Is this the year the US realize that their system simply DOES NOT work

An embarassing loss to Germany of all teams and on the verge of losing badly to the Canadians and being basically embarassed out of the tournament. Is this finally going to be enough for the American brass to change their format for selecting the team???

They are looking horrible against Canada and not much better against a German team that everyone would say that they should have beat.

Their forwards can't put the puck in the net, their defense is getting burned and their goalie is letting in softies. Maybe a week long selection camp will give them a better idea of what they have to choose from, or at least show what guys mesh together a little better. The current system is obviously NOT working.

dont they have a National development team? or is that U18 only?

the selection system is not what's at fault here. Their kids haven't been tought solid tactical hockey. They have skills galore. they just can't figure out how to play a solid 2-way game. They haven't for years.

the selection system is not what's at fault here. Their kids haven't been tought solid tactical hockey. They have skills galore. they just can't figure out how to play a solid 2-way game. They haven't for years.

Except that time they got it together and won gold in Grand Forks. I'm all in favour of the week long seletion process, these kids need to gel, they're all over the place.

Except that time they got it together and won gold in Grand Forks. I'm all in favour of the week long seletion process, these kids need to gel, they're all over the place.
Sidney Crosby and company were actually Americans? Interesting.

Except that time they got it together and won gold in Grand Forks. I'm all in favour of the week long seletion process, these kids need to gel, they're all over the place.

Canada won Gold in Grand Forks.

US won in Helsinki (Stand corrected by RR), and they still werent playing good 2 way hockey.

Canada won Gold in Grand Forks.

US won in Halifax, and they still werent playing good 2 way hockey.

U.S. won in Helsinki, and yes they played solid two-way hockey in that tournament. As for the topic of this thread, I doubt the selection process changes as long as TPTB remain at USA Hockey and the USNTDP is the "official" proving ground for the top American talent. At this point the two go hand in hand, and IMO that IS a problem.

U.S. won in Helsinki, and yes they played solid two-way hockey in that tournament.

oops, my bad. but no they didn't

I keep forgeting the Russians winning in halifax. Even when i saw the game this weekend on ESPNCC i forgot it was the gold medal game.

Most American boys do not play hockey. Americans watch more Bass Fishing and Bowling on TV than they do hockey. Why do people feel that they should dominate this sport that the country doesnt care about? Hell, the tournament can only be seen on American TV by people who have Center Ice and can be home at strange hours. I believe that is somewhere around 20 people.

While during the last 5 years you have seen an increase in participation of young Americans playing hockey, it is still not a hotbed for developing hockey players.

oops, my bad. but no they didn't

I keep forgeting the Russians winning in halifax. Even when i saw the game this weekend on ESPNCC i forgot it was the gold medal game.

You're right, Montoya had ZERO help that tournament.

Most American boys do not play hockey. Americans watch more Bass Fishing and Bowling on TV than they do hockey. Why do people feel that they should dominate this sport that the country doesnt care about? Hell, the tournament can only be seen on American TV by people who have Center Ice and can be home at strange hours. I believe that is somewhere around 20 people.

While during the last 5 years you have seen an increase in participation of young Americans playing hockey, it is still not a hotbed for developing hockey players.

The issue (at least for me) is the U.S. has had the talent to win a medal (Gold even) the last few years but has underachieved. This year doesn't look any differant.

The issue (at least for me) is the U.S. has had the talent to win a medal (Gold even) the last few years but has underachieved. This year doesn't look any differant.


To put the best team on the ice, you still have to have the support of the country and sponsors to make things happen. Americans simply do not care about hockey. They never have except for about 15 minutes in 1980 and until that changes you are never going to see the best team regardless if you have the most talented team or not.

For instance, in Canada Im sure this will be on the news. Had USA won today about 20 people would know. And it will not be on any news broadcasts.

To answer the original question:

In short, no. The process will not change and we will continue to underachieve. I didn't watch this game since I thought it was a good idea not to get let down and upset.

