How Good Was the 1996 World Cup?

[jasonponty]

I went to the USA/Russia game at MSG, unbelievable atmosphere!

 

[The Kingslayer]

Best tournament to date including the past 3 Olympic games. The intensity of those games were unrivaled and the best of 3 format was perfect.

 

[Inkling]

I attended a bunch of games in Ottawa and Montreal, including Game 3 of the Final, and it was an amazing festival of hockey. The last game was probably the best game I've ever personally attended (even though the wrong guys won!), it was played at such a high level.

There's no question that the Olympics have more 'prestige', but how many people ever get to live in an Olympic-host city, or can afford to travel to the Winter Olympics? The World Cup is a great concept because it travels to where the fans are and permits the average fan to experience best-on-best hockey in person. The schedule is more flexible and doesn't have to be so compressed as the Olympics. I hope they continue with the tournament, along with the Olympics too. With time it can gain more importance.

 

[Big Phil]

I've always felt that Grant Fuhr wouldn't have looked out of place on the 1996 team. Roy wasn't picked and neither was Belfour. I can understand Belfour since he was not considered a goalie at the time that you could win with. Roy's exclusion puzzles me.

But since Fuhr had started his second wind in the NHL I think he'd have done as good if not better than Joseph or Brodeur at that time.

 

[Theokritos]

Roy's exclusion puzzles me.

It is puzzling indeed. The only explanation I've ever read is an assertation that Avalanche GM Pierre Lacroix made in June 1996: "It was a clique thing, Sather and some of his pals... Sather got a couple of his favorites on there, but forgot about the best in the world."

Patrick Roy has a reputation of turning his back on Team Canada time after time, but that neither applies to the 1996 World Cup nor the 1991 Canada Cup. In August 1991, he was sidelined by a sinus operation and in 1996 he was simply not invited. Talking about the World Cup, Roy later (during the 1998 Olympics) stated: "I was not part of it and there was nothing you can do about it. Sure, I was disappointed. Obviously, I was hoping to have a chance to play. I felt like I deserved a chance to play."

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

It is puzzling indeed. The only explanation I've ever read is an assertation that Avalanche GM Pierre Lacroix made in June 1996: "It was a clique thing, Sather and some of his pals... Sather got a couple of his favorites on there, but forgot about the best in the world."

Another point is that at the time some people were also critical of his attitude. IMO some in the hockey world felt he was a "me" person, rather than a "team" guy at the time, especially with the way he left Montreal and the way he controlled that team post 92 and prior to asking to be traded.

 

[justsomeguy]

The last game was probably the best game I've ever personally attended (even though the wrong guys won!), it was played at such a high level.

Was looking down on the US net in the first and third period. Richter stood on his head in the last period. Probably the best sustained 20 minutes I've ever seen live. Heck, Brett Hull blocked shots. Game must have meant something to him too.

 

[VMBM]

You rave about "skill" and then post videos of line brawls and high stick incidents? Insane indeed... Thank god more and more people realise that it's sport, not war, so that this kind of, ehm, animosity has vanished from the international scene.

Took words out of my mouth.

Russia defeated Slovakia (7-4) and Finland (5-0), hardly a sign that they didn't care.

If I remember correctly, the Russian players (NHLers) had problems with the coach Boris Mikhailov and his coaching style - doesn't necessarily mean they didn't care, but anyway...

Edit: beaten to it... by far

 

[jekoh]

As it seems unlikely that the Olympics would ever move away from a single-game elimination final and since the same format was used in the 2004 World Cup, it could very well be that the 1996 tournament is the last time we will ever see a best-on-best series between countries.

Good riddance, the one-game format is better.

3. They were the top eight teams in the world at the time.

True, and in fact Germany did not even finish bottom in their group and thrashed the Czech Republic, but the fact remains that the World Cup was invitational. It would be taken more seriously if it had actual rules to determine who makes it and who does not.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

The Czechs were terrible, they lost 7-1 to Germany who really shouldnt have even been there. Hasek was missing and that was a big part of the reason, also Jagr never really had an impact at international level.



Thank you, and yes this would have helped. Sweden Russia in one pool and USA Canada in the other. That way there would have been some parity (instead we got...parody).

The Czechs imploded in that tournament. There were lots of problems with the way their hockey program was managed and the team was a mess.

2 years later, the Czechs won gold in the first Olympics to feature NHLers.

I don't think it's correct to say they "didn't care" about the World Cup of Hockey but in Europe it was widely seen as a contrived money grab tourney by the NHL. A last gasp to capitalize on the legacy of the Canada Cup. Essentially a big commercial for the NHL. The World Championships and of course Olympics were viewed as much much more significant in Europe than this manufactured, artificial World Cup.

 

[tarheelhockey]

The final series between Canada and USA was just amazing. The collection of talent on the ice boggles the mind.

 

[IggyFan12]

I was very young when this Tournament was going on can someone fill me in on how Sakic fresh off one of the greatest playoffs ever was held to only 2g and 2a in 8games?? Was it fatique? Does anyone remember who his linemates were and what his ice time was that tournament????

 

[Big Phil]

Good riddance, the one-game format is better.

A shame you weren't old enough for the other tournaments. 1976 had Canada needing overtime in the 2nd game to win. 1981 had the one game format which was a blowout. For 1984 they went back to the best of three and to tell you the truth the Canada/Russia semi was the best game. 1987 speaks for itself. 1991 gave us more time to build animosity towards the Americans. 1996 made us really hate the Americans. 2004 was okay, but the final was a one game elimination and while it was a 3-2 game it was anti-climactic and Finland is just a country Canada doesn't hate in the first place, even in hockey, anyway.

