There seem to be some awful strong opinions here but nothing to back them up.
1. Brule doesn't deserve to be there at 17. Why not? Canada has a history of bringing along 17 year olds so that they gain the experience. Brule is every bit as talented as some of the guys being mentioned. If he's a 13th forward, why not?
2. So you don't think Canada would bring along a player that would fit on a line perfectly with one it's go to guys? That's some pretty sound thinking there. Anyone who watched Roussin play this year saw that he can put the points up without Crosby. He is a very talented player and deserves to be on the team. To me it makes complete sense to put a guy on the team that can play alongside Crosby. That was part of the problem last year, there was no one he could play with and click.
3. A lack of offence? You must have been watching a different tournament than most of us. Canada had some of the most creative and offensively impressive play in the tournament. They never lost because of a lack of offensive, they lost because of a couple of bad bounces.
4. What about Bernier, Pouliot, Fehr, and Stone? Bernier is an overweight, replaceable element. There are plenty of players that can offer what he brings to the table. I'm not a Bernier fan at all. Pouliot is too injured for my liking. He has some talent but he never brings it enough because he's always hurt. Stone is not an element that Canada needs. They have plenty of offence to go around and some physical play as well. As for Fehr, it's a matter of numbers. He's a great player and one of the last I took of the team. I just felt that he lost out because of the numbers game, not playing ability.
Like I said, every year people have issues with the team that is selected. No matter what happens, people will criticize it unless the team brings home gold.