The World Hockey Summit reached its conclusion on Thursday afternoon, finishing with a seminar titled “Growing Participation in Hockey”, with discussions centering around the need to reach out and get more people involved in the game. Darren Eliot, a former NHL player and current broadcaster for the Atlanta Thrashers, moderated the panel on the subject, one that is very familiar to him as he is the hockey development liaison for the Thrashers. In this role, Eliot reaches out to the Atlanta community to encourage its residents to learn more about hockey and take part in a game that is still growing in popularity there.

Tommy Boustedt, a Swedish representative of the IIHF, began the discussion by describing the national minor hockey programs available to children in his home country, the Three Crown hockey school, as well as explaining the role of parents that have in helping their young kids develop properly into the sport. Having come across parents who are not sure which skate goes on which foot for their children, Boustedt was able to outline some trouble areas that became recurring themes for the other speakers.

Dr. Paul Dennis, recently retired from a 20-year career with the Toronto Maple Leafs as a player development and mental skills coach, lent his expertise in those fields to the attendees as the first panelist. Believing that delivering key, positive messages to kids serves as encouraging reinforcement for them to want to stay in hockey, Dr. Dennis stressed the importance of the mental challenges children face in sports and what can be done to ensure their best chances to succeed.

One suggestion made by Dr. Dennis was to simply let the kids enjoy themselves, and enjoy the game for what it means to them. “We want them to meet our expectations in hockey as parents,” the current teacher of sports psychology at the University of Toronto and York University said, “not for them to meet their own.”

Pat Kellehar spoke next, the assistant Executive Director of Membership Development for USA Hockey giving his insight into the methods that their program has used to face the challenges of developing hockey in a country that has many sporting options for kids and parents alike to choose from. Stressing that the parents are the ones they need to gear their invitations to the game towards, Kellehar broke down the areas that he feels are the biggest obstacles to overcome in showcasing hockey as a good choice.

Kellehar described the boundaries that USA Hockey needs to help parents get past are the cost, the commitment and the unique culture, while listing common stereotypes parents have of the game as it being too expensive, too violent and too much of a commitment for both them and their kids. The techniques Kellehar and USA Hockey use to get around these include selling parents on the resources, such as rinks, they have to help, creating a consistent brand of youth hockey and promising three things – that their kids will have fun, will get excellent guidance from their coaches and the sense of achievement they gain from doing something new and getting better at it.

Cyril Leeder, president of the NHL’s Ottawa Senators, was next and spoke of the initiatives that the club has taken in the city of Ottawa, attempting to foster the growth of the game with children, girls, women and new Canadians. Using a blend of work on community rinks, coach development, signature events with children and underprivileged families, Leeder described many of the attempts the Senators are taking in order to keep “hockey the sport of choice for Canadians.”

John McDonough, president of the Stanley Cup champion Chicago Blackhawks was the next panelist to offer his take on developing participation in hockey, offering the incredibly successful blueprint the Blackhawks have utilized in making hockey relevant again in the Windy City. Having come to the hockey team in 2007 from the Chicago Cubs, McDonough has been part of an extremely aggressive plan to put a successful product on the ice, one that will draw the fans in through its accomplishments. Having won the game’s ultimate prize, McDonough said the team is making significant in-roads against the traditionally more popular sports of baseball and basketball in the city, noting that since the Cup victory, the team is “trying to manage an explosion of interest.”

Finland’s Director of Coaching Arto Sieppi spoke after McDonough, drawing on some of the angles his Scandinavian counterpart Bourstedt took in his own presentation. Showing the annual breakdown of kids who occupy the ranks of the Finnish “Lion’s Road” program, Sieppi demonstrated how, of the 33,000 kids born in the country every year, only two or three of those will ever be NHL or Olympic caliber players. Delivering personal anecdotes of his coaching experiences, Sieppi continually stressed the importance of making the game fun for kids, a common theme throughout the seminar. When kids have fun with the game, Sieppi maintained, that is when they’ll be motivated to stay with it.

The final speaker of the “Growing Participation in Hockey” seminar was Hockey Canada’s Chief Executive Officer, Scott Smith. Saying that “Hockey Canada is in the business of meaningful experiences,” Smith outlined how his team seeks out both parents and children to give them just that. Smith then presented several key statistics showing a trend in the country that shows declining numbers in hockey participation amongst Canadian children aged 5-19, and a growing trend towards a population with more new Canadians. Smith described Hockey Canada’s recruitment and retention program as the best means to counteract these developments, hoping to give parents a consistent brand of hockey that they can be comfortable having their children be a part of.

QUESTION: We heard 9.91 percent of kids are playing minor hockey. Is that a low number and can it be improved? If so, how?

BOB NICHOLSON: You know what, our goal is to improve that number.  But it's going to take a lot of work.  I think we really have to look at how we try to recruit new young boys and girls into the game of hockey and we are going to try to work a lot closer with the schools and try to get into elementary schools to introduce the game.

And I guess the first step is just to make sure they get on the ice and hopefully as they do that, they will have the choice between speed skating, figure skating and hockey and we have to work with our partners to do that.  That was one of the great things today.  I think it really opened up the dialogue for us to work with the National Hockey League, the players, the CHL.

Everyone's goal here is to get more kids on the ice, more fans involved in the game.  But it is a challenge.  Facilities in our country, as you heard, is an issue, and we have to make certain to utilize that ice time from 9:00 to 3:00 which is open in Canada and around the world.

QUESTION:  Bill, three and a half years away from Sochi, half a year away from Vancouver, probably two years away from a decision, so much emotion spent this week discussing that. Did any of that surprise you?

BILL DALY:  That's an easy question.  No, none of that surprised me.  No, I think we identified that issue right up front.  We didn't want to be having to be defending a position and a decision we haven't even made yet.