I think the best of three builds better rivalries and for those of us that remember 1996 you would concur

 

[Padan]

I was very young when this Tournament was going on can someone fill me in on how Sakic fresh off one of the greatest playoffs ever was held to only 2g and 2a in 8games?? Was it fatique? Does anyone remember who his linemates were and what his ice time was that tournament????

He centered a line with Eric Lindros and Brendan Shanahan, I think. That line played pretty well during the entire tournament, probably the best of Team Canada.

 

[luffis]

The 96 world cup is one of my best hockey memories, me and my dad staying up late at night to catch swedens games. I will never forget the semis vs Canada, we sat on nails for those OTs and woke up half the neighbourhood with our cries at fleurys winning goal.

 

[Theokritos]

He centered a line with Eric Lindros and Brendan Shanahan, I think.

Yes, from game 4 (quarterfinals against Germany) on. In the round robin games the regular unit was Brind'Amour - Sakic - Fleury (games 1 and 2) and then Brind'Amour - Sakic - Yzerman (game 3).

Edit: Earlier I said that Brind'Amour was a scratch in game 3, so obviously my state of information is a bit in confusion. I'll try to figure that out.

Update: Brind'Amour was indeed scratched in game 3. Sakic probably centered Yzerman and Fleury in that game.

 

[DeadGhost]

what was the incentive for players to show up and care?

 

[86Habs]

what was the incentive for players to show up and care?

They're professionals, playing for their countries. Should be more than enough incentive to "show up and care".

 

[connellc]

what was the incentive for players to show up and care?

The winners got a world cup ring.

 

[doakacola*]

Absentees already mentioned: Mario Lemieux (back issues), Paul Kariya (abdominal muscle strain), Ray Bourque (declined invitation), Patrick Roy (not invited? not interested?). Then you've got the players who pulled out just before the World Cup tournament started:

Allan MacInnis: Attended training camp and played in exhibition games, but had to pull out late in August due to an infection that reportedly caused him lose 12 pounds weight in one week.

Ron Francis: Attended training camp and played in exhibition games, but decided to pull out with his effectivity limited due to an injury (rib? knee? I've read different causes). Francis stated: "If it was the NHL playoffs, you'd play with it, but you don't know how effective you'd be."

Defense:
Coffey, Stevens, Niedermayer, Desjardins were no brainers. With Bourque and MacInnis missing, Rob Blake and Adam Foote slipped into the lineup, while Ed Jovanovski (20), Lyle Odelein (28) and Sylvain Côté (30) acted as substitutes. The inclusion of Odelein was labeled as a "mystery" even back in 1996.

Offense:
Gretzky was past his prime and Lemieux was sorely missed, but the depth is impressive nevertheless: Messier, Sakic, Yzerman, Lindros, Fleury ... the roster speaks for itself.

USA had no Roenick & Iafrate (injuries killed his career by age 28, could have been a dominant dman for years in the NHL was 30 years old in 1996).

 

[steve141]

It was good but the two conferences were unequally divided:

The top 3 teams (including Russia) were in the "North American" pool, whereas the rest were in the European pool.

I mean #3 (NA pool) Russia beat #2 (Euro pool) Finland 5-0, there was a huge gap in talent difference. The Czech Republic would have been romped in the North American pool so badly, in fact they had a -13 goal differential in 3 games in the Euro pool.

The Euro pool teams went 0-3 in the playoffs and were outscored 12-3. Sweden basically got a buy into the semis and were an OT goal away from playing for the championship.

In hindsight yes it was very uneven.

But I'd venture it wasn't as clearcut before the tournament. The Euro pool had the reigning World Champions (Czechs), the 1995 World Champions (Finland) and the reigning Olympic Champions (Sweden). On paper, this was the pool with the most success in the years leading up to the tournament.

Also, the US hadn't really established itself as a real contender up to this point. There was usually of a top 4 consisting of Can, Cze, Swe and Rus, followed by the US and Finland. In the middle of the 90s the US and Finland caught up. Both pools had two of the traditional top 4 countries.

 

[doakacola*]

In hindsight yes it was very uneven.

But I'd venture it wasn't as clearcut before the tournament. The Euro pool had the reigning World Champions (Czechs), the 1995 World Champions (Finland) and the reigning Olympic Champions (Sweden). On paper, this was the pool with the most success in the years leading up to the tournament.

Also, the US hadn't really established itself as a real contender up to this point. There was usually of a top 4 consisting of Can, Cze, Swe and Rus, followed by the US and Finland. In the middle of the 90s the US and Finland caught up. Both pools had two of the traditional top 4 countries.

Really???? Who was the finalist in the 1991 Canada Cup? It was clear the US had
a ton of talent and were clearly being touted as one of the two countries (Canada)
to win the World Cup.

 

[McGuillicuddy]

Good riddance, the one-game format is better.

Fail. The best-of-3 format has shown itself repeatedly to be the preferred way to determine a champion in a short tournament. There's so much randomness in hockey that a 1 game winner-take-all final leaves so much room for speculation and 'what-ifs'.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

The Sweden v Canada semi final double overtime thriller is the greatest hockey game I have ever watched.

Mats Sundin was a beast for Sweden and of course Fleury's herorics at the end were great.

Does anyone know where I can get a dvd of this game? Especially with Doc Emrick commentary.

 

[habsfan87]

I remember Adam Graves was on TSN a few years ago and he mentioned there was 6 fights in an exhibition game against the USA. Anyone know who was involved in those fights?