2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

[Arafel]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

There hasn’t been this much controversy since Herb Brooks picked his 1980 team.
If this D3 Flatulenceburgh coach is so great, why hasn’t one of the D1 schools hired him?
Does anybody know what happened to Klee or are we just going with he was fired?
Haven’t they won both the tournaments they have been in with Stauber as the head coach?

And that's instructive in some ways. Compare what Brooks did to what Stauber is doing. Brooks felt his players were complacent and said he was going to bring in Tim Harrer. The players revolted and stood up to Brooks, who decided not to bring in Harrer and then cut Ralph Cox and Jack Hughes to finalize the roster.

Stauber by contrast keeps adding players to the roster right after the U.S. has a dominant performance in the Four Nations Cup. He says these new additions "bring something that's missing." All I can ask is, "What was missing, losses?" The team had one loss to Canada prior to the additions, and is 0-4 since.

 

[Lindsay]

And that's instructive in some ways. Compare what Brooks did to what Stauber is doing. Brooks felt his players were complacent and said he was going to bring in Tim Harrer. The players revolted and stood up to Brooks, who decided not to bring in Harrer and then cut Ralph Cox and Jack Hughes to finalize the roster.

Stauber by contrast keeps adding players to the roster right after the U.S. has a dominant performance in the Four Nations Cup. He says these new additions "bring something that's missing." All I can ask is, "What was missing, losses?" The team had one loss to Canada prior to the additions, and is 0-4 since.

I am not understanding the conspiracy theory here. Head Coach Stauber is trying to lose? Is that the argument?

 

[MaizeRage]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I don't think college coaches are a problem. The players on the team are already either in college or post college, so what agenda do they have that is screwing the team? They failed under Stone and Johnson, but all the game and player management and player skill evaluation experience is a huge asset. I'd take either one of those again over Stauber just based on that alone.

I think what he's referring to is that many people feel that Stone took players from Harvard that otherwise would have had no chance at making the team so that she could bolster her recruiting by bragging about how many Olympians Harvard had.

 

[Arafel]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I am not understanding the conspiracy theory here. Head Coach Stauber is trying to lose? Is that the argument?

Peripherally. What I have heard rumblings about is that USA Hockey is not happy with how much egg they had on their faces after the successful player boycott in March. After the women won that fight, and then won the Worlds, and then followed that up with a dominant performance in the Four Nations Cup, USA Hockey doesn't want them to win the Olympics.

USA Hockey wants to knock the women down a peg. The Olympics are the biggest stage. What better way to do it and then be able to justify cutting player salaries, e.g. "You still can't win when it matters."

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

Peripherally. What I have heard rumblings about is that USA Hockey is not happy with how much egg they had on their faces after the successful player boycott in March. After the women won that fight, and then won the Worlds, and then followed that up with a dominant performance in the Four Nations Cup, USA Hockey doesn't want them to win the Olympics.

USA Hockey wants to knock the women down a peg. The Olympics are the biggest stage. What better way to do it and then be able to justify cutting player salaries, e.g. "You still can't win when it matters."

I know we have our differences but this is such a dumb argument, come on.

FWIW (almost nothing) one of the players I spoke with who definitely has incentive to think this would have to do with the boycott said this has, quote, "nothing to do with the boycott whatsoever."

EDIT: Hanlon's Razor.

 

[Lindsay]

Peripherally. What I have heard rumblings about is that USA Hockey is not happy with how much egg they had on their faces after the successful player boycott in March. After the women won that fight, and then won the Worlds, and then followed that up with a dominant performance in the Four Nations Cup, USA Hockey doesn't want them to win the Olympics.

USA Hockey wants to knock the women down a peg. The Olympics are the biggest stage. What better way to do it and then be able to justify cutting player salaries, e.g. "You still can't win when it matters."

Hmm. Well, it is interesting to say the least. I appreciate your explanation. I struggle to see a head coach being in on such a thing, though. They are, literally, on the same team as the girls.

