2016 World Cup of Hockey: Alternative Formats - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Jets4Life · 06-02-2015, 08:49 PM

Since the new World Cup of Hockey format seems to be universally despised (U23, Team European Leftovers, etc.), I wanted to see what others could come up with, when choosing a format to see what countries participate.

My version:

Take the top six traditional powerhouse Ice Hockey nations, and have them qualify automatically:

-Canada
-USA
-Sweden
-Finland
-Russia
-Czech Republic

Then take the next 10 best countries ranked by the IIHF, an have them in two groups, and compete with each other to qualify. The top two teams in each pool earn a birth in the World Cup. This preliminary tourney would be held in August or September this year.

Example:

Pool A:

Switzerland
Austria
Belarus
Slovenia
France

Pool B:

Slovakia
Denmark
Latvia
Germany
Norway

When all is said and done, have 10 teams in two pools, battle it out for the World CUp

Tyler · 06-02-2015, 10:26 PM

"I don't want to see the best under 23 year old players in the world, but i want to see Team France!"

Ridiculous

mile · 06-02-2015, 10:45 PM

I like the idea. What I would change is having just the top team in each preliminary pool make it to the main tourney, making it an eight team tournament like in the 2004 version. I feel with two teams with each pool entering you're going to get two teams that probably shouldn't be there.

In any case this is better than the new format. Don't like the gimmick teams at all, it makes the tournament feel less important. With the preliminary tournament idea I don't mind it because you don't have to watch it if you don't want to.

My other idea would be to just have Switzerland and Slovakia as the other two teams added to the six.

sureLoss · 06-02-2015, 10:52 PM

They already explained that the U23 and Euro leftovers was for the 2016 world cup only because they didn't have enough time to organize a qualifying tournament for 2016.

They said the plan for the 2020 World Cup was to have a qualifying tournament.

Itse · 06-03-2015, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

They already explained that the U23 and Euro leftovers was for the 2016 world cup only because they didn't have enough time to organize a qualifying tournament for 2016.

The incompetence of hockey organizations never ceases to amaze me.

GirlySports · 06-03-2015, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

They already explained that the U23 and Euro leftovers was for the 2016 world cup only because they didn't have enough time to organize a qualifying tournament for 2016.

They said the plan for the 2020 World Cup was to have a qualifying tournament.

The question is why did they have to play in 2016?

lazypucker · 06-03-2015, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The question is why did they have to play in 2016?

Sportsnet / Rogers paid off IIHF to get a World Cup in Toronto 2016 - ala Qatar style....

dying4acup · 06-03-2015, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by girlysports

the question is why did they have to play in 2016?

hrr

hockey related revenue

to be shared between the nhl and nhlpa

getbak · 06-03-2015, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The question is why did they have to play in 2016?

FireGilbert · 06-03-2015, 06:52 AM

Are the 2018 Winter Olympics an acceptable alternate format?

Assuming the Olympics are out of the question, my idea of a format is to have international hockey every two years. One year being World Cup qualification and the second being the Cup itself.

Teams 1 to 8 would make it automatically while teams 9 to 16 would attempt to qualify for two more spots. The qualification tournament would have 2 groups of 4 teams playing home and homes with the group winners getting the final Cup spots. While the qualifications are going on the top 8 teams are required to play at least 6 international games which would count in world rankings. Teams would have very large rosters making this sort of a try out for the World Cup team and it would be a big money maker guaranteeing big international games in the US and Canada every four years.

The 10 team World Cup would then be simple with groups of 5 playing a round robin before the top 4 in each play single elimination. It would also alternate between North America and Europe and be hosted by around 6 to 8 cities in close geographic proximity.

Jason14h · 06-03-2015, 07:59 AM

Can we at least see how the format goes?

I actually think it's a lot better then 2 throw in teams to get destroyed

King Theo · 06-03-2015, 08:32 AM

Keep you top 6 teams.
Canada
USA
Sweden
Finland
Russia
Czech Republic

Can you make 2 teams out of the rest?
Switzerland
Austria
Belarus
Slovenia
France
Slovakia
Denmark
Latvia
Germany
Norway

Or add a "Canada 2" team

Jets4Life · 06-03-2015, 03:01 PM

Let's not forget Switzerland did beat Canada in 2006. Belarus defeated Sweden in 2002. Some countries, and their hockey programs, have improved dramatically in the last 20 years.

GirlySports · 06-03-2015, 05:47 PM

I mean why couldnt they have played in 2017?

Yamer · 06-03-2015, 06:47 PM

Is the World Cup NHL players only?

dying4acup · 06-04-2015, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yamer

Is the World Cup NHL players only?

No.

Each country has its own choice of who plays. How the winning purses for players is divided I don't know.

But the profits from the tournament will be NHL HRR. Divided between players costs and owners revenues equally. Likely increasing the cap.

Red Menace · 06-04-2015, 07:13 AM

It's not restricted to NHL players, but this is a co-venture between the NHL and NHLPA; the IIHF is not involved.
There is a strong incentive to have the field be almost entirely members of the NHLPA, this is why there is not much interest in having countries who cannot ice a full roster of NHLers compete.

#-3 · 06-04-2015, 07:43 AM

I think when you look at the elite countries, Czechs and Slovaks should both be on the bubble, I think they are either both in or both out.

Aside from Jagr and Hasek I don't really see the Czechs as ahead of the Slovaks in any way, and those guys won't be playing in future world cups.

I think a way they could do it and minimize organization ahead of time.

Automatically in;
Canada
USA
Sweden
Finland
Russia

Then you have 4 game head to head summits the year before. Each countries Hockey federation organizes and hosts 2 games. The winner is in, the loser is out.
6 vs 15 (Czech vs Denmark)
7 vs 14 (Switzerland vs Slovenia)
8 vs 13 (Slovakia vs Germany)
9 vs 12 (Belarus vs France)
10 vs 11 (Latvia vs Norway)

Austria is 16th in the world rankings right now and doesn't fit my model.

This model could be expandable, if you get to where you want to include more teams you could have 2 summit rounds.

Top 5 in

6-10 buy into summit round 2.

11-20 play to get into summit round 2.

GirlySports · 06-05-2015, 10:33 AM

The NHL isn't really that interested in running extra tournaments for more countries. Growing the sport internationally is the job of the IIHF and their 70-odd members.

This World Cup is a cash grab. I would not be surprised if the Euro and U-23 teams became permanent fixtures or new ideas for teams or the event dies off again.

Jets4Life · 06-05-2015, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The NHL isn't really that interested in running extra tournaments for more countries. Growing the sport internationally is the job of the IIHF and their 70-odd members.

This World Cup is a cash grab. I would not be surprised if the Euro and U-23 teams became permanent fixtures or new ideas for teams or the event dies off again.

Correct me if I am wrong, but is the U23 team from all of North America, or do they have a separate Canada-U23 and USA-U23? I would think it would be hard to motivate ourself if you were 22 years old, and playing on "Team U23 North America" against the nation you were born in.