canada has been in the same boat as everybody else....they've just chosen not to host the event. 2008 WC was the first time they applied for it.
Your logic is similar to a European saying WJC is a North American event...yet he ignores the fact that few European countries are applying to host WJC anymore.
All that is different from a World Cup where sponsorship comes from the NHL.....meaning every elimination round/final will always be held on North American ice. It makes no sense for the NHL to hold it otherwise.
Last edited:
Incognito
Registered User
Olympics (most important hockey tournament)
World Cup
World Junior Championships
World Championships (Doesn't mean anything, since it's not best versus best, but rather the rest versus the rest)
World Cup
World Junior Championships
World Championships (Doesn't mean anything, since it's not best versus best, but rather the rest versus the rest)
The World Championships is such an underated tournament. I'm Canadian and I enjoy the Tournament. Most canadiens say it's a nothing tournament. Well We have not won for a while now so... It is still a best on best. By the time it starts the Stanley Cup Playoffs are already like in the Second round which means they are ALOT of NHL players available. The only people Who Don't care about it are North Americans. Europeans love it.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Series Winner Boston Bruins vs Toronto Maple LeafsWagers: 6Staked: $2,110.00Event closes
- Updated:
-