The entire country is mad at Mike Babcock. He's the orchestrator of what some are referring to as an unmitigated disaster, and he and GM Steve Yzerman will be hammered if the Canadians come home with anything less than gold wrapped around their necks. And when it comes down to it, both men know what they signed up for.
The unmitigated disaster--Canada's inability, through four games of Olympic competition, to snuff out their opponents with a minimum of five goals per game; Canada's failure to capitilize on their chances; Canada's failure to play perfect, pristine, Canadian--no one is as good as our paper roster would have you believe--hockey.
Babcock, winning coach of the 2010 Olympic team, is purposely screwing Canada by not dressing P.K. Subban, and he's out of his mind with his insistence on 40-second shifts. And he's just nuts-crazy for assembling the lines as he has.
And Yzerman and his staff have got to be the dumbest people on Earth to have selected Chris Kunitz over Claude Giroux, or Logan Couture, or even Martin St. Louis, but Babcock is even dumber for sticking with Kunitz.
And Canada is doing it all wrong. They're winning games, but heaven forbid anyone challenge them along the way. And even worse, how could they only beat Latvia 2-1 in an elimination game???
2-1!?!?!?!?!? Shooting on a bloody AHL goalie!
And they have no chance against the Americans who have been excellent since the puck dropped. Dan Bylsma's got it completely figured out, and every call he's made has been a stroke of genius, and the Americans' success thus far has had zero to do with the execution of its players.
Nope, the line combinations have been the only reason the Americans are succeeding as they are. The tactics, the roster decisions--these are the only reasons the US have looked dominant in their games.
Canada has no chance. ***************
1) A guy I follow and respect--his name is Robert Rice, and he writes prospect reviews for Habs Eyes on the Prize (a fantastic blog)--tweets to me: "That game was nail-biting but honestly, play that game 10x and what's the result? Canada by 5 goals."
Robert's been as critical as any Canada fan when it comes to Babcock's roster decisions, but at least he's not blind.
Play that game 10 times, and in at least five of them, it's Canada by 10 goals.
People don't want to hear it because they expect perfection, and someone like me who would dare suggest Canada played great in a game they only won by a goal against a team that shouldn't even be in the same rink as them are to be shunned.
I guess what I'm saying is, I don't expect perfection. But if I did, the only missing quotient for the Canadians against Latvia was luck.
They've earned their way to have another chance at better luck. And I wouldn't change anything about the way they played to get there.
What did Babcock say about aligning the stars and the moon to win this tournament? He's right. You can make every right call, and play perfectly, and that's no guarantee you'll win.
Granted, like any hockey fan who knows their hockey, I know Subban's a better option out there than some of the players Canada's brought to play on their blue line. But to suggest Canada's defense--without him--hasn't been their strong point would be untrue.
Were it up to me, Subban would be dressed against the US. I can't think of anything else to complain about.
2) Not even Chris Kunitz. I'm not going to complain about him. I wish he'd have buried two of Canada's best scoring chances in the tournament (one against Finland, one against Latvia), if only to get everyone off his back, but he hasn't.
I'm not going to argue that he's better than any of their 14 (now 13 forwards with Tavares done for the tournament with a knee injury), but he's not going to lose it for them. He may just win it if he buries one of those chances sure to come his way as he continues along with Crosby.
3) And everyone is worried about four games being played without Crosby finding the back of the net. How can you not worry about that?
I'd wager the US is as worried about Crosby breaking out as Canada's worried about him remaining off the scoresheet.
People said the same thing about Crosby all throughout the Vancouver games, until there was one shot to win the game, and sure enough he was the one to take it.
4) Bouwmeester and Pietrangelo were obvious weak points on the team against Latvia. One blemish cost them a goal. A couple more in the neutral zone could've cost the Canadians more, but they recovered on those plays. Neither player pushed enough in the offensive zone either, and it has to have Babcock considering some tinkering.
5) Carey Price faced 16 shots against Latvia, and in a tied hockey game, or up by just a goal, all of them were scoring chances. All of them. Because the circumstances were beyond nerve-wracking.
If he lets one in, he becomes the goat in the most shocking upset in hockey history. You hear that, 1980-Olympic Gold USA team? You hear that Belarus (who beat Sweden in 2002)?
Price obviously didn't let his mind go there. You couldn't see it on his face, but I've never seen more nervous body language from him. Ever!
He made some great saves, and he deserves as much credit as the Canadian goalscorers in the game do.
6) How do you avoid letting your mind go there if you're anyone on Team Canada? How do you avoid thinking that if the puck won't go in, you will be a part of the worst hockey loss, ever?
And no one wants to credit the leaders of that team for keeping the guys calm enough not to change anything in their gameplan. They changed nothing. They kept attacking and attacking and attacking. They drew a penalty--finally, and they scored on the powerplay. And they kept attacking.
And it's up to the country to worry about what's already happened and how it'll affect the team moving forward. As for the members of the team, they have to believe they've gotten this far without any luck whatsoever. Safer to assume none of it's coming, and they'll just have to battle for every inch they get. If some finally does come, maybe people will say they played perfectly.
7) Russia faced major adversity, and they crumbled under it. Was it shocking to see them lose to Finland?
NO.
Any one of the four remaining teams can win gold. For different reasons, they can all do it.
The Russians-- they couldn't do it. It didn't look like they could on paper, and it definitely didn't look like it on the ice, either.
8) There will be 10,000 questions about Mike Babcock's roster for the semifinals, and another 10,000 on how he manages the game, and I can guarantee you that if Canada beats the USA, there will be no credit given to Babcock and his staff. There will only be more second guessing; more suggestions as to how they could've done it better.
Unenviable, but Babcock will take all of it, hedged on what could be the most satisfying win of his career.
9) Kristers Gudlevskis. The name that would've forever haunted Canada.
He looked like he was going to die on the ice, he exerted himself so fully.
They made him look better than he was, at times. It wasn't perfect. But they overcame that. They overcame the pressure of perhaps the most embarrassing loss in hockey's history.
While everyone launches into full panic mode over what they believe will be Canada's demise, is there at all a sense that Canada got better today as a result of what they overcame?
10) Carey Price. He will have to be Canada's MVP if things don't change with their puck-luck (lack thereof). He will probably have to be Canada's MVP even if the scoring chances start turning into goals for Canada.
Is he reason enough to believe in the Canadians?