After today, are we really any good as compared to 2002?

That's ridiculous and revisionist and make believe. How the hell is a team underwhelming when they make a World Cup final? How do you know Portugal overlooked us and we just weren't better?

I keep repeating this. We got EXACTLY what we deserved in 02...we didn't get lucky. We got EXACTLY what we deserved in 06...we didn't get unlucky.

Look at the players we had on that team. Donovan, Beasley before injuries and full of confidence. Perhaps the best center pairing of the tournament in an inefuego Reyna and O'Brien, a sizzling hot RB in Sanneh, one of the best center backs of the tournament in Pope, Brian McBride in form and battering central defenders...That was a VERY VERY VERY good team. A team that I'd put money on getting out of the 06 group we had. That team was easily better than the Czech Team that pasted us IMO.

 

The US advanced from the group stage through the back door. They got pummeled by Poland 3-1 in there final group game. The only reason they advanced is because Portugal choked against South Korea. I think 2002 was a mirage (just like the 3rd place finish in 1930 or whatever) and has ultimately hurt the US' growth. Specially in the media and general public by over hyping 2006.

 

we didn't come close to getting "pummeled" by Poland and you know it. You also refuse to acknowledge that we got a point from South Korea. That team was possibly the best team CONCACAF has ever produced in Moderb soccer.

 

Oh, we did get a little lucky, for sure.

But we put Portugal away (in spite of Agoos)

We manned up against SK.

We flamed against Poland.

We beat the team we should have in Mexico.

Went toe-to-toe with Germany and should have beat them.

We had one bad game out of 5. Unfortunately, in international soccer, that's usually more than enough to go home. That's where the luck came in.

 

Wow! I will not even comment on the last sentence. Perfect example of a US fan overestimating their team, hence all the disappointment internationally ever since. That Poland game was very poor for the US and you cannot disagree with that. All they needed was a tie because everyone expected Portugal to get a result against South Korea but they were outplayed. I will ask you one question. When was the last time the USMNT won a game in an official FIFA competition outside the US not named Mexico (they do not count as the US has their number)? I believe it was in the first game of 2002 against Portugal. That was 7 years ago. And you can probably go a few years back to find another one. So 1 win besides Mexico in about 10 years outside the US.

 

Q: After today, are we really any good as compared to 2002?
A. No. Today's team sucks.

 

that 2002 result was an anomaly, that has unrealistically raised all of our expectations...

 

I would also add someone like Robbie Rogers. This team is dying for width. Most of the lineups I see do not have anybody who can provide width to the attack.

 

See though, you said that Portugal choked against the US, and now Portugal was outplayed by South Korea. So, what was it? Was it that the US got through the back door, or maybe Portugal just wasn't as good as the US and South Korea?

You're trying to make a point- I see that- that the US was lucky. Well, they finished with 4 points in the group, and Portugal couldn't get the result in either game against the teams that progressed ahead of them.

Did the US catch lightning in a bottle? Yeah, probably, but had they lost to Poland 3-1 in the first game, tied Korea in the second, then defeated Portugal in the last game, you wouldn't be here calling it lucky.

I'm of the opinion that the US overachieved in 2002 (though they were a blatant handball on the goal line away from tying Germany), but I don't think your reliance on saying they surprised Portugal and got in through the back door works- Portugal showed they were not up to par with the rest of the group in 2002.

And, there are a lot of countries in the world that would trade records with the US over the years- FIFA tournament or not.

 

Good post. Fair enough.

 

Based on what, exactly? Portugal coming out flat? Your own personal assertion that the U.S. squad was overrated, ergo Portugal must have "understimated" them? Can't you admit that the U.S. had a brilliant and brilliant executed gameplan that devastated Portugal early? Kudos to the Portguese for battling back and nearly grabbing a point, but that was a good, if underperforming Portuguese squad. They simply ran up against an opponent who found a way to exploit their aging legs.

This conveniently fails to mention the outrageous call that negated Donovan's tying goal. Poland iced the game only moments later. No excuses for the U.S. performance, which was mostly flat and nervous, but let's call a spade a spade.

Good fortune right there, no question.

More good fortune, sure. But this team could have laid an egg against Mexico and didn't.

Selective memory here. Beckenbauer famously said that apart from Kahn "you could put that lot [the Germans] in a bag and beat it with a stick and whoever got hit would deserve it." The Germans played poorly, no doubt, they were a fairly underwhelming side. But, crucially, the U.S. played extremely well, attacking in droves. It was easily the best game I ever saw Reyna play for the U.S., and the rest of the squad was equally tenacious.

Well, we got two big breaks:

1. South Korea beating Portugal.
2. No handball call on O'Brien against Mexico.

We also got two that went against us:

1. Donovan goal called back against Poland.
2. No call on Frings handball.

Our luck ran out in the end - but this was a very good squad. Not world beaters. Probably not "the best team CONCACAF has ever produced in Moderb [sic] soccer," but a damn good squad from front to back that showed up to the tourney and expected to win.

The big difference then from now is the complete lack of heart and fire. We saw the same thing before 2006. That, more than anything, is why Bob ought to be fired. I see no signs that this team's attitude will turn around anytime soon.

 

The major difference maker in 2002 was the addition of O'Brien. The US had gone through it's usual uneven qualifying campaign, then in the cup the addition of O'Brien and to a lesser extent Pablo Mastroeni took the team a step up from where it had been all throughout qualifying. Even Beasley was an addition that many considered to be too early.

It wasn't that we snuck in to the later rounds. We had some luck that is true, but there really is no doubt that the US played better than it had before or since, whatever the results.

From a talent stand point we don't have Reyna or O'Brien. Beasley is a shadow of himself. McBride's stock has actually risen since that cup, mostly via Fulham.

What is worrisome is that the team has never played as loose and confident since. In particular this seems to be true about Landon.

 

The '90 and '94 teams were better than these guys.

 

You left out getting a 1-1 draw vs the hosts in oppressive heat and a front of a fanatical crowd. A pretty good result overlooked.

 

Don't forget Mathis. Around 2002, he became a clinical finisher and we have nobody like him now. Its a shame he through away his career on booze.

 

Hell, after watching today's atrocious U.S. performance, I'd bring Mathis back to serve as a sub. Dude can't run, but his touch on the ball still kills the majority of U.S. regulars.

 

Have you ever seen Russia play? We have never been anywhere near as good as that team is. I would rank them in the top 5 right now. They have WORLD class players. Akinfeev, Zhirkov, and Arshavin are legit world class players and Pavlyuchenko/Semak are not far behind. Their domestic league is shockingly good as well. I would agree that a healthy US club is on par with some of the other teams but not Russia.

 

In what way does having one good world cup team not allow us to have high expectations from that point on??? That is some wierd logic.

The current team is an absolute embrassment. It is soooo painful to watch them play. There is no desire to win at all. I can't even count how many times in the last two games that I have seen US players not even try to get to the ball or opponent. Just standing around sucking their thumbs. There was one point during the Brazil game during a Brazil corner kick there were 3 US players just standing in a circle marking absolutely no-one. I am so tired of seeing crap like that.

Also, something that I haven't seen anyone else point out is...
If these players are so great, then why in God's name are they not good enough to get any playing time with their club teams?? Someone answer me that, and I will back off of this team (if you can even call it a team).

I said this when Bob Bradly was given the reins...He is killing our team. It has to be stopped. There has been nothing but negative growth since his take over.

 

nothing weird about it... I didnt say you shouldnt expect better than the crap that was on display today... im just contesting comparing it to the 2002 squad

if you think the US should be getting out of the group stage every world cup, then you are crazy... especially using 2002 as the gauge considering how lucky the US were to get out of their group, then get a familiar team, then have a Mexico goal saved by an obvious handball...

then we turn around and get screwed by an obvious handball in the tournament...

if South Korea doesnt decide to really go for it against Portugal, then this thread does not get made

 

I would say we are better than Mexico when playing each other, however Mexico is able to up their game against superior international competition and we simply pack it in. The only team we seem able to step up to on a neutral field is Italy. I don't think we have the heart and desire that we used to, maybe losing all of these games will make us an even bigger underdog in 2010 like we were in 2002 and we will come out with nothing to lose.

 

I don't think this is the right comparison. We shouldn't be comparing the 2009 team to the 2002 team. This team is not built to win world cups (no shit, huh?) it's still a developmental team, with the idea of building a team to compete in 2010. Please note that I'm not making excuses for what happened today by any means. But the way USSF has gone about this is clearly designed to get the team prepared for the big show next year - it's one of the few things they've done correctly in my opinion. (As a side note, I think this has been a pretty useful exercise in that we now know that we need a new coach.)

It's more appropriate, imo, to compare the 2009 team to the team we were constructing in the run-up to 2002. In this situation, the current vintage of the USMNT comes out looking a little better. That team lost, among other things to Ireland, Germany and Italy and looked pretty well outmatched in those encounters. They ended up doing better against Holland later on, and were unlucky to lose that game, but they had a pretty unsavory series of results prior to that.

In WC 2002, a few things happened - JOB stayed healthy. Sanneh played the best he's ever played in his life. Clint kept his hands away from his crotch. Friedel saved two penalty kicks. The team played some very good games and was on the right side of lady luck until the Germany match.

In a short knockout tournament luck plays a disproportionate role. We got the rub of the green in 2002 and we didn't in 2006 (what if Reyna's distance attempt in the Czech game goes in instead of just wide? What if the second goal against Italy is not waved off?). The same will be true in 2010.

The bottom line is that we have to get a lot better, but it can happen, because it did happen before. Of course that doesn't mean it will happen. I still think we need a new coach.

 

I think it's fine (and even necessary) to have high expectations, but it's also possible to have unrealistic expectations. I remember many posters here on BigSoccer arguing that the U.S deserved whatever their FIFA ranking was going in to the 2006 WC - I think it was #3 or something like that. That's unrealistic. But because we made it through in 02 and we cruised through qualifying in 06, people thought we were much better than we actually were. That is to some extent a result of our 2002 performance.

At least we won't be falling into that trap this time around.

 

I was thinking about him today myself. Miss his energy and fire as well as the tenacity of Cobi Jones. Heck, I think if Cobi got in a fight with today's starting 11, he kick all their butts by his self. Cobi had balls. And I think this team is missing theirs.

 

Bingo! I think the reason is that Mexico has the talent to take advantage of open spaces left by teams pushing forward. They play up to the level of higher quality teams because those teams are trying to win and are pushing forward in numbers and Mexico has the individual talent to excel in these games. However in CONCACAF Mexico is almost always the favorite thus teams do not push forward much against them and then Mexico gets frustrated and plays down to the level of lower quality opponents. The US has built their team and system to to beat these CONCACAF teams and it has been successful but they do not have the talent or system to match up against the top tier teams.