We understand the importance of the issue to the hockey world, so you can't really have a summit like that and not have a thorough discussion on that issue.

So, no, it didn't surprise us, and hopefully we dealt with it in an appropriate and respectful way.

QUESTION:  It's been such a long time since leaders in hockey have come together and done this kind of soul searching.  Can you talk about the one thing learned that maybe was a surprise or the biggest thing learned through these four days?

DAVE OGREAN:  Yeah, I'll give you two things because I believe it is important for somebody to have found something was concrete they could use.

I never realized until I had a chance to have some in depth conversations at the beginning of the week how similar the Scandinavian countries are with the U.S. and Canada at the grass roots level:  Built under the same model, totally volunteer based, based on the same issues of how to recruit and train volunteers.  And that's why I think that we have a very close relationship with those countries, a uniquely close relationship.

I would say the other thing is    and this is editorializing.  I don't know how everybody else feels about this, but I came away more convinced than ever that we are going to have the NHL players at Sochi, and some of that is just an emotional feel perhaps.  And, by the way, nobody talks about the Olympics and their emotional relevance better than John Furlong.

But there is a simple presence here by the people who are going to work together, that have to work together, do work together, and who want this game to be the best.  So I'll go to sleep tonight just personally with faith that they are going to get it done.

QUESTION:  Dave, Bob earlier talked about the participation of kids in Canada and the numbers.  Are you happy with the numbers of kids playing in the U.S., especially in the non traditional markets where you start to see kids from southern California and Texas and places like that?

DAVE OGREAN:  I would use John McDonough's phrase, "never satisfied."
It's encouraging to have some improvement, and especially as the concrete result of the membership development department that we set up under Pat Kelleher's leadership a few years ago; that's working.  We had pretty significant growth, five percent a year at the eight and under level, and we have to do a better job since we have empirical evidence now as to why kids are leaving and just keeping them in longer.

But I think we are both seeing a lot of the same problems.  There's probably one issue in Canada which is not quite frankly broadly affecting us in the States and that might be the condition of facilities.  But we are all competing with immigrant populations who have perhaps different sport interests who are dealing with an economy that's impacting a sport that's not inexpensive to play.

We are dealing with a lot more choices on the sport menu as our populations grow and become more diversified.  So it is very, very similar to the issues that we have with Canada, and that's why we are closer to Canada, probably psychologically and politically, than anybody else in the world.

QUESTION:  We are living in hard times and I would like to ask anyone how they look to deal with that challenge, particularly in the U.S., and how big is the downturn in the economy in the world going to affect your organizations?

BOB NICHOLSON:  You know what, I'll take that one.  It is a challenge on making sure the kids can play the game and get involved in the game.

The one thing that we have talked about through the various sessions is we see hockey from September through till April.  And maybe we should take the model of some of the other sports.  Maybe there should be hockey for six to seven weeks so they can get involved in the game.

We have to also work with all of our partners, whether it is government or with our corporates to try to make sure that we get equipment on young kids that is affordable.  Those are huge challenges and we have to try to do those one step at a time, and it's not one group that can do that; it's collectively trying to get the game cheaper.  There are certain costs that are there are that are never going to go away.

QUESTION:  For Bob and Dave, we both heard wonderful examples of NHL teams who are growing their sport within their communities.  What about the many communities in Canada and the U.S. that don't have any clubs?

BOB NICHOLSON:  You know what, we are fortunate in our country with our NHL teams.  Dave Branch and myself have orchestrated another meeting at the end of September to try to work with Hockey Canada and the Canadian Hockey League to look at programs designed for the Hockey Canada and CHL.  I think once those programs are designed, we can take that down into junior level and use that into the minor hockey associations.

But it's really important that you get the major stakeholders, the NHL and the CHL, in our case, on side, and I think we can build programs and then we can deliver down to minor hockey.

DAVE OGREAN:   We are very fortunate in the States to have as many NHL teams as we do.  They are the biggest and best when it comes to helping to promote the game to be a partner.

Gary takes a lot of knocks for expanding into non traditional markets who were not necessarily immediately successful, but I will tell you, what is happening in our programs at the grass roots levels in Atlanta, in Phoenix, in Texas, in Florida, in the Carolinas has been phenomenal.  We have more of a national footprint today with our registration with our membership registration just as the National Hockey League footprint has gone national, too.

The other thing that really helps, and we have always seen this in the States when the NHL team moves into a new area for the first time, and I don't mean a town; I mean a state or a region; you will see minor league hockey crop up all around it.

This may not still be true but there was a wonderful trivia question in the late 90s that was accurate. It went, what were the two states in America with the most professional franchises? The answer was Texas and Florida; because they had NHL teams, they had East Coast League teams or AHL, sometimes CHL teams.  And the sport grows when you plant it.  And the biggest seed is the NHL.

So from that standpoint, our growth in those areas has been encouraging and strong and the participation of those NHL clubs as partners in what we do has been so critical.
Chicago is an entrenched hockey area.  Illinois is an entrenched hockey area.  But John McDonough and Rocky Wirtz have just revitalized that franchise.  They help us so much.  But every one of the 24 clubs in America is a vital partner of what we do. And I think those areas that are not in the shadow of an NHL team or arena, there's a similar kind of relationship, maybe less horsepower.  But we work with the AHL clubs.  We work with the NCAA programs.  We work with the United States Hockey League teams.  We work with the other minor leagues.  So I think this is a sport where I think the leadership at every level realizes we have to do it together.  So we have a lot of good alliances to let us grow.

QUESTION:  Dave, at Air Canada Centre the other day, all of the people involved in junior development throughout the world made a very eloquent and passionate argument on why their programs are the best for upcoming prospects.  Is there a need for common ground there?  Do you think it's inevitable that there will be competition and hopefully healthy competition for the best pro prospects?

