Olympics vs World Cup... or Both?

Status
Not open for further replies.

yarre

Registered User
Oct 13, 2005
931
0
Gothenburg
World cup has a major flaw and that is that I have never seen a system in it, I mean, when is it going to be played, which teams are going to be involved and where is it going to be played (well the finals etc. is in Canada which I also find stupid, should be like World Championship or the Olympics, all games played in one country).

Give us WC every forth or sixth year so we can start looking forward to it, I almost had forgot about the World Cup before 2004. If a hockeyfan has a hardtime to know when it is and remember that it even has that name, what do you think the people who should be attracted by the sport has? Make it on regulary bases, we want to know when the next one is like we always know where the next Olympics will be.
 

willie

Registered User
Mar 3, 2002
3,976
0
Visit site
yarre said:
Give us WC every forth or sixth year so we can start looking forward to it, I almost had forgot about the World Cup before 2004. If a hockeyfan has a hardtime to know when it is and remember that it even has that name, what do you think the people who should be attracted by the sport has? Make it on regulary bases, we want to know when the next one is like we always know where the next Olympics will be.

I completely agree with this. There hasn't been any consistency whatsoever with the tournament and this needs to change. What I'd like to see is the IIHF delay the World Championships every fourth year until after the NHL playoffs are over. Then we can have a best on best tournament that everyone deems legitimate.

Make it a 16 team tournament, top 2 move on to QF's. Perhaps have guaranteed entries to the top 8 or 10 ranked IIHF teams and have a qualifying tournament to determine the rest of the field. Switch the location every year but - from a $$$ perspective - you would probably have to rotate between North America and Europe each tournament.
 

Force

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
220
0
Two way approach. Cut the NHL schedule and finish a bit earlyier, and delay the WCships a little.
 

Jester

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
34,076
11
St. Andrews
Force said:
Two way approach. Cut the NHL schedule and finish a bit earlyier, and delay the WCships a little.

less games == less money.

however, i think the NHL would be better off in general with schedule that was in the 60's rather than 82.
 

Jazz

Registered User
Jester said:
the sample demographic being the 2nd largest hockey market in the US... the demographics that the NHL has to be concerned with first are it's 30 franchise markets... the Flyers are one of the largest of those markets.
Ken Hitchcock said this in in a radio interview describing the fan base in Philadelphia "They are not hockey fans, they are Philadelphia Flyer fans"

Obviously then they do not have what is good for hockey in their thinking, only what is good for their team.
 

revolverjgw

Registered User
Oct 6, 2003
8,483
19
Nova Scotia
jazz said:
It would take decades to built up the World Cup to even half the stature of the Olympics.... The World Cup simply has no reach outside the established hockey nations, the Olympics does...

heck, only Canada, and to a smaller extent Sweden and Finland give the World Cup any credibiltiy. It is a non-factor in the US, Czech Republic (2 tournments and yet to sell-out a game in Prague), Germany (ditto), Russia and Slovakia.

If you care about expanding hockey worldwide, you will pick the Olympics.

Yeah, you're right about that, the World Cup doesn't have the reach and it would be hard to build it up... but I guess the reason I prefer the WC is because I don't care about that, I don't care about ''expanding hockey worldwide'', I really only care about level of play. I'm selfish like that. The World Cup can easily be on par or better than the level of play in the Olympics, but it would have to be the only best-on-best tournament around.

As long as the players care, that's all I care about.
 
Last edited:

BigE

Registered User
Mar 12, 2004
4,476
0
New York, NY
Personally, the Olympics have taken away from what has been a stellar season. I like the World Cup because you don't get the chincy "hitting too hard" calls, nor do you have to deal with the slow-flow no-touch icing calls.
 

Jazz

Registered User
revolverjgw said:
Yeah, you're right about, the World Cup doesn't have the reach and it would be hard to build it up... but I guess the reason I prefer the WC is because I don't care about that, I don't care about ''expanding hockey worldwide'', I really only care about level of play. I'm selfish like that. The World Cup can easily be on par or better than the level of play in the Olympics, but it would have to be the only best-on-best tournament around.

As long as the players care, that's all I care about.
Well, that's your right to think that way. I think it is short sighted, as expanding the game globally will result in more countries involved, eventually the better the future tournaments will be.

Also, from a hockey point of view, the players are admittedly rusty during the August World Cup, they are more in form now, so I think the hockey is better here.
 

