Do you believe in miracles?

[bzygo]

http://www.majorleaguesoccertalk.com/is-there-a-miracle-for-usa/2122

[FC Funkotron]

I can't find the article. But Bradley, at the start of his tenure, mentioned something along the lines of a building a team around that premise. Maybe not using a college team, but using a strong core of players and that anything was possible.

I'm not really sure how it went, but he mentioned the 1980 team.

[Clint Eastwood]

Um, 1950 WC anybody? If a team of nobodies beats arguably the best team in the world at the World Cup, then that's a miracle moment. That's what happened that day.

[PhillyQuakesFan]

Um, 1950 WC anybody? If a team of nobodies beats arguably the best team in the world at the World Cup, then that's a miracle moment. That's what happened that day.

Yeah. The US today is a team full of professionals, about half of whom are playing in "big 4" European leagues, and is one of the top 20-25 teams in the world (which means a lot more in soccer than it does in hockey). There's no team in the world that would need a "miracle" to lose to us (or for that matter plenty of teams worse than us). A US World Cup victory would be a major upset, along the lines of Greece or Denmark winning their respective Euro championships, but not a miracle.

[Grumpy in LA]

[1] Yeah. The US today is a team full of professionals, about half of whom are playing in "big 4" European leagues, and is one of the top 20-25 teams in the world (which means a lot more in soccer than it does in hockey). There's no team in the world that would need a "miracle" to lose to us (or for that matter plenty of teams worse than us). [2] A US World Cup victory would be a major upset, along the lines of Greece or Denmark winning their respective Euro championships, but not a miracle.
[1]—Really? That seems like a lot more than I can think of in the "big 4" (which I'm assuming are the EPL, La Liga, Serie A, and 1 Bundesliga). These are players in those leagues: Howard, Dolo, Bradley, Dempsey. I guess one could make a case for Donovan or Altidore but not the same case at the same time (either you play for your contract team or your loan team). I guess that's about half of the starting line-up, but it's not half of the usual squad.

[2]--Wasn't Greece's or Denmark win equally unlikely as the US winning the gold? I mean, yeah, Canada and Russia had better players than we did in 1980, but we were probably still a top five team.

The problem is that "miracle" is a bit of sports-announcer hyperbole that came out of Cold War excitement and got perpetuated by Cold War excitement. To me, the bar for miracle should be way higher: Eric Moussambani wins Olympic gold in the 100m free, or Eddie the Eagle wins in the ski jump. Or even something more plausible like El Salvador winning the World Cup.

[Bolivianfuego]

Um, 1950 WC anybody? If a team of nobodies beats arguably the best team in the world at the World Cup, then that's a miracle moment. That's what happened that day.

I disagree. I'd say its the 1930 team that made it to the final 4 of that world cup. They were expected to win it all with the best player of the tournament, bert patenaude. But they lost to argentina, and like they say, the rest was history.

[PhillyQuakesFan]

[1]—Really? That seems like a lot more than I can think of in the "big 4" (which I'm assuming are the EPL, La Liga, Serie A, and 1 Bundesliga). These are players in those leagues: Howard, Dolo, Bradley, Dempsey. I guess one could make a case for Donovan or Altidore but not the same case at the same time (either you play for your contract team or your loan team). I guess that's about half of the starting line-up, but it's not half of the usual squad.

It was just a "guesstimate" off the top of my head, I didn't actually go through counting players.

[2]--Wasn't Greece's or Denmark win equally unlikely as the US winning the gold? I mean, yeah, Canada and Russia had better players than we did in 1980, but we were probably still a top five team.

Not even close--you're disregarding the gulf between professionals and amateurs in sports. Not everyone on the US Olympic hockey team ever even played in the NHL, and they beat the best team in the world at the time. Was the US team top-5?? Maybe, but that didn't mean a lot considering how few countries played the sport. The modern equivalent of the US beating the USSR in 1980 would be an NCAA all-star team beating Argentina or Italy.

[Karl K]

Do I believe in miracles?

Uh, no.

[Brandinho]

No team in world soccer were as unbeatable as the USSR were at hockey.

[deuteronomy]

1. Since 1990 we have won exactly 2 World Cup matches.
2. We have one player (Howard) who might start for a couple of the top 10 National teams in the world. A case could be made that we have 2-3 players who might compete for playing time off the bench. We don't have the players. We need more stars we can rely on out in the field.
3. Since defeating Portugal 3-2 in 2002, there will be no teams taking us for granted in the first round.
4. The US has gotten out of group play exactly twice since 1930.

It would be an unusual miracle to be sure.

[Brandinho]

1. Since 1990 we have won exactly 2 World Cup matches.
2. We have one player (Howard) who might start for a couple of the top 10 National teams in the world. A case could be made that we have 2-3 players who might compete for playing time off the bench. We don't have the players. We need more stars we can rely on out in the field.
3. Since defeating Portugal 3-2 in 2002, there will be no teams taking us for granted in the first round.
4. The US has gotten out of group play exactly twice since 1930.

It would be an unusual miracle to be sure.
Just for the record, we won 3 World Cup matches. Colombia in 94, Portugal in 02, Mexico in 02.

[voros]

We're discussing a just shy of 36 Frankie Hejduk being an option for us at right back in 2010.

Isn't talking about "miracles" putting the cart before the horse. Shouldn't we actually start to make some real progress on the player development front before concerning ourselves with whether we can make a "miracle" run?

This sort of "we can do anything" attitude is actually quite helpful, but can become a drawback when we refuse to seek help on issues we know nothing about. We've established pretty clearly that we don't know how to raise World Class soccer players in this country. The above article seems to suggest we try and do without. I'd rather we start asking people who do know how for some help.

I've always been partial to sports teams like the '95-'96 Bulls. The best teams leave as little to chance as possible. Let's become one of those.

[deuteronomy]

Just for the record, we won 3 World Cup matches. Colombia in 94, Portugal in 02, Mexico in 02.
Absolutely, correct! My bad. What I meant to say and did not was 2 victories in the group stage.

[bzygo]

One of the points I was trying to make is that even if the team were to achieve great success in a World Cup, it's unlikely that such an event would create a big impact on the attitude of Americans towards soccer. What do you think?

[Sachsen]

One of the points I was trying to make is that even if the team were to achieve great success in a World Cup, it's unlikely that such an event would create a big impact on the attitude of Americans towards soccer. What do you think?

MLS and American soccer in general gets a boost every World Cup.

The more success the team has, the more of a boost it gets.

It depends on how you measure "big", but yes, success in the World Cup does have an impact.

[Karl K]

We're discussing a just shy of 36 Frankie Hejduk being an option for us at right back in 2010.

Isn't talking about "miracles" putting the cart before the horse. Shouldn't we actually start to make some real progress on the player development front before concerning ourselves with whether we can make a "miracle" run?

This sort of "we can do anything" attitude is actually quite helpful, but can become a drawback when we refuse to seek help on issues we know nothing about. We've established pretty clearly that we don't know how to raise World Class soccer players in this country. The above article seems to suggest we try and do without. I'd rather we start asking people who do know how for some help.

I've always been partial to sports teams like the '95-'96 Bulls. The best teams leave as little to chance as possible. Let's become one of those.

FH may be going on 36 when is at the WC, but he has the body and stamina of a 25 year old.

At least we've established pretty clearly how to raise "damn freaks" athletically.

Meanwhile, we have a 1st division league that's only a dozen years old. Leagues in England, Italy, Spain are years ahead of us. We don't have huge sums of TV and endorsement money greasing the league coffers. We can't attract world class players in their prime to our league to up the competitive ante. We don't have real youth academies, real U19 professional club teams, real reserve teams to bring along the 3-4 spectacular players every World Cup cycle. We don't have moderate weather across the nation so we can have 10 month 36 game schedule. And for our good players to get into top clubs in Europoe, there are work permit restrictions, which act as barriers to the free flow of our talent to the teams where the highest level of play exists.

