Absolutely. And the additional point could be argued that European teams do "better than fine" in World Cups played inside of Europe. for a WC outside of UEFA, and in CONMEBOL specifically in 2014, you are correct to note that... Whereas when a WC is played in Europe, the conditions are pretty much un-equal for and somewhat tilted against the non-UEFA national teams (and/or to the benefit of the {so many} UEFA teams playing on their home continent). World Cup tournaments played outside of Europe tend to level the playing field fairly universally for all participating nations, and there is a more even distribution of the success rates of various confederations sending teams beyond the groups and deeper into the knock-out rounds.
While this is true, the number of UEFA teams qualifying out of the group stage into the elimination rounds was at a historical low. What this shows me is that the competitive teams from UEFA are no better than the competitive teams from other confederations. In short, Portugal have as much chance of success or failure from the group as Ghana and the USA have. However, big European teams, like Spain, Holland and Germany--Will still be big powers. That's a given.
Remaining World Cup teams without a confirmed March 5th friendly : CAF: Ghana, Nigeria AFC: Australia CONCACAF: USA, Costa Rica, Honduras CONMEBOL: Ecuador UEFA: Russia, Bosnia
I would love to play Sweden - that imo would be great prep for the Portugal game. In addition to that we've got to play a team like Ghana before June. Hope US Soccer makes it happen. If we don't, think that's a failure in the preparation department.
So the team that is the best "imitator" of Ghana is Cameroon, and both Portugal and Germany have already lined Cameroon up for pre-WC friendlies? Way to drop the ball there. The US can't get a top European side, so the only logical play is to get Nigeria in Europe. Get it done.
Why does this make any sense? Is there some unwritten rule that all African teams play alike? What unifying African style makes them play alike? Its nonsense, just schedule a quality opponent. People don't rush to schedule Canada just because they drew the U.S.
Quality opponents are now hard to come by. Most teams have a friendly booked. Now all thats left are Nigeria, Russia, Bosnia or one of the better UEFA teams that didn't qualify.
West African teams are very similar in style. Athletic, skilled, aggressive, combination of direct and possession. Playing Nigeria would give some feel of what it will be like to play Ghana, much more so than playing Sweden.
As long as the game isn't on US soil, I'm good with it. It's time for the team to get far away from any comfort zone, only road games after South Korea. Sweden would be a good test in March. They play similar to Germany, and going up against Ibra, provided he gives a shit, would be a top notch test for the backline. The May friendlies are trickier. You want teams that will test you, but that you have a relatively good chance of defeating to build confidence. I think back to '06, losing to Morocco and when they stunk against Latvia, all in the US, it spelled doom. Of course all the May games will be in the US, and I hate that. Make that money, rah rah rah, and do nothing to prepare the team for the tournament.
I find your anti-US soil stand to be rigid and simplistic, as well as not justifying "hate". We are playing in Brazil. Games in some parts of the US will give us a closer experience to playing in Brazil, both in terms of climate and, depending on who we play, crowd reaction than playing in some other locals, especially Europe. I think we can play some games in May at home without destroying our chances, though a game in Mexico, Central America or (dare to dream) South America would be good if it can be pulled off.
It will probably be another nike sponsored team to show off the new world cup jerseys like they did in 2010. As of right now I am guessing Australia.
And Australia is used to hoofing it to Europe to play friendlies...makes a lot of sense Although I hope it would be someone more challenging than Australia...even Sweden (if they play their first choice team) would be a better test than Australia. This is an important friendly, need to get quality competition in. (And as much as I respect the Australian team, it is not representative of the quality of the 3 teams that the US will play in Brazil.)
True, but at least they'd be a WC-qualified side in the midst of important preparations themselves. The risk with playing a non-qualified nation in March is that the USA would quite possibly get much more of a disinterested walk-through from that friendly opponent with nothing immediately on the horizon to prep for. If some (quality, but non-qualified) team like Sweden is the opponent, it could indeed be good preparation for the US, but there is also that very real chance that opponent won't "play their first choice team" or that those first-choice players won't play with any real motivation/activity.
That's true, so we whomp 'em in front of their fans, put 4 goals in the back of their net, build up our confidence, and let the Swedes know never to underestimate the Yanks when they visit ever ever. Just like we did against Scotland 2012, when you get an inadvertent bad friendly, you do what you can to make something out of it. We worked on our finishing then, we can work on it against Sweden too.
As are the African teams. So as you pointed out, why would we want to play a crappy Australia? Heck, we haven't played an African team since ............ well, since we lost to Ghana 4 years ago. We could play Nigeria in London and we'd be outdrawn 3-1 there. A much better test than Australia, and most of the other teams that are in the WC we play or have played recently (Bosnia, Russia, CR, Honduras, Ghana).
I thought it was a rumor about playing in St. Louis, but nothing has come out about it. The US wants to play in Europe to prevent excessive travel for Euro players. http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...usmnt-vs-bosnia-herzegovina-friendly-st-louis
Sour grapes for the last time? Still can't believe that the Yanks dropped 4 on them in the second half?
Ukraine is still available, and is ranked above Sweden in current FIFA rankings. Turkey and Hungary still available as well. Armenia is also available - would be fun to see Yura Movsisyan again. Though security would be crazy considering they are next door neighbors of Iran.
My question is what in the heck are the USSF waiting for? The USA have been qualified since September, and it was known this was the only remaining FIFA date before WC rosters are due. USSF should spend less time patting themselves on the back about how wonderfully prepared they are for Brazil, and get their act together on scheduling this friendly.