Doesn't matter how we qualify

[Eliezar]

"Whether it is done earlier than later doesn't really matter. Clearly our goal for this team is going to be putting ourselves into a position where we will play in Germany 2006."

Bruce Arena

taken from
http://www.ussocceruk.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=193&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Anyway, we know that Bora was fired from Mexico even though he qualified and even other countries have fired coaches that were doing well after a couple bad results. Was it Paraguay that got rid of their coach because they lost all their qualifying matches after they had secured qualification?

Is the next step in US soccer to require that our coaches qualify us with a good showing or will just qualifying for the world cup be enough for US coaches?

[BennyDee19]

I do not think that it will come to that...I think here in the US things happen, and we understand...in that case you are saying BA may have been fired after that Phantom handball a while back...and a string of bad games....I think after following this summer....BA is the best coach weve ever had and I have learned to trust him because he gets the job done...against Mexico I was like whats that lineup??? But we won and I ve learned to trust him...he'll be fine and isnt going anwhere....

-PB20

[tcmahoney]

Originally posted by Eliezar
Is the next step in US soccer to require that our coaches qualify us with a good showing

The answer is "yes." That is, if you want the next step to be a backwards step. The USA had a rough time in qualifying. So did Germany. So did Brazil. Conversely, Argentina sailed through qualifying only to crap out with one goal in Asia.

Look, anyone in any nation on this planet who ever again argues that "qualifying with a good showing" has any bearing on the results in the World Cup itself needs to have "2002" tattooed on their foreheads with something sharp, painful and infection-causing.

[lynesjc]

Originally posted by tcmahoney
needs to have "2002" tattooed on their foreheads with something sharp, painful and infection-causing.

Is THAT what happened to Mike Tyson? ;)

[highlander]

Originally posted by tcmahoney
The answer is "yes." That is, if you want the next step to be a backwards step. The USA had a rough time in qualifying. So did Germany. So did Brazil. Conversely, Argentina sailed through qualifying only to crap out with one goal in Asia.

Look, anyone in any nation on this planet who ever again argues that "qualifying with a good showing" has any bearing on the results in the World Cup itself needs to have "2002" tattooed on their foreheads with something sharp, painful and infection-causing.

I agree completely. I think that the next step is to learn how to win during the difficult knock out rounds of the cup. The one game that we did win, although well deserved, was against a very familiar opponent. I would love to see us beat a world class opponent in a critical knockout game that we don't already play against one or twice a year. I don't see us doing this until 2010, at the earliest. Could be wrong. I guess time we tell.

[Toffees_rule]

The real issue isn't how we qualify for the World Cup, but if we can continue to at least equal, and then excell our previous performances there.

As any poster here now if they would accept a similar result, a QF loss to a good team after acquiting ourselves well, against good teams like Italy or Spain or England or Deutschland again, and they'd gladly take it.

Because it would show that the US' results in 02 wern't just dumb luck, (as in only did what we did based on luck) but we have grown and can now put some consistent results together as far as when it matters on the international stage.

[Serie Zed]

Exactly. There are lots of fluke Q-finalists like Cameroon, Nigeria and England (kidding, mostly) that disappear again for a decade. If we reached the Q-final in 2006 and played great again I'd be happy win or lose.

2010 might be a different story.

[dude8]

who cares how we qualify? just get in. we only made it to the qtrs. thanks to an overacheiving south korea team, and nobody mentions that too much.

here's a better question,

would you rather have beaten germany on the uncalled penalty kick, or lost gallantly like we did?

in 2006, do you care how we get there, so long as we are there? and wouldn't you rather advance than "have a good showing" and bow out in the qtrs? say we are grouped with brazil, italy, and england. if we went o-3 but "showed well", would anyone be happy with that?

what d' ya think?

i know my answer would be -NO.

[usagoal]

Originally posted by dude8
who cares how we qualify? just get in. we only made it to the qtrs. thanks to an overacheiving south korea team, and nobody mentions that too much.


No. No. No. We made it to que qtrs because we were the only team to get a point against Korea. Poland couldn't do it, Portugal couldn't do it.

[Toffees_rule]

Originally posted by dude8
who cares how we qualify? just get in. we only made it to the qtrs. thanks to an overacheiving south korea team, and nobody mentions that too much.

:rolleyes:

[dude8]

Originally posted by usagoal
No. No. No. We made it to que qtrs because we were the only team to get a point against Korea. Poland couldn't do it, Portugal couldn't do it.

my point was that they(sk)didn't need to beat portugal to get in, but we did. nobody told sk to play for the draw, thank god.

[USA4Life]

I think we were lucky in 2002. Anything can happen in 2006. Just because the talent pool is greater doesn't imply that the US will get better results.

1/4 finals would be absolutely outstanding in 2006.
I would be thankful for the team to get out of group play.

[Karl K]

Just so everyone is clear on ONE thing:

Qualifying in CONCACAF is HARD

For everybody, not just us. Just ask the Mexicans.

