2014 FIFA World Cup™ Round of 16: United States v. Belgium | Tues, Jul 1

Or as the Seal's say, "Not Dead. Can't Quit."

Very proud of the boys exemplifying this Navy Seal Credo in back to back to back to back world cups (against Germany in 2002, against Italy a man down in 2006, against England, Slovenia, Algeria, and Ghana in 2010, and against Ghana, Portugal, Germany and Belgium in 2014) and it was fantastic to see our son's of American servicemen born in Germany, John Anthony Brooks (winner against Ghana), Jermaine Jones (equalizer against Portugal), and youngster Julian Green (goal in 107th minute down 0-2), carry on the legacy this past month. Onward we go.

 

Will someone, other than a San Jose Wondo's apologist defend Wondo? Quit trying to defend the blown sitter. Hell Wondo apologized. I feel for the guy, biggest moment of his entire life, and for whatever reason, it just didn't work out for him. It's tragic for him personally and sad for the US, but everyone makes mistakes, even the greats, and he'll move on from this, and you need to move on from defending a guy who shouldn't have been there over Boyd in the first place, and was largely there for his intangibles, intelligence and work rate, rather than his skill.

And btw, the reason the game opened up for the US was because:

#1 Belgium was tired

#2 Belgium was nursing a 2-0 lead and could cede more of the possesion.

As another poster mentioned, losing Jozy meant we had to complete change our tactics, and strategic formations, the team simply didn't have the hold up player (Boyd), necessary to continue playing the way we had against Turkey (could have been a blood bath), Nigeria (dominating performance), and the first 20 minutes against Ghana. This was the only way we could play.

To play the way you would have wished would have insured we would have crashed out in group play, or gotten obliterated by Belgium if somehow we did.

His strategy nearly worked, and if Wondo, or Dempsey had had softer touch, that game is won, or sent to penalties, despite the team having been played largely off the field. Klinsy's approach gave us a chance in a scenario where we'd be played off the field, your approach would have flat out resulted in us being played off the field. We needed a defensive shield in front of our defense and keeper just to have any chance at all, 2 forwards up front would have lead to 50 shots or more going at Howard instead of the innumerable (27?), that did. We simply wouldn't have had the numbers in central midfield, and the defense in depth to hold them off.

With Klinsy's strategy, we nearly pulled off a miracle. Using that miracle to suggest that we actually would have gotten the Miracle on Grass, if we'd simply listened to your tactical advice ignores the facts playing out right in front of your face throughout that game on the television.

 

Altidore is not that good to make much of a difference, he's not Suarez for sure. Still, the USA showed a lot of composure, grit, and at least a good number of the players have talent: Bradley, Dempsey, Johnson, Susie and Beasley (only he can't cross). And of course Howard.

One thing to worry is that after Meola, Friedel, Keller and Howard, the USA does not have a young keeper in that tradition at the moment.

 

Nearly every team that ended up randomly drawn with Manaus was automatically going to have one of the longest travel distances humanly possible in the cup because of just how far it is from anything in Brazil, I believe the only side that didn't end up with that problem in Manaus was England. Klinsy decided to set up the teams facility before the draw, betting that it was a great facility (it was one of the best for the tournament), and that we'd be one of the 26 teams that didn't get Manaus, rather than one of the 6 that did. He lost that bet. He decided not to change where he set up shop because he felt it was perfect for the team and didn't want to jerry rig one of the last places secured in an inferior spot.

And as mentioned earlier, any team that had Manaus, ended up finishing amongst the most travelled teams possible in the tourney. That, along with the horrific conditions there, was precisely why England's Manager, and Klinsy were quoted pre-draw, much to the chagrin and anger of the Manaus Mayor, as having said, "We're fine with anything so long as we don't have to play in Manaus."

A last little tidbit worth mentioning:

Of the 6 teams that played in Manaus: Italy, England, USA, and Switzerland all lost their next game. Only Portugal, amongst those teams won, beating Ghana, in a game that for all intents in purposes, probably should have been a draw, or a Ghana victory, but wasn't due to Ronaldo, horrendous goalkeeping from Ghana, and a blown sitter by Waris. Honduras had no next game, though we all know they would have lost if they did.

 

my simple point is that Belgium made Howard's job easier than Brasil made Ochoa's. there's no denying that.

yes they did. they won.

and you cited the injury.

because they aren't that much better than the Swiss, based on FIFA rankings. i think i made that point in my post.

if the expectation was that their victories would be more decisive, they failed, but the top teams won, without exception. so maybe it's your expectations that were not met, not theirs.

 

fascinating word etymology. there are two words, jury and jerry, used with -rig to denote something makeshift, but they have two entirely different etymologies. i would have said "jury-rig", but i think both fit perfectly well.

 

Proves you have zero knowledge of football. When Windo came in it allowed Dempsey to go back to hid position.

After that we wete the better team.

We run everything through Altidore, all of those bad passes Bradley had in the WC he would have just sent Altidore's way ad got the ball back, because Altidore is to strong to pushe off the ball, Dempsey is 32 and can't jold the ball up for us.

Wondo should have passed the ball to Dempsey or hit it before it hit the ground, once the ball hit the ground he go under jt.

