View Poll Results: How many countries would you include in the World Cup?

Voters
126. You may not vote on this poll
  • 8 - (2 groups of 4, as it is now)

    40 31.75%
  • 10 - (2 groups of 5, Top 4 of each to Quater-Finals)

    26 20.63%
  • 12 - (2 groups of 6, Top 4 of each to Quater-Finals)

    26 20.63%
  • 16 - (4 groups of 4, Top 2 of each to Quater-Finals)

    34 26.98%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 78 of 78

Thread: How many countries Should be in the World Cup?

  1. #51
    IHF Prospect
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    B.C. Canada
    Posts
    30
    I have to agree that a 10-12 team tournament would be optimal. It would really help grow the tournament's stature in Europe. Perhaps we could have some sort of qualifying tournament for the 2nd tier teams, so that nations 8-16 would all be involved.

    The problem I see is that unlike most international hockey tournaments this is a private business venture. This is the NHL and NHLPA looking to make money, and they should be allowed to make money. As it currently stands, I don't think they make a lot of money. I'd have to look it up, but I believe in its heyday the Canada Cup/World Cup "only" made a few million dollars. By the time you split that 30 ways and disperse that over 700 paychecks, that's not a lot of money.

    Does inviting 2nd tier nations, most with few or no NHLers, add any economic value? I'd guess its probably negligible. And whatever gains would be offset or worse by costs.

    I know the common argument will be the NHL is too shortsighted and they need to have the bigger picture in mind. I tend to agree, and I tend to think the NHL has actually done a good job of that. But as a commerce major myself I know that a private business has to have measurable returns or its just not going to survive.

    Joe Pelletier
    ------------------
    In bookstores now:
    LEGENDS OF TEAM CANADA - More info at http://www.1972summitseries.com
    WORLD CUP OF HOCKEY - More info at http://www3.telus.net/worldcuphockey
    -------------------
    Hockey Over Time has returned - http://www.legendsofhockey.blogspot.com

  2. #52
    IHF Member twelve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier
    I have to agree that a 10-12 team tournament would be optimal. It would really help grow the tournament's stature in Europe. Perhaps we could have some sort of qualifying tournament for the 2nd tier teams, so that nations 8-16 would all be involved.
    A qualifying tournament is certainly a good option, IMO four teams could compete for the 8th starting place. However, there would arise the problem of how to schedule this qualification(which would most probably have to be staged in Europe). If the qualifying tournament were shortly before the World Cup, the number of games the 2nd tier teams would have to play before the actual tournament would have a negative influence on their performance in the actual World Cup tournament. I'm sure the question whether this was fair on the 2nd tier team would arise soon enough.

    Also, 2nd tier teams have to play in a number of tournaments to qualify for major events, so it would have to be ensured that one qualifying tournament doesn't clash with the other. A good result in the World Cup would have a lower priority than a good result in a qualifying tournament for a ihwc- or Olympic games.
    Up The Irons!

    -

    "L'anne de trop? Je l'ai faite quand j'avais 13 ans." = "If I played a year too much, it was the year when I was 13." -Gil Montandon, when asked if he wasn't a year too old to sign a contract as a hockey-pro at the age of 40. (That was in 2006. He went on playing professionally till the end of the 2008/09 season.)

  3. #53
    IHF Prospect
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Hradec Krlov
    Posts
    24

    5 team tournament

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazz
    If you were organizing the World Cup...how many teams would you have included in the tournament format, and why??

    Please post any thoughts/responses below.
    CANADA
    USA
    Europe central
    Scandinavia (and Latvia,Estonia and Lithuania)
    East Europe

  4. #54
    IHF Member Hatman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    58
    32 of course, just like Football! ;)

    Imagine what a tournament with 32 hockey nations would be like? Total insanity :D
    :653: Do the hat dance.

  5. #55
    IHF Member Tokyo Bucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    1,383
    Haha, but even with football there are too many minnows amongst the 32 (well, they could just decrease the CONCACAF and Asia entries..) so the tournament doesn't really get going with unpredictable high quality matches until after the group stage.

    Just imagine how many goals Russia will score against Israel! :005:

  6. #56
    IHF Member Hatman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    58
    It would be cool. There would be a continental qualifying stage:

    North & South America - 2 teams
    Africa 0.5 teams
    Oceania 1.5 teams
    Asia 6 teams
    Europe 22 teams

    :D

    Canada/USA/Mexico would provide for an interesting tournament :D
    :653: Do the hat dance.

  7. #57
    IHF Member Tokyo Bucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    1,383
    Hey, you gotta give Mexico a chance.

    2.5 teams for the Americas and 5.5 teams for Asia :003:

  8. #58
    IHF Member Hatman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokyo Bucks
    Hey, you gotta give Mexico a chance.

    2.5 teams for the Americas and 5.5 teams for Asia :003:
    Good point. Of course, I choose to differ from FIFA in that Israel, Kazakhstan and Turkey will be considered part of Asia and Australia is in Oceania (like it should be).

    That would put 31 countries in Europe in which 22 must qualify. Maybe to make things more interesting, we could divide Europe up into qualification zones?
    :653: Do the hat dance.

  9. #59
    IHF Member twelve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatman
    Good point. Of course, I choose to differ from FIFA in that Israel, Kazakhstan and Turkey will be considered part of Asia and Australia is in Oceania (like it should be).

    That would put 31 countries in Europe in which 22 must qualify. Maybe to make things more interesting, we could divide Europe up into qualification zones?
    As in:

    Eastern Europe 7.3
    Skandinavian Countries 4.1
    Meditarranean Countries 5.4
    Switzerland 1
    Western Europe 4.2
    Up The Irons!

    -

    "L'anne de trop? Je l'ai faite quand j'avais 13 ans." = "If I played a year too much, it was the year when I was 13." -Gil Montandon, when asked if he wasn't a year too old to sign a contract as a hockey-pro at the age of 40. (That was in 2006. He went on playing professionally till the end of the 2008/09 season.)

  10. #60
    IHF Member Tokyo Bucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    1,383
    Hahaha, is that

    Neutral Europe 1

    to be less obvious? :claphands

    Off topic, but FIFA needs to realign the conferences. Divide Asia into West and East, then merge Oceania with East Asia. Then reassign the WC spots accordingly (way too much politicking here, so this great idea like many others is guaranteed never to become reality, heh). It's ridiculous that Gulf nations and the Far Eastern nations have to play home and away qualifying matches against eachother through 6 time zones and 9000kms (in the case of Lebanon and Japan, for example).

  11. #61
    IHF Member Toni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Linz, Austria
    Posts
    1,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokyo Bucks
    Hahaha, is that

    Neutral Europe 1

    to be less obvious? :claphands
    Hey,

    de jure Austria is neutral too (not to forget hockey powers like Liechtenstein, San Marino or Andorra). This would be too tough for Switzerland :002: My proposal:

    Famous for Cheese and Watches Europe 1

  12. #62
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    576
    World Cup of Hockey are a exhibitions tournament. Its not a championship but a great show on ice. So I think that 8 teams are enought, the eight best teams in the world. Maybe just six teams Canada and USA and the four best teams form Europe in one groupe like the old Canada Cup.


    In the world championship its better to have more teams to expand hockey world wide. I think its time to have 20 teams in the IHWC.
    four groups whit five teams. Number one to 1/4 finals and 2-3 to 1/8 finals.

  13. #63
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Vienna-Beli-Zagreb
    Posts
    155
    World Cup of Hockey are a exhibitions tournament. Its not a championship but a great show on ice. So I think that 8 teams are enought, the eight best teams in the world. Maybe just six teams Canada and USA and the four best teams form Europe in one groupe like the old Canada Cup.
    I agree that 8 is enough. But not with the idea of 6 teams. You forgot that with the split of Czechoslovakia there are 7 big hockey countries now. Those 7 plus another one sounds good to me.

    In the world championship its better to have more teams to expand hockey world wide. I think its time to have 20 teams in the IHWC.
    four groups whit five teams. Number one to 1/4 finals and 2-3 to 1/8 finals.
    That might be interesting as well. I'd like to see that.
    Beli ha quello che il mondo non ha...

  14. #64
    IHF Member twelve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric
    In the world championship its better to have more teams to expand hockey world wide. I think its time to have 20 teams in the IHWC.
    four groups whit five teams. Number one to 1/4 finals and 2-3 to 1/8 finals.
    I'm not much in favour of this solution, because it would make it easier for the four top teams to get on into the semifinals. Being top of the group after only four games shouldn't be enough to be allowed to rest more than the other teams.


