HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Leagues > The KHL
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The KHL Discuss the Continental Hockey League (Kontinentalnaya Hokkeynaya Liga).

Medvedev wants to expand to 64 teams

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-14-2012, 09:29 AM
  #26
Jeez
Jay Jay
 
Jeez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Praha - Islands
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dosing View Post
The point is to give a first glance of "khl's greatness" having that many teams. Unless there's some secret tactic behind the idea we haven't heard of yet that is.
But barring a genius plan if he really wanted to create a good stable hockey league he would never suggest that many teams but try increase the quality of what he already have. If he had a better product right now it would be alot easier to expand the league. But as stated he wants quick fixes before the time is right completely ignoring any consequences. It's just normal human psychology that shows what his real intentions are. unless as i said he honestly doesn't understand it himself, and i doubt even you would prefer that scenario
Cold war continue. I expect Sputnik moon division as KHL next idea. Waiting for NHL moves, maybe some mexican clubs will join.


Last edited by ThirdManIn: 06-14-2012 at 09:46 AM. Reason: quote
Jeez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 09:32 AM
  #27
Vicente
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cologne
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vorky View Post
This is exactly what Medvedev said.
No. In Medvedev's plans you would have a league with 2 conferences (the western one divided in two parts) and they would play 62 games a year with a big part of them gainst teams of other conferences.

In my idea the teams in the West would play like last year in the ET around 11 games (more like the UEFA CL) and then the winners would play against Gagarin Cup winner/finalists. In my system you also would have to qualifiy for this ET by your league result.

In Medvedevs way you would destroy national leagues. In my way you would make the European leagues more attractive.

PS:

So in this way the KHL and the ET would play for the European Super Cup or so and these teams could compete against the Stanley Cup finalists for a Club World Cup. Hope you guys know what I mean.

Vicente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 09:34 AM
  #28
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vorky View Post
This is exactly what Medvedev said.
Except that he wants 24 inter-conference games.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 09:38 AM
  #29
Vicente
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cologne
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
Except that he wants 24 inter-conference games.
Yep. Medvedev wants a pan-european league by destroying all other top leagues in Europe. I want a Euro Cup whose winners play against Gagarin Cup winners.

Vicente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 10:00 AM
  #30
Jeez
Jay Jay
 
Jeez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Praha - Islands
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicente View Post
Yep. Medvedev wants a pan-european league by destroying all other top leagues in Europe. I want a Euro Cup whose winners play against Gagarin Cup winners.
Sorry, I'm not for your idea. I'm not fan of IIHF Champions league. I don't like this super cup game, that can be fixed by an exhibition game. I'm fully for one strong permanent league, it sounds to me, more competitive than just one super cup game, or so.

Jeez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 10:10 AM
  #31
Sokil
Ukraine Specialitsky
 
Sokil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 6,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fulcrum View Post
Well, Russia wouldn't get to be the biggest country in the world (by a wide margin) without some (crazy?) unrealistically ambitious people, like Medvedev.

This should be the definition of setting high goals. I applaud him for the ambition, as unrealistic as it is in our day and age. But never say never.
I think your analogy stands. Russia is only big due to a lot of useless land, as would a KHL with 40 useless teams.

A KHL this big would just be a a Potemkin league, if you know what I mean.

Sokil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 10:15 AM
  #32
Jeez
Jay Jay
 
Jeez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Praha - Islands
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sokil View Post
I think your analogy stands. Russia is only big due to a lot of useless land, as would a KHL with 40 useless teams.

A KHL this big would just be a a Potemkin league, if you know what I mean.
exactly.

Jeez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 11:50 AM
  #33
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 68,722
vCash: 50
Whilst I'd be in favour of a pan-European tournament, don't you think it'd be better to keep those teams in their national competitions and leagues and have it as an extra competition with less teams, say 32?

A champions league style tournament is better as it allows each team to stay in their respective leagues but challenge amongst the best in Europe. By removing the best teams from the national league you massively decrease the quality of players.

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 12:34 PM
  #34
Jeez
Jay Jay
 
Jeez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Praha - Islands
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
Whilst I'd be in favour of a pan-European tournament, don't you think it'd be better to keep those teams in their national competitions and leagues and have it as an extra competition with less teams, say 32?

A champions league style tournament is better as it allows each team to stay in their respective leagues but challenge amongst the best in Europe. By removing the best teams from the national league you massively decrease the quality of players.
I agree with 32 teams. The resolution about what teams, must make every country, which wants to join. They joined to KHL already existed club Slovan Bratislava in Slovakia. But Czech republic created brand new club.

Jeez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 12:37 PM
  #35
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
A champions league style tournament is better as it allows each team to stay in their respective leagues but challenge amongst the best in Europe. By removing the best teams from the national league you massively decrease the quality of players.
Tried twice, failed twice. European Hockey League in 2000, Champions Hockey League in 2008. Still the wet dream of IIHF and European Clubs, but they don't have a clue how to make it work, hence the Panel discussions etc.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 01:16 PM
  #36
Sokil
Ukraine Specialitsky
 
Sokil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 6,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
Whilst I'd be in favour of a pan-European tournament, don't you think it'd be better to keep those teams in their national competitions and leagues and have it as an extra competition with less teams, say 32?

A champions league style tournament is better as it allows each team to stay in their respective leagues but challenge amongst the best in Europe. By removing the best teams from the national league you massively decrease the quality of players.
IMO, national leagues should act as development / farm leagues for one or two top pro clubs from each nation (more or less depending on demand and how many elite teams a country can support and not dilute things)

i think latvia, ukraine, and belarus are doing the right thing. hopefully this is the result of Lev and Slovan joining the KHL, too.

Sokil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 01:24 PM
  #37
Sokil
Ukraine Specialitsky
 
Sokil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 6,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
By removing the best teams from the national league you massively decrease the quality of players.
No, by removing the 'best' teams from each national league, the those KHL teams will sign all of the best players. If anything, it concentrates the quality players of a nation to 1 or 2 teams.

Of course, it decreases the quality of players remaining in the national league, but who cares?

Sokil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 01:34 PM
  #38
Jeez
Jay Jay
 
Jeez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Praha - Islands
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sokil View Post
Of course, it decreases the quality of players remaining in the national league, but who cares?
In smaller cities, where they produce some good players for non-profit. But Czech federation wants to fix it, by regulation that Lev must to pay provided money for this youth talented players.

Jeez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 01:39 PM
  #39
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 68,722
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sokil View Post
No, by removing the 'best' teams from each national league, the those KHL teams will sign all of the best players. If anything, it concentrates the quality players of a nation to 1 or 2 teams.

Of course, it decreases the quality of players remaining in the national league, but who cares?
Probably the fans of those teams who'll get bored of the same team winning.

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 01:48 PM
  #40
Jeez
Jay Jay
 
Jeez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Praha - Islands
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
Probably the fans of those teams who'll get bored of the same team winning.
Yep. This situation is in czech league more than 20 years. Remember club Vsetin (really small city) They won maybe 7 times in row. Because They had a lot of money in this time. Jaskin was on a team, such a great guy.


Last edited by Jeez: 06-14-2012 at 04:49 PM.
Jeez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 04:10 PM
  #41
Sokil
Ukraine Specialitsky
 
Sokil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 6,227
vCash: 500
Well, wouldn't the high rolling 1-2 teams be in the KHL, and the rest be lower tier and with a lot more parity?

Sokil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 05:21 PM
  #42
ozo
Registered User
 
ozo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Latvia
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to ozo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sokil View Post
Well, wouldn't the high rolling 1-2 teams be in the KHL, and the rest be lower tier and with a lot more parity?
And nothing really to play for... Proud champions of development/feeder league.

ozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 06:04 PM
  #43
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 68,722
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozo View Post
And nothing really to play for... Proud champions of development/feeder league.
This. All players would swan off to either teams in the European competition as 3rd/4th or back-ups or stay in their leagues making them weak. Medvedev has the right idea, but not the execution.

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 06:36 PM
  #44
Krotak
is the Legend
 
Krotak's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 584
vCash: 500
When I saw the picture, I thought that's exactly how I see it:



Then I read this part of the article and I knew Swedes, Finns, Czechs, Germans, Swiss etc. would never accept it:
Quote:
He sees the KHL’s expansion to consume all of Europe, with one KHL Conference in and around Russia and a European Conference with a Scandinavian Sub-Conference (Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway) and a Central European Sub-Conference (Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, France, Italy, Great Britain, Netherlands, Belgium).

In all, he sees 64 teams in two conferences of 32 teams.
In all the respect to Russia, this distribution of teams to this conferences doesn't show parity.
When we want to talk about a paneuropean hockey league, we should talk about two factors:
A. traditional hockey markets (popularity of hockey, number of registered hockey players, number of hockey rinks etc.)
B. economic potencial

E.G. Despite all the problems Czech republic has the most registered players in Europe. On the other hand Germany is the biggest European economy. Despite being a giant, Russia is somewhere in between.

IMO something like this is the parity, which "almost" everybody in Europe would accept:

3 conferences and each one consists of 20 teams:

Eastern Europe Conference:
- Russia (16 teams)
- Latvia (1 team)
- Belarus (1 team)
- Ukraine (1 team)
- Kazakhstan (1 team)

Nordic Conference:
- Sweden (8 teams)
- Finland (8 teams)
- Norway (2 teams)
- Danemark (2 teams)

Central European Conference:
- Czech republic (5 teams)
- Germany (5 teams)
- Switzerland (3 teams)
- Austria (2 teams)
- Slovakia (2 teams)
- France (1 team)
- Italy (1 team)
- Slovenia (1 team)

Krotak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 08:21 PM
  #45
yunost
Registered User
 
yunost's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 390
vCash: 500
Obviously 64 teams or whatever is just a numbers game...It doesn't exactly mean anything.
I see Medvedev's meaning much differently from the talk in the previous posts. Its more about the system.


Medvedev explained that the new league should be a closed system. “It should be a closed system to have long-term planning and teams can’t be sent off to lose credibility and money.”

“We have no interest in a parallel system,” said Medvedev, who earlier presented his vision of a permanent European league. He was alluding to the difference between a massive club league in Europe like the NHL model in North America versus the European football tradition of having the best teams year by year qualify for another tournament based on the Champions League model.


Rolf Bachmann, COO from SC Bern, was asked to share the opinion of his club

“What we need is a parallel system according to the example of the Champions League in football,” Bachmann noted. What clubs need are the local rivalries against smaller clubs in the national league that are crucial for the fan base, and European competition as the icing on the cake.

The session ended with the moderator informally asking the attendance whether they prefer a parallel European club competition or a permanent pan-European league. The vast majority of those who raised their hands opted for the parallel way.


So now you tell me, without the numbers game of 64 or 1000 teams, which hockey vision do you agree with?

I have no clue why the IIHF is inviting Champions league and Euro Basketball and Handball league representatives for inspiration!

If you want an excellent example just look at the NHL! EVERYONE agrees that its the number 1 in the world. Best with fans, attendance, business, everything. And they don't even need the 2000 year old rivalries

This is what it comes down to:
1) By ignoring the closed system, the individual European teams think they can make a better system than the NHL (which is hilarious)

or

2) They are not aiming to be a top league capable of attracting the worlds best players. They are settling for a mediocre 2nd

So which system is better for creating a better league, or making Europe more competitive and keeping talent at home? Just a fair answer without any politics. I know most North Americans would agree with Medvedev, or at least all the NHL and club executives.

I think Medvedev knows more about hockey than all these other Europeans; he's certainly done more for it already.

yunost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2012, 08:38 PM
  #46
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
28 or 32 is far more sensible than 64...

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2012, 01:58 AM
  #47
vorky
@vorkywh24
 
vorky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krotak View Post
When I saw the picture, I thought that's exactly how I see it:



Then I read this part of the article and I knew Swedes, Finns, Czechs, Germans, Swiss etc. would never accept it:


In all the respect to Russia, this distribution of teams to this conferences doesn't show parity.
When we want to talk about a paneuropean hockey league, we should talk about two factors:
A. traditional hockey markets (popularity of hockey, number of registered hockey players, number of hockey rinks etc.)
B. economic potencial

E.G. Despite all the problems Czech republic has the most registered players in Europe. On the other hand Germany is the biggest European economy. Despite being a giant, Russia is somewhere in between.

IMO something like this is the parity, which "almost" everybody in Europe would accept:

3 conferences and each one consists of 20 teams:

Eastern Europe Conference:
- Russia (16 teams)
- Latvia (1 team)
- Belarus (1 team)
- Ukraine (1 team)
- Kazakhstan (1 team)

Nordic Conference:
- Sweden (8 teams)
- Finland (8 teams)
- Norway (2 teams)
- Danemark (2 teams)

Central European Conference:
- Czech republic (5 teams)
- Germany (5 teams)
- Switzerland (3 teams)
- Austria (2 teams)
- Slovakia (2 teams)
- France (1 team)
- Italy (1 team)
- Slovenia (1 team)
nice model, but unrealistic. KHL will NOT accept it. To have 8 teams from Sweden/Finland and 5 from Germany/Czechs is nonsense. No market in Czech rep for so many teams, the same Sweden/Finland. Germany cannot have less teams than Sweden/Finland because Germany is bigger economy. KHL will not reduce number of teams, I would say adding (or relocating) 2-3 is more realistic. You should take it into account if you suggest euro-league.

if you want to discuss your model, so ok. As I said, KHL will not accept it.

Quote:
Eastern Europe Conference:
- Russia (18 teams)
- Latvia (1 team)
- Belarus (1 team)
- Ukraine (1 team)
- Kazakhstan (1 team)

Nordic Conference:
- Sweden (7 teams)
- Finland (7 teams)
- Norway (1 team)
- Danemark (1 team)

Central European Conference:
- Czech republic (3 teams)
- Germany (7 teams)
- Switzerland (3 teams)
- Austria (2 teams)
- Slovakia (1 teams)
- France, Italy, Slovenia (maybe later)

vorky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2012, 02:09 AM
  #48
BalticWarrior
Registered User
 
BalticWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Riga
Country: Latvia
Posts: 4,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krotak View Post
When I saw the picture, I thought that's exactly how I see it:



Then I read this part of the article and I knew Swedes, Finns, Czechs, Germans, Swiss etc. would never accept it:


In all the respect to Russia, this distribution of teams to this conferences doesn't show parity.
When we want to talk about a paneuropean hockey league, we should talk about two factors:
A. traditional hockey markets (popularity of hockey, number of registered hockey players, number of hockey rinks etc.)
B. economic potencial

E.G. Despite all the problems Czech republic has the most registered players in Europe. On the other hand Germany is the biggest European economy. Despite being a giant, Russia is somewhere in between.

IMO something like this is the parity, which "almost" everybody in Europe would accept:

3 conferences and each one consists of 20 teams:

Eastern Europe Conference:
- Russia (16 teams)
- Latvia (1 team)
- Belarus (1 team)
- Ukraine (1 team)
- Kazakhstan (1 team)

Nordic Conference:
- Sweden (8 teams)
- Finland (8 teams)
- Norway (2 teams)
- Danemark (2 teams)

Central European Conference:
- Czech republic (5 teams)
- Germany (5 teams)
- Switzerland (3 teams)
- Austria (2 teams)
- Slovakia (2 teams)
- France (1 team)
- Italy (1 team)
- Slovenia (1 team)
GODDAMNIT! it`s starting to get on my nerves LATVIA.IS.NOT.IN.EASTERN.EUROPE,okay?!

BalticWarrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2012, 02:24 AM
  #49
vorky
@vorkywh24
 
vorky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,626
vCash: 500
yunost

Quote:
So now you tell me, without the numbers game of 64 or 1000 teams, which hockey vision do you agree with?
clear answer - I agree with medvedev´s one.

Why?
I wrote it here earlier, so you can find my posts. I will repeat key points:
- big gap among best euro league (KHL) and 2nd league (SWE or FIN, I dont know which is 2nd). That means less attractive competition (Champions League as example). Swedish, Finnish, Czech or so clubs will not increase budgets twice to have minimal budget of weakest KHL teams.

- one league, one financial rules. That means club has to fullfill budget criteria and attract players from NA. Look at swedish/finnish teams, they can not keep their best players! Would they do it if Champions League exists? I dont think so. They will not do it because nobody forces them. if they joins KHL (or so league), they will have to increase budget. Look at Donbass, last season VHL, no KHL with budget over 20 milions euro. Look at HC LEV, last season with budget around 10 milions euro, now 19 milions. Slovan is similar case, now over 10 milions, increasing 2nd season. Avto/Vityaz will also have bigger budgets like in past.

If you want to compete with NHL (in future), you need have bigger budgets. I dont believe it is possible with Champions League model.

IIHF should realise that soccer is not hockey. Champions League does not work in hockey. Why? I will write only one reason - budget=quality of game. Majority of best footballers play european domestic leagues. So, we have mopjority of best footballers in Europe. Euro clubs cooperate in Champions League, they dont fight each other. They are making one product (Champions League) to earn more money. AND HOCKEY? Majority of best hockey players are in North America. European clubs HAS TO lure them to play in Europe if clubs want to create succesfull product (Champions League or one league as Medvedev said). So, European clubs have to cooperate in Europe and [B]fight [/B]against NHL. What is reality? Euro clubs fight among each other in Europe and DONT fight against NHL. How to change this attitude? By making Champions League? OR one league as Medvedev said?

Soccer can have model of parallel competitions because 3-4 euro leagues are at same (similar) level. BUT it is not in hockey where you have dominant KHL.

I think that model of euro basket could work in hockey.

KHL + euro clubs with temporary licence (3-4 years)
B-League (call it like you want)

We would add a few euro clubs to KHL for 3-4 years (criteria as you suggest). These euro clubs would play only KHL, not domestic league. Maybe model of playing both leagues but it is not good (too many games, KHL does not want breaks during regular season etc)

The rest euro clubs would play domestic leagues, would compete for B-League spots. The same model like UEFA Champions League. Club would play domestic league and B-League as Champion League. You know, we have also in soccer such B-league (Euroleague I hope, former UEFA Cup)
So, domestic leagues would be still attractive for fans, sponsors, tv. After 3-4 years we can mix clubs. Some euro clubs added to KHL can move back and play B-League (+ domestic league) and clubs from B-League can earn KHl spot for next 3-4 seasons.


I think all parts would be happy. KHL has its league, no breaks for international competitions. Plus has top euro clubs. IIHF has domestic leagues and B-League (Champions League).

vorky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2012, 03:34 AM
  #50
albator71
Registered User
 
albator71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,336
vCash: 500
I want to remind vorky that the last time CHL was played 2008-09 a swiss club Zurich defeated Magnitogorsk in the Final.

As far as I'm concerned Champions League style tournament is the best way to go for European hockey.

I think KHL/Russia doesn't want anything to do with CHL, because they afraid to lose, then they won't be able to say that KHL is the best league in Europe. It's easier to say you are the best league in Europe and don't have to prove it.

I can guarantee you that the top clubs in Sweden, Finland, Swiss and Germany can defeat the best clubs in KHL on any given night.

I do hope that in the near future that we'll have a champions league to crown a European champion.

albator71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:43 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.