FanDuel - WFBC

February 23, 2006

And then I read this, and I laughed out loud.: Lately here I have been accused by others of 'Modano bashing'. This morning, I read this column, and I offer it as evidence of my case in point. This may be the reason the US and Canada team organizers need to recoup their thought processes before trying this again.

posted by mrhockey to hockey at 06:30 AM - 17 comments

Modano is a cry baby! They were out played by teams that were hungrier!

posted by Taimaishu at 11:20 PM on February 23

[But] it only matters who wants to win more. Nothing else matters." That's what it comes down to in any sport. That's why underdogs win sometimes and so-called "talented" teams lose sometimes.

posted by roberts at 04:50 AM on February 24

Then, after that, Modano skips the last team meeting, and goes home (a day early, making his own travel accomodations). But it's someone else's fault, right, Mikey. He's always been good at pissing and moaning about others, but the blame NEVER has to do with his own ass. Both Canada and the US were slow and unaccustomed to the large ice, and did nothing to compensate for this. It's really too bad that the coaches and leaders couldn't see what was happening, but that's a consequence of taking one league apart for three weeks to try to make winning teams from it. PLEASE!! In 2010, leave the pros home and use your real talent players from the college ranks.

posted by mrhockey at 07:31 AM on February 24

Do you really think the best college players in the USA would have beat Russia, Finland, or Sweden?

posted by fabulon7 at 07:49 AM on February 24

Isn't this the exact same writer who was ridiculed in an earlier thread? Not sure I'd want to hold him up as validation of my opinion.

posted by yerfatma at 08:10 AM on February 24

I agree Modano is not being a good sports here. He still comes off as a family guy more than a playboy, though. In any case, Modano has been slowing down for three years now, and he is no longer the dominant player he once was. You can't realistically expect him to carry a team by himself. He will be remembered as one of the top US-born players of hockey history, but his best years are behind him. The US simply didn't have enough firepower to compete in this tournament. Gionta and Gomez are good and still young, but they're far from concession players. Yet they're Team USA's present and future. It looks a little grim from here.

posted by qbert72 at 08:31 AM on February 24

It's really too bad that the coaches and leaders couldn't see what was happening, but that's a consequence of taking one league apart for three weeks to try to make winning teams from it. PLEASE!! In 2010, leave the pros home and use your real talent players from the college ranks. I would like to point out that of the 4 teams that did win their quarterfinal matches, more than 75% of their rosters were NHL players. What you had were one nation's NHL players beating another nation's NHL players. So, in fact, it seems that the "winning teams" WILL be made up of primarily NHL players. In 2010, leave the pros home and use your real talent players from the college ranks. In Vancouver? An NHL city? There is a better chance of Gordie Howe, Bobby Hull and the reanimated corpse of Maurice Richard being the starting forwards for Team Canada than there is of no NHL players at the 2010 Winter Olympics. After 2010, you'll probably get your wish and watch as Sweden, Finland, Russia, Czech and Slovakia field amazing teams from their professional leagues, but Canada and the US are forced to use the "best of the worst".

posted by grum@work at 08:55 AM on February 24

Canada and the US are forced to use the "best of the worst" Which will of course set the stage for a new Miracle on Ice. Ratings (or downloads of the made-for-TV-movie) will go through the roof!

posted by qbert72 at 09:23 AM on February 24

Can we all at least agree that this royally sucks* *statement not valid in Finland and Russia.

posted by chris2sy at 09:59 AM on February 24

I dunno - I think anyway who assumed that the US roster could compete against the other teams in this tournament was fooling themselves. There wasn't enough top level talent at all - at all positions. Canada - total disappointment. USA - pretty predictable (though I thought they were good for at least another win in the round robin).

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:04 AM on February 24

Were audiences of amateur hockey to be realistically viewed, they would see why the 198 'Miracle on Ice' was so compelling a story. Using pros for the Olympics has made the whole Olympic procedure a farce. Audiences expect professional sports performance from their countries. It's idiotic, but so are the Olympic expectations. We all need to be less critical of what the real Olympic ideal is. The Olympic games SHOULD be done by non-professionals everywhere, not just in the United States, but that would not be acceptable to today's world. That would present a problem to most of the sports fans that watch them, but not to real sports enthusiasts.

posted by mrhockey at 10:09 AM on February 24

Were audiences of amateur hockey to be realistically viewed I don't get it. What would I gain by watching amateur hockey audiences?

posted by DrJohnEvans at 10:24 AM on February 24

Why would I want to watch my country send anything but its best players to the biggest international competition? Because our best players are rich? I don't get it. I don't want to watch Canada lose every Olympic hockey tournament knowing that we could win if we were allowed to send our best players. That just plain sucks.

posted by fabulon7 at 10:31 AM on February 24

I bet Jeremy Roenick still thinks he should have made the American team.

posted by Mookieproof at 12:56 PM on February 24

Why would I want to watch my country send anything but its best players to the biggest international competition? And this was our (and Canada's) best players?

posted by graymatters at 02:32 PM on February 24

And this was our (and Canada's) best players? Yes, with very few exceptions, mostly caused by injuries.

posted by qbert72 at 03:05 PM on February 24

Maybe not the best Canadian players (due to loyalty and injuries) but as close as you are going to get. The team in 2010 is going to be interesting because Gretzky (or whoever takes his spot) will not feel obligated to invite previous Team Canada members (as opposed to the 2002 Olympic and 2004 WC winners). Players like Spezza, Staal and Crosby will make the team without worrying about older players getting "legacy" spots first. If 2010 is the final NHL-filled Olympics, it's going to go out with a blast.

posted by grum@work at 03:48 PM on February 24

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.