RANT: The state of hockey development in Canada is completely broken, and national pride/arrogance is preventing us from fixing it

[PureQuickness]

6 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Go tell this poster below that. 

 

 

You have by far been the most fervent defender of Hockey Canada in this thread.  The news that is breaking today is actually old-ass news.  I have repeatedly stated how they've put an insane amount of effort into covering up scandals and not focusing on improving hockey development.  And all you keep spouting is medals medals medals.  I'm talking about the influence that Hockey Canada has over the THOUSANDS of kids trying to make their way through the various junior systems across the country, and here you're talking about medals medals medals.  What the fuck does a Junior A league in British Columbia have anything to do with World Championships?

 

I'll post one thing for you: how significant are playoff runs? Playoff revenue.

 

No one with an educated mind will say "playoff runs mean nothing". Similarly, tournament PERFORMANCES mean something. Medals mean something. You cannot talk about performance without talking about tangible success. You can't just cherrypick whatever you want to talk about to support a point that is disputable.

[PureQuickness]

8 minutes ago, Provost said:

You are missing some very key elements to make what you are saying true.

 

The US is larger, but hockey is more of a fringe sport choice there.  In Canada it is the sport of choice.  Canada is the Goliath in hockey and you are making it seem the other way around.

 

No one said Hockey Canada was just the juniors so you are batting at windmills there.

 

If you look at OPs post, the basis of his argument is that all the junior players are flocking elsewhere (i.e. the US), which is the argument that US hockey programs are supposedly superior to Canada.

 

OP won't even consider medal counts, or the fact that the US has done worse than Canada on an international level (he'll downplay this)

 

US is larger. Period. A lot larger.

 

You say hockey is a fringe sport in the US - partially true, but the US programs are not poor. There's lots of SERIOUSLY underrated US schools (i.e. North Dakota). They love their hockey. It's not fringe there. UMichigan for example take their hockey very seriously. So to say that hockey is a fringe sport is just relying on stereotypes.

 

What I'm trying to say is that the US academic system is better. Had OP talked about this and made an argument that we need to improve our education system to better support our players, I would be 100 percent in agreement.

 

The problem is that Miss Korea is deliberately targetting Hockey Canada as an entity, which leads me to think he has a personal vendetta with it. He's missing the mark on his arguments and then changes the argument when those weaknesses are addressed by me.

 

This poster is just coming across to me as a person who is upset with Hockey Canada, but can't put their finger on why.

 

Edited January 24 by PureQuickness

[Miss Korea]

5 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

I don't think it is the gold standard at all, so I'm not sure why you're speaking on my behalf. I've made the argument that the US has always been bigger in scale, so naturally, everything else will be magnified. If you were to reverse the positions of Canada and the United States, you would get a similar result, I'm betting.

 

Take this into account: Hockey Canada is more than just the juniors: the programs BEFORE the juniors is also under Hockey Canada jurisdiction. In short, Hockey Canada is a governing body. To say Hockey Canada sucks because of the players flocking elsewhere is a weird thing to say.

 

To be perfectly honest, Canada is doing very well competitively despite its southern neighbour having a lot more resources. There's a reason why we, as a country, has more medals than the US does. Now, OP will say, "well a lot of the Canadian players benefited from the US system". So why is the US underperforming when it matters the most? Medal counts. If what OP is saying is true that the US has a better development program, they should be on par with Canada, but that's not the case.

 

Tournament appearances are one of the biggest reasons for funding. That exposure is proof of a development program flourishing.

 

2 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

It's weird that you start changing the dynamics of your argument as soon as I address a weakness in your point. The SCALE of the two countries has to be considered when making an argument.

 

It's a weak point to say "Look, the US hockey program is doing good because EVERYONE is rushing to go to the US"

 

The US overall has a better academic system, especially when it's paid off for you. To me, it makes sense why people will go there. This is BEYOND a Hockey Canada thing is what I've been trying to tell you.

 

The United States has a better development program because more and more NHLers are coming out of their system.  Even Canadian kids who don't even dream of the NHL as 17 year olds?  They go to college for 4/5 years and realize they can actually go pro.  Because of the way the CHL is structured, you do not have the option to spend an extra 4 years of development.  You either go pro at age 20 or you don't.  That is a feature of Canadian junior hockey.  That's why you see so many goalies go to the states.  That's why you see so many defencemen go to the States.  How many fucking 20 year old goalies or D-men do you see crack the NHL?

 

You are pretending like the United States being a hockey country is suddenly a new thing - like the NCAA didn't exist ten years ago.  It's always been an option for kids around the world.  People chose to go to CANADA in the past because we used to have the best development system in the world.  J.T. Miller went to Canada.  Matthew Tkachuk went to Canada.  Patrick fucking Kane went to Canada.  The fact that nobody comes to Canada anymore for junior hockey is the real proof.

 

This is a numbers game.  Your best odds of making the NHL doesn't have to with what country you represent.  That's nonsense.  The best option (in general) for any kid wanting to go pro is to go to the United States and play hockey.  They can win gold for whatever country they're from.  That has fucking nothing to do with where they choose to play hockey.

[shiznak]

I’m not going through this again. I already went through this on CDC.
 

There’s many pro reasoning why players choose the college route over the CHL, and it has little to do with development. 
- You can get to choose your own path, life after hockey.

- The freedom of getting to choose your own school to attend.

- The facilities.

- Playing with mature players (which I don’t understand.)

- Experiencing the college life. Being independent.

 

When you playing in the CHL, you don’t get to experience those things.

- You start off for the team that drafts you.

- Education is not at its best. 

- High-school gyms.

- Playing with players around your own age.

- Living with your billets.
 

 

Edited January 24 by shiznak

[Miss Korea]

3 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

If you look at OPs post, the basis of his argument is that all the junior players are flocking elsewhere (i.e. the US), which is the argument that US hockey programs are supposedly superior to Canada.

 

OP won't even consider medal counts, or the fact that the US has done worse than Canada on an international level (he'll downplay this)

 

US is larger. Period. A lot larger.

 

You say hockey is a fringe sport in the US - partially true, but the US programs are not poor. There's lots of SERIOUSLY underrated US schools (i.e. North Dakota). They love their hockey. It's not fringe there. UMichigan for example take their hockey very seriously. So to say that hockey is a fringe sport is just relying on stereotypes.

 

What I'm trying to say is that the US academic system is better. Had OP talked about this and made an argument that we need to improve our education system to better support our players, I would be 100 percent in agreement.

 

The problem is that Miss Korea is deliberately targetting Hockey Canada as an entity, which leads me to think he has a personal vendetta with it. He's missing the mark on his arguments and then changes the argument when those weaknesses are addressed by me.

 

This poster is just coming across to me as a person who is upset with Hockey Canada, but can't put their finger on why.

 

Oh, Jesus.  You really come off as someone who has never paid attention to junior hockey in this country.  I have repeatedly mentioned here in this thread the headway that USPORTS has made.  Without looking it up, can you explain to me what USPORTS is?

 

Or better yet, can you explain to me the current situation of the BCHL/AJHL without looking it up?

[PureQuickness]

Just now, Miss Korea said:

 

 

The United States has a better development program because more and more NHLers are coming out of their system.  Even Canadian kids who don't even dream of the NHL as 17 year olds?  They go to college for 4/5 years and realize they can actually go pro.  Because of the way the CHL is structured, you do not have the option to spend an extra 4 years of development.  You either go pro at age 20 or you don't.  That is a feature of Canadian junior hockey.  That's why you see so many goalies go to the states.  That's why you see so many defencemen go to the States.  How many fucking 20 year old goalies or D-men do you see crack the NHL?

 

You are pretending like the United States being a hockey country is suddenly a new thing - like the NCAA didn't exist ten years ago.  It's always been an option for kids around the world.  People chose to go to CANADA in the past because we used to have the best development system in the world.  J.T. Miller went to Canada.  Matthew Tkachuk went to Canada.  Patrick fucking Kane went to Canada.  The fact that nobody comes to Canada anymore for junior hockey is the real proof.

 

This is a numbers game.  Your best odds of making the NHL doesn't have to with what country you represent.  That's nonsense.  The best option (in general) for any kid wanting to go pro is to go to the United States and play hockey.  They can win gold for whatever country they're from.  That has fucking nothing to do with where they choose to play hockey.

 

You DO realize that Hockey Canada has a hand in the hockey programs when they're little kids right?

