2010 Olympic Men's Ice Hockey Thread

GQgeek · Feb 28, 2010

Originally Posted by brlfvr

Not according to certain Canadian forum members who said the US would lose in a 7 game series to Canada's B and C squad. I wonder if they still feel that confident.
I don't know the current players well enough because I stopped watching hockey as much when Yzerman retired. I think that this team's biggest enemy was itself though. For whatever reason, they had a tendency to sit back once they had a substantial lead. It never made any sense to me because when they were attacking, they were unstoppable. The switch was clear between the 3rd period and overtime. All of a sudden they felt they needed a goal again and all of a sudden they started controlling the puck again and a good chunk of OT was spent in the American zone, which was totally the opposite of the 3rd (and even late second period).

sonick · Feb 28, 2010

Originally Posted by NewYorkRanger

Youngest team in the tourney, no real game changer on our roster (sorry, don;t think Parise is in the same league as half of Team Canada, Sedin twins, Gaborik, Hossa, Jagr, Elias, Ovechkin, Malkin, Kovalchuk etc...)

Forget BB, NO ONE was talking a medal for the USA

Maybe no one who was actually knowledgeable about hockey. The package Burke put together for Team USA rivals Sweden but with more grit and speed. Russia has elite top end talent, but with no defense and nowhere near the depth that US had. And don't forget the goaltending, Ryan Miller is a candidate for MVP and Vezina this year.

Originally Posted by brlfvr

Not according to certain Canadian forum members who said the US would lose in a 7 game series to Canada's B and C squad. I wonder if they still feel that confident.

I said Olympic medal contenders. Just because Canada has enough talented players to ice two teams that would be competitive, doesn't make the US any less competitive.

ryoneo · Feb 28, 2010

A let down, but a great game. Now, time for bed.

Stazy · Feb 28, 2010

Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!

Piobaire · Feb 28, 2010

It's a miracle! A MIRACLE ON ICE!eleventy!!

oneeightyseven · Feb 28, 2010

Originally Posted by Piobaire

It's a miracle! A MIRACLE ON ICE!eleventy!!

happy to be a caker?

Piobaire · Feb 28, 2010

Originally Posted by oneeightyseven

happy to be a caker?

A MIRACLE ON ICE!!11!!

Stazy · Feb 28, 2010

Originally Posted by Piobaire

A MIRACLE ON ICE!!11!!

Miracles are nice but they don't happen twice.

PiperInAlberta · Feb 28, 2010

Awesome game, I was going to mention how the Americans played a really great, gritty game but considering all the "ya they won but we had a...(younger team that gave Canada a run for it's money or any of that other BS)" all I'll say is...neener neener.

For those of you not making whiney excuses for your team or snide remarks about Canadian fans, Team USA played a heckuva game. That last second goal in the 3rd was the result of some amazing bloody balls to the wall hockey.

And 14 gold beats 30 silver and bronze in my books. I can't agree with a medal count that designates a 'winner' that builds the majority of it's medals on second and third place competitors.

oneeightyseven · Feb 28, 2010

^^^
should be a points system.

Piobaire · Feb 28, 2010

Originally Posted by PiperInAlberta

Awesome game, I was going to mention how the Americans played a really great, gritty game but considering all the "ya they won but we had a...(younger team that gave Canada a run for it's money or any of that other BS)" all I'll say is...neener neener.

As I observed some days ago:

Originally Posted by Piobaire

Have you folks every watched a US broadcast of the Olympics? This talk of America "losing" at something indicates otherwise. American athletes never "lose." Sometimes, they beat themselves by, "Not playing up to their ability," or "Having an off day/bad luck," or are "beat by an injury." Other teams never actually win because they are better either, they either play "way above their heads," or got a lucky break.

Psyren · Feb 28, 2010

I don't hear anything outside right now. It's louder when the Flames win a game lol.

PiperInAlberta · Feb 28, 2010

^^^
should be a points system.

Gold = 3
Silver = 2
Bronze = 1

Or that's how it should work. Under that system Germany would be 1st place in medals.

Quality, not quantity.

AR_Six · Feb 28, 2010

Originally Posted by PiperInAlberta

And 14 gold beats 30 silver and bronze in my books. I can't agree with a medal count that designates a 'winner' that builds the majority of it's medals on second and third place competitors.
I can. The USA absolutely slayed at these games. Their underdogs and also-rans stepped up and delivered when it mattered and that's why they outpaced every expectation. People need to respect american athletes because they ALL seem to give everything they have like their life depends on it, just like that hockey team did. They deserve all the credit we give them (though perhaps SLIGHTLY less credit than their media gives them). As for whether it's better to win more events outright, or podium more events, that's an endless and honestly pretty stupid debate. And in Canada's case, it's a pretty lame attempt to move the goal posts. We didn't win the medals we should have, but enough people met or exceeded expectations to a point where we can be happy with the performance. Besides, in the end all that matters is that we win what some advertising guys decided to brand as "our game", right?

oneeightyseven · Feb 28, 2010

I'd do 4, 2, 1. It goes down by half every medal you go lower. So essentially 2 silvers = 1 gold.

2010 Olympic Men's Ice Hockey Thread

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Not left of center?

Almost Special

Not left of center?

Distinguished Member

Senior Member

Almost Special

Not left of center?

Senior Member

Senior Member

"Sookie!"

Almost Special

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Always - Sustainability is a top priority in all my clothing purchases.

Often - I frequently consider sustainability, but it isn't the main factor in my decisions.

Rarely - I seldom consider sustainability when purchasing clothes.

Never - Sustainability is not a factor I consider in my clothing choices.

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: