Toggle sidebar

Everyones overall thoughts about team Canada?

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Complete buy in by every player is what stands out for me. Once they figured out what they were supposed to do in game one they just started rolling. The defense was simply amazing, never seen anything like it.
 
These Olympics showed that having defensive defensemen is a great thing (Hamhuis, Bouwmeester, and Vlasic are all stay-at-home guys). You pair an offensive D-man with a defensive one, which frees up the offensive D-man. They also showed that "defense wins championships".
 
Some final thoughts on Team Canada and the 2014 Olympic tournament:

Overall, I was extremely satisfied with the Gold victory, and the style of play employed by the team. Enormous credit goes to Yzerman and the management group, Babcock and the coaching staff, and the players themselves. To go into Russia, on international ice (supposedly our Achilles heel), and dominate in the fashion that we did required a huge amount of thought, scouting, discussion, and confidence in our strategy and gameplan. And of course, most importantly the execution by the players under Babcock’s direction neared perfection. I think in all honesty everything started with the selection of Babcock as head coach. The 200 foot, defensively relentless, puck possession style of play employed by Babcock requires a commitment from each and every player, and props need to be given to the coaching staff as well Crosby/Toews/Weber for their leadership in getting their teammates to buy in to the defensive strategy. Engaging Ralph Krueger to hone the defensive side of the game on international ice deserves credit, and undoubtedly helped. The penalty kill, apparently led by Julien, was excellent. This was an extremely well-prepared, confident team with the right players in place to execute a well-defined and thought-out strategy. I’ve never seen a Canadian team play like this, and doubt whether I’ll ever see a Canadian team play like this in the future. Outstanding.

In terms of the players, most of us here quibbled over a couple of players and the management of the bench, myself definitely included. This happens in Canada. But overall Yzerman and the managers did a fantastic job building this team, and the efforts everyone put into the process paid off. I hope Hockey Canada maintains the same management team-based process going forward. I didn’t want Kunitz on this team, and when he made the team, I didn’t want him playing 1st line minutes. The supposed chemistry between Kunitz and Crosby was never evident to me, and in spite of a beautiful goal in the GMG, I don’t think Kunitz played well in this tournament overall. But the fact is, Babcock trusted him in that role, and IMO the discussion re: Kunitz should end there; we may very well have won Gold with other individuals, but we did win Gold with the 25 players selected. I wouldn’t have personally selected certain others (in all honesty, Nash and Benn were the most questionable to me), but both of those guys played great hockey, Nash in a more limited role (very admirably), and I’m happy to be proven wrong. Benn’s was probably the most surprising performance for me, and while I had wanted Carter on the team since last spring, he played better than I could have expected. To no one’s surprise, Bergeron was a warrior. Getzlaf and Perry (Perry, in particular) played better than I thought they would on international ice, and I was pleasantly surprised by their performance. Despite a lot of concern about their lack of scoring, Toews and Crosby were both 2-way monsters. The entirety of the defense corps was outstanding, as was Price. Weber, Doughty and Vlasic stood out to me. Several of these players, perhaps the majority, will be back for the World Cup or next Olympics.

For the casual observer, this Olympic tournament and this version of Team Canada will not have the same staying power as previous OGs / teams. The tournament did not have any singular dramatic moments, like Crosby’s Golden goal on home soil in 2010 or the ending of the Gold draught in 2002. Few, if any of the games had the same tension or dramatic feel as the critical games in past OGs. The host Russian squad was extremely disappointing and washed out very early. Crowds seemed to be sparse and relatively unenergetic and unenthusiastic, and some of the contending teams, including Canada, were missing star players due to injury. Hanging over the head of the tournament was the possibility that this would be the final Olympic tournament featuring NHLers. For students of the game and interested observers, however, Canada’s games were an absolute gold mine of winning strategy and execution, and aesthetically perfect.

In terms of this team’s place in history, its too early to tell, IMO. Like most historical events, it takes time to properly reflect on the team’s performance in all facets of the game, the quality of competition, and other extraneous factors that had to be overcome. 3 goals against in 6 games, back-to-back shutouts in the SF and GMG, absurd possession times, and out-chancing every team by huge margins. On paper, this team is not as good as the 1976 Canada Cup team, and perhaps not as good as the 1987 CC or 2002 OG teams. I’m not sure. The team’s inability to score goals puzzled me, especially considering one of the expressed interest in selecting certain players was their ability to score. However, their performance on the ice, specifically on the defensive end and with their ability to maintain puck possession, speaks for itself, and I’ll leave it at that for now.

