Finnish for US

TURIN -- Yes, it was the 26th anniversary of the most cherished and revered of all American team victories. And no, Team USA coach Peter Laviolette admitted, he had not the slightest clue when he awoke. He explained that he and his staff have been living a hermetically sealed existence consisting of games, tape review, a bit of sleep, and more games, with barely enough time to eat and no time to think of anything other than the next game. He couldn't tell you the day, the date, or even if the Winter Olympics contained sports other than hockey.

But when so informed, the coach had this to say:

''I don't think the US can have another miracle on ice," Laviolette said. ''It's not an easy thing to do, to win a gold medal. It would be a tremendous accomplishment, but it would be short of a miracle."

In last night's 4-3 loss to Finland, Team USA had a listless first two periods, falling behind, 4-2. There was a late goal by Brian Gionta, and a lot of 6-on-5 flurrying in a classically frantic finish, but there were no additional American goals. The team that deserved to win the game won the game.

The United States no longer needs a miracle to win Olympic gold in hockey. A lot has happened since that golden Friday afternoon in Lake Placid, when Herb Brooks's band of college kids beat the mighty Soviets. In addition to Canadians, every NHL team is populated with Americans, Americans, and more Americans. Every NHL team is likewise loaded with Russians, Czechs, Slovaks, Swedes, Finns, and assorted other Europeans, including Poles, Swiss, and Germans, in addition to various other remnants of the old USSR, and that's the point. The Americans aren't the only non-Canadian team not in need of a miracle in order to win Olympic hockey gold. Sweden won in '94. The Czechs won in '98. The undefeated Finns might win in '06. We know Canada won't be repeating. (It was a bad night if you had the North American parlay.)

The United States will head home with a 1-4-1 record, having defeated only the lowly Kazakhs. But was it a terrible team? No. Did it play to its capabilities? Absolutely not. There is no great larger issue here. These players could have played better, starting with the Latvia game (3-3), when they found themselves on the ice less than 24 hours after landing in the country. But that's the Olympic hockey tournament. Obviously, some teams adjusted better to the circumstances than others.

''The short preparation time is tough for everybody," Laviolette said. ''It wasn't biased toward one team. Everybody is in the same boat. We were all dealt the same cards."

Is there something fundamentally wrong with American hockey, at least in terms of administration? Again the answer is no, although Mike Modano seems to think so.

''I've seen a lot of the same faces with USA Hockey for a long time," he said. ''It probably is time some names changed."

When first asked for a reaction to Modano's criticism of USA Hockey, Laviolette initially said, ''I have no comment on that." But about three seconds later he changed his mind. ''Actually," he said, ''I do have a comment. The people who run USA Hockey care more about this program than anyone I know. They are passionate about it."

USA Hockey put together a team that was never considered to be a favorite for gold, but one that could certainly medal. It lurched into the medal round despite losing one-goal games to Slovakia, Sweden, and Russia. The effort was there, but the goals weren't. Last night was a different matter.

''We are very disappointed with the way we played tonight," Laviolette said. ''It was a game where we seemed to have the least amount of pop and energy. We couldn't seem to find our energy until the final 12 minutes -- when we knew we were facing elimination."

There were also 30 minutes of USA penalties, including 18 in the third period (10 on a Scott Gomez misconduct). That's not using the old testa.

When a team underachieves there are always questions, and in most societies I can think of there is a need to affix blame. Teams are no longer allowed to just get beat. So we'll play the game -- briefly.

OK, did Team USA have the right players? Some American puckheads over here were grumbling about leaving some talented younger players home. Is it possible Laviolette had a somewhat old team with tired legs playing six games in eight days?

To his credit, Laviolette didn't duck that one. ''It was a concern, to be honest," he admitted. ''But, having said that, [44-year-old] Chris Chelios was terrific. We just needed to play with more urgency tonight in the first 40 minutes. For whatever reason, we did not do that."

Laviolette explained that the selection process is not perfect, that players chosen when a selection list is needed may not be performing as well when the actual competition begins. This, of course, is what we hear every Ryder Cup year.

If there was one area where the United States was not going to match up at the highest level, it was goaltending. No one would seriously argue that the triumvirate of Rick DiPietro, Robert Esche, and John Grahame constitute the pinnacle of contemporary netminding.

But goal scoring was more of a problem than goaltending in 2-1 losses to Slovakia and Sweden. There is a deep enough reservoir of American talent to foster legitimate debate about which forwards should have been chosen. Replacing a few people might have made a difference.

The United States won't be the only disappointed team before this tournament is over. Canada, Sweden, Russia, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Finland all were capable of earning a medal, and only three will get one.

The US team can play with these people. ''I think the expectations should be to come over here and win the gold medal," said Laviolette. ''But that's very difficult to do."

It wasn't Peter Laviolette's happiest night. But at least no one asked him why he didn't take Cammi Granato.

Bob Ryan is a Globe columnist. His e-mail address is ryan@globe.com.