I love the Memorial Cup, and cannot wait for the 2023 iteration to begin on Friday . I'll watch as many of the game as possible, including the final. It is on my bucket list to cover and call one day and although that possibility dwindles with each and every passing year, I have not given up on that particular dream. It might seem strange that someone like me who loves the Memorial Cup wants to change the format of the Memorial Cup, but I'm a complicated, and deep thinking person so bear with me on this one.
The current format sees the three league champions, plus the host team battle it out in a four team round robin round robin. The winner of the round robin portion move to the final, the 2nd and 3rd place finishers play a semi-final and the 4th place finisher is eliminated. If there is a tie for points, then a tie-breaker game is played. It's designed to be a fast, furious, short tournament format with each game having a heightened importance. However, the tournament does not play out like that. It's actually a slower paced tournament with one game a day, and could even feature a match-up that does not mean anything in the standings, which is something that should never happen at a national tournament. Other things that have not sat right with some is the fact that the host team gets beaten out early in the playoffs and then have ample time to rest up key players who may have been injured. Plus, can you really consider a team a champion if they cannot make it out of their own league's playoff brackets? Of course shaking off the rust after a lengthy absence to play high stakes meaningful hockey can also backfire on the host team.
I would rate the tournament experience as just fine, but I see more potential. This year's tournament will encompass nine days, so I'll try to stick to the timelines as best as possible. Lets brainstorm!
OPTION ONE- FOUR TEAM FORMAT REMAINS, BUT THEY PLAY TWO OUT OF THREE
DAY'S 1-3 BEST OF THREE 1 V 4 2 V 3 Determined by playoff success- who lost the least. Host team gets 4 slot, unless they win their league final
DAY 4 REST DAY
DAY 5-7 BEST OF THREE FINAL
DAY 9 ONE GAME FINAL
ADVANTAGES :
Best of format at least keeps some sort of structure
Keeps nine day format
Keeps some form of old format with "winner take all" game
Two games a day much better for TV
DISADVANTAGES:
Doesn't change things that much
Teams could be done after just two games
Is it TV friendly? Times could be wonky, depending on location
FOUR TEAM TOURNAMENT OPTION 2
DAY'S 1-3 BEST OF THREE 1 V 4 2 V 3 Determined by playoff success- who lost the least. Host team gets 4 slot, unless they win their league final
DAY 4: Series losers play a 'play back in " game
DAY 5-7 3 TEAM ROUND ROBIN
DAY 8 TIEBREAKER GAME
DAY 9 ONE GAME FINAL
ADVANTAGES:
All games are meaningful
Opportunity to get back into tournament
At least three games
DISADVANTAGES
Do we really want two different formats in the same tournament?
OPTION THREE: EIGHT TEAM FORMAT
This one consists of three league winners, three league finalists, the host team, and a wild card team. If the host team is one of the winners/league finalists, then two wild card teams are based on a series of criteria not limited to regular season record, playoff record, record versus two finalists in their league.
ROUND ONE IS BEST OF THREE
DAY ONE AND TWO: 1 V 8 AND 4 V 5
DAY THREE AND FOUR: 2 V 7 3 V 6
DAY FIVE- 3RD GAMES IF NEEDED
DAY SIX TO EIGHT- WINNERS OF DAY 1/2 AND WINNERS OF DAY 3/4 IN BEST OF THREE
DAY 10: FINAL - ONE GAME WINNER TAKE ALL
ADVANTAGES:
Expanded format gives deserving finalists another shot at the glory
More of a true champion, having to win 2 out of 3 games x 2
Does retain the one game winner take all final
Days off are spaced out
DISADVANTAGES
Subjective criteria to pick a wild card team can be a nightmare, though I suppose you can award the host league the extra spot
Can you sell packages of tickets for this? How do you price it?
Is this TV friendly?
Kind of a long tournament
On the whole I do like the eight team tournament format as I think finalists do deserve a 2nd chance at winning the big trophy, and it still retains all the short tournament intensity. I am not 1000% convinced that this will draw anymore ratings and could price itself out of range for the average fan with the increased number of games.
A really ambitious format sees a 16 team regional format ending with a final four at a pre-determined host city, or with the highest seed hosting. I have not got that far in terms of trying to see how that looks, but I know it does not look cost effective, and I'm not convinced a major network is devoting that much time to a 16 team tournament.
Listen, I'm a fan. I'll keep watching regardless, and to me the format is fine, but I think there is an evolution to the format that includes more deserving teams. Using this year as an example, you would add London, Halifax and Winnipeg back into the mix to win the Memorial Cup, and I do not think that is a bad thing at all. You won't get big market teams like those three every year, but you are still getting deserving teams who won twelve hard-fought games to get into their league final. The host berth will always be a question to consider. Do you make the host team win a round to ensure the benefit of hosting? Sure, but if they do not win, that's a whole lot of hard work and tickets sold down the drain so I do not think logistically that works. For better or for worse, the host team changes, unless they are Dukes of Hamilton level bad then they lose the tournament. I remember those days and that year well! We ended up with Kitchener, Oshawa, Kamloops, and the QMJHL team escapes me, though Laval comes to mind with Kitchener and Oshawa playing a classic final which ended in either double or triple overtime in the best live sporting event I've ever seen.
One thing I would not change is the tradition of the Memorial Cup, and those special uniforms worn by the host team the first night. That stays. The rest is certainly, in my opinion, would be up for discussion with an eight team format being my preferred choice. Can it work? More importantly, as a marketing tool, is there an added revenue stream or streams? Does TV embrace this new format? These are all reasonable considerations, but to me it's time to look at some alternate format ideas.
Steve Clark- Steve just finished his 15th year with the OHL as the TV play-by-play voice of the Niagara IceDogs.
Comments