An Eye on the Region [Multiple R]

USA Results:
11/17/02 USA 2 EL Salvador 0
01/18/03 USA 4 Canada 0
02/08/03 USA 0 Argentina 1
02/12/03 USA 2 Jamaica 1
03/29/03 USA 2 Venezuala 0
05/08/03 USA 0 Mexico 0
05/26/03 USA 2 Wales 0


USA Totals: 5-1-1, +10 GD, 1.71 GSPG, .28 GCPG*

for a bit of presepctive

 

Re: Re: An Eye on the Region [Multiple R]

Although the Jamaica game was away (Nutmeg seemed to be using the home-team-first format), so...

12/02/03 Jamaica 1-2 USA

 

Geez, USA is the only team to win more than 1 game.

 

Its actually .28 GCPG

 

Re: Re: An Eye on the Region [Multiple R]

Seems as Mexico has certainly had to toughest schedule to date.

 

duly noted. Thank you

 

Mexico hasn't found the back of the net much in 2003; 3 goals in 5 home games isn't very encouraging if you're pulling for El Tri.

 

Looking at these results -- thanks by the way for posting them -- it appears that our regional rivals have had tougher opponents, more or less, kinda sorta, than we have had.

In addition, I would hypothesize we are doing well because:

(a) we have more continuity in coaching

(b) we are coming off an excellent world cup with high spirits

(c) our best younger players are moving into the realm of seasoned international players, who have been a part of high pressure, high stakes games.

and, as a result,

(d) our transition to the new cycle has been a bit smoother than our regional rivals.

Anyway, just a theory.

I think, for example, that Lavolpe and Sampson have a bit more sorting out to do yet. I haven't looked closely at Mexico's post WC rosters, but my gut tells me that that things are pretty fluid there right now, once you get past Arellano, Torrado and Borghetti.

I look forward to Nutmeg's discussion of individual rosters to see whether that confirms or refutes this supposition on my part.

Of course, we should all keep in mind that it's still early. These results, while not meaningless, should have their significance put in a proper perspective.

I would expect our regional rivals to gear up and be formidable opponents in the next 12 months -- certainly in their own hellish venues.

 

Trying to look through coach speak, Bruce expects that we will dominate all CONCACAF teams for the foreseeable future, with the notable exception of Mexico.

In practice, this means victories at home and at least a draw away in WCQ. With the growing talent pool on both sides of the pond, a strong MLS version of the USMT and continuity in leadership, this is an reachable goal in the next qualifing run. Particularly, if we establish a true home field advantage -- Columbus or New England.

Of course, Bruce wants to lower expectation in front of the Confed Cup, but his rhetoric of focusing on the Gold Cup makes sense. We SHOULD be co-dominating Concacaf at every level.

This is not to say that there will not be upsets. The game is too unpredictable. But, teams in the region should become conditioned to lose to US.

 

I have to think we will get past the first round of WC qualifying and probably the second.

If we get that far, I don't see us not finishing in the top 4. A top 3 finish gets us a spot in WC2006, a four finish a play-off versus Asia #5.

I think we should have this wrapped up. We too talented to not make it.

On a side note...I like the extra qualifying games for giving us more important games, but i don't like having to play so many games to qualify because it increases our chance to miss the cut. We might not bring our top players because of this, and it may result in a few upsets or unwanted draws.

 

Getting away points doesn't have as much to do with talent as it does with guts. Getting anything out of the Saprissa in Costa Rica is difficult. If your Brazil or your France it would still be difficult. That place makes Cameron Indoor look like a wine and cheese party

 

US should do well this time out.. Maybe come in 1st.

 

The US has improved, but still has some problems:

Primarily, can't get a result in Costa Rica or Mexico

However, I believe the US is a co-favorite to finish in first place.

Nothing really has changed:
US and Mexico will advance plus either Costa Rica or Honduras
Jamaica and Guatemala are dark horses.

 

You're missing their Copa UNCAF results:

09/02/2003 Costa Rica 1-0 El Salvador
13/02/2003 Costa Rica 1-1 Guatemala
15/02/2003 Costa Rica 1-0 Nicaragua
20/02/2003 Costa Rica 1-0 Honduras
23/02/2003 Costa Rica 1-0 Panama

(all games played in Panama)

And today: Costa Rica 1-0 Chile

Also from the UNCAF tournament:

Honduras 2-0 Nicaragua
Honduras 0-1 El Salvador
Honduras 1-1 Panama
Honduras 1-2 Guatemala

Guatemala 0-2 Panama
Guatemala 5-0 Nicaragua
Guatemala 2-0 El Salvador
Guatemala 2-1 Honduras

 

Honduras has been playing horrible lately
they just lost 2:1 against Venezuela in Miami
If this keeps up we might see Guatemala or El Salvador grabbing on the .5 spot (1 if FIFA increases from 32 to 36)

 

Suspending Guevara wasn't the smartest thing they've ever done.

 

Costa Rica 1 Chile 0 - friendly result

 

Don't totally discount some of the other teams in the region. After the US, Mexico, and Costa Rica, it's pretty much wide-open.

Depending on the draw for the first round, I wouldn't be surprised if any of these teams made the hex (FIFA rank in parentheses):

Jamaica (48)
Honduras (37)
T&T (52)
Guatemala (58)
Canada (77)
Cuba (56 - surprise)
El Salvador (82)

And really, any of those teams could even advance past the hex in the right circumstances. Haiti's actually 80th, but somehow I see El Sal having a better shot than them.

What's up with Cuba being so high?

 

I was surprised when I saw the results of the UNCAF tournament. Panama had very good results it seems. If they are doing better, I'd like to avoid them in round one of WCQ.

 

Based on performance in recent games of major importance, I think Honduras still has to be the consensus #4. But I agree with you that the other teams all have a shot, though I'm not clear why you're bothering to eliminate Haiti. I don't think El Salvador's recent form proves anything else to us that Haiti hasn't achieved, though their history and what we know of their roster appears superior.

Actually, I think what this also indicates is the importance of bringing the best available team to preliminary qualifiers, because everyone on this list is an upset threat to the top 3/4.

 

We won't get them in the first round, it seems. They're in Pot C (those teams who made the Semifinal Round, but not the Hex, last time) and I think both of our First Round opponents will come from Pot D (the 23 who didn't make the Semifinal Round last time).

http://www.concacaf.com/news/article.page/1202

 

Yeah, I realized that a little while after I wrote that.

 

Re: Steve Sampson Article

Good article. Interesting words from Sampson:

“To this day, I believe we struck a balance, or a least tried to, between the experience we needed to get to France and the need to bring along younger players,” he said. “In a way, I was caught between generations.”