I’ll miss watching this team.
 
86Habs said:
Some final thoughts on Team Canada and the 2014 Olympic tournament:

Overall, I was extremely satisfied with the Gold victory, and the style of play employed by the team. Enormous credit goes to Yzerman and the management group, Babcock and the coaching staff, and the players themselves. To go into Russia, on international ice (supposedly our Achilles heel), and dominate in the fashion that we did required a huge amount of thought, scouting, discussion, and confidence in our strategy and gameplan. And of course, most importantly the execution by the players under Babcock’s direction neared perfection. I think in all honesty everything started with the selection of Babcock as head coach. The 200 foot, defensively relentless, puck possession style of play employed by Babcock requires a commitment from each and every player, and props need to be given to the coaching staff as well Crosby/Toews/Weber for their leadership in getting their teammates to buy in to the defensive strategy. Engaging Ralph Krueger to hone the defensive side of the game on international ice deserves credit, and undoubtedly helped. The penalty kill, apparently led by Julien, was excellent. This was an extremely well-prepared, confident team with the right players in place to execute a well-defined and thought-out strategy. I’ve never seen a Canadian team play like this, and doubt whether I’ll ever see a Canadian team play like this in the future. Outstanding.

In terms of the players, most of us here quibbled over a couple of players and the management of the bench, myself definitely included. This happens in Canada. But overall Yzerman and the managers did a fantastic job building this team, and the efforts everyone put into the process paid off. I hope Hockey Canada maintains the same management team-based process going forward. I didn’t want Kunitz on this team, and when he made the team, I didn’t want him playing 1st line minutes. The supposed chemistry between Kunitz and Crosby was never evident to me, and in spite of a beautiful goal in the GMG, I don’t think Kunitz played well in this tournament overall. But the fact is, Babcock trusted him in that role, and IMO the discussion re: Kunitz should end there; we may very well have won Gold with other individuals, but we did win Gold with the 25 players selected. I wouldn’t have personally selected certain others (in all honesty, Nash and Benn were the most questionable to me), but both of those guys played great hockey, Nash in a more limited role (very admirably), and I’m happy to be proven wrong. Benn’s was probably the most surprising performance for me, and while I had wanted Carter on the team since last spring, he played better than I could have expected. To no one’s surprise, Bergeron was a warrior. Getzlaf and Perry (Perry, in particular) played better than I thought they would on international ice, and I was pleasantly surprised by their performance. Despite a lot of concern about their lack of scoring, Toews and Crosby were both 2-way monsters. The entirety of the defense corps was outstanding, as was Price. Weber, Doughty and Vlasic stood out to me. Several of these players, perhaps the majority, will be back for the World Cup or next Olympics.

For the casual observer, this Olympic tournament and this version of Team Canada will not have the same staying power as previous OGs / teams. The tournament did not have any singular dramatic moments, like Crosby’s Golden goal on home soil in 2010 or the ending of the Gold draught in 2002. Few, if any of the games had the same tension or dramatic feel as the critical games in past OGs. The host Russian squad was extremely disappointing and washed out very early. Crowds seemed to be sparse and relatively unenergetic and unenthusiastic, and some of the contending teams, including Canada, were missing star players due to injury. Hanging over the head of the tournament was the possibility that this would be the final Olympic tournament featuring NHLers. For students of the game and interested observers, however, Canada’s games were an absolute gold mine of winning strategy and execution, and aesthetically perfect.

In terms of this team’s place in history, its too early to tell, IMO. Like most historical events, it takes time to properly reflect on the team’s performance in all facets of the game, the quality of competition, and other extraneous factors that had to be overcome. 3 goals against in 6 games, back-to-back shutouts in the SF and GMG, absurd possession times, and out-chancing every team by huge margins. On paper, this team is not as good as the 1976 Canada Cup team, and perhaps not as good as the 1987 CC or 2002 OG teams. I’m not sure. The team’s inability to score goals puzzled me, especially considering one of the expressed interest in selecting certain players was their ability to score. However, their performance on the ice, specifically on the defensive end and with their ability to maintain puck possession, speaks for itself, and I’ll leave it at that for now.

I’ll miss watching this team.
Click to expand...

