View Single Post
02-14-2013, 05:18 PM
Registered User
JackSlater's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 6,945
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Cory Trevor View Post
Maybe something like a two game series with a third game if necessary. The only problem is the argument extends itself, well 2 games?? why not 3!!! why not 5!!! why not the same length of an NHL playoff series. One single game allows for anything to happen and frankly, they are usually more exciting. The World Cup Final, A game 7, the Superbowl.
I agree that it's not feasible, and I never expect it to actually happen. You're probably right that it's more exciting in the current format, but I am mainly talking about the search for the best team.

Originally Posted by Cory Trevor View Post
I get where you are coming from but maybe that last Gold Medal game was a bad example. Both of those teams were two different styles with the U.S. maybe not being as talented but playing workman like and Canada allowing their natural abilities takeover. Each team performed to their strengths however the better team won. Had the U.S. done like you said, would they be considered deserving because they worked just as hard while being slightly not as talented?
Of course they would be a deserving winner in that scenario. As long as you didn't cheat, the winner is deserving of the win. That does not mean the winning team is necessarily the best team though. Tournaments are mainly the search for a winner, not the search for the best team.

Originally Posted by hitmen19 View Post
like 2006? does that mean you're going to be throwing games again to play lessor talented teams? There will always be an asterik with that win, no matter what you say. I don't consider that a legitimate win.
Embarrassing for Sweden, but still a legitimate win.

JackSlater is offline