And boy did I make a good decision.

It's a real shame. I might tune in to the next game, but if they lose again I'm done with this group until they fix what's wrong. They need a longer time to associate with one another and a much better selection process.

Not only do I disagree with Ryan, but I think that Michael Sauer is becoming a bigger and bigger omission. His defensive steadiness would've been nice, it seems.

To put the best team on the ice, you still have to have the support of the country and sponsors to make things happen. Americans simply do not care about hockey. They never have except for about 15 minutes in 1980 and until that changes you are never going to see the best team regardless if you have the most talented team or not.

For instance, in Canada Im sure this will be on the news. Had USA won today about 20 people would know. And it will not be on any news broadcasts.

IMO you don't have to have the support of a nation to win the WJC's. The U.S. did a few years back and hardly anyone cared about it back home. That being said, the U.S. effort is incredibly well-funded and has it's pick of some of the best junior talent in the world. The problem is player selection, discipline, and egos. All appear to be falling short.

To answer the original question:

In short, no. The process will not change and we will continue to underachieve. I didn't watch this game since I thought it was a good idea not to get let down and upset.

And boy did I make a good decision.

It's a real shame. I might tune in to the next game, but if they lose again I'm done with this group until they fix what's wrong. They need a longer time to associate with one another and a much better selection process.

Not only do I disagree with Ryan, but I think that Michael Sauer is becoming a bigger and bigger omission. His defensive steadiness would've been nice, it seems.

The sad thing is the U.S. could have brought an all CHL defense and fared just as well if not better (maybe a stretch, but anyway):

Sauer
Zimmermann
Mike Weber
Joey Ryan
Sanguinetti
Blum
Montgomery

IMO you don't have to have the support of a nation to win the WJC's. The U.S. did a few years back and hardly anyone cared about it back home. That being said, the U.S. effort is incredibly well-funded and has it's pick of some of the best junior talent in the world. The problem is player selection, discipline, and egos. All appear to be falling short.

Exactly, the Players should want to win for themselves and the team. you'd think with a Development squad and the players playing together for a while, some team unity would emerge. but instead stupid feuds and other crap reared thier ugly head. in short a Development team is a great idea, i wish Canada had a national team of sorts as well, but you need to stock with the players with the best frame of mind, and not exactly the "best" of the "best" its about finding a mix.

For whatever reason, the U.S. seems to hit a wall once they reach the WJC.

I don't know if they need to blow up the program all-together. I believe they've won gold at the WU18 the last two years, and I think they have one or two other gold medals at that tournament this decade. Now, the WU18 is a tournament that the U.S. should win, since their U18 players basically spend the year together.

The U.S. has also enjoyed some of its finest drafts ever, especially 2003, 2005 and 2006. These are likely the three best drafts for the U.S. since 1990.

The team in 2004 was a great team. They showed all of the traits of a champion. The 2005 team in Grand Forks definitely represented a step back, but when you take a deeper look, they were definitely the No. 3 team in that tournament, a big step behind the Russians and a much bigger step behind Canada. Bronze was the best result they could have hoped for. So the fourth place finish shouldn't be viewed as that big of a flop.

Last year's team was a flop. They were expected to win gold. They finished fourth. They lacked that team concept. And you could see it coming. They squandered a huge lead in a tie against Switzerland. They lost by a goal to Canada, but were outclassed at 5-on-5. And then came the medal round turkeys against Russia and Finland. Chemistry, team concept and coaching were all deficiencies. Any team with problems in those aspects won't win a short tournament, whether it be the Olympics, the WJC or the Quebec peewee tournament.

This year's team appears to be heading down the same road. They have all this talent from the 2005 and 2006 drafts. They just can't bring it all together.

One thing worth noting is that struggles at the WJC are nothing new to the U.S. They were expected to be a perennial medal contender for most of the 1990s. They lost to Canada in the 1997 gold medal final, but the results in 1995, 1996 and 1999 were very disappointing for a team that was expected to contend for a medal.

