Let's be rational about our chances. The US Team is an average side who is coached by a competent individual. We are nothing more and nothing less. Here are a few reasons why I believe we have a legitimate shot to advance out of our group regardless of the draw: •Schedule-Very few teams have played as many games against seeded teams. We have played or will play 7 out of the 8 seeded teams at one time in the last 3 years. Not only that, we have played Brazil, Argentina and Spain multiple times. Brazil and Spain were played in a tournament setting. I don't know how that compares against the last cycle, but I am pretty confident are competition has been much more difficult. •Surroundings-This will be the third time the USMNT has traveled and played in South Africa. I venture to say of all the teams, we will probably be very comfortable with our environment. Furthermore, from what I read, Bob and the FED selected one of the best training facilities available. •Experience-Long gone are the days where the USMNT was made up of 2nd rate pros who were probably overwhelmed by the whole Word Cup atmosphere. Many of our players have played in pressure packed matches. Our best player will be making his third trip and there is no doubt he understands the type of pressure this tournament provides. This team will be focused. •Hostile enviroment-The USMNT very rarely has home support. Most of the time, we are lucky to have half the crowd behind the team and this is for home games. That has to play on the team's psyche a bit. I bet in SA, we will receive much better support. Of course, this all depends on who we play. •Age-We are a relatively young team. Combine youth with our known fitness level and you have a team that will run other teams ragged especially at altitude. I am writing this before the WC draw. Instead of having a sinking feeling that we will be drawn into the group of death, I have accepted that will probably be the case. The intagibles discussed above should give us an edge. Will that be enough? At the end of the day, I truly believe Bob Bradley has done everything possible to have the best team on pitch come next June. As fans, that is all we can ask.
I dont think any of the foreign coaches that everyone was salivating over after Arena was canned would have had us in any better position now than Bradley does.
Most of these arguments were made prior to 2006, but I'm hoping the key differentiator this time around is Schedule. Glad to see we've stepped up and are still going out of our way to face tougher competition (e.g. The Netherlands).
We are about middle of the pack in terms of the WC squads: 1) Undeniably MORE talented/better (9) Brazil, Spain, Italy, Germany, Netherlands, Argentina, England, France, Portugal. 2) Probably More talented (6) Ivory Coast, Serbia, Cameroon, Mexico, Chile, Paraguay 3) About the Same (9) Uruguay, Denmark, Greece, Switzerland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Australia, Ghana, Nigeria. 4) Probably Less Talented (5) Algeria, Japan, South Korea, Honduras, South Africa 5) Less Talented (2) New Zealand, North Korea
I don't recall any past USMNT coach arranging as many away games as Bob has. Bora may have played a ton of friendlies, but most of them were at home. I don't recall Sampson playing any away friendlies other than Austria prior to WC 98. Bruce lined up a great set of games in 2002, but a variety of factors kept him from doing so in 2006, and we didn't play a lot outside North America in non-WC years during his tenure. Bob can't really take credit for the Confederations Cup schedule, but for preparation it's hard to beat the "Murderer's Row" friendlies in 2008. Other than Camp Cupcake and the almost-annual Mexico games, we've played fully two-thirds of our friendlies away. This is a sign of valuing competitive preparation over money. The results this summer reflected it.
I support the idea that we have a lot of intangibles on our side. But I take exception to the idea we are an average side coached by an average coach. In terms of world football the USA MNT is a top 20 team, out of 203 ranked teams. Way above average. We happen to be trying to climb up to the next rung on the ladder, which is entirely filled with teams where the national sport, and really the only nationally played sport, is soccer. And damned if we aren't close. Not that on a bad day we can't stumble and be beaten by a much less well regarded side. Ask England, The Netherlands, Spain, and Argentina if that disappointing feeling ever goes away. Our coach has led us to a runner-up spot in the only worldwide cup competition besides the WC. He led us to thru WC qualifying to the WC Finals. He led the team sufficiently well that no player that I know of has come out and criticized him or refused to play (ask the irish how it feels to have your captain quit the team a couple weeks before the Finals). He has looked for and found new blood for the team. Bob Bradley will be coaching in SA while Hiddink, Trappatoni, and Klinsmann try to make it look like they are glad to have some time off. It will be very interesting to see what happens with the USA coaching set-up after the Finals. Time to stop apologizing for our team, our players, and our coach. Tell them all they can watch us on TV if they can't afford the fare to SA, otherwise, we'll see about trying to fit you in to our busy schedule of world tournaments and top of the rankings table friendlies.
The one thing I think we can be assured of is that Bradley won't have a rush of blood to the head and try to play attractive attacking football in the World Cup like Arena did in 2006 before being torn apart by the Czechs on the counterattack. Our best results (e.g. Portugal 2002, Spain 2009, 1st half of Brazil 2009) have come by playing counter attack soccer and unlike Arena before him, Bradley won't lose site of that fact.
As a fan, I would have to say one of the chief intangibles is the team concept, and Bob has done an exceptional job. This squad has bought into his inner circle philosophy, although I'm not sure I've ever heard Bob explain it in his words. If anyone has a clip of Bob describing this, I'd love to check it out. I see an excellent parallel with the Patriots in the Super Bowl vs the Rams (2001). The Rams were the Greatest Show on Turf, and came out in all their regalia, one by one: Faulk, Bruce, Holt, Warner, Hakim, Proehl, etc. Unstoppable, right? Smoke, dry ice, thunderous applause. Then you see the Patriots come out introduced as a team, a hungry, hostile mob of underdogs. That was before Belichick was wildly successful, and he had a lot to prove after failures elsewhere, and being in Bill Parcells' shadow as a coach. Does this sound familiar? I think it sets us up well. Add to the mix the extra team unifier in Davies' accident, and the possibility of our team making CD's missing the WC a rallying cry, and I would say we have the single most important intangible going into a World Cup: it's us vs. them.
I guess you could say that our group games can't be won based on these factors, but they could certainly be lost. Meaning, the stage has been set - the intangibles give our guys all the tools necessary to perform well (which is the tangible). The other tangibles are form, injury, and energy level in club play leading up to the WC. Definitely a mixed bag on that front right now.
Hey I like your enthusiasm, but there aren't 203 teams in the WC. Because we already qualified, that puts us among the elite. But look at TrueCrews post above (which is even a little bit generous to us). We are smack in the middle of all the teams, or rather, the average (median if we are splitting hairs). I EXPECT a good performance, but based on the quality of opposition, I HOPE for good results.
I agree with the analysis that says we are an average WC Finals team. But I maintain we are a way above average team in the bigger picture.
I think we have done more than any other country in the field of 32 to have our players prepaired to play (1) against top competition and (2) in South Africa and (3) in a tournement setting. I suspect we will bleed as much (or more) than any other mid-ranking team out of the talent we have on hand. However, our talent isn't world class and this is the ULTIMATE LIMITING FACTOR in a WCF. Take Brazil's/England's/Spain's etc etc talent and put them through the wringer that our boys have been through, and I'd show you a clear WC favorite (Brazil is anyway). Take our talent and you've got a team hoping for a good draw to advance because if we get a brutal one, it's going to be a real uphill climb to overcome our talent deficite.
This came up in another thread. We are NOT a relatively young team. A likely first XI would be Dempsey and Jozy up top, a midfield of Jones, Bradley, Holden, and Donovan, a backline of Cherundolo, Bocanegra, Onyewu, and some LB, and Howard. That is NOT a young team. We played a 4-5-1 against the Czechs. Not sure what you mean here.
We also were attempting to hold possession and control tempo. The Czechs, to our surprise, were willing to cede possession and look for the counterattack. And it took all of 5 minutes to pay dividends. (P.S. Many people, myself included, noticed that Donovan was very often even with McBride, in a straight 442, simply dropping deeper to see the ball, though he certainly didn't see much of it, and didn't do much of anything with it when he did see it.)
Our intangilbes in relation to teams in our group are very favorable. I can't emphasize this enough. Slovenia and Algeria did not make the last WC. All of their players will be WC novices. Compare that to the USMNT and you really see the difference in experience.
If you compare us to other teams, you'll see we're not young. Remember, we had one of the older teams in 2006. Boca, Donovan, Cherundolo, and Gooch are all 4 years older.
While true that Boca, LD, Dolo and Gooch will al be 4 years older a lot of others are replacing some pretty old guys like Mcbride, Reyna, Lewis, Heydude, etc.) If you add up the starting 11 you submitted and divide, you get 26. I think I remember that at the last World Cup, spain had one of the youngest teams there at ........ 26. Plus, look at the aaverage age of the other guys going - -at least the ones I listed as probable above and add in a few more (Casey-28, Johnson - I know, I know, but who else- 25, Guzan- 25, Demerit - 30) a total of 10 more probable players and you get an average of .......24.6 years of age. Young. Young and bled. Young, bled, played in a lot of pressure situations, played in S. Africa - twice. Rarely play in a friendly stadium. Shoot, I think we'll get some nice support down in SA - -another........ INTANGIBLE.
You mean except for tough schedule and level of competition? And the surroudings with being in South Africa twice already? AND age, where the US has bled in a huge crop of young talent over the last year? 3 out of those 5 argument couldn't be made for the 2006 squad. Don't bother, I've tried to throw numbers at people before and they still refuse to accept it. They look at the experienced starting XI like they're going to be the only players who play, and then say the team is old. Despite 25 year old Chad Marshall as a backup, 24 year old Holden who may earn a starting nod, a (currently) 22 year old Robbie Rogers, a (currently) 23 year old Maurice Edu, a 25 year old Brad Guzan, and of course the player who people forget is still very young for a holding midfielder, 22 year old Jose Francisco Torres.
I'd move Mexico and South Africa both down a peg. How is South Africa not necessarily less talented than us?
That may well hope but i'd rather have a healthy Charlie with one more solid season in Europe under his belt. Another interesting quote from Capello about the US. "And another thing about the USA is that they will have more time to prepare and work hard." I feel like we're a better team when we have more than a day or two to prep. I think a long camp to get ready for the cup will help us more than the average team.
I agree. Any news on how our spat with Italy's FA is going over training grounds/accomodations? From what I understood, USSF scouted out a great facility while down in SA this summer, grabbed it, and now Italy is saying that they'd had dibs on it. Anybody know if we're getting it or not? That would be a great help, and the fact that it's at altitude, close to all three of our group match venues is another small plus in our corner.
1. A small detail, but Hejduk missed out on the last Cup due to injury. 2. Let's see how the numbers compare in May. I'll bet the US is in the fattest part of the bell curve.
Earlier, you said that we had one of the older teams in 2006. This would mean that we would be to the right of the fattest part of the bell curve (the mean). Now, if we are IN the fattest part of the bell curve, that constitutes a lowering of our average age (in comparison to the other WC teams).