# Why does Sweden fail so much?



## Eye of Ra

World Cup 96, loss against Canada in semifinal.

Olympics 98, loss against Finland in qf.

Olympics 2002, loss against Belarus in qf.

World Cup 2004, loss against Czech in qf.

Olympics 2010, loss against Slovakia in qf.

Olympics 2014, loss against Canada in final.

World Cup 2016, loss against Team Eu in semifinal.


How is it possible to fail so often with so good teams?

My take on it, is that Sweden is playing to non-physical and with to little energy.


----------



## Nordic*

Swedish players are never as good on the national team as in the NHL (these days). Not sure if it is the system or lack of passion for the national team.

Finns are the exact opposite.


----------



## Phil McKraken

Apart from Canada, what nation has done better? An Olympic gold and silver since 98 is a hell of a lot better than what e.g Russia has managed.


----------



## Alexander the Gr8

TheFatOne said:


> World Cup 96, loss against Canada in semifinal.
> 
> Olympics 98, loss against Finland in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2002, loss against Belarus in qf.
> 
> World Cup 2004, loss against Czech in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2010, loss against Slovakia in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2014, loss against Canada in final.
> 
> World Cup 2016, loss against Team Eu in semifinal.
> 
> 
> How is it possible to fail so often with so good teams?
> 
> My take on it, is that Sweden is playing to non-physical and with to little energy.




Canada is just a lot better most of the time. In fact, I fear international hockey is becoming less competitive because of Canada's dominance.


----------



## XO

Yet Sweden have the 2nd most gold medals since the 90s


----------



## Fantomas

Because like all other non-American nations, they are merely a farm team to the NHL without a real identity of their own.


----------



## Bear12Good

Lousy coaching

it is actual for Russia, too


----------



## XO

Bear12Good said:


> Lousy coaching
> 
> it is actual for Russia, too




Well that's a fact, but I don't know how you can look back back and say Sweden have failed anyway. 2nd most gold medals since the 90s including 2 Olympic Golds and that's while having fewer registered hocey players than even Finland and Czech by a lot.


----------



## Srsly

Failing by what standards? I don't consider making the finals at the Olympics or losing in the semi finals during this tournament failing. At what point are people gong to admit that other teams are no longer collapsing and that Team Europe actually outperforming their expectations? 

I don't see Sweden as failing at all. I think they put together a decent team and have a promising future.


----------



## Don Corleone

Eazy for Kuzy said:


> International hockey is becoming less competitive because of Canada's dominance.




It sure has. Canada has been steamrolling every country for years now. They would do easily even better if they would sent better teams to the World Championships. Canada is far and way better than any other country. Its unfair man


----------



## Mattb124

In this instance, it was a lack of offense.


----------



## Epsilon

The only thing embarrassing on Sweden's resume is the Belarus loss in 2002.

It's not like any non-Canada country has done appreciably better.


----------



## Eye of Ra

Imagine if Sweden had a coach like Babcock.


----------



## Eye of Ra

Epsilon said:


> The only thing embarrassing on Sweden's resume is the Belarus loss in 2002.
> 
> It's not like any non-Canada country has done appreciably better.




The loss against a dead Slovakia team made up by many khl players is embarassing.


----------



## Epsilon

TheFatOne said:


> The loss against a dead Slovakia team made up by many khl players is embarassing.




The "dead Slovakia team" that lost by 1 goal to eventual champ Canada in the semifinals?


----------



## BonAppleTea

TheFatOne said:


> The loss against a dead Slovakia team made up by many khl players is embarassing.




Yea that one almost made me off myself. For real, I was screaming so loud I thought I damaged my own hearing


----------



## that is unfortunate

Anything can happen in a best of 1, they're just unlucky. I can't take international hockey seriously, especially one like the World Cup.


----------



## TheBigThree

TheFatOne said:


> World Cup 96, loss against Canada in semifinal.
> 
> Olympics 98, loss against Finland in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2002, loss against Belarus in qf.
> 
> World Cup 2004, loss against Czech in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2010, loss against Slovakia in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2014, loss against Canada in final.
> 
> World Cup 2016, loss against Team Eu in semifinal.
> 
> 
> How is it possible to fail so often with so good teams?
> 
> My take on it, is that Sweden is playing to non-physical and with to little energy.




Because you overvalue your own team. If they were a good team they would beat their opponents.


----------



## A1LeafNation

Goaltending has been crap in until 2006 at Lundquists prime.


----------



## Confucius

Sweden is a small country. Unfair to compare them to large countries playing on a world stage.


----------



## Eye of Ra

GrÃ¶nborg choosed to many grinders.

Team should have looked like this.

Sedin - Sedin - Eriksson
Forsberg - BÃ¤ckstrÃ¶m - Johansson
Nyquist - Rask - Zibanejad
Hagelin - SÃ¶derberg - Silfverberg

And Klingberg for D.

And Markstrom instead of Lundqvist.


----------



## CherryToke

They don't score enough goals. too much focus on defence.


----------



## JackSlater

This is not tangible or anything, but I find that Swedish teams don't have a great mentality. They kind of play the same way regardless of what is happening. Not the killer instinct to put teams away, and not a lot of push back when trailing. Canada and Russia do a much better job in this regard. Just an observation.


----------



## Nithoniniel

Looking at how Sweden was coached and the systems in use, it seemed as if they were trying to cover for a weak defense by demanding more from solid two-way forwards. Not exactly ideal when you have world class defense and a sub-par forward group.

With guys like Karlsson, Hedman and OEL, you want to give them as many opportunities as possible to assert themselves on the game while your forwards adapt and cover for them. Instead our guys were asked to play it safe and not take chances until they get back pressure, which is essentially just making the D-mans ability less of a factor by reliance on team play.

Canada does something similar, but it makes sense for them because their great defense can just give stability for their extremely strong forward group. Sweden _needed_ our defense to be a difference maker, and coaching made it a non-factor instead.


----------



## BonAppleTea

JackSlater said:


> This is not tangible or anything, but I find that Swedish teams don't have a great mentality. They kind of play the same way regardless of what is happening. Not the killer instinct to put teams away, and not a lot of push back when trailing. Canada and Russia do a much better job in this regard. Just an observation.



Yea the difference between now and then really is more our defense than tactics. There are loads of games where we took the lead and just tried to coast to the finish line. This time it worked thanks to defense, but the playeres were far from well utilized.
Team Sweden needs a brilliant goal scorer who can push the pace to really excell


----------



## TLeafsFan

Yeah, I miss Sundin, too.


----------



## Talisman

TLeafsFan said:


> Yeah, I miss Sundin, too.




i miss both sundin and Foppa!!. i think that sweden team miss great world class centers like back in the day you had sundin7Forsberg ans Nylander!!. for instance i don`t see that bÃ¤ckstrÃ¶m is a high caliber center like those legends but good center his own right and good center in capitals!!. William nylander could be next


----------



## Confucius

MrJE said:


> *Yea the difference between now and then really is more our defense than tactics.* There are loads of games where we took the lead and just tried to coast to the finish line. This time it worked thanks to defense, but the playeres were far from well utilized.
> Team Sweden needs a brilliant goal scorer who can push the pace to really excell




yep you don't have a a Lidstrom anymore...


----------



## Hisch13r

TheFatOne said:


> GrÃ¶nborg choosed to many grinders.
> 
> Team should have looked like this.
> 
> Sedin - Sedin - Eriksson
> Forsberg - BÃ¤ckstrÃ¶m - Johansson
> Nyquist - Rask - Zibanejad
> Hagelin - SÃ¶derberg - Silfverberg
> 
> And Klingberg for D.
> 
> *And Markstrom instead of Lundqvist.*




C'mon Lundqvist was the obvious choice


----------



## Big Phil

JackSlater said:


> This is not tangible or anything, but I find that Swedish teams don't have a great mentality. They kind of play the same way regardless of what is happening. Not the killer instinct to put teams away, and not a lot of push back when trailing. Canada and Russia do a much better job in this regard. Just an observation.




Sort of what I've always felt too. Just a very bland style of game. When has Sweden ever played a high octane game? Even in 1984 when they made the final against Canada they lost in two rather convincing games (although they made a comeback in Game 2 almost). Their coach stated he wanted to roll 4 lines and he did. Which is fine, but maybe play your best players a little more in such a short tournament. 

That being said, in the last 20 years other than Canada they are right in the mix as the team with the next best results. Russia hasn't won in 35 years. USA in 20. Finland never. Czech in 18. Sweden in 10.


