View Single Post
Old
01-09-2013, 10:30 AM
  #76
doakacola*
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daver View Post
You would be more credible if you did not generalize a whole country.

This debate should start and end with what happened on the ice but if you want to play the "what if" game....

The 04 US team was your A team. There were no players that were not eligible to play because of commitments to their club team. The fact that a few players who developed into better NHL players is irrelevant. If you want to get into the "what if" game, there are plenty of other versions of Team Canada that would have been better than the 04 US team based simply on the fact that players who did not play were "too good" for the team, not because they were borderline like the four you mentioned were missing from the 04 team.
Canadians do it relentlessly when they lose. You just can't accept there are other
"what if " circumstances. In fact you lost to the US team that had at least 5-6
2nd teamers.

So lets hear your 2004 versions.

Its laughable that you say the difference between Buff and Likens or Pavelski, Callahan, and Backes over Moore, Wiener, Dowell or Fritsch were borderline. The difference was not borderline. USA Hockey picked the wrong players, period.

doakacola* is offline   Reply With Quote