2010-2011 CONCACAF Champions League [R]

de que hablas guey?

it was obvious that the Nads were using their Z squad

 

RSL lost 5-4 on the road against CA. Then won 3-1 at home against CA using their B team. (Much bigger embarassment than Monterrey losing the final)

I think Monterrey is alright representation. I would have loved to see Santos instead.

 

No, no. Not important see RSL beat Cruz Azul with their B team at home 3-1. That is all that matters.

 

What is this Fox news in here, I heard this also in Jorge Ramos yesterday.

http://www.concacafchampions.com/page/CL/Schedule/0,,12856,00.html

RSL 2 starters.

Borchers
Johnson


Cruz Azul 5 Starters

Dominguez
Castro
Cervantes
Torrado
Gimenes


Morales did come in for RSL in the 76th minute. RSL was already winning 3-1 by then.

 

sergio santana and osvaldo martinez will be fit to play. as long as they figure out the defensive mid situation, i think monterrey will be able to win.

 

Cruz Azul had a mix team. RSL had their backups +2

People like to excuses Cruz Azul saying that they only lost because they had a B team, well they had 6 backups sure, but RSL had 9 backups playing that game.

I remember eating my words since I made fun of RSL fans that their home undefined streak was going to end when they played Cruz Azul, and then Cruz Azul went there and laid an egg. I was pissed.

 

the game won't be as easy for salt lake as everyone makes it seem. they will actually open up and play at home, i think at least, from what i've read by their fans i don't suspect that they bunker at home and play 85% of the game in their own third. will make quite a bit of difference with cradozo and suazo running at them on a counter as opposed to a wall of eight players. monterrey will likely play with five in the back as they did in the liguilla last season. too much is being made of this result, it's ridiculous. sure, respect to salt lake for getting a tie in mexico but lets not skew things,they had an easy path to the final and were dominated for the majority of the match by a monterrey team that was playing horrendously. to add to that, they by no means represent a league which has, as many people have posted, 'grown exponentially'. lets not forget that in this same edition of the tournament, los angeles were eliminated in the qualification rounds by a d-2 team and the seattle sounders finished dead last in their group. this result by no means defines the league as a whole, it is at it has always been.

 

I don't think RSL bunkered as much as most here seem to think. In the first half, they were playing with Monterrey. Their forwards (yes, they had two) were getting shots whenever they wanted. They made Monterrey's defense their bitch. The second half was a totally different story. Monterrey controlled the game, but couldn't finish. RSL gets a chance...and it goes in. I wouldn't bet against a Chupete Suazo-led team, though. He was doing whatever he wanted.

I've got Monterrey winning 2-1.

 

monterrey had several more chances than rsl in the first half. de nigris had three or four himself, suazo had a few as well. salt lake by no means made anyone their bitch, especially not the manner in which they played the second half. i realize i could eat my words, but i am not as worried as most people are. if, and a big if of course, monterrey score first, the game will change completely and salt lake will not be able to handle it. their home streak will end, but it won't be the first time a mexican team does that.

 

Ah, meant Monterrey's defense. And I was talking about the first half. Their forwards were making Monterrey's defense their bitch.

 

General Game Stats

----------------Monterrey--------Real Salt Lake
Shots on goal-------8------------------6
Shots wide---------12------------------7
Fouls---------------12-----------------16
Corner Kicks---------8------------------7
Offsides-------------4------------------0
Possession----------57%--------------43%


This was not Barcelona - Arsenal Second leg of the Champions as some of you would like to think.

Compare to the Copa de el Rey Final

Barca had the ball 69% to R.M. 31% and we know who won that game

http://www.marca.com/marcador/futbol/2010_11/copa/final/bar_rma/

But please do not let stats get in your way!

 

how many of those shots were actually dangerous? i recall salt lake getting a shots on the counter that didn't really trouble orozco much. i'm not sure why you're bringing up barcelona and real madrid either, what does that have to do with this? the majority of salt lakes chances came from the counter. i'm not sure what you're trying to prove.

 

So Chivas Making the Libertadores Final one year and Jaguares losing to a Division 2 team from Bolivia says what about the Mexican League?

I do agree there are many people in the USA that think MLS is so great now, they are full of it. RSL is the best team in MLS, but they do not represent the MLS quality overall. We still have shitty teams, shit if Omar Bravo can score on you then you are a shitty team (I kid, I kid).

 

How did Real Madrid Score their goal?


Well at least 2 of RSL shots were dangerous, right?

 

Stats are more meaningless in soccer than just about any other sport. The ONLY that matters is the score.

Real played very well in Monterrey and deserved to get a result, which they did. What I do find interesting is that a huge amount of fans have already crowned them the champs.

I've never really understood the clueless arrogance that some MFL followers, and the Mexican media, have toward MLS. One of the picante guys called the semi-final betwen CA and Monterrey una final adelantada. Open your eyes before you open your mouth.

Better teams breed better competition. In the long run, a stronger MLS will make the MFL stronger.

 

it speaks volume about the quality of the league when jaguares, a team in last place of the league beats the top south american team, inter, and advances out of a continental tournament round robin group to play in the round of 16, as well as chivas reaching the final when they haven't won a title in mexico in five years or six years. sure, most people think mexico is on a decline at the club level but we are still getting results. jaguares lost to a D2 team, yes, but they are pretty much a D2 team now, went without their coach and only fourteen players to bolivia. fact is the still advanced and may even reach the quarter finals being the last place league team. when mexico has teams lost in the qualification round of the concacaf cup consistently as mls does, then i'll worry.

 

This is heresy; you must be stoned to death!

I would add, better Central American teams would also help.

 

Necaxa fans sure hope so, but wait, last time I checked Necaxa is being relegated.

Am I wrong?

Also, Queretaro is worst then Jaguares, I will confirm this.

http://www.femexfut.org.mx/portalv2/secciones.aspx?s=1643&ep=908&dd=1

Yes, I was right.

BTW; you are correct, losing to a shitty team in a playoff means nothing, R.M. got eliminated by a 4th Division team last year in Copa de El Rey (or was it 2 years ago?) Real Madrid must really suck now.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD08uECDg98"]YouTube - Clavado de Saborío CONCACAF Champions League Final 2011 Monterrey vs Real Salt Lake[/ame]

 

with all due respect to john, there is a reason mexican media and fans fail to give much credit to mls. this is, as it stands now, a fluke run for an american team. just like korea, turkey, croatia, uruguay, etc in recent world cups. as it stands now based on history. sure, that could change in the future, but that has yet to be seen.

2008 - of the four american teams to qualify, new england were eliminated 6-1 on aggregate in the qualification round, to joe public, and chivas USA 3-1 to tauro. DC united qualified to the group stage automatically and finished last without a win, houston advanced second in their group but went out in the next round losing 4-1 to atlante.

2009 - new york is eliminated in the qualification round, again by a team from t&t like the revolution before them, DC united gets through qualifying round with penalties but is eliminated in the group stage (beaten out by a honduran team), houston is eliminated in the group stage (a team from panama finishes ahead of them), the crew advance but loses in the first round.


out of eight teams in two years, three were eliminated in the qualification rounds, two in the group stage, two reached the next round and went no further than that. add in this edition, and one more team gets eliminated in the qualification round, one more finishes last in their group, two advance and one has reached the final. it had been eleven years since an american team last reached the final of a concacaf tourney, and they needed the help of a draw which put them against no mexican teams in the knock out stages to to so, much like the last time it occured, when galaxy defeated a honduran and american team in california. an mls team has only ever eliminated a mexican team once since going to the home-away format in 2002, that was when santos played KC with their second division affiliate. if salt lake beats monterrey, that will be twice in eleven years. underrating? i don't think so.

 

Past performance is not indicative of future results. What has happened in the past has absolutely no bearing on what is happening right now. If that is the only argument one has, then they are not really paying attention.

Alabama had never beaten Texas in their six meetings prior to their meeting in the Rose Bowl. Did that mean that the Tide had no chance against Texas because they had yet to win?

Ask yourself this: Which league in CONCACAF has the mechanism to improve exponentially over the next decade? Is it the Honduran league? What about Guatemala's top flight?

I am not saying that MLS will become the best league in the region, but it will certainly be much more competitive than you have eloquently cited. Some teams, like Real Salt Lake, are doing it the right way. They have become a solid, formidable squad over the past year and a half and are clearly the best team in the league. I will agree that one team is not indicative of how the rest of the league plays, and you can say that about any league. But the days of the CCL champion being exclusive real estate for Mexican teams is coming to close, and that is not a bad thing. They will still be in the neighborhood, of course, they just have to realize that there will be some new tenants.

When professionals were allowed to play basketball in the Olympics, it was pretty obvious that the US would dominate, and they did. But Charles Barkley, back in 1992, knew that it would not last forever. He knew the other teams would catch up sooner rather than later, but his concerns fell on deaf ears, though. And as the rest of the world caught up to the USA, the USA did nothing to get better. Why get better when you are already the best? The US suffered some what many considered humiliating losses. They were seen as humiliating because no one was paying attention. The other teams had gotten much, much better while the US thought it was nothing more than a cascarita. US Basketball learned from its mistake, took it more seriously, and got better.


Unfortunately, as we have seen many times, Mexican futbol's extreme arrogance toward its own region has gotten in the way for them to learn from their mistakes. Maybe that can change as well. Past performance is not indicative of future results, right?