World Cup Rosters - Nuge named to U24 NA team. Hall not named to Canada

[Replacement*]

Agreed. Gimmick tourney

Really I don't know a single hockey fan excited about this tournament or that is anybody that has seen Canada Cup Tournaments and Olympic tournaments. This is a lame youngstars format designed to appeal specifically to some younger fans that have never seen better.

As soon as you arbitrarily screw around with the format like that and make unders teams in the tournament so that players like McDavid are not playing for Team Canada and actually playing AGAINST Team Canada it just makes it all strange.

Imagine a Canada Cup with Gretzky and Lemieux playing against Canada. Yeah, that ridiculous. It removes the whole meaning of the national pride and playing for team and country and makes it an exhibition tournament instead. Players will just use this to warm up and get in shape as nothing, no national bragging rights are at stake. Its a nothing format.

 

[Replacement*]

​

Team USA's selection has certainly been Looney.

It'll have to do

Exhibition season will be more interesting than this. Especially with the new Arena on tap and the promise of yet another season with the Oilers 0-0..

 

[Soundwave]

I'm excited for the tourney just because when else are you going to see McDavid-Eichel-MacKinnon-Gaudreau-Matthews-Ekblad on the same team?

To be honest I always enjoyed the previous World Cup though it was a while ago now (20 years to 1996!), it really sucked when the USA beat Canada. To me I think that's really where the modern Canada-USA rivalry started.

Just don't take it too seriously. It'll be more fun than watching NHL pre-season.

 

[Replacement*]

I'm excited for the tourney just because when else are you going to see McDavid-Eichel-MacKinnon-Gaudreau-Matthews-Ekblad on the same team?

To be honest I always enjoyed the previous World Cup though it was a while ago now (20 years to 1996!), it really sucked when the USA beat Canada. To me I think that's really where the modern Canada-USA rivalry started.

Just don't take it too seriously. It'll be more fun than watching NHL pre-season.

This makes me not care even more and its something I don't care to see. Like I say when you've seen the absolute best configs of Canada in World Cups and Olympics this is nothing.

Call me spoiled by seeing great hockey and truly great hockey formats that are very unlikely to ever be revisited. Certainly not in this arbitrary unders/overs configuration.

If the football WC did this everybody would think they've gone mad.

 

[Philly85*]

We'll see what happens when we get there. Not overly excited, but at the same time will probably watch.

 

[Soundwave]

This makes me not care even more and its something I don't care to see. Like I say when you've seen the absolute best configs of Canada in World Cups and Olympics this is nothing.

Call me spoiled by seeing great hockey and truly great hockey formats that are very unlikely to ever be revisited. Certainly not in this arbitrary unders/overs configuration.

If the football WC did this everybody would think they've gone mad.

Lets be honest, they really wanted McDavid at the tournament but Canada is way too deep at center to take him so they decided to allow this team so they could have the "Next One" there to market. I'm sure Rogers and several other sponsors want him there too.

Still, it will be fun to watch that team and hey when's the last time the Oilers have had a player that everyone in the hockey world is falling over themselves to see.

 

[Replacement*]

Lets be honest, they really wanted McDavid at the tournament but Canada is way too deep at center to take him so they decided to allow this team so they could have the "Next One" there to market. I'm sure Rogers and several other sponsors want him there too.

Still, it will be fun to watch that team.

McDavid by rights is good enough to play for Team Canada and should. He's already one of the best players in the game.

Gretzky, at a similar age got a chance to play with the best players for Team Canada in Canada Cup tournaments.

This not only robs Team Canada of the generational skill of McDavid, it robs Mcdavid, and his development, and his chance to play for Team Canada and establish that in his hockey line.

As ugly as this would be if it happened to Gretzky, its ugly for McDavid and depriving him of that brilliant opportunity and development playing with the Canadian greats.

Won't be fun imo seeing McDavid play with Yanks. jmo

 

[gqmixmaster]

McDavid by rights is good enough to play for Team Canada and should. He's already one of the best players in the game.

Gretzky, at a similar age got a chance to play with the best players for Team Canada in Canada Cup tournaments.

This not only robs Team Canada of the generational skill of McDavid, it robs Mcdavid, and his development, and his chance to play for Team Canada and establish that in his hockey line.

As ugly as this would be if it happened to Gretzky, its ugly for McDavid and depriving him of that brilliant opportunity and development playing with the Canadian greats.

Won't be fun imo seeing McDavid play with Yanks. jmo

It's not perfect but it's going to be fun to watch

 

[Up the Irons]

Really I don't know a single hockey fan excited about this tournament or that is anybody that has seen Canada Cup Tournaments and Olympic tournaments. This is a lame youngstars format designed to appeal specifically to some younger fans that have never seen better.

As soon as you arbitrarily screw around with the format like that and make unders teams in the tournament so that players like McDavid are not playing for Team Canada and actually playing AGAINST Team Canada it just makes it all strange.

Imagine a Canada Cup with Gretzky and Lemieux playing against Canada. Yeah, that ridiculous. It removes the whole meaning of the national pride and playing for team and country and makes it an exhibition tournament instead. Players will just use this to warm up and get in shape as nothing, no national bragging rights are at stake. Its a nothing format.

Hear! Hear!

like Soundwave said. the whole Gimmick team is solely to put McDavid in the tourney. but, I'm with you; he's good enough to make team Canada right now.

I'll watch, and if Canada makes the final, i'll probably get excited. but, right now, a few months out, it just feels like a joke tourney. an NHL money-grab.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Hear! Hear!

like Soundwave said. the whole Gimmick team is solely to put McDavid in the tourney. but, I'm with you; he's good enough to make team Canada right now.

I'll watch, and if Canada makes the final, i'll probably get excited. but, right now, a few months out, it just feels like a joke tourney. an NHL money-grab.

It is a money grab and a promotional tool for the NHL, why is this a bad thing. I mean worry comes from players potentially getting injured, but it's chance to showcase a bunch of different (fairly high end) NHL players all over the league.

The NA team makes perfect sense, because there are a ton of young stars who won't be picked for National Teams for various reasons, but the NHL wants to promote these stars, sell these stars, why is this bad?

The Tournament should be fine, hopefully all the team tries, but who knows. All I know is I'm interested to see how Canada does, how NA does, how Europe *Other does, because they make for interesting mixes.

Again, it is just a cash grab and promotional tool for the League, but why is this bad, is the League not allowed to promote itself? A lot of this over the top cynicism is a little silly.

 

[Replacement*]

Hear! Hear!

like Soundwave said. the whole Gimmick team is solely to put McDavid in the tourney. but, I'm with you; he's good enough to make team Canada right now.

I'll watch, and if Canada makes the final, i'll probably get excited. but, right now, a few months out, it just feels like a joke tourney. an NHL money-grab.

I wouldn't even mind if it was a particularly good money-grab from the NHL. I don't know it even ends up being that.

It is a money grab and a promotional tool for the NHL, why is this a bad thing. I mean worry comes from players potentially getting injured, but it's chance to showcase a bunch of different (fairly high end) NHL players all over the league.

The NA team makes perfect sense, because there are a ton of young stars who won't be picked for National Teams for various reasons, but the NHL wants to promote these stars, sell these stars, why is this bad?

The Tournament should be fine, hopefully all the team tries, but who knows. All I know is I'm interested to see how Canada does, how NA does, how Europe *Other does, because they make for interesting mixes.

Again, it is just a cash grab and promotional tool for the League, but why is this bad, is the League not allowed to promote itself? A lot of this over the top cynicism is a little silly.

The criticism isn't silly Jimmi and a lot of people have been saying it. Having an unders mix with two unders clubs taking up players from the National sides has the effect of negating the legitimacy of the international competition. Because it will be impossible to state that the best nation won. With that one silly unders decicision this tourney is NOT about bragging rights, its not about best against the best, it is instead about as arbitrary as a standard WC tourney while the NHL is still in playoffs.