Given these handicaps -- some of which are related to the nascent quality of the league, some of which are accidents of our geography, some of which are the residue of the amateur nature of soccer in this country -- I think we're doing awfully well.

Maybe my expectations are too low, but I think it's going to be another decade minimum before we even have a remote shot at winning the tournament. Even then, we are not, in most of our lifetimes, going to become a soccer "hyperpower" like Italy, Spain, Brazil, France, Argentina.

We just won't have the cards.

[Justin Z]

No team in world soccer were as unbeatable as the USSR were at hockey.
Absolutely correct. The Soviet national team had beaten the freaking NHL All-Stars, 6-0, in 1979, and somehow a group of amateur players beat them in the Olympics. And that, after the Soviets had also beaten the American Olympic team, 10-3, in an exhibition game two weeks before the "Miracle" match-up. There's really no comparison in soccer to how strong the Soviets were then.

[oldguyfc]

Absolutely correct. The Soviet national team had beaten the freaking NHL All-Stars, 6-0, in 1979, and somehow a group of amateur players beat them in the Olympics. And that, after the Soviets had also beaten the American Olympic team, 10-3, in an exhibition game two weeks before the "Miracle" match-up. There's really no comparison in soccer to how strong the Soviets were then.

Actually it might be like the current NCAA Champion's Maryland beating Manchester United; certainly not a "miracle"; but hardly an expected result.

[casoccerdad47]

FH may be going on 36 when is at the WC, but he has the body and stamina of a 25 year old.

At least we've established pretty clearly how to raise "damn freaks" athletically.

Meanwhile, we have a 1st division league that's only a dozen years old. Leagues in England, Italy, Spain are years ahead of us. We don't have huge sums of TV and endorsement money greasing the league coffers. We can't attract world class players in their prime to our league to up the competitive ante. We don't have real youth academies, real U19 professional club teams, real reserve teams to bring along the 3-4 spectacular players every World Cup cycle. We don't have moderate weather across the nation so we can have 10 month 36 game schedule. And for our good players to get into top clubs in Europoe, there are work permit restrictions, which act as barriers to the free flow of our talent to the teams where the highest level of play exists.

Given these handicaps -- some of which are related to the nascent quality of the league, some of which are accidents of our geography, some of which are the residue of the amateur nature of soccer in this country -- I think we're doing awfully well.

Maybe my expectations are too low, but I think it's going to be another decade minimum before we even have a remote shot at winning the tournament. Even then, we are not, in most of our lifetimes, going to become a soccer "hyperpower" like Italy, Spain, Brazil, France, Argentina.

We just won't have the cards.

I have to agree with almost everything you say, but are you implying that England and Germany have moderate weather throughout their league seasons?

[SCBozeman]

Not everyone on the US Olympic hockey team ever even played in the NHL, and they beat the best team in the world at the time. Was the US team top-5?? Maybe, but that didn't mean a lot considering how few countries played the sport.[/SIZE][/FONT]

No team in world soccer were as unbeatable as the USSR were at hockey.

Absolutely correct. The Soviet national team had beaten the freaking NHL All-Stars, 6-0, in 1979, and somehow a group of amateur players beat them in the Olympics. And that, after the Soviets had also beaten the American Olympic team, 10-3, in an exhibition game two weeks before the "Miracle" match-up. There's really no comparison in soccer to how strong the Soviets were then.

Oh come on.

In 1980 there were, what, 6 nations proficient at hockey? USSR, Canada, US, Sweden, Finland and East Germany? There are, what, 80 or 100 nations proficient at soccer? Just given those odds, the US was a pretty good bet to go on a streak. Heck, Greece winning the Euros was a bigger "miracle" just because the the number of good teams it was against.

At the time, the US was the odds-on favorite to take bronze. The US winning gold was like France winning the WC in '98. The jump from #3 to #1 was big, but the US wasn't like the 30th best team in the world (heck, there probably weren't 30 teams in the world in 1980). Yes, beating the USSR was a big upset, but nothing like 1950 US vs. England or even the US beating about 3 or 4 USSRs in winning the WC.