----------



## skolgoar

Cogsbreakaway said:


> Swedish players are never as good on the national team as in the NHL (these days). Not sure if it is the system or lack of passion for the national team.
> 
> Finns are the exact opposite.




Really? Compare the number of Cup winners on Team Europe (8) to the number on Team Sweden. The current crop of Swedish "superstars" really don't have what it takes to take it to the next level.


----------



## Exarz

I think it has got better from the 2014 Olympics and onwards. Canada was a tough opponnent in the Olympics (especially with some key players missing) and Price played like a God in that tournament. Yesterday's loss against Team Europe wasn't as bad as people seem to think. Europe has been playing good the whole tournament and I doubt that Sweden would've won against Canada anyway.

I'd say that the top 6 best on best rankings are something like this:
1. Canada
2. Sweden
3. USA (they would've been way better without the NA U23 team)
4. Russia
5. Finland (just wait until the juniors are top notch NHL players)
6. Czech Republic


----------



## Burke the Legend

Srsly said:


> Failing by what standards? I don't consider making the finals at the Olympics or losing in the semi finals during this tournament failing.




Making the semi-finals in a tourney where there's only 6-8 actual contender national teams is not a big accomplishment.


----------



## Drij

Because the sedins suck.


----------



## Brun0

so many excuses, maybe there are just not as good as swedes them self hype them?


swedes like explain one player here or there.


The best team was chosen, face the facts like all others do too 

Id sweden wins gold they have always over achieved


----------



## Brew

Just a team with no finish.


----------



## NyQuil

Nithoniniel said:


> Looking at how Sweden was coached and the systems in use, it seemed as if they were trying to cover for a weak defense by demanding more from solid two-way forwards. Not exactly ideal when you have world class defense and a sub-par forward group.
> 
> With guys like Karlsson, Hedman and OEL, you want to give them as many opportunities as possible to assert themselves on the game while your forwards adapt and cover for them. Instead our guys were asked to play it safe and not take chances until they get back pressure, which is essentially just making the D-mans ability less of a factor by reliance on team play.
> 
> Canada does something similar, but it makes sense for them because their great defense can just give stability for their extremely strong forward group. Sweden _needed_ our defense to be a difference maker, and coaching made it a non-factor instead.




I think this is a great point.

Sweden employs the same system no matter who is on the team and what is going on in terms of the game.

Meanwhile, Canada chooses the personnel that fits the system. No one denies that Subban and Letang are world class players but the team brass opted for safety on the back end to complement the heavy offensive talent up front.

There's a degree of conservative tactics in Swedish hockey which you can't really pin on the players who excel in leading roles on their NHL teams.

Europe seems to be the exact opposite - where the team and the system are very complementary.


----------



## LiveeviL

JackSlater said:


> This is not tangible or anything, but I find that Swedish teams don't have a great mentality. They kind of play the same way regardless of what is happening. Not the killer instinct to put teams away, and not a lot of push back when trailing. Canada and Russia do a much better job in this regard. Just an observation.




In that perspective I can agree, but I just think that it is a lack of individuals. With Sundin and P. Forsberg it was different. 

On a side note, I do think that Sweden always (i.e. since I started watching the national team) has had a great mentality when it comes to acting as a team and ,most importantly not throwing the game when odds are stacking up during game (I think both Canada and esp. Russia are more prone to that).

Further Sweden is a smaller nation than Canada in real numbers and in percentage of active players/population. Sweden have enough to cover for an excellent team at all times, but just about that. When people for some reasons do not play it do matter. If Sweden lose Steen for example one can compare that with an even better Canadian not playing during this tournament and say that it is equal. But it is not, Sweden cannot cover that loss while Canada can (the situation is worse for many other countries of course). During many tournaments Sweden have had some key players which did not play. This tournament is actually one of the better in this aspect with Steen and a somewhat less missed Zetterberg missing.


----------



## Kranix

Maybe they're coached too clinical. They don't get desperate.


----------



## Woll Smoth

So they can learn to pick themselves up.


----------



## KingsHockey24

Because Lundqvist is a terrible goalie.


----------



## llwyd

I have always admired Swedish hockey: they are ice cool under pressure, self-confident, stick to their plan no matter what and play very disciplined and tight game. But the downside at times seems to be that they don't have that kind of damn the torpedoes, throw the kitchen sink at them extra gear that Finland for example quite often generates and plays above our paper strength. I think it's pretty rarely when Swedes kind of _exceed_ themselves - they often play as well as you would expect from their roster, but not more.


----------



## Cursed Lemon

Sweden has kept up a tradition of breeding strong defensemen, but nowadays they don't have an offensive punch like they used to.


----------



## Scrub*

It's team Sedin not team Sweden! Pass the puck to someone else.


----------



## Benedict Kovalchuk

I can't speak to every tournament, but for this one they had an absolute embarrassment of riches(some of the best I've ever seen) on D and refused to use any of them. Very perplexing.

And as mentioned before, they tend to play the same the system ALWAYS and play it with little to no passion.


----------



## tgo0

I'm not surprised that they don't win everything, rarely have they been the favourites coming into those tournaments, but I am surprised how often they get bumped in the first round of knockout games (5/7 as the SF at WCH was like the QF of other tournaments)


----------



## LaGu

LiveeviL said:


> In that perspective I can agree, but I just think that it is a lack of individuals. With Sundin and P. Forsberg it was different.
> 
> On a side note, I do think that Sweden always (i.e. since I started watching the national team) has had a great mentality when it comes to acting as a team and ,most importantly not throwing the game when odds are stacking up during game (I think both Canada and esp. Russia are more prone to that).
> 
> Further Sweden is a smaller nation than Canada in real numbers and in percentage of active players/population. Sweden have enough to cover for an excellent team at all times, but just about that. When people for some reasons do not play it do matter. If Sweden lose Steen for example one can compare that with an even better Canadian not playing during this tournament and say that it is equal. But it is not, Sweden cannot cover that loss while Canada can (the situation is worse for many other countries of course). During many tournaments Sweden have had some key players which did not play. This tournament is actually one of the better in this aspect with Steen and a somewhat less missed Zetterberg missing.




I know that piling on Zetterberg popular nowadays after his slow second half of last season, but he is in effect the captain of tre kronor. I think he was PPG his first 15 games or so last season, always starts strong. He was/is by far the most significant loss to injury. The only other players I would value in that way is Karlsson and Lundqvist. Losing Zetterberg was far more significant than some think.

PS I also don't see how Sweden fails so much. Belarus stand out, but it's hockey and unless you are Canada, from 2010 to now, you will win some and lose some.


----------



## Get North

They need more aggressive forwards. Not big mean powerforwards but guys like Forsberg, Zetterberg (he's done now), Sundin. Their intensity was miles ahead of the Sedins, Eriksson, F.Forsberg. Even a guy like Landeskog, he plays hard, but he's not talented enough like Forsberg to dominate and physically push the other team.

They aren't hard enough to play against and don't take their game to another level when they have to. That's what they used to do and sort of lost in the last 6-7 years.


----------



## El_Loco_Avs

TheFatOne said:


> World Cup 96, loss against Canada in semifinal.
> 
> Olympics 98, loss against Finland in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2002, loss against Belarus in qf.
> 
> World Cup 2004, loss against Czech in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2010, loss against Slovakia in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2014, loss against Canada in final.
> 
> World Cup 2016, loss against Team Eu in semifinal.
> 
> 
> How is it possible to fail so often with so good teams?
> 
> My take on it, is that Sweden is playing to non-physical and with to little energy.




Failing? The only fail in your list is the loss against Belarus.
The rest of the losses came against fairly good competition.
You could argue they should've done better during the days of Forsberg/Sundin/Lidstrom but really theydid what could've been expected. They won the Olympics!


----------



## Trilliann

TLeafsFan said:


> Yeah, I miss Sundin, too.




I and about 5 million other Finns don't.


----------



## TLeafsFan

Trilliann said:


> I and about 5 million other Finns don't.




LOL, yeah I'd say that's fair.


----------



## Brock Boeser

Gotta wonder if other nations start looking to hire NHL coaches for international tournaments held on NHL ice. Looking at the Swedish roster they are all NHL players so there wouldn't be a language barrier plus the players are used to playing the systems their NHL teams use, which are probably a lot different than what an international head coach would try to set up.


Looking at other sports like soccer you see all the time national team coaches being from different countries so it isn't something farfetched.


----------



## LaGu

Brock Boeser said:


> Gotta wonder if other nations start looking to hire NHL coaches for international tournaments held on NHL ice. Looking at the Swedish roster they are all NHL players so there wouldn't be a language barrier plus the players are used to playing the systems their NHL teams use, which are probably a lot different than what an international head coach would try to set up.
> 
> 
> Looking at other sports like soccer you see all the time national team coaches being from different countries so it isn't something farfetched.




I wish. Keep the coaching team for the year-round activities but bring in a NA coaching team for these events, or at the very least a NA head coach. 

Thinking outside the box for a team playing the same way for years and years would be agood start.


----------



## Drij

Because their team was build like ikea furniture?


----------



## Dazed and Confused

Coaching is a big issue. 

If I had to guess why, I'd say it's because it difficult to bring in a "national" coach who likely spends little to no time with or watching his players, and then expect everything to fall into place. The vanilla system is likely due to the coach not knowing his roster, and instead of utilizing its strengths, tries to play it safe.

Babcock at least spends his time game planing around Crosby and such to know what he's getting into. The players also get to play against Babcock's teams and see how they work. GrÃ¶nborg likely just has reputation and highlight packs to go by. Not to say he's a good coach, but it's definitely a massive issue to deal with.

If all/most of your roster is NHL based, perhaps a more NHL-centric coaching staff is needed.


----------



## WingsFan95

So out of the last 7 big tournaments, Sweden has 1 Gold and Silver.

Okay. Czech has 1 Gold.

And Canada has the rest.

World Championships have nice variety.


----------



## Epsilon

WingsFan95 said:


> So out of the last 7 big tournaments, Sweden has 1 Gold and Silver.
> 
> Okay. Czech has 1 Gold.
> 
> *And Canada has the rest.*
> 
> World Championships have nice variety.




Canada only has 4 out of 7, USA has 1 win along with Sweden and the Czech Republic.


----------



## LaGu

Dazed and Confused said:


> Coaching is a big issue.
> 
> If I had to guess why, I'd say it's because it difficult to bring in a "national" coach who likely spends little to no time with or watching his players, and then expect everything to fall into place. The vanilla system is likely due to the coach not knowing his roster, and instead of utilizing its strengths, tries to play it safe.
> 
> Babcock at least spends his time game planing around Crosby and such to know what he's getting into. The players also get to play against Babcock's teams and see how they work. GrÃ¶nborg likely just has reputation and highlight packs to go by. Not to say he's a good coach, but it's definitely a massive issue to deal with.
> 
> If all/most of your roster is NHL based, perhaps a more NHL-centric coaching staff is needed.




I agree in principle, but you are most likely wrong about him not knowing his players. They spend lots of tike in NA and it would be wrong to think they are going off high light reels to study up on their players. GrÃ¶nborg didn't participate in the iihf world championships this year because he was working on preparations for the world cup, so I am pretty confident that they spent enough time preparing, the question of course is how they used that time.

The problem is coaching tough, there I agree. I think they want to (and do) use the Swedish model which has worked in the past. Calm, secure defensive and then trust that your star fwds pot a couple. Problem is of course that they need to be relying much more on the D for offense seeing how that team is built and where its strenghts are.


----------



## Benedict Kovalchuk

Epsilon said:


> Canada only has 4 out of 7, USA has 1 win along with Sweden and the Czech Republic.




Which? As far as I know the USA hasn't won a senior tournament in over 20 years.


----------



## Epsilon

Benedict Kovalchuk said:


> Which? As far as I know the USA hasn't won a senior tournament in over 20 years.




Did I miscount? Working backwards:

2014 Olympics: Canada
2010 Olympics: Canada
2006 Olympics: Sweden
2004 World Cup: Canada
2002 Olympics: Canada
1998 Olympics: Czech Republic
1996 World Cup: USA

Is something missing that's just slipping my mind?


----------



## Canuck21t

Exarz said:


> I think it has got better from the 2014 Olympics and onwards. Canada was a tough opponnent in the Olympics (especially with some key players missing) and *Price played like a God in that tournament*. Yesterday's loss against Team Europe wasn't as bad as people seem to think. Europe has been playing good the whole tournament and I doubt that Sweden would've won against Canada anyway.
> 
> I'd say that the top 6 best on best rankings are something like this:
> 1. Canada
> 2. Sweden
> 3. USA (they would've been way better without the NA U23 team)
> 4. Russia
> 5. Finland (just wait until the juniors are top notch NHL players)
> 6. Czech Republic



What?!? Price was hardly tested in 2014 since Canada mostly played in the attacking zone; all off Canada's opponents barely had good chances in the Canadian zone.


