He has been pretty good for the USA. We'll see how it plays out but USA soccer is on the rise. Remember they tied Italy at the last WC so they are not that far behind.
I highly doubt it! The US in South America will fail and fail miserably. Look at how they did in the Copa America last year!
Freddy Adu and Altidore beat a Pato led Brazil in the U-20 tournament last time. By 2014 they will be the leaders on the team. 5 years from now and like I said the core group that will make up that team will be playing together for over a decade. They will be ready.
yeah and cyprus tied one of italy's best ever team 1-1 25+ years ago...they still ain't competing for world cup's though. us soccer needs to first focus on getting a couple, just a couple, of players who are good enough to play regularly on mid-table teams in the top 3-4 leagues...once that happens, then they can go from there. baby steps, baby steps.
Go to the Yanks Abroad thread and see how much they are crying about Adu not getting any playing time. I think there are whining about Altidore too. Look at what Pato is doing. Look at how difficult it is for Giovinco to break in with Juve and he is 10 times better than Adu. He has a better attitude than the impetuous Ghanian-American as well. The youth system is broken here and those in charge have no clue about real talent. It will take a very long time to catch up.
the only way U.s will catch up with Italy, Spain, France, England is if there leagues have a 90% foreign rate and there are no more then 1 italians on the team.
And if there is a 3rd world war where all the European armies were comprised entirely of football players.
The US is good because they're good defensively. Last time we were GREAT, 2004-2006, was because we were an impenetrable force. Watching the US under Bradley, they're building from the defense up. They have a good counterattack going for them. Individually, they're OK, but as a team they're good.
No, just no. Adu is a lightweight whose reputation rests mostly upon precocious youth World Cup showings and a game immediately prior to Euro 2008 against a Spanish side that couldn't be arsed. His club situation is deplorable. Altidore has the ability to be a decent striker but he's not nearly as special as they would have you believe (there was an Altidore vs. BENZEMA thread on the US forum once). Bradley... good instinct in the box, good understanding of the game, but a rash defender. If the US does indeed reach the semifinals in 2014, it will be because others have stumbled and not because they have raised their game. Just my 0.02 cents.
good defensively? italy right now is going through a "defensive crisis" yet has probably 50 cbs better than gooch, if not more...hell, at the u21 level every italy cb among andreolli, santacroce, bocchetti, and criscito are all better than gooch. i mean yeah, he is part of the belgian best xi, but his one short foray into a top league made boumsong look like baresi...
I can't make a full assessment right now, but I think we should watch the USNT's next few games to see. From what I saw against Mexico, with Erickson on the bench, Mexico was strangled by the US defense. I'm not saying Mexico is Brazil, but they're also a decent team. I'm not comparing Italy to US either, just saying that the US isn't really that bad and I bet they're give us a good run in the Confed Cup.
They almost did in 2002, but they were screwed by the refs. The US seems to have a good WC every other WC, expect them to do well in 2010.
South Korea nearly went all the way in 2002... I guess this means I can party in 2010, eh? The 2002 performance is much less relevant to the team's current state than the 2006 performance.
Mexico under Sven is bad... Mexico hasn't won in the US in recent times, and the US hasn't won in Mexico...
the reason the us (adn mexico for that matter) get overrated are because they have a free pass to every world cup now. i mean if they had to qualify from SA or europe, then they would only qualify less than scotland. i mean once you have a free pass to every world cup, then on years when you happen to get an easy group or a little bit of luck, voila, you make the round of 16 and once every 5 tourneys or so, maybe a quarters, scotland would do that or more, but unfortunately most world cups they are at home, or when they do qualify, they are thrown in a low pot and hence have a chance for a tough group. the last 5 world cups, the us had a disastrous 1990 world cup, and were the worst team out of 32 teams iirc in the 1998 one. obviously 2006 was a tough break getting one of the toughest groups, and hence one point it was, the 1994 world cup was at home (huge advantage) and barely scraped by as a third place team after a fluky own goal (poor fellow got killed in his home country because of it). the only really "good" performance was 2002, and that was one of the weirdest world cups in history, big teams getting upset left and right due to late end of european season that year, some of the worst officiating decisions in history, et al. again the us is good enough to make the second round on average every third world cup because like mexico, if you get a free pass to qualify for every one it greatly increases your chances, but actually competing for a world cup...a long way away from that. and i say all this as a us fan as well, not trying to bash, just being realistic
They almost beat Brazil in 94, it's every other WC for the US to make a good run. Just like we make the final every 12 years. I think it's fair to say they're good enough to be a part of the WC, even though they have one of the easiest qualifications. If they do win in Mexico, I think it's a fair indication they're getting better.
Great sample size, isn't it? 3 "good" World Cups and 3 crappy ones? But I would think that the US will get out of group play in 2010 as well. Not a terrible team by any means.
even worse, 2 good ones and 3 crappy ones. and as i said, once you get a free pass to the world cup and there are a few teams from asia, the bottom one or two from africa and the bottom couple from concacaf that are dreadful, so basically every world cup not only do you get "free" qualification, but there are about 6/7 teams that are pretty poor (saudi arabia's and trinidad & tobago's of the world), so the us averaging top 16 out of 25 teams every other world cup and that's usually if they only get favorable group draws or host the thing to boot, is far from being a world cup contender. that's my whole point of contention. as far as improving or getting better, yeah i ain't gonna argue that, but they are far away from italy, brazil and others, though yes, on any given day, the reality of international football is you can get a result over very small sample sizes. anyways, i think it's safe to say this is off topic, so if we want to continue this, i guess we can take it to pms (I personally have no desire actually, so don't pm me )
speaking of free pass....brazil and argentina also get free passes to world cups.....s. america qualifiers are 1 group of 10 i think and the top 4 make it so obviously in a big group like that, eventually after 18 games brazil and argentina will have more points than the other teams