I was just looking over the wikipedia page for Copa America. I'm wondering how we'll do and it looks to me like we got a tough draw. Was there a formal seeding process or were the hosts just really "lucky" with the draw? I'm hoping some of you guys can rank the 12 teams for me. I'm just curious as to how this all shapes up. I'm pretty sure the top three are Brazil, Argentina, Mexico....but after that I get a little jumbled. Thanks. Venezuela (hosts) Argentina Bolivia Brazil (Holders) Chile Colombia Ecuador Mexico (Invitee) Paraguay Peru Uruguay USA (Invitee)
1) Brazil 2) Argentina 3) USA 4) Mexico 5) Paraguay 6) Uruguay 7) Ecuador 8) Colombia 9) Venezuela 10) Chile 11) Peru 12) Bolivia EDIT: I rank the US ahead of Mexico simply because we've owned them head-to-head, but there's no doubt El Tri have a better record in international competitions than we do. I also bumped Venezuela up a spot because they're home. But really, I think we all know it's Brazil and Argentina, then everybody else, then, a mile back, Bolivia.
1) Brazil 2) Argentina 3) Paraguay 4) USA 5) Mexico 6) Ecuador 7) Uruguay 8) Colombia 9) Venezuela 10) Chile 11) Peru 12) Bolivia
Based on the fact that this tournament is in South America... 1.) Argentina 2.) Brazil 3.) Uruguay 4.) Mexico 5.) USA 6.) Chile 7.) Ecuador 8.) Paraguya 9.) Colombia 10.) Venezuela 11.) Peru 12.) Bolivia I give Mexico a slight edge over the U.S. b/c they're more tested in the Copa and had a much better WC performance. I think Uruguay is #3 in terms of talent (Forlan, Regueiro, Recoba, Estanoyoff, Canobbio). Chile might be a better team than us, though it's close.
Here is the list based on FIFA rankings. Argentina Brazil Mexico Uruguay Paraguay Columbia USA Ecuador Chile Peru Venezuela Bolivia
i think we have to look at the list of players each team will bring before ranking squads.... usa will have a lot of 2nd tier guys, while venezuela goes TOP line... i'd suspect venezuela to have the home field edge, and perform at a higher level than the usa...
I'm glad we're not in Venezuela's group. If we do play them, there will be a lot of political tension that might overshadow the game somewhat. Then there's the likelihood of refereeing being influenced by the home supporters. I wouldn't be expecting a good result for us in that situation. I agree with the person who said our draw is tough. I personally don't know much about Columbia, but I'm definitely concerned about Paraguay. I think if we advance, it will be with a 1-1-1 record.
You guys aren't giving Ecuador enough credit. That's probably because we watched the recent US match with them that wasn't close. If the games were played in a neutral venue and all countries brought their A squads: Argentina Brazil Mexico USA Ecuador Paraguay Uruguay Columbia Chile Peru Venezuela Bolivia Of course teams won't bring their A squads and the location of the tournament play a role. But I haven't factored that in. To be honest I don't know much about the bottom 3 teams, so whatever. It's not like the US blew out Venezuela the last time they played.
Yep. It's very important to remember exactly how much of an advantage the home field is. Ranking the teams is entirely separate from how the team will do in the tournament, though. I'm betting Venezuela makes it to the semifinal. But no matter the home field advantage, I just can't see them making it to the final. (And thank you, whoever's doing the Wikipedia site. Couldn't find the brackets on the CONMEBOL website.)
Argentina Brazil Uruguay Paraguay USA Mexico Ecuador Columbia Chile Peru Bolivia Venezuela My list, the first 2 are self-explanatory and interchangable. I think Uruguay and Paraguay are better than us going into the tournament simply because they care more about this tournament, it's in their backyard and they play with a lot of ballz when they play the top 2 teams. I wouldn't be surprise to see us get beat with a few 25-35 yard goals by these guys especially with a aging Keller in the box. I'd prefer Hahnemann at this point. Mexico might be a step ahead of us because we probably will field a fairly "weak" team, though I tend to argue that our MLS guys are more likely to step up their game ie Mexico game. The last four are interchangable, but can pose a threat to a team like the US if we play with the lack of urgency like in WC06. Mapp will likely be the key for the team I think. His ability to dribble and take on defenders in the wing will likely dictate how the US plays. I doubt teams will be bunkering early, so the US needs those points quickly. If he plays well, I'm sure some team will be smart enough to figure him out and close him out later in the tournament. I think Donovan will be in this tournament, and sit out the GC.
