View Full Version : Olympic hockey
Stemmer
02-08-2006, 03:38 PM
The Feb issue of "USA Hockey" magazine which arrived here today has a nice lineup and photo spread and info on the US mens' and womens' teams.
Online at www.usahockeymagazine.com, they apper to have the prior issue up.
Not too much said about either Conroy or Cole since neither has a lot of international experience with US teams. But in the preview they refer to Erik as one of "young guns" that needs to "find the back of the net."
Too lazy to look up the TV schedule...anyone know if we have to stay up to the wee hours to watch these early round US games?
Actually most of the games are on around 2-3:00 PM, with the Championship game being on at like 8:00 am. Looks like Tivo, a portable TV at work, or going in and skipping out early for me.
Stemmer
02-08-2006, 03:52 PM
Ron,
Thanks. Looks like that timetable may work for me. One of the benefits (what are the others?) of teaching only morning classes at college.
Hopefully my Wed eve class next week doesn't conflict with a game.
Ron,
Thanks. Looks like that timetable may work for me. One of the benefits (what are the others?) of teaching only morning classes at college.
Hopefully my Wed eve class next week doesn't conflict with a game.
My biggest fear really is that I'll Tivo the thing, and I won't be able to dodge the score during the day.
Stemmer
02-08-2006, 04:25 PM
My biggest fear really is that I'll Tivo the thing, and I won't be able to dodge the score during the day.
Reminds me of the game at LP vs Russia in '80. I dodged the score at work all day successfully and got home in time to catch the delayed b'cast.
As soon as I walk in, my apartment roomie blurted out the final score. Still enjoyed watching the game but the suspense went pffffft! :rolleyes:
Here's your olympic schedule:
http://usahockey.com/06oly/main_site/main/men/06oly_sked_men/
(on the right hand side)
TV coverage is apparently all over the place -- USA, CNBC, MSNBC, Universal HD and NBC. I don't see any live coverage planned -- all delayed, except possibly the women's semifinals at 4 AM on the 17th on USA. You folks up in the NC can probably get pretty good TV coverage out of Ottawa.
SpongeRob
02-10-2006, 09:28 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/torino2006/schedule
Complete schedule for the entire games on Yahoo. Enjoy.
keener83
02-16-2006, 03:06 PM
Reminds me of the game at LP vs Russia in '80. I dodged the score at work all day successfully and got home in time to catch the delayed b'cast.
As soon as I walk in, my apartment roomie blurted out the final score. Still enjoyed watching the game but the suspense went pffffft! :rolleyes:
I watched the Miracle game from a dorm in The Pit (Hamlin3) LIVE! Thanks CBC. Watched the Al Michael's ABC version 3 hours later. I was in LP to see the USA - Romania game a week before via the Clarkson Olympic ticket lottery. I had no idea that I was watching a legendary squad. Thanks CCT for those memories!
chuck
02-19-2006, 10:12 PM
Interesting article I found on Yahoo...
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=dw-teamusa021606&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
What do you think?
In this case he's way off the boat. For one thing, the NHL guys, from what I've seen on tv, really care about these games. I don't get the same feeling when I watch NBA players in the Olympics. Second, the BEST NHL players all came to the Olympics (barring injury). This wasn't like the NBA where you hear Shaq say he's not going to go if so-and-so is named head coach.
Just look at the american team and the canadian team, those are clearly the top players from both countries. We haven't sent our 'top' NBA players to the Olympics since the original dream team.
The only thing I'd change is to have a longer NHL break. These guys do need a week or so to be in the olympic venue practicing together. Some of the countries without NHLers have played as a unit better.
IF the NHL did not participate in the future, the other option I'd suggest is to use AHL players BUT to not have them play for their NHL affiliate's that season. Have a team called 'team USA' that plays in the AHL (even if all games are just exhibitions) or 'team Canada'. If they played 20 or so games before heading to the Olympics they'd be more of a real 'team'. However the negative with AHL guys is someone may be called up to the NHL just prior to the Olympics.
CUKnight
02-20-2006, 12:54 PM
Olympics should be for amatuers. End of story. Let the U-18 go play in the olympics. Or establish a group of solid college guys. I am tired of seeing professionals in the olympics (in any sport).
If we want to establish a world cup of hockey, fine. But thats not what the olympics are for.
Olympics should be for amatuers. End of story. Let the U-18 go play in the olympics. Or establish a group of solid college guys. I am tired of seeing professionals in the olympics (in any sport).
