Your post is reasonable....although i don't get where you read from my post that i claimed that Canada is better this year(although they are playing better right now)....i would'nt make that claim until/if we win the darn thing this year. I will argue your claim that the U.S is the top under 20 countrry right now as one gold medal in the wjc (and no medals of any color at all the prior five years before that does not make one the best under-20 country at all.) It means they were the best last year.You can't make claims like that based on "steady improvement" It's consistently being at the top or near it that let's you make claims like that and last year was the U.S's first wjc win ever and......not a sniff five years previous.Finland has won the wjc before but no-one was claiming they had the top under 20 program.The States have to win it a few more times and/or finish consistently top -3 to say that without batting an eyelash....and i will do it once they pull it off(which they may) I'm a homer but i am certainly objective when others are the same with me.tomerez said:
USA Hockey improving nicely
- Thread starter markov`
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
tomerez said:
If you aren't basing your opinion on the fact that US won gold last year, then what other factors would lead you to believe that the US is a better u-20 country then canada ???? Canada has medalled way more then the US, and has way more depth of prospects in the country
Shane said:
Lets not compare american players to russian players, because most would side with the russians when you are talking about the modano, guerin and roenick generations.
In regards to young talent, the russians still have an edge with the number of talented players in the NHL.
In regards to recent success, the americans are by far much better in recent international competition.
Individual success russians have the edge, team successs is cleary in favour of the americans.
Lets all shake hands and be happy with what we have....
Canada has not won gold since 97, it doesent mean, they lost to teams that were better then them. every year, Canada's junior team is always deepest.
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
lets not bring intangibles into this, because Canada would have to have the worst. I mean blowing a 2 goal lead and 2 3 goal leads in the 3rd period in the gold medal game in 3 consecutive seasons is mind blowing. in fact, they didnt even blow them to a tie, they just lost in regulation.AgentNaslund said:
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
Ron Degregorio (President of USA Hockey) made an interesting point last night. He said that the total number of registered hockey players and officials in the U.S. right now stands at over 600,000. That's close to Canada. Add to that the two thousand or so rinks, with more being built, a well-established and funded national team development program, and growth in non-traditional hockey markets, and the U.S. is in excellent shape.
cyclops said:
well obviously, but hockey becoming more popular in the states is more likely than 270,000,000 people moving to Canada.
bonefizzle said:
lol, you named two. Nice arguement. The US has always been good at hockey, just not as good as they have been in the past 10 years.
Can't argue with that...MOGiLNY said:
BTW, MOGiLNY, А откуда ты из России?
Sorry, fellas, couldn't resist...
tomerez
Registered User
bonefizzle said:
I'm basing it on the same thing you're basing your statement "has way more depth of prospects in the country." and that is opinion.
I think USA's roster can in many aspects be considered better than Canada's at the U20s this year and last. I am basing my argument on the American victory last year, but them being a contender this year for gold also contributes and their steady improvement.
I see where you guys are coming from, and in fact I am a fan of Canada, however I was just trying to provide an objective argument formulated on something more than "Canada's team is stacked so we own hockey"... Be objective guys, the Americans have a hell of a hockey program now, the Russians always have and Canada is no longer far and away the #1 power in hockey.
Hey sotnos we've had our problems but i don't think you are being objective here at all and i'm calling you on it....it does help a great deal....those guys are great players(any surprise)....Brett Hull at world cup(leading scorer) deadmarsh(best player at wjc in 1995 and just one of your best players period) Parise best player at last years wjc.,O'sullivan is a key factor in your beating us last year,i could go on and on,take those guys away and your program is not as strong and i(and others) know it.I respect the U.S.A program as they do a heck of a lot with a nation that does'nt exactly hold hockey to it's bosom.I know you are'nt crazy about me but don't try to ******** me with razzle dazzle arguments that don't take reality into account because i've watched hockey too long with too much passion to not know what i'm talking about.I'm sorry you don't like hearing things like that(you have a lot of pride in your country like i do) and i realise i've been wrong in the past by not just owning up to the fact that players like Chris Bourque are really American players because they are born and raised there...i apoligise for that......but just don't try to ******** me with smoke and mirrors stuff about what is fact because i've watched the international game too long to be bull****ted on stuff like that....the U.S is the only country to benefit form that scenario and you know it.You are a good hockey country and i know it...but some realities are realities and i don't expect you to rag me on it once you step back and accept things as they are.In the end i accept the reality of the situation because i am confident that the passion we have for the game will always produce the players we need to stay at or near the top for a long,long time.I'm doneSotnos said:
Agree Markov.
In 2005 they have prospects like Johnson , Skille , Stoa , Lee etc.... Who are pretty high in the rankings.
In 2006 : Kessel
They aren't bad in international tournaments neither.They'll maybe surprise many in this wjc.
In 2005 they have prospects like Johnson , Skille , Stoa , Lee etc.... Who are pretty high in the rankings.
In 2006 : Kessel
They aren't bad in international tournaments neither.They'll maybe surprise many in this wjc.
Oh...forgot to say that i agree with you that player development is the more important reason,that's true,no one player can win games....but it sure is augmented with ex-Canadian nhl players kids who more often than not provide you guys with some of the most primo talent you get.......to argue that is wrong and false and you know it. This is a pride thing here for sure with you and i understand why but i'm just pointing out that it exists without question......we are not blessed with Mike modano's offspring and neither is anyone else,it definately helps the U.S.A program for sure.
And this is a true point also.The infrastructure is there and the U.S has put emphasis on it.....this is also a legacy of 1980.It is true U.S hockey fans like you that have made it happen.........credit for last years wjc gold medal goes to real American hockey fans and the 1980 boys because without you and them this would'nt be the reality.Rabid Ranger said:
Anthony Mauro
DraftBuzz Hockey
- Oct 3, 2004
- 6,859
- 5
thegreatone said:In 2006 : Kessel
They aren't bad in international tournaments neither.They'll maybe surprise many in this wjc.
And Erik Johnson, Peter Mueller, Chad Morin(05 or 06?), Brian Strait, and i think Kyle Okposo.
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
markov said:
You start up by asking when was the last time they had two prospects like Kessel and Johnson, and you conclude that this occurance makes them a better hockey country? I don't get it.
It seems every year or two Russia is churning out absolutely amazing talent on us on a consistent basis. In the 2000s we've already got Frolov (2000), Kovalchuk (2001), Semin (2002), Zherdev (2003) and Ovechkin/Malkin (2004) not to mention plenty of guys that are promising like Chistov, Perezhogin, Tjutin, Babchuk, Grebeshkov, Vorobiev and SO many others.
The US is definitly an improving hockey nation but Russia is phenomenal, IMO. But this is too short of a sample to come to this conclusion and we haven't heard the last word on what Russia will have to offer..
Haven't seen the Johnson kid but Kessel looks very good. Let's see what Russia will have to offer in 2005 and 2006. Many of the European kids pop on the radar a little late, sometimes even just before or way after the draft.
There was a time a few years ago when the Czech Republic was winning absolutely everything and then they were supposed to be the new kings. What's up with that?
Let's see if the USA can churn prospects on a consistent basis that are superior to Russians. Then we can make the call.
markov`
Registered User
Vlad The Impaler said:
It was just miswritten. I brought Kessel and Johnson to show that the country was producing nice players, and I said that they could be a better hockey country than Russia because of the Olympics and the WJC.
I think one of the main reasons for the resurrgence in U.S. hockey is a spinoff from the World Cup win in 1996. (I know I've advocated this before). The Kessels and Johnsons are the latest line in an impressive group of prospects from the last few years. The 2002 and 2003 first rounds saw eight Americans drafted in each. The 2003 crop was particularly strong, with excellent prospects such as Suter, Parise, Brown, Stuart, Kesler and Eaves. These were players inspired by the 1996 World Cup win. 2004 wasn't as strong for the U.S., but 2004 was a pretty crappy draft outside of the top three picks.
Look at the spinoff from the 1980 Miracle on Ice. The U.S. had several years of bumper drafts from 1986 to 1992. Most of the players on the 96 team (and other recent Team USA editions) came from those drafts. Again, these were players between the ages of five and 12 inspired by the Miracle on Ice.
One of the reasons the U.S. went with such a decrepid, old roster at the 2004 World Cup is the talent pipeline suffered a gap from about 1994 to 2001. (Not to say the U.S. didn't produce any quality players, they did, but not in the abundance from 1986-92 or that we've seen recently). Sorry, Americans, but your team is going to take a legitimate plunge in the next five years (like what Sweden will take in a couple years), as USA Hockey transitions from one era to the next. However, with the talent that has been emerging in recent years, and continues to be emerging, there promises to be hope in the future.
In the end, the U.S. still has a long way to catch up to Canada and Russia for overall talent produced. That will not only require events to inspire the youth of America, but hard work and improved coaching in the American developmental leagues.
Look at the spinoff from the 1980 Miracle on Ice. The U.S. had several years of bumper drafts from 1986 to 1992. Most of the players on the 96 team (and other recent Team USA editions) came from those drafts. Again, these were players between the ages of five and 12 inspired by the Miracle on Ice.
One of the reasons the U.S. went with such a decrepid, old roster at the 2004 World Cup is the talent pipeline suffered a gap from about 1994 to 2001. (Not to say the U.S. didn't produce any quality players, they did, but not in the abundance from 1986-92 or that we've seen recently). Sorry, Americans, but your team is going to take a legitimate plunge in the next five years (like what Sweden will take in a couple years), as USA Hockey transitions from one era to the next. However, with the talent that has been emerging in recent years, and continues to be emerging, there promises to be hope in the future.
In the end, the U.S. still has a long way to catch up to Canada and Russia for overall talent produced. That will not only require events to inspire the youth of America, but hard work and improved coaching in the American developmental leagues.
tomerez said:
I am being objective.. i do agree that the US is a hockey power now.. and will continue to get better but their is no way i will agree with you in your post before this one in which you said USA greater then Canada at U-20 level. I believe that the US has an awsome first team but that team is the only team that would be able to compete with canada.. and if canada but together a "B" team to play the US "B" team canada would smoke them.. and if you went "C" team against "C" team it would be an even bigger blowout and the score would get higher in canada's favor the longer you went down the depth chart of the U-20 level. Anyone else agree or disagree with this??
hockeyfan125
Registered User
- Jul 10, 2004
- 20,017
- 0
- Status
Latest posts
-
Post-Game Talk: Leafs lose to Minnesota and end January with a whimper- Latest: ChurchOfMatthews
-
-