So what's the solution? I think they need to have a selection camp. I think they to start looking for the best team, instead of just the best players. I think they took a step in the right direction by leaving Bobby Ryan off this year's team. But a selection camp, with scrimmages and intrasquad games, is a must. They can't have a U20 program like they do with the U18 and U17. The college and junior programs just won't let it happen.

Perhaps this is anathema around here, but it's not a huge deal to me how well my country's team places at a junior tournament. My thing is: is the program producing the best talent they can? At the end of the day, the WJC for me would be to give the /most promising/ kids a chance to play at the highest level they can. If I'm running a development program and I leave a more promising talent at home so that I can build a better unit, quite frankly I think that's counter to the job.

Sidney Crosby and company were actually Americans? Interesting.

oops my bad.

Perhaps this is anathema around here, but it's not a huge deal to me how well my country's team places at a junior tournament. My thing is: is the program producing the best talent they can? At the end of the day, the WJC for me would be to give the /most promising/ kids a chance to play at the highest level they can. If I'm running a development program and I leave a more promising talent at home so that I can build a better unit, quite frankly I think that's counter to the job.

You do run a development program however with results in mind. They do not do this just to raise the draft stock of US born players but to create players with a winners mentality- to serve them at the junior level and then go on to play at other major events for the USA. A development system made just to crank out skill is better than no development at all but people and sponsors like to see the fruits of their labor.

IMO you don't have to have the support of a nation to win the WJC's. The U.S. did a few years back and hardly anyone cared about it back home. That being said, the U.S. effort is incredibly well-funded and has it's pick of some of the best junior talent in the world. The problem is player selection, discipline, and egos. All appear to be falling short.

a coach like sutter.

No nothing will change in the short term. Typical response goes something like: Back up another five feet from wall, lower head, and run into brick wall.

I would like to see a coach like Eddie O. or Kevin Constantine coach the US team. Maybe bring in some guys that think out of the box with a new set of players and team philosphy.

The USA may be doing slightly better had they brought Nick Foligno with them.

A development system made just to crank out skill is better than no development at all but people and sponsors like to see the fruits of their labor.

I understand it's not an all-or-nothing thing, I'd like to see trophy's as much as the next guy, and I recognize that hockey is more than just doing fancy things with a stick while blazing by on skates. But as far as results go, I'll look for them at the olympic level. We've had some of the best drafts I've ever seen so I don't think the program's been all bad.

I understand it's not an all-or-nothing thing, I'd like to see trophy's as much as the next guy, and I recognize that hockey is more than just doing fancy things with a stick while blazing by on skates. But as far as results go, I'll look for them at the olympic level. We've had some of the best drafts I've ever seen so I don't think the program's been all bad.

I don't think the program is bad either. I am not near the panic mode some others are in about the US system. Of course I am Canadian so perhaps I am not as involved.

There are a couple things wrong with the Americans. While some may disagree with the omission of players like Ryan and Sanguinetti, I think there's a good reason; to keep players on the team that have developed through the American system.

It's not to say that the CHL system is bad, far from it. But when you spend your more formative hockey years playing in Canada, it's not conducive to have to teach them the American system for a short tournament.

- The selection process should be modified. Like Team Canada, they should actually have tryouts. Some people step up for tournaments, and that's what they should be looking for.
- The system should be modified. The team moves as a unit, but they give themselves little options. The Canadians do have more skilled players, but they also have a more dynamic approach in the offensive zone, and it's not just attributed to the skillset of their players. They move as a unit to give themselves more options for passes, dump-ins, and rushes.

Most American boys do not play hockey. Americans watch more Bass Fishing and Bowling on TV than they do hockey. Why do people feel that they should dominate this sport that the country doesnt care about? Hell, the tournament can only be seen on American TV by people who have Center Ice and can be home at strange hours. I believe that is somewhere around 20 people.

While during the last 5 years you have seen an increase in participation of young Americans playing hockey, it is still not a hotbed for developing hockey players.
Ratings mean nothing, the overall population of the US is what, almost 10 to 1 of Canada? So say 1 out of every 10 canadian boys plays hockey, if 1 out of every 100 American boys do it's basically the same amount of people.

the US program attempts to use this tournament to show off their program but in the end politics is always a topic of discussion, man Jimmy Fraser sure is giving the US abetter chance over the likes of Ryan and Foligno :sarcasm:

The parts of the U.S. where hockey IS a major sport (New England, Great Lakes region, the upper Midwest) probably have a total population equal to that of Canada, and vastly larger than European countries like Finland, Sweden, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. So I wouldn't blame the U.S. woes on simple lack of interest. There are millions of Americans who follow the game.
The States turns out lots of great players. Why don't they win the WJC more often? Politics must play a role. Freezing guys out just because they play in the CHL is dumb, but anti-CHL atttitudes run deep in the American hockey system.

It's not just hockey but in case you haven't noticed the US has trouble winning at the world stage in the sports they invented.

I don't think the US doing poorly in this torney is because they aren't taking players from the CHL. The NTDP has had quite a few top end players come through that program as well as the American Jr./college programs. O.K. they have picked a few guys that really don't deserve to be on the team, but that isn't the main problem as these players are still competitive and the top US players have almost always been picked.

The problem with the Americans starts with the coach, who sets the attitude and work ethic and acceptance of the role each player plays (i.e. Sutter/Hartsburg). This is a short tourney so there isn't room for laziness, stupidity or selfishness. Canada has no problem with that. Each Canadian player wants to win incredibly badly and will do whatever is necesary to win. Country size, T.V. coverage, fame, etc. has nothing to do with will to win. No egos involved. American players are not that commited, by and large. To much individual play and not enough tough, team play. It's that simple.

It's not just hockey but in case you haven't noticed the US has trouble winning at the world stage in the sports they invented.

And you know what?

No one in the US cares about world/olympic sports.

There are a couple things wrong with the Americans. While some may disagree with the omission of players like Ryan and Sanguinetti, I think there's a good reason; to keep players on the team that have developed through the American system.

It's not to say that the CHL system is bad, far from it. But when you spend your more formative hockey years playing in Canada, it's not conducive to have to teach them the American system for a short tournament.

- The selection process should be modified. Like Team Canada, they should actually have tryouts. Some people step up for tournaments, and that's what they should be looking for.
- The system should be modified. The team moves as a unit, but they give themselves little options. The Canadians do have more skilled players, but they also have a more dynamic approach in the offensive zone, and it's not just attributed to the skillset of their players. They move as a unit to give themselves more options for passes, dump-ins, and rushes.

There should'nt be a problem taking cHL guys as American hockey plays the Canadian system of hockey.There are probably differnces in the way the game is called from the NCAA to the CHL but that won't affect them in an international tournament with international rules,everyone has to get used to how it will be called.Other then that American players play the Canadian game.Dump and chase,strong work along the boards with a mix of skill/physical play etc,etc.

There is no difference in style of play to teach them other then the specific system that particular coach is going to want to use in the tournament but not even the NCAA guys are going to have a grasp of that until camp starts.

Slotting CHL guys in should'nt be an issue.

I do see something wrong with the selection process. Not as many glaring ommissions this year of American kids playing in Canada as in most years but still there were two in my mind

The real problem is the National Development program. They take 40 or so kids at the age U17 and U18 level. They give them top notch training (ice time, off ice, nutrition, you name it) The majority of their (U18) money goes to a travel schedule that is off the chart. Minn., Alaska, Mass., NH, Maine, No Dakota, NY, NJ.

The problem is that you
#1 You could be wasting your time on 30 out of these 40 kids. We all know that a promissing kid at 16/17 doesn't mean he is going to pan out at 20. Too many kids emerge at 18, 19 and 20 and USA Hockey hasn't even thought of them. The kids emerging in other area's of the country are doing it without this top notch training because the cream always rises to the top. Allow this natural process to happen and spend this money else where

#2 If these players are going to go away from home any way, why not play in the USHL or Canadian Jr A? Why spend USA Hockey money when most of these kids would probably have a spot on any Jr A team.

#3 The US NTDP teams are winning a good amount of tournaments while they are together. But then they seperate and go onto college or Jr A and the chemistry doesn't work when they get put back together for the U20 championship. I would much rather win U20 Championship than the four nations cup. If these teams are being put together to just be sucessfull and win the four nations cup and then fall on it's face for the U20, then it is one big waste of money

What about last year? Did it work last year? :dunno:

It has a lot more to do with the lack of quality coaching (the US team needs more coaches like Mike Eaves in the worst way) and consistent goaltending then anything. Player selection isn't the issue.

It has a lot more to do with the lack of quality coaching (the US team needs more coaches like Mike Eaves in the worst way) and consistent goaltending then anything. Player selection isn't the issue.

Coaching does seem to be an issue. I'd like to see a guy like Kevin Constantine get a shot next year.

I do see something wrong with the selection process. Not as many glaring ommissions this year of American kids playing in Canada as in most years but still there were two in my mind

The real problem is the National Development program. They take 40 or so kids at the age U17 and U18 level. They give them top notch training (ice time, off ice, nutrition, you name it) The majority of their (U18) money goes to a travel schedule that is off the chart. Minn., Alaska, Mass., NH, Maine, No Dakota, NY, NJ.

The problem is that you
#1 You could be wasting your time on 30 out of these 40 kids. We all know that a promissing kid at 16/17 doesn't mean he is going to pan out at 20. Too many kids emerge at 18, 19 and 20 and USA Hockey hasn't even thought of them. The kids emerging in other area's of the country are doing it without this top notch training because the cream always rises to the top. Allow this natural process to happen and spend this money else where

#2 If these players are going to go away from home any way, why not play in the USHL or Canadian Jr A? Why spend USA Hockey money when most of these kids would probably have a spot on any Jr A team.

#3 The US NTDP teams are winning a good amount of tournaments while they are together. But then they seperate and go onto college or Jr A and the chemistry doesn't work when they get put back together for the U20 championship. I would much rather win U20 Championship than the four nations cup. If these teams are being put together to just be sucessfull and win the four nations cup and then fall on it's face for the U20, then it is one big waste of money


Excellent thoughts. I share many of your same concerns about the program.

Maybe it's just a simple fact that US isn't as developed as players as Canada?

Anyway, regarding the population issue...you can drive through a town of 500 in Canada (for example, Emerson, MB) and I gaurantee there's an arena and an outdoor sheet of ice as well. Drive through a town of 500 in the upper Midwest states (yes, even Minnesota) and there's not an arena and you're lucky to find plywood boards up around a sheet of ice. I grew up in MN, and outside of the Twin Cities area, basketball, football, baseball, etc. are much more popular as far as kids participation and fan attendance in the youth through high school level outside of a few towns (Roseau, Warroad and the like).

I now live in North Dakota and the state wrestling tournament in more popular than the state hockey tournament. That's the way it goes in the States...unfortunately.

It basically boils down to attitude, and the NTDP is at the core of the problem. You're singling out kids at 16 and 17 and bringing them to a program that fosters these kids' own ideas of superiority. Canada by comparison, and I only use Canada as an example because I understand their system, takes these great players, brings them together for certain development clinics/camps/teams but then sends them back out into the Canadian hockey fold, for many reasons, but primarily for the development of character. These reasons, included below, for convenience sake:

A) Canadian stars play against one another, not with one another (for the most part), thereby increasing rivalries between teams and players and teaching the kids that it takes an entire team to win games, instead of fostering cutthroat relationships where teammates are trying to crawl over top of one another to get scouted. It's your basic predator-prey theory people: either the biggest predators are spread thin in a given area (one or two or at most three per team), or they begin to eat one another. In the NTDP, they're eating one another.

