Womens Hockey: How Much Time Left?

[VladtheImpaler]

You guys bring up what happened in 1932 like it has any relevance whatsoever...

[Resolute 14]

Because it does.

In the 1920s and 1930s, men's hockey was dominated by Canada and the United States, while Europeans barely knew which end of the stick went on the ice.

Women's hockey today is in that same state. In the men's game, Europe began to catch up to North America in the second generation (then surpassed it when the Soviets resorted to cheating). Question now is why the women's game should not be given the same opportunity?

[VladtheImpaler]

It has no relevance at all because in 1932 there was no TV, no advertising, the Winter Olympics had a dozen countries participating, and it was basically a club for aristocrats from northern Europe and the "colonies". A slightly different environment today, no?

[Red_Baron]

Originally Posted by Mike Vernon

I completely disagree with you Baron, Im watching the Finish girls play the Americans right now and they have talent and skill but unlike the Americans and Canadian girls they are much younger and smaller. In the years to come I can see some good games as the skill level evens out. The Pioneer girls for Canada will retire, it will be interesting to see what country the next girl superstar player comes from, who knows she might not be from North America.

Does anyone know what kind of body contact is acceptable with the girl hockey? I cant think of another contact team sport that girls play?

Go watch a pee wee girls game in any arena in Canada, then watch a Pee wee boys AAA game. Note how much closer the skill level of the girls is compared to the women's national team than the pee wee boys are to the Men's national team. The old guard of the Canadian women's team is going to seem very mediocre compared to the next wave. The competition is going to fall further behind for the foreseeable future.

[octothorp]

Consider it from the perspective of the IOC: women's hockey occupies hours and hours of time at the Olympics, and outside of Canada and the US, probably draws next to nothing for ratings, and will probably not draw crowds either. It requires an additional venue, and is logistically complex with the number of athletes involved. So where's the benefit in it for the IOC? They're more interested in making money than growing sports, and unless they're planning a return to North America after Sochi (unlikely), women's hockey is a losing proposition. It might take a generation for women's hockey to become competitive, but even then, is it really going to be a moneymaker for them?

[Mike Vernon]

Originally Posted by Red_Baron

Go watch a pee wee girls game in any arena in Canada, then watch a Pee wee boys AAA game. Note how much closer the skill level of the girls is compared to the women's national team than the pee wee boys are to the Men's national team. The old guard of the Canadian women's team is going to seem very mediocre compared to the next wave. The competition is going to fall further behind for the foreseeable future.

Can you please tell me the lotto numbers for next week while your telling me what the future holds

Those Fins would rock any Pee Wee girls team, like I said, they are young, in the next olympics in 4yrs they will be much more competitive. Will they win the Gold? Prob not, but we will see a game like the Mens Norway/USA today or dare I say the Swiss/Canada game. I dont know why you think that they will not be able to compete because they are from Europe or Asia? Those girls can train just as hard, and be just as good as our girls, it will just take more experience and training. The playing field will level out, and its not going to take 50yrs like it did when hockey was first played ever. Its catching on and the North Americans will be looking over there shoulder in no time!

[browna]

Originally Posted by octothorp

Consider it from the perspective of the IOC: women's hockey occupies hours and hours of time at the Olympics, and outside of Canada and the US, probably draws next to nothing for ratings, and will probably not draw crowds either. It requires an additional venue, and is logistically complex with the number of athletes involved. So where's the benefit in it for the IOC? They're more interested in making money than growing sports, and unless they're planning a return to North America after Sochi (unlikely), women's hockey is a losing proposition. It might take a generation for women's hockey to become competitive, but even then, is it really going to be a moneymaker for them?

Not sure it or any event has to be a moneymaker per se, but agree with the rest of your post.

With the Olympics not likely in North America for 12 years or so, not sure how much interest its going to be in Europe...for all the extra logistical and venues its an uphill battle in that regard.

I also agree with the 1932 argument being fairly irrelevant given the scope and breadth that the Olympics have grown to since that point.

All that said, Hockey Canada will fight something like this tooth and nail and likely (publically or behind closed doors) threaten to pull professional players on the men's side out if the Women's competition is dropped back down to annual World Championships only. Knowing Hockey Canada, it would be a highly public campaign.

[GGG]

I think what we are missing is that the battle for the bronze medal is highly competitive.

I was at the Slovak Sweden game and it was decent hockey. The teams were very competive. The hockey game was at least as entertaining as the Mac's tournament. The crowd there was amazing.

The logistical aspect of hockey isn't that difficult. Any city hosting a winter olympics should have at least 3 ice arena's. If there is little demand for tickets you could put the round robind in a 1000 seat arena so you the only real logiscal issue is 160 extra athletes.

On Don Cherry's Grapevine segmant he had a suggestion to stop the running up the score and that was to make all tie breaks based on goals against rather then differential. That way as soon as you were up 5 you would focus on keeping pucks out of the net rather then scoring goals.

The fact that Sweden won a silver should at least get them past Sochi. But I do agree the quality of the Women's game in Canada is going to go up faster than the rest of the world.

[united]

Women's hockey (Canada and USA that is) is pretty much midget without hitting. I don't even know what you could compare the rest of the countries to. Hopefully things pickup in the next decade but I wouldn't be surprised if this is the last Olympics they participate in for a while.

[Red_Baron]

Originally Posted by Mike Vernon

Can you please tell me the lotto numbers for next week while your telling me what the future holds

Those Fins would rock any Pee Wee girls team, like I said, they are young, in the next olympics in 4yrs they will be much more competitive. Will they win the Gold? Prob not, but we will see a game like the Mens Norway/USA today or dare I say the Swiss/Canada game. I dont know why you think that they will not be able to compete because they are from Europe or Asia? Those girls can train just as hard, and be just as good as our girls, it will just take more experience and training. The playing field will level out, and its not going to take 50yrs like it did when hockey was first played ever. Its catching on and the North Americans will be looking over there shoulder in no time!

So in your mind Women's hockey in Canada has peaked?
Or did you even understand my post? Where did I say that the Fins would lose to a Canadian Female Pee Wee team?

[bcb]

Forget that watching Canada vs. any other woman's hockey team is like watching the 1996 Detroit Redwings play the 2010 Edmonton Oilers, or the 1995 Chicago Bulls play the 1995 LA Clippers. Ignore the lack of parity for a moment.

The real issue is that the sport is so damn boring!

Honestly, penalties for body checking? Helmets that look like Hasek's goalie mask?

[Hack&Lube]

If women's ski jumping can get axed - and that's a competitive individual sport that women from all countries can get good at, women's hockey can get axed.

There simply isn't enough competitiveness and no demand. In today's modern world of so many diversions and entertainment, you need something that will draw audiences.

Even aside from the competitiveness, the game itself is boring as heck to watch. It's more like watching a train wreck on ice.

[jayswin]

I will continue to watch women's hockey because I am in love with Meghan Agosta.

[burning_acid1]

Too bad they're removing women's ice hockey for the 2014 Olympics That'll be one less gold for Canada

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by burning_acid1

Too bad they're removing women's ice hockey for the 2014 Olympics

Since when?

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I will continue to watch women's hockey because I am in love with Meghan Agosta.

I would play shinny with this broad any day of the week! Gal's got sick hands!

[bcb]

In the event Meghan Agosta decides to take up fencing, she won't have to buy a new helmet.

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by burning_acid1

Too bad they're removing women's ice hockey for the 2014 Olympics That'll be one less gold for Canada

There is rumblings of that, however I don't see it happening.

[jayswin]

[Canada 02]

Women's hockey must improve or else - IOC's Rogge

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Women+h...#ixzz0gaGfZUf8