 

https://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/hockey-programs/coaching/under-7

 

By the time the kids are grown up (14, 15, 16), the mould of these players are evident. They are already well scouted and further development is needed. But to say that Hockey Canada is trash is a weak point. Hockey Canada is more than just "omg junior players"

 

What I'm trying to say is that people who go to the US to go to school do it for the academic opportunities that Canada just doesn't have.

 

The US has always had the muscles to flex itself when needed. 10 years ago, yes, Canada was good. But the US has put more money into hockey. It's not really as much of a fringe sport as it was 10 years ago.

 

So something has got to give: is hockey a fringe sport or not? It's not. Not anymore. Sure, many parts of America don't care about hockey. But if you look at Arizona, the fans of the team LOVE their hockey. (This is more to address Provost's claim that hockey is a fringe sport).

 

So maybe we should stop seeing things in a black and white thing. There's a ton of mixtures. Arizona's fans should be giving up on their teams, but they don't. They still show up to their games.

[PureQuickness]

5 minutes ago, shiznak said:

I’m not going through this again. I already went through this on CDC.
 

There’s many pro reasoning why players choose the college route over the CHL, and it has little to do with development. 
- You can get to choose your own path, life after hockey.

- The freedom of getting to choose your own school to attend.

- The facilities.

- Playing with mature players (which I don’t understand.)

- Experiencing the college life. Being independent.

 

When you playing in the CHL, you don’t get to experience those things.

- You start off for the team that drafts you.

- Education is not at its best. 

- High-school gyms.

- Playing with players around your own age.

- Living with your billets.
 

 

 

Bingo. If OP went with this, I would have been in 100 percent agreement. But nooo, OP has to whine about Hockey Canada being the fault of everything.

 

Our education system unfortunately is the Achilles' heel. OP has been barking at the wrong tree with regards to hockey.

[PureQuickness]

5 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Oh, Jesus.  You really come off as someone who has never paid attention to junior hockey in this country.  I have repeatedly mentioned here in this thread the headway that USPORTS has made.  Without looking it up, can you explain to me what USPORTS is?

 

Or better yet, can you explain to me the current situation of the BCHL/AJHL without looking it up?

 

Let's see you address what @shiznak said about hockey first. I'm not expecting much of a quality response.

[Miss Korea]

3 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

Let's see you address what @shiznak said about hockey first. I'm not expecting much of a quality response.

 

I'm doing that right now.  But you really don't know what USPORTS is, do you?

[Rekker]

 So much to digest with all the Hockey Canada comments. I'm close to the fire with a son who plays Junior A, another playing USports. Both recently leaving Minor Hockey sponsored by Hockey Canada behind. I can say this. Hockey in this country, the development of our players is broken, many issues that I don't have the time to get into. Hockey Canada is guilty by association if nothing else. I don't have the answers, but my feeling is that Canada will slip among the hockey powers of the world, and my opinion, already has. The system is broken and there are l lot of leaks in the dam of player development in this country. Tough times ahead in imho.

[Miss Korea]

Just now, Rekker said:

 So much to digest with all the Hockey Canada comments. I'm close to the fire with a son who plays Junior A, another playing USports. Both recently leaving Minor Hockey sponsored by Hockey Canada behind. I can say this. Hockey in this country, the development of our players is broken, many issues that I don't have the time to get into. Hockey Canada is guilty by association if nothing else. I don't have the answers, but my feeling is that Canada will slip among the hockey powers of the world, and my opinion, already has. The system is broken and there are l lot of leaks in the dam of player development in this country. Tough times ahead in imho.

 

You and I don't agree on ANYTHING.

 

 

So this is a surprise.

[DeltaSwede]

18 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

It's weird that you start changing the dynamics of your argument as soon as I address a weakness in your point. The SCALE of the two countries has to be considered when making an argument.

 

It's a weak point to say "Look, the US hockey program is doing good because EVERYONE is rushing to go to the US"

 

The US overall has a better academic system, especially when it's paid off for you. To me, it makes sense why people will go there. This is BEYOND a Hockey Canada thing is what I've been trying to tell you.

Bro, your arguments are getting weaker and weaker. Canada is falling behind the US in terms of development. No reason to deny that really. Been reading through your exchange with @Miss Korea and you just come across as being in complete denial of that out of pride. 

I hope Hockey Canada adapts and improves for the good of the game. Sweden in the same way has fallen behind on development and should look to learn from other countries programs. 

Hockeys home is Canada. Canada is hockey. Canada and Finland are probably the only countries in the world where hockey is the #1 sport. For the good of ice hockey I want to see a really strong Canada because it's always been the driving force behind the development of the game as a whole. In it's current state I think it puts that in somewhat jeopardy. If it does.. will it be Canadas #1 sport anymore? 

I think it would be a cool thing if larger Canadian universities joined the NCAA for example. I'm not sure the CHL will forever be the top junior level in Canada as we've seen more players opt to go to leagues like the BCHL over the last decade. Now with some AJHL teams joining the BCHL and most likely a larger proportion of players looking to remain NCAA eligible it seems to be the way things are developing. 

Having to change, adapt and progress isn't a bad thing. 

[PureQuickness]

1 minute ago, Miss Korea said:

 

You and I don't agree on ANYTHING.

 

 

So this is a surprise.

 

It's pretty vague to be honest.

 

2 minutes ago, Rekker said:

 So much to digest with all the Hockey Canada comments. I'm close to the fire with a son who plays Junior A, another playing USports. Both recently leaving Minor Hockey sponsored by Hockey Canada behind. I can say this. Hockey in this country, the development of our players is broken, many issues that I don't have the time to get into. Hockey Canada is guilty by association if nothing else. I don't have the answers, but my feeling is that Canada will slip among the hockey powers of the world, and my opinion, already has. The system is broken and there are l lot of leaks in the dam of player development in this country. Tough times ahead in imho.

 

I understand the sensitivity of the events that have happened surrounding Hockey Canada, but how is it "broken"? I think we on some level will ALL agree that all entities (including people) can continually improve from their current points.

 

And to be honest, i still think OP might have some valid points, but they are using the wrong evidence to back it up.

[PureQuickness]

4 minutes ago, DeltaSwede said:

Bro, your arguments are getting weaker and weaker. Canada is falling behind the US in terms of development. No reason to deny that really. Been reading through your exchange with @Miss Korea and you just come across as being in complete denial of that out of pride. 

I hope Hockey Canada adapts and improves for the good of the game. Sweden in the same way has fallen behind on development and should look to learn from other countries programs. 

Hockeys home is Canada. Canada is hockey. Canada and Finland are probably the only countries in the world where hockey is the #1 sport. For the good of ice hockey I want to see a really strong Canada because it's always been the driving force behind the development of the game as a whole. In it's current state I think it puts that in somewhat jeopardy. If it does.. will it be Canadas #1 sport anymore? 

I think it would be a cool thing if larger Canadian universities joined the NCAA for example. I'm not sure the CHL will forever be the top junior level in Canada as we've seen more players opt to go to leagues like the BCHL over the last decade. Now with some AJHL teams joining the BCHL and most likely a larger proportion of players looking to remain NCAA eligible it seems to be the way things are developing. 

Having to change, adapt and progress isn't a bad thing. 

 

I'm not saying it out of pride though. I have NO connection to Hockey Canada: why would I prop up something that I don't have any connection to? I don't think it's good or bad.

 

My exchange with Miss Korea was always contingent on their argument being supported with weak evidence.

 

Their point was that hockey development sucks because people are scrambling to the US. That could be counterpointed, but OP refuses to take this into account. Hence, we are just going in circles to the point where we don't agree on anything now.

 

Notice how OP doesn't even go into address @shiznak 's points. I honestly think that OP is just wrong with how they're going about with this. Their emphasis is so much on "Hockey Canada", but OP refuses to listen to other points that may make their point correct. You claim that I'm prideful about something. Should you not comment on why Miss Korea is so rigid on "Hockey Canada", but not address the other factors such as country scale, academic opportunities (the US has this over Canada, as well as the rest of the world HANDS DOWN; it's not even an argument).

Edited January 24 by PureQuickness

[Miss Korea]

5 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

It's pretty vague to be honest.

 

I understand the sensitivity of the events that have happened surrounding Hockey Canada, but how is it "broken"? I think we on some level will ALL agree that all entities (including people) can continually improve from their current points.

 

And to be honest, i still think OP might have some valid points, but they are using the wrong evidence to back it up.

 

3 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

I'm not saying it out of pride though. I have NO connection to Hockey Canada: why would I prop up something that I don't have any connection to? I don't think it's good or bad.

 

My exchange with Miss Korea was always contingent on their argument being supported with weak evidence.

 

Their point was that hockey development sucks because people are scrambling to the US. That could be counterpointed, but OP refuses to take this into account. Hence, we are just going in circles to the point where we don't agree on anything now.

 

 

I literally opened with the disclaimer that this is not a debate about international tournaments, and I explained why.  The first thing you did was start talking about gold medals.

 

If I tried to use international tournaments as an argument against Canada, how would that work?

 

As you said, Canadians (and honestly teens from around the world) are scrambling to the US.  How is that a good look for Canada?  And why are you acting like nothing has changed from the past?  The RATE in which Canadians leave for the US has skyrocketed.  The RATE in which Americans come up to Canada has plummeted.  Why?

 

Also, can you please explain to me what USPORTS is, as well as the current situation surrounding the BCHL/AJHL?

Edited January 24 by Miss Korea

[Rekker]

12 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

You and I don't agree on ANYTHING.

 

 

So this is a surprise.

Lol. Like I said, I'm as close to the fire as can be. Hockey development in this country is broken. 

[PureQuickness]

1 minute ago, Miss Korea said:

 

 

 

I literally opened with the disclaimer that this is not a debate about international tournaments, and I explained why.  The first thing you did was start talking about gold medals.

 

If I tried to use international tournaments as an argument against Canada, how would that work?

 

As you said, Canadians (and honestly teens from around the world) are scrambling to the US.  How is that a good look for Canada?  And why are you acting like nothing has changed from the past?  The RATE in which Canadians leave for the US has skyrocketed.  The RATE in which Americans come up to Canada has plummeted.  Why?

 

Also, can you please explain to me what USPORTS is, as well as the current situation surrounding the BCHL/AJHL?

 

Where's your response to Shiznak? It's pretty telling to me that you have consistently avoided all the counterpoints that could remotely support why people are flocking to the US. It's just obvious to me that your vendetta is with Hockey Canada.

 

You're not going to change your mind no matter how wrong you are with your arguments. That's why this is just entertaining to see you toot your own horn about how right you are without addressing the questionable evidence.

[shiznak]

I also want to point out that Button emphasized neither one program is better at development than the other.

 

https://www.elitelevelhockey.com/ncaa-or-chl-it-depends-on-the-player/

 

Quote

“If anyone tells you one path is better, run for the hills. There is nothing that says one is better than the other. There is only one thing I will guarantee, though, and that is not doing your investigative work is a mistake and that will hurt you.”

 

Edited January 24 by shiznak

[Miss Korea]

1 minute ago, PureQuickness said:

 

Where's your response to Shiznak? It's pretty telling to me that you have consistently avoided all the counterpoints that could remotely support why people are flocking to the US. It's just obvious to me that your vendetta is with Hockey Canada.

 

You're not going to change your mind no matter how wrong you are with your arguments. That's why this is just entertaining to see you toot your own horn about how right you are without addressing the questionable evidence.

 

As I said, if you read my eventual response to shiznak you'll know exactly what USPORTS and BCHL/AJHL is.

 

I am giving you the chance to explain to me what those are, without me having to spoon-feed it to you.  Because if you don't know what those two things are, you really don't understand the problems plaguing Hockey Canada.

[Rekker]

9 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

It's pretty vague to be honest.

 

 

I understand the sensitivity of the events that have happened surrounding Hockey Canada, but how is it "broken"? I think we on some level will ALL agree that all entities (including people) can continually improve from their current points.

 

And to be honest, i still think OP might have some valid points, but they are using the wrong evidence to back it up.

It's so deep, so many aspects, some funding, societal, directives. Not exaggerating when I say I could be on my keyboard for hours describing the issues. Not all on Hockey Canada though. But to your question, some is societal. Canada vs USA, we do not support youth sports to anywhere near the same extent as the USA, not just funding but societal. Facilities are sparse, support is lacking, just not enough pride in raising youth and supporting their athleticism. It's just not even close between the two countries. I'm just touching on the subject with this. But in Canada we spend far more money on CrackHead issues than supporting the youth. The youth that if not supported properly, are more likely to become Crackheads. Ffnn crazy. The systems that support sport, youth, development, are all under fire. Fire from society, greed, selfishness, crap leadership, and government. 

[HKSR]

50 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

The US overall has a better academic system, especially when it's paid off for you. To me, it makes sense why people will go there. This is BEYOND a Hockey Canada thing is what I've been trying to tell you.

This is probably the strongest argument and one that several of us have talked about in this thread.

 

If my son had a choice between playing for the Prince George Cougars and attending UNBC vs playing for Harvard, Yale, or Stanford, I know exactly where I'd be urging my son to go play hockey lol

[Curmudgeon]

1 hour ago, Miss Korea said:

The fact that nobody comes to Canada anymore for junior hockey is the real proof.

 

Hunter Brzustewicz.

[Miss Korea]

3 minutes ago, shiznak said:

I’m not going through this again. I already went through this on CDC.
 

There’s many pro reasoning why players choose the college route over the CHL, and it has little to do with development. 
- You can get to choose your own path, life after hockey.

- The freedom of getting to choose your own school to attend.

- The facilities.

- Playing with mature players (which I don’t understand.)

- Experiencing the college life. Being independent.

 

When you playing in the CHL, you don’t get to experience those things.

- You start off for the team that drafts you.

- Education is not at its best. 

- High-school gyms.

- Playing with players around your own age.

- Living with your billets.

 

Canadian/American kids can still choose a Canadian college route and universities have made massive strides in that area.  But that entire system runs independently from Hockey Canada and the CHL.  Some of the best hockey development systems (BCHL/ parts of AJHL) are running independently from Hockey Canada.  These entities had to break off in order to keep up with the style of hockey development the United States enjoys.  Obviously the Canadian counterparts are still vastly inferior, but they are still there and they are trying their hardest to improve it.  

 

TSN and Sportsnet have already been forced to discuss why all the best defencemen and goalies tend to come from the States.  Even Cale Makar, a future Canadian HHoFer, hails from U-Mass.  That's because defencemen and (especially) goalies take longer to develop than forwards.  The best development comes from a heavy mixture of practice and games, and the NCAA has a very practice-heavy schedule.  It also has the reputation for being very defence-oriented, which you can take as a criticism if you want.  But to be honest, that doesn't explain why lottery pick forwards like Adam Fantilli and Macklin Celebrini choose the USHL and NCAA to develop their game. 

 

I remember you from CDC.  You said Canada would beat USA in a best-on-best because our players have something special (I think you mentioned pride) that makes them better.  A very interesting take to have given the current structure of our Canucks.

[Miss Korea]

21 minutes ago, Curmudgeon said:

 

Hunter Brzustewicz.

 

Ah, a notable exception.  There are two OHL players on this year's Team USA from the World Juniors (Hillebrandt and Hayes).  But Brzustewicz is also a player who never got to play for Team USA in the U-20 World Juniors.  Which brings me back to my original premise - you cannot assess a country's development quality based on their medal table.  There are so many excellent NHL players who have never had the chance to represent their country in international tournaments.

 

Now, despite me saying that, Brzustewicz has represented Team USA in the U-18 championships.  In that format, the Americans are king.  Interpret that however you want.

 

Edited January 24 by Miss Korea

[PureQuickness]

1 hour ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Ah, a notable exception.  There are two OHL players on this year's Team USA from the World Juniors (Hillebrandt and Hayes).  But Brzustewicz is also a player who never got to play for Team USA in the U-20 World Juniors.  Which brings me back to my original premise - you cannot assess a country's development quality based on their medal table.  There are so many excellent NHL players who have never had the chance to represent their country in international tournaments.

 

Now, despite me saying that, Brzustewicz has represented Team USA in the U-18 championships.  In that format, the Americans are king.  Interpret that however you want.

 

 

And this is HILARIOUS.

 

You now accept medal counts in your argument AFTER arguing that medal counts in tournaments don't matter? You wanna know why you change your argument? Because this FITS in your narrative (never mind the factual country medal count that doesn't)

 

This is proof that you don't care how your argument lands as long as it pushes your narrative - and that makes a very disingenous discussion. I've been calling you out for that, plus more.