If the NHL wanted to market to the youth market I would be fine with them having a SEPARATE unders tournament just like what occurs in Soccer. With Soccer paving the way and being the most popular sport on the planet not by accident. That would be a good idea for the NHL if not the hockey world. But leave the Premier world tournament alone. Leave that be ALL the best.

Again, fact of the matter is the Canada Cups would've been bogus if young Wayne Gretzkys and Mario Lemieuxs were not playing on team Canada, but against team Canada. That's just surreal.

Next, I have no inkling whatsoever to want to see NA unders combined, and Euro unders combined. That's arbitrary to me. If it isn't National sides in this kind of tourney it ain't anything of significance.

Just think about it. 10 yrs from now people might read up that the bronze medal match was Finland against team U NA. They all be going what?! Its like looking at a historic list of GRey Cup combatants and seeing such silliness as Calgary Stamps against Baltimore Stallions or Toronto Argonots vs Las Vegas Wrangler whatevers.

Stupid one off formats are stupid formats. Leave it alone. Canada Cup was great and overdue. This could've been that.

 

[Raoul Duke]

This makes me not care even more and its something I don't care to see. Like I say when you've seen the absolute best configs of Canada in World Cups and Olympics this is nothing.

Call me spoiled by seeing great hockey and truly great hockey formats that are very unlikely to ever be revisited. Certainly not in this arbitrary unders/overs configuration.

If the football WC did this everybody would think they've gone mad.

Not exactly shocked that you feel this way. I can't say I disagree but my kid and his friends are jacked for it. I will watch it with him and probably enjoy some well played hockey.
Those old Canada and world cups never meant as much as we like to think they did. Great hockey though. This format is dumb but who cares? It's a different world.
Kids will like it. Old timers will say it's terrible, not like "back in my day".
Much like the all star game, I don't understand why people need to rage against the machine over it.
Don't like it? Don't watch it.
It's not always for you. The younger generation will watch it, and probably love it.

 

[Raoul Duke]

It is a money grab and a promotional tool for the NHL, why is this a bad thing. I mean worry comes from players potentially getting injured, but it's chance to showcase a bunch of different (fairly high end) NHL players all over the league.

The NA team makes perfect sense, because there are a ton of young stars who won't be picked for National Teams for various reasons, but the NHL wants to promote these stars, sell these stars, why is this bad?

The Tournament should be fine, hopefully all the team tries, but who knows. All I know is I'm interested to see how Canada does, how NA does, how Europe *Other does, because they make for interesting mixes.

Again, it is just a cash grab and promotional tool for the League, but why is this bad, is the League not allowed to promote itself? A lot of this over the top cynicism is a little silly.

It's a money grab and so is the NHL itself. Owners put teams on the ice for money. Players play for money. That's how the world works. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Replacement*]

Not exactly shocked that you feel this way. I can't say I disagree but my kid and his friends are jacked for it. I will watch it with him and probably enjoy some well played hockey.
Those old Canada and world cups never meant as much as we like to think they did. Great hockey though. This format is dumb but who cares? It's a different world.
Kids will like it. Old timers will say it's terrible, not like "back in my day".
Much like the all star game, I don't understand why people need to rage against the machine over it.
Don't like it? Don't watch it.
It's not always for you. The younger generation will watch it, and probably love it.

The younger generation prefers graphic novels to Hemingway. Prefers texting to real discussion, prefers google and wikipedia to other forms of learning.

More to the point the younger generation likes 3 on 3, ASG gimmickry, and will in turn shape the game as we know it as marketers bend to capture youth share. Only a matter of time before playoff sudden death Ot is revisited as league realizes younger viewers may tune out if OT results aren't quick. All these changes will come, and I guess we'll all have to like it.

Its not just a consumer or value added argument. When we gain things, change things, we lose things, and things are never quite the same.

For instance I don't have to like/dislike ebooks to realize antiquarian bookstores are dying and all of what they were with them. Its not just that one consumer can like one thing, and another select the other brand. NHL is NHL. It'll move in the direction of Beyoncé/Kanye demographic and away from Beatles/Stones.

But really we all lose. Younger fans just might not realize it. That's the real point.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

It's a money grab and so is the NHL itself. Owners put teams on the ice for money. Players play for money. That's how the world works. Nothing wrong with that.

First, welcome back, and second, thanks. I felt things were getting a little ridiculous. If you are someone who feels strongly about how "negative" "Gimmicky" this Tournament is, then just ignore it and wait for the season to start.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

The younger generation prefers graphic novels to Hemingway. Prefers texting to going to Libraries and reading up on classics.

Just because you don't understand the changing nature of the world around, or you don't like the changing world around you, doesn't mean you "know better" or that "it's wrong"

The world, generations, Always change, you either accept that not everything if "For You" all the time forever, or you feel "quite a bit different".

 

[Replacement*]

Just because you don't understand the changing nature of the world around, or you don't like the changing world around you, doesn't mean you "know better" or that "it's wrong"

The world, generations, Always change, you either accept that not everything if "For You" all the time forever, or you feel "quite a bit different".

This topic is outside of this discussion. Its a lot more complex. As I stated.

I've already noted examples where the game DOES change to specifically cater to youth demographic thus bending the way the game is played not only for youth, but for all viewers. For better or worse.

As a somewhat older viewer of the NHL I know the league would sell its grandparents if it meant more viewers and is susceptible to changing gimmickry.

So far;

3 on 3

4 0n 4

Shoot outs

Allstar gimmickry

3pt games because a younger generation doesn't properly comprehend what a tie is.


just to name a few. Keeping track that most of these changes have been dreck.

That said many of the best hockey games ever played have been in tournaments like the past Canada Cups. They were great, trust me, or trust anybody old enough to have seen them. They weren't just good, they were freaking fantastic. Or you can think otherwise and think you'll be getting the same competition. Except how is that going to occur when it isn't actually best vs best in international play? like the Canada Cups were.

 

[Raoul Duke]

The younger generation prefers graphic novels to Hemingway. Prefers texting to real discussion or going to Libraries and reading up on classics.

More to the point the younger generation likes 3 on 3, ASG gimmickry, and will in turn shape the game as we know it as marketers bend to capture youth share. Only a matter of time before playoff sudden death Ot is revisited as league realizes younger viewers may tune out if OT results aren't quick. All these changes will come, and I guess we'll all have to like it.

Its not just a consumer or value added argument. When we gain things, change things, we lose things, and things are never quite the same.

For instance I don't have to like/dislike ebooks to realize antiquarian bookstores are dying and all of what they were with them. Its not just that one consumer can like one thing, and another select the other brand. NHL is NHL. It'll move in the direction of Beyoncé/Kanye demographic and away from Beatles/Stones.

But really we all lose. Younger fans just might not realize it. That's the real point.

Yep. I follow you. You're largely right. To hell in a hand basket and all that.
Isn't that how society works though. Beyonce is throw away music to me. The stones were throw away music to someone's parents at one point.
Classics stay classics, just the medium changes. The Beatles are still loved when played on digital format. That music stays relevant on vinyl, 8 track, tapes, CDs, mp3, and vinyl again.
We lose things we love like record shops and book stores. That means something to us but it's largely nostalgic.
All star formats are for the kids anyway. Always were. From the time I was a kid until I had kids, I didn't watch them.
Before '72 was there any international tournaments like this. The whole things a gimmick.
Things change.

 

[Raoul Duke]

This topic is outside of this discussion. Its a lot more complex. As I stated.

I've already noted examples where the game DOES change to specifically cater to youth demographic thus bending the way the game is played not only for youth, but for all viewers. For better or worse.

As a somewhat older viewer of the NHL I know the league would sell its grandparents if it meant more viewers and is susceptible to changing gimmickry.

So far;

3 on 3

4 0n 4

Shoot outs

Allstar gimmickry

3pt games because a younger generation doesn't properly comprehend what a tie is.


just to name a few. Keeping track that most of these changes have been dreck.

That said many of the best hockey games ever played have been in tournaments like the past Canada Cups. They were great, trust me, or trust anybody old enough to have seen them. They weren't just good, they were freaking fantastic. Or you can think otherwise and think you'll be getting the same competition. Except how is that going to occur when it isn't actually best vs best in international play? like the Canada Cups were.