If we want to establish a world cup of hockey, fine. But thats not what the olympics are for.
The thing is, for almost every sport in the Olympics before the NHL and the NBA had their players in there, you were still watching essentially professionals. "Amateur" Figure Skating just means you're not on "Stars on Ice", all of these skiers, snowboarders, speed skaters, cross-country skiiers, lugers, this IS their pro level, they've got guys in the World Cup and whatever for their repsective sports and they get paid for it probably pretty handsomely. So to say the Olympics should be for amateurs, needs a bit more defining than that. People who don't get paid to train, no sponsorship deals, etc etc.
SpongeRob
02-20-2006, 03:13 PM
Yeah, as Ron said, this is their professional level, and they make serious endorsement money for it. This isn't like the NCAA where atheletes must be amateur and are not allowed to participate in compensated advertising or other "professional practices." In Austria, Raich, or anyone on that ski team, is the national marketing equivalent of Lebron James.
Yeah, as Ron said, this is their professional level, and they make serious endorsement money for it. This isn't like the NCAA where atheletes must be amateur and are not allowed to participate in compensated advertising or other "professional practices." In Austria, Raich, or anyone on that ski team, is the national marketing equivalent of Lebron James.
I actually just did a little googling and wikipediaing. It turns out the only Olympic sport that remains exclusive to amateurs is boxing, I suspect that's because the scoring and rules are significantly different in the Olympics. Amateurism was dropped in the 70's.
Muskieman
02-21-2006, 10:53 PM
Olympics should be for amatuers. End of story. Let the U-18 go play in the olympics. Or establish a group of solid college guys. I am tired of seeing professionals in the olympics (in any sport).
If we want to establish a world cup of hockey, fine. But thats not what the olympics are for.
Ditto here.
Todd '86
02-22-2006, 11:54 AM
Same goes for me. Except for keeping a close eye on Cole and Conroy, this feels like watching an NHL All-Star tournament.
The Olympics should be the *best* sport has to offer. I.E. i want to see the best skaters, the best skiers, the best lugers, the best biathletes, the best bobsledders AND the best hockey players.
If you only let amateurs in you also open the door for tons of 'loopholes' where a person would be a pro in all but actual paycheck. The best option for the Olympics is to truly be a showcase of the best athletes the world has to offer in every sport!
chuck
02-22-2006, 04:33 PM
I want to see the best TEAM. It doesn't seem that we're getting that. It also doesn't seem that too many Americans care about our current Olympic men's hockey team. We will never be able to relive the 1980 glory. That was about way more than hockey, but even as a hockey fan I feel that there is not a lot to be interested in. Even 4 years ago when the team did much better, I wasn't terribly interested in watching NHL'ers play what amounted to a bunch of exhibition games.
SpongeRob
02-22-2006, 04:36 PM
Andy, I agree. However, in hockey, the best hockey TEAM, not the best hockey PLAYERS, should be on the ice. As the USA men proved today, and the Canadians proved against the Finnish, these are not the best hockey TEAMs that could have been out there. I know this because I refuse to believe, as much as I love Erik Cole and Craig Conroy, that the USA team that failed to medal by losing today was the best TEAM that the United States could have put on the ice.
Andy, I agree. However, in hockey, the best hockey TEAM, not the best hockey PLAYERS, should be on the ice. As the USA men proved today, and the Canadians proved against the Finnish, these are not the best hockey TEAMs that could have been out there. I know this because I refuse to believe, as much as I love Erik Cole and Craig Conroy, that the USA team that failed to medal by losing today was the best TEAM that the United States could have put on the ice.
Then go back and read what I said at the start of this thread, that they should take more time off BEFORE the games start so they can practice as a unit.
coolhandtouc
02-22-2006, 05:06 PM
Andy, I agree. However, in hockey, the best hockey TEAM, not the best hockey PLAYERS, should be on the ice. As the USA men proved today, and the Canadians proved against the Finnish, these are not the best hockey TEAMs that could have been out there. I know this because I refuse to believe, as much as I love Erik Cole and Craig Conroy, that the USA team that failed to medal by losing today was the best TEAM that the United States could have put on the ice.
Rob, are you saying Cole and Conroy did not belong? I think cole was one of the better players for the US and I think Conroy played well.
chuck
02-22-2006, 10:26 PM
Then go back and read what I said at the start of this thread, that they should take more time off BEFORE the games start so they can practice as a unit.
It'll never happen. The NHL season is already too broken up by this break plus the all star break. That's the point of the original article. To have a good team you must have time together to become a cohesive unit. That takes too much time for the NHL to be able to accomodate. Therefore the only way to have time as a team is to go back to college and junior ranks.
Now that being said, it would kind of suck if we had lost say Weller and Gutherie to the Olympics this year. Or even worse if we lost a couple in a year in which we were contenders.
SpongeRob
02-22-2006, 10:41 PM
Rob, are you saying Cole and Conroy did not belong? I think cole was one of the better players for the US and I think Conroy played well.
Absolutely not! I fully agree with you, they were definitely two of the most solid players on the squad. The point was more related to what Chuck just said.
It'll never happen. The NHL season is already too broken up by this break plus the all star break. That's the point of the original article. To have a good team you must have time together to become a cohesive unit. That takes too much time for the NHL to be able to accomodate. Therefore the only way to have time as a team is to go back to college and junior ranks.
In order for a great TEAM to be put together, it would require something similar to what the women do (take a year off of college and play together for a whole season in order to be a real team). This would mean that we wouldn't be able to see Cole or Conroy in Olympics.
SpongeRob
02-22-2006, 10:42 PM
On another note....
Chuck, they skip the all star break during an Olympic year.
Goldie Knight
02-22-2006, 10:55 PM
Tuesday, February 21, 2006 9:35 PM
Here is my three cents worth of criticism as to why the United States did so poorly in today's game against Finland.....too many undisciplined penalties taken by some of the US team members. If all of us knew the damage being done by taking so many penalties, then why in the devil didn't those players know it and care enough to stop taking those pathetic punishments?
I thought Eric Cole and Craig Conroy exhibited the reasons why they were chosen to represent our country at the Olympics.....as always, they were awesome.
YOUR CLARKSON FRIENDS ARE PROUD OF YOU, ERIC AND CRAIG.:)
My 2 cents worth.....
1.Most of the younger gang and good skaters -- Cole, Conroy, Gomez, Gionta, Rolston, etc., played pretty well throughout the series, I thought.
2.The older guys & slower skaters were behind the play quite a bit and took many ridiculous penalties as a result. Big ice always hurts the Hatchers, Chelios', etc.
3. Goalie play was only fair - Mr. Miller might have made a difference.
4. Wasn't really impressed with Laviolette's coaching either.
5. Can't really complain much about a thrown together at the last minute team, as nearly all the other teams were populated with NHLer's as well.
6. Be really interesting to see the effect on the NHL post olympics -- for example, If Sweden goes deep, what will happen to the Wings coming down the stretch and into the playoffs???
chuck
02-23-2006, 09:18 AM
On another note....
Chuck, they skip the all star break during an Olympic year.
Shows how much I know and how interested I am in the NHL. My interest goes only far enough to occasionally see how former techers are doing.
5. Can't really complain much about a thrown together at the last minute team, as nearly all the other teams were populated with NHLer's as well.
That's a good point, but in my mind the discontent is not just that they didn't do well. For me it's difficult to rally behind or be interested in a group of proffessional all-stars playing exhibition games. Does anyone know how many Olympic teams are 100% NHLers? USA and Canada both are correct? Any others?
A lot of criticsm because of the losses is expected, but I was surprised at how well the team actually played.
I'm in the same boat as any as to the confusion of why some players were on this team. Team USA brings young players on to develop their international experience, but I think no matter what you need to bring your BEST players.
Back to the team though. They played VERY well. They outshot and outchances every team they played against with the exception of Sweden, where they were outshot 26-25. They dominated faceoffs winning up around 70-75% for the tournament. The downside is they lost EVERY game by a single goal. It just wasn't going in, and it leads me to think that more and more a short international tournament is dictated by how hot a goalie is more than anything. Aebischer and Gerber carried the Swiss team, and a slightly injured Brodeur killed the Canadians. DiPietro was good, but not outstanding, and that's what you need.
Lets not forget the Swiss, Slovakians and Canadians all went home yesterday too.
Does anyone know how many Olympic teams are 100% NHLers? USA and Canada both are correct? Any others?
There are some 154 active NHLers plus a few who have previously played in the NHL. I haven't done the math team by team, but the bottom 5 teams don't have a lot of NHLers, so the top seven are pretty close to 100%
Sweden is in and the Finns are leading the Russians 3-0 after 2, so it's looking like a Sweden/Finland final.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.