----------



## babylonzoo

Epsilon said:


> Canada only has 4 out of 7, USA has 1 win along with Sweden and the Czech Republic.




Canada has more if you factor in the Canada cups


----------



## sr edler

They need a good scorer with killer instinct. An egotistical shoot first player.

Like a Markus NÃ¤slund but not Markus NÃ¤slund, if that makes sense.


----------



## Laineux

Hmm? Sweden was the second best national team in this tournament.

Starting from 2006 there have been 4 best on bests.

Sweden has finished 1, 5, 2, 2.


----------



## Senor Catface

Woll Smoth said:


> So they can learn to pick themselves up.




I appreciated the quote, Mr. Wayne.


----------



## Tulipunaruusu*

Brock Boeser said:


> Gotta wonder if other nations start looking to hire NHL coaches for international tournaments held on NHL ice. Looking at the Swedish roster they are all NHL players so there wouldn't be a language barrier plus the players are used to playing the systems their NHL teams use, which are probably a lot different than what an international head coach would try to set up.




https://blog.paf.com/petterisihvonen/
_
"Even the Swedes didn't keep the identity of their own making. Tre Kronor, played as everyone, some sort of modified-NHL."
_
The Leading One put it the best. NHL is so unimaginative cloning league that you get no advantage from following their (in most cases) tactically poor, on all fronts unified ice hockey. Leading One points out that only Team Europe had a non-NHL identity in this World Cup: Finland and Sweden did not.

Under Kustaa II Adolf Sweden in 17th century created an identity for all team sports to follow. Where was that?


----------



## Tmu84

TheFatOne said:


> World Cup 96, loss against Canada in semifinal.
> 
> Olympics 98, loss against Finland in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2002, loss against Belarus in qf.
> 
> World Cup 2004, loss against Czech in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2010, loss against Slovakia in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2014, loss against Canada in final.
> 
> World Cup 2016, loss against Team Eu in semifinal.
> 
> 
> How is it possible to fail so often with so good teams?
> 
> My take on it, is that Sweden is playing to non-physical and with to little energy.




Seriously, as a Finn, there is no way Swedes should feel they have underachieved in any way in last 20 years. They do have the gold from 2006. And Canada, as others have mentioned, is on a level of it's own. Sadly other countries can't do anything about it . So I have no problems saying Sweden is clearly #2 now followed by the rest. Losing to a gimmick team in semi-finals (World Cup 2016) changes absolutely nothing. 



Canuck21t said:


> What?!? Price was hardly tested in 2014 since Canada mostly played in the attacking zone; all off Canada's opponents barely had good chances in the Canadian zone.




Agreed. I think when it comes to 2014 Olympics, Canada could have played with Vesa Toskala and they still would have won gold. Probably. Ok, maybe not a shutout against Sweden. But still.


----------



## vippe

They lack intensity. It's a team full of Ryan's (hue hue hue)

I mean, outside of Backstrom, Hornqvist and Hagelin it was a total lackluster effort by every single forward on the team. The loss of Rakell hurt more than it should have. He's giving it all 100% of the time.


----------



## Pyromaniac

Sweden desperately needs better forward talent. It was sad to watch them throw out the Sedins in OT after how ineffective they were this past season. They have to hope that all of E. Lindholm, W. Nylander, A. Nylander, Burakowsky and Forsberg all reach their max potential. So far the only ones I have a reasonable degree of confidence will reach their full potential are William and Forsberg. Compare that to the young forward talent coming for the other countries and Sweden looks very lackluster.


----------



## ReginKarlssonLehner

I am actually impressed they made it this far this tourney but then again the Finns and Americans were nothing special so you expected Sweden to make the finals, not surprised they lost to Europe tho.

Their forward talent took an enormous hit with Alfredsson and Zetterberg gone. Let alone Sundin back from 06'.

They have yet to replace that talent. Backstrom is phenomenal but the Sedins are on the decline(even though they carried a lot of the offense too this year, if not half). There needs to be an influx of star talent forwards to help Backstrom. Nylander bothers could help and Forsberg playing better. Landeskog has been a let down, smh.

Berglund playing a key role on any of your top 2 PPs is already a red flag, imo.