Wondo made the pass to Dempsey on the free kick.

Wondo should have started, although Eddie Johnson should have been chosen over him.

You can't have Dempsey as a hold up guy at 32.

Beckerman sjould have started, the defense had played great yet JK chose to screw with it.

Yeldin should have started at winger of the HORRIBLE ZUSI.

 

i sure hope you're on the short list to replace Klinsmann if he bails.

 

Tim Howard's performance was greatest game performance in US History

 

Brad Guzan is a stud, there will be no drop off at keeper when Howard retires from the NT.

 

Well, that's not saying much

 

Altidore is not very good for Sunderland. He was great for AZ Alkamaar, and was great for the USMNT. Indeed 2013 was his best season for the US ever. He scored a brace against Bosnia, in Bosnia, on Germany in the US, and scored 8 goals in total from June 2013 thru October.

Our entire system was built upon his hold up play and understanding in the US system, where the best of his game is always seen. He couldn't have been utilized worse than how he was for Sunderland, but with us he was always productive, getting a brace against Nigeria in a demolition style performance right before the cup.

He is not Suarez, no doubt, but how many teams at this World Cup had forwards that could compete with Suarez? Van Persie, Sanchez, Martinez, Balotelli, Messi, Ronaldo are the only guys at this World Cup that could be mentioned in the same sentence as Suarez, and not be ridiculed. The rest of the best, are either getting up there in age, a bit of a lower tier, or like Altidore, either inconsistent, or a system forward with their team (Benzema is a good example, had produced nothing at all for France in multiple tournaments until WC '14, and the bulk of his productivity came in one game). Jozy fits snugly in the second or third tier at this cup, but when he plays for team USA, he's been hugely productive other than the one dry spell (late '12 to mid '13 oddly enough when he was killing it with Alkamaar).

 

Did they only intentionally do the minimum against Ghana too? Was that 2-2 draw all part of their master plan?

I think you're giving them a bit too much credit and short changing the US. It was a strong defensive performance by the US and Germany took their chance, but it was clear they wanted to win and would go hard for 90 minutes. If Lahm doesn't make that 60 yard run to block a shot, it easily could have ended in a draw.

 

Guzan's great, though not quite at Howard's peak level. Howard at his peak has been world class, on one of those amazing charts (wish I could remember where I saw it), that showed performance on a graph, Howard fit snugly in the elite tier, basically somewhere between 4th-8th in the world amongst keepers.

We also have a young kid coming up behind Bill Hamid, and Sean Johnson, that may be better than either of those guys, which would be awesome. I can't remember his damn name though! Brutal. Apparently he is considered perhaps the best prospect we've had by many since Howard fifteen years ago. But his name has completely slipped my mind. Anyone remember it? There was a US Soccer video put up this year about him if memory serves.

 

Adding to That.. had Germany lost to the US 2 goals and Ghana beaten Portugal by 3 x 0 Germany would have not made it.

 

I love Howard (no doubt the best American player during this tournament and can be argued multiple a tournament), but imo 4th to 8th in the world would still be pretty high. In the EPL, I'd take De Gea, Cech, Courtois, Lloris, Szczesny and Begovic over him, and that'd already be 6. Add in Neuer and... alright then maybe LOL 8th? Either way having an American considered within the top 10-15 in the world at his position is already an honor enough, since no other player is even close to cracking that.

To the young kid, I truly hope it isn't Cody Cropper since that dude really cannot play.

But traditionally, I think the world would agree that if there'd be one position where the U.S. has an excellent track record of producing high quality players, then that position is goalkeeper.

 

I don't really agree on De Gea or Szczesny and Cech at this point in his career. As many Arsenal supporters will tell you, Szczesny has been an adventure in back. De Gea is good but again, not among the elite in the prem. Cech isn't what he was for Chelski and hasn't been for a few years.

For what it's worth, Begovic, Courtois, Mignolet, Howard are my current top 4 in the EPL.

Absolutely!

 

We'll agree to disagree, though I should note both Cech and Szczesny shared the Golden Glove, and most Arsenal supporters would also be the first to tell how during this season (2013-14) Szczesny matured a lot this season. And most objective Spurs supporters would also say the best keepers during the season are both found in North London. To my eyes though, I'd actually rank De Gea #1. Anyway, we're getting off-topic and I am sure you're a big EPL viewer so your view is valued, but I'm just happy that at 35 Howard is still as good as he is. It's true goalkeepers can stay at a high level for much longer than say, wingers, but looking at the drop off Casillas or Julio Cesar (not really at this WC, just past several seasons) have had, it'd be quite an accomplishment on Tim's part.

 

I don't understand your point. Ghana were a very difficult opponent for Germany that pushed them all the way to the wire. The US were not.

 

Wow. And if Cameroon hadn't conceded 9 goals and instead scored 15 they would be winning the World Cup now. Are you finished with your what-if gymnastics?

 

Yeah, funny how the "ifs" in this thread are conveniently made for other teams not US.

 

@Tukafo - why are you so belligerent against any positive post about USA?

 

That's flawed logic. Ghana lost to the US. Germany were taken to the brink against a team the US beat. Germany won by just a goal against the US meaning the US were also a difficult opponent for Germany. Can you see what I'm getting at?