    @Tokyo/Toni: I had hoped no one would notice... ;)
    Up The Irons!

    -

    "L'anne de trop? Je l'ai faite quand j'avais 13 ans." = "If I played a year too much, it was the year when I was 13." -Gil Montandon, when asked if he wasn't a year too old to sign a contract as a hockey-pro at the age of 40. (That was in 2006. He went on playing professionally till the end of the 2008/09 season.)

  15. #65
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    576
    today they play to many games in a championship. nine games to the gold are to much. Its better to only have one roundrobin and after that play off. 7-8 games to the gold are better. The QF Sweden vs USA was very anjust against USA they played a late game the night before and coundnt recover to the earkly afternoon game. Its to many games in to short time. Every team must have one day of before the play off at least 24 hours.

    Its a matter of money more games more money. But in the end its bad for the sport of hockey. 9 games in 16 days will not produce good hockey every day. It was a disaster to play the final the day after the 1/2 finals. Great action in both 1/2 finals but a final whit a completly tierd czech team. Fewer games= better hockey.

  16. #66
    IHF Member Brimsek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,995
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric
    today they play to many games in a championship. nine games to the gold are to much. Its better to only have one roundrobin and after that play off. 7-8 games to the gold are better. The QF Sweden vs USA was very anjust against USA they played a late game the night before and coundnt recover to the earkly afternoon game. Its to many games in to short time. Every team must have one day of before the play off at least 24 hours.
    I'm not sure how many teams should participate. But I do agree with the time in between games. There needs to be at least 24 hours as suggested by you Eric. It wouldn't have changed the result for the US (Sweden was way too strong for US team), but it may have been a little closer and the US team may not have run out of "gas" so easily. No team should have to play two games in that short of time span.
    Buffalo Sabres: TPS : Milwaukee Admirals

  17. #67
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    576
    Maybe not. But I dont like Sweden to win becurse of this. If both Sweden and USA had have one day of before the game I think it have ben a very good and close game.

  18. #68
    IHF Member evenstrengthscout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Waterford
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatman View Post
    32 of course, just like Football! ;)

    Imagine what a tournament with 32 hockey nations would be like? Total insanity :D
    That would be awsome.

  19. #69
    IHF Prospect krystof.herold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    27
    My idea:
    Top 6 teams IIHF Ranking(or other ranking e.g. last Olympics) automaticly to Quarterfinals
    Qualification - 7-10(or 12)teams mini-tournament (two to Quarterfinals)

    And then Playoffs (Best of 3 - Home/Away/Home)
    Q1) 1-Qual2
    Q2) 2-Qual1
    Q3) 3-6
    Q4) 4-5

    S1) Q1-Q4
    S2) Q2-Q3

    F) S1-S2

  20. #70
    IHF Member steap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Posts
    141
    2 teams:
    USA
    Canada
    Sorry4my_bad_english =)

  21. #71
    IHF Member Conesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Currently Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    2,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatman View Post
    32 of course, just like Football! ;)

    Imagine what a tournament with 32 hockey nations would be like? Total insanity :D
    Well, I can't deny that I'd probably be able to watch more countries play
    But yeah, I think it would inevitably be overkill. Maybe 16, 18 at most. I know it's not going to happen, but it could be a bigger tournament, and more exposure. Feel free to shoot this suggestion down.
    Twitter: @CSmeeth

  22. #72
    IHF Prospect
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Manila
    Posts
    11
    I do wish the World Cup of Hockey would have 16 teams but that's for the future, IF EVER hockey grows in popularity in less "traditional" territories...

  23. #73
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    168
    It would nice if you could have a 16 team tournament eventhough you'd have some blowouts but at least those lesser teams in a 12 team tournament would get more experience in a 16 game tournament.

    Who would the countries be in a 16 team tournament?

  24. #74
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    39
    Canada Cup began with just 6 teams then increased to 8 when Canada Cup changed to World Cup with games being held in Europe. So now, more hockey nations are improving so I would propose those following. Keep the 8 teams for now until more than 8 teams has improved and close the gap. It will not happen for quite a while. 2010 Olympics proved that other 9-12 ranked national teams has long way to go. The Swiss has improved to the point where they can compete as long as they have goaltending. Without those, there will be lopsided score.

    My proposal would be a qualification games between 8th seed to the 12th seed in world ranking in a qualification tournament, home and away using NHL rules in the summertime one year before the World Cup tournament actually begin. This will help the lower seeded teams to get acquaintance with the NHL-sized rink play.

    If all goes well, and there are real improvement from the 8th seeded teams in the World Cup then the future world cup can increase to 10 teams with qualification process for 8 to 16 ranked in the world using NHL rules, home and away in future World Cup after 2012. You will see real interests if there is qualification tournament. World Cup should be unique because it is played on smaller ice size. The Olympics can have their international ice size.

  25. #75
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier View Post

    The problem I see is that unlike most international hockey tournaments this is a private business venture. This is the NHL and NHLPA looking to make money, and they should be allowed to make money. As it currently stands, I don't think they make a lot of money. I'd have to look it up, but I believe in its heyday the Canada Cup/World Cup "only" made a few million dollars. By the time you split that 30 ways and disperse that over 700 paychecks, that's not a lot of money.



    Joe Pelletier
    ------------------
    In bookstores now:
    LEGENDS OF TEAM CANADA - More info at http://www.1972summitseries.com
    WORLD CUP OF HOCKEY - More info at http://www3.telus.net/worldcuphockey
    -------------------
    Hockey Over Time has returned - http://www.legendsofhockey.blogspot.com
    The World Cup tournaments from what I have read made a boatload of cash for the NHLPA.
    In fact, the first tournament in 1996 alone made more money for the players than the five Canada Cup tournaments combined!
    That's because now disgraced former NHLPA boss Alan Eagleson had his hand in the till and pilfered money
    off those tournaments like he did so many of his clients he purportedly represented.
    Personally, like the old TV show, eight is enough.
    The Swiss have shown at the last two Olympics they are a worthy adversary, even though their talent level is thin.
    They have top caliber goaltending and use a defensive system that will keep them in games.
    Anything beyond eight increases the risk of blowouts exponentially.
    We see enough of those during the WJC and the women's WC, thank you very much.

  26. #76
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    168
    Based on the IIHF rankings it looks like Austria, Denmark, Italy, and France would be included if you went with 16 teams in any hockey tournament.

    But you wouldn't do that with the World Cup of Hockey since there is such a dropoff in the talent level. In fact you may not even go with the top 12 teams.

  27. #77
    IHF Prospect
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    1
    I hate to bump an old thread, but with the World Cup all but confirmed as returning, this is what I would like to see.

    Hosted by two cities (Montreal and Toronto the first year), there are two groups of six teams, meaning a five game round robin. The groups would not be limited to one city, each team would play a minimum of two games in each city (that way both Montreal and Toronto fans can see Canada play). In total, there would be thirty round robin games. At three games per day, this would take ten days to complete. Day 11 would be an off day, Day 12 would see all four quarter final games played, two in each city. Day 13 would be an off day. Day 14 would have the two semi finals games. Day 15 would be another off day, and Day 16 would be the finals.

    Should the NHL bow out of the Olympics, I would like to see European Championships (and Asian) held every four years. While the Europeans are going on, a Canada-USA series (either Best of Seven or an Eight Game Series) could be held as well. Since the World Championships would not be taking place in this scenario, somehow qualification into the World Cup would need to take place (perhaps the fall before the World Cup takes place).

  28. #78
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    988
    Quote Originally Posted by tnk View Post
    I hate to bump an old thread, but with the World Cup all but confirmed as returning, this is what I would like to see.

    Hosted by two cities (Montreal and Toronto the first year), there are two groups of six teams, meaning a five game round robin. The groups would not be limited to one city, each team would play a minimum of two games in each city (that way both Montreal and Toronto fans can see Canada play). In total, there would be thirty round robin games. At three games per day, this would take ten days to complete. Day 11 would be an off day, Day 12 would see all four quarter final games played, two in each city. Day 13 would be an off day. Day 14 would have the two semi finals games. Day 15 would be another off day, and Day 16 would be the finals.

    Should the NHL bow out of the Olympics, I would like to see European Championships (and Asian) held every four years. While the Europeans are going on, a Canada-USA series (either Best of Seven or an Eight Game Series) could be held as well. Since the World Championships would not be taking place in this scenario, somehow qualification into the World Cup would need to take place (perhaps the fall before the World Cup takes place).
    As it's just an NHL pre-season taster event, three teams should do it. Canada, USA and Rest of the World. Not as if it is anything serious like the WC or Olympics.

    Geoff

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •