Team USA has one more big statement to make in gold-medal game

The United States men's hockey team has been in this position multiple times over the past 25 years.

Championship game. Against Canada. Gold on the line. 

In each of the previous three instances at the 2002 Olympics, 2010 Olympics and 2025 4 Nations Face-off, they came up short. They were painfully close in some of those games. But not quite close enough. 

In the previous Olympic tournaments, you could easily make the argument that Canada was the far superior team on paper and was expected to win. But the talent advantage in that regard has been closed dramatically in recent years, and might be tighter than it has ever been between the two hockey powers. After an overtime defeat in the championship game at the 4 Nations tournament, it is time for the United States to take the next step and get the win against their biggest rival.

It will get another chance to do so Sunday in the gold medal game against Canada (8 a.m. ET).

The United States advanced thanks to a dominant 6-2 win over Slovakia in the semifinal game on Friday.

Now comes its biggest test of the tournament and its chance to make its biggest statement.

Why Team USA needs to win gold

The United States has already assured itself of leaving Milano with at least a silver medal, making it its first Olympic men's hockey medal since 2010 (silver), and its first medal outside of North America since the 1972 games (Japan), when it also won silver. 

There was a time, not that long ago, that winning silver would have been seen as a huge accomplishment.

That can not be the standard now or the expectation given the talent level they have accumulated. 

They showed a year ago that they can hang with the Canadians, beating them in the round-robin portion of the 4 Nations and then taking them to overtime in the championship game. That U.S. team also did not have Quinn Hughes (Minnesota Wild), Tage Thompson (Buffalo Sabres) or a healthy Charlie McAvoy (Boston Bruins). 

Auston Matthews (Toronto Maple Leafs) and Jack Hughes (New Jersey Devils) were also not fully themselves or playing at 100 percent health in that tournament.  

Not only are all of those players here on this team, but they are also playing at an incredibly high level in the tournament. Matthews and the Hughes brothers have been especially dominant in every single game. 

All of that makes this team better than the 4 Nations team on paper, and it is playing better on the ice.

To this point, the United States has pretty much dominated its way through the tournament, feasting on what has turned out to be a favorable schedule and path to the gold medal game. 

Including Friday's win over Slovakia, they have outscored their five opponents by a 24-8 margin and outshot them by a 201-124 margin. They are impressive numbers. But they are also expected, given the competition and the roster. This is, at worst, the second-best team in the tournament on paper and getting to this point should have been the bare minimum expectation. 

The goal was not only gold, but also beating Canada to get there.

Roster decisions and a team philosophy were all centered on what it would take to beat Canada, and Canada specifically. 

And that also extends the pressure beyond the players on the ice to team management and the coaching staff. There were several controversial roster decisions in the building of the roster, while they seemed more intent on building a physical, balanced, NHL-style team instead of simply taking their best talents. 

That mindset has hurt them in past best-on-best tournaments when it comes to winning gold. If they come out on Sunday and lose another low-scoring game to Canada, where they struggle to score goals, or are not competitive, it will again call that philosophy into question. It will also likely lead to intense criticism, even with a silver medal in hand. 

If they get it done this time, it will not only validate the United States as a hockey power on the same level as Canada, it will also validate the front office and coaching staff for their approach. The pressure is on everybody. It is time to answer it.