With the IIHF World Juniors approaching the end of the round robin portion of the tournament, an interesting question has been raised by St. Louis Blues beat reporter Andy Strickland; Does the IIHF need to re-think how many countries participate in the WJC tournament?
It's an interesting question, and one that doesn't exactly have a simple answer. Best-on-best hockey is a phenomenal idea in theory. However, the fact that there is obvious disparity between the countries who participate is a subject worth discussing.
Canada, USA, Russia, Finland and Sweden are always top-tier teams, primarily due to the countries' sizes, population and the quality of their hockey development programs. The Czech Republic and Germany also have quality programs, but are in the next tier of teams, with a great degree of separation beginning there with the remaining countries, such as Austria, Switzerland and Slovakia. These clubs, suffice it to say, are almost always being fed to the wolves in the round robin as the top teams jockey for position.
TSN hockey analyst Carlo Colaiacovo had an interesting theory for how the IIHF could widen the margin for competition at these types of tournaments, suggesting that the "passport rule" be thrown out, allowing players who weren't selected by their home country to play for another. At the very least, this would reduce the number of blow-outs in the preliminary games and during round-robin play.
The Athletic's Sunaya Sapurji also took the time to point out that Strickland's question is misses the mark about what the tournament means to the other counties who take part, knowing that medalling is probably not in the cards for them. Sapurji points out that many smaller countries rely on these types of tournaments for government funding and advertising and exposure for the sport in their own markets, offering the opinion that hockey is "already niche enough".
No matter which side of the fence you're on, I think the tournaments are a wonderful opportunity for players of all backgrounds to get on the world stage and show what they can do against the best players from around the globe. It's a fantastic opportunity for players to continue in their development if they've already been drafted, and for others to potentially raise their draft status if they're draft eligible - or approaching their draft-eligible years.
Some really good food for thought within these responses. I feel that Colaiacovo's suggestion, in particular, could provide additional interesting hockey narratives to follow throughout the tournament, though conversely, it would take away opportunities from some of the countries' finest young players who are looking to establish themselves on the world stage. Nothing comes without a price.
-
-
-
