HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Kharlamov or Bure?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-02-2006, 09:13 AM
  #51
Paxton Fettel
Registered User
 
Paxton Fettel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by murray View Post
Thank you very much for bringing this up. What this tells me is that at age 37(and definitely past his peak), Hull was still able to tie for most goals in the tournament and garner more goals & points than every Russian player except for one.
you're forgetting that the Soviet Union sent its B squad to the 76 Canada Cup, and added Tretiak and Maltsev. And I'm not judging by the players, but the team consisted of 90% of the official B team with the B team coach.

now you're going to tell me that it's an excuse, but well, it's the same excuse that Canada has for not sending its best players to the World Championships.

Paxton Fettel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 09:32 AM
  #52
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paxton Fettel View Post
you're forgetting that the Soviet Union sent its B squad to the 76 Canada Cup, and added Tretiak and Maltsev. And I'm not judging by the players, but the team consisted of 90% of the official B team with the B team coach.

now you're going to tell me that it's an excuse, but well, it's the same excuse that Canada has for not sending its best players to the World Championships.
once again,it's not the same excuse.Please give that one up.What is Canada going to do?..................shut down the nhl playoffs to accomodate this tournament? The Soviets did'nt send their best players to the 76 cup not because they could'nt send them but because of God knows what reason and that's their business.

Don't compare the situations as they are'nt the same whatsoever.you've got to give that one up,it's tiring and false.

Nothing has changed in this regard either,the situation still exists.The only thing that has changed is that now Russia has to send teams over there under the same circumstances .Consequently....................their dominance dried up the minute they had to start doing it too.Confirming exactly what fans over here knew all the time anyway...........but what fans from there still won't accept,The Soviets dominance was part artifical.

Time to deal with that and move on.


Last edited by espo*: 10-02-2006 at 09:38 AM.
espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 09:36 AM
  #53
Paxton Fettel
Registered User
 
Paxton Fettel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,314
vCash: 500
it's your own truth.

Paxton Fettel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 09:47 AM
  #54
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
My own truth?

Are you saying Canada was not involved in the nhl play-offs when the world championships were held?

How is that MY own truth? Explain that to me please.

And are you saying Russia's dominance and fall from dominance at that tournament has not coincided with their players playing in the nhl and not as the Soviet Union? Just how will you explain this off? This is going to be great to read.

It's going to be funny at the very least.

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 10:11 AM
  #55
Paxton Fettel
Registered User
 
Paxton Fettel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,314
vCash: 500
All I'm saying is that your arguments and jokes, like yourself, are getting old.

Paxton Fettel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 10:17 AM
  #56
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paxton Fettel View Post
All I'm saying is that your arguments and jokes, like yourself, are getting old.
can't do it eh?


hopefully now you'll give it up.Because that's seriously old.....................and ******** to boot.

bad combination.

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 10:23 AM
  #57
Paxton Fettel
Registered User
 
Paxton Fettel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,314
vCash: 500
the bottom line is : some Soviet player I've never heard of, outscored both Hull and Espo, while playing 3 less games.

Paxton Fettel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 10:29 AM
  #58
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Fine,point taken.

but that does'nt explain your side of our disagreement.

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 01:32 PM
  #59
YMB29
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 422
vCash: 500
Quote:
That's how I see it. I also see Mikhailov as no better than 4th best center all-time.

But the question is, what did Kharlamov do that no one else could do? What did he accomplish that puts everyone else to shame?

I'm not denying his abilities, but if he is to be put along side Howe, Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux, there has to be something about him that stands out like a sore thumb as flat out superior.
You are just proving what I said before. And what is your opinion on Mikhailov based on?


Quote:
And are you saying Russia's dominance and fall from dominance at that tournament has not coincided with their players playing in the nhl and not as the Soviet Union? Just how will you explain this off?
It also coincided with the break up of their country and decline of the hockey system. Player dedication also declined significantly.


Quote:
Nothing has changed in this regard either,the situation still exists.The only thing that has changed is that now Russia has to send teams over there under the same circumstances .Consequently....................their dominance dried up the minute they had to start doing it too.Confirming exactly what fans over here knew all the time anyway...........but what fans from there still won't accept,The Soviets dominance was part artifical.
How many European players played in the NHL and were not able to play for their country in the tournament before the 90's?
As for Canada, the time they sent most of their best players the Soviets beat them easily anyway.

YMB29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 02:01 PM
  #60
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
"It also coincided with the break up of their country and decline of the hockey system. Player dedication also declined significantly".



yes it did, but the main overwhelming reason is that they are under the same constraints as everyone else now.The fall of the Soviet Union is now long gone but their results are still miles from what they used to be.It's comforting to think there are political reasons for their decline at that tournament i suppose but the biggest reason is the fact they can't have all their best players playing under the old systen they used to have.It's undeniable

There is still plenty of Russian talent that you would be able to put them together today in the same system as the old Soviets and throw them against the left-over nhl guys from the play-offs and they'd still clean up.

They have to put together teams under the same circumstances as everyone else now and it shows.Their current state as a national hockey organization may be the reason it has been so long since they've won that tournament but not why they can't win it year after year like in the past.

Is that so wrong to admit?

We said for years in Canada constantly...."if they could'nt do that then we'd see just how dominant they are"

And time has proven we were correct.

They're still great players,i've never said they were'nt. It's just that other countries could have been just as good in that tournament under the same circumstances.I know we could have without question.

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 02:08 PM
  #61
Polska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Poland
Posts: 411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
Bure was at his best when Lemieux was still ruling the roost and then Jagr rose to ascendence............he was not the most dangerous offensive player in the game.

Can't use that as an argument over Kharlamov.
I'd argue his prime was when he played with Florida. He was much more polished and was playing in the clutch-and-grab/trap era with more consistent goaltending and still dominating, nearly matching his goal totals from 92/93 and 93/94.

If you watch some of the games or highlights from his time in Florida you'd see him doing things I've never seen Kharlamov do, and I doubt he could've duplicated. Bure was so explosive and controlled, he was a refined scoring machine.

Polska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 02:17 PM
  #62
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polska View Post
I'd argue his prime was when he played with Florida. He was much more polished and was playing in the clutch-and-grab/trap era with more consistent goaltending and still dominating, nearly matching his goal totals from 92/93 and 93/94.

If you watch some of the games or highlights from his time in Florida you'd see him doing things I've never seen Kharlamov do, and I doubt he could've duplicated. Bure was so explosive and controlled, he was a refined scoring machine.
No question he was. Bure was a goal scoring machine...big shot,acceleration second to no-one that's ever played the game,stickhandling virtuoso and a guy who smelled blood on goal scoring opportunites and knew what to do with them.I can't honestly compare him to Kharlamov because he did'nt play many games in his prime here that i could watch. Bure was not however the best OFFENSIVE player in the league in any year he played here that i can re-call. Jagr and Mario were both more dangerous all around in his time here.

I'm not qualified to make a call betwen Kharlamov and Bure,i doubt any North american is.


Only Russian/some European posters would have the real insight on that debate IMO. Some of them have had the pleasure of watching both those guys in their best days on a regular basis.

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 05:12 PM
  #63
YMB29
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 422
vCash: 500
You are making it seem that only the Soviets could send all of their best players to the World Championships. This is not true, European countries before the 90's could. Canada not sending their best because of the NHL is their own fault.
As for Russia's failure to win, stop overstating the reason that suits you as a Canadian fan. A team could have the best players, but if they are not organized, they will always lose. This is especially true for Russia since Soviet/Russian hockey style is based on team work. So don't say that it is all fair now. Has hockey in any other nation gone through what Russian hockey has? What country had such problems with its hockey system and with player dedication (look at how many times the best Russian players refused to play since 1990)?

YMB29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 07:30 PM
  #64
Crosbyfan
Registered User
 
Crosbyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 8,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paxton Fettel View Post
the bottom line is : some Soviet player I've never heard of, outscored both Hull and Espo, while playing 3 less games.
Good point, because although Hull and Espo were clearly past their prime, they were not nearly as past it as Gordie Howe at 46, when he scored 7 points in 6 games and one period, to Kharmalov's 8 points in 8 games.

Soviet National team > WHA allstars

Kharmalov peak = Howe well past prime and closer to 50 than 40

Crosbyfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 08:23 PM
  #65
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YMB29 View Post
You are making it seem that only the Soviets could send all of their best players to the World Championships. This is not true, European countries before the 90's could. Canada not sending their best because of the NHL is their own fault.
As for Russia's failure to win, stop overstating the reason that suits you as a Canadian fan. A team could have the best players, but if they are not organized, they will always lose. This is especially true for Russia since Soviet/Russian hockey style is based on team work. So don't say that it is all fair now. Has hockey in any other nation gone through what Russian hockey has? What country had such problems with its hockey system and with player dedication (look at how many times the best Russian players refused to play since 1990)?
Say whatever you want to yourself as long as and as often as you have to in order to make it real to yourself.


Nothings a lie..............................as long as you believe it to be true.

You're living proof.

i do it myself,i just get up in the morning and tell myself i've got it as good as anyone in the world.Works for me.

You talk about how anyone can expect to play as well when they are not organized,geez-no kidding!! isn't that what i've been saying all this time? The Soviet teams were just machines that played as a collective unit all the time and then went in to do battle against a rag-tag group of put together whatever was available nhl'ers. Why the sour mood?.........you agree with what i say.Now it's gone and you compete on the same level as anyone else and the results are gone with it.What's the mystery? Sure you could be just as dominant with the old system,we all know that.The point is you can't be dominant without it and never could.

god it's frustrating,even when you point out the advantages you had you end up turning them around in your mind to a place where you think things are as you want them to be.

Beyond stubborn. Never seen anything like it.


Last edited by espo*: 10-02-2006 at 09:00 PM.
espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2006, 08:50 PM
  #66
YMB29
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 422
vCash: 500
I tell you the same thing.

YMB29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 02:56 AM
  #67
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
They're still great players,i've never said they were'nt. It's just that other countries could have been just as good in that tournament under the same circumstances.I know we could have without question.
Wrong. For the majority of the 70's (Kharlamov's era) most countries DID send their best to the WC. It's not like every country sent amateurs and the Soviets were the only ones using professionals.

In those days the World Championships were, essentially, the Canada Cup minus team Canada.
It, obviously, wasn't at the level of the CC without Canada - but nothing to scoff at either considering every other team sent their best.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 03:34 AM
  #68
Marcus-74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paxton Fettel View Post
you're forgetting that the Soviet Union sent its B squad to the 76 Canada Cup, and added Tretiak and Maltsev. And I'm not judging by the players, but the team consisted of 90% of the official B team with the B team coach.

now you're going to tell me that it's an excuse, but well, it's the same excuse that Canada has for not sending its best players to the World Championships.
Could you, like, exaggerate a little more?

Though players like Balderis, Kapustin and Zhluktov were still young and inexperienced at that level, you can hardly call them players of the B team!

And what about Vasiliev (easily their best defenseman), Lutchenko, Gusev and Vikulov who were all regulars on the national team and who played in the tournament? And Boris Alexandrov who had impressed also North Americans during the Super Series ´75-76. He didn´t have a very long career at the top but certainly belonged there in ´76.

Without having the heart and soul of the team (namely the top line), and missing Yakushev and Shadrin too, the Soviets were clearly weakened. But if you were not (intentionally) exaggerating (or joking) with that "90 %", well, you don´t know anything about the Soviet hockey of the ´70s.


Last edited by Marcus-74: 10-03-2006 at 06:22 AM.
Marcus-74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 05:37 AM
  #69
XploD
Registered User
 
XploD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
once again,it's not the same excuse.Please give that one up.What is Canada going to do?..................shut down the nhl playoffs to accomodate this tournament?
Just as they are shutting down the NHL season for the Olympics. Yeah that would've been an option.

I just don't like your attitude in this matter. You're making it sound that the Soviets are the nasty villains because they didn't send their best to the '76 Cup and you should count that win as much as any other win but when Canada didn't send their best to the WC it's okay because they had better things to do, but then you're basically saying that the Soviets shouldn't count the WC wins. At least the Soviets stepped up to the challenge.

XploD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 05:51 AM
  #70
Wisent
Registered User
 
Wisent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Mannheim
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
"It also coincided with the break up of their country and decline of the hockey system. Player dedication also declined significantly".



yes it did, but the main overwhelming reason is that they are under the same constraints as everyone else now.The fall of the Soviet Union is now long gone but their results are still miles from what they used to be.It's comforting to think there are political reasons for their decline at that tournament i suppose but the biggest reason is the fact they can't have all their best players playing under the old systen they used to have.It's undeniable

There is still plenty of Russian talent that you would be able to put them together today in the same system as the old Soviets and throw them against the left-over nhl guys from the play-offs and they'd still clean up.

They have to put together teams under the same circumstances as everyone else now and it shows.Their current state as a national hockey organization may be the reason it has been so long since they've won that tournament but not why they can't win it year after year like in the past.

Is that so wrong to admit?

We said for years in Canada constantly...."if they could'nt do that then we'd see just how dominant they are"

And time has proven we were correct.

They're still great players,i've never said they were'nt. It's just that other countries could have been just as good in that tournament under the same circumstances.I know we could have without question.
To be fair, I think that many nations are having a hard time now internationally. And that has more to do that hockey changed drastically in that time. Now you only need to have a few very well trained and tactically schooled athletes. They will grind their way through. Look at Germany for example. Under Zach they were ultra defensive and successful, the minute he goes they get demoted to the B-Pool (tried to plqay offense, it didn`t really work). Even the great teams are not heads and shoulders above everyone else right now, there us always a Switzerland or Belarus that can annoy the presumed favourite.

