US vs Costa Rica @ Denver Friday 3/22 10 PM EDT (8 MDT)

Not to downplay Edu's (relatively) strong performance in Honduras, it should be noted that his task (as a 33 minute player) was significantly different from (and "easier") relative to all those guys who had to go 90 (or even 60 minutes) in that heat and humidity.

 

I don't think it's at all realistic to expect 16 points from our last eight matches. You've got a pretty tough home game against Mexico and two brutal road games against Mexico and Costa Rica in that bag of eight games you're pulling from. Realistically, I think the most points you expect from those three games is 1 points. That leaves you looking for all 15 points from the other five games. Do you think that's realistic?

Here are the most realistic expectations in my opinion:

CR- 3 points
@CR- 0 points
MEX- 1 point
@MEX- 0 points
JAM- 3 points
@JAM- 3 points
PAN- 3 points
@PAN- 1 point
HON- 3 points
Total- 17 points

You flip that 3 CR points into 0 and you tell me where you make up those three points?

Edit- Maybe we call home to CR a "must-at-least-tie situation"?

 

I think he's better than Williams though at covering the back 4, Williams was overhyped because he was a Bundesliga starter (on a god awful team). He's now on the bench and probably going to be playing on a Bunde 2 team next year. He doesn't have enough bite for me to play the 6.

 

Sort of. You probably would need five wins and ONE draw. If you assume 0 points from @HON (pretty safe assumption!), home to CR (which is the basis of your question) and @MEX (pretty safe), you would need at least five wins and a draw from your remaining 7 games to get to 16 points.

That would mean you would have to win at least one of these three games: @CR, @PAN and home to MEX. Does anyone think we can count on a win in any of those three games?

 

Agreed.

I don't expect it. But I do recognize that "16 points from our last eight matches" certainly is a (somewhat reasonable) possibility. (Though certainly not as reasonable as the possibility or expectation of simply getting the full three points home to CRC on 3/22.)

I don't make up the points, the USMNT would have to.

Their possible paths would be:

@MEX: 3 pts

or

@CRC: 3 pts

or

@PAN: 3 pts + @MEX: 1 pt

or

MEX: 3 pts + @CRC: 1 pt

or

hope all the other games not involving the US end as ties, so the US could get in with 13 or 14 points.

Yes, maybe we should call the next game a "must-at-least-tie situation."

Or maybe we could say the goal/need should be 3 or 4 points from the next two games. (Heck, the goal should be 6 points from the next two games, but 3 or 4 points would likely turn out to be the accurate "need" for qualification.)

There are certainly (challenging) games on the schedule in which to find the needed points to ensure WC qualification. But there's nothing (yet) truly "must-win" about these games (home or away). But certainly winning games now in the first half of the Hex would go a long way toward lessening the needs for too-big of a point haul in the second half of the Hex.

 

Completely agree.

(Although, it doesn't change the perhaps accurate, yet hypothetical, argument that had Edu started and gone 57 minutes, and Williams had subbed in for the last 33 minutes -- then Williams could have looked to have had the stronger/better performance and day in those hot/tough conditions.)

 

I hear you, but it's starting to feel like the 80s when we had a succession of sub-par coaches.
Bielsa and Peckerman would have been great choices.
Novack and Rongen shouldn't have been protected as you say.
If Jurgen got his role with the senior team right, it wouldn't be so bad that he is uninvolved with the youth teams.

 

Um...OK.

If you think we need at least 3-4 points from the next two games (which includes AZTECA), then home to Costa Rica is precisely what I originally called it, and what you apparently originally took umbrage with: as close to a must-win game as we will have this Hex.

 

The point is, it's better (and more helpful, imo) for the overall analysis to take a broader approach to analyzing the games or a subset of games (and the Hex as a whole) -- an not only trying to look at the individual matches (as if we know how all the remaining matches will unfold).

The assumption that "the best" the US can do at Mexico is come away with one point is the basis for calling the 3/22 match "as close to a must-win game as we will have this Hex."

If that assumption is wrong, and the US can/does grab three points at Mexico (or just a point there yet still later goes to CRC and gets 3 points there), then that certainly puts the home match vs CRC not all that "close to a must-win" imo. ymmv.

If the "need" is 4 points vs each of 3 opponents (H/A), and 3 points vs each of the other 2 opponents (H/A) -- as that would get the US to 18 points as a very strong/safe finishing point -- then there's nothing really "must win" about any of the first 3 games, especially if they avoid loses.

 

Or suppose you make jamaica 0 points and CR home 0. That leaves your realistic expectation outcome 11 points.

We already lost to Jamaica last year and they have improved since then. Have we?

Yes, I'd say the game at Denver in March against CR is a "must win"

 

You are. But it's a nice place to be.

 

You make a good point, which is that any time we get fewer than the points we should expect from any game, then we have to make those points up by doing better in some other game than we would be expected to do. Losing at home to CR leaves us needing three points from some other game that I do not expect us to get. (Now, as I conceded earlier, it's probably more fair to call this game "must-at-least tie" than "must-win," but I think these are three points we are going to need.)

 

What makes it all so uncertain is that our last game is Panama and we have no way of knowing what Panama's situation will be on that final day. Will they need a win or draw to qualify for Brazil 14? In that case they will be playing out of their minds. Or will they already be eliminated or qualified, meaning they dont care?

 

This.

(And the US would "need" these three points on 3/22 vs CRC a bit less if they manage to go and get 3 points on 3/26 at MEX.)

 

Regardless of the standings, my assumption is that opponents will always want to beat (and maybe play some small or significant part in trying to eliminate) the big teams (MEX and USA especially) -- and especially at home.

(Although the hypothetical situations of Panama needing a draw or needing a win on the last match date are in fact two very different situations and may have a huge impact on how Panama opts to approach that game.)

 

A tidier way of saying that would be that we will need points from Azteca a lot more if we fail to get three points from hosting CR, but I won't quibble any further.

 

Fair enough. (And I like the tidy statement of "3-4 points needed in March.")

 

Edu has been in those conditions before, where Williams hadn't, which is why I would've given him the nod. The discrepancy between the two players is minimal if any at all, but most people either hate Edu or think Williams is quality because he's going to ride the pine the rest of the year in Germany.

 

That's actually less true than one would expect, since Edu played exactly 1 minute in the entire 2009 Hex due to his knee injury that year.

 

I hope Shea and/or Gatt are ready to go for this one, they will be KEY.

 

I'm a little apprehensive about what kind of knee jerk reaction Klinsmann is going to have to yesterday's game. I think at this point he isn't going to blame himself or his staff; I just wonder which players are going to suffer for his shortcomings.

 

Absolutely. Gatt will be ready to go as he was in the camp in January and got to meet and play with all the nats.

 

Well, Shea training today and Puls sounds like he'll run him out and soon as he proves his fitness, so there's hope there.

We really needs Landon/Shea opposite each other on the wings in Den. Our wing play has been abysmal of late and our lack of any central creativity only highlight that problem as it would the way to produce chances. When we're not wiping balls into the box and can't eve get the ball through our mid field, well, we look like we currently do. Impotent.

 

Exactly

 

The midfield (and wide players used, if any) will be of no more importance than the back four.

The key to winning WCQs at home is in many ways not giving up too many (or any) goals.