DAVE BRANCH:  There's some passion there for sure.  I think one of the great things I will take away from this event is I have a new friend in Slavomir Lener.  We have gotten to know each other over the last couple of days, and he had some great comments about the programs in the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

And I think one of the things that we all recognize up here is the importance of growing the game and the importance of the health of the game.  And all of us up here have to, as they say, be up about 30,000 feet and look down at what is best locally.

That said, hockey is a very competitive game on the ice and off the ice, and I think that competition will always be there for the player, but I do view it, as we say, healthy competition.  I know I'm speaking on behalf of the Canadian Hockey League.  Ten years ago, we recognized we had some huge issues in terms of attracting the best young players, and to the credit of the people involved, we responded by better coaching, better facilities, the latest in technology and the like, and of course our college scholarship program which is the best in the world.

I think at the end of the day, competition makes the game better on and off the ice, and the key for us who are in positions of leadership is to continue to embrace each other for the good of the continued growth of the game.

QUESTION:  For Dave or for Bob, is there any future for non contact in the lower levels of minor hockey?

DAVE BRANCH:  I think we both should respond to that, because I think that Bob of course speaks on behalf of the whole here in terms of minor hockey.

I just want to offer a personal experience, being from Whitby, which I consider to be the capital of hockey of Canada.  The local committee was having problems with its Midget house league in terms of player registrations.  And to their credit they challenged what they could do better and they decided to eliminate body checking even at that level.  And wow, you know what happened?  Registrations went way up.  I think that's a positive and it really supported a lot of the statements in the submissions on the first day.

BOB NICHOLSON:  I really think it's important that we do it and we have some issues around some of our regulations that have been there since 1940, maybe 1930.  And we have to make change.  We have to listen to what families, moms and dads and kids want.
The majority of the young girls and boys playing, they want to play with their friends and our regulations don't allow that.  We have to change that to meet the needs of the new family in Canada, the makeup of that.

We really have to look at how we play the game.  There are so many other options.  I talked about, you know, six  or seven week leagues.  Maybe the season should be divided into three or four different seasons so that kids can play up till Christmas and then go skiing.  If we get more flexible, and that's what we have to do, I think it's not just about body checking.  It's about allowing them to be able to play when they want to play.

QUESTION:  Mike, can you comment about the reports of Donald Fehr taking the interim director's job, and what the time line would be for any sort of ratification process?

MIKE OUELLET:  We are only talking about players' participation in the Olympics here.  But the news reports, I can tell you, are not entirely accurate and there is a process that is still ongoing.  The process isn't completed.  When the process is completed and there's an announcement to be made, everybody will be made aware.

As far as the time line goes, certainly the expectation and the hope is that there's something in place before the start of training camp, which is, I believe, the 17th or so of September.

QUESTION:  Can you speak to the value of import players to the CHL, not just to the players but to the teams as well?

DAVE BRANCH:  That came up during the junior development discussion and there's a real push/pull there, as it relates to some of the concerns that we expressed, and we recognize that.  We are not insensitive to that.

You know, when it was such a huge political shift going back to the early 90s, we started to get a huge number of calls and the requests for players from overseas to come and play.  It resulted in us putting a cap system in place where each team is capped at two.
I think the challenge is, can we reduce to one, should we reduce to one.  I think there's some value - obviously there's significant value to players wishing to come and play and develop within the CHL structure, but once again, for those of us that are in positions of leadership, we can't overlook the need to see what's best for the game and what adjustments we should consider there.

I think it's incumbent upon us, based on what we heard here, and quite frankly the last little while, that we have to address that as an area of serious discussion.

QUESTION:  Considering how contentious the decision is on getting players into the 2014 Olympics, when the next C.B.A. negotiation is done, do you plan on settling not only the 2014 Olympics but also 2018?

BILL DALY:  Look, I wouldn't characterize the issue as being a contentious issue, vis a vis the PA and the League at this point in time.  We have to go through our own process, make the best-informed decision on behalf of the League and then talk to the Players' Association about it.  So it may or may not be contentious, I suppose.

I think, as I said on the panel yesterday, having a defined international calendar, with or without the Olympics, is a good idea, and I think I answered a question sometime today about this; I certainly can see reaching an agreement on that calendar vis a vis the Players' Association, kind of separate and apart from the Collective Bargaining Agreement, including on dates that may extend beyond the Collective Bargaining Agreement, because I think in some respects, it's a separate discussion.

So, yes, I think having a defined international calendar and what we are participating in and what we are trying to achieve is an important thing to do, and something that we are going to have discussion on.

MIKE OUELLET:  I'll just echo those comments as well from a business perspective, having a defined calendar makes a lot of sense for sponsors, for broadcasters, for promoters and for fans who want to know what to expect down the road.

As Bill said, our involvement in international hockey is a partnership and we can decide at any point in time during the course of a C.B.A. whether there are certain events we want to conduct and we have an international committee that makes those decisions.

I'm not sure how long the next C.B.A. term will be either, so can we say that we'll play in the 2018 event? I can't tell you that right now.  But we certainly recognize the value of having a set calendar for international play.

THE MODERATOR:  Thanks very much.

DAVE OGREAN:  Thank you to you guys, we are all trying to make this game more popular, get more kids to play it, and you do play an awfully important part in that.  We know there's a lot of guys that could be fishing or swimming or doing something like that and I know you are probably itching for training camp to start, so we gave you some meat in late August to write about.

But the gusto and volume that came out of the media coverage the last several days was very exciting to see, and it's very important to what we do.  From time to time we may not open up to you as much as you like but we appreciate the job you have to do and the job you do do, because I think we all love hockey.

TORONTO, Ont. – The Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit concluded on Thursday in Toronto, with over 400 delegates participating in the four-day event.  The summit was a global hockey symposium, attracting global leaders of the game and interested stakeholders to share and enhance global hockey knowledge. Full event details and coverage is available online at www.worldhockeysummit.com.

The steering committee, comprised of the seven summit partners (IIHF, NHL, NHLPA, Hockey Canada, USA Hockey, CHL and Molson Coors), will be reviewing all of the results from the work group discussions on player skill development, junior development in the hockey world, an evaluation of Vancouver 2010, a global hockey event agenda, women’s hockey after Vancouver 2010 and growing participation in the game.

Event proceedings, including formal presentations and the results from the discussion groups, will be provided to all IIHF member federations and summit partners, providing these organizations with the opportunity to develop their own action plans.

The summit partners will also collaborate on developing recommendations and collective action plans going forward, and expect to announce details over of the course of the 2010-11 season.

"Coming into the summit we really didn't know what to expect, but I could sense that this would be a success after one day," said IIHF president René Fasel. "We discussed the most pressing issues in our game and we had a very good and healthy exchange of views in front of more than 400 keen delegates. These were four very good days for hockey. The next step is to evaluate the proposals from the delegates and see if we can work out any recommendations."

"The discussion and dialogue here over the last four days has clearly extended hockey knowledge and enriched hockey insight at all levels,” said Bill Daly, NHL deputy commissioner. “The National Hockey League was proud to play a meaningful part in that dialogue and I believe the game – both at the NHL level and all other levels – will be better for it."

"The NHLPA was pleased that the major stakeholders in hockey were part of the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit to discuss how the global game can prosper," said Mike Ouellet, NHLPA chief of business affairs. "NHL players bring forth a key perspective in growing the game worldwide and we hope to build off of this week's momentum. In particular, we look forward to expanding best-on-best tournaments, such as the World Cup of Hockey and the Olympics, where fans watch their favourite players participate."

“It has been a very productive week here in Toronto,” said Hockey Canada president & CEO Bob Nicholson. “Hockey Canada and the representatives of our member branches throughout the country have been very excited about being part of this collaboration, discussing matters ranging from skill development to hockey at the Olympic Games with the major hockey stakeholders. We look forward to working together and coming about with a plan to make our game even better.”

“This event has exceeded my expectations,” said Dave Ogrean, executive director of USA Hockey. “With the relatively diversified audience, and designed by seven different entities, there was a pleasingly high level of interaction and engagement.”

“The Canadian Hockey League is extremely pleased with the success of the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit in attracting global hockey leaders to one stage,” said CHL president David Branch.  “It was energizing to be around so many passionate hockey people that were all focused on the betterment of the game which will undoubtedly result in positive changes to hockey in the years to come.”

"Molson Canadian was there back in 1999 for the very first Open Ice Summit and continues to support the development and evolution of 'our game'," said Pat McEleney, director of sports and entertainment for Molson Coors Canada. "The dialogue, discussion and debate from this year's Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit should unlock clues to help grow the game and improve the sport at all levels."

TORONTO--Canada’s women’s captain, Hayley Wickenheiser, opened the final day of the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit with a keynote speech which accentuated the gap between North America and the rest of the world in women’s hockey. And then she offered solutions to ensure her career continues with greater purpose after Sochi.

She began at the obvious starting point, referencing IOC president Jacques Rogge’s comments from Vancouver in which he demanded a closing of the gap in quality of play. “I look at his comments as a positive,” she began. “It might be why we’re here today.”

Wickenheiser showed a video clip of women’s hockey over the last 20 years, from the inaugural World Women’s Championship in 1990 through to the 2010 Olympics. As she pointed out, the increase in quality of play and skill was staggering.

But it’s only a general overview. Specifics offered both optimism and pessimism. Finland, she noted, has tripled participation in the last three years, thanks in large part to the efforts of Arto Seppi, a full-time director of women’s hockey with the Finnish Ice Hockey Federation.

But Wickenheiser pointed to the incredible discrepancy in domestic league play among the top teams in the women’s world. Some leagues play only ten games per team; others 66. All players outside the top four hockey nations also say that their domestic leagues play a game of far inferior quality to the international game, making development even more difficult.

She shared a brief conversation she had with Uwe Krupp, coach of Germany’s men’s team. She asked why funding for the German women’s team has virtually dried up. He said the team hasn’t been winning. Get a winning team and the funding will come. That is what’s called Catch-22. The less the funding, the lesser the chance of success.

Russia, she noted, also spends no money on women’s player development, and Switzerland is right there near the bottom. Only seven of the top 14 women’s nations have an executive on the national and federation level dedicated to women’s hockey.

“It’s just not good enough,” Wickenheiser concluded.

“We need more exhibition games for the national teams. The U18 championship is only three years old, but the level of competition at that level is closer than at any other level of women’s hockey, so the future looks bright,” she offered by contrast.

Wickenheiser proposed specific solutions to the various and many problems. “It’s clear Canada and the U.S. and the IIHF should lead the way, but it’s up to federations to help,” she began. “We need leadership. We need to change societal values. We need to grow the game at both the grass roots level and improve the quality of play at the elite level as well. We have to keep players in the game. So many women, after they graduate and have nowhere to play, simply leave the game. We need more money and more exposure. I think we can use the World Juniors as a model. Look at the U20. When it first started, it was small, but in Canada it has become one of the biggest hockey events every year.”

Detailed solutions? Wickenheiser was intelligent in her observations. “We need to increase the opportunities in North America. By that I mean, we need a professional league in North America that stands as the best in the world where players from all over North America and Europe can play.”

“We need to have women play more games against boys’ teams. This will improve the skill level immensely, as we found out prior to Vancouver. We also have to have all top nations planning for Sochi, so that the tournament is as good as it can be.”