Also, the Soviets used to have an eight hour workout everyday. I doubt that now that the army training system is gone that athletes let them do that to themselves. The east nations definately had the training advantage over nearly everyone these days.

Wisent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 07:10 AM
  #71
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
Wrong. For the majority of the 70's (Kharlamov's era) most countries DID send their best to the WC. It's not like every country sent amateurs and the Soviets were the only ones using professionals.

In those days the World Championships were, essentially, the Canada Cup minus team Canada.
It, obviously, wasn't at the level of the CC without Canada - but nothing to scoff at either considering every other team sent their best.
We've already been through this one.Yes,most countries did but Canada did'nt and they along with the Czechs were your only real competition for most of the big red machines heyday and Canada was your toughest challenge.

I'm not saying the world championships were anything to scoff at.It was/is a good tournament that i enjoy watching but it is very hard to listen to anyone who trys to pawn off Russia's dominance in the past at that thing as anything other then what it was.I'm saying Russia's dominance at it was due to the factors i mentioned in the previous posts and that is unquestionably true no matter how many want to deny it.I've got posters refusing to accept reality and that's just silly. it's not political problems why they don't win year after year there anymore

The facts are there, people can say it's because of this or that but everyone really knows why and that's because they send teams over there under the same circumstances as everyone else now.Russia will win the world's again some day,they just will never win that thing in such dominant fashion like that again as long as they compete on the same footing as everyone else.unless it goes back to the way it used to be they are going to be just one of the big teams trying to win that thing here and there.

Why not just admit it?

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 07:26 AM
  #72
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XploD View Post
Just as they are shutting down the NHL season for the Olympics. Yeah that would've been an option.

I just don't like your attitude in this matter. You're making it sound that the Soviets are the nasty villains because they didn't send their best to the '76 Cup and you should count that win as much as any other win but when Canada didn't send their best to the WC it's okay because they had better things to do, but then you're basically saying that the Soviets shouldn't count the WC wins. At least the Soviets stepped up to the challenge.
Once every four years the owners can live with XPLO,but not every year.N.h.l hockey is a business,the owners are in to it to make money,they can't shut the league down every year,too much of a hassle. Why did'nt the I.O.C have the worlds when the season was done then maybe?

As for 76 i don't care,Maybe you are right,maybe they all had the flu.what do i know? sure,the Soviets stepped up to the challenge(aside from 76) and i respect them for that in the Canada cups (i would also respect them if they considered them legitimate when they lost not only when they won,but that's for another debate) Canada did'nt have the chance to step up to the challenge with the worlds..........the I.O.C made sure of that with the timing of the tournament. I don't like your attitude in this matter.................saying we would not step up to the challenge.We did step up to the challenge with what we had available every year,i remember the thanks we used to get for it to.It was like waking up in Kompala heaven.


The worlds are the worlds,what can you do? it's a nice tournament that i always watch and enjoy.This "meeting the challenge " stuff is neither here nor there for me. What is sticking in my craw is when some folks just won't give it up and call it what it was and is concerning Russia's performance over there.

Russia still meets the challenge at that tournament every year..................they just don't win it all that much anymore.Who can win that thing year after year the way teams have to be put together?(the way Canada has always had to put them together for it in the modern era) No-one can.

I know it sucks that the good old days are gone but no-one has to lie about them.That won't bring them back.

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 12:13 PM
  #73
XploD
Registered User
 
XploD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
I don't like your attitude in this matter.................saying we would not step up to the challenge.We did step up to the challenge with what we had available every year,i remember the thanks we used to get for it to.It was like waking up in Kompala heaven.
By stepping up to the challenge I mean sending your best to compete with the best. I've said before that I don't blame Canada for not sending their best to the Worlds but I hate when canadians then goes on to blame the Soviets for not sending their best to the '76 Canada Cup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
I know it sucks that the good old days are gone but no-one has to lie about them.That won't bring them back.
Who's lied?

XploD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 12:20 PM
  #74
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
We've already been through this one.Yes,most countries did but Canada did'nt and they along with the Czechs were your only real competition for most of the big red machines heyday and Canada was your toughest challenge.

I'm not saying the world championships were anything to scoff at.It was/is a good tournament that i enjoy watching but it is very hard to listen to anyone who trys to pawn off Russia's dominance in the past at that thing as anything other then what it was.I'm saying Russia's dominance at it was due to the factors i mentioned in the previous posts and that is unquestionably true no matter how many want to deny it.I've got posters refusing to accept reality and that's just silly. it's not political problems why they don't win year after year there anymore

The facts are there, people can say it's because of this or that but everyone really knows why and that's because they send teams over there under the same circumstances as everyone else now.Russia will win the world's again some day,they just will never win that thing in such dominant fashion like that again as long as they compete on the same footing as everyone else.unless it goes back to the way it used to be they are going to be just one of the big teams trying to win that thing here and there.

Why not just admit it?

What are you talking about? - because you're starting to contradict yourself now.

First you state "other countries could have been just as good in the WC under the same circumstances", then, above, agree with me that (apart from Canada) other teams DID send their best. What exact countries were you talking about and how were they shorthanded? And don't say the USA, b/c they had no chance at being as good as the Soviets back then. Unless Canada was more than one country in the 70's your post makes no sense.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops View Post
Russia will win the world's again some day,they just will never win that thing in such dominant fashion like that again as long as they compete on the same footing as everyone else.
If by 'everyone else' you mean Canada....I agree. However, Canada was the only team at a disadvantage. How were the Soviets given an advantage over everyone else they played? Every team benefited from Canada not being there. You make it sound as if the Soviets received some sort of preferential treatment.

Either way, you can't compare the today's WC with those of the 70's because global hockey has changed drastically. Nobody sends their "A" team to the WC and the rest of the world has caught up with the Russians, Canadians and Czechs.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2006, 01:32 PM
  #75
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
What are you talking about? - because you're starting to contradict yourself now.

First you state "other countries could have been just as good in the WC under the same circumstances", then, above, agree with me that (apart from Canada) other teams DID send their best. What exact countries were you talking about and how were they shorthanded? And don't say the USA, b/c they had no chance at being as good as the Soviets back then. Unless Canada was more than one country in the 70's your post makes no sense.

other teams(mistake is in teamS) is Canada yes,is that what you're stretching really far for? I'll give you this one,not that it matters much does it? by Sweden having their best team there at that time does it really matter? Does teams like sweden and finland having their best teams there at the time change anything?


If by 'everyone else' you mean Canada....I agree. However, Canada was the only team at a disadvantage. How were the Soviets given an advantage over everyone else they played? Every team benefited from Canada not being there. You make it
sound as if the Soviets received some sort of preferential treatment.

Excellent.Not preferential treatment no.........but a lopsided competition without Canada involved at their best? of course.And without Canada there to keep the Soviets honest.............who was gonna take them out? Finland? Did they(Soviets) benefit from not having Canada there with their best team over other teams?...........sure,look at the pile of Golds they won.You can strike probably half of them out of the books for the Soviets if that was the case.It's not like Germany was going to be winning because Canada was'nt there.
.
Either way, you can't compare the today's WC with those of the 70's because global hockey has changed drastically. Nobody sends their "A" team to the WC and the rest of the world has caught up with the Russians, Canadians and Czechs.
Yes and No. The global hockey world has indeed changed dramatically.No team can send their best team there anymore (the Soviets would really clean up now eh?) The important thing is that Russia can't send their best teams anymore and in that sense the W.C. as a tournament is comparable to yesterdays when you survey Russia's results since the fall of the Soviet union.Russia still has great top end talent,you take all their best players and get them under the old Soviet system and they would still dominate that tourney today against a bunch or put-togethers from the n.h.l playoffs from each country. But when they can't...........you get what you have now and what you would have had in 1977 if your players were all playing over here.That's very comparable.

Are you saying this is just MY truth? That's what some posters say.......what do you say?

If that is just my truth,then why has Russia's dominance completely ended since the fall of the Soviet Union? If you answer with economics or politics i'm just going to move on and let your fantasy stand,you don't even have to waste your typing time responding.I will assume reality is just something you cannot deal with when it comes to this matter.

Why would any of this bother any fan from there? if it was the other way around i could deal with it. It's not like you are no longer capable anymore of being the top team from time to time,you just have to go out there and do it.

but don't tell me there is any other reason other then you are now under the same constraints as everyone else why you can't be the dominant team over there even to this day.You picked up gold after gold over there in those days because of the nature of international hockey at that given time. You had great teams,but your Gold results are grossly inflated due to the factors we have talked about.

everyone knows this,well,almost everyone.

Boy this cut and paste thing does'nt work well for me..................look at how this all came out!!Some of my answer is is the qoute..some of it down below.
Hope you can splice it all together!!

espo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:31 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.