The funny thing is, as a Canadian, I saw this coming before it even happened based on the selection of this team, the way the lines were structured, and the rotation of players on the ice. There is just so much different than what even the casual hockey fan would do. And it failed.
As I have said before, I find this tournament entirely meaningless based on it's sample size and the over-hype from commercialization, patriotism, and economics. However, even with that said, if this is not back to the 'drawing-board' for Canada, then I do not know what is. I think it's time to start changing how the Canadian style of hockey is used to select for this tournament.
The Americans had a clear strategy based off their elite goaltender and strength from defense from two of the best blue-liners in the tournament. This was their identity. What did Canada have? Can anyone hear even definitively state what the identity of this team was? The system was completely ineffective by 'role-players' who did not even perform their basic task, which supposedly got them on the team. The other key players and their strengths were not utilized enough, though everyone saw how effective they were in the small amount of ice-time they were given. Rielly and Jenner come to mind in this regard.
Worst of all, it seemed like the Canadian players were fine with this result and are happy to be playing Russia in the Bronze Medal game. Not one single player or coach ignited this team. No passion, which surprisingly, I thought Canada would maintain regardless of circumstance. I guess not. On to next year, as they say.
