At 1:38 PM -0400 9/16/96, Adam Wodon-Around the Rinks wrote:
> A Canadian friend, before the tournament, said he didn't realize LeClair and
> Tkachuk were Americans because they "played like Canadians."  I realized he
> meant nothing vicious by the comment, but I was a little offended.
 
I would not have been offended at this - actually, quite the opposite.  For
a long time, the US has shown it can produce talented players, but to win
at the pro level, you need players who are capable of the physical play
too.  And I am probably more of a fan of the hard-working, physical aspect
of hockey than many college fans (comes from years growing up watching the
Big Bad Bruins, I guess).  Those of you out there who have played with me
know that this is the way I play when I get out there (except when Heather
is hacking me viciously :-)).
 
It has usually been the case that the better physical players have been
Canadians, and so it really should be taken as a great compliment when one
says that guys like Leclair and Tkachuk "play like Canadians".  There is no
shame in being able to excel at emulating the style of play of the best,
wherever they are from.  And these guys and others show that Americans, and
not just those who go through major junior instead of US high school or
college, are just as capable of playing that way.
 
Another product of the US system - high school, at least - is Jeremy
Roenick, who is very similar to these other two players and did not even
play in the tournament.
 
> In the last couple of years, US colleges seems to be losing more recruits to
> juniors than they did in the late 80's -- Let's hope that changes once again
> --- and this way, we can continue to have great US players, who also played
> collegiately.
 
This is a good point - for the most part, the former collegians on Team USA
went through college hockey a number of years ago.  There aren't too many
recent grads who seem to be as good as the players on this team.  It is
hard to say whether major junior really is a better development path than
US college, but it is true that that is the perception and that more and
more good American players are choosing the major junior route.  Still, the
achievements of the players on 1996 Team USA do prove that you can go
through college and become a good player, and maybe this will indeed be a
boost for US college hockey.
 
BTW, to follow up on something that Craig Lisko said in a great message
about the Canadian perspective,
 
>   I want to whole-heartedly congratulate the US team on winning but also
>   state that Canada may still be looked to as the greatest hockey country.
 
I don't think there would be any argument about that, not from me anyway.
I even commented soon after the game that if there was a tourney for each
country's "second team", then Canada would likely win handily.
 
But the reason this is so important of a win is that in every tournament in
the past in which each country was able to send its best players, the US
could never come close to being considered the best team, not even the 1991
Canada Cup.  They never had the ability to put together even one team that
was as good as that from anyplace else.  Now that has changed.  The first
step in attempting to come close to what Canadian hockey is, in terms of
depth, is to be able to build one team that can be looked at as the
leaders, to inspire those who will come afterwards.  That is why the 1980
team was so important, and it is also why this team is so important.  It
will be interesting to see how things may have changed in 2012, in another
16 years.  Look at how far college hockey has come since 1980.
 
I also think the way in which people from the two countries have reacted to
this result is something worthy of note.  Despite their jubilation, most
American hockey fans, I believe, have a real empathy and understanding of
what hockey means to Canada, and in a very real way we feel for the
Canadians after having lost such a tough tournament.  At the same time,
despite the disappointing loss, Canadians understand what this win means to
US hockey and have an honest respect for what Team USA accomplished.  Maybe
this is the lasting effect of a tournament like this.  In the end, the
biggest winner is hockey itself.
 
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                   [log in to unmask]            *HMM* 11/13/93
*****       Unofficial Merrimack Hockey home page located at:       *****
*****   http://www.tiac.net/users/machnik/MChockey/MChockey.html    *****
>>>  14Sep96 11:16PM USA 5, Canada 2: It's A Great Day For US Hockey  <<<
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.