I think we can all still agree that our 2002 team is better than the one we currently have, even if the margin is paper thin with our confederations cup performance. Note: please no posts about how this is speculation. I know that is what it is, and those who would like to participate in the discussion are most welcome, and those who are here for the opposite are not. What do you guys think now? If you still favor 2002, what has to happen for the 2010 version to become the best American team? The most important question is what has to happen in the next 12 months for this version of the USA team to be the best ever?
I think that if you posted a poll and asked people which team was better, the 2002 team or the 2009 team, more than 50% would say the 2009 team (with the inclusion of Jones). I personally think this team right now is better, and deeper than any team ever in the history of the USMNT. But not by that much.
What do we need to do to improve the team? 1.) Kljestan needs to regain form. We need cover at the wings and if Kljestan can pick up the pieces that will help. 2.) Other fringe outside mids need to show their worth at the gold cup or in January. 3.) Jay Demerit needs to continue performing. Whats the chances of him finding a better club? 4.) Onyewu needs to get PT at AC Milan. Cant think of more.
I think this team is way more talented than our 2002 team, I really don't think its close. In fact I think the 2009-2010 team could do exactly what the 2002 team did, except beat atleast Poland and maybe Korea as well.
I realize that most people won't agree with me. But I think player for player the US team in 2010 will be stronger. The 2002 team was very fortunate to get to the quarter-finals. The US was lucky to advance out of the group, and was lucky to draw Mexico in the round of 16. Granted they played very well. GK - Freidal was probably slightly better than Howard. Brad had a great tournament but Howard can be as good. -------- Slight Edge 2002 CBs - I prefer Onyewu and Boca to Pope and Agoos. Pope was good, but Onyewu has blossomed in the last year. And I thought Agoos was mediocre at that point. -------- Slight Egde 2010 WB - 2002 was probably better at this point because of the weakness on the left side. But by 2010 things should improve. Hejduk is probably better now than he was. And if Spector can play the other outside back he is fairly close to Sanneh. --------- Slight Edge 2002 CM - Mastroeni was a good destroyer and Obrien was serviceable. But Jones or Edu should be able to do what Mastro did and more by 2010. Reyna is obviously better than Jr. at this point but Bradley is improving quickly. So while Reyna would swing the penjelum to 2002, there is so much more depth now. Feilhaber's creative spark is nothing to sneez at, and by 2010 we should have plenty of good options. --------- Even WM - Stewart gave the US several good years, and Beasley had younger legs. But they don't hold a candle to the threat that Donovan and Dempsey have been providing --------- Big edge 2010 ST - Donovan was playing well in his support striker role and McBride was great. Mathis was also a nice spark plug off the bench. While I really like what Davies has brought, I can't say Davies, Ching, or Altidore match up YET. -------- Edge 2002 For the 2010 team to be considered as good or better than the 2002 team they will simply need to get to the round of 16 or quarter-finals.
pretty damn good analysis, the only think i'd tweek is that you have our cm positions as even. i think the fact that the depth now is so much deeper than 2002's makes it better. other than that its good
For the current team to improve for 2010 Altidore has got to get playing time and has got to develop his ball control skills. He's very unrefined at the moment, despite his tremendous potential.
He certainly was a weak link against Brazil in the final. His first touch is as bad as ever with his lack of playing time/injury, if the Olympiakos thing works out and gives him playing time he should be fun to watch in 2010.
O'Brien was serviceable? Do you remember his pass to Mathis to create the goal against SK? Do you remember him springing Lewis down the left flank for the 2nd goal against Mex? He was responsible for a good deal of what little possession we managed against Portugal, SK, and Germany. IMHO, his form was way better than Claudio Reyna (who wasn't even on the field against Portugal), and JOB was our only player with real creativity and vision... not to mention a great "soccer brain." We need another CM like him, which is one reason I'm really pulling for Benny to have a great year. The jury is out, way out, comparing CMs between 2002 and 2010. We really don't have a clue how Benny, Jermaine, and Maurice will perform under pressure in the World Cup. Think about it... If Chris Armas hadn't injured his knee in the buildup, he probably would have been the starter in 2002 (at the expense of O'Brien), and our offensive creativity would have suffered. I don't think we would have beaten Portugal....
The team is bigger, stronger, and faster now with way more threats to score goals and way more depth. we have improved a lot since 2002 regardless of whether we get to the quarterfinals or not. The thing we need now is to find some way to keep possession so Howard is not continually under pressure like he was in the second half against Spain and Brazil.
I agree completely. The 2010 team will be better than the 2002 team regardless of the results. The talent is improved and the depth is MUCH better. And, yes I think our 2010 team could beat the 2002 Portugal and Korea teams and not get get blasted by a very mediocre 2002 Poland team. The 2009 team is clearly MUCH better than the 2001 team.
The 2002 team is still the "Gold Standard" for the US, as much as any US team can be considered a Gold Standard. These type of comparisons come up every few months and over the last couple of years I have consistently argued that the 2002 team was better than the team of 2007, 2008, and at the start of 2009, but I have also consistently argued that the youthful talent and depth has more potential now than it did in 2002 and that the 2014 team will be the best ever. I still think that is true, but a couple of recent developments will give the 2009/2010 team the real chance to exceed the 2002 team not only in potential and depth, but in game-day talent, too. The most important recent developments are: Spector's emergence as a prime-age starting defender; Davies' emergence as a serious starting option; Boca's recent shift to LB; and Jones' announcement that he wants to play for the US. Until recently we knew that: * Young Altidore 2009/2010 basically matched young Donovan 2002 in potential, but that the other striker options were inferior to McBride. * That the trio of O'Brien, Reyna, and Mastro in 2002 was better than the CM's of today, even if the CM depth/potential today was better. * That the outside backs of 2002 (Sanneh and Hejduk) were better than the outside backs of today. The CB's and Keepers are very similar today and in 2002, so that's a wash. The current starting outside mids are better than in 2002, but the depth here has been dubious. The emergence of Spector, Davies, Boca at LB and Jones can shift those factors in favor of the current team over 2002. Strikers and outside backs might now match 2002, while the CM's could either match or exceed 2002. Indeed, if the 2010 team does prove to be better than the 2002 team, it will be because the 2010 starting midfield of Donovan-Jones-Bradley-Dempsey could be the strongest, most accomplished, most dynamic midfield in US soccer history. Recent developments may force me to change my mind about the 2002 team still being the best ever. And that is a good thing for a fan of US soccer.
On paper. If you remember during the Confed Cup, Bradley was struggling to find trustworthy guys to sub. I think 2010 is better than 2002. These things need to happen before SA 2010. 1. Altidore needs to play somewhere. 2. Gooch needs to play at AC Milan. 3. Guys off the bench like Edu, Feilhaber, Klejstan must continue playing (and play good) 4. Bob needs to decide on his 3rd striker off the bench. I can live w/ Ching in that late 75th minute role. I can't with Casey. 5. We need to find a pure attacker to come off the bench. Adu is the 1st candidate, if he'd only show some life on the field. Holden maybe. 6. Demerit needs to continue playing and be healthy. I'm fine with him staying and playing at Watford. (The CCC is better than a lot give credit for) 7. Spector and Cherundolo need to stay health.
I agree with a lot of your post and think you will shift your gold standard this year. Also, I do agree we will be better in 2014 than 2010 and think we will be better in 2014, 2018, 2022, etc. than the 2002 team also. I have never agreed with the 2002 CB options being comparable. Bruce started Agoos in the WC and Agoos would not make this team's 23 player roster at the WC. Gooch, DeMerrit, Boca are clearly much better than Pope, Agoos, Beerholder. Spector/Dolo and Boca/Bornstein or Spector have always been better options than Sanneh or Heydude. I do agree that the midfield/forward gap is less obvious now, but in a year this could be the best US midfield ever fielded at a major tourney. Dempsey----------Jr.--------Jones/Edu--------------- Landy Alti/Davies could also surpass the McHead/Wolff/Mathis options from 2002 one year from now. Alti/Davies looked great in the CC together and clearly cause a load of problems already. The one position I hope we are comparable is GK. Howard is as talented, but Friedal's performance in 2002 was fantastic. I agree with MassYank and hope Bob finds/acclimates some of the better depth that we have. We still have a year to go, and I would not be surprised to see some players come out of relatively nowhere (not penciled in now) to make the 23 or possible contribute at the tourney similar to our 2002 experience. We are still a year away, so it is obviously difficult to compare/project and is all opinion at this point, but we are much better in 2009 than 2001.
From what I remember leading up to Japorea, this team we have now has a LOT fewer questions and a lot better depth. I mean, Carlos friggin' Llamosa was one of our go to defensive subs FFS. I feel more confident with this team only because we can all pretty much agree on our current starting 11 and 4-4-2 afer this past Confed Cup. 2002 had a TON of uncertainties even leading up to the send off friendlies against Jamaica and Holland in May of that year.
The spread of talent from best to worst player is much narrower now than it was in 2002. The consistency of the squad is much better now as well. The 2002 team had a three difference makers that were unexpected: Friedel, O'Brien, and Pablo. Friedel kept Keller on the bench and had an incredible run. Pablo was the surprise beneficiary of an injury to Chris Armas. O'Brien was the real glue taking over the central midfield, eventually leading to Reyna playing his best game as an outside mid. O'Brien rarely played in qualifying for health and club reasons, but was finally able to put together a string of games without injury and demonstrated how good he really was. We don't have a player like O'Brien. I hope Benny proves to be that player, but his has not so far. Unfortunately, any talk of the 2002 usually collapses into a discussion of the true value of Reyna. He was unique among our central mids but he was part of as many failures as successes.
Amen! JOB is/has been the best CM in my liftime when healthy. With Bruce Almighty at the controls, an already once injured JOB was able to keep the still healthy (?) Claudia Reyna on the bench. Oh what could have been if JOB stayed healthy. But the thread is about 2002 v 2010. I look at USMNT as reborn in the mid 80's by the babies of the old NASL. These guys put the US back on the international scene with in appearence in the 90WC. I am sure that 90WC performance generated investment interest that in turn landed the 94WC right here and the birth of the MLS. That laid the foundation for continued growth that we have today. To me, the US futbol growth has been constant and somewhat linear since 1990. Using the WC as the meter, I see our results this way: 1990 Awesome for a group of guys who have second jobs. 1994 Nice to be home and get the home draw. 1998 Time to change the line up from 1990, too bad a very tough group draw exposed the change deficiencies. 2002 45 minutes of JOB at a level the USMNT has never had before or since during the Portugal match. Rode those minutes to the quarterfinals. 2006 Time to change the leadership that rode those 45 minutes vs Portugal for too long. Let's kick the bucket! 2010 The US has continued its growth and is now being supplemented by the MLS talent to push the results even higher. We have recently started to kick the bucket exposing the defieciency in the midfield. If the current US Soccer leadership presses for continued growth in all phases of the game but especially in the middle, we will do very well in WC both in 10 and 14. So yeah, 2010 is better 2002 which is better then 1994, etc......
I think we got the best team ever are A Squad still needs improvement but were far far from a Bad team above Average IMO and are B Squad are passing touching scoring Quality goals and doing quality plays with most being MLS talent we finnaly got Forwards who look promising Altidore, Davies,Cooper & Ching ect. And yes we got a Quality manager i still think he needs help with his decion making of who's coming of the bench but he prove in the Confederations cup what hes all about and look at all of are CM's Bradley,Clark,Edu,Feilhaber,Torres and the list goes on and we finnaly got a Player playing in a top 4 team GOOCH!!!
And the successful 2009 Confed Cup team played .400 ball. Which doesn't mean diddly, except that it indicates that W-L% is very misleading in short tournaments.
Agree with what you say here. I would like to add a couple of things. BB has done a very good job given the circumstances of his hiring. The prep work for matches has been spot on. But as you say, BB has trouble during a match. I am not sure that is curable, he should and will get the WC10 to demonstrate if can make the adjustments. You were so spot on to call for Altidore. He can right now be a player that the opposing teams need to plan for dealing with. He is a target and as anybody who has played will tell you, having a target on the offensive end in a tightly contested (top 10 team) is invaluable. It relieves the pressure elsewhere. He has huge upside and is great right now. Midfield; i also agree, we have lots of options, lets see them, even if Junior has to sit for several/many matches.
LOL... The difference in quality of opposition between the two tourneys is laughable. Brazil, Spain, and maybe even Italy would absolutely destroy any team we played in 2002. 2002 WC Portugal - old and slow but technical. Korea also beat them. South Korea - fit and well coached. Poland - mediocre, slow (but we somehow got drilled by them) Mexico - we always beat them. Germany - very bad German team. Not even in the same breath as Brazil or Spain in 2009. 2009 CC Italy - solid and technical team bringing in some youth Brazil - light years ahead of anything from 2002 (world class at almost every position) Spain - see Brazil Egypt - very technical team that we absolutely destroyed. A better team than the 2002 SK, Mexico, and Poland teams.
The difference in quality is real, but it isn't laughable. Heck Germany made the 2002 Final, so they were hardly chopped liver. Korea was the Hiddink-Genius-coached home team that made the semi-finals. Portugal was a pre-tourney favorite Top-10 team and comparable in talent and world rankings to the aging 2009 Italy team. And Egypt is a nice team, but not nearly as good as Mexico or South Korea were in 2002. But I agree that the 2009 Confed Cup opponents were better overall than the 2002 WC opponents. Against very good opponents in 2002 the US played .500 ball and against somewhat better opponents in 2009 the US played .400 ball. Hardly shocking differences, and definitely not worthy of using W-L% to prove anything. Which was my point -- the W-L% is virtually meaningless in a short tourney. Holland had a .750 winning % at the 2008 Euros, but couldn't reach the semi's and became another underachieving, forgettable squad. What matters is getting to the Quarterfinals in the WC and to the Finals in the Confed Cup.
You're right, they weren't "chopped liver" they were much worse than that. This was the same Germany who were absolutely murdered by England 5-1 in Munich 6 months earlier. They reached the wc final without beating a single european team along the way and had, without question, the easiest draw of any world cup final team in history. That was a bad German team.