Olympic Hockey

[Northlander]

What can you say great game by both teams, congrats to Canada can't say they didn't deserve it. Like I said before it would be very hard to beat Canada twice but we certainly gave out best. USA hockey has come a long way in the past decade or so, I see only good things in our future and more huge games against Canada.

I just have one tiny complaint, and honestly I would have said this if the USA won, not making any excuses or taking anything away from Canada they deserve gold. I just don't like the 4 on 4 in overtime, it changes the whole game. You grow up playing the game one way your entire life and then they change the rules for OT, espeically in a big game like this I just don't like it. I understand it helps open things up and helps decide the game in overtime vs a shootout, which would have been a terrible way to see a team lose. Regular season NHL game sure I'm ok with anything but at least in the playoffs its five on five hockey.

4 on 4 in OT? I didnt know that. Thats dumb! Play the game as it was supposed to be played. Dont fix what aint broke. I also hate shoot outs.

[PierBridge]

I like the rule and Frankly with the size and speed of the athletes today along with the smaller American rinks I think the NHL would have a greatly improved product if they went to 4 on 4 Hockey for the entire game.

Although I think the 4 on 4 favored Canada a smidge more than likely we end up in shoot-out if they don't go 4 on 4 but I still like the rule.

[harvey lee]

I think the 4 on 4 really opens up the game. No need for a tie.

The USA did well considering they were playing hands down the best team in the World. I do not believe we were suppose to even medal this year. I believe Russia, Finland and Sweden were all ranked higher.

[Eric Wettschreck]

What a game!!!!! Congrats to the Canuks.

Both sides represented well and put on one heckuva show!!!!

[Jarrod32]

I think the 4 on 4 really opens up the game. No need for a tie.

The USA did well considering they were playing hands down the best team in the World. I do not believe we were suppose to even medal this year. I believe Russia, Finland and Sweden were all ranked higher.

The rankings/seedings going into the Olympics:

1. Canada

2. Russia

3. Sweden

4. Finland

5. Slovakia

6. USA

[solbes]

Great effort from the USA team. And kinda cool to know that they could be the 2014 team as well. Most of them are pretty young with this being their first Olympics. Congrats!!!

[spearchucker]

Originally Posted By: Bear55

What can you say great game by both teams, congrats to Canada can't say they didn't deserve it. Like I said before it would be very hard to beat Canada twice but we certainly gave out best. USA hockey has come a long way in the past decade or so, I see only good things in our future and more huge games against Canada.

I just have one tiny complaint, and honestly I would have said this if the USA won, not making any excuses or taking anything away from Canada they deserve gold. I just don't like the 4 on 4 in overtime, it changes the whole game. You grow up playing the game one way your entire life and then they change the rules for OT, espeically in a big game like this I just don't like it. I understand it helps open things up and helps decide the game in overtime vs a shootout, which would have been a terrible way to see a team lose. Regular season NHL game sure I'm ok with anything but at least in the playoffs its five on five hockey.

4 on 4 in OT? I didnt know that. Thats dumb! Play the game as it was supposed to be played. Dont fix what aint broke. I also hate shoot outs.

NHL is the same way.

[walleyes12]

It was a great olypmics for USA hockey, I loved it!

[OnAFly]

I had to stop at a bar in Jamestown, ND to watch it, but that was a great game. I don't know if the US would have done as well on an Olympic sized sheet of ice. As soon as they went 4-4, all that open ice really gave Canada the advantage.

There's no shame in taking silver to a team like that.

The average age on the US team is 27, in 4 more years, we'll have a lot of the same very talented players but with more experience. Also, we've won the junior world championships this year so we'll still have some good young talent to go along. I think we will be a real contender at the next Olympics. Hopefully Bettman takes step one to getting hockey more respect and pulls his head out of his... If the NHL players aren't allowed to play that tournament, it will be pretty damaging for the NHL image. People in the US won't watch as much if they don't think we have a chance.

[Bear55]

I like the rule and Frankly with the size and speed of the athletes today along with the smaller American rinks I think the NHL would have a greatly improved product if they went to 4 on 4 Hockey for the entire game.

Although I think the 4 on 4 favored Canada a smidge more than likely we end up in shoot-out if they don't go 4 on 4 but I still like the rule.

Its not the worst thing they could do but why play the entire game one way then switch everything up for ot just doesn't make sense to me. Again I'm fine with it for regular season stuff but to decide a championship or Gold medal by different rules doesn't make sense. What if baseball went to 7 on 7 in extra innings in game 7 of the world series? What is the Super bowl was decided in OT with 8 on 8 to open things up? NBA finals OT 2 on 2 or 3 on 3? Those might be some extreme examples but it seems a little silly when you look at other sports.

Again no sour grapes here over the loss, Canada deserved the win and they probably score first 5 on 5.

[Jmnhunter]

the US literally gave them the puck a few times in OT; its fixed

[Northlander]

I say you play until someone wins in the Olympics, playoffs and championships. No odd man games, no shoot outs, no starting from the 30.

[lovebigbluegills]

I say you play until someone wins in the Olympics, playoffs and championships. No odd man games, no shoot outs, no starting from the 30.

Exactly right. Any playoff games, to include championship games should be sudden-death overtime (not 4-on-4 either, unless it's because of penalties) until somebody wins it.

[scsavre]

So I didnt get to watch as closely as I would have liked to. My wife decided to go into labor hours before the game started. You cant even make that up. So instead of my 58" TV i had to settle for the 19" room TV.

My point to bring up is this though. That was an unbelievably good thing for hockey as a sport. I couldnt believe it at the hospital. The nurses, doctors, parents, kids and friends, everybody was talking about the game. When we got there, the nurses honestly said "lets get this baby out before 2pm, we need to watch the game." there were rooms with no one even in them that had the game on so that the staff and residents could pop a head in and watch. Every where you went, "whats the score"? 90% of these people werent even hockey fans. I wish I was selling USA gear, ID be rich. So to me it was a huge win for the sport. I think we picked up a ton of fans. WOuld it have been better to win, yes. But still it was awesome. I felt like I was in Canada with all the hockey talk. Honestly I go to every single Wild game, and there were more people excited about hockey at this tourny.

And about the 4 on 4. I say it is garbage. It isnt acceptable to change from the 5 on 5 and totally screw up your game plan. It really does change everything about your game. And the only reason the NHL has changed to it is for the fans. Fans already think half of the 84 games are meaningless. Obviously they want someone to win and 4 on 4 makes it sloppy enough to maybe get a goal.

I have the game on Tivo, So i will have to rewatch and get a getter look.

By the way, too bad on that OT goal. Not the goal you want to loose on. Either way, MVP Miller for me, runner up Parise?

[cbrooks]

I second that Ryan Miller gets the MVP. BTW congratulations scavre.

[croixflats]

the US literally gave them the puck a few times in OT; its fixed

Yeah, I heard Roger Goodell is connected with the Olympic Committee.

[solbes]

Congrats to SC!

4 on 4 really favors the Canada team I think. Either way, I guess I can see it both ways. I've seen games where 5 on 5 went three 20 minute overtimes (high school tourney with Apple Valley). 4 on 4 should be a lot quicker to a conclusion, but I agree it changes the complexion of the game. We probably would think the system wasn't that bad if we won

Kinda off topic, but how do you pronounce the great hockey name of Parise? When he was at UND I always heard PariSEA, like a body of water. During the Olympics I've heard PariZAY, Parizee, and who knows what else.

[cbrooks]

I say it as presz-sa. I hope thats right.

[buzbunni]

I say you play until someone wins in the Olympics, playoffs and championships. No odd man games, no shoot outs, no starting from the 30.

Amen.

I'm no great hockey mind (tho I did play in high school and college), but Northlander speaks the truth.

Olympics are once every 4 years, and the odds of playing any OT game aren't that great.

When/if an Olympic game does go to OT....well, c'mon, let's play it out the way the game was meant to be played.

[brmuskie]

Congrats [pleasebecomeasponsor] - hopefully everything is going well.

I tend to agree with most of the comments about the OT - BUT here are some opposing views to consider. 4 on 4 hockey is kind of like going back to the pond, the way we all started playing. There are more good goals playing 4 on 4 than 5 on 5. Much less chance for a rebound goal or garbage goal playing 4 on 4. Both teams had to play 4 on 4 so I don't know how it favored one team over another. It does favor the team with more individual talent on it. With the closing ceremonies scheduled for after the game, I don't think that you can expect them to allow a game to go for 3 overtimes.

Either way - great game, great tourney, great for hockey, and great for USA Hockey.

[PierBridge]

It's just a good reasonable way to attempt to complete a game and keep the games on schedule. I haven't heard one player or media person complaining about this. The rule was set before the games everybody knew it and its a non story and sour grapes IMO.

[OnAFly]

PB - Agreed. The argument is there only if they changed the rules half way through.

[Bear55]

Peir no sour grapes here, I did say Canada deserved to win. I was planning to bring this up as soon as I saw they went 4 on 4 in OT regardless of the winner, it probably got more of a response because we lost. It certainly is a non story, its just my opinion that its a bad move for championship type games. I'll even give you that its a reasonable way to play the OT, certainly better than a quick OT and shootout.

Now with all that said is it reasonable to change the rules just to get the game done quickly when a championship or gold medal is on the line? Shouldn't we play hockey by the same rules throughout the entire game? No other sports do this, even the NHL has enough sense not mess with the OT rules in the playoffs. No doubt games can get a little long when you get into 2-3 overtimes but those usually go down as some of the greatest games in history. Why play the most important minutes of the game in what is usually a special teams situation just so the game can be done on schedule?

[PierBridge]

As always you make some great points and I understand the frustration by some of the purist in here. I guess my point was, some the posters were acting like they changed the whole game by going 4 on 4 it's not like the players have never played 4 on 4, they do it often also some of the analogy's used like playing 8 on 8 in Football game didn't sit well for me. I don't see one less player on the ice a big deal either way.

I guess you could wave the 4 on 4 for the medal round and that wouldn't effect much of anything like the NHL does. Although I think the NHL has ratings on there minds when they switch from the regular season OT rules.

You are right some of the best games are the 2, 3 and 4 overtime games.

I heard Gustavus and Augsburg just played one of the longest games in Hockey history the other night to get into the conference playoff championship game.

Go Tommie's!!

[scsavre]

Pier, actually going to 4 on 4 absolutely changes the game. You prepare a game plan, you stick with that. Come overtime, you change a lot. Your forecheck, your Neutral zone, your brake out. You have to change it all. I think the USA was a team that beat expectations because they were usually a pretty disciplined and well positioned team and well coached team 5 on 5.

The overtimes in the NHL are a joke. The teams become a mess out there. But the fans do need those games to end, and have a winner.

I think you didnt hear a lot of complaining about it by the announcers was the fact that they have gotten used to it. The world juniors and past olympics have gotten people acustomed to it. The reason they have the 4 on 4 rule is largely due to the Round Robin Format of international tournaments.

By the was the USA won, they had the most points in the end. HAHAH