More important, Wickenheiser repeated a theme consistent all week in the men’s discussions—coaches. “We need more quality coaches in the game all over the world. Coaching is the key to development.”

Challenging the IIHF, she continued: “We need the IIHF to hire someone dedicated to women’s hockey whose only job is to provide a voice for the women’s game. We need to take action now. The game has come a long way, but we have a lot more to do still.”

During the follow-up question and answer period, Murray Costello, an IIHF Council member, revealed details of a Council meeting held the day before the Summit began. “I’m here to tell you that our president, Rene Fasel, is here, as is the general secretary, Horst Lichtner, and Sport Director Dave Fitzpatrick, and we are listening. We have committed $2 million to women’s hockey. It still has to be passed through Congress, but we are listening. However, we can’t do this alone. The work has to start at home. We need the national federations to come to us and tell us they are ready to move forward. But we have listened to you today. We have heard, and we are impressed. And we are here to give our support.”

The last day of the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit started with a discussion of women’s hockey and provided the crowd in Toronto with tremendous discussion and interest. The esteemed on-stage panel parsed observations made by keynote speaker Hayley Wickenheiser. Representatives included her American counterpart, Angela Ruggiero; American national team coach, Mark Johnson; Arto Sieppi, director of women’s hockey for Finland; Peter Elander, longtime head coach of  Sweden’s national women’s team; and, Mel Davidson, Canada’s national team coach.

The message was unanimous in many ways and on many levels. The women’s game needs funding, needs development, and first and foremost, needs respect. “There is still a perception in many parts of the world that hockey isn’t for women, that women are best seen not heard, that they should be barefoot and pregnant,” Davidson said. “And these are views I heard last month in Vierumaki.”

Elander echoed these sentiments by pointing to the obvious: “We have to treat boys and girls the same at the grassroots level. Rule number one—hockey is not based on gender.”

Sieppi silenced the crowd when he told of how he got involved in women’s hockey in 1998. “I was asked to be an assistant coach with the national team, and I said no many times for two reasons: women can’t skate and women’s hockey players are not athletes. My wife convinced me to try it, and 12 years later, I don’t regret a single day. The development of women’s hockey in that time has been huge.”

Ruggiero told her story, a fairy-tale one by comparison. “I’ve been playing hockey since I was seven years old, in southern California, and it was because of family support that I was able to pursue a career in the game.”

From the grassroots level working up, Elander said, opportunity is the most important factor in improving the women’s game. “If you want more girls to play, you need them to have leagues to play in in their countries,” he stated.

Johnson, and later Murray Costello, made the most important observation of the day. “Getting girls to play hockey is not just about the Olympics; it’s about teaching life lessons.”

Costello, an IIHF Council member, promised added support for women. “We believe hockey develops character and makes people better, regardless of whether they get to the NHL,” he explained. “Well, 50 per cent of the world is women, so why wouldn’t we want to give the same opportunity to them as we give for men?”

On the more serious and difficult problems of improving the game at the higher levels, budget issues were, of course, a major concern. Said Elander: “I am a coach at the University of North Dakota, and our budget for the 24 girls is twice what my budget for Sweden’s national team is.”

To a man and woman, the panel agreed strong leadership is needed, both at the IIHF and within each federation. The game needs a person to give a dedicated voice to women’s hockey was the well-received consensus.

Sieppi has been a game-changer in Finland. He has tripled the number of girls in the country who play the game, and by adopting Hockey Canada’s hugely successful Girls’ Hockey Day he has given all of Finland a focal point. He announced that the national team will play 20 games a season for the next four years leading to Sochi, and it will centralize for the last year to further improve the country’s chances of winning another Olympic medal to follow on the heels of the bronze in Vancouver.

Passionate and effective, he looked out to the audience and declared: “This is a company. It’s not like Nokia, but it’s a company that’s going to the stock market. You are investors—buy that stock!”

“We’re just tapping the surface,” Johnson said of the quality of play in women’s hockey. “We have a great opportunity with so much positive momentum coming out of Vancouver. We need resources and opportunity. We need to expose the sport and give kids a chance to play.”

Davidson agreed. “We’ve been growing pretty quickly. If we work together, our game has no limits.”

TORONTO, Ont. – The Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit concluded on Thursday in Toronto, with over 400 delegates participating in the four-day event.  The summit was a global hockey symposium, attracting global leaders of the game and interested stakeholders to share and enhance global hockey knowledge. Full event details and coverage is available online at www.worldhockeysummit.com.

The steering committee, comprised of the seven summit partners (IIHF, NHL, NHLPA, Hockey Canada, USA Hockey, CHL and Molson Coors), will be reviewing all of the results from the work group discussions on player skill development, junior development in the hockey world, an evaluation of Vancouver 2010, a global hockey event agenda, women’s hockey after Vancouver 2010 and growing participation in the game.

Event proceedings, including formal presentations and the results from the discussion groups, will be provided to all IIHF member federations and summit partners, providing these organizations with the opportunity to develop their own action plans.

The summit partners will also collaborate on developing recommendations and collective action plans going forward, and expect to announce details over of the course of the 2010-11 season.

"Coming into the summit we really didn't know what to expect, but I could sense that this would be a success after one day," said IIHF president René Fasel. "We discussed the most pressing issues in our game and we had a very good and healthy exchange of views in front of more than 400 keen delegates. These were four very good days for hockey. The next step is to evaluate the proposals from the delegates and see if we can work out any recommendations."

"The discussion and dialogue here over the last four days has clearly extended hockey knowledge and enriched hockey insight at all levels,” said Bill Daly, NHL deputy commissioner. “The National Hockey League was proud to play a meaningful part in that dialogue and I believe the game – both at the NHL level and all other levels – will be better for it."

