Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Cowtown, post: 5310084, member: 2350"] There was a lot of moaning and gnashing of teeth among the talking heads. One point that stood out to me is related to your comment about selection. As in, they picked 18 of the same type of player. They all looked like they had never played together before (and I think mostly they hadn't?). They had no offensive creativity or imagination, or sense of timing. They just flew around the ice as fast as they could. The ratio of expended energy to developed momentum was considerably less than proportional. Another problem loudly decried that I saw was they didn't practice between games. Yikes. So what did they do? Played video games and read all the shtt-talk about them on social media. Then they showed up for the next game pretty much unprepared, especially after a poor game the last time out. Yes, the other teams are closing the gap. From my own observation, take Latvia: they had C+ talent but A level team play. And they were very well organized in their own end and Canada had no plan to attack their goal. And their effort was tremendous. Although Canada was not short on effort, they were running around like the proverbial "Chinese fire drill." They appeared baffled when they couldn't out-effort the other side. They passed when they should have driven to the net, they threw passes to guys who were covered, routinely threw passes into their target's skates. When they weren't doing all that, they hung on to the puck too long. I think you're right on the money with your observation about the US national development program. I feel bad for the Canadian kids. As I said, no problem with their effort. But the system that got them there seems to have let them down. It's almost like Hockey Canada had bigger problems elsewhere. :rolleyes: [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?