Jester

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
34,076
11
St. Andrews
Jazz said:
Ken Hitchcock said this in in a radio interview describing the fan base in Philadelphia "They are not hockey fans, they are Philadelphia Flyer fans"

Obviously then they do not have what is good for hockey in their thinking, only what is good for their team.

i could have told you that... however, that isn't an issue just in philly... that's an issue throughout the US (which is where the NHL makes the lion-share of its money).

clearly, however, to dismiss them based on those grounds is idiotic. whatever the reasoning here in philly, the fans have created easily one of the most viable hockey markets in North America. if the NHL had 30 philadelphias we wouldn't of had a lockout.
 

revolverjgw

Registered User
Oct 6, 2003
8,483
19
Nova Scotia
Well, that's your right to think that way. I think it is short sighted, as expanding the game globally will result in more countries involved, eventually the better the future tournaments will be.

Yeah, like I said, it's rather selfish! You're not wrong. Still, I'd sacrifice whatever benefits (minor, I think) we'd see by the tourny being more ''globalized'' just so my NHL season would go smoothly... plus I like having some extra hockey at a time when there usually isn't any hockey.

The old Canada Cups had some damn aweome hockey now and then, I think we could build a World Cup into something special. But it doesn't look they're going to get a chance to build it anyway.
 

Jazz

Registered User
Jester said:
i could have told you that... however, that isn't an issue just in philly... that's an issue throughout the US (which is where the NHL makes the lion-share of its money)....
That is wrong, and not healthy for the sport in the long-run. What happens when the Flyers have a few bad years (which is more likely in a cap-world where you can't buy yourself out of troubles)? Everyone abandons the team until the next upswing?

Ok, let me ask you this: Why can other sports have fans of other cities, yet hockey can't (in the US)?
 

Jazz

Registered User
revolverjgw said:
Yeah, like I said, it's rather selfish! You're not wrong. Still, I'd sacrifice whatever benefits (minor, I think) we'd see by the tourny being more ''globalized'' just so my NHL season would go smoothly... plus I like having some extra hockey at a time when there usually isn't any hockey.

The old Canada Cups had some damn aweome hockey now and then, I think we could build a World Cup into something special. But it doesn't look they're going to get a chance to build it anyway.
LOL - at least you admit it...I gotta respect that! :thumbu:

Cheers!
:cheers:
 

Gerry4001

Registered User
Dec 21, 2005
107
0
Toronto
After 3 Olympics with the pros I can safely say that I enjoyed the Canada/World Cup
much better since it was played during the summer when there's no other hockey
going on. It's a real treat.

Having to stop a season, fly thousands of miles, change jerseys, and then go back to fight for the Stanley Cup within weeks must be tough on the players. An injury to a key player (they all are at that level) can scrap the fight for a playoff spot such as the Leafs, Canadiens, and Bruins are going thru right now. In the summer, the guys are rested and don't have to worry about injuries as much. They got time to recoupe before the playoffs. The format is more NHL style with a best of series. I saw one of the Canada/Russia games in '87 live at the Forum and will never forget it.

Sure the Olympics are huge but give the World Cup some time with a regular 4 year
schedule and it will eventualy upstage the Olympics such as the World Cup of Soccer has.
Its focused on Hockey and I don't care about bobsledding or tobaganing or whatever else goes on in these Olympic bore outs. These other so called sports need the Olympics to live, not Hockey.

Plus the NHL should make the money since they feed the players and the game.
The Olympics, for a hundred years, never supported the pros anyways so screw 'em.
 

Jester

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
34,076
11
St. Andrews
Jazz said:
That is wrong, and not healthy for the sport in the long-run. What happens when the Flyers have a few bad years (which is more likely in a cap-world where you can't buy yourself out of troubles)? Everyone abandons the team until the next upswing?

Ok, let me ask you this: Why can other sports have fans of other cities, yet hockey can't (in the US)?

they continued to sell-out the Spectrum in philly when the team went downhill in the early 90's. Flyer fans are easily the most loyal of the groups down here... as much as the Eagle fans might like to argue against this, it wasn't too long ago that games were at risk to get blacked-out here.

well, you got the 4 "major" sports.

1. Baseball - Football has passed Baseball in many respects. however, there remains a very strong connection to the US culture here, for many reasons. the largest advantage is that Baseball is a very accessible sport to people growing up (pretty much everyone has the ability to play in some form of youth league), so there is a connection to the sport itself that goes beyond simply watching it. people know what it's like to throw, hit, and catch a baseball... people aren't intimidated by the game itself (hockey can be confusing... i think we've all had to explain something to someone in the past), so on and so forth.

