Worse NHL olympics ever?
- Thread starter Pepper
- Start date
It was dominant winning hockey. I'll take it over the mess I last saw on the big ice for Canada.
Speaking of embarrassing yourself - your rants and insults are just that.
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2011
- 10,959
- 653
The only thing worse than making fantasy lines is making fantasy lines with people who have as much of a chance at being terrible at hockey as they do of being NHL calibre.
Cawz
Registered User
I feel sorry for those who said it was boring. But the reasons people are stating kind of explain why.
People are complaining about the lack of hits, after-whistle scrums and overtime. These are the people who don’t really appreciate the fundamentals of hockey, but love the emotion. Canada’s game was as close to fundamentally perfect hockey as you can get. Did it have the drama or passion of other games? No, not really. The womans final did, but lets be honest, that was relatively poor quality hockey, especially compared to the mens.
So this seems to come down to those who love the sport of hockey for the actual sport, and those that love it for the emotion it evokes with its mix of speed and violence. I personally think Canada’s last 2 games were beautiful to watch, and I’m still in a bit of awe after watching a near perfect example of the fundamentals of the sport of hockey.
People are complaining about the lack of hits, after-whistle scrums and overtime. These are the people who don’t really appreciate the fundamentals of hockey, but love the emotion. Canada’s game was as close to fundamentally perfect hockey as you can get. Did it have the drama or passion of other games? No, not really. The womans final did, but lets be honest, that was relatively poor quality hockey, especially compared to the mens.
So this seems to come down to those who love the sport of hockey for the actual sport, and those that love it for the emotion it evokes with its mix of speed and violence. I personally think Canada’s last 2 games were beautiful to watch, and I’m still in a bit of awe after watching a near perfect example of the fundamentals of the sport of hockey.
Pominville Knows
Registered User
Question is if not the three round robin groups are the biggest problem here. I mean, no good matchups really, bad seeding, bad rampup for the teams to the knockout-round. Obviously many injuries to some top teams did not make it better, not Russias fiasco either, not czech and slovak regression.
Terrible really.
Terrible really.
Lebowski
El Duderino
- Dec 5, 2010
- 17,609
- 5,273
The entire tournament felt boring to me, and that's coming from a Canadian. Lack of offense, underwhelming performances by some powerhouses, no nail-bitters...
Maybe that has a bit to do with the fact games were aired in the morning... It was easy to get hyped up for a game when I was watching with a bunch of buddies around a couple of beers... But in the morning, along with your bowl of cheerios, is another story.
Vancouver was just special, in many regards. The final game was just icing on the cake. When Crosby scored that OT goal, I remember me and a bunch of my friends were going absolutely APE ****. The final in Sotchi was more like "hey, we won gold".
The closest thing to that kind of scenario was the CAN - USA gold medal game in women's hockey... Unfortunately, I didn't pay much attention to them.
Maybe that has a bit to do with the fact games were aired in the morning... It was easy to get hyped up for a game when I was watching with a bunch of buddies around a couple of beers... But in the morning, along with your bowl of cheerios, is another story.
Vancouver was just special, in many regards. The final game was just icing on the cake. When Crosby scored that OT goal, I remember me and a bunch of my friends were going absolutely APE ****. The final in Sotchi was more like "hey, we won gold".
The closest thing to that kind of scenario was the CAN - USA gold medal game in women's hockey... Unfortunately, I didn't pay much attention to them.
I don't know that it was the worst ever, but it was certainly underwhelming compared to 2010. The US didn't show much effort in the semis, and it really sucks that sweden didn't have their top 3 centers for the gold medal game. Don't get me wrong, I'm still glad Canada successfully defended their gold medal, but it wasn't nearly as exciting as it could have been, and the team often looked sloppy and disorganized in the preliminaries. They were dominant, but only because of the defense. The forwards couldn't produce jack (except against Austria), unlike 2010.
Back in Black
All Sports would be great if they were Hockey
From a Canadian point of view (mine), it wasn't boring, but was a little disappointing, as I was expecting much better games out of USA (Especially USA) and Sweden.
The slow starts against the weaker Teams is nothing new to Canada, because of the trap style they play. Yes those were a little boring, but expected!
The slow starts against the weaker Teams is nothing new to Canada, because of the trap style they play. Yes those were a little boring, but expected!
People forget that the bigger ice surface dilutes and decreases the speed of the game. The parity amongst the nations is that much stronger than 4 years ago, and much much stronger than 8 years ago. Although they weren't the most dramatic or entertaining NHL olympics I've watched, they were certainly the most competitive. Lots of teams surprised us.
Cawz
Registered User
It was fantastic fundamental hockey. Thats why the term "perfect" keeps being thrown around. I agree there werent many "interesting plays" like spin-o-ramas, toe-drags, behind the back blind passes and such, but if you really need fluff like that to keep you interested, well...
I think the 2010 Olympics was overshadowed mostly by a fantastic final. The tournament was good but the final game was huge in North America. Great teams, great play, great story and perfect ending for entertainment.