I think my greatest issue has been the abandonment of a stated process, by adding one and then two players, late in the game. Coaches and programs sell a process to their players. Presumably, players buy in. When the coaches/program abandon a process it breaks trust that has been established, and distracts from their common goal. As someone astutely pointed out on Twitter, if USA loses, they will blame the girls only. And that sucks, because this process had to have been challenging for the girls, but it is leadership who is responsible for it.

The girls very well may win in South Korea. They were close games, the last four. Nonetheless - Skarupa, Morin, and Barnes are going without the full centralization experience. That is just dumb, there’s no other way to put it.

As far Carpenter not making it, I am more inclined to think it’s just politics. Every player has people in their corner. This year, Carpenter didn’t have enough in her corner I guess. It is weird of course, you’d think there would be room without all the Harvard people Stone brought along last time.

 

[Arafel]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I know we have our differences but this is such a dumb argument, come on.

FWIW (almost nothing) one of the players I spoke with who definitely has incentive to think this would have to do with the boycott said this has, quote, "nothing to do with the boycott whatsoever."

EDIT: Hanlon's Razor.

OK, but as I said, look at the facts of what's been going on Tony.

1) US women boycott, win boycott, go on to win Worlds on home ice in front of sold-out crowd (something USA Hockey didn't expect)
2) US women win first game against Canada 5-2. Lose next one, 5-1, Cayla Barnes brought in, US win Four Nations Cup, sweeping all games, including two against Canada.
3) US women were told of centralization plan well in advance. Was supposed to be one team.
4) USA Hockey/Stauber break centralization promise, add Skarupa and Morin, Stauber says "Something is Missing" despite US winning Four Nations with two wins over Canada
5) US goes 0-4 against Canada since additions. Despite this, Stauber states "These call-ups have added something that was missing, and made us better."

In what universe do 4 and 5 make sense given 1-3? Your team is humming along, has great chemistry, has beaten its biggest rival in the last three tournaments, and right after sweeping the Four Nations the coach decides to add players and make the existing ones compete in some sort of Hunger Games for their spot, right after SWEEPING Canada. They've gone 0-4 since the additions, but Stauber doggedly states the additions have been crucial and made the team better.

Regarding better, again I ask, better at what? Losing?

 

[joecct]

I know we have our differences but this is such a dumb argument, come on.

FWIW (almost nothing) one of the players I spoke with who definitely has incentive to think this would have to do with the boycott said this has, quote, "nothing to do with the boycott whatsoever."

EDIT: Hanlon's Razor.

Nothing USA Hockey does surprises me. Nothing.

 

[shelfit]

Nothing USA Hockey does surprises me. Nothing.

Agreed. Surprises, never. Disappoints, absolutely!

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

In what universe do 4 and 5 make sense given 1-3?

One with incompetent people.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

Ultimately, it comes down to what shelfit said...If they win gold then all the second guessing will really not matter. Anything else, it's open season.

 

[pokechecker]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I think my greatest issue has been the abandonment of a stated process, by adding one and then two players, late in the game. .

This is true, but equally true is that if the players are so fragile that they cannot deal with adversity, then maybe they are not gold medal material. Athletics is, after all, about overcoming adversity.
I get what you are saying though, notwithstanding Hanlon’s Razor, but sometimes the best laid plans go awry, sticking with the plan if there is a problem with it is as stupid as not sticking with a plan that is working.
We don’t really know why they brought in three new players and cut three that have impressive resumes of accomplishment. And we may never know. But don’t stop anybody from advancing conspiracy theories, we need something to entertain us before the games begin.

I thought the purpose of The Time Is Now was to increase interest in women's hockey.
Then I saw one of the games, boring!!!
It is ironic that what goes on away from the ice gets more attention and interest than what happens on the ice.
or is it?

 

[play-by-play guy]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

The more I think on this, the more I wonder if this isn't some sort of retribution for the boycott in March. If not, it's just utter incompetence from Stauber. It makes no sense on the face of it. Look at the facts:

- U.S. defeats Canada and wins women's worlds in April, bringing new attention to game after successful player boycott
- U.S. sweeps Canada twice and also defeats Sweden and Finland in Four Nations Cup early November, looks dominant.
- Stauber announces player additions shortly thereafter, rumors of players all being on edge.
- U.S. hasn't defeated Canada since.

I'm beginning to think there is a lot more going on.

There is....a LOT more. I promised my sources not to say too much at this time, but Stauber has lost many, if not most of this team.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I think what he's referring to is that many people feel that Stone took players from Harvard that otherwise would have had no chance at making the team so that she could bolster her recruiting by bragging about how many Olympians Harvard had.

The only egregious item I recall was Chu on and Pankowski off.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I think my greatest issue has been the abandonment of a stated process, by adding one and then two players, late in the game. Coaches and programs sell a process to their players. Presumably, players buy in. When the coaches/program abandon a process it breaks trust that has been established, and distracts from their common goal. As someone astutely pointed out on Twitter, if USA loses, they will blame the girls only. And that sucks, because this process had to have been challenging for the girls, but it is leadership who is responsible for it.

I agree 100%.

 

[Puckdrop14]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

Canada's roster is out. Looks like no Potomak, no Kryczaniak (apologize for the spelling) and no Hart.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

Canada's roster is out. Looks like no Potomak, no Kryczaniak (apologize for the spelling) and no Hart.

The Potomak sisters got locked out, interesting.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

The only egregious item I recall was Chu on and Pankowski off.

Lyndsey Fry over Brandt or Skarupa...

 

[shelfit]

Take the players that were cut from the US and Canadian teams during this process and make two teams of those players and there's your Bronze medal game. In other words the rest of the world still has a long way to go to catch up. I just hope women's hockey remains an Olympic sport for a long time to come.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2018 USA Olympic Women's Hockey Team

OK, but as I said, look at the facts of what's been going on Tony.

1) US women boycott, win boycott, go on to win Worlds on home ice in front of sold-out crowd (something USA Hockey didn't expect)
2) US women win first game against Canada 5-2. Lose next one, 5-1, Cayla Barnes brought in, US win Four Nations Cup, sweeping all games, including two against Canada.
3) US women were told of centralization plan well in advance. Was supposed to be one team.
4) USA Hockey/Stauber break centralization promise, add Skarupa and Morin, Stauber says "Something is Missing" despite US winning Four Nations with two wins over Canada
5) US goes 0-4 against Canada since additions. Despite this, Stauber states "These call-ups have added something that was missing, and made us better."

In what universe do 4 and 5 make sense given 1-3? Your team is humming along, has great chemistry, has beaten its biggest rival in the last three tournaments, and right after sweeping the Four Nations the coach decides to add players and make the existing ones compete in some sort of Hunger Games for their spot, right after SWEEPING Canada. They've gone 0-4 since the additions, but Stauber doggedly states the additions have been crucial and made the team better.

Regarding better, again I ask, better at what? Losing?

There is....a LOT more. I promised my sources not to say too much at this time, but Stauber has lost many, if not most of this team.

There's a huge, huge difference between "the coach has lost the team" to "the coach is sabotaging things." Coaches lose teams all the time.

Not only that, but this team isn't exactly not talented. They cut one of their best players. They still have like two dozen others. At the absolute worst, their chances to win gold are, what, 10% worse now? What purpose does it serve USA Hockey to try and get "Revenge" on the players by making them have a 40% chance of winning gold rather than 50%?

It is far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, FAR more likely that Stauber lost the team and cut players that he thought didn't buy in to his (probably bad) way of doing things, rather than some kind of petty, not-all-that-effective-anyway "sabotaging" of their chances to win gold.

I get that everyone's mad, but a coach making a stupid, unpopular decision is not evidence of them trying to intentionally lose. This stuff happens every day in every sport.

And PS, there's no benefit to USA Hockey here to sabotage the team. Do you really think them winning silver one time after winning gold in all those World Championships the last 4 years is going to give them an excuse to reneg on the agreement made with the players? You guys aren't looking at this with a clear head.