[GDT] Ongoing 2025 WJC Game Day Thread

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Y
Do you really think they picked this team to try and prove a point and not to win a gold medal?
Even if we picked all the consensus best players we still might’ve lost. Would we still say they were trying to prove they were the smartest guys in the room?

I'll answer, because I'm firmly believe it the same as Scorp.

Yes - Yes they did pick this team to try and prove a point.

When literally every hockey analyst not paid by Team Canada is scratching their heads with over half a dozen players omitted, there's a serious 'bias' problem.

They weren't picked because Cameron and the selection committee thought they were smarter than the eye test and statistical backup to prove it. They claimed to build a team to "compete with the U.S's power" but failed to show anything of the sort.

If you honestly believe there was no bias, and that they picked the absolute best players to give them a shot at gold then I would argue I'm equally puzzled as well.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

You’re the most recent one to post this out of dozens so I’m gonna reply to you but why do people keep saying this stupid bull####? What do you mean act like they’re smarter than everyone else? They were paid to pick a team and they picked the team that they thought would win. They didn’t pick a team to try and flex their IQ skills.

Do you really think they picked this team to try and prove a point and not to win a gold medal?

We can all admit, they made a bad move, but all of this smartest guy in the room stuff makes no sense. No one picked this team because they thought they were the smartest guy in the room. They picked it because they were people with years of experience in Canadian hockey who were hired to pick a team to win gold.

Dave Cameron did a terrible job. But he and the rest of hockey Canada didn’t pick this team as a flex.

Even if we picked all the consensus best players we still might’ve lost. Would we still say they were trying to prove they were the smartest guys in the room?

Defence wins championships but so does skill and we left skill at home. That has nothing to do with anyone thinking they’re the smartest guy in the room. It’s basic coaching philosophy.

Stop defending incompetence. It is not a good look.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

I've never seen him do this. He's usually pretty even keeled. But this is new (low) level for him. It's sad to watch.

Now Duthie throws out the 'robbed' phrase.

Everything but a team that just wasn't good enough.

Yeah it’s really bad a shame really. He’s always been one of the best.

[Junglist]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Yeah it’s really bad a shame really. He’s always been one of the best.

and still is, sorry you dont like his opinion.

[MonaTone]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

I get that they are trying to deflect hate from the players. But TSN is really embarrassing themselves here.

The coaches sucked. The players were not good enough. And Hockey Canada is better at covering up sexual assault than picking a good roster.

No victory celebrations = no secret payouts later on?

Losing as a cost saving measure by hockey Canada.

[carmenshoes]

The first "knee" should have be two not five.

The second "knee" is the right call.

Yes the refs didn't have their best game. There was a high stick to the face that was missed.

[MRCboicgy]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Agreed. Every international tourney is the same. They focus on head shots, kneeing, hits from behind. This is nothing new.

Which is why the McKenna headshot non-call was so baffling because they usually call that to the Mahomes standard we see in the NFL these days.

Going back 25 years of watching this tourney, I've never seen a group of players so unprepared for the on-ice situations.

[Sandman]

Ya know, I think we can do away with the argument that they didn't pick the right team. While I do agree that they left some of the best players at home, the team they picked should STILL be competing for Gold. The team they had was GOOD ENOUGH, but the coach was not.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

The McKenna thing seemed to just be the refs thinking he fell over. Which he partially did. It wasn't cut and dry.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Ferarri

This didn’t feel like a Canadian team with an identity. In a short tournament a coach plays a pivotal role in finding the right balance and combinations. Cameron was a terrible evaluator of talent and never pushed the right buttons. His deflection and tone deaf replies when asked tough questions further proves his arrogance.

Hockey Canada has a lot to answer for and one would hope this would spark some significant change. As others have mentioned, the skill gap between us and other countries continues to shrink. You can’t leave talented players off the roster and still expect to win.

To play like this on home ice and leave the tournament early is not acceptable. I’m hoping the media cranks up the pressure and makes a lot of noise about the players, coaches and executives. Changes to Hockey Canada are long overdue.

O'Neill kind of mentioned a few minutes ago that (paraphrasing) in a tourney like this you bring your best players and make some of the highly skilled players fit into roles. Don't go so heavy on bottom 6 players. Then if you need a gamebreaker or 2 they're already on your roster.

I think we'll (hopefully) see a new mindset next year with the evaluation camp and selections. Something has to give.

[dieHARDflameZ]

Originally Posted by Royle9

I'll answer, because I'm firmly believe it the same as Scorp.

Yes - Yes they did pick this team to try and prove a point.

When literally every hockey analyst not paid by Team Canada is scratching their heads with over half a dozen players omitted, there's a serious 'bias' problem.

They weren't picked because Cameron and the selection committee thought they were smarter than the eye test and statistical backup to prove it. They claimed to build a team to "compete with the U.S's power" but failed to show anything of the sort.

If you honestly believe there was no bias, and that they picked the absolute best players to give them a shot at gold then I would argue I'm equally puzzled as well.

Not only did they fail miserably to compete with the US’s power, they also failed to compete with checks notes, Latvia and Czechia. Genius stuff.

[Junglist]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Ya know, I think we can do away with the argument that they didn't pick the right team. While I do agree that they left some of the best players at home, the team they picked should STILL be competing for Gold. The team they had was GOOD ENOUGH, but the coach was not.

The proper picked team, even with Cameron still makes the Finals.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Ya know, I think we can do away with the argument that they didn't pick the right team. While I do agree that they left some of the best players at home, the team they picked should STILL be competing for Gold. The team they had was GOOD ENOUGH, but the coach was not.

Wait, what? What about this game and tournament made you think we should do away with the argument that they didn't pick the best team?

I mean you literally said in your own post that you "agree that they left some of their best players at home".

[ben voyonsdonc]

When the team plays more than one good game in the entire tournament, I’ll start to hear the argument about bad reffing.

Dave Cameron was so bad that an American saboteur acting as head coach couldn’t have done a better job ruining our chances.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Wait, what? What about this game and tournament made you think we should do away with the argument that they didn't pick the best team?

I mean you literally said in your own post that you "agree that they left some of their best players at home".

That's right, but the team they picked was more than good enough to be playing for Gold. I should have used the word "excuse" rather than "argument".

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Sandman

That's right, but the team they picked was more than good enough to be playing for Gold.

We don't know that at all, though. You pick your best team possible and we didn't do that. you can't rest on "well, any team Canada picks should be fighting for Gold", that's silly.

[dieHARDflameZ]

I’m certain 100% of people on this forum could have picked a roster that would have at least made it to the semis.

[memphusk]

Dave Cameron. Ahahahahahaahah

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by jayswin

We don't know that at all, though. You pick your best team possible and we didn't do that. you can't rest on "well, any team Canada picks should be fighting for Gold", that's silly.

I didn't say "any" team would be fighting for Gold- the blame should be on the coach, not the roster. This team is still one of the best rosters in the tournament, even without the guys we left at home.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Sandman

I didn't say "any" team would be fighting for Gold- the blame should be on the coach, not the roster. This team is still one of the best rosters in the tournament, even without the guys we left at home.

The blame is on the coach and roster. The roster was not the best selected and therefore is majorly to blame for bowing out this early. The world juniors are way more evenly matched these days, Canada is falling and needs to select it's best roster each year to win Gold, and they didn't do that.