Yep, I'm aware of all of that. Still, they are recent matches that Ghana lost, and they had some first team players in each match. Perhaps something could be gleaned from them.
Remaining World Cup teams without a confirmed March 5th friendly (12 + USA to go!): CAF: Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon AFC: Australia CONCACAF: Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras CONMEBOL: Colombia, Ecuador UEFA: Russia, Bosnia, Portugal
Since Portugal is out, it's 50/50 between Bosnia and Russia. However, I could see him flipping to an CAF side in Europe. Edit: provided the list of open teams on 5th is accurate.
It's 100% accurate as of today. Friendlies may yet be cancelled, Nigeria is strongly rumoured to play a South American side, Portugal has practically booked a friendly vs Cameroon. That would mean no CAF team is available. Sweden is available from non-qualified top UEFA teams.
Cameroon may be interested, since they're playing Mexico and may think CONCACAF teams play similar style (totally false). Nigeria has no business playing the USA, they need to prepare for Iran or Argentina (have played UEFA teams already). So they'll be going after Colombia, Ecuador or the Aussies --but the last don't play at all like Iran, on the other hand Colombia and Argentina have similarities. So I can see them trying to book a game versus Falcao's group. Now, if the Cameroonians are really watching style, they'd want to play Costa Rica instead of the USA. Right now, Costa Rica is like an improved version of Mexico, like the Mexico of old. Teams interested in playing the US would be those facing the likes of Germany, or the Scandinavian teams, or Scotland/England. Since Germany is in our group, no Scandinavian teams made it, and no Scotland, then the ones to face England would be the ones more logically interested; but both Italy and Uruguay are already taken. My guess is that if Cameroon gets a date with the Ticos, the USA will have to settle for Russia or a smaller UEFA team. Not exactly useful, Russia doesn't play like Portugal or Germany at all.
Greece play South Korea Switzerland play Croatia Ukraine is not a World Cup squad. http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/results/male.html# http://www.croatiantimes.com/news/Sports/2013-12-23/34923/Switzerland_and_Croatia_test_each_other_before_the_World_Cup
Ok you're right. So best euro options we haven't played recently are Sweden, Ukraine, turkey and Hungary.
Your analysis makes total sense until you include finacial standing of these soccer federations, not likely either Cameroon or Costa Rica would spend the money to play each other.
We played Bosnia Aug. 14 of this year, definitely won't play them again. And we already played Russia in Nov. 2012 - doubt we'd play them again on their soil so soon.
I agree. Probably the best of the friendlies we can schedule. Thing is, a match against Nigeria A would be a must win. We should be able to beat Nigeria, period. Not being able to beat Nigeria means there is no possible way we can beat Ghana.
A dubious penalty call or 2 in the USA's favor would certainly be a way to have Ghana lose their first match at WC2014. Generally speaking, I don't think any friendly result that the US gets (or doesn't get) on March 5 will be all that indicative of what the US will or will not be able to achieve versus Ghana on June 16.
I'm guessing the USA's March 5th friendly will be at White Hart Lane (or if that is not available, then somewhere like Craven Cottage, Hannover, Hamburg or Kaiserslautern).
Trust me, I'd worry if Nigeria run us off the pitch. I think BS would have a rightful meltdown. That said, I don't see that happening.
You worrying or BS having a meltdown (or not) because of the result of a March 5 friendly likely will have no impact on or foretell the upcoming competitive result(s) at the World Cup in June (and maybe even July) for the USMNT.
True, but it's a good gauge on where we stand. That's why we play friendlies. As a yardstick to measure what we need to improve on. A loss would mean there would be lots of work to be done. A big loss in March would mean a lot of work and not a lot of time. In 2006, we got beaten by Germany badly. We played well at times but overall we looked unprepared. In 2010, we went against Holland, we got beaten in a close game but looked cohesive especially in the face of the Netherlands's dangerously physical play. In 2002, we lost to Italy but outplayed them in the first half by a wide margin and played up to them in the second, and we had an open and spirited game against Germany that we also lost. In 1998, we crashed against a poor Belgium side and it wasn't even close. My point is, the March World Cup Euro-Trip friendlies are historically a good gauge to how the US performs in the World Cup. I find if the US plays comfortably in those matches, we do fine. We play pensive and lose poorly, we crash out in the group stage. So no, it's not BS fanboyism to place a bit of importance on this match.
Russia is in group H, they aren't going to give a group G team a look with the full national teams. I'm kind of surprised South Korea is willing to, but neither the Koreans nor the Americans will resemble their full team.
Nigeria is looking to schedule a South American opponent for March 5th. http://www.nigerianwatch.com/sport/...ondon-on-march-5-for-south-american-friendly-
"A bit of importance" is fine, but not very much in line with your earlier (and overly dramatic, imo) statement: There's also the consideration for historical analysis of the USA traveling to play an away friendly against a top UEFA team in March ahead of a WC in say France or Germany -- as that may be more indicative/informative than when the 3-months-later WC is played in a "more neutral-like" location (with respect to UEFA opponents specifically) such as S. Korea, S. Africa or Brazil.