[fires up the wayback machine] I mean, there's no way the Americans can knock off the Soviets in hockey. Sure, they're playing here in Lake Placid, but the Russians wiped the floor with us just a month ago! Hell, they obliterated an NHL all-star team just before the Olympics. I mean, look at all that talent - Tretiak, Fetisov, Kasatonov, etc. Who do the Americans have? Jim Craig? Ha! Man, I expect the Soviets to win by at least 5 goals. Don't get me wrong, I love America, but there's no way that the US can match up talent-wise with the Soviets. [steps out of wayback machine] My, it's good to see how much things have changed since then....
That is about what I'd pick. Indeed, the actual performances in the group stage surely could be very different. Really hard to pick between Cech and Buffon... Cech is the best keeper as of now that I've seen a lot of - I haven't seen enough of Buffon (with keepers, you have to see soo many matches to get a really good impression) to make an excellent comparison. There is a huge difference between thinking the US can beat Italy and thinking they WILL beat Italy. All about the odds...
I agree. My post was more a response to the people who keep saying that the US doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell in Group E. Anything can happen... that's why the game is played on the grass and not on internet message boards.
Jesus, you try to be subtle on these boards, but nobody gets anything until you whack 'em over the head about 50,000 times.... OK, here goes: Basically, all I've been hearing on these threads is how the US doesn't have a chance in hell against CR and Italy (especially Italy). Mainly for these reasons: 1) The US lost 4-1 against Germany who was beaten 4-1 by Italy; 2) The Italian team by itself could be considered a Group E All-Star Team; 3) Italy has a much longer tradition of being a world soccer power; 4) The US, although they are somewhat mildly respected, do not have world-class players (or at least, are no match talent-wise for the Euro teams). Simply put, those were roughly the same reasons people were giving for the US hockey team to have no shot at a medal during the 1980 Winter Games in Lake Placid. But sure enough, it happened... we beat the mighty Soviets, who hadn't lost an Olympic game in 12 years. As King-James said, I'm not guaranteeing that the US will automatically knock off the Italians, but I'm optimistic that we can beat them in the Cup. Things like that happen... it's why the game is played. Frankly, I'm tempted to compare Herb Brooks to Il Bruce, but Herbie was way better at lighting a fire under his players. Not that Arena's bad, but any coach who tells his team "You lose this game and you take it to your f***kin' graves" automatically goes to the top of the list.
Like I have said in a previous post, there have been US fans who think that a win against the Azzurri is a certainty and they say that certain US players are better than some of the Azzurri players. The arguements they have put together are flawed and unrealistic.
No win in a World Cup is certain. I'm sure everyone thought that a France win v Senegal was "certain," just as everyone thought a Portugal win over the US was a "certain." But to think that the US isn't capable of winning this game is absurd. Believe it or not, its not always about how many "great" players one team has vs the other team. Its about how that team plays together. Surely few people expected the Greeks to win Euro 2004. Obviously England, France, Holland, Portugal, etc had many better players that had scored better goals in better leagues against better competition. The Greeks wom because the were committed as a team. So, I welcome the challenge on the Azzurri and I firmly believe the US can take points off them. Nothing line-up or stats or history that you guys throw out on this board in gonna change that. But I'd love to meet you guys for a beer after the game in Germany....
There's #3 and #4. From another thread in the forum: There's #1. And do I really have to go back to the beginning of this thread to point out instances of my second point? All I'm saying is that people are giving all these reasons why the US can't advance from Group E, some of which are solid, others are terribly short-sighted. However, all the analysis we do beforehand doesn't mean a damn thing, because anything can happen in those 90 minutes. We'll just have to see... but I don't think anything is guaranteed. And 11Best, I'm not implying that a win against Italy would have anywhere near the implications that the Miracle on Ice had. I was just using it as an example that nothing is certain in the world of sports. I could've used "Casey at the Bat" for an Italy comparison, and though the two have practically nothing in common, they carry a similar message {NOTE: I am not saying that Italy will "strike out" at the WC... just that it's a possibility}. In 1980, it was all about proving that the US was still a world power against the Soviets, and it was to restore our damaged pride. A win vs. Italy just shows that we won vs. Italy, nothing more. I'm fully aware of that. As I said, it was just a loose comparison.
Of course no win is certain in a World Cup and I do feel that the US are capable of surprising anyone. The results in the World Cup of 2002 proved that. All I'm saying is that there have been posters who have been making those conclusions by claiming that the US can clearly beat the Azzurri and that Italy are crap. I see the realism of the US springing a surprise against Italy but are those comments about the US clearly beating Italy realistic? I don't think so. It would be like Aussie fans guaranteeing a win against Brazil. One fan might say that Australia is capable of getting a surprise result against Australia and that's a realistic responce. If another Socceroo fan then says that Australia can clearly beat Brazil, that comment is absurd. Likewise applies to the US fans who think that America can clearly beat Italy.
I havent seen anyone anywhere on these boards say that Italy is crap. I think youre making that up to make your ignorant posts seem somewhat plausible.
I've seen it. Why would I want to make such comments up? If those comments were false, I wouldn't consider making up such lies in the first place. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=322725 Have you looked at that thread, CincoDmayo?
Well, ignore those idiots who said those things. The rational US fan knows that your team is class when it plays at its highest level.
I'm pretty sure that someone on BS has said just about anything at some point in time. The errors made on these boards are when people listen to these comments outside the mainstream, respond to them, generalize them, consider them representative of the majority, and pop off about them. There are just some people out there trying to stir things up. Don't let it degrade to a useless mudslinging contest. We all have poo - not all of us sling it at people. That being said - I'd like to get back to the point of this thread before it completely gets lost. A Group E Best 11: First - some guidelines. Any best 11 cannot be solely comprised of players from a single team or even 80% so. They may be the best 11 by reputation and skill coming into the tournament, but it's nearly impossible that each will play up to that reputation and that no players from the other teams will outshine them. Due to the fact this is a tough group and no team is expected to get wins from all three of their games - Any group best eleven at most would include 6 players from the team winning the group and 3 players from the next best team. Does this make sense? So it would be logical to think that if the group points turned out... Italy 7 USA 5 Czech 2 Ghana 1 ...you'd have a pretty similar balance of players representing their countries on the best 11 squad So: Italy - 5 players on best 11 USA - 3 Czech - 2 Ghana - 1 Now you can obviously mess around with the expected final standings (Czech over USA) and short one team for another. But I don't think anyone in their right mind believes any team will win all of their group games - thereby dominating the group so entirely that the group's best 11 could reasonably be considered to come almost entirely from one team. So here goes: ---------Gilardinho--Toni----------- ---------------Nedved---------------- -Beasley--Essien----O'Brien--Cameronesi --Nesta-----Cannavaro---Onyewu --------------Cech-------------------- How's that all check out?
i think ur just trying to make everyone happy... but i would have totti for sure... and buffon .. then that would be ok.. u would be crazy not to put those players in a all-star team
My comments were meant to say that the USA has a chance vs Italy, because in my opinion, we do. I agree that anyone who says Italy is crap doesn't follow the game. In fact, I wouldn't say any team is "crap" once they have reached this stage. Sure, some are clearly (there's that word again) better than others and some have tougher qualifications than others, but at this point all the teams have earned the right to be in Germany...
Totti's injury, while recovering quickly, is the reason I felt comfortable leaving him off. A fully healthy Totti however is among the best players in the entire tournament, let alone the group - so if he returns in form I'd have to re-evaluate. I'd justify leaving Buffon off because of Italy's defense. If he doesn't have many chances against him - he won't make a best 11 side. That's the trick - and why I feel I'm being more realistic than making people happy. If the team plays together it makes it less likely that the individual will shine. If your team's service is great - it makes it less difficult to finish off the goals and show yourself better than other strikers. If you're goals are due to amazing work from your forwards - your midfield isn't gonna get much credit. If your team's defense holds strong - goaltenders shine less. A bunch of great saves from your goaltender reflects poorly on your defense. The ones who will attempt to make people happy are FIFA's technical studies group - who grant the awards (at least for the whole tournament - maybe not group play). They'll look for a balanced team as well. bwach
Thanks. I really think that the only Italian you can't leave off is Luca Toni - and possibly Cannavaro - though he's starting to look a little uncertain at times, very much unlike himself in his prime. Actually - those are the only players in the entire group that I feel stand so head and shoulders above the rest that they're virtual locks to make the team. All other players in the group have too much competition.
Cannavaro? Group E All Star? Please. He's old and slow and was never that good to begin with. A Thug perhaps, He is a media darling for looks, not ability. How many times has Thuram covered for Cannavaro's lack of pace? too many....He's never been in Nesta's class. Did anyone see Henry blow by him like 8 times in the last 2 weeks? or was it just me?