Neb00rs Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share Posted February 22, 2014 (edited) It has nothing to do with politics. Team USA is a group of All-Stars that get together randomly for two weeks every four years. There's no emotional investement in that team just because they have the uniform on. Granted you don't see any of the Olympians really between Olympics but at least with amateurs you know they train their whole life for this. The pros train their whole life to play in the NHL and win the Stanley Cup, they're just hired guns in a competition like this, much like the basketball Dream Teams. If anything I'm at the point where I'm glad they're getting shown up now so they DO clean out all the old guard in management. Though I was not rooting against Team USA, just not rooting for them, I definitely agree with this post and can get on board with that last point. While I find it very funny that the OP used a joke column by a Canadian writer to help his point (not a joke in that it is crap, but the point of the column was meant in jest), and while I think his reasons for hating each player a little ridiculous, it's perfectly fine that he couldn't get into rooting for Team USA. Not sure why he deserves a lot of hate. You spend all year, every year rooting against these players, and they get re-branded as Team USA for two weeks every 4 years and you HAVE to love them, now? For some Team USA > NJ Devils and the NHL. For some it isn't. There doesn't have to be a right or a wrong. It's not quite accurate to say the column was "written in jest." It was written in a light-hearted manner in the spirit of good old trash talk but that doesn't change the fact that the points he makes about some of the USA players (whom I can't really say that I hate, as much as 'just don't care for') are valid. Harrison Mooney has been repeating the same type of trash-talk this whole Olympics; some of it slightly funny, the rest of it somewhat obnoxious. I don't think anyone "bought the article wholesale" like Triumph posits, nor would that even negate the facts within it. The rest of your post obviously I agree with. That's exactly it - Team USA hockey is not that big of a deal. Rooting for or against them is not akin to being a good citizen or benedict arnolding your country respectively. The part I bolded is a specifically eloquent way of putting it. I also DEFINITELY don't consider a USA win more important than the Devils winning. In a game of the Devils vs. Team USA, I would root for the Devils in a heartbeat. Edited February 22, 2014 by Neb00rs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landofvanilla Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 A couple of instances of international sports make it hard for me to take it seriously.. Russia trying to get Galchenyuk and USA soccer trying to get Rossi. Its like they don't care where their players allegiances lie... just want to stack their team up as much as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsrule33 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 (edited) International sports mean more than the pros to me because there are no salaries and the players are playing for their country, an entity that has real meaning, rather than playing for whatever billionaire owner gave them the biggest contract to be a product in their business. Players can't be traded or sign with another team, their country is always their country. There is no entry draft in place to promote every team getting a chance to contend every few years, the countries just need to produce better players. While I am a fan of the NHL, it just doesn't have the same meaning to me. The Devils' players generally speaking really don't have much attachment to New Jersey. They are just hired to play here. "New Jersey Devils" is really just a business, but Team USA has meaning outside of hockey. In international sports, and in college too, the players have the same connection to the team that the fans do. I don't know really about any of this. Your opinion is fine, but for these players wearing the NHL sweater of the team that drafted them could be just as important as wearing a country's sweater. For the players it is about the love they get and the support. You kind of get overwhelmed if you win a gold because you have an entire country backing you, which has to be a surreal experience. Having said that, say you are Patrick Marleau. You have been a Shark for 15 years. You win a gold in Sochi and go right back to the US minutes after you win. You win a Stanley Cup for SJ, I would think that one has a bigger meaning. New Jersey is always going to be a bad example because there isn't a great connection between the state or a city and the team. It would be different for many other teams and players that might very well have that connection. I don't hate anyone on team Canada, but I have no interest in rooting for these hired guns, as someone said earlier, for two weeks when I root against them all year around. I don't have the connection with any of them, and I really don't care if they win or lose. You speak of attachment, but it is a two-way street. Even if they did have the attachment they wanted, they would just be let down because the average fan turns on a player much faster than a player turns on an organization. You say it is a job or a business, but fans are into the business of winning, and that's it. Edited February 22, 2014 by devilsrule33 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aylbert Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 I personally don't feel a need to cheer on my country in the Olympics. Why? because they are sporting events. In war, of course. But I was personally pulling for the Czechs tbh, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 I don't know really about any of this. Your opinion is fine, but for these players wearing the NHL sweater of the team that drafted them could be just as important as wearing a country's sweater. For the players it is about the love they get and the support. You kind of get overwhelmed if you win a gold because you have an entire country backing you, which has to be a surreal experience. Having said that, say you are Patrick Marleau. You have been a Shark for 15 years. You win a gold in Sochi and go right back to the US minutes after you win. You win a Stanley Cup for SJ, I would think that one has a bigger meaning. New Jersey is always going to be a bad example because there isn't a great connection between the state or a city and the team. It would be different for many other teams and players that might very well have that connection. I don't hate anyone on team Canada, but I have no interest in rooting for these hired guns, as someone said earlier, for two weeks when I root against them all year around. I don't have the connection with any of them, and I really don't care if they win or lose. You speak of attachment, but it is a two-way street. Even if they did have the attachment they wanted, they would just be let down because the average fan turns on a player much faster than a player turns on an organization. You say it is a job or a business, but fans are into the business of winning, and that's it. The Stanley Cup is more meaningful because it is the same legendary trophy that is competed for every year and you get your name on it as opposed to new medals being made every four years, it is the end goal of an entire year of games and practices with mostly the same teammates, and when a lot of these players were growing up, the Olympics wasn't a goal because the best in the world weren't eligible to play. I root against Callahan and McDonagh all year because of the team they are on, I have nothing against them as hockey players so why should I not support them on Team USA? I can understand being indifferent, but I would never root against USA. The players on that team are the ones I have the most in common with. They grew up in the same part of the world and generally with the same culture and lifestyle I have compared to the players from other countries. I can't wrap my head around people born and raised in New Jersey who root for the Rangers, and it makes even less sense to me that someone would support another country over their own in international sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landofvanilla Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 (edited) I think it has to do with separating in your mind between the team and who they represent. Being a fan for my entire life, I see these players as just players. When they're assembled as team for their countries, I still see the players. The players have more in common with each other than with me. In the case of Canada and USA and to a lesser extent the Europeans, they practically live together, they raise their families in each others' countries. Our cultures are not that different. Hell, why do some people emigrate and call other places home, places not where they happen to be born? It's not that hard to fathom. It would be different if there were never any NHL and all the players could only play in their home countries and then they meet every 4 years to duke it out. Gets back to that emotional investment bit someone else brought up. Edited February 22, 2014 by landofvanilla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgb6397 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 I liked this team. If anything, I welcomed rooting for players like Callahan and JVR because while in the NHL I'm tempted not to like them because of their teams, they're actually very likable players and I'm glad they played for "my team" to some capacity. I'll admit I was at a crossroads with Parise though, while I've more or less forgiven him, i still felt myself rooting against him. This team was poorly constructed in a few ways, omitting Ryan, Okposo, Bishop/Schneider etc. for who they were beaten by was a bad move, but to suggest it was done because of "politics" is silly. The only one you can kind of see is Orpik, as Bylsma is his coach, but even so, it doesn't mean it was done in a dirty way or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarDew Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 I stopped watching and caring about the Olympics once professionals started playing. I believe the Olympics are for amateurs. Professionals, regardless of sport, take away a dream from them, imo. They cannot be over soon enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devlin Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 I stopped watching and caring about the Olympics once professionals started playing. I believe the Olympics are for amateurs. Professionals, regardless of sport, take away a dream from them, imo. They cannot be over soon enough. I just had a conversation about this at work and said the same thing, I stopped caring once pros were allowed to participate. Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted February 23, 2014 Author Share Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) I actually never understood the "pros shouldn't go" argument. The point of the Olympics to me, is to see sport at its highest levels on the World's stage, which you wouldn't get with amateurs. With your definition of "pros" almost every athlete in the games would be ineligible; from skiing to bobsledding, they are all paid pros whenever they are not participating in the Olympics (and even during those two weeks as far as sponsorships go). I have watched some great hockey at the Winter games - especially the past 3 or 4 tournaments and would be sad to see the players end there participation in the event. However, the wide ice (as earlier posters mentioned), lack of parity (only 6 or 7 teams out of the whole IIHF really stand a chance...but that may change), and the unlikable U.S. program (which will stay that way as long as Brian Burke has anything to do with Team USA), all make the viewing experience less pleasurable and make me somewhat apathetic about South Korea 2018. IMO. Edited February 23, 2014 by Neb00rs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazer Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) I actually never understood the "parise shouldn't go" argument. fixed; now you do Edited February 23, 2014 by lazer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 Couldn't read all this, but I always root for the Americans. not matter what NHL sweater they wear. And I am rooting for the King With No Rings to beat those friggin' obnoxious Canucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgeControl Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 Would take the post more seriously if it was written day one of the tourney......... ZZZzzz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarDew Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 I actually never understood the "pros shouldn't go" argument. The point of the Olympics to me, is to see sport at its highest levels on the World's stage, which you wouldn't get with amateurs. With your definition of "pros" almost every athlete in the games would be ineligible; from skiing to bobsledding, they are all paid pros whenever they are not participating in the Olympics (and even during those two weeks as far as sponsorships go). I have watched some great hockey at the Winter games - especially the past 3 or 4 tournaments and would be sad to see the players end there participation in the event. There will never be another Miracle on Ice. They were amateurs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 The whole "pros shouldn't go" is nonsense. Those original Olympic rules barring professionals was created at a time when there really weren't professional leagues like we have today. I'm glad the Olympics are turning the tide on that silliness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoffeecake Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 This is about supporting the team that represents the hockey system we all played in. Like it or not, whether you're patriotic or you aren't, these are the hockey representatives of the place you're from, and I also don't care who is playing and who isn't. Do I think it's bullsh!t Andy Greene's name didn't even come up? Absolutely, but that's just how it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted February 24, 2014 Author Share Posted February 24, 2014 Would take the post more seriously if it was written day one of the tourney......... ZZZzzz This is the second time this nonsensical argument has been offered in this thread. I didn't say "I told you all the USA would lose!" or "The USA was not good enough to compete." In those instances you might have a point. But that's not the case. I posted that I don't like the players and managers of the team and so I couldn't root for them this year. It wouldn't matter if I posted it today. If anything, it was proper and respectful to wait until the team lost to make a post condemning them as opposed to being negative when the team is winning. You can "ZZZzzz" all you want but you have failed to contribute to the debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 still waiting for an answer as why people bashed Zach while he got 8 shots in the semi final but if a Devils player would have got 8 shots in a game he'd be some kind of god... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redruM Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 You root for the flag, the county , not the players!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils Pride 26 Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 still waiting for an answer as why people bashed Zach while he got 8 shots in the semi final but if a Devils player would have got 8 shots in a game he'd be some kind of god... Because his shot is extremely weak. He literally didn't do a thing all tournament. One goal that pavelic kicked in in a blow out. He has no vision, and what was once his top asset, his speed, looked incredible average. He can't raise his game when the stakes are higher (playoffs and Olympics) because he is a glorified grinder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 (edited) Because his shot is extremely weak. He literally didn't do a thing all tournament. One goal that pavelic kicked in in a blow out. He has no vision, and what was once his top asset, his speed, looked incredible average. He can't raise his game when the stakes are higher (playoffs and Olympics) because he is a glorified grinder yeah well i get that dont get me wrong, but why do people here look strictly at "shots" without looking any farther if they were quality shots or nothing. Strictly look at shots numbers to make points. Thats what i absolutely don't get or would like to point out. its either really cherry picking, hypocrite, double standard or wtv... but really you really can't do both lol and there's a reason i never got an answer cause people know it's right and their stuck in a corner so they rather stay silent Edited February 24, 2014 by SterioDesign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Because his shot is extremely weak. He literally didn't do a thing all tournament. One goal that pavelic kicked in in a blow out. He has no vision, and what was once his top asset, his speed, looked incredible average. He can't raise his game when the stakes are higher (playoffs and Olympics) because he is a glorified grinder And I hope the Olympics help get through some Devils fans head's who are still whining about losing Zach why in the long run it is better we let him walk, especially for that kind of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsrule33 Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Because his shot is extremely weak. He literally didn't do a thing all tournament. One goal that pavelic kicked in in a blow out. He has no vision, and what was once his top asset, his speed, looked incredible average. He can't raise his game when the stakes are higher (playoffs and Olympics) because he is a glorified grinder Which NHL star raises their game when the stakes get higher , let alone constantly? Parise is who he is. A very good NHL player. His game doesn't suit international hockey very much as others have pointed out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 And I hope the Olympics help get through some Devils fans head's who are still whining about losing Zach why in the long run it is better we let him walk, especially for that kind of money. Him not producing in the olympic (4 games) surely totally eclipse the reality that we havent made the playoffs, are struggling scoring, especially in SO and have Salvador as captain since he left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Yeah, the Olympics have nothing to do with Parise's performance in the NHL. He is just a mediocre player on big ice - I'm not even sure he would be one of the best players in the KHL if he played there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.