How far can team USA go!?

[cjm502 165]

Just a heads up, Tollefsen will be playing for Norway on thursday when USA takes them on.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

After watching Russia and Canada yesterday, USA doesn't have a shot in hell in getting silver or gold.

We'll have to see in a few hours how Sweden looks, but based on their lineup, they're gonna be pretty ridiculous as well. I could maybe see the USA getting a bronze in an upset over Sweden, but I strongly doubt that the USA has a chance at a gold or silver based on their lineup and how they played yesterday.

You should have read my post.

Switzerland had Hiller in net. A really good NHL goalie who's unlikely to give up 9 goals in a game. Who did Norway and Latvia have in net? Also, Switzerland beat some good teams in the Olympics last time, including Canada.

Yesterday's games are not a good basis for which to judge the tournament on.

Edited February 17, 2010 by GMRwings1983

[Kwame_Kilpatrick 0]

yes switzerland is a good country, overall i was happy with the performance. dont forget it was 3 - 0 so it was not so close :usaflag:

[SDavis35 140]

You should have read my post.

Switzerland had Hiller in net. A really good NHL goalie who's unlikely to give up 9 goals in a game. Who did Norway and Latvia have in net? Also, Switzerland beat some good teams in the Olympics last time, including Canada.

Yesterday's games are not a good basis for which to judge the tournament on.

Agree; Canada's biggest weakness yesterday was keeping the puck in the zone, especially on the PP. If they fix that they're going to be in the gold medal game. Americans (I didn't catch much) were playing a decent team. For the US, my question mark is about the scoring, they have pretty good scorers, but I'm not so sure they'll be able to keep it going against the better defensive teams. They could beat Russia, who (imo) are weakest on defence, but can score at will. Of course, like it's been said, games are won on the ice. Passion levels are bound to be high for the Americans, but if I had to give gold to the most passionate... Canada would hold that honor, being the home team brings soo much more pressure and expectation, and you can see it in the crowds in Vancouver.

In the end though, it'll be good solid hockey that should be fun to watch. Much better than women's hockey.

[Theophany 110]

You should have read my post.

Switzerland had Hiller in net. A really good NHL goalie who's unlikely to give up 9 goals in a game. Who did Norway and Latvia have in net? Also, Switzerland beat some good teams in the Olympics last time, including Canada.

Yesterday's games are not a good basis for which to judge the tournament on.

I read your post; I just happen to think that every post you make is retarded.

Look at what the US has on paper compared to Canada, Russia, and Sweden. Hell, even Finland.

If Miller is standing on his head, I could see the USA possibly going to the gold medal game, but if he's looking at all human, I can't see the team in front of him doing as well as Canada and Russia.

[T.Low 1,011]

Not sure why you think this, in my opinion, Canada, traditionally, does the opposite.

Yeah, I kinda looked at that statement for minute too, especially after Team Canada's major lack of chemistry last night against Norway. (Major sarcasm warning for some of the slower people on LGW; you know who you are)

Yes they were playing Norway...but Canada looked focussed and unbeatable last night. They are a team on mission. The entire team had as much chemistry as the Sedin twins have. It was an unbelievable display of hockey. Babcock couldn't even keep a straight face on the bench.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

I read your post; I just happen to think that every post you make is retarded.

Look at what the US has on paper compared to Canada, Russia, and Sweden. Hell, even Finland.

If Miller is standing on his head, I could see the USA possibly going to the gold medal game, but if he's looking at all human, I can't see the team in front of him doing as well as Canada and Russia.

You mean you're not a fan of my posts?

Oh and Canada had a good roster on paper last time, and still got beat by just about everyone, including the Swiss. Sweden got beat by Belarus in 2002 despite having a good team on paper.

The only thing paper is good for is wiping your ass with it.

Edited February 17, 2010 by GMRwings1983

[dropkickshanahans 463]

Yeah, I kinda looked at that statement for minute too, especially after Team Canada's major lack of chemistry last night against Norway. (Major sarcasm warning for some of the slower people on LGW; you know who you are)

Yes they were playing Norway...but Canada looked focussed and unbeatable last night. They are a team on mission. The entire team had as much chemistry as the Sedin twins have. It was an unbelievable display of hockey. Babcock couldn't even keep a straight face on the bench.

Ya' they even looked dominate in the first despite not scoring for the people that were looking at that as some kind of knock. It was something like 14 shots to 4 in the first? It was only a matter of time before they got on the board. Getzlaf also could easily have had a hat trick to share with Iginla as well if he didn't hit all those posts. Even though it was Norway, Canada looked the best compared to the other teams thus far.

[RusDRW 155]

team USA certainly can compete for the gold. Tough, big team with a lot of skill. I follow hockey for around 20 years and this is the first US team I actually like.

PS Experience is overrated. Will is underrated.

[Theophany 110]

You mean you're not a fan of my posts?

You have less than a clue about anything hockey related, that's all I'm saying.

[Guest Lidstromboli]

GMR is a fountain of knowledge. What are you talking about?

Edited February 17, 2010 by Lidstromboli

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

You have less than a clue about anything hockey related, that's all I'm saying.

Well, that's where kernels of knowledge like yourself come in to educate the rest of us idiots.

What would we do without you sir?

[Echolalia 2,961]

Man i thought the same untill yesterday. USA looked pretty decent, although not overly powerful on offense. Our goaltending was great and we have 2 other goalies jst as good in reserves. Our D looked solid after the first period for the most part. As wings fans we all know that defense and goaltending wins championships. Theres always a chance

PLUS

I stayed up extra late to watch the Russia game and i was VERY dissapointed. Offense looked sloppy except for the goals that were scored, and Nabokov gave up 2 goals to a LATVIA team that didnt look very good offensively the entire game. I dont really see to much defense on the Russian squad and if Nabokov is ganna give up 2 goals to Latvia, than i dont see an over powering force in their net either.

Canada, as much as it pains me to say it, looked the best in their first appearance. Had offense, defense, and goaltending all going at once. damn Canucks....

I always thought Nabby was overrated as a goaltender. Sure he's solid, but I always looked at him as the best of the average goaltenders instead of an average elite goaltender.

[dropkickshanahans 463]

I always thought Nabby was overrated as a goaltender. Sure he's solid, but I always looked at him as the best of the average goaltenders instead of an average elite goaltender.

He's streaky for sure. There's times when he just steals a game and other times when he doesn't look good. If he can get hot at the right time then Russia will take gold.

[j.hoop 64]

just waiting for the canadian fluffers to ruin this thread (ie themule, cern)

i think USA has a decent chance at medaling , not gonna predict any yet because they have yet to face a real challenge. chemistry, hardwork, and miller, like others have said, will be the key because they cant win on pure skill alone

[Guest zackmorris]

If Canada or the US could play with the unity and chemistry Germany and Sweden have both displayed they'd be great.

Germany especially has had a great game considering, you know...