Exactly how i felt=( Nailed it. another 4 years until we get to see them play=(
 
86Habs said:
Some final thoughts on Team Canada and the 2014 Olympic tournament:

Overall, I was extremely satisfied with the Gold victory, and the style of play employed by the team. Enormous credit goes to Yzerman and the management group, Babcock and the coaching staff, and the players themselves. To go into Russia, on international ice (supposedly our Achilles heel), and dominate in the fashion that we did required a huge amount of thought, scouting, discussion, and confidence in our strategy and gameplan. And of course, most importantly the execution by the players under Babcock’s direction neared perfection. I think in all honesty everything started with the selection of Babcock as head coach. The 200 foot, defensively relentless, puck possession style of play employed by Babcock requires a commitment from each and every player, and props need to be given to the coaching staff as well Crosby/Toews/Weber for their leadership in getting their teammates to buy in to the defensive strategy. Engaging Ralph Krueger to hone the defensive side of the game on international ice deserves credit, and undoubtedly helped. The penalty kill, apparently led by Julien, was excellent. This was an extremely well-prepared, confident team with the right players in place to execute a well-defined and thought-out strategy. I’ve never seen a Canadian team play like this, and doubt whether I’ll ever see a Canadian team play like this in the future. Outstanding.

In terms of the players, most of us here quibbled over a couple of players and the management of the bench, myself definitely included. This happens in Canada. But overall Yzerman and the managers did a fantastic job building this team, and the efforts everyone put into the process paid off. I hope Hockey Canada maintains the same management team-based process going forward. I didn’t want Kunitz on this team, and when he made the team, I didn’t want him playing 1st line minutes. The supposed chemistry between Kunitz and Crosby was never evident to me, and in spite of a beautiful goal in the GMG, I don’t think Kunitz played well in this tournament overall. But the fact is, Babcock trusted him in that role, and IMO the discussion re: Kunitz should end there; we may very well have won Gold with other individuals, but we did win Gold with the 25 players selected. I wouldn’t have personally selected certain others (in all honesty, Nash and Benn were the most questionable to me), but both of those guys played great hockey, Nash in a more limited role (very admirably), and I’m happy to be proven wrong. Benn’s was probably the most surprising performance for me, and while I had wanted Carter on the team since last spring, he played better than I could have expected. To no one’s surprise, Bergeron was a warrior. Getzlaf and Perry (Perry, in particular) played better than I thought they would on international ice, and I was pleasantly surprised by their performance. Despite a lot of concern about their lack of scoring, Toews and Crosby were both 2-way monsters. The entirety of the defense corps was outstanding, as was Price. Weber, Doughty and Vlasic stood out to me. Several of these players, perhaps the majority, will be back for the World Cup or next Olympics.

For the casual observer, this Olympic tournament and this version of Team Canada will not have the same staying power as previous OGs / teams. The tournament did not have any singular dramatic moments, like Crosby’s Golden goal on home soil in 2010 or the ending of the Gold draught in 2002. Few, if any of the games had the same tension or dramatic feel as the critical games in past OGs. The host Russian squad was extremely disappointing and washed out very early. Crowds seemed to be sparse and relatively unenergetic and unenthusiastic, and some of the contending teams, including Canada, were missing star players due to injury. Hanging over the head of the tournament was the possibility that this would be the final Olympic tournament featuring NHLers. For students of the game and interested observers, however, Canada’s games were an absolute gold mine of winning strategy and execution, and aesthetically perfect.

In terms of this team’s place in history, its too early to tell, IMO. Like most historical events, it takes time to properly reflect on the team’s performance in all facets of the game, the quality of competition, and other extraneous factors that had to be overcome. 3 goals against in 6 games, back-to-back shutouts in the SF and GMG, absurd possession times, and out-chancing every team by huge margins. On paper, this team is not as good as the 1976 Canada Cup team, and perhaps not as good as the 1987 CC or 2002 OG teams. I’m not sure. The team’s inability to score goals puzzled me, especially considering one of the expressed interest in selecting certain players was their ability to score. However, their performance on the ice, specifically on the defensive end and with their ability to maintain puck possession, speaks for itself, and I’ll leave it at that for now.

I’ll miss watching this team.
Click to expand...

Good post, thanks for taking the time to write it.
 
Best team in the tournament for sure but let's be honest. They barely squeaked out wins against some of the minnows and they didn't exactly overwhelm Sweden or the US. They deservedly won both of those games but both were pretty evenly matched the first half or so. A bad bounce or two and Canada could be without a medal.

Now I'm not for one second suggesting they got lucky or anything (the best team for sure won the gold) but reading this thread makes one think that Canada won every game 16-0.
 
Doshell Propivo said:
Best team in the tournament for sure but let's be honest. They barely squeaked out wins against some of the minnows and they didn't exactly overwhelm Sweden or the US. They deservedly won both of those games but both were pretty evenly matched the first half or so. A bad bounce or two and Canada could be without a medal.

Now I'm not for one second suggesting they got lucky or anything (the best team for sure won the gold) but reading this thread makes one think that Canada won every game 16-0.
Click to expand...

I dont think anyone here is making it seem like they won 16-0. if you haven't been following this thread... everyone is complimenting on how strong our team was overall as one. no one here has said anything about the offense looking like they should be, if anything..... ppl here have brought up how even if you switched the 7 forwards with any other team... they wouldve still won. the bottom line is.....THEY won with great teamwork and defence and thats what won the games. they were never down.....they never loss......3 goals allowed. you dont have any leverage to what your saying.

"A bad bounce or two and Canada could be without a medal." .... yea because they were totally gonna fold and give up all medals because one goal was scored on us... lol nice logic.

"They barely squeaked out wins against some of the minnows and they didn't exactly overwhelm Sweden or the US." .............. LOL the US and Sweden were totally overwhelmed, 0 goals in a single knock out round?! Canada by far best was the best. no one couldve even came close
 
Doshell Propivo said:
Best team in the tournament for sure but let's be honest. They barely squeaked out wins against some of the minnows and they didn't exactly overwhelm Sweden or the US. They deservedly won both of those games but both were pretty evenly matched the first half or so. A bad bounce or two and Canada could be without a medal.

Now I'm not for one second suggesting they got lucky or anything (the best team for sure won the gold) but reading this thread makes one think that Canada won every game 16-0.
Click to expand...

You sound like you're one of those people who always scream "SHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT" on powerplays.

Offense isn't everything. While a team does require 1 more goal to in order to beat the opposition at the end of the game, they clearly need to play well at both ends of the ice to show what true dominance is.

They didn't need to beat down every team 16-0 because the other teams could hardly get 1 goal.
 
Yzerman also said to IIHF.com: "It’s the most impressive, the greatest display of defensive hockey."
 
86Habs said:
Some final thoughts on Team Canada and the 2014 Olympic tournament:

Overall, I was extremely satisfied with the Gold victory, and the style of play employed by the team. Enormous credit goes to Yzerman and the management group, Babcock and the coaching staff, and the players themselves. To go into Russia, on international ice (supposedly our Achilles heel), and dominate in the fashion that we did required a huge amount of thought, scouting, discussion, and confidence in our strategy and gameplan. And of course, most importantly the execution by the players under Babcock’s direction neared perfection. I think in all honesty everything started with the selection of Babcock as head coach. The 200 foot, defensively relentless, puck possession style of play employed by Babcock requires a commitment from each and every player, and props need to be given to the coaching staff as well Crosby/Toews/Weber for their leadership in getting their teammates to buy in to the defensive strategy. Engaging Ralph Krueger to hone the defensive side of the game on international ice deserves credit, and undoubtedly helped. The penalty kill, apparently led by Julien, was excellent. This was an extremely well-prepared, confident team with the right players in place to execute a well-defined and thought-out strategy. I’ve never seen a Canadian team play like this, and doubt whether I’ll ever see a Canadian team play like this in the future. Outstanding.

In terms of the players, most of us here quibbled over a couple of players and the management of the bench, myself definitely included. This happens in Canada. But overall Yzerman and the managers did a fantastic job building this team, and the efforts everyone put into the process paid off. I hope Hockey Canada maintains the same management team-based process going forward. I didn’t want Kunitz on this team, and when he made the team, I didn’t want him playing 1st line minutes. The supposed chemistry between Kunitz and Crosby was never evident to me, and in spite of a beautiful goal in the GMG, I don’t think Kunitz played well in this tournament overall. But the fact is, Babcock trusted him in that role, and IMO the discussion re: Kunitz should end there; we may very well have won Gold with other individuals, but we did win Gold with the 25 players selected. I wouldn’t have personally selected certain others (in all honesty, Nash and Benn were the most questionable to me), but both of those guys played great hockey, Nash in a more limited role (very admirably), and I’m happy to be proven wrong. Benn’s was probably the most surprising performance for me, and while I had wanted Carter on the team since last spring, he played better than I could have expected. To no one’s surprise, Bergeron was a warrior. Getzlaf and Perry (Perry, in particular) played better than I thought they would on international ice, and I was pleasantly surprised by their performance. Despite a lot of concern about their lack of scoring, Toews and Crosby were both 2-way monsters. The entirety of the defense corps was outstanding, as was Price. Weber, Doughty and Vlasic stood out to me. Several of these players, perhaps the majority, will be back for the World Cup or next Olympics.

For the casual observer, this Olympic tournament and this version of Team Canada will not have the same staying power as previous OGs / teams. The tournament did not have any singular dramatic moments, like Crosby’s Golden goal on home soil in 2010 or the ending of the Gold draught in 2002. Few, if any of the games had the same tension or dramatic feel as the critical games in past OGs. The host Russian squad was extremely disappointing and washed out very early. Crowds seemed to be sparse and relatively unenergetic and unenthusiastic, and some of the contending teams, including Canada, were missing star players due to injury. Hanging over the head of the tournament was the possibility that this would be the final Olympic tournament featuring NHLers. For students of the game and interested observers, however, Canada’s games were an absolute gold mine of winning strategy and execution, and aesthetically perfect.

In terms of this team’s place in history, its too early to tell, IMO. Like most historical events, it takes time to properly reflect on the team’s performance in all facets of the game, the quality of competition, and other extraneous factors that had to be overcome. 3 goals against in 6 games, back-to-back shutouts in the SF and GMG, absurd possession times, and out-chancing every team by huge margins. On paper, this team is not as good as the 1976 Canada Cup team, and perhaps not as good as the 1987 CC or 2002 OG teams. I’m not sure. The team’s inability to score goals puzzled me, especially considering one of the expressed interest in selecting certain players was their ability to score. However, their performance on the ice, specifically on the defensive end and with their ability to maintain puck possession, speaks for itself, and I’ll leave it at that for now.

I’ll miss watching this team.
Click to expand...

Yes good post. I especially like that you took the time to single out Ralph Krueger. I mentioned ici, a few games back, my niggling suspicions that TC's game plan had RK's fingerprints on it, and a few days before coach Babcock was magnanimous enough to confirm this to reporters ( seem to recall that one or two others suggested this too ). I actually wanted Andy Murray, rather than Babcock, to coach TC originally, because of his success overseas/ wealth of Big Ice experience, but even this vast reservoir of knowledge pales in comparison to Krueger's...Good on Babcock for enlisting his services !
 
Doshell Propivo said:
Best team in the tournament for sure but let's be honest. They barely squeaked out wins against some of the minnows and they didn't exactly overwhelm Sweden or the US. They deservedly won both of those games but both were pretty evenly matched the first half or so. A bad bounce or two and Canada could be without a medal.

Now I'm not for one second suggesting they got lucky or anything (the best team for sure won the gold) but reading this thread makes one think that Canada won every game 16-0.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree with this. They looked really sloppy against Norway (who they blew out in 2010), and every other game was close-scoring except Austria. They dominated defensively and in puck possession, but all it would have taken was a lucky bounce for one of these weaker teams to topple Canada this year. I can't wait until a year from now when people can look at this team more objectively and realize it wasn't the best ever. Everybody is caught up in the moment right now.
 
Penguins87 said:
First off i just wanna say i feel so proud to see Canada win gold once again. its amazing how a great game of hockey can remind me of how proud iam to be a canadian=) now regarding the team, do you guys feel like all questions were answered about team canadas line up and overall gameplay? because eveyone knows at the start of this tournament we had alot of questions going in.

there was alot of discussion about carter at the start until he got the hat trick and then after that everyone started blaming crosby/kunitz and then ppl start mentioning not enough goals were being scored, at the end of the day is everyone here satisfied with team canadas overall individual gameplay (without including results) and does anyone still regret any of the players chosen on the roster?!
Click to expand...

Why would anyone want to change any roster moves when we won gold. You say try and leave out results but how can you? Why does it matter how many goals we scored, when we won the whole thing? I don't get it. Are you not satisfied enough?
 
They could have replaced half their team with players who didn't make it, and still won.
 
Doshell Propivo said:
Best team in the tournament for sure but let's be honest. They barely squeaked out wins against some of the minnows and they didn't exactly overwhelm Sweden or the US. They deservedly won both of those games but both were pretty evenly matched the first half or so. A bad bounce or two and Canada could be without a medal.

Now I'm not for one second suggesting they got lucky or anything (the best team for sure won the gold) but reading this thread makes one think that Canada won every game 16-0.
Click to expand...

Perhaps had the USA scored three we might have scored four or Sweden three we might have scored six.

They didn't exactly overmatch Sweden and the USA. Not sure what games you were watching but you have a strange definition of competitive hockey.

Look at puck possession and time in the other teams zone. Like Babcock said does anybody know who one the scoring title and does anyone really care.
 
Was an excellent team from top to bottom. I disagreed with some minor personnel decisions (Subban scratched, Bouwmeester cemented in the lineup, and Kunitz over a more talented player) but in the grand scheme of things they're small gripes.

The team was built and managed incredibly well, it's nice that it was other countries that had the huge gaffes instead of Canada. Hard to look at the Swedes leaving Hedman home, Czech's taking guys like Nedved, and the whole Bobby Ryan thing and be upset about Kunitz.

It was really just systematic domination from the Canadians. There was a lot of fear after the Latvia game but we all saw what happened when Canada played real teams who weren't doing a 1-4 and trying to win a moral victory. Canada outshot, outchanced, outplayed, and smothered other teams for the entire tournament, they were simply dominant, and don't let a 6 game sample of low shooting percentage skew that perception.
 
This was a defensive tournament through and through, and Canada played the best defense. They didn't score many goals, but they didn't allow any either. That's not necessarily what the NHL is hoping to feature - 1-0 AND 2-1 games, but it worked well for Canada in Sochi.
 
Before the SFs quite a few Canadian fans were on the edge of throwing away their nerves, this player was terrible, that player was worthless and so on, and then two games later everyone agrees that Team Canada was flawless and fantastic. Interesting to say the least.
 
Noob616 said:
Was an excellent team from top to bottom. I disagreed with some minor personnel decisions (Subban scratched, Bouwmeester cemented in the lineup, and Kunitz over a more talented player) but in the grand scheme of things they're small gripes.

The team was built and managed incredibly well, it's nice that it was other countries that had the huge gaffes instead of Canada. Hard to look at the Swedes leaving Hedman home, Czech's taking guys like Nedved, and the whole Bobby Ryan thing and be upset about Kunitz.

It was really just systematic domination from the Canadians. There was a lot of fear after the Latvia game but we all saw what happened when Canada played real teams who weren't doing a 1-4 and trying to win a moral victory. Canada outshot, outchanced, outplayed, and smothered other teams for the entire tournament, they were simply dominant, and don't let a 6 game sample of low shooting percentage skew that perception.
Click to expand...

i'm no jay-bo fan, but i thought he was really good. early on, when pietrangelo looked overmatched at this level, jay-bo carried the mail defensively. in the last couple of games, when pietrangelo figured things out, those two were phenomenal together.
 
Penguins87 said:
I dont think anyone here is making it seem like they won 16-0. if you haven't been following this thread... everyone is complimenting on how strong our team was overall as one. no one here has said anything about the offense looking like they should be, if anything..... ppl here have brought up how even if you switched the 7 forwards with any other team... they wouldve still won. the bottom line is.....THEY won with great teamwork and defence and thats what won the games. they were never down.....they never loss......3 goals allowed. you dont have any leverage to what your saying.

"A bad bounce or two and Canada could be without a medal." .... yea because they were totally gonna fold and give up all medals because one goal was scored on us... lol nice logic.

"They barely squeaked out wins against some of the minnows and they didn't exactly overwhelm Sweden or the US." .............. LOL the US and Sweden were totally overwhelmed, 0 goals in a single knock out round?! Canada by far best was the best. no one couldve even came close
Click to expand...

I acknowledged Canada was the best. A bad bounce against Latvia and the team could have been eliminated in the quarterfinals. A bad bounce early in the game against USA and they could've been playing for third place.

I don't have any leverage to what I'm saying? Umm... It's an opinion. That's the whole point of this forum, is it not?

What I'm reading in this thread is that Canada DOMINATED throughout and there was never a question that they would cruise to the gold. Which, in my opinion was not the case. They worked hard and earned the gold though, that is not in question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom