Other Sports ****Official Canada vs United States Gold Medal Hockey thread **** - Page 23

The_Doctor10 · 02-27-2010, 08:18 PM

I know there's a Winter Olympics thread, but this is the premiere event of the Olympics, and it's the matchup VANOC hoped they'd get when they spent how many billions of dollars to get the Games. NBC wanted this, and there's a chance that the American viewing audience of this game surpasses the population of Canada. It deserves it's own chuffing thread for ****s sake!

To analyze the game some, Ryan Miller could very well be his generation's Mike Richter... the dude plays lights out in big games. Meanwhile, Canada's throwing Roberto Luongo in net who seems more likely to follow Russia's Evgeni Nabokov and Finland's Miikka Kiprusoff as high-profile tenders who have completely shit the bed when it mattered most. Personally, Luongo has been average at best, though better than Fatso Brodeur, which isn't saying much. It boggles my mind that Marc-Andre Fleury, Canada's most prolific big-game goalie of the past 2 years, did not see one second of ice time, as he's probably the best-suited to take on the Americans.

For the US team... there was a lot of shit heaped at the feet of GM Brian Burke after he picked his team... picking Komisarek, Drury, Langenbrunner among others led to his being raked across the coals by many in the hockey world. Injuries prevented Komisarek from making the trip to Vancouver and that was probably a blessing as he likely would've lost America a game or two on his own.

We can debate forward matchups in perpetuity... Canada has a more skilled group, but you can't undersell how well the US forwards have played as a group.

Regardless this should be one for the ages, and hopefully it does a lot for the popularity of hockey in the United States. Though I'm still gonna say 4-3 Canada.

Good luck ladies and gents!

Mosbonian · 02-28-2010, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

You don't like me pointing out his use of the word?

mmaddog
********

**DaFace** · 02-28-2010, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mmaddog

You don't like me pointing out his use of the word?

mmaddog
********

I get it. I don't disagree with you. But it seems like you do more posting on this forum when you're arguing with people about that word than you do participating in actual conversation.

Mosbonian · 02-28-2010, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

I get it. I don't disagree with you. But it seems like you do more posting on this forum when you're arguing with people about that word than you do participating in actual conversation.

Really?

I'm sorry I don't meet the "positive to negative" proper quotient needed....

And if you really look at the number of times that word is used here that I just overlook maybe you wouldn't feel that way.

And I am a reasonable person....if you can show me where my arguing posts about this word is much greater than the other posts I do here, I will be glad to refrain from saying anything about about the word for the remaining portion of 2010.

mmaddog
********

POND_OF_RED · 02-28-2010, 08:00 PM

These Canadiens are acting like they just won the Super Bowl. It's hockey, and you won a 12 team, 2 week tournament. Settle down now. I never understood the fascination for hockey all of those Canadiens have.

KC_Connection · 02-28-2010, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED

These Canadiens are acting like they just won the Super Bowl. It's hockey, and you won a 12 team, 2 week tournament. Settle down now. I never understood the fascination for hockey all of those Canadiens have.

Stop whining. This is their Super Bowl.

Mosbonian · 02-28-2010, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mmaddog

Really?

I'm sorry I don't meet the "positive to negative" proper quotient needed....

And if you really look at the number of times that word is used here that I just overlook maybe you wouldn't feel that way.

And I am a reasonable person....if you can show me where my arguing posts about this word is much greater than the other posts I do here, I will be glad to refrain from saying anything about about the word for the remaining portion of 2010.

mmaddog
********

Just to reiterate my point....out of my last 200 posts (going back to December) i have 4 posts about this issue and 2 were from the same thread.

But since my harping seems to bother everyone I will refrain from pointing this out going forward.

Sorry if I offended.

mmaddog
********

Goldmember · 02-28-2010, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD10367

I thought it was a bit of hyperbole when the announcer said, if the US won it in OT, the goal-scorer would have a place next to Mike Eruzione. I'm sorry, but "NHL pros vs. NHL pros, in a battle of friendly border countries" can never match the Miracle on Ice.

You got that right. This was like an NHL All Star game

POND_OF_RED · 02-28-2010, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

Stop whining. This is their Super Bowl.

Really? This isn't even the most popular winter olympic sport. Why the fascination from the Canadiens?

