How to grow the game?

[Alberta_Beef]

This debate has spanned over several threads now, so I thought maybe it would be good to have a place to discuss this rather than having it scattered throughout the 2018 Olympic thread, the Tavares thread, probably Zetterberg too by now.

I know Undercoverbrother and I just had a decent debate in the Tavares thread about it. We could only agree than more hockey is better.

--------------------------------

My stance is that hockey in the spotlight will help it grow if there are quality, highly competitive games like the Canada/USA women's Gold medal game as well as high end performances that steal the spotlight (the Latvian goaltender).

undercoverbrother was in the camp that having best on best promotes the game better and leads to better quality games.




But I would like to know more peoples thoughts, opinions and ideas.

[undercoverbrother]

Thanks for starting the thread.

I think it is a great discussion to have.

I will say that the Women's CAN v USA game is an example of best on best competition.

I honesly feel that hockey should have a best on best national tourney. I think it will show the game at its best, both individual skill and team skills.

Viewers new to the game will see the best athletes in the world and follow them to the leagues in which they play, this will grow the professional game (NHL, SHL, KHL et al.).

[Alberta_Beef]

One thing I would like to see happen is a tournament of champions between the Champs of the top leagues outside of the NHL.

KHL, AHL, SHL (formerly SEL), SM-Liiga, Czech Extraliga, DEL, NLA (Swiss)

maybe throw in the Slovak Extraliga, or the NCAA champs if they would be allowed to participate.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

One thing I would like to see happen is a tournament of champions between the Champs of the top leagues outside of the NHL.

KHL, AHL, SHL (formerly SEL), SM-Liiga, Czech Extraliga, DEL, NLA (Swiss)

Great idea, but why exclude the NHL? I supose it is cuz they will wipe the ice with the other teams.


I will say that in other sports a Club World Champsionship has not gained the same traction.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Great idea, but why exclude the NHL? I supose it is cuz they will wipe the ice with the other teams.


I will say that in other sports a Club World Champsionship has not gained the same traction.

You answered your own question.

But hasn't soccer had some success with using championship teams in some sort of format?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

One thing I would like to see happen is a tournament of champions between the Champs of the top leagues outside of the NHL.

KHL, AHL, SHL (formerly SEL), SM-Liiga, Czech Extraliga, DEL, NLA (Swiss)

maybe throw in the Slovak Extraliga, or the NCAA champs if they would be allowed to participate.

Can't see this ever happening because it is nowhere near a level playing field.

The major soccer leagues are more or less equally competing for the same players and the top teams are equal enough competitively that they can challenge each other on the same field.

The various hockey leagues are not.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Can't see this ever happening because it is nowhere near a level playing field.

The major soccer leagues are more or less equally competing for the same players and the top teams are equal enough competitively that they can challenge each other on the same field.

The various hockey leagues are not.

fair enough, but all do serve as feeder leagues for the NHL, so at least between the AHL, KHL and SHL (I feel they are easily the top 3) I think we would see some very very good games.

I never watched it, but it sounds like the Marlies/Farjestad game was quite entertaining.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

You answered your own question.

But hasn't soccer had some success with using championship teams in some sort of format?

I don't really follow soccer (I think it is an aweful game that has only done one thing right in the entire time it has existed).


But we are talking about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_Club_World_Cup

There are also options the Heineken Cup and Champions League.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I don't really follow soccer (I think it is an aweful game that has only done one thing right in the entire time it has existed).


But we are talking about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_Club_World_Cup

There are also options the Heineken Cup and Champions League.

well I didn't mean the world cup. But I think it might be the Champions league. I don't follow soccer either

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

well I didn't mean the world cup. But I think it might be the Champions league. I don't follow soccer either

Club World Cup is only professional clubs, ie: Man U, etc.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Simple, keep NHL players in the Olympics. Nothing has ever gotten Americans to care about hockey more than seeing their team have a chance at a gold medal, hell you even had the president praising Oshie by name on Twitter after their game against the Russians. If the owners are stupid enough to pull their players from the Olympics then they'll be shooting themselves in the foot, looking at short term positives over the long term gain

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Club World Cup is only professional clubs, ie: Man U, etc.

i didn't see the word club in the link

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Simple, keep NHL players in the Olympics. Nothing has ever gotten Americans to care about hockey more than seeing their team have a chance at a gold medal, hell you even had the president praising Oshie by name on Twitter after their game against the Russians. If the owners are stupid enough to pull their players from the Olympics then they'll be shooting themselves in the foot, looking at short term positives over the long term gain

That is it in a nutshell.

It is a long term gain.

Again, I don't follow soccer, but what happens to the leagues that play during the World Cup or Euro Tourney?

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Simple, keep NHL players in the Olympics. Nothing has ever gotten Americans to care about hockey more than seeing their team have a chance at a gold medal, hell you even had the president praising Oshie by name on Twitter after their game against the Russians. If the owners are stupid enough to pull their players from the Olympics then they'll be shooting themselves in the foot, looking at short term positives over the long term gain

I think the game will grow whether the NHL is there or not.

Lets be honest in terms of Olympic goals the Peter Forberg goal in 1994 was just as epic as the Crosby goal in 2010.

