U.S. = Bad
I hate to say I told you so, but I'd called this since last summer's Gold Cup. The U.S. will disappoint in Europe. They benefited greatly from a neutral-site WC in 2002, and people got big heads.
As for the U.S.'s draw vs. Mexico's, FIFA has a draw for World Cup group seatings, and teams are grouped into 4 buckets of 8. One team from each bucket is put into each group. The U.S., and Costa Rica were in the same bucket, and the U.S's group is just how the draw played out. It doesn't matter that the U.S. finished ahead of Mexico in qualifying, just like it didn't matter that Costa Rica finished 1st in qualifying in 2002. Basically, the top 8 teams are put into the 1st bucket to be the heads of each group based on ranking and previous WC results, and U.S. didn't make that cut (Mexico did based on the last few World Cups and their ranking at time of draw) (Remember U.S. finished dead last in 1990 and 1998). After that, teams are put into buckets based on regions. Remaining teams in Europe and South America went into 2 buckets, and CONCACAF went into a bucket with Asia and Australia (I think this is how they did it but is was 8 months ago). Before the WC started, all teams listed 1st are "heads," all listed 2nd were in 1 bucket, all listed 3rd were in another bucket, and listed 4th were in the last. Then they were drawn at random. U.S. did get a tough draw, but I think it was karma at work. The U.S. shouldn't have talked so much smack about Mexico and CONCACAF in general during qualifying, or about how the rest of the world now feared playing them (laugh!). My question to Donovan is, "who sucks now?!" His career always was a disappointment in Germany, and this World Cup will be no different. Italy and Ghana are just as tough as Czech.
Czech played very well today. The U.S. looked really good until the 2nd goal; then they just looked disjointed. I honestly believe this team underestimated how difficult it is to play European teams in Europe. They were definitely overconfident. The gap in talent and quickness (in terms of touch on the ball) was evident, which is to be expected when your best player plays in MLS. It's a whole different world compared to the leagues in Europe, and Johnson, Donovan, and other young players would do well to make the move to Europe while they're young.
Although I'm pulling for all teams in CONCACAF, including the U.S., I'm much more realistic, and apparently a much better analyst than anybody on CNNSI, Fox Soccer Channel, and ESPN, that predicted the U.S. to win this game and advance to the second round. Some even claimed a quarterfinal or semifinal appearance, which is still possible, although VERY unlikely. I wonder if Fox Soccer Channel spent more time showing games outside the Premier League, then maybe they'd have a much better (and realistic) understanding of other national teams outside England and the U.S.

5 Comments:
I agree; we looked terrible. But the Czech's also looked just as sharp as anyone else has this tournament (maybe it was the competition).
I understand the system now that you explained it, though parts of it seem silly; eg, World Cup History (should UNC, Duke, UCLA, Kentucky be #1 or #2 seeds annually due to their pedigree?). Also, how does Spain end up a #1 given their poor World Cup history? Anyways, it probably wouldn't matter. Even if the US had an easier draw we'd get hammered. Maybe we can come out more focused for Italy.
The problem with looking at previous World Cups is that going back more than 2 takes into account WCs before most players in this year's were participating. However, what else do you use? There are very few international competitions outside of one's region, so how do you compare U.S., Mexico, and Costa Rica vs. European teams. Especially given the obvious flaws in FIFA's ranking (they've admitted as much and have chenged the rankings with the new system being implemented after the World Cup). I know there are issues with how the Top 8 are chosen, but there really isn't a better way. National teams play about 20-25 "official" games over 4 the 4 years between WCs (this doesn't include friendlies), and most of those are within your own region (i.e. Gold Cup, WC qualifying). The only true exposure one gets outside of one's region is through the World Cup and Confederations Cup (1 team per region), or by being invited to participate in another region's tournament (i.e. Costa Rica or U.S. in Copa America, Brazil or Columbia in Gold Cup).
One question remains: How the hell did France get a #1 after their last World Cup (scoreless in 3 games) performance? They looked terrible today. They don't play as a team. They make a lot of frustration errors. Did anyone expect the French to be victorious on German soil? Ha!
I was watching the France game with my boss at lunch and he was thinking the same thing. His comment at halftime went something like, "I'm surprised the French haven't surrendered yet."
As for seating, I'm sure winning the WC in 98 somehow mathematically trumped 02.
"I'm surprised the French haven't surrendered yet."
Quote of the month.
JD
Post a Comment
<< Home