Making sense of the various international IH tournaments

[dfb547490]

So right now we have 3 hockey world championships, none of which is a definitive world title, all of which have their pros and cons.

What I think we need to do is establish the Olympic hockey tournament as the sport's definitive world championship, with the WCoH as a slightly less prestigious, invitation-only tournament (similar to the World Cup/Confederations Cup in soccer, with the difference that the gap in prestige in the soccer tournaments is immeasurable whereas in hockey it wouldn't be as great).

I really like the IHWC format (promotion/relegation, hosted by a single country, simple group format with no confusing preliminary rounds but with the group play actually meaning something), but feel that it can't be considered a real world championship as long as Canada and the US (the best and arguably second-best teams in the world) don't take it as seriously as the European teams. Also, the fact that it is played every year, even in Olympic and WCoH years, diminishes its importance IMO--and let's not even get into the fact that it conflicts with the Stanley Cup playoffs.

The WCoH is obviously a made-for-TV tournament designed to line the pockets of NHL execs. That's why the tournament is played under NHL rules, that's why the group stages are played in both the US and Europe (despite the popular notion of US=Money, no-one aside from hard-core hockey fans is going to pay $60 to see Germany vs. Sweden in New York). That's why, even if Belarus clearly surpasses Germany as the #8 team in the world at some point (which they haven't done yet, but are getting there), they will never be the 8th team invited to the WCoH.

Which leaves us the Olympics. I'm not sure about the group play format--on one hand the preliminary stuff is confusing, on the other hand it allows more teams to take part without pissing the NHLPA off too much. The severe downside to the Olympics, of course, is that we never know whether or not NHL players will be taking part in the next tournament, but hopefully that's something that will be resolved in this round of labor talks.

Basically, I would suggest that the IIHF merge the IHWC Div 1 and the Olympics into a single tournament. This allows us to remove some of the clutter from the international ice hockey schedule while still retaining the long history of the IHWC. Play it every 4 years obviously, a 16 team tournament using the same format as the soccer tournament. Keep the lower IHWC divisions going on the current every-year format and allow those teams to qualify for the Olympics by playing well in their divisions.

Then on the non-Olympic even years, you have the WCoH. Keep the current format, it's fine for what it is--a showcase tournament. The only thing I would change is that any team that makes the Olympic semifinals is guaranteed a berth in the next WCoH and thus a large paycheck for their IHF. This gives even the weaker teams something to play for in the Olympics--after all if Belarus could do it in 2002, why not Kazakhstan or Italy or Switzerland in 2006? With the weakening of Germany's hockey program (until 2002 I think they along with Slovakia were clearly the "next 2" after the Big Six and the gap between them and the #9 team was ridiculous, but Slovakia has clearly left the Germans in the dust and Belarus is breathing down their neck) I feel this is neccesary step.

For the "odd" years, have 2 premier international competitions--a best-of-3 (rotating home ice advantage) US-Canada challenge cup, and a European Championship tournament (you could allow Japan to play in this as well). You could even have a challenge match between the North American and European champions right before the NHL season each fall.

I'd like to see this schedule put into place beginning with the Winter Games in 2006. So, to recap:

2006 - Winter Olympics
2007 - US-Canada Challenge Cup, European Championships, NorAm-Euro Cup
2008 - World Cup of Hockey
2009 - same as 2007
2010 - Winter Olympics

etc.

What do you guys think?

[Daniel from Montréal]

Assuming NHL players participate:

The World Championships are good to build a national team. This is when the different national teams get to play together, with differing degrees in regards to the "full" team. The Swedish team is usually very strong there, as well as the Slovaks who have medalled the past 3 years. Lots of Canadians have made the World Cup and Olympic national team because of the Worlds (Maltby, Draper, Smyth, Luongo, etc.). The Americans usually don't really bother with sending their top talent.

The Worlds' greatest aspect is that it develops lower-ranked countries, such as Germany, Switzerland, Slovakia (helped a lot), etc. They get to play more than once every 4 years (or never!) and that's good for hockey. Also, you need to consider that the Worlds served as Olympic qualifying. The States' decent showing this season made them avoid preliminary qualification.