A goal that was capture on Swedish stamps, that has carved out an entire generation that use that same move in the shootout.

[FireGilbert]

More international hockey is needed. Four years apart just isn't enough especially when it doesn't even guarantee the top teams play each other. Canada and Sweden are the two best teams in the world but this is the first time they play each other in 12 years! NHL players should stay in the Olympics, there needs to be a world cup, and international teams need to play friendlies every year. My plan is as follows:

-Two weeks every year are put aside for international hockey. One week in September replaces part of the pre-season and one week in February replaces the All Start break. International teams would meet, practice and play two games in the week. For example, Canada could host Sweden and Finland one September, then in February play a home and home against the US, then next September travel to Europe to play the Czechs and Russians. Teams would be allowed an extended roster and these friendlies would be used as a tryout for the Olympics and World Cup.

-Every four years the September break is extended to two weeks for a World Cup. I don't mean a Canada cup or the first editions of the World Cup, as those tournaments pretty much guaranteed Canada got to the finals, but something like a Rugby or Soccer World Cup. There should be 16 to 20 teams with the Cup being held in a different location every four years. They could be rotated between North America, Northern Europe, and Eastern Europe for example.

-Every four years the February break is extended to two weeks for the Olympics. No explanation needed here, the tournament can remain the same with some adjustments to the format.

This would solve many issues with international hockey and grow the game. There would be a lot more of it with the best teams playing each other more often and the IIHF rankings would actually be accurate. As well it would be easier for teams to pick their best players and develop chemistry. Team Canada would be named every year and different lines/player combinations could be tried in the friendlies before picking Olympic and World Cup rosters.

[AvsJerk]

Still a bit disappointed here after yesterday (great job Team Canada!) and this morning (Congrats and impressive win Finland!). I'm not sure how you grow the game.

I grew up in the Northeast (20 miles north of Boston), and grew up with the game (it was multi-generational there)...I also spent a fair amount of my youth living in places like Florida, Colorado, and Southern California that didn't have hockey roots.

I played the game growing up and still play a pick-up game here and there as an adult. I've tried getting friends interested in hockey to no avail. I think it's a game you have to grow up with. The only friends I have that are interested in hockey are people that grew up in the northeast or upper midwest...most other people in the states seem to be only interested in NFL or MLBA (I've never been friends with anybody that follows NBA or NASCAR...go figure).

That being said, I've seen hockey (and lacrosse) grow quite a bit in the states over the past 20 years or so...out of the traditional northeast/midwest markets. That's probably how you grow the game, get more youth programs started. Hockey has always been somewhat of a middle class/upper middle class/rich kid sport in the U.S, so that's a barrier.

[RougeUnderoos]

I've never really understood the whole "grow the game" thing. As a Canadian and hockey fan already, what difference does it make to me? Why should I care if it grows? What does "grow" even mean? More people play hockey? I guess that would be a good thing.

Other than that though, "grow the game" has always seemed to me to something Bettman would say instead of saying what he really means, which is "get more money for NHL owners". That's his job and it makes sense, but it doesn't do anything for me. It might even be bad for me, as a Canadian hockey fan (and taxpayer).

[AvsJerk]

I also think USA hockey took a hit here by not even medaling. USA hockey had been on a bit of a rise, what with their showing against Canada in Vancouver. This was definitely a step back for Team USA...I'm still a fan, but I'm sure they'll lose some interest because of this.

World wide, I think there would be greater interest if there weren't NHL/KHL/other pro-leaguers playing in the Olympics.

For already established fans, the pros are great, and it's a blast watching them compete for their countries.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

More international hockey is needed. Four years apart just isn't enough especially when it doesn't even guarantee the top teams play each other. Canada and Sweden are the two best teams in the world but this is the first time they play each other in 12 years! NHL players should stay in the Olympics, there needs to be a world cup, and international teams need to play friendlies every year. My plan is as follows:

-Two weeks every year are put aside for international hockey. One week in September replaces part of the pre-season and one week in February replaces the All Start break. International teams would meet, practice and play two games in the week. For example, Canada could host Sweden and Finland one September, then in February play a home and home against the US, then next September travel to Europe to play the Czechs and Russians. Teams would be allowed an extended roster and these friendlies would be used as a tryout for the Olympics and World Cup.

-Every four years the September break is extended to two weeks for a World Cup. I don't mean a Canada cup or the first editions of the World Cup, as those tournaments pretty much guaranteed Canada got to the finals, but something like a Rugby or Soccer World Cup. There should be 16 to 20 teams with the Cup being held in a different location every four years. They could be rotated between North America, Northern Europe, and Eastern Europe for example.

-Every four years the February break is extended to two weeks for the Olympics. No explanation needed here, the tournament can remain the same with some adjustments to the format.

This would solve many issues with international hockey and grow the game. There would be a lot more of it with the best teams playing each other more often and the IIHF rankings would actually be accurate. As well it would be easier for teams to pick their best players and develop chemistry. Team Canada would be named every year and different lines/player combinations could be tried in the friendlies before picking Olympic and World Cup rosters.

I like this, but I would go a step further and make those games world cup qualification games rather than just friendlies.

[nik-]

Does it makes me an ####### that I'm sick of hearing "grow the game" and that I really don't care anymore if more people watch it or not?