Where would you say each major national team is in cyclical terms.
View Single Post
12-12-2012, 05:35 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Originally Posted by
It may not be, but it's not suffering from participation in those states. Minnesota high school hockey is not popular? We have more than enough kids, with more than effort passion for the sport. It's a very popular sport from Minnesota to New England. We have plenty of amazing athletes playing hockey, one of some of the best skaters, the biggest hitters, athletically we have no problem in this sport. That's why our teams are consistently playing a style based on skating, speed and not based on skill. The best athletes argument fails to pass the smell test. We are not suffering from unathletic hockey players, we are lacking in skilled hockey players. Skills can be taught. They are taught in Sweden where sports such as soccer, handball, skiing and other sports are also popular. We have more kids playing hockey than almost any other country aside from Canada. I doubt that there is any skew that unathletic and untalented kids pick hockey for some reason. The same excuse is heard in soccer and the same reason is true there as in hockey. Skill can be taught and skill must be taught.
The US is dong just fine and anyone who takes a minute to look at the numbers will quickly see it. I agree that the US does not have a lot of the big name flashy forwards right now, but their depth is only exceeded by Canada. For example look at the top 50 scorers from the NHL last season. 25 were from Canada, 8 were American, 5 Swedes, 4 Russians, 3 Czechs and 2 Finns. Sure the Americans aren't as well represented in say the top 10 scorers right now, but a lot of that is just the chance of the cycle. Top to bottom the US are solidly number 2, by a fair margin.
View Public Profile
Mr Kanadensisk's albums
Find More Posts by Mr Kanadensisk