"The NHLPA was pleased that the major stakeholders in hockey were part of the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit to discuss how the global game can prosper," said Mike Ouellet, NHLPA chief of business affairs. "NHL players bring forth a key perspective in growing the game worldwide and we hope to build off of this week's momentum. In particular, we look forward to expanding best-on-best tournaments, such as the World Cup of Hockey and the Olympics, where fans watch their favourite players participate."

“It has been a very productive week here in Toronto,” said Hockey Canada president & CEO Bob Nicholson. “Hockey Canada and the representatives of our member branches throughout the country have been very excited about being part of this collaboration, discussing matters ranging from skill development to hockey at the Olympic Games with the major hockey stakeholders. We look forward to working together and coming about with a plan to make our game even better.”

“This event has exceeded my expectations,” said Dave Ogrean, executive director of USA Hockey. “With the relatively diversified audience, and designed by seven different entities, there was a pleasingly high level of interaction and engagement.”

“The Canadian Hockey League is extremely pleased with the success of the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit in attracting global hockey leaders to one stage,” said CHL president David Branch.  “It was energizing to be around so many passionate hockey people that were all focused on the betterment of the game which will undoubtedly result in positive changes to hockey in the years to come.”

"Molson Canadian was there back in 1999 for the very first Open Ice Summit and continues to support the development and evolution of 'our game'," said Pat McEleney, director of sports and entertainment for Molson Coors Canada. "The dialogue, discussion and debate from this year's Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit should unlock clues to help grow the game and improve the sport at all levels."

For more information, contact:

NHL: Julie Young ([email protected])

Hockey Canada: Andre Brin ([email protected])

IIHF: Szymon Szemberg ([email protected])

USA Hockey: Dave Fischer ([email protected])

NHLPA: Jonathan Weatherdon ([email protected])

CHL: Paul Krotz ([email protected])

Molson: Adam Moffat ([email protected])

“Developing a Global Hockey Agenda” was the seminar topic for the afternoon session of the World Hockey Summit’s third day, with Darren Dreger moderating a panel that included speakers from all major stakeholders of the game, drawing perspectives from the NHL, the NHLPA, the KHL and the IIHF. The session focused on how to best arrange certain events within the hockey calendar and what would the optimal way to mix best-on-best international competition with league play in North America and Europe.

Ralph Krueger, currently an associate coach with the NHL’s Edmonton Oilers after spending over a decade coaching the Swiss national team, led the panel and began the discussion by offering up his take on what the global hockey agenda should be. Believing that “the only way this will work is if we have a clear plan,” Krueger went into detail describing different scenarios revolving mainly around the Olympics and supplementing non-Olympic years with World Championships, a World Cup, Champions League play between European league winners, and the ‘challenge cup’ between European teams and NHL teams. A wrinkle added by Krueger to Olympic years saw the World Championships change to a U-23 tournament every four years.

The discussion was then opened to the members of the panel, who based their approvals and concerns off of Krueger’s model, which led to over an hour of interesting debate between conflicting viewpoints.

Bill Daly, the NHL’s deputy commissioner, was the first to discuss Krueger’s model and said that “from the NHL’s perspective, we’re on board with many aspects of it. International competition for hockey and the NHL is very important. It’s very special and part of our culture, part of our history and part of our tradition.” Daly continued by saying that the NHL has a very big role with any best-on-best tournament or ‘challenge cup’ between leagues and that the league is looking forward to discussing those.

Agreeing partly with the four-year cycle concept given by Krueger, Daly suggested that it may be too much for players to play an Olympics and a World Cup every four years, as well as an annual World Championship, claiming that players “need some time to recharge the batteries, they need to have a summer” after going through long, grueling NHL seasons. Daly also agreed with the concept of U-23 World Championships, saying that it was a good idea to help shoulder the international competition burden on the league’s star players. With “no tried and true mechanism in place” for ‘challenge cups’ yet, Daly also thought it was a good idea to work on ways to gain more exposure for European NHLers in their home countries.

Alexander Medvedev, president of the KHL, said that the league “is ready to support all of the ideas that were presented,” claiming that the positive effect that international competition has on the development of hockey is unmistakable. Medvedev also said that he was surprised that NHL commissioner Gary Bettman is still saying there is time to decide on NHL participation for the 2014 Sochi Olympics, saying that by not sending NHLers to the Olympics it would be like putting “poisoned pesticides in the soil that is producing a first-class product and I hope that such a decision would not be made.” Medvedev also said that he hoped for a revitalization of the Victoria Cup, citing it as a success in the past.

The NHLPA’s Mike Ouellet said that he was at the summit to deliver the views  of the players, and began by stating their interest in playing best-on-best hockey has always been there. “This is about showcasing the best players on the planet,” Ouellet said, “so we have to listen to them.” Citing a survey of players done in 2008 of over 600 NHLPA members, Ouellet said that 95% were in favor of participating in the Olympics past Vancouver, 91% of players said yes to continuing the World Cup of Hockey and 53% said yes to playing in the World Championships during an Olympic year or World Cup year.

Brian Burke, general manager of the NHL’s Toronto Maple Leafs and the 2010 U.S Olympic team, continued his support of including the World Cup in a four-year event cycle going ahead, while also believing that “NHL players should continue to participate in the Olympic Games, but there’s a big ‘if’ at the end of that sentence.” The “if” Burke referred to is addressing the concerns that teams and management have about allowing their contracted players to leave their NHL teams mid-season, which they believe disturbs the flow of the season and putting them at risk of injury. Burke prefers the August-September World Cup model, which allows teams to come together in advance of the tournament and practice together, whereas he described members of the 2010 U.S Olympic team who arrived in Vancouver only two days before their first games.  

Anders Hedberg, a pro scout for the New York Rangers and one of the first Swedish-born NHLers, continued on a common theme addressed by those who went before him, saying the need for best-on-best competition is absolutely there. Hedberg continued by elaborating on the Olympics, saying it is the players who want this as well, and it will be them who will ultimately decide if they will be playing in Sochi in 2014.

“Just like Ovechkin and Malkin said ‘we’re going’, I think Backstrom will go, I think Zetterberg will go,” Hedberg said. “I think a lot of Canadians will go, regardless of what the NHL or their owners are saying. So don’t forget the will of the players. The Olympics matter to players; it matters more than the NHL, it matters more than the IIHF, it matters more than the KHL.”

Hedberg then used the FIFA World Cup as the model that hockey should adopt with the Olympics, saying that the soccer tournament is the most popular sporting event, but that it all revolves around having the best players in the world there. Hedberg also suggested taking some of the NHL’s dwindling franchises and putting them in some of the most hockey-popular European cities, claiming it could be the turning point for hockey across the Atlantic.  

The CBC’s Glenn Healy, a retired NHL goaltender and former director of player affairs for the NHLPA, continued the discussion by stating that the NHL’s participation in future Olympics should not be considered a bargaining chip between the league and the union because the biggest NHL stars will go anyways, and that it is the players who are “pushing the envelope on this and saying ‘yeah, I want to be a part of this and I want to grow this globally.’”

At the same time, Healy also suggested several tweaks to the Olympics, namely better medical and marketing access for NHL clubs to the players, who are coordinated by and in direct contact with only the IIHF to themselves during those two weeks. Too much money is made by hockey in the Olympics, Healy said, for anyone to say that more cannot be done for the players who provide the product. Healy also suggested that the World Cup seize February as an opportunity to do the same for the tournament with fans.

Paul Romanuk, a broadcaster for over 25 years in both Canada and Europe and currently based in London, England, touched on the need “for a meaningful club championship in Europe” as he feels that there is value in developing that into something worthwhile and then involving NHL club teams, once it has prestige of its own. Romanuk described it as the “hockey form of the Champions League of soccer, which is a massively successful marketing vehicle, as well as something that just captures the hearts and minds of soccer fans all across Europe.” Romanuk continued by suggesting that a Global Hockey Week should be held in place of the NHL All-Star week, bringing together all of the leagues and stakeholders of the game in one place, “focusing the eyes of the world for one week on this great game.”  

Ouellet also continued on a point first brought up by Healy, saying that the Olympics would not be used as a chip in collective bargaining and that “the players have never admitted that they would be giving anything up in order to go play in the Games, so people should recognize that it won’t be a huge bone of contention and that it won’t be used against them as a bargaining chip.”

An emotional debate developed on stage during a follow-up session to Ralph Krueger’s proposal for a unified global hockey agenda, with several parties expressing opinions contradictory to others’ on stage and creating a charged atmosphere that gave the attendees a sense of what might a real negotiation sound like behind closed doors.

At the crux of the discussion was Olympic participation, which segued quickly from Krueger’s big-picture plan to a laying bare of emotions an issues which is clearly the most contentious in the hockey world these days.

“From the NHL’s perspective,” deputy commissioner Bill Daly began, “we’re on board with a lot of what Ralph suggests. We have to make sense of a very cluttered, disconnected international world. The four-year cycle makes very good sense. But Olympics every four years, World Cup every four years, and World Championship participation every year, is too much. That has to be taken into account.”

As for Krueger’s bold suggestion to eliminate the World Championships in an Olympic year and replace it with, ostensibly, a sort of senior-junior event, Daly remarked: “The U23 is a great concept and one we’ve talked about in the past. Club competition is also important, and there’s a lot of enthusiasm for this kind of event, whether it’s exhibition or playing for a trophy.”

Brian Burke’s opening remarks we straightforward if not entirely illuminating. “I do believe that players should participate in the Olympics, but there’s a big “if.” If and only if some of the concerns that this participation poses for NHL teams are addressed. If you look at Anaheim, they lost momentum because of shutting down for the Olympics and missed the playoffs. The Olympics will still happen if NHL doesn’t go.”

While Burke endorses the Olympics, he also is fully supportive of resurrecting the NHLK-run World Cup of Hockey. “In terms of international hockey, the World Cup is excellent,” he opined. “The best hockey I ever saw was the 1987 Canada Cup. If you have a World Cup before the season starts, you arrive early, have practice and a full training camp, work on special teams. The key is best on best. That is essential.”

Anders Hedberg, the universal, international Swede, promoted top-level hockey in all its variegated forms. “Best on best? Absolutely. I believe the players will decide on the Olympics, regardless on what the NHL or owners or the board of governors. The will of the players is—I want to go! It matters more than the NHL or the KHL or anything. The Olympics matter.”

The ever-opinionated Healy, a former NHL goalie turned broadcaster, spoke with racing emotion that was easy to get caught up in, both for his honesty and logic, even if one didn’t necessarily agree with him.

“Our best players are also our younger players” he started. “Guys like Toews and Crosby and maybe the best player in the world, Ovechkin. We have a great opportunity to grow the game globally now. But we have to see the business of the game is changing. We had 142 players at the Olympics but we couldn’t have NHL.com interviewing its players. Doctors couldn’t see the players. These things have to change. Hockey generated 30% of all ticket sales in Vancouver and allowed players with $2.1 billion in contracts to play, and yet the players and league got not a penny.

Like the others, he also favoured a return of the World Cup. “I love the World Cup, but I say make it in February. The Olympics are in February. Let’s make February our month. Let’s see where we can go in ten years and grow this game together.”

Mike Ouellet, representing the players, shed light on a number of players-only matters. First, he revealed some numbers from an internal survey of 650 NHLers conducted by the PA two years ago. “Some 98 per cent favoured continued participation in the Olympics and 91 per cent wanted the World Cup as well. Fifty-three per cent wanted to play the World Championship, even in an Olympic year or a year with the World Cup. Only 40 per cent wanted an event like the Victoria Cup.

Ouellet also suggested moving the World Cup to February, so that every other year February would see a two and a half week break for that event and the Olympics. The suggestion, however, was immediately rejected by Burke who didn’t see the concept being accepted by the board of governors.

As well, Ouellet said the PA was looking to create a round-robin tournament with NHL teams, in Europe. As for when the World Cup of Hockey would next be played, he suggested it wouldn’t be until 2016 because “2012 is a very aggressive timeframe.” On the assumption that it would be played every four years, two years after the Olympics, 2016 would mark the first possible, realistic date.

Paul Romanuk suggested the NHL abandon its All-Star Game weekend in favour of a week-long Global Hockey Week festival, but most of the fireworks came during further questioning about the Olympics. Clearly the men on stage had strong opinions, but the general consensus was Olympic participation is a great idea—if problems can be worked out. The World Cup seems certain to make a comeback, but not any time soon. But nothing is going to be decided any time soon.

As Daly said, the NHL needs to give national federations about a year to decide, and Ouellet hoped it would be part of the 2012 CBA negotiations, so it might well be two years before fans know for sure whether NHLers will go to Sochi.

Ralph Krueger, longtime coach of La Suisse and newly-hired assistant coach of the Edmonton Oilers, took the stage at the Sheraton Centre during the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit to outline a global agenda for the game.

His vision was all-encompassing, from North America to Europe, from national to international, from club to country. He began by introducing the five areas of the game that need to be coordinated: (1) pro hockey in North America, notably the NHL; (2) pro hockey in Europe, which thrives and has developed by leaps and bounds in the last 30 years; (3) national teams, which need to be re-invented; (4) amateur hockey worldwide; (5) club challenge between the NHL and Europe.

Krueger then broke down this outline to detail every aspect of hockey competition. “National teams would be best to function on a 6-year plan and a 4-year cycle,” he began. “The national team is so important to the success of a country’s hockey development. Think of any nation’s greatest victories and how they propelled a country’s players to have the confidence to believe they can be a top player. Think of what Slovakia’s gold medal did in 2002, or the Czechs’ Olympic gold in 1998.”

He continued: “National teams can be best on best, but we can’t have that every year. I think this has to be every two years. The Olympics, of course, comes every four years, and the World Championships, I believe, is a vital tournament. The money the IIHF makes from this event funds 28 tournaments around the world, every year.”

As a result, the top level of play would constitute competition every two years, the World Cup of Hockey and Olympics alternating. Krueger also realizes the significance of the World Championship, both financially to the IIHF and developmentally to players aspiring to become world class. “But I think,” he explained, “in an Olympic year we would not have a World Championship. Instead, we would have a World U-23 Championship which would give every country a chance to take stock of their depth.”

Of course, every country needs a national league to allow its players to take that first critical step of development. “On a club level,” Krueger explained, “we need a Champions League, a competition between NHL teams and top European teams. This is an essential part of making the game more popular in Europe. In addition, we need to resurrect the Victoria Cup, a tournament which could take place between two NHL teams and two European teams.”

In the end, he said, there has to be a carefully laid out plan which utilizes the players effectively, without wearing them down, and also a system which maximizes the importance of tournaments so a term like “world champion” still has some meaning.

“We need to ask what’s best for the game. It’s a complex process, but if we have a clear destination and direction, hockey worldwide will benefit. We need a place for league play and for national teams, for the future of the game.”

One of the most anticipated appearances at the Molson Canadian World Hockey Summit took place Wednesday afternoon at the Sheraton Hotel in downtown Toronto with a Q & A with NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and TSN’s Pierre McGuire. 

Of course, the first question—the “elephant in the room” as McGuire described—is NHL participation at the 2014 Olympics in Sochi, Russia.

“It fascinates me to see all the commentary that says I’m against going to the Olympics,” Bettman began, “We’ve gone to the last four Olympics during my time as commissioner. I think the commotion is that we haven’t made a decision yet for Sochi, but we don’t feel that’s big a deal.”

As for the perceived success of the Vancouver Olympics as a steppingstone for Sochi, Bettman offered a guarded opinion. “Going to the Olympics is a mixed bag,” he explained. “It can be very good, but there can be problems. On balance, Vancouver was a good experience. It wasn’t all good, but it was good.”

Bettman added to the speculation, both pro and con, by making a couple of other salient issues public. “We are not under any time pressure to make a decision. The IOC hasn’t even assigned their broadcasting rights for Sochi. For instance, I have been told that broadcasters will make two bids, one based on NHL participation and another without. That will make for an interesting discussion with our Board of Governors.”

Indeed, it is with the league’s 30 governors that the decision of whether or not to participate in Sochi will be made. “There is a mixed sentiment among the clubs,” Bettman revealed. “Some clubs think it’s a terrible idea, and some think it’s very important. The decision to go will also have to be made with the Players’ Association.”

Contrary to the opinion of Jamie Langenbrunner, who suggested the players owe it to the fans to go to the Olympics, Bettman suggested it wasn’t so simple. “It might surprise some people to know,” he said, “that not all fans are in favour of NHL players going to the Olympics. Some worry about how it will affect their NHL team.”

On the national front, Bettman states emphatically and unequivocally that, “we’re coming off an absolutely outstanding season in the NHL…and we are pleased to be opening our 2010-11 season in Europe. With about 25 percent of our players coming from outside North America, we wanted fans of those players and in those countries to see our game. We believe it will help develop the game in those countries.”

Good news on the NHL front, to be sure, but for anyone hoping to hear definitive news about NHL participation in the Olympics, well, the wait is on.