August1991 Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 (edited) If I understand properly, to win the Stanley Cup, a team must simply win enough "points" to enter the "finals" and then it must win a series of matches (first team to win 4 games). I don't understand exactly how a team wins the European Cup but it seems to be based on a simple win of a game. But subsequent matches are based on the score or the margin of victory. It strikes me that if Team A beats Team B by 9-2 then that is different from Team C defeating Team D by 4-3. Moreover, including the margin of victory makes the game more interesting. To win is one thing, but to score more goals something else. ---- Do I have this right? Edited December 7, 2011 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 teams must place 1st or 2nd in group stage(groups of four teams)3 pts for a win, 1 for a draw...two top team advance, teams then play a home and away series with next opponent,winner advances; in case of draw, 1 win each or two ties, goals scored away from home away count as two goals...final is a one game match... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 you need to win 3 rounds to advance to the stanley cup quarter finals, semi finals conference finals ... best of 7 series winners from each conference go on to a 7 game series winner wins the cup HOWEVER next year the format will be different as the NHL is going through a realignment no one knows how the playoffs will work yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 (edited) you need to win 3 rounds to advance to the stanley cup quarter finals, semi finals conference finals ... best of 7 series winners from each conference go on to a 7 game series winner wins the cup HOWEVER next year the format will be different as the NHL is going through a realignment no one knows how the playoffs will work yet You need to win four best of 7 rounds to win the Stanley Cup not 3. And I know exactly how the playoffs will go next year. You have 4 conferences of 7 or 8 teams. Top 4 teams in each conference make the playoffs. They play two in-conference rounds and 4 conference winners are re-seeded based on their regular season record and two more rounds are played to decide the Stanley Cup. Sports aren't you thing dood. Edited December 7, 2011 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 (edited) Comparing Elite North American Professional Sports to European Soccer doesn't work. The NHL, NFL, MLB and NBA are the top leagues in their respective sports. They don't have comparable leagues anywhere in the World. The champions of these leagues are the best club team in the world, no debate. If the Green Bay Packers played the BC Lions 100 times the Packers would win 100 times. Ditto if, say, Moscow Dynamo played the Bruins. In European Soccer there are many comparable leagues. So they pick top teams in each league England, Portugal, Italy, Spain, Germany etc. And they have a tournament to decide the top Club team in Europe. I think they even have a tournament with Champions of different Football Federations. Toronto FC is part of the CONCOCAF Champions League. They're still Alive I believe. They have a game against the LA Galaxy early next year in that tournament. And yes, instead of using Best of 7 series' they use home and home series' where they they take the combined score in both games to decide the winner. They also put more weight on Goals scored in the opponents Stadium. Edited December 7, 2011 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 Who gives a crap!!! It's football season!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 (edited) You need to win four best of 7 rounds to win the Stanley Cup not 3. And I know exactly how the playoffs will go next year. You have 4 conferences of 7 or 8 teams. Top 4 teams in each conference make the playoffs. They play two in-conference rounds and 4 conference winners are re-seeded based on their regular season record and two more rounds are played to decide the Stanley Cup. Sports aren't you thing dood. i said you need to win 3 rounds to advance to the stanley cup (yes i forgot to add finals but you dont hear ppl say finals often unless its on tv) we're both right i just worded it differently btw playoff format has not been decided yet will be in march and who the fark are you to tell me what my thing is or isnt? jerk Edited December 8, 2011 by olp1fan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Plus, they can't play as many games in soccer because the game is much harder to play than hockey. If they had a best of seven series for the Euro, all the players would die. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Who gives a crap!!! It's football season!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Comparing Elite North American Professional Sports to European Soccer doesn't work. The NHL, NFL, MLB and NBA are the top leagues in their respective sports. They don't have comparable leagues anywhere in the World. The champions of these leagues are the best club team in the world, no debate. in europe the winning the league title is final there are no playoffs...where you place in the league decides what cup competitions the team is eligible for the next year...finishing in the top four of the major leagues qualifies tems for the biggest richest competition, the champions league...finishing lower qualifies them for the europa cup...even finishing in the bottom three places is significant as those clubs are dropped to the 2nd division, a considerable drop in revenue... Ditto if, say, Moscow Dynamo played the Bruins. hmm...100 out of a 100, I wouldn't bet on that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Plus, they can't play as many games in soccer because the game is much harder to play than hockey. If they had a best of seven series for the Euro, all the players would die. true, for clubs to play in all the cup competitions takes a very large squad of players, teams that can't afford a large roster can't keep up the pace as players don't get enough recovery time between games...burnout is a major complaint for the better players who play in the various overlapping competitions, they're also are called up through the season to play qualification games for their countries for international cups, at the end of the this club season is the European championship, the best players will just finish for their club teams and be off to represent their countries...optimum performance is an issue with too many matches... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 hockey players have to be in better physical shape than soccer players Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 hockey players have to be in better physical shape than soccer players nope, not even close...soccer, rugby, aussie rules lead team sports for required fitness...covering a 100+ meter field for up to 120 minutes with no substitutions vs hockeys 30-60 second shifts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 nope, not even close...soccer, rugby, aussie rules lead team sports for required fitness...covering a 100+ meter field for up to 120 minutes with no substitutions vs hockeys 30-60 second shifts... Seriously? When was the last time you saw a soccer player "covering a 100+ meter field for up to 120 minutes?" It is pretty rare that it is any more that midfielders. And at that, for 90 minutes mostly. And they ain't running all the time either. That being said, to be a top flight soccer player you have to be super-fit. Then again, it would be more interesting if they played a best of three during a week or two week period. The World Cup are on, what, 5-6 day schedule and the Premier League is weekly. They could do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 nope, not even close...soccer, rugby, aussie rules lead team sports for required fitness...covering a 100+ meter field for up to 120 minutes with no substitutions vs hockeys 30-60 second shifts... Soccer players have to be extremely fit too but hockey is just a more difficult sport to play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Soccer players have to be extremely fit too but hockey is just a more difficult sport to play I don't know about that, I think a running back on a football team takes the cake as far as a difficult job in sports. There's a reason they only play once a week. Ask Jack Weber, he knows more about football than half of Saskatchewan. A stud d man plays about 20-25 minutes at 100% A football players play for about half an hour at 100%, and depending on your spot you get hammered hard. Soccer players, its a flat out endure. It may not look intense, but when your running, changing directions, making plays, and decisions, its very very taxing on the body as well. Hockey is a skilled game to play because there is so much that a person has to do. Then we have boxers, 12 rounds of moving, punching, taking punches, and strategizing also very grueling. Then there is motocross racing, which may not look hard, but that rider is wrestling that bike and taking hard hits from all the jumping. Again exhausting. Basketball, exhausting as well. You also have to remember what kind of fitness we're going for. Soccer players are cardio'd right up and are built for endurance, you won't see to many stacked soccer players. Hockey players are basically all legs, football players; well thats just fully stacked, as they're designed for short intense bursts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Seriously? When was the last time you saw a soccer player "covering a 100+ meter field for up to 120 minutes?" It is pretty rare that it is any more that midfielders. And at that, for 90 minutes mostly. And they ain't running all the time either. That being said, to be a top flight soccer player you have to be super-fit. Then again, it would be more interesting if they played a best of three during a week or two week period. The World Cup are on, what, 5-6 day schedule and the Premier League is weekly. They could do it. 120minutes is the max for cup matches each player should be prepared to play that..90 minutes is standard, all but 3 players will log the full 90 and the average hockey plays 14 minutes per game...premier league is weekly but then there are various cup matches to be played...FA cup, league cup, euro qualifications, champions league... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Soccer players have to be extremely fit too but hockey is just a more difficult sport to play obviously someone who has never played the game... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 ice hockey is ranked 2nd here http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 I don't know about that, I think a running back on a football team takes the cake as far as a difficult job in sports. There's a reason they only play once a week. Ask Jack Weber, he knows more about football than half of Saskatchewan. A stud d man plays about 20-25 minutes at 100% A football players play for about half an hour at 100%, and depending on your spot you get hammered hard. here's the truth about football...total playing time for both offense and defense combined is...12.5 minutesnothing happens for the other 47-48 minutes...I didn't believe it when i first heard that but I got a stop watch out and confirmed it...and i'm from saskatchewan, i stopped watching football after that...Soccer players, its a flat out endure. It may not look intense, but when your running, changing directions, making plays, and decisions, its very very taxing on the body as well. Hockey is a skilled game to play because there is so much that a person has to do.Then we have boxers, 12 rounds of moving, punching, taking punches, and strategizing also very grueling. Then there is motocross racing, which may not look hard, but that rider is wrestling that bike and taking hard hits from all the jumping. Again exhausting. Basketball, exhausting as well. You also have to remember what kind of fitness we're going for. Soccer players are cardio'd right up and are built for endurance, you won't see to many stacked soccer players. Hockey players are basically all legs, football players; well thats just fully stacked, as they're designed for short intense bursts. excellent assessment on each of those blueblood, not many people would have thought to add motocross...you could have added cross country skiing and rowing as extremely demanding sports... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 ice hockey is ranked 2nd here http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills ya right north american sports announcers, no bias there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 ya right north american sports announcers, no bias there if it were a euro study it'd be biased too so find a study that says soccer is more difficult Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 long time ago before olp1fan was born the older forum members may recall a televised sports competition that pitted athletes from various sports against each other....during the 6yrs the world super star competition ran a canadian soccer player brian budd won it three times,then the competition passed a rule that prevented anyone from winning more than three times... brian budd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 if it were a euro study it'd be biased too so find a study that says soccer is more difficult SURPRISE! euros play hockey too ...actual scientific studies and not talking head sport casters... vo2 tests are the standard for fitness study's...soccer comes out ahead of hockey and both place ahead of football....every sport trails nordic skiing by a considerable distance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Its whatever your opinion is but most rankings ive seen puts hockey in front of soccer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.