B) Canadians are all given the chance to be great players within their respective systems, with top-line PP time and 1st line experience; in contrast third and fourth liners on the NTDP are only getting third and fourth line ice. This may be good for the players' individual character, but putting super-talented players on the third line is doing very little for their exposure and development, no matter what the benefit to attitude may be. Like OTT did with Spezza, allowing great players to develop completely before moving on to the next leve teaches a player to become a star at every level. Joey T would've benefitted from a little of this restraint in his early years.

C) They live and play in an (excuse the expression) good ol' Canadian hockey town, where ideals such as respect for teammates, honor amongst competitors and self-sacrifice for the benefit of the team are still enforced. By contrast, the Americans play in an elitist hockey society where they are being led to believe that they are somehow special for their gifts, and thus should be treated with defference by any coach who approaches them. It's why the dressing rooms in USA teams all over the world are ripped apart by in-fighting every year. They all believe they should be the go-to guy, and they will not accept anything less.

There are problems in the Canadian system as well, and not ever Canadian player is going to be selfless, respectful and mature. But these issues are at the core of why the USA teams are skilled beyond believe every year, but rarely live up to the hype.

It's attitude, nothing more.

It basically boils down to attitude, and the NTDP is at the core of the problem. You're singling out kids at 16 and 17 and bringing them to a program that fosters these kids' own ideas of superiority. Canada by comparison, and I only use Canada as an example because I understand their system, takes these great players, brings them together for certain development clinics/camps/teams but then sends them back out into the Canadian hockey fold, for many reasons, but primarily for the development of character. These reasons, included below, for convenience sake:


You're partially right, though I think you overstate a few things and give Canada too much credit.

But the issue is that there just aren't as many high-quality junior leagues in the USA - not as many opportunities for these guys to go back to programs that will help them develop and give them that ice time. That's why the NTDP was formed in the first place. It's not a great solution, but it's a step in the right direction. Most other countries, ie pretty much everyone except Canada, just don't have junior hockey development leagues that are large enough, widespread enough, and high-quality enough to compete with the Canadian junior system. You've got to start somewhere and build - the US NTDP is that start. And frankly, I'm not sure hockey will ever be 'big' enough in the States to overcome all of those issues.

However, whatever the problems in the system, I don't think it necessitates an attitude problem. Just because a player is in the NTDP or the NCAA instead of the CHL doesn't mean he doesn't understand how to be a team player.

It's not just hockey but in case you haven't noticed the US has trouble winning at the world stage in the sports they invented.

And what sports would that be, bearing in mind basketball was invented by a Canadian, golf by a Scotsman, tennis by an Englishman, etc., etc.

And what sports would that be, bearing in mind basketball was invented by a Canadian, golf by a Scotsman, tennis by an Englishman, etc., etc.


I guess the point is Americans (of late) have struggled in sports that we typically do very well in, such as basketball and tennis. Is that cyclical? Probably, but that's for another conversation.

And what sports would that be, bearing in mind basketball was invented by a Canadian, golf by a Scotsman, tennis by an Englishman, etc., etc.

Uh.... baseball, you guys did invent that, right? The World Baseball Classic was basically the Canada Cup of baseball and the US didn't even make the semi-finals :biglaugh:

Yeah basketball may have been invented by a Canadian but that was while he was living in the US and that's where the game was developed, it's an American game.

It's not just hockey but in case you haven't noticed the US has trouble winning at the world stage in the sports they invented.

So much of one's time should never be spent thinking so much about the sports programs of a country they do not live in. It only points to one thing.


Not too many sports have been invented by American's like you believe. But since your so worried about their sports ability on the world stage, maybe check out the medal counts of the summer and winter olympics

The USA may be doing slightly better had they brought Nick Foligno with them.