Baseball's biggest advantage, and greatest weakness is casual fans. the number 1 reason why Baseball took such a huge hit after their strike that killed the WS was that they lost many of the "casual" fans for a number of years...

The NHL's greatest weakness is the absolute lack of casual fans... However, the addendum to this is that the NHL's greatest strength is that the fans that do exist are extremely passionate... a fact the owners took advantage of in the lockout... they KNEW we would be back.

2. Basketball - has actually been on a decline... however, it has obvious strength in certain urban markets and is another sport where people grow up with the sport and have a connection to it... casual fans exist, once again, because they understand what is going on...

3. Football - not even worth dealing with... so far and above the other leagues it's a near joke. Football enjoys being very much a part of the american cultural experience growing up (HS Football games, College Football Games being big aspects of the schools...). Football is also easy to watch casually, you only need to devote one/two days of the week to watch a football game... not to mention football simply works the best on TV of the top 4.

then there is hockey... no one really grew up with the sport. this is changing (i'm 25 and the ability to play hockey has exploded in the philadelphia area -- both roller and ice), but it isn't going to see real results until 20 years down the road. therefore people are attached to the TEAM, not the sport... they haven't played the sport, they just like watching their team play... helps that the flyers win a lot too.

so i think the growth of playing the sport will help grow fans that just watch hockey... but i don't think watching the Olympics is going to help create that. i think it's a problem to get people watching when you are already asking them to watch 82 games and then playoffs of the team they actively care about...

for the record, the Flyers get better TV-ratings than the Sixers or Phillies...
 

Gerry4001

Registered User
Dec 21, 2005
107
0
Toronto
If you're a great player, you get to perform in the World Cup.

If you can't make it in the pros, you play the Olympics.

Simple.
 

Gerry4001

Registered User
Dec 21, 2005
107
0
Toronto
If you look at the size of the World Cup of Soccer, the Olympics could never pull that off.
The World Cup allows way more teams and a longer schedule than the skimpy 2 week Olympic program.

If you want the sport to grow, you gotta have more teams.

Ask any soccer fan what matters more.
 

Lindros_for_rizzle_

Registered User
Oct 20, 2005
1,834
47
BigE said:
Personally, the Olympics have taken away from what has been a stellar season. I like the World Cup because you don't get the chincy "hitting too hard" calls, nor do you have to deal with the slow-flow no-touch icing calls.

Wow, I could figure out your username after such a clever post.

If this tournament haven´t taught us otherwise (and it hasn´t), it´s that the rink size and other things have to change to benefit good hockey. This non-intense anti-hockey tournament is one I could bare not to have witnessed, which I´ll pretend I didn´t.
 

ALF AmericanLionsFan

Registered User
Dec 19, 2002
7,646
7
Cleveland, Ohio USA
Visit site
I can easily say dump the World Cup and keep the Olympics. You can't compare the two. Yes, it may be a hinderance every four years,but it is only every four years. Change the schedule abit to accomodate it better next time around. The Olympics will always have that special feeling and atmosphere that you will never see from the World Cup. And one of the only reasons the NHLers will stop going is because the league is not getting a cut from the revenues they would make with a World Cup. I just think everyone is down on the Olympics this year because we have had these best on best tournaments every other year now for the past six. Go with the Olympics and leave it be. Also in my opinion the failure of both the Canadians and Americans have both countries crying to have amateurs back. I'm actually pretty excited to see this Sweden Finnish match up. Big rivals and should be a fantastic gold medal game. :clap:
 

ryanghg

Registered User
Oct 29, 2005
764
0
Montreal
SwisshockeyAcademy said:
Thanks for coming out. Do not contact us we will contact you.
Huh?

Was this not a poll on whether to keep the Olympics, World Cup or make the Olympics Amateur only?

Yes, yes it was.

Keep your useless remarks to yourself please.
 

SwisshockeyAcademy

Registered User
Dec 11, 2002
3,094
1
Visit site
ryanghg said:
Huh?

Was this not a poll on whether to keep the Olympics, World Cup or make the Olympics Amateur only?

Yes, yes it was.

Keep your useless remarks to yourself please.
You are the thousandth poster to come in and say keep the pro players out. What shall we use then? USA use college kids, Canada use juniors not under contract and what shall be of Europe? Who will they use? 15 year olds with no professional club ties? I am so sick of this bibble babble I could puke so that is why you got the response you got. At least elaborate please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad