Another World Cup? No thanks
![]() |
| TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO |
| Remember the Lucky Loonie from the 2004 World Cup? Turns out, wasn't so lucky after all. |
Glad to hear the 2011 World Cup of Hockey is apparently on.
Not really.
Remember the 2004 World Cup? Yep, that was held right before the NHL and NHLPA went to war and ultimately wrecked the entire 2004-05 season. The funds raised from the ’04 World Cup helped the two sides wage labour war, and thus those fans who supported the tournament actually ended up feeding the fight that deprived them of the sport for a year.
Now they’re talking about a 2011 tournament, which would take place – you guessed it – right before the current CBA expires, assuming the players do as everyone expects and don’t re-open the arrangement beforehand.
Already, both sides are girding for another protracted fight, and so are more than willing to stage another World Cup to raise funds for that very purpose. The players are growing increasingly unhappy with giving back chunks of money in escrow funds every year, while the owners are already talking about another rollback in salaries, and you can bet some among the NHL ranks will be looking to kill guaranteed contracts.
So why would any hockey fan help these people kill off another season by supporting the 2011 World Cup?
It’s an international event that really only means something in Canada – sort of like the world juniors – and one that has no predictability in terms of when it will pop up on the hockey landscape. It’s the bastard child of the old Canada Cup, and an event that’s nowhere near as meaningful as the Olympics.
So be excited about another World Cup if you want. Not me.


I thought the World Cup went out with powdered wigs!
The Canada Cup lost my interest after the '87 tourney and these reincarnations of it since have been basically just something to watch on TV when there was nothing else to watch on, but not great events in terms of leaving us with lasting, feel-good patriotic hockey memories. It's overkill, really, with the Olympics and World Juniors also getting kinda tiresome themselves.
Posted by: Cosmo K. | January 20, 2009 at 12:52 PM
I never thought of it that way, Damien. Thanks for the insight.
I do miss the CANADA CUP, though.
Posted by: bobbyshow | January 20, 2009 at 12:55 PM
I can't agree. If anything, I wish the pros would skip the Olympics and instead move to a truly meaningful World Cup every 4 years (leaving the Olympics to amatuers or, up and comers...similar to the World Juniors). I personally do not think the cash generated by the World Cup means much in terms of the bigger labour picture. The NHL players and owners both have an agenda and if they are unable to reconcile, then there will be either a strike or a lockout. I doubt the cash generated by a World Cup would have a significant impact on the duration of either.
Posted by: mark | January 20, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Good Grief. A lean menu for things to chew on today Damien? What's wrong with making money? And what's wrong with good hockey showcasing some of the World's best. Get over it.
Posted by: wyattearp | January 20, 2009 at 01:30 PM
C'mon Damien. Where's your sense of patriotism to our great game? I remember back in the day when the Canada Cup use to roll around and get extremely excited. Then some idiot(s) killed it and brought about the World Cup? I don't know which side to be on, ...but love the hockey nonetheless.....
Posted by: Dana Drake | January 20, 2009 at 01:40 PM
I still can’t understand why no one complained when Bettman TRASHED the Canada Cup all because Americans wouldn’t relate to it and brought in the world cup.
A cup named to honour the country that gave the world the game of hockey and it’s trashed.
I wonder if the America’s Cup would ever deserve the same fate…..NOT!
I would love to see an on line movement to bring back the Canada Cup. Maybe, I’d be the only one to sign it…pity only in Canada.
Posted by: gary | January 20, 2009 at 01:43 PM
Damien - do you think another strike/lockout/big eff u to the fans is a real possibility? I initially though Kelly wouldn't lead the game back down that road.
With the tough years ahead in many American markets, I think a lockout in 2011 (when the NA economy should be back on track) would be the final death blow to the NHL as we know it. Do you get any sense that the players or PA understand that? I would think that protecting jobs would be the most important thing the PA could do, and doing anything that compromises the viability of franchises is bad for the PAs business with each team representing dozens of jobs.
Posted by: tree | January 20, 2009 at 02:03 PM
I would much rather see a regular World Cup of hockey than the Olympics. I much preferred the old Canada Cup format of a best of 3 series in the final and dislike the one game final in the Olympics - any fluky goal or bad call can make all the difference. I also prefer the North American ice surface that a World Cup brings (are they playing on Olmypic sized ice in Vancouver?)
I have much stronger memories of the Canada Cup than I do of the Olympics - the only thing that really made the 2002 Olympic hockey special was the fact that Canada lost in 98. The 1987 tourny is the greatest hockey tournament ever played in my opinion.
So, I will be excited about this World Cup (and the Olympics) because they will be amazing hockey tournaments. Blaming the World Cup for a possible strike that may never happen is ludicrous. We'll see whether the World Cup has no interest for you, something tells me you will be just as enthralled by it (and write about it, the possible team, that there won't be any fighting etc.) as everyone else.
Posted by: John | January 20, 2009 at 02:58 PM
Without the reasons behind the tournament and fan interest elsewhere, it sure is great to see the best against the best no matter the reason.
Posted by: jeff | January 20, 2009 at 04:01 PM
Your right, no one cares about hockey outside of this country, it's an insignificant fringe sport.
the last "world cup" was a cynical money grab by the nhl, not a true international competition with meaningful qualification rounds and legit competition.
Posted by: jean-guy pepper | January 20, 2009 at 04:35 PM
Totally, totally agree. The World Cup is completely lame in every way.
Posted by: Kyuss | January 20, 2009 at 05:17 PM
It would be a good tournament for Canada to show the world that we have the best hockey players..A Canada vs. Sweden game could end the speculation once and for all..Remember, until 2006, Canada held the World Cup, world championship and Olympic hockey titles..I don't think your lovable Swedes could ever say that...
Without Sundin and Alfredsson they don't have a chance..By the way, I did respond to your question Mr Cox, but it seems it didn't make it on the blog..Go figure..
Posted by: ray brewer | January 20, 2009 at 05:59 PM
To Ray Brewer,
You make it sound as if Canada is all-dominant in ice hockey, and as much as I wish it was true - it's not. Sweden has twice won Olympic gold in the last 15 years whereas we've won it once in over fifty years, we do better in the world championships (let's be honest, depends on who doesn't make the playoffs) but in the last ten years the Czechs have won four times, Canada three and Sweden twice so there's no huge gap, and there's only been two world cups which have hugely favoured North American teams and so it's no surprise that one was won by the US and the other by Canada.
I think it's a lame tournament rigges for N. America to win and designed to make a few people some money. I'd much rather watch the Olympics.
Posted by: Adrian | January 21, 2009 at 03:50 AM
Another negative article by Cox. Does he ever say anything positive about anything? Surprised?? Not me.
Posted by: Dave | January 21, 2009 at 05:44 AM
Can we not do away with the Pros competing. If hockey is truly our game, then why send Pros to the Olympics and World Cup and whatever? Why not give some of our youth the opportunity to represent Canada. It may be the only pinnacle they reach in their careers. I am tired of watching millionaires compete in what should be an amateur showcase. If truly our game then we can send our amateurs. Should not matter. No Pros to the Olympics and other international competitons.
Posted by: tony | January 21, 2009 at 08:49 AM
Hey morons!!!
World Cup, World Championship, Olympics - all the same stuff!!
Same players, different day of the week! Anyone who actually sits back and distinquishes between any of these international tournaments is a bit looney. How can one be better than the other? Or mean more than the other? Give your heads a shake.
Canada vs Sweden in the World Cup means no more than Canada vs Sweden in the world championship. How can it? Same cast of characters. It's like saying Montreal beating Boston on a Tuesday nightis not as important as Boston beating Montreal on a Saturday night. Same teams, same players, and when all is said and done,,,,,,,same crap.
Posted by: jboy | January 21, 2009 at 09:36 AM
Damien, do you really need to make the world's best hockey players playing a hockey tournament a negative thing? What true hockey fan wouldn't want this? I want to see these awesome line combinations and the magic they create as often as possible. I would think any true hockey fan would. It seems you being a writer who's paid to come up with controversial things to write about hockey, has to resort to making up an argument that isn't productive for real hockey fans.
Posted by: Chardcore | January 21, 2009 at 11:17 AM
The NHL had a $300-million warchest. The NHLPA had a $150-million warchest. The last World Cup reportedly brought in less than $10-million. Do you REALLY think that this small amount prolonged the lockout?!?!?! Gimme a break.
Did they both want more money? Sure. It's a business. Just like FIFA makes billions with the World Cup. Just like baseball is trying to make more coin with the World Baseball Classic. I'm sure you've realized now that professional sports is about big money. It's been that way forever and isn't going to change.
Posted by: TJ | January 21, 2009 at 04:47 PM
Canada is the dominant team in history..Your stats are seriously flawed Adrian..We need to remember that up until 2002, Canada didn't ice its best team for the Olympics..They won in 2002 and remember what happened to Sweden?..They got humiliated by Belarus..Tommy Salo put on his Hardy Astrom impression and let a goal in off his head..
Sweden won the Gold in 2006 but did they play Canada?..They played Finland, Czech Republic and Switzerland..Hardly the best teams in the world..Maybe the best in the tournament that year, but not the world..
Canada didn't pick the right team for 2006 and in 2010 you will be eating your words..
Canada is ranked number one by the IIHF..They won four of five Canada Cups, 2002 Winter Olympics, four consecutive IIHF World Championships and the 2004 World Cup of Hockey ..18 World cup championships including wins in 03', 04', 07 and too many World Junior Championships to remember..
Canada is the best..No doubt about it..
Posted by: ray brewer | January 21, 2009 at 06:24 PM