No offense, but you think Nick Foligno would've had more of an impact than Bobby Ryan, Bobby Sanguinetti, or Michael Sauer!? :amazed:

I see no hard evidence that one can pin this on the nature of teen development in the states. IMO a couple of factors play a much bigger factor:

Youth hockey cultureAlthough the US is a big country, it is in fact youth hockey culture that drives the quality of hockey developed. For example, Minnesota has a hockey culture along the lines with much of Canada...but its the only state that does (including Michigan and Mass). Minnesota has generated more first round picks than the rest of the country combined the last couple of years. It has nothing to do with the nature of teen hockey development but rather deep youth hockey culture that has been driving results. And Canada has much, much more than the US.

US international team competition There is something wierd about American team sports. The US should dominate in a large number of international competitions regarding team sports...and it doesn't (it does far better in individual sports). The US should really crush in basketball, baseball and golf (Ryder cup) and it consistently underperforms in all. Its not a shock that hockey is another one of those team sports that the US seems to come out short on.

C) They live and play in an (excuse the expression) good ol' Canadian hockey town, where ideals such as respect for teammates, honor amongst competitors and self-sacrifice for the benefit of the team are still enforced. By contrast, the Americans play in an elitist hockey society where they are being led to believe that they are somehow special for their gifts, and thus should be treated with defference by any coach who approaches them. It's why the dressing rooms in USA teams all over the world are ripped apart by in-fighting every year. They all believe they should be the go-to guy, and they will not accept anything less.





I don't agree with this point. If anybody's in an "elitist hockey society", it's not the Americans. I understand what you're saying about being set apart but I would argue that it would be much easier for a Canadian teen to get an elitist attitude, as he's (at this level) much better than his peers at something they all do. Personally, I don't care if I'm the best at something that few people do.

I think most of these perceived attitude problems can be attributed to the fact that these players are all still teens. And there's no way in overcoming that. :biglaugh:

if usa doesnt get a medal there will probably be changes, hey maybe bring in some more chl players next time. but hey i dont think they have played that poorly so far. it sucks they lost to germany after outplaying them, even against canada they played decent (but still outplayed) except for generated little in front of price.

I don't think the problem is the system, I think it's just getting the right mix of players that buy into the right type of system. The US has plenty of talent now throughout Jr. A, College and Major Jr.. Having a hard nosed coach might help too in a short tournament like this versus an easier going coach. Getting players to buy into the team first mentality versus, "I'm gonna be the star of this team" mentality is also key. And you need 100% conformity to the team if you're going to have a chance at winning a medal.

Winning this tournament is very difficult and not winning doesn't mean that things are completely screwed up and that an overhaul is in order.

US international team competition There is something wierd about American team sports. The US should dominate in a large number of international competitions regarding team sports...and it doesn't (it does far better in individual sports). The US should really crush in basketball, baseball and golf (Ryder cup) and it consistently underperforms in all. Its not a shock that hockey is another one of those team sports that the US seems to come out short on.

Basketball Game
Olympic Games
Appearances 15 Medals Won 15
Medals Gold: 1936, 1948, 1952, 1956, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1976, 1984, 1992, 1996, 2000
Silver: 1972 (Took the Soviets two tries to get the gold in this one.)
Bronze: 1988, 2004

Bronze in 2004 with golds the previous three olympics. I would really hate to see what you consider overperforming.

Golf
Ryder cup. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it the best of one country USA against the best of all of Europe? Lets at least stick with competitions where it's country against country and not one country against one continent.

Golf, Gymanastics, Volleyball, wrestling, speed skating, skiing, bicycling, tennis etc
I'll stack the USA's diversity of sports champions against any country out there.

Minnesota has a hockey culture along the lines with much of Canada...but its the only state that does (including Michigan and Mass).

Contradiction much?
-----

The problem is the politics, sure some CHL players are on the WJC team (notablely Kane and Lewis) but like stated above the US would fair much better with Sanguinetti, Foligno, and Ryan. USA Hockey made the NTDP and they are so focused on showing off what they can do that they put in players that don't deserve to play over others.