All indications sound like Yzerman, with I assume Holland. They'd incorporate someone from the east, but I'd be surprised if it's Gainey. I'd go after whoever is the best regarded pro scout in the conference.
Why Holland? He has zero experience putting together a team without a majority of Swedes and Russians.
For all of you that think selecting team Canada is easy, you are simply, wrong. You think chosing 23 players out of like 75 supremely talented and worthy players is easy? You have to have the write mix, experience and youth on the team. You need to have the players that are willing to give it their all on the ice. Try it for fun, it is a lot harder than it looks.
I find it funny how much criticism the Nagano team got. It was ironically the best performing team of the 3. The 02 gold medal was a total fluke, and the 06 team was awful. The Nagano team was the best team in the tournament, but got beat by Hasek in the semis. Canada may have won gold in 02, but without the miracle of miracles with Belerus making the semis Canada finishes a disapointing 4th.
Hey whats up it's me Moon Man, just stopping by to say I think Bob's attention is better served elsewhere. No need to crowd his plate with creating a depth chart for the entire league and wasting precious head space on a national roster. Let some one else carry the burden and leave Bob to all matters Montreal.
I find it funny how much criticism the Nagano team got. It was ironically the best performing team of the 3. The 02 gold medal was a total fluke, and the 06 team was awful. The Nagano team was the best team in the tournament, but got beat by Hasek in the semis. Canada may have won gold in 02, but without the miracle of miracles with Belerus making the semis Canada finishes a disapointing 4th.
I never really critisized the Nagano team, however I absolutely hated the Turin team. Once the roster was annouced I was pretty livid at the horrendous picks.
For all of you that think selecting team Canada is easy, you are simply, wrong. You think chosing 23 players out of like 75 supremely talented and worthy players is easy? You have to have the write mix, experience and youth on the team. You need to have the players that are willing to give it their all on the ice. Try it for fun, it is a lot harder than it looks.
It is easy.
Sure you have an abundance of players but that's not what I qualify ''a hard job''.
It is easy.
Sure you have an abundance of players but that's not what I qualify ''a hard job''.
Most of the players are givens too. So really the only questions are players filling out the bottom two lines and the bottom defensive pairing.
Plus watching tournaments leading up the the Olympics helps tremendously. Judging by the World Championships, the Canadian GM certainly has to put Nash with Getzlaf and Heatley. Things like this make the decision process much easier.
Plus remember the times Canada loses and wins tournaments. 1998 - Nagano, international ice, same with 2006 in Italy. 2002 in Salt Lake and the World Cup in 2004, North American ice. 2010 is played on NA ice in Vancouver. So less things to think about then.
Ok, cool. Maybe it's not so difficult. Now leaving all the rest aside, is that order determined by your personal preference alone, or is there some more complicated set of social parameters involved in the selection?
You have some degree of flexibility, but there are rules. Gentlemen should generally refrain from drinking anything which is made up of tropical fruit juices or that is served in a coconut.
In terms of the "order", since one does not wish to reek of lager before noon the medicinal application of a mimosa or a bloody mary for breakfast or brunch are almost demanded by decent society.
In the afternoon when one generally watches sporting events (in a pub or perhaps in your drawing room) the rules are far more relaxed and the variety of drinks one may partake of is expanded. In the evening, more formal and traditional concoctions are advisable (i.e. Martini or Manhattan etc...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien
And genuine curiosity here about that last comment, why does one have to worry when ordering a Benderitter or Kashenka (whatever they are) in the presence of the fairer sex?
You don't order a Benderitter or a Kasenka in the presence of the fairer sex, you order them for the fairer sex. The Benderitter and the Kasenka, not unlike wine spritzers, are almost exclusively consumed by ladies (the odd cad may imbibe them as well, generally graduates of Queen's University or some other substandard institution).
I find it funny how much criticism the Nagano team got. It was ironically the best performing team of the 3. The 02 gold medal was a total fluke, and the 06 team was awful. The Nagano team was the best team in the tournament, but got beat by Hasek in the semis. Canada may have won gold in 02, but without the miracle of miracles with Belerus making the semis Canada finishes a disapointing 4th.
Nope.
The '98 team did have arguably the best d-corps ever assembled (the weak-point was Desjardins in his prime) but up front they were lacking, even with the likes of Gretz and Lindros (Sakic's groin ) there were just too many role players, not enough finish. And Crawford
'02 was not a fluke, come out of it. They handily defeated a pretty gritty Finnish team (Hurme left everything out there) and would have looked far more up to task against the Swedes than in the opener, ultimately defeating them. If Salo couldn't keep his cool against the Belarussians, what reason is there to think he could cope with a rejuvenated Canadian squad? Then they kicked the **** out of the Americans. Fluke? No sir.
06 was a joke though.
Anyway, all-in-all, Hockey Canada should look to fresher faces.
The '98 team did have arguably the best d-corps ever assembled (the weak-point was Desjardins in his prime) but up front they were lacking, even with the likes of Gretz and Lindros (Sakic's groin ) there were just too many role players, not enough finish. And Crawford
'02 was not a fluke, come out of it. They handily defeated a pretty gritty Finnish team (Hurme left everything out there) and would have looked far more up to task against the Swedes than in the opener, ultimately defeating them. If Salo couldn't keep his cool against the Belarussians, what reason is there to think he could cope with a rejuvenated Canadian squad? Then they kicked the **** out of the Americans. Fluke? No sir.
06 was a joke though.
Anyway, all-in-all, Hockey Canada should look to fresher faces.
Also remember in 1998 Kariya was a force and could not play because of that cheap shot by Gary Suter.
2002 was not a fluke, I agree. A great combination of veterans and young players (Iginla's coming out party). They had a poor showing against Sweden and even Germany. When Wayne came out and spoke to the media about how everyone wanted Canada to lose it had a serious effect, no one had ever seen Wayne like that and players began to play like they could.
2006 was just pathetic. Chemistry was ignored and it was thought if you can just put the best group of Canadians together they would win easily, and wow were they proven wrong. It's a good lesson to learn though for trying to win in 2010 at home.
You have some degree of flexibility, but there are rules. Gentlemen should generally refrain from drinking anything which is made up of tropical fruit juices or that is served in a coconut.
In terms of the "order", since one does not wish to reek of lager before noon the medicinal application of a mimosa or a bloody mary for breakfast or brunch are almost demanded by decent society.
In the afternoon when one generally watches sporting events (in a pub or perhaps in your drawing room) the rules are far more relaxed and the variety of drinks one may partake of is expanded. In the evening, more formal and traditional concoctions are advisable (i.e. Martini or Manhattan etc...)
You don't order a Benderitter or a Kasenka in the presence of the fairer sex, you order them for the fairer sex. The Benderitter and the Kasenka, not unlike wine spritzers, are almost exclusively consumed by ladies (the odd cad may imbibe them as well, generally graduates of Queen's University or some other substandard institution).
I feel enlightened. I'm pretty sure I'll never remember all that (or ever be in a situation where remembering it might matter), but hf4 never fails to impress upon me how the world is a far more complex place than I ever quite manage to realize.
Hopefully I can remember to order a Benderitter and a Ka(h)senka sometime, just to test the tolerance of society... I always thought that wine was best served spritzed. Still pretty awful, but better spritzed than not. Perhaps the ladies and the Queens's are on to something...
I feel enlightened. I'm pretty sure I'll never remember all that (or ever be in a situation where remembering it might matter), but hf4 never fails to impress upon me how the world is a far more complex place than I ever quite manage to realize.
Hopefully I can remember to order a Benderitter and a Ka(h)senka sometime, just to test the tolerance of society... I always thought that wine was best served spritzed. Still pretty awful, but better spritzed than not. Perhaps the ladies and the Queens's are on to something...
'02 was not a fluke, come out of it. They handily defeated a pretty gritty Finnish team (Hurme left everything out there) and would have looked far more up to task against the Swedes than in the opener, ultimately defeating them. If Salo couldn't keep his cool against the Belarussians, what reason is there to think he could cope with a rejuvenated Canadian squad? Then they kicked the **** out of the Americans. Fluke? No sir.
06 was a joke though.
Anyway, all-in-all, Hockey Canada should look to fresher faces.
The Americans were totally spent. That game against Russia took a toll on them mentally and physically, and a knee on knee from Kasperitis to Tkachuk did not help matters at all. Finland was not a good team. In no way, shape or form were they god. They were without arguably their best player in Koivu and had not impressed all tournament. Yes, Hurme left it all out their, but up until that game, canada was embarassed by the Swedes, tied a lacklustre Czech team and squeaked by the Germans. Assuming they beat Sweden, they would have at least had to play somebody and use up energy. USA/Russia was a very physical game that took its toll. Canada would not have won gold if not for Belarus defeating Sweden.
The Americans were totally spent. That game against Russia took a toll on them mentally and physically, and a knee on knee from Kasperitis to Tkachuk did not help matters at all. Finland was not a good team. In no way, shape or form were they god. They were without arguably their best player in Koivu and had not impressed all tournament. Yes, Hurme left it all out their, but up until that game, canada was embarassed by the Swedes, tied a lacklustre Czech team and squeaked by the Germans. Assuming they beat Sweden, they would have at least had to play somebody and use up energy. USA/Russia was a very physical game that took its toll. Canada would not have won gold if not for Belarus defeating Sweden.
Tell that to the Loonie put at the centre ice circle
I love Gainey, but we have to put this team together in a year. It'll take Bob at least five years + 1 for a lockout to ake a championship team! Seriously, Kenny Holland is really good but he had Scotty next to him.
) there were just too many role players, not enough finish. And Crawford 