Argentina Brazil --------------------- USA Mexico Ecuador Paraguay --------------------- Colombia Uruguay Venezuela Chile --------------------- Peru Bolivia
At full strength and on neutral ground this is how i would rank the teams: 1. Argentina 2. Brazil 3. United States 4. Mexico 5. Paraguay 6. Ecuador 7. Uruguay 8. Colombia 9. Chile 10. Venezuela 11. Peru 12. Bolivia But going off the fact that we will not bring a full strength team, and also that it's in South America...this is the way i predict (sadly) the group stages will go: (does anyone know how the wildcard goes?) Group A: 1. Uruguay 2. Venezuela 3. Peru 4. Bolivia Venezuela 2 Peru 1 Venezuela 1 Bolivia 0 Venezuela 1 Uruguay 1 Uruguay 2 Bolivia 0 Uruguay 3 Peru 1 Peru 1 Bolivia 0 Group B: 1. Brazil 2. Ecuador 3. Mexico 4. Chile Brazil 2 Mexico 2 Brazil 2 Ecuador 1 Brazil 5 Chile 0 Mexico 0 Ecuador 0 Mexico 2 Chile 2 Ecuador 1 Chile 0 Group C: 1. Argentina 2. Paraguay 3. Colombia 4. United States Argentina 4 Paraguay 0 Argentina 5 Colombia 1 Argentina 1 United States 1 Paraguay 1 Colombia 0 Paraguay 0 United States 0 Colombia 2 United States 1 ***honestly, i think the US has the potential to advance (even win) this group (and anything less is a failure), but it is NOT going to be easy. So, it has nothing to do with our talent because i wouldn't be surprised to see european power-houses like England, Italy, France, Portugal, etc... at full strength to fail in a group like this.
I love how you have Mexico tying Brazil, and then managing another tie against Chile. That's a bit like tying Chelsea, then managing only a draw against Millwall. Then you have the US getting a point from Argentina, yet losing to Colombia. You are a firm believer in teams playing down to the level of their competition aren't you?
1. Brazil - no need for explanation 2. Argentina - no need for explanation 3. Uruguay - lots of talent, but perenial underachievers. 4. Mexico - although owned by US, have much better international record 5. USA - can play very well at times & very poor as well 6. Paraguay - solid side 7. Ecuador - solid side 8. Colombia 9. Chile 10. Peru 11. Venezuela 12. Bolivia 3-9 are pretty much equal, and not much separates them. Venezuela although low on the list are playing at home. USA although at #5 travel very poorly and will likely be at the greatest disadvantage of all the teams.
1. Argentina 1a Brazil 3. Paraguay 4. Mexico 5. Uruguay 6. Colombia 7. USA 8. Ecuador 9. Chile 10. Venezuela 11. Peru 12. Bolivia The first 2 are obvious and interchangeable. People don't realize how good Paraguay is, plus it's SA. I rank the US behind Mexico because they have more int'l experience. Uruguay because it's SA. Colombia because it's SA and they neigbor Venezuela, so they should have more fans in the stands. Sorry folks but the USA is also sending in backups but unlike the other countries we rarely play meaningful games outside the US. The rest of the teams.....who cares?
Colombia is ranked higher then Paraguay. "protocol13" had posted this previously on Copa since Concacaf has participated: "A combined record of all Copas Americas since 1993 (first time Mexico participated in a Copa America), will yield the following results. 1. Brazil 32 games 72 points 2.25 average points per game. 2. Colombia 32 games 58 points 1.81 average points per game. 3. Argentina 24 games 41 points 1.71 average points per game. 4. Mexico 32 games 48 points 1.50 average points per game. 5. Uruguay 31 games 46 points 1.48 average points per game. 6. Paraguay 23 games 32 points 1.39 average points per game. 7. Peru 25 games 31 points 1.24 average points per game. 8. Ecuador 22 games 26 points 1.18 average points per game. 9. Bolivia 22 games 25 points 1.14 average points per game. 10.C.Rica 11 games 11 points 1.00 average points per game. 11.USA 9 games 8 points 0.89 average points per game. 12. Chile 22 games 18 points 0.82 average points per game. 13 Venez 18 games 3 points 0.17 average points per group." ...point being that Colombia is a top 5 team for Conmebol and does especially well in Copa America (Semis in 04' Edition). Missing out on the past 2 WCs hurt their 'rep' a bit. but even in those instances, they were tied with points with Uruguay for the 02' WC, eliminated by a 1 goal differential and missed 06' WC by 1 point, edged again by Uruguay (the 06 WCQ had Colombia winning only 1 point from 12, which after firing the coach, made us play catch up!).... Colombia is 'on paper' as talented as Uruguay and can beat many of the top sides. Their club teams do well in Copa Libertadores and their youth system is well established. One last note, so far from Chile, Colombia, Venezuela, Argentina, the coaches have confirmed that they are using many of their "European" based players. Next Copa is in 2011, so it's really important for all these new coaches to put a strong side forward (all but 1 coach in Conmebol is new). I would assume Mexico will do the same (Rafa Marquez has already stated he will not play in the Gold Cup). Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia will likely do the same and bring they're top players, as they're not so deep to have a true contending alternative side.. Brazil, not sure. So the only one I know of who has stated bringing a true alternative team is the US.
So is Ecuador and the US here is the fixed list. Thanks for catching that. Argentina Brazil Mexico Uruguay Columbia USA Ecuador Paraguay Chile Peru Venezuela Bolivia
saw paraguays last two friendlies, and the were anemic offensively... tough defensive side, who plays a very physical brand, and it'll test usa...
I just don't buy the Mex had a much better World Cup arguement. What did they do? They beat Iran & tied Angola. We tied the eventual champs. They had a better draw. Granted our blow out by the Czechs was bad. So, Mex had a <i>slightly</i> better WC. And, I'd say that as of right now, Uru is better than the U.S. and when Santa Cruz has been healthy, Para has played very well in the WC, so if Roque's playing, I'd put Para ahead of us. I'd put the U.S. and Mex tied.