Which Gold medal loss stings more? 2004 or 2011?

[connellc]

Simple question. I believe the 2004 team was a bit more favored and also featured Crosby and Phaneuf, Carter. I believe they had a two goal lead going into the third as well. I can't quite remember if they had a 3-0 lead at one point. I also think U.S made a goaltender change? The Golden mistake was well...a tough pill to swallow.

I also wanted to mention that Canada had a pretty long drought then with regards to winning gold’s. I think it was 6 years compared to 2 in 2011. Maybe asking the question isn’t appropriate now since 2011 is fresh in our minds, but which loss hurt more?

Click to read more...

 

[Minister of Offence]

Ha...I watched the 04 game in the cafeteria at school telling a buddy of mine I hoped the US scored to make it a closer game. Damn, **** me right? . Upon losing the game he threw a small orange across the cafeteria that stuck on the wall near the ceiling for years.

This one stings more...but personally, I've found that I'm getting much less caught up in the winning or losing and just much more interested in the prospects in general.

 

[Uncle Rotter]

I also wanted to mention that Canada had a pretty long drought then with regards to winning gold’s. I think it was 6 years compared to 2 in 2011.

7 years (1997)

 

[adtthosa]

I remember 2004 really sucked. I would personally say that I was more heartbroken by that one. Just the way it ended....watching Fleury bank it into his own net for the GWG was awful. At least the Russians earned it this year by scoring all 5 goals themselves.

 

[nitz]

I didn't watch the 2004 one live ... so I've never really felt a strong connection to it. However, I watched this year's meltdown in a bar with a hundred other people and I honestly felt like throwing up by the end of it.. and it wasn't from the cheap beer.

 

[parabola]

2004 didn't really sting because it was just a stupid fluke deflection.

This one stings more because the meltdown was just awful.

 

[v-man]

I was over it ten minutes after the game ended. In the over-all scheme of things, this tournament is entirely pointless. It's essentially one birth year playing a tournament at which few teams have a chance to win due to drastically uneven participation levels. It doesn't accurately portray the true nature or stature of any country's hockey program. It's a nice little thing to watch during the holidays, but I don't lose any sleep over it.

 

[29dryden29]

Simple question. I believe the 2004 team was a bit more favored and also featured Crosby and Phaneuf, Carter. I believe they had a two goal lead going into the third as well. I can't quite remember if they had a 3-0 lead at one point. I also think U.S made a goaltender change? The Golden mistake was well...a tough pill to swallow.

I also wanted to mention that Canada had a pretty long drought then with regards to winning gold’s. I think it was 6 years compared to 2 in 2011. Maybe asking the question isn’t appropriate now since 2011 is fresh in our minds, but which loss hurt more?

I would say both loses were pretty monumental failures and like in 04 when Fleury scored into his own net the 4th goal for Russia actually went in off our player so we screwed ourselves in both games but honestly we sucked in both and deserved the fate we were handed. I am disgusted at how the team played and the way they sat around past the mid point of the second period. They needed to play a full game like they did against the US and all would have been fine but they didn't and they lost. Silver medal means nothing other than you were the last loser.

 

[Mizral]

Has to be 2004. That crushed me.

 

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaa]

1998 Olympics.

I think 2004, simply because the team was better going in, in my opinion. This 2011 team...I didn't realistically expect them to get the gold, and maybe not even a medal at this tournament, as they had a lot of first rounders, but none that would be considered top-flight players.

It's worth noting though, that in 2004, Crosby was barely 16 years old. Don't put the blame on him. No 16 year old controls the wins or losses of a U20 team.

 

[Kenobody]

2004 didn't really sting because it was just a stupid fluke deflection.

This one stings more because the meltdown was just awful.

Bingo.

 

[thomasincanada]

Last year irked me more than this year.

The reality is that it's a tournament of youngsters played every year and we have what.. 5 golds and 5 silvers in the last 10 years. Hard to be genuinely upset by this.

If we had lost the olympics I would have been 1000x more upset than this.

 

[SMoneyMonkey]

This years was hurtful for about five minutes. The sting of losing was dulled by the great game the Russians played and just their story throughout the tournament. 2004 was just bleh. Definitely worse.

Although I can't say WJC is ever that stinging. I mostly watch it to see a few prospies play.

 

[Riggins]

For me:

2004
2010
2011

This year doesn't bug me much for whatever reason. Fleury's gaff in 2004 was definitely the worst.

 

[Due North]

This one for me because I was there to witness it live.
I'm still proud of the kids. I was at the U.S. game and they
were so dominate, I still think they ran out of gas and then
panic set in. We'll get them next year