I have heard Saudi and Japan. I was hoping for one elite team in that window, but maybe they don’t want to play down.
I mean who could we play? UEFA is tied up in Nations League, and Brazil and Argentina play each other in South America (its a World Cup Qualification Match which makes NO sense at this point.)
Africa is tied up to. I didn't realize that about Brazil and Argentina. Of teams going to the World Cup the only options are Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Qatar, or Ecuador. And Australia just qualified so I doubt they were part of any discussions, plus we've played Qatar in the last year as well. Would I prefer Ecuador to Saudi Arabia? Of course. But we may not have had that option.
Amen. We just played Uruguay. Taking Europe out, the highest ranked teams (March 31 FIFA): 9th: Mexico 13th: Uruguay (just played them) 17th: Colombia (nothing to play for) 20th: Senegal 21st: Iran (in our group) 22nd: Peru (nothing to play for) 23rd: Japan 24th: Morocco (just played them) 28th: Chile (nothing to play for) 29th: South Korea 30th: Nigeria (nothing to play for) 31st: Costa Rica 32nd: Egypt (nothing to play for) 35th: Tunisia 37th: Cameroon 38th: Canada 42nd: Australia 44th: Algeria (nothing to play for) 46th: Ecuador 49th: Saudi Arabia Japan & KSA is about as good as we can do.
Totally. I feel like it should be a rule that you can't begin qualifying for a World Cup during the previous cycle, but of course that window would normally have been after the WC. This window that we played would normally be the window for the WC instead of Nations League, but of course this year everything is backwards.
I assumed, though haven't checked, that this was the makeup match for the one that was canceled due to COVID issues early in qualifying. Why they decided to make it up even though both teams were already qualified is anyone's guess. Though, I imagine Brasil and Argentina don't mind the competition leading up to the WC. EDIT: I was right--it was a makeup game for the WC Qualifier that was stopped earlier. However, they were set to play it in Australia but then THAT game got cancelled because Argentina didn't want to travel. Crazy shit.
This is why I hate Nations League. The UEFA countries keep playing each other, while we are stuck with few options outside of playing the same CONCACAF crapfests that occur whenever we play them.
Really interesting how things have been shaking out for friendlies with Nations League tying everybody up. With most top teams always busy now, we are going to see nothing but CONCACAF games and lower level friendlies outside of the actual World Cup until something changes. The US is going to have a very flashy win-loss record moving forward under these circumstances.
I thought the NL semis (Honduras) and finals (Mexico) were very good competitive tests for the team. Those matches effectively launched the current generation. Made them believe in themselves. But I also think we will have to fit in some quality opposition outside of CONCACAF. Not having a WC qualifying schedule might help in that regard. Often there is a quality team (sometimes because they are in a group with an odd number of teams) looking for a dance partner.
That’s a good point, and I get it. The issue I have, and you mentioned it as well, is teams don’t get a chance to play other teams outside of their continent as much. If I ran things, I’d do away with Nations League entirely. Take that first year after the World Cup and do a bunch of eight team events like the SheBelieves Cup. Mix teams from different confederations and treat them as scouting events. Three group matches and two knockout matches for everyone, so you get five matches to try out some new faces.
Fair point, but outside of playing the concacaf teams on the list KSA would probably be the least desired for many of the (nothing to play for) countries.
I'm wondering if there might be some extra dough kicked in to play KSA. It wouldn't be a bad thing if we allowed finances to come into play to some extent.
I agree. I think another cost of adding NL onto other international tournaments is the wear and tear on top players. I don't know how many matches top players had to play 25 years ago, if there are more FIFA-mandatory windows, or how many weeks off they had. But in my memory the difference is large. TV $ distort decision-making in sports all the time, and this seems like one of those instances to me.
US would be smart to get all the non-euro confederations to partner with CONCACAF. I know CONMEBOL is partnering with EUFA soon but that can change and their should be big attempts to change it. US draws big crowds for games so invite tournaments, friendlies, combined NL's or whatever it takes to get other feds on board. Pressure UEFA so that no one cooperates with them anymore for their greediness.
There will be some opportunities to play some UEFA teams during the Euro Cup qualifiers - a couple of the groups will have odd numbers of teams, such that one team will be available. That is throughout 2023 into early 2024. Plus you have the host not playing qualifiers (for the 2024 Euro Cup, that is Germany). But I do agree that with UEFA teams being tied up with Nations League (and potentially involving CONMEBOL teams next cycle), it does limit the opportunities for friendlies with teams from Europe. Probably will see more games against Asian or African teams as a result. I do believe, though, that COVID and the odd WC schedule for the fall is what messed up "send off" games this year. I think that if the schedules are normal, that there wouldn't be UEFA (or CONCACAG) NL games in the post-WC qualifying, pre-WC timeframe.
There are fewer FIFA windows, as the big European clubs have used their influence to reduce things. In a typical year (one without COVID adjustments and without a Qatar World Cup), there are four in-season international windows during the predominant August-May club season. Everything else is put into an immediate post-season window (like we just saw) plus the typical summer tournaments.
In 2023, look for teams from the odd-numbered qualifying groups, or Germany. I think the March 2024 window will be friendly-only for UEFA, as well as the June Euro tuneup window.
We obviously should be exploring pre-WC closed-door scrimmage opportunities in the week(s) before our first game.
This year? There's no time. Players will be with their clubs, except for MLS players eliminated from the playoffs. Maybe they can arrange something very informal in Qatar 3-4 days before the first game, which would be 2-3 days after everybody arrives.
if you want to get rid of nl, offer fifa 80% of the take from every friendly. everything else is noise. this is about fifa getting money.
In normal WC years, these scrimmages are common. You need the right (cooperative) opponent, who's willing to provide a 3/4-speed tune-up without any rough stuff. Agree the window is much tighter this year, but it would still be worth a look.
The main driver of the CONCACAF Nations League is giving the lower tier of teams regular competition at a reasonable competitive level. For many of them, their programs consisted of getting bounced early from WCQ, then not doing much until they get bounced from the next WCQ. Hard to develop anything with that kind of scheule. Additionally it creates for CONCACAF another showcase final where, if everything works out right, it can fill an NFL stadium for a US-Mexico game. FIFA has not much to do with it. For UEFA, I think the decision was that so many international breaks for friendlies were a waste of time.
fifa has everything to do with it. nl replaces the confederations cup, which was a two week event, with windows throughout every year. its sole purpose it to get fifas hand in the pocket of every federation and the individual money made which fifa saw none of. it has as much to do with a competitive level for lower league nations as money for youth soccer and fields in concacaf under jack warner.