----------



## Ben Matlock

TheFatOne said:


> World Cup 96, loss against Canada in semifinal.
> 
> Olympics 98, loss against Finland in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2002, loss against Belarus in qf.
> 
> World Cup 2004, loss against Czech in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2010, loss against Slovakia in qf.
> 
> Olympics 2014, loss against Canada in final.
> 
> World Cup 2016, loss against Team Eu in semifinal.




One of these is not like the others; the one that was actually a shameful fail. Then you have two somewhat surprising losses against solid teams. The rest are neither. On the other hand you managed to win the Olympic final against the best playing team of the tournament in 2006.


----------



## Laineux

What team, other than Canada, does not "fail" then?

Only Finland has done better than expected. Not in this tourney though, obviously.


----------



## InGusWeTrust

The Brewmeister said:


> Just a team with no finish.




I see what you did there...


----------



## Epsilon

babylonzoo said:


> Canada has more if you factor in the Canada cups




Well yeah, but the discussion was about the last 7, which I presume meant 1996 World Cup onwards.


----------



## Hybbe

Srsly said:


> Failing by what standards? I don't consider making the finals at the Olympics or losing in the semi finals during this tournament failing. At what point are people gong to admit that other teams are no longer collapsing and that Team Europe actually outperforming their expectations?
> 
> I don't see Sweden as failing at all. I think they put together a decent team and have a promising future.




Agreed, reactionary hyperbole from the OP, but losing against Team Europe was still definitely a failure. To me it felt like someone was holding the reins on them and refused to let go pretty much all throughout the tournament, but particularly against Europe.


----------



## cbzblaze

There good enough to get there but don't have enough offensive game changers to win it. They play a little too conservative for my liking. Always involved in close games where a bounce here and there and they might lose. Sedins are still there most dangerous players which isn't good considering their age.


----------



## Swipes

I personally think they lack high-end game-breaking forwards.


----------



## Phil McKraken

Petyr Baelish said:


> Sweden desperately needs better forward talent. It was sad to watch them throw out the Sedins in OT after how ineffective they were this past season. They have to hope that all of E. Lindholm, W. Nylander, A. Nylander, Burakowsky and Forsberg all reach their max potential. So far the only ones I have a reasonable degree of confidence will reach their full potential are William and Forsberg. Compare that to the young forward talent coming for the other countries and Sweden looks very lackluster.




Agreed, though we might have the best Swedish forward prospect of the past 15 years coming up in Lukas Wernblom. Watching how good he is at 16 I think he has a legit chance at going first in the 2018 draft, but a lot can happen before then obviously. If he pans out well along with Forsberg (already panned out) and the Nylander brothers that's all we need, since we'll be stacked with defensemen for the coming decade.


----------



## lifeisruff

Epsilon said:


> The only thing embarrassing on Sweden's resume is the Belarus loss in 2002.
> 
> *It's not like any non-Canada country has done appreciably better.*



*
*

Winner. the Swedes aren't dramatically better then the Russians or Americans and they all coward before the Canadians


----------



## Conspiracy Theorist

Epsilon said:


> The only thing embarrassing on Sweden's resume is the Belarus loss in 2002.
> 
> It's not like any non-Canada country has done appreciably better.



Finlandia usually brings the best out of their roster.


----------



## authentic

cbzblaze said:


> There good enough to get there but don't have enough offensive game changers to win it. They play a little too conservative for my liking. Always involved in close games where a bounce here and there and they might lose. Sedins are still there most dangerous players which isn't good considering their age.




Backstrom is their best forward, and Karlsson is the best offensive player on the team. Other than them the Sedin's are the most dangerous, especially because of how they play together.


----------



## Back In Black

TheFatOne said:


> Imagine if Sweden had a coach like Babcock.




A monkey could coach Team Canada, just let them play!

As far as Sweden goes, they haven’t s*** the bed like Russia has!


----------



## TopCheese

they are the polar opposite of russia. Scary defense but little to be desired up front especially with the sedins aging. Hopefully putin dosent invade sweeden cause then canada might have some real competition


----------



## westc2

They didn't have Steen...


----------



## Bookman

For a country of 9.5 million people, shouldn't the question be "how does Sweden overachieve so much?" Same with Finland.


----------



## Slimmy

JackSlater said:


> This is not tangible or anything, but I find that Swedish teams don't have a great mentality. They kind of play the same way regardless of what is happening. Not the killer instinct to put teams away, and not a lot of push back when trailing. Canada and Russia do a much better job in this regard. Just an observation.




Spot on.


----------