KC_Connection · 02-28-2010, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goldmember

You got that right. This was like an NHL All Star game

NHL All Star games are boring and played without intensity or hitting. That was one of the best hockey games ever played in terms of talent and effort.

ArrowheadHawk · 02-28-2010, 08:12 PM

Why do they change the rules in OT? That just seems stupid. That would be like switching to 7 on 7 in OT in the NFL.

KC_Connection · 02-28-2010, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED

Really? This isn't even the most popular winter olympic sport. Why the fascination from the Canadiens?

A couple of things, asshole.

#1. It's Canadians. Canadien refers to people from the French part of Canada.

#2. Hockey is by far the most popular winter sport.

#3. Are you seriously asking why Canadians are fascinated with the sport that they are best at? Should we ask next why Americans enjoy watching football or baseball?

The_Doctor10 · 02-28-2010, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goldmember

You got that right. This was like an NHL All Star game

Yeah because the losers of the All-Star game are always holding back tears in the aftermath, eh?

Moron...

KC_Connection · 02-28-2010, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowheadHawk

Why do they change the rules in OT? That just seems stupid. That would be like switching to 7 on 7 in OT in the NFL.

To make it more exciting and allow for a goal to be scored, instead of going to a shootout.

In the playoffs, however, they don't go to 4 on 4. They just play 5 on 5 until someone scores. That can take a while.

ArrowheadHawk · 02-28-2010, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

To make it more exciting and allow for a goal to be scored, instead of going to a shootout.

In the playoffs, however, they don't go to 4 on 4. They just play 5 on 5 until someone scores. That can take a while.

So the winner is not the best team at what they have been playing the whole tournament. Its who can play the best 4 on 4. Plus shootouts are stupid in both Hockey and Soccer. Just play sudden death until somebody wins.

KC_Connection · 02-28-2010, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowheadHawk

So the winner is not the best team at what they have been playing the whole tournament. Its who can play the best 4 on 4. Plus shootouts are stupid in both Hockey and Soccer. Just play sudden death until somebody wins.

Canada was the best team in this tournament, I doubt playing 5 on 5 instead would have changed the result.

However, I agree with you about the concept of shootouts.

02-27-2010, 08:18 PM
The_Doctor10 Everyone else is 'peasants' Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $9914900	**Official Canada vs United States Gold Medal Hockey thread I know there's a Winter Olympics thread, but this is the premiere event of the Olympics, and it's the matchup VANOC hoped they'd get when they spent how many billions of dollars to get the Games. NBC wanted this, and there's a chance that the American viewing audience of this game surpasses the population of Canada. It deserves it's own chuffing thread for **s sake! To analyze the game some, Ryan Miller could very well be his generation's Mike Richter... the dude plays lights out in big games. Meanwhile, Canada's throwing Roberto Luongo in net who seems more likely to follow Russia's Evgeni Nabokov and Finland's Miikka Kiprusoff as high-profile tenders who have completely shit the bed when it mattered most. Personally, Luongo has been average at best, though better than Fatso Brodeur, which isn't saying much. It boggles my mind that Marc-Andre Fleury, Canada's most prolific big-game goalie of the past 2 years, did not see one second of ice time, as he's probably the best-suited to take on the Americans. For the US team... there was a lot of shit heaped at the feet of GM Brian Burke after he picked his team... picking Komisarek, Drury, Langenbrunner among others led to his being raked across the coals by many in the hockey world. Injuries prevented Komisarek from making the trip to Vancouver and that was probably a blessing as he likely would've lost America a game or two on his own. We can debate forward matchups in perpetuity... Canada has a more skilled group, but you can't undersell how well the US forwards have played as a group. Regardless this should be one for the ages, and hopefully it does a lot for the popularity of hockey in the United States. Though I'm still gonna say 4-3 Canada. Good luck ladies and gents!
Posts: 1,532

02-28-2010, 08:00 PM	#334
POND_OF_RED The talking stonehead Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Blue Springs, MO Casino cash: $-1936854	These Canadiens are acting like they just won the Super Bowl. It's hockey, and you won a 12 team, 2 week tournament. Settle down now. I never understood the fascination for hockey all of those Canadiens have.
Posts: 6,018

02-28-2010, 08:12 PM	#340
ArrowheadHawk Rock Chalk! Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Topeka, KS Casino cash: $7744961	Why do they change the rules in OT? That just seems stupid. That would be like switching to 7 on 7 in OT in the NFL.
Posts: 15,676