![Cool 8-)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Seriously, I hope now, this game is not the last memory for the USA -NHL guys in the Olympics.
Gaucho wrote:Sounds like a 6-5 win for Sweden would be ideal.Tico Rick wrote:I'd like to see Kunitz score 5 goals to shut up the Canadian media. Barring that, I'd like to see Sweden win, just so I can pay back my Canadian friend who's been harassing me for the past 24 hours.
Face plant?bhaw wrote:More like a pivot.Idoit40fans wrote:Was it a step back or a set back.
What do you want him to say? American players just aren't as good as Canadians?bse wrote:largegarlic: "...it's a tough emotional turnaround from playing and losing a close game against your biggest rival to playing a consolation game less than 24 hours later against a team that's hard to hate."
Like a one goal loss to archrival and neightbouring nation, the Sweden?
It falls on the coach to get his team ready. "We couldn't get to our game" is getting very old. One should ask, why weren't they?
A headcoach can't escape responsibility every time his team loses in a big game, and always come up with this very same excuse.
What did he do trying to avoid this situation? Why weren't they able to get into the game? I mean, HE KNOWS, YOU KNOW, I KNOW that they weren't able to get into the game. But he's the head coach and he's supposed to do something about it. He's just portraying the problem every time, over and over again. Until the next time it happens again.
But Tico, they surely are as good as or better than the Finns. Why is it that every time games matter, DBs teams explode?Tico Rick wrote:What do you want him to say? American players just aren't as good as Canadians?
I don't know about all the times DB has made similar comments after Pens flame outs. But today, specifically, I got the sense he said what he said to avoid throwing some of the players under the bus.Tico Rick wrote:What do you want him to say? American players just aren't as good as Canadians?bse wrote:largegarlic: "...it's a tough emotional turnaround from playing and losing a close game against your biggest rival to playing a consolation game less than 24 hours later against a team that's hard to hate."
Like a one goal loss to archrival and neightbouring nation, the Sweden?
It falls on the coach to get his team ready. "We couldn't get to our game" is getting very old. One should ask, why weren't they?
A headcoach can't escape responsibility every time his team loses in a big game, and always come up with this very same excuse.
What did he do trying to avoid this situation? Why weren't they able to get into the game? I mean, HE KNOWS, YOU KNOW, I KNOW that they weren't able to get into the game. But he's the head coach and he's supposed to do something about it. He's just portraying the problem every time, over and over again. Until the next time it happens again.
Or the Finnish care more? Seriously they where motivated to have Selanne go out with a medal, that seems to get lost in all the bylsma bashingTico Rick wrote:What do you want him to say? American players just aren't as good as Canadians?bse wrote:largegarlic: "...it's a tough emotional turnaround from playing and losing a close game against your biggest rival to playing a consolation game less than 24 hours later against a team that's hard to hate."
Like a one goal loss to archrival and neightbouring nation, the Sweden?
It falls on the coach to get his team ready. "We couldn't get to our game" is getting very old. One should ask, why weren't they?
A headcoach can't escape responsibility every time his team loses in a big game, and always come up with this very same excuse.
What did he do trying to avoid this situation? Why weren't they able to get into the game? I mean, HE KNOWS, YOU KNOW, I KNOW that they weren't able to get into the game. But he's the head coach and he's supposed to do something about it. He's just portraying the problem every time, over and over again. Until the next time it happens again.
Brian Burke had a huge influence in putting together the team, too.murphydump55 wrote:Why? Shero was Asst GM. Poile was the GM.bhaw wrote:Yeah, I was going to say I actually think DB has a better chance at coaching again than Shero does at GM'ing again for USA.
Everyone was selected before Poile got injured, so what does the GM have to do once they board the flights to Sochi?
We steamrolled over weak teams, as we should have, but to paint it as the US steamrolling throughout the preliminary rounds only to choke when it counts - as some are doing - is inaccurate. The US could have very easily lost to the Russians. Conversely, they only lost to the Canadians by one goal. The shellacking at the hands of the Finns could be due to, as others have suggested, a letdown less than 24 hours after the biggest game of most US players' careers while facing a team inspired to win a medal for Teemu.pensfan1989 wrote:Dejan had a pretty good column on Bylsma.
http://triblive.com/sports/dejankovacev ... z2u5t9l0Jo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
To me, results are what matters. And again, we saw a Bylsma-led team steamroll through the games that in the big picture don't really matter and come up way short in the ones that do.
DudeMan2766 wrote:I'm sure if we won gold the attitude would have been "Who cares?"
The Detractors wrote:Until he wins the cup again this means nothing.
hah. Awesome.Tico Rick wrote:Acceptance is the fifth stage of loss and grief. Maybe some of us are not there yet.
Thank you, Idoit. I appreciate your thoughts.Idoit40fans wrote:don't the pens usually run a 1-2-2? Its moer of like a 1-1-1-2 I guess with the two forwards almost cycling in and out of the forecheck to force the puck carrier to his backhand and then the second forward to take over the forecheck if/when the puck goes over to the other dman. By the time that switch has occurred, that first guy is back at the top of the zone. with the defenseman who previously had the puck. The third guy is then to take away a lane or apply pressure to the puck carrier.
Anyway...I think everyone runs their own version of a 1-2-2, but having that loosely described structure doesn't necessarily mean its passive. I've seen a lot of people complain that the US shouldn't have been trying to run with the Canadians...
As far as my thoughts go...I think if they really sent two hard forecheckers and got really aggressive, they would have been asking for a track meet that you don't want to get in when you're less talented than the other team. Canada has a lot of cool defensemen with great puck skills that aren't going to be rattled by that pressure and are going to find their man for odd man attacks. The reason a team can get away with this normally is that they aren't playing an all star team. Every team has rookies that will get rattled and guys like Scuderi who can't handle the puck well and have 1 option and 1 option only...have the puck on the forehand and play it off the glass. Neither the US nor Canada have guys like that, so I don't think more aggressive was a great idea. Like I said, I'd rather be a little more passive when you have the advantage on goal and arguably on defense.
The US wanted a 1-0 game, but they came out on the wrong side of it.