Post-match: 2026 FIFA World Cup Draw; December 5th - 12pm

I think its 1000% conditional.

Those fans are really sick to death of how --- their team has been for years. They've been booing them religiously in friendlies held down there. They only seem to get unconditional support in the US. The Mexico based fans show their disgust quite quickly. They are very lucky they drew the most erratic of the likely opponents for matchday 1. If they pulled South Korea or Denmark, ouch....they fall behind, very possible, the fans will turn on them viciously.

They need to thank the soccer gods that South Africa is gonna walk out their in that hell hole stadium, and not know what to do. South Africa still might shock them. They consistently outperformed Nigeria in WCQ, and Nigeria is super talented, they also finished 3rd at AFCON '23. They beat Morocco, then played to penalties in 3 games in a row, outlasting Cape Verde, losing to Nigeria, than beating DR Congo in the consolation game. The Group Stage wasn't impressive (lost to Mali, beat Namibia and tied Tunisia).

I would just love love love it, to see South Africa just fly across that field and steal a point or 3, it would be amazing, and it would likely demolish El Tri's cup (the fans would be ready to eviscerate them if there was another misstep).

Right now Jimenez has openly talked about how much it has sucked to get treated like ---- by the fans after they play like --- quite consistently in front of them....so there's probably mutual irritation at this point.

Otoh, listening to Futball americas, they all sounded delusional to me, but then again even Vegas agrees (they are +100 to win the group). The ESPN crew seemed to think El Tri got a great draw, and should win the group. I look at the group and wonder: are they better than ANY of those teams? Probably South Africa, at least in the past anyway. But Denmark? No. Ireland? Yeah, but the current Ireland of the last window definitely beats them. Czech's are totally erratic, so not sure there. But yeah, I look at the UEFA Path Winner at +210 and South Korea at +350, and I just find it really odd.

Feels like 2022 on repeat. Both '22 and '26 they did draw wonderful groups of life, but for the other teams, like our group, they will look at that tape and quickly realize that El Tri is playing like hot garbage, and doesn't really have any of the ---- they usually have (an elite defender, a strong GK, a MF Maestro, an incisive winger, or wing forwards, a solid striker....nope. They have none of that, they've got a 17 year old, Edson, and two strikers that can't seem to score goals in the El Tri shirt....wtf is that exactly?). Why should South Korea or the UEFA side be scared? The altitude and smog sucks, but get acclimated and you should be fine, and again, El Tri currently is pretty god awful....

I don't think they've played a genuinely good game since NL last spring, they played Canada pretty even, even if the scoreline wasn't even, they took the Gold Cup crown too, but weren't terribly impressive. The US was what we'd regard as a C side with a couple of A/B guys, same with Canada. And yet, meh.....not great at all.

So getting South Korea, just throwing it out there, or the UEFA path team? Why not? At +210, or +350 for South Korea....again, I felt this way in '22, my line at the time was literally, "the only reason they're gonna keep alive that run going back to '86/'94, is landing this joke of a group (Argentina, but absolute --- sides in Poland and Saudi Arabia from Pot 3 and Pot 4) and sure enough, they went out there, and were absolute trash...the same toothless, possession with no cutting edge problems hey had going back 2 years, continued unabated at the WC....just a joke of a. performance.

Nothing has really changed since then beyond getting even older and more retirements. Santi and Mora are now here, but only Mora looks ready to contribute in the shirt consistently and will that hold up with him just a young teenager with the weight of the world on his shoulders? I view them as worse than 2 of the 3 teams in the group, and probably better than South Africa, if good El Tri shows up, and they should, but you look at this fall:
1-2 loss to Paraguay
0-0 draw with a Uruguay side we put 5 on.
1-1 with Ecuador, not bad.
0-4 loss to Colombia, ouch.
2-2 draw with South Korea
0-0 with Japan.

That's basically 4 goals scored in their past 6 games. More of the same problems. And the defense getting shelled except against Japan and Uruguay, who brought B teams with some A sprinkled in. Not great.

I just find the expectation that they will be fine, odd. They have not played like a great soccer team consistently since 2018-2019. It's been literally 6 or 7 years. Sure they got results in Qualifying in '21-'22, but anyone watching, including El Tri fans, was terrified at how bad they might be in Qatar, and sure enough, they were a total disaster....

So, forgive the long screed, I just find the positive expectations people in the media have for them utterly obtuse. Unless they can win over the home crowd in June with a great opening performance, they finish 3rd in the group or 4th in my view. They simply aren't playing well enough for them to be the favorites that they are, that ammo is entirely based upon past accomplishments no longer relevant, and a sketchy equivocal fan base, that will turn on them if they struggle and they probably will struggle.

 

I wasn’t blaming that decision on FIFA, but making the point that the match times only add additional limitations on viewership to what is already in place.

 

I can't see it happening but Mexico and Canada both getting grouped at home would be utterly glorious.

 

I think a lot of people assume that if Turkey advances then they will be the presumptive favorite in Group D. However, we should remember that when we rolled out our Gold Cup squad against them in June there were a lot of positives that people came away with from that game despite losing 1-2. If it weren’t for a couple of preventable defensive blunders, people came away with thinking the result was there for the taking for the US—and it was pretty strong Tukey side. Just some food for thought.

 

For me, I think I’d rather see our confederation do well. As much I’d find some pleasure in seeing those teams do a face plant, I think it’s probably best for our confederation to get some results.

In some ways, it helps grow the game in our backyard, which is a good thing for the USA long term.

 

respectfully disagree. 2010 England was better than anyone in 2026 group, including potentially Turkey. 2010 Slovenia and Algeria also very good sides - I’d put both above Australia, and equal to Paraguay (maybe better).

 

I'm gonna respond to you and Manti's Toboggan's post:

#1 I don't know what the hell South Africa is, which is why my post is equivocal on them. You can see the same sentiment on the teams in various breakdowns like espn (really down on them if memory serves) and the athletic (more enthusiastic)....They've got a really impressive set of campaigns behind them....
They were completely robbed against Ghana in the round before the home and home for the tickets in an epic degree of home town cooking, so I was quite happy to see them qualified after such a travesty in qualifying for Qatar '22. At the AFCON in '23 they were very good. In WCQ they were mostly good but lost to freaking Rwanda, so who are they? I really don't know.

#2 Nigeria is a flagship team, for CAF, historically, they've been a powerhouse like El Tri has been in Concacrap until the US arrived. Nigeria has collected plenty of silverware at the youth level, far more than anyone else in the region (8 appearances in U17 Finals, 2 at the U20 levels, 3 trips to the medal stand at the olympics, 8 finals appearances at the AFCON with 3 titles, you get 16 medals if you treat it like the olympics in terms of top 3 finishes (and I like to look at it as a Final Four NCAA style approach with competitive regions like CAF, Conmebol and UEFA. But there's no question they are wildly inconsistent and dysfunctional, having failed to qualify for back to back tournaments despite a pile of riches in terms of attacking talent, it's rather inexplicable.

#3 In regards to the "Hell Hole", lol, I'm referring to the experience of it for opposing teams....It's a stadium at extremely high elevation, notorious for smog issues, and oh, you've got nearly 100,000 capacity. It is literally one of the pinnacle stadiums of home field advantage in international football. It is the absolute definition of a hell hole for opposing teams at a WC. I'm aware of the historical significance, hosted the famed Brazil 1970 revenge squad, hosted Maradona's heroics in '86....there's probably no stadium with as prestigious a history in International soccer as it, but in terms of intimidation purposes for a relatively inexperienced international squad like South Africa, OMG, it absolutely will be a hell hole. It does sound like they modernized the facilities for WC '26 so it's not gonna be as 60's era yuck as it had gotten in recent years, but hopefully you get my meaning. I'm far more speaking to it having the feel of a place where out of town gladiators go to get sacrificed lol, although in recent years, it's had less of that feel as El Tri has struggled to maintain it's former degree of intimidation (because of the ebb in El Tri's quality, rather than a decline in the stadium's ability to intimidate teams: see the US not losing a WCQ their since 2009, and that was a rather flukish loss (winner was largely the product of a swine flu infected Donovan losing his man late in the game. Normally we'd never have had a chance any other decade, but 2005 was the last time we face planted there in a critical match that counted). That's why El Tri needs to open up and kick South Africa down quickly before there's a risk of the fans turning. If the stadium's w/them, they can smash people, but they simply haven't played like that in a long time with consistency.

In Fairness, my entire view of the US, is if we play like '21-Summer '24, or the last two friendly windows, we win our group and maybe go far, if we play like we've played fall '23 through summer '25 and the South Korea friendly, we get grouped, or finish 3rd. I'm not a homer, or delusional when it comes to either national team.

#4 in reference to Mantis, I'm always torn with El Tri because my students and their families bleed green, white and red. I'm a guy that gave out the necessary bathroom pass to students when El Tri crashed out after beating the Saudi's three years ago. I don't want them to suffer, even in as much as I've found the antics of the team absolutely repulsive, particularly in '21, '22 and '23, as well as the fans showering are players with debris. But I love my students, and I know the agony of that scale of failure at a WC, so on the one hand, I want the horrible fans, and some of the players to suffer, otoh, I really don't want the good fans, and my students to suffer, so I'm torn.

I'm also Canadian on my dad's side (his family is from Alberta, British Columbia, and Nova Scotia (and eventually Irish, and English/German), so I will not be rooting against Canada. Rooting against them feels like rooting against 1990's USA, if I were a neutral, I want them to do well, even if their media, coach and some players are annoying. It's a good thing that they've arrived just as all the second and third tier Concacaf sides have collapsed in terms of quality (Costa Rica, Honduras, Jamaica, T&T, Guatemala etc).....

 

Sure I'll root for Panama/Haiti/Curacao as well as Suriname and (as a Union fan) especially Jamaica in their playoffs.

Mexico and Canada? Nah.

 

2010 England was good, but (unlike 2022 and now) they weren't really elite at the time. I agree they were tougher than current Turkey though.

 

One goal was off an absolute howler of a defensive error from Johnny that no sane person is executing in a World Cup in your own box right in front of goal (that, combined with/injuries is for now, keeping him off the metaphorical plane, in my view). The game was relatively even in attacking #'s (we had the xG, total shots #'s, they had the SOG total, a slight advantage in corners and offsides), and of course we were rolling out only 1 presumed starter at kickoff (Richards) and only 1.5 as of now (Richards and maybe Tillman).

I thought Turkey were the better side, but lets be straight...

Our team was:
Attacking spear: Agyemang-Luna-Tillman-McGlynn, literally zero of those guys were seen as the starting spear as of 6/25, CM's of LDLT and Johnny, neither were or are starters, and for now, neither are on that plane, FB's were Arf, and Freeman, both have climbed in esteem with Jedi and Dest's injuries, but neither would be FB starters then or now in a back four, CB's 1's a starter, 1's not, and Freese replacing a struggling Turner at goal, nobody had Freese as starter at the time.


So yeah, us losing to them with basically a B/C team off an absurd error by a player who wasn't starting if we have anything remotely like a first XI then, and definitely not now?

I'm worried about Turkey because they ARE LOADED with great attacking talent, that June result is actually a mark against them. An even game against us rolling out backups and third stringers was not a strong performance, especially considering the own goal quality of the first goal, a howler even worse than that Scottish 4th goal a few weeks ago, even the second goal was a colossal bit of defensive stupidity by a back four and CM that had literally NEVER played together as a unit together and it showed.

If they beat us, or are the favorites, its because of how they are playing in UEFA, the June friendly wasn't a great performance by them, it was kind of ---- actually considering our lineup, roster, and how they actually got their goals.

 

I like Mexicans but I hate the team. I have friends who are Dallas Cowboys fans too, doesn't mean I don't want them to lose every game they play.

As for Canada, I'd have rooted for them up until the last 5 years. But Marsch, their fans, and their CONCACAF thuggery embracing players need to be humbled and the Yukon sized national inferiority complex is in need of reinforcing.

 

Just another reason they should've had some actual footballers do it. I think they would've understood how important it was.

 

Anyone know of Ivan Barton is reffing in the WC?
If so, I'll need all the time I can get in therapy to prepare myself.

 

The peace prize set the stage. Everything that followed could not top that humiliation.

 

You guys are rookies. The whole show is on mute at Rahbiefowlah’s house and I don’t even pay attention until the ping pong balls

 

If they can parlay the disrespect into getting jacked up enough to get a result in one of their games I'm sure their fans and players will take that trade off any day

 

Remember that Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta are all air-conditioned domes. All three are hot and humid cities, and training facilities would involve the players sweating a lot, but they'll be in the 70s at game time, guaranteed.

The East Coast NFL stadiums are all open and hot and humid and subject to not-infrequent summer thunderstorms. Toronto is a little less hot, but still very humid, and subject to relatively frequent summer rain and t-storms. Kansas City is another open-air stadium which is frequently hot, humid, and subject to summer rain and t-storms. Obviously, Miami is hot and humid.

I've honestly never been to any of the three Mexican host cities, but I've known a lot of people who have lived in Mexico City, and they all tell me that summer weather is actually pleasant apart from the smog, and we all know about the altitude. Smog and altitude are really damn hard to play in, in terms of aerobic fitness, and teams who have to travel and play there I assume will struggle to regenerate afterwards to the same degree as others when they go and play someone else elsewhere. I know that Monterrey is both less high up and is supposed to be hot and humid in the summer, like Texas, but well above sea-level, right at about the point where altitude just begins to be a factor.

The teams on the West Coast have it best (thanks Gregg, seriously!), followed by those who have their schedules dominated by the air-conditioned domes of Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta. I think the teams who have to go down to Mexico, and the teams that play on the East Coast and at KC will have the hardest time with the weather.

But the traveling fans will love NY and Boston and Toronto and Miami for the travel and tourist atmosphere, for sure. The Scots and the Norwegian fans will totally love hanging out in Boston, guaranteed. The Norwegians I think have two games there, even. The players may hate it, but the fans will love it. The English and French fans will love going to NYC, but the stadium experience will kind of suck from a weather and transportation standpoint, and the players are going to be really worn-down by the weather by the later stages of the tournament, I think.

The Spanish and the Portuguese I suspect will handle our climate best, and maybe the Brazilians, if Brazil ever get their train going...

 

P.S. Spare a thought for the Koreans, who I think were actually feeling their chances coming into this tournament, but they're going to have to play their whole group stage in Mexico, which have some of the most difficult playing conditions in this tournament, and far away from most of their North American fanbase, which is quite numerous on the East and West Coasts.

The Japanese will play two games in the domes of Texas and one game in hot, humid, slightly elevated Monterrey, south-of-south-Texas. Not too bad, and not much travel.

 

But Mexico have their enormous home field advantage (the conditions themselves, even if their fans turn against them), and a fairly easy group, while Canada have a pin cushion in their group that they can run the score up against and salvage 3rd place if nothing else.

I think the Danes or Irish or Czechs (or Macedonians) will have a hell of a time with the altitude and smog and travel.

Odds are very good that both Canada and Mexico make the round of 32 at least, and Mexico stays in Mexico through the round of 16, unless they somehow come in third, IIRC.

 

Yeah… I know what you mean. Especially Mexico…

 

FIFA was clearly playing the "even North American sports icons love our game" angle. Baseball, basketball, gridiron, and hockey, including a Canadian, the MJ of the sport...

FIFA are cheesy. Corrupt, cheesy hangers-on. I knew this sort when I worked in the Balkans and Eastern Europe. These newly-wealthy gangster guys who controlled the local economy acted the exact same way, sports-and-celeb-washing and such.

 

I watched all the WCgames that were hosted here in Orlando the last time we hosted and there was a HUGE advantage against players playing in Europe. All the players struggled, but it Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Mexico all out performed expectations against Belgium, Netherlands, and Ireland. The fans struggled too. They were falling out despite mist sections in the stadium. And here is the big variable, todays sun is way worse than how it was in the 90’s. Something to keep in mind when predicting outcomes.

 

Generally speaking, professional players from almost every fully-professional league are better-conditioned (and better-monitored, empirically) on average than they were 30 years go. I'm not arguing against your point, and I agree that will be a factor, but I also think that the EPL and Championship and Eredivisie players today are on a different fitness footing than the were then. Chelsea and PSG played in the heat this summer and beat the Brazilians. But then again, the Brazilians very definitely overperformed relative to the overall competition level, it's true. This Brazil ain't great by Brazilian standards, a few players aside, but Brazilians seem to be able to handle a North American summer. They did in 1994, too.

 

Put some respect on David Blackham's name