I feel America did great in this tournament....

Status
Not open for further replies.

monkey_00*

Guest
Greetings and salutations from Hamilton Ontario Canada.........

I just wanted to say here that American hockey fans have nothing to be ashamed of........They should be damn proud of their hockey team!......They did their best..............................

Finland is also a great hockey club and could be the ones that actually go all the way and win this whole tournament........We haven't seen the last of this U.S.-squad.......I believe that they are in a transition phase right now and look out for them at the next Winter Olympics.

Cheers!~

monkey_00
 

H/H

Registered User
Aug 27, 2004
308
0
They only had one really great game, but then again, it's the results that count and getting knocked out in the semis isn't bad.
 

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,624
40,716
www.youtube.com
It's been a funny tournament. The Czechs looks asleep for the first two games, then caught fire, the Russians looked great early and played much better then I expected, the US looked bad in their first 2 games yet bounced back strongly, while the Slovaks looked lost from the start and the Germans tried hard but just didn't have it.
 

DownFromNJ

Registered User
Mar 7, 2004
2,536
2
The US is in a transition phase right now. Give em a few years, they'll be bigger than ever.
 

wilka91*

Registered User
May 5, 2004
4,251
1
2-3 record is OK when playing against the World's greatest. On the other hand with 4 home games it could have been better ...
 

Lou is God

Registered User
Nov 10, 2003
26,550
9,968
New Jersey
Til the End of Time said:
I wouldn't say they played great.

They had a respectable tournament, and shouldn't be bashed for their performance, but they also shouldn't be applauded.

While they didn't play their best they did play hard and represented our country proudly and for that should be applauded.


:clap:
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,113
11,131
Murica
I think the U.S. met the expectations heaped upon it for this tournament. I don't think they under or over-acheived. For an older team with alot of turmoil on the blueline, young and inexperienced goaltending, and the Brett Hull distraction, I thought we did fairly well. It's too bad we couldn't keep that lead against Finland though...... :banghead:
 

ceber

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
3,497
0
Wyoming, MN
Team USA had some good moments. They had more moments that weren't good, though. Overall, I was happy with the games, but disappointed with the performance. Just my opinion, but I don't think we saw a consistent best-effort from Team USA.
 

Mountain Dude

Guest
They had a a 2-3 record, beating the Slovaks, and then beat a team B russia that didn't show up to play.
 

Douggy

Registered User
Dec 22, 2002
9,784
1
London, Ontario
Visit site
Rabid Ranger said:
I think the U.S. met the expectations heaped upon it for this tournament. I don't think they under or over-acheived. For an older team with alot of turmoil on the blueline, young and inexperienced goaltending, and the Brett Hull distraction, I thought we did fairly well. It's too bad we couldn't keep that lead against Finland though...... :banghead:
There are people who are in a position to say that the US met their expectations, but you aren't one of those people.

Before the tournament, you were one of the guys talking about how the US and Canada should be in the Gold Medal game. Now I know they didn't miss by much, but I don't see how you can say they met expectations.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,113
11,131
Murica
Douggy said:
There are people who are in a position to say that the US met their expectations, but you aren't one of those people.

Before the tournament, you were one of the guys talking about how the US and Canada should be in the Gold Medal game. Now I know they didn't miss by much, but I don't see how you can say they met expectations.



I'm not talking about my expectations, I'm talking about expectations in general. I did think the U.S. would make it to the championship game, and that almost happened. MOST prognosticators however weren't nearly as generous, and those people looked like geniuses the first two games.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,113
11,131
Murica
The Albino said:
Here's a pretty scathing article on the subject from Slam.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/WorldCup/2004/09/12/626782.html

It seems pretty harsh, but take it for what it's worth.

I do agree with one thing in the article though: Chelios ain't exactly the best ambassador for the game :)



A junk article IMO. The U.S. iced the best possible line-up (IMO) and resorted to playing a style that EVERYONE else did in order to win games. The fact is the U.S. has won it's fair share of medals at international tournaments of late, and the future does look bright. Not winning the World Cup this year isn't going to change that. I wonder what his critique of Russia might be? The federation's in shambles, can't win to save their lives, yet we look good doing so! :joker:
 
Last edited:

PullolaForPresident

Registered User
Sep 11, 2004
1
0
Finland
It's said in Finland that beating USA in semis was our biggest win so far in the whole history of national team. It wasn't such a big deal for us if it wasn't against a great opponent.

Team USA of course still is and will continue to be one of the top teams in the world.
 

guinness

Not Ingrid for now
Mar 11, 2002
14,521
301
Missoula, Montana
www.missoulian.com
Rabid Ranger said:
A junk article IMO. The U.S. iced the best possible line-up (IMO) and resorted to playing a style that EVERYONE else did in order to win games. The fact is the U.S. has won it's fair share of medals at international tournaments of late, and the future does look bright. Not winning the World Cup this year isn't going to change that. I wonder what his critique of Russia might be? The federation's in shambles, we can't win to save our lives, yet we look good doing so! :joker:

I found it funny with that article that the writer brought up 1998 in reference to Chelios, but not also 1996 and 2002.

USA's style was boring, SFW. When you lack a lot of depth, you do what you have to do in order to win some games.

USA Hockey will be fine, as evidenced at the last WJC's, probably not on the level of Canada, but who is.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,113
11,131
Murica
guinness said:
I found it funny with that article that the writer brought up 1998 in reference to Chelios, but not also 1996 and 2002.

USA's style was boring, SFW. When you lack a lot of depth, you do what you have to do in order to win some games.

USA Hockey will be fine, as evidenced at the last WJC's, probably not on the level of Canada, but who is.


I didn't get the Chelios potshots. He's one of the best defensemen to ever play the game, and has ALWAYS come to play when his country asked. Yeah, he's been part of some stinkers, but also some great accomplishments as well. So what if he's a %$^ to play against or whatever?
 

roast

Registered User
Mar 3, 2004
858
0
Pittsburgh
No one will probably be able to match the depth Canada will have either now or in the future, however I think down the road the American's top players may be able to rival the Canadians a bit better.

That article was pretty on about Chelios, however the shots at the youngsters was not called for.
 

Kickabrat

WHAT - ME WORRY?
Jul 4, 2004
3,959
0
Ottawa
Lou is God said:
While they didn't play their best they did play hard and represented our country proudly and for that should be applauded.:clap:
At least they didn't bust up their hotel rooms.
I thought they played a lot better after Hull left. It probably created a rallying point for the team. At the beginning I thought they would be in the finals, since they weren't they did not meet my expectations, but they still provided better entertainment then some of those Euro division snoozefests.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad