Archive for February 28th, 2010
Canada-USA: The Sequel
Guy in the black tee = Turncoat and a traitor
The Molson is on ice and the onion dip is ready. Now it’s time for some thoughts on the game.
1. Does what happened a week ago matter?
Not unless the Canadians and Americans have a real lack of understanding on what a gold medal game is. Forget about revenge or payback for what happened in Salt Lake or any of that other manufactured garbage; the motivation for Canada (and the United States) is simple. Win and you get a gold medal. The X-factor in this comes from the pressure. Despite going undefeated to this point and being the No. 1 seed come elimination time, the U.S. has little pressure when compared to Canada. No one expected them to be here.
2. Can you get to Ryan Miller?
Yes. With traffic. And more traffic. Canada has enough skill on the blue-line to get the puck on net from the point. Two of the three goals against Slovakia happened using that formula. The Canadians are the bigger team. They’ll have to work the puck back, set up some screens in front, and hope they can get some pucks through the mish-mash of players clogging up the middle. One thing is for certain, the U.S doesn’t have any questions in goal.
3. Has anyone seen Sidney Crosby?
The last two games, the best player in the world hasn’t been the best player in the world. He’s been a non-factor of late, leading to questions of an injury or possibly a lack of chemistry with Jerome Iginla on the side. Canada’s depth has covered his absence and provided a secondary threat akin to what Dale Hawerchuk* did for Canada in 1987, but can guys like Jonathan Toews and Ryan Getzlaf keep it up for another game? That has to be the biggest question up front for Canada today.
4. True or false: Steve Yzerman cringes every time Patrice Bergeron is on the ice?
True. Unless Chris Pronger is out there. Then he just hides under the ledge in the press box suite and prays nothing bad happens for the duration of their shift. Yzerman then ignores the regular text from Gretzky, who jokes that Bertuzzi wasn’t this bad in Turin.
5. What does a win mean for each side?
For the U.S., a victory puts them as the clear world power heading into future tournaments of this magnitude. It would be a benchmark achievement for a program that has nothing but ups and downs over the years. Think about it for a second: They would have beaten a favoured Canadian team twice on Canadian soil. That cannot be ignored (if it happens). Even if they lose, the Americans have made their mark at these Olympics, I think. On the flip side, a Canada win would turn this country upside-down tonight and give the country the usual sense of superiority we have in matters of sticks and pucks. Canada was expected to win, and Canada won. In a bigger Olympic picture sense, while the U.S will walk away from Vancouver with the most medals won in a Winter Games, a Canada win would put an exclamation point on its own medal haul. They didn’t purchase the podium, but leading the gold medal count and having the men’s hockey title still gets you a table at that fancy new restaurant.
*VANOC Wrap Jam