--You've got hellish venues (Saprissa, Azteca, Columbus Ohio in February, ). Fields/stadiums that are too cold, too high, too wide, too smog-ridden, too torn up/bumpy.

--You've got opponent fans that scream at you in the hotel, throw feces and junk food at you in the stadium. It's lovely.

--You've got teams who hate each other.

--You've got extremely variable officiating.

Mix it all together and you've got one very very nasty cocktail.

Me, I don't care how we do it. Just qualify -- any way, as fast as possible.

This is not figure skating; there are no style points, but rather win and tie points.

Those are the points I want, and I don't care how we get them.

[voros]

Originally posted by dude8
who cares how we qualify? just get in. we only made it to the qtrs. thanks to an overacheiving south korea team, and nobody mentions that too much.

You mean the team that scored a late goal against us in the second half that prevented us from advancing after two games?

If South Korea overachieved any less, we would have had 6 points going into the Poland game and been through to the second round.

People who constantly harp on how close we were to not qualifying need to also harp on how close we were to making the third round of games irrelevant.

[Sachin]

Originally posted by dude8

here's a better question,

would you rather have beaten germany on the uncalled penalty kick, or lost gallantly like we did?

in 2006, do you care how we get there, so long as we are there? and wouldn't you rather advance than "have a good showing" and bow out in the qtrs? say we are grouped with brazil, italy, and england. if we went o-3 but "showed well", would anyone be happy with that?

what d' ya think?

i know my answer would be -NO.

To answer your first question, I would rather have won, even if it meant Tony Sanneh picking up the ball and running it into goal. It's all about winning. We're past the point where "moral victories" or "showing well" count for anything.

As for your second point, I expect us to win every time we take the field.

Sachin

[sregis]

Originally posted by Karl Keller
Just so everyone is clear on ONE thing:

Qualifying in CONCACAF is HARD

For everybody, not just us. Just ask the Mexicans.

--You've got hellish venues (Saprissa, Azteca, Columbus Ohio in February, ). Fields/stadiums that are too cold, too high, too wide, too smog-ridden, too torn up/bumpy.

--You've got opponent fans that scream at you in the hotel, throw feces and junk food at you in the stadium. It's lovely.

--You've got teams who hate each other.

--You've got extremely variable officiating.

on the other hand, would you really want it any other way? i'll take concacaf over europe, s. america, africa, and perhaps asia, any day.

Mix it all together and you've got one very very nasty cocktail.

Me, I don't care how we do it. Just qualify -- any way, as fast as possible.

This is not figure skating; there are no style points, but rather win and tie points.

Those are the points I want, and I don't care how we get them.

[Metros#1]

Originally posted by voros
You mean the team that scored a late goal against us in the second half that prevented us from advancing after two games?

If South Korea overachieved any less, we would have had 6 points going into the Poland game and been through to the second round.

People who constantly harp on how close we were to not qualifying need to also harp on how close we were to making the third round of games irrelevant. How about if SK made a better PK, then we would lose 1:2? A poor PK effort is NOT overachieving. In fact Fridel is the one "overachieved," stopping not just PK but a few other great chances. Judging from the run of the play, we cannot complain SK "overachieved" in that 1:1 draw .

On the other hand, SK had NO need to go for the win against Portugal in the second half. A draw or even 0:1 SK loss would be sufficient to put both through and shut US out. It's purely the pride in SK part, we should be thankful for that.

[Dr. Wankler]

Originally posted by Metros#1
On the other hand, SK had NO need to go for the win against Portugal in the second half. A draw or even 0:1 SK loss would be sufficient to put both through and shut US out. It's purely the pride in SK part, we should be thankful for that.

Did you watch that game? How do you explain South Korea not going for the kill? They were up two men, had several breakaways, and on each case after the 78th or 80th minute, their forwards just gave the ball away to one of the outnumbered defenders (or THE outnumbered lone Portuguese defender). Either they were taking it easy (certainly not something a proud team would do) or they were tired (which goes against the "gee these guys are fit" theory).

So, no, we don't owe SK crap. Watch the end of that game again and see how they took their foot off the gas. Oh, and they didn't owe us crap, either.

But why are we worrying about 2002. It's in the books and we can't change it anyway. Luck or skill? Both come into play in world cup soccer, for every team there.

[Metrogo]

Originally posted by Dr. Wankler
Did you watch that game? How do you explain South Korea not going for the kill? They were up two men, had several breakaways, and on each case after the 78th or 80th minute, their forwards just gave the ball away to one of the outnumbered defenders (or THE outnumbered lone Portuguese defender). Either they were taking it easy (certainly not something a proud team would do) or they were tired (which goes against the "gee these guys are fit" theory).



You're joking, right? The Koreans were playing out of their skins. They were going in waves, man. I don't know if we owe them anything or not, but the Koreans absolutely played their hearts out.

[dude8]

As for your second point, I expect us to win every time we take the field.

Sachin [/B][/QUOTE]

great minds....
i couldn't agree with you more, regardless of the team we field.