• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Olympic Hockey Gold Medal

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Watching the game it is very evident that USA is going to struggle to score goals against elite teams. I look at the lack of true playmakers on the USA team. Really makes you question the decision to take the bigger, pysical players over the smaller, more talented.

At any rate it was a good first win considering the entire team just arrived.
 
Upvote 0
What's the group advancement procedure for Olympic Hockey?

I think the US can knock off Norway and likely lose to Canada. But that would put us in 2nd in our group! Would we move on in this situation?
 
Upvote 0
BigWoof31;1660857; said:
What's the group advancement procedure for Olympic Hockey?

I think the US can knock off Norway and likely lose to Canada. But that would put us in 2nd in our group! Would we move on in this situation?
Click to expand...
Men's Ice Hockey : Preliminary Schedule and Results
Men's Ice Hockey : Playoffs Schedule and Results

There are 3 groups of 4. After round robin play all 12 teams are ranked 1-12. Teams 1-4 get first-round byes and its a single elimination tournament from there. So a team that finishes last in its group could win the gold medal, though that possibility would be slimmer than USC coming away with a clean slate from Bushgate.

So the US could lose to Canada and still finish as one of the top 4 ranked teams and get a first-round bye.
 
Upvote 0
korchiki;1660740; said:
Watching the game it is very evident that USA is going to struggle to score goals against elite teams. I look at the lack of true playmakers on the USA team. Really makes you question the decision to take the bigger, pysical players over the smaller, more talented.

At any rate it was a good first win considering the entire team just arrived.
Click to expand...

I think the US was forced to go the big and physical route due to them just not having the talent to compete with four #1 lines like Canada has, and to a lesser extent Russia. Even Sweden.

That, and I don't think the US could've iced a competitive small/talented squad. Big/physical was pretty much the way to go if they wanted to have a chance. At least try to punch the other team in the mouth and get them off their game.

Canada looks pretty dominating, but I've only seen five minutes of the third period.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top