The World Cup is an inconsistent money grab organised by the NHL/NHLPA and, although it means something, it's not even close to the Olympic Gold (1998, 2002) in pretty much any country (including Canada). It is organised "whenever" (1987, 1991, 1996, 2004) and the invitation-only format and NHL rules reduce it in stature and seriousness (that and the admission of all teams in the QFs this year). The World Cup is NOT a true world cup.

The Olympics. The holy grail. Since the admission of NHL players in 1998, both tournaments have been the most important of the past 10 years and their champions (Czechs, Canada) were recognised as heroes in their country. The wonky format shafted the Slovaks and helped the Belarussians in 2002, but it will be revised for 2006. 12 teams will qualify and will be split into 2 groups of 6. The top 4 of each group move on to the QFs.

The Olympics really matter because they have history, show great play (midseason action, when the players have hit their stride) and everyone is focused on them for 2 weeks (hardly the case of the WCh or the WCup).

Rumour has it that this is the last World Cup we see, and if NHL players keep on attending the Olympics (they wouldn't if the lock-out lasts all season this year), I like the competitions that will be left over. The World Championships bring a steady dose of international hockey which helps form teams and proves surprising every year and the Olympics are the ultimate event, culminating every 4 years.

[dfb547490]

One of the interesting things to me in the World Cup is that some of the individual games, such as US-Canada, seem to mean more than the tournament itself.

I guess my plan wasn't clear--I would make the World Championships equivalent to the Olympics going forward. If you win the Olympic gold medal, you also win the Ice Hockey World Championship. The steady dose of int'l hockey you talked about would be provided by the WCoH if it continues, but also by the European (+ Japan) Championships and US-Canada Challenge Cup in odd years. And the smaller teams would still get their day on stage, as I would expand the Olympic tournament even further to 16 teams (altho now that I think about it I wouldn't just use the same format as soccer--how about group winners get byes to the quarterfinals while 2nd and 3rd-placed teams have to play off? Despite the fact that more teams advance past the group stage this would add more bite to the first-round games involving Big 6 teams--so that if you get a group of, say, the US, Sweden, Kazakhstan, and Italy, then the US and Sweden would be playing for a bye straight to the quarterfinals rather than just for seeding, in which case they might have a boring skate-around with guys afraid of getting hurt).

If the WCoH doesn't come back then I suppose you could have a World Championships in the other even years, but aside from that a biennial 10- or 12-team European Championships along with retaining the lower-division World Championships on an annual basis would seem to work (any non-European team qualifying for the A pool would get an invite to the European Championships, but realistically Japan is the only team that could do it--altho looking at the IIHF website I see that they had a playoff with Korea to qualify for the last World Champs, and only beat them 4-1, so maybe the Koreans could hang as well).

[DoyleG]

The only change to the calendar that might be considered is not having a WC during an Olympic year.

Any other tournaments would only work if nations are willing to put huge amounts of money in to have full-time national teams. With the NHL at the Olympics now, countries don't see the need for such squads.

[nyrmetros]

The World Cup of Hockey must become the most prestigious hockey tournament in the world.

I feel that the World Champoionships should merge with the Olympics.
But the World Championships on the junior level can still go on.

For the WC of H.
Let the IIHF run the show.
The NHL and NHLPA should all be shot for not having a 2000 WC of H.

tournament is every 4 years.
16 teams. Every team but the host country(s) must qualify.
Alternate the semi final and final between Europe and North America.
Teams can get eliminated with a piss poor performance in the group stage.
Get a REAL freken World Cup trophy!!

There is so much more that can be done for the WC of H, but I don't have the time to list em all.

[Daniel from Montréal]

Pretty much all the guidelines listed work for the Olympics...

In 2006:

- 12 teams, with 8 going through to the quarters.
- 2002 and 2010 in NA. 2006 in Europe.
- You DO need to qualify (World Championships and past Olympic performances make the qualifying criteria)
- Tournament is every 4 years (guaranteed!)
- The IIHF runs it with international ice and rules
- Host is an automatic qualifyer
- Classic trophy with tradition (silver plate)

and

- Mid-season form means better hockey

This is pretty much why the World Cup isn't needed. The Olympics have nearly 100 years of hockey history backing them and are the oldest international hockey tournament.