This generation knows what a tie is. They just don't like them. They like 3 on 3 and such because they play it and find it exciting. The all star game gimmickry hurts nothing. If you actually like the all star game, it still there with the same lack of competition it always had. Skills thing is separate.
I agree with you about the level of hockey we saw in past Canada cups etc. but every generation talks about how much better these things were in their day. Couldn't it be perception? Could we be biased?

 

[Raoul Duke]

First, welcome back, and second, thanks. I felt things were getting a little ridiculous. If you are someone who feels strongly about how "negative" "Gimmicky" this Tournament is, then just ignore it and wait for the season to start.

Agreed.
If people want to complain, of course they're free to, I just don't understand why it's so upsetting.

 

[Replacement*]

Yep. I follow you. You're largely right. To hell in a hand basket and all that.
Isn't that how society works though. Beyonce is throw away music to me. The stones were throw away music to someone's parents at one point.
Classics stay classics, just the medium changes. The Beatles are still loved when played on digital format. That music stays relevant on vinyl, 8 track, tapes, CDs, mp3, and vinyl again.
We lose things we love like record shops and book stores. That means something to us but it's largely nostalgic.
All star formats are for the kids anyway. Always were. From the time I was a kid until I had kids, I didn't watch them.
Before '72 was there any international tournaments like this. The whole things a gimmick.
Things change.

But shouldn't be for change sake and hooks and wrinkles and trick mirrors. Most of us love this game for what it is. A lot of us are purists. Read my last post for a synopsis of some of what has already changed.

Damn straight its only a matter of time before the NHL makes major changes with playoff OT. to me its the untouchable golden grail. But I doubt it is under present stewardship. The NHL already knows that younger viewers don't last into 2,3 periods of OT. Most of us that have seen kids watch already know this too. But it isn't the same. Hell, decades ago when I was that kid I would LOVE if a game went 4 periods of OT and I would be pressed forward each minute missing nothing. With mom saying she's sending me to be the moment she sees me lose interest or my eyes start to close..
To me there was something sacred about OT and I always wanted more, more more. I wanted a Mud Bruneteau goal after 5-6 OT periods. I wanted that to happen. I wanted to see what would occur if hockey game was still on in the morning. What would they do? There was a fascination and wonderment. Just imagine.

I guarantee you the NHL is changing this potentially endless OT. They will do something like 10mins 5 0n 5 and then switch to 3 on 3. Guarantee you something that will occur.

One of the most magical facets of NHL Stanley Cup playoffs will be gone forever.

heh, truth be, I'm still a kid and the world is wonder.

 

[Replacement*]

This generation knows what a tie is. They just don't like them. They like 3 on 3 and such because they play it and find it exciting. The all star game gimmickry hurts nothing. If you actually like the all star game, it still there with the same lack of competition it always had. Skills thing is separate.
I agree with you about the level of hockey we saw in past Canada cups etc. but every generation talks about how much better these things were in their day. Couldn't it be perception? Could we be biased?

I love these discussions with you ftr. Hope its OK, I think its sidebar interesting for readers as well and nobody is talking about anything else so hope its allowed.


Anyway, I can tell you its not just generational perception. For all of my extended family forefathers parents, grandparents, uncles, friends parents, forefathers etc the premise remained largely the same. That the Canada Russia series was the penultimate hockey ever played or seen to that time and the most riveting thing to ever happen in the hockey world. People that had seen the original 6 NHL, great hockey not watered down, all felt that series was gold. They all felt the Canada Cups were gold. Really it was quite universal, among different generations, to share the view that those were the peak moments in hockey. Especially from a Canadian perspective. Prior to that Canada had to send AMATEUR players to compete in world tournaments which was a constant frustration to all Canadian hockey fans. There was an indelible national want for tournaments to be a proving ground of Canadian supremacy or at least the opportunity.

The latest of that was the Olympic Tournaments which have also been legendary only since the NHL was involved. Few would argue the Oly hockey tourney was worse for it. (unless in Sweden...)

Some things can be universal and shared generational views and they are immediately understood as that. Everybody in the nation knew Canada vs Russia summit was great when it was happening. Everybody from age 5-95. For Canada it was bigger than the first man on the moon. To put it into perspective.

 

[Raoul Duke]

But shouldn't be for change sake and hooks and wrinkles and trick mirrors. Most of us love this game for what it is. A lot of us are purists. Read my last post for a synopsis of some of what has already changed.

Damn straight its only a matter of time before the NHL makes major changes with playoff OT. to me its the untouchable golden grail. But I doubt it is under present stewardship. The NHL already knows that younger viewers don't last into 2,3 periods of OT. Most of us that have seen kids watch already know this too. But it isn't the same. Hell, decades ago when I was that kid I would LOVE if a game went 4 periods of OT and I would be pressed forward each minute missing nothing. With mom saying she's sending me to be the moment she sees me lose interest or my eyes start to close..
To me there was something sacred about OT and I always wanted more, more more. I wanted a Mud Bruneteau goal after 5-6 OT periods. I wanted that to happen. I wanted to see what would occur if hockey game was still on in the morning. What would they do? There was a fascination and wonderment. Just imagine.

I guarantee you the NHL is changing this potentially endless OT. They will do something like 10mins 5 0n 5 and then switch to 3 on 3. Guarantee you something that will occur.

One of the most magical facets of NHL Stanley Cup playoffs will be gone forever.

heh, truth be, I'm still a kid and the world is wonder.

I hope you're wrong about changing playoff overtime. I would think there'd be healthy opposition to changing it.
Completely agree that it, along with game 7, is the pinnacle of hockey.

 

[Raoul Duke]

I love these discussions with you ftr. Hope its OK, I think its sidebar interesting for readers as well and nobody is talking about anything else so hope its allowed.


Anyway, I can tell you its not just generational perception. For all of my extended family forefathers parents, grandparents, uncles, friends parents, forefathers etc the premise remained largely the same. That the Canada Russia series was the penultimate hockey ever played or seen to that time and the most riveting thing to ever happen in the hockey world. People that had seen the original 6 NHL, great hockey not watered down, all felt that series was gold. They all felt the Canada Cups were gold. Really it was quite universal, among different generations, to share the view that those were the peak moments in hockey. Especially from a Canadian perspective. Prior to that Canada had to send AMATEUR players to compete in world tournaments which was a constant frustration to all Canadian hockey fans. There was an indelible national want for tournaments to be a proving ground of Canadian supremacy or at least the opportunity.

The latest of that was the Olympic Tournaments which have also been legendary only since the NHL was involved. Few would argue the Oly hockey tourney was worse for it. (unless in Sweden...)

Some things can be universal and shared generational views and they are immediately understood as that. Everybody in the nation knew Canada vs Russia summit was great when it was happening. Everybody from age 5-95. For Canada it was bigger than the first man on the moon. To put it into perspective.

Right back atcha.

I can't speak on all kids' attention spans but mine is glued to the tv during OT. Just like you were, just like I was.
I'd take '87 over '72. But then, I wasn't alive yet and only watched the summit series after the fact. That one's different. Given the political climate, lack of foreign players in the NHL and the fact that it was the first of it's kind, I'm sure it was incredible.

 

[Replacement*]

Right back atcha.

I can't speak on all kids' attention spans but mine is glued to the tv during OT. Just like you were, just like I was.
I'd take '87 over '72. But then, I wasn't alive yet and only watched the summit series after the fact. That one's different. Given the political climate, lack of foreign players in the NHL and the fact that it was the first of it's kind, I'm sure it was incredible.

Heh, nice that you're sharing that with your kid. Just one more comment on OT. Can't remember what game it was but I think it was last round, but they were camera panning around the crowd and it looked like the crowd was going to sleep. The commentator said I can understand kids doing this at 10 o clock but adults? heh. Plus we're all more sleep deprived as a society than maybe we used to be but people were just falling asleep in the OT, not in intermission, but during the period.