It was a perfect final in many ways. So I feel that since these finals were not as entertaining that we forget about everything that led up to it.
USA vs Russia in group was amazing.
Latvia vs Canada was pretty dam good too.
All of the USA games were pretty entertaining.
Most Sweden games was awesome
I thought the final was a great show of what a great team is all about. Many claim that they played a very trap like system but to me they played everything to perfection.
It was a sad ending for the US and most countries but I watched a lot of good games during this time.
It was a perfect final in many ways. So I feel that since these finals were not as entertaining that we forget about everything that led up to it.
USA vs Russia in group was amazing.
Latvia vs Canada was pretty dam good too.
All of the USA games were pretty entertaining.
Most Sweden games was awesome
I thought the final was a great show of what a great team is all about. Many claim that they played a very trap like system but to me they played everything to perfection.
It was a sad ending for the US and most countries but I watched a lot of good games during this time.
I don't need that stuff, but I would like to see the puck occasionally enter the middle of the ice in the offensive zone and the puck eventually get near the goal. I watched nearly every game involving the big hockey countries, and just by the eye test I'd say only 3 teams in this tournament were actively trying to possess the puck and score (doesn't get more fundamental than that), those being Canada, USA and Russia, with the USA relying a lot on the rope and dope and transition rushes too.
This tournament should once and for all put to bed any notion that a larger ice surface creates a better game with more offence.
If NHL games were driven by perimeter play as much as that tournament, I probably wouldn't watch games that didn't involve my team and I'd bet that casual fans would tune out. These Olympics were entertaining only because of the stakes involved.
oldtimerhockey
Registered User
Jussi
Registered User
If the best teams with the best talent are also tactically on the same level, you're going to see low scoring games no matter what the rink size is. In Vancouver e.g. Finland had huge tactical problems, the NHL players weren't on the same page as the coach, which caused more defensive lapses and higher scoring games than intended.
The games were pretty terrible. If I weren't rooting for Canada I wouldn't have been watching. There was exactly one exciting game for neutral fans (USA-Russia).
But at least this tournament put to bed the myth that bigger ice means more scoring.
But at least this tournament put to bed the myth that bigger ice means more scoring.
Ya, there are too many teams. It should be 8 teams. Let more play earlier to decide who gets to lose to Canada, Sweden, USA, etc... in the later rounds, but having three groups with two doormats each is just useless.
SlingshotVv
arm-bar all the things
It was dominant winning hockey, and it's also the exact type of hockey that the sport does not want showcased if it was going to hope for exciting showdowns of best on best to a casual viewership to help grow the sport. My coworker is a huge sports nut, but not a hockey fan, that decided to tune in to see the best team in the world go for gold. It certainly didn't get him hooked.
I've had a post deleted in this thread needlessly for stating that Russia v Slovenia, and USA vs Russia were the only two games I found exciting, and they were the only two games I watched that Canada did not play in. That's a valid opinion on a hockey discussion board, and censoring it was abusive nonsense, for no reason other than disagreeing.
Canada has a hegemony as the world's hockey superpower right now, and the world got to see the product, and it wasn't very appealing. Even to a crazed hockey nut like myself.
RED ARMY EAST
Registered User
Cawz
Registered User
It was appealing if you understand the sport, but it did lack drama since Canada elevated its game so high. I can understand why casual fans may not have enjoyed it, since they are probably only looking for big hits, goals and fights - the lowest common denominator of hockey entertainment. They probably wouldnt appreciate the forecheck, cycle and defensive zone clearing that the Canadains were performing to near perfection.
An elite team in any sport winning it all with little opposition wont have drama and wont impress the casual fan. Thats why you have some people who liked the womans hockey ending better. Does more drama trump better hockey? For some I guess. Not me.
Cawz
Registered User
Yeah, I wasnt happy with how some of the teams were trapping in this tournamant either. I do think the NHL ice should get bigger though, just not to the extent of IIHF size.
SlingshotVv
arm-bar all the things
While I sort of agree with what you're saying, it's not necessarily true. I understand hockey very well. I tarted playing at 6 years old in NJ and played through college. I've competed in floor hockey, roller hockey, and slow-mo leagues as well. I understand the subtletes of a LWL, the difference between man to man and hybird zone defenses. I still found the Canadian games boring. I was witnessing dominant hockey for sure, but not a brand I find entertaining.
Tons of people on this board know hockey well and are bored to tears by the old NJD, old Wild, and the NYR from two years ago. It's just isn't conducive to compelling storylines. However it is effective. And when the best players in the world buy into it, it's absolutely dominating. Either way I was hoping that NA hockey moved away from that style, but we just showcased it to the world on the road to an undefeated Gold medal.
Agree... Watched a few euro games, not much is really happening. Hope NHL don't change to bigger ice
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Props Alex Ovechkin to Record 895th Career Goal During 2024/25 Regular SeasonWagers: 12Staked: $21,883.00Event closes - 2 days from now- Updated: