Toggle sidebar

Should we eliminate the bronze medal game?

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
CapitalsCupFantasy said:
Completely right....they're not losing any sleep over it. ...their lives will go on like it never happened.
Click to expand...

And that's how it should be. There should be no reason try cry. You either are good enoguh or then you aren't, work harder for next time.
 
Look at Selanne, a pretty good ending to his international career. Also, bronze is a part of the Olympics.
 
QnebO said:
And that's how it should be. There should be no reason try cry. You either are good enoguh or then you aren't, work harder for next time.
Click to expand...

Never did I say that they'd act like it never happened. Most of those players are in the NHL and are in playoff races. I don't think they'll still be fretting about losing in the Olympics for much longer especially if they are in a tight playoff race. Their minds are now back focusing on winning the cup.
 
DrunkKaner88 said:
Never did I say that they'd act like it never happened. Most of those players are in the NHL and are in playoff races. I don't think they'll still be fretting about losing in the Olympics for much longer especially if they are in a tight playoff race. Their minds are now back focusing on winning the cup.
Click to expand...

I know. Same for the finns. That's what I meant, that's how it should be. Didin't win the gold but you don't have to act like it is pain in your ass, life and hockey is meant to be enjoyoed, better luck next time.

Or then you are gold / bust attitude guy, who thinks himself as a failure and loser and doesn't allow himself smile, if he doesn't get a gold.
 
QnebO said:
I know. Same for the finns. That's what I meant, that's how it should be. Didin't win the gold but you don't have to act like it is pain in your ass, life and hockey is meant to be enjoyoed, better luck next time.

Or then you are gold / bust attitude guy, who thinks himself as a failure and loser and doesn't allow himself smile, if he doesn't get a gold.
Click to expand...

I could understand older more veteran guys like teemu getting emotional about winning because this probably was his last Olympics and getting any type of medal meant a lot to him. But for the younger guys, I'm sure they may have another chance at it if the nhl decides to send them in 2018.
 
There are a lot of countries...a lot of players....who would view bronze as a lifetime accomplishment.

The arrogance of thinking the bronze is not worth fighting for is quite sickening. If you won't try for a bronze, that is why you lost the gold, too, you baby.
 
nhindian said:
Sure.
Click to expand...

But it's never going to happen in Olympics. In Olympics, the medals mean alot too. In the Olympics. Murican's have 1 problem, and it's the fact that they think that them showing how much they don't care and how they do not appreciate, would some how have an effect on other people.

If you like coffee and some one says it sucks, do you care? No. If some one keeps repeating he thinks coffee sucks, while you drink it, what does it make that some one?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Then what do they do with the bronze medal for hockey? Give it to the country with the best goal differential or something?

I'm sorry but this is a silly idea, just because a team doesn't show up to the game (USA) doesn't mean we need to abolish it all together.

I think having it the day after the semi's sucks though.
 
Dontdive said:
I think it's cruel to have it at all. The teams that are in it just lost the game the day before that could have had them playing for gold. And while a lesser nation might consider it their just rewards, and go all out to play in it, there's usually going to also be a "top three" team that simply won't go all to win it, whether they should or not.

And that can and often does lead to a bad hockey game. Is that what we want?

I think as a principle too, that we shouldn't force anyone to compete in the Olympics at any point if they have no chance to get the gold medal. And that's what we're doing with the bronze medal game.

Heck, if we base who gets the bronze on the record during the previous games, then maybe teams who get to coast to the "medal round" will try harder during those "non-medal round" games.

I say, get rid of it.
Click to expand...

why not just eliminate all none medals that are not gold?
 
The premise of the OP makes about as much sense as eliminating all medals except gold in other events as well. After all, whether it be skiing, snowboarding, luge, bobsled, curling, etc., there was only one winner. Technically speaking, every other athlete lost to that winner. So why even award them medals?
 
Dontdive said:
I think it's cruel to have it at all. The teams that are in it just lost the game the day before that could have had them playing for gold.
Click to expand...

Life is full of challenges. Obviously Olympic gold is the best, but being an Olympic medalist of any shade is pretty awesome in its own right. If you want to be counted among the few thousand athletes in the world to have an Olympic medal, you dust yourself off and make the most of an opportunity afforded to you by winning the quarterfinal round. If you can't then someone else will.

Dontdive said:
And while a lesser nation might consider it their just rewards, and go all out to play in it, there's usually going to also be a "top three" team that simply won't go all to win it, whether they should or not.
Click to expand...

Then that's their problem, and all they'll have to show for their trip to Sochi is jet lag.

Dontdive said:
And that can and often does lead to a bad hockey game. Is that what we want?
Click to expand...

If you aren't entertained by bronze medal games, then you don't have to watch them. The athletes will still play for them.

And if the potential for a bad hockey game is your metric for whether or not a game should be played, then let's just agree to cancel all remaining games this season for the Sabres, Oilers, Panthers, and the entire ECHL.

Dontdive said:
I think as a principle too, that we shouldn't force anyone to compete in the Olympics at any point if they have no chance to get the gold medal. And that's what we're doing with the bronze medal game.
Click to expand...

No one is *forced* to play in the Olympics. Either team was free to forfeit and get a 24-hour head start on their flights home. Or get really hopped up on allergy medication and go watch figure skating. The athletes there chose to stay and play for a medal.

Dontdive said:
Heck, if we base who gets the bronze on the record during the previous games, then maybe teams who get to coast to the "medal round" will try harder during those "non-medal round" games.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how a team would be motivated to play harder in the earlier rounds to win a medal which, according to you, that same team would display no interest in actually playing a game to win.
 
IMO Olympics is the kind of a format where you settle who is the best, who is the second best etc (Women's hockey they even had to battle for the fifth, lol). World Cup is the kind of a format where you play for the trophy, not the third place or so. Even the runner up ends up with a handshake or so.

So at Olympics absolutely! World Cup no need for bronze.
 
The idea of eliminating the bronze medal game is absolutely absurd and stinks of sour grapes. If it doesn't matter to players why do they speak of the thrill of donning their country's jersey in international competitions when discussing the highlights of their career? The notion that the players don't care has been proven wrong in many posts. If I were a fan of Team USA I would be more disappointed in the fact that my team gave up after a 2 goal deficit than anything else. I guess they missed what the Canadian women did in their gold medal game??? Kudos to Finnish posters though. You've responded to the arrogance with class.
 
Just give both teams the bronze medal. They both pretty much finished 3rd when they lost in the semis. They actually did that in tennis when it first was put back into the olympics in 1988 and then in 1992. They changed in the 1996 for a bronze medal match.
 
Dontdive said:
I think it's cruel to have it at all. The teams that are in it just lost the game the day before that could have had them playing for gold. And while a lesser nation might consider it their just rewards, and go all out to play in it, there's usually going to also be a "top three" team that simply won't go all to win it, whether they should or not.

And that can and often does lead to a bad hockey game. Is that what we want?

I think as a principle too, that we shouldn't force anyone to compete in the Olympics at any point if they have no chance to get the gold medal. And that's what we're doing with the bronze medal game.

Heck, if we base who gets the bronze on the record during the previous games, then maybe teams who get to coast to the "medal round" will try harder during those "non-medal round" games.

I say, get rid of it.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous idea. Maybe the IIHF can eliminate the concept of medals at the World Championships (I'm not for the idea), but no way you can do that at the Olympics. Every event gets three medals except for hockey?!? I'm sorry, but that's not how things work. Canada sent a delegation of 200+ athletes. You think all of them have medal hopes? Of course not, yet they all want to be there. Are you kidding? No one is being forced. Everyone WANTS to compete.
 
Last edited:
DrunkPerrinFan said:
No.

Zr9y3Xm.jpg
Click to expand...

I remember that scene from "Being Olli Jokinen"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom