Hey, I said before the 2006 WC that the US had a great run in 2002 but that was aided by a great run of luck (though there are always things that go against you) as well. The luck (aside of Zaccardo's own goal) mostly ran out in 2006. Ignore this at your own peril. This stuff runs in streaks and you don't want to have a "Reyna off the goal post with Peter Cech beat" or "Reyna stumbles and loses the ball to Dramani" when it counts. You can't predict when it's going to go the other way but you know it will happen some time. But you want it when you need it.
Har... I assume that, at say River vs. Boca or Red Star Belgrade vs. anybody, someone wearing a bandanna over their face is doing it so as not to be identified after-the-fact as being engaged in some nefarious behavior. Did the two yahoos in Carson expect to toss some trash cans through the windows of Panera Bread should things go awry against Barbados? I honestly found it the most interesting thing about the match. But, to remain vaguely on-topic: I applaud Beasley for avoiding contact with the opponent. His knee is much more valuable than showing "heart" in that particular match. On to... well... Barbados!
Yep, not that anybody is doing grades for this match, but it sure wasn't Heath's shining moment. He looked a bit overmatched at times, amusingly. Beaz also had his issues, feet of concrete on the day.
I really don't see how anyone can take anything from this match. I think most people thought 5-0 or so and we got 8 and had a goal called back. We looked methodical and workman-like out there but that was to be expected. I'm sure the guys relaxed (and it showed) after going up 3-0 in 20 minutes. Now, as Harkes kept saying (some of the only decent points he made), we cannot pick up bad habits from this game and the next leg too. Meaning we're not going to face a "Barbados" again in qualifying (well we might if Bermuda beats T&T...although Bermuda is better than Barbados). We cannot be lulled into a trap and come out like this against anyone else in CONCACAF. I don't think we will, but it's always a concern. As for leg 2. You obviously don't bring Howard. I'd start Guzan and then have Cervi or Seitz play in the 2nd half. I'd also bring a lot of the U-23 guys and let Adu, Edu, Bradley, etc. start. I also wouldn't mind Johnson starting. I know goals against Barbados don't prove much, but soccer, like all sports is about confidence. Scoring against Barbados won't make him Cristiano Ronaldo, but any confidence it can give him will help us overall in the future.
8-0 flatters the US, but they definitely did what they had to do and got some good bounces. Really hard to understand why Ching starts when EJ got all the minutes in the friedlies and did reasonably well. Given that Ching looked pretty poor compared to some of his earlier stints with the Nats (whiffs, bad first touches, slllloooowwww), it's hard to imagine that Ching just won the job in training this week. Yes the olympic team would almost certainly hold the lead, but this is still for all the marbles. The large cushion gives BB a chance to (i) start Guzan again, (ii) rest Mastro if he otherwise would have played and if his glut needs it, (iii) hold a couple of other key players out to avoid injury or fatigue or accommodate MLS, (iv) figure out the best strategy for Gooch's yellow --- does it carry over? Would a second yellow carry over? and maybe leave him on the bench. In other words, start a few bench guys, but not the Oly team.
A head target in a crowded box (yeah, EJ's tall too, but not as strong), plus better ability to hold up the ball and get his teammates involved. All this helps when you're looking to build up attack against a bunker. You have to figure that EJ's speed (his primary weapon) isn't going to be as much of a factor against that sort of opponent. As to your second paragraph, I agree with it. I don't think a full "second XI" or U23 team is the right move, but rather to start like 4 guys who wouldn't normally start with 7 more established guys, which I think is about all you can introduce without completely stripping a team of its inherent chemistry. (The whole idea of giving the Olympic kids senior nats minutes is that they are senior nats minutes, not Olympic minutes on a day the senior nats were scheduled to play.) Priority given to players who can more-or-less fill the roles of guys who you want to hold out because of health issues, club-team issues, or card issues (Gooch). I frankly see no reason for Gooch to play the away leg, as its just one match out of many over the past 18 months in which he and Bocanegra have played together. (I'm assuming that a second yellow in this stage would carry over as a one game suspension in the semifinals, but if it remains a single yellow it's wiped clean for the semifinal stage. Anybody who knows the ruling better than I can correct me.)
also, EJ was a euro, so he got the time... ching is a known factor, so what does BB need to elarn from him... don't forget the guzan transfer last year was denied because he ddin't have enough international appearance... BB is smart here, giving guzan the time in the friendlies.. although howard, if healthy, would have played, BB is very smart getting guzan in line for a better chance to be accepted next time... BB player management is good here.. usa controlled absolutely, and checking out the other concacaf highlights, ONLY jamaica showed as well... BB is getting it right, despite the haters
England and Macedonia did not play a two-match tie to qualify for Euro qualifying. You're wrong. I distinctly remember England losing at home to Croatia on the last match day. If England had drawn, they would have advanced and Croatia would not have.
Are you trying to suggest that CONCACAF should take its 35 teams and put them into seven groups of five teams (or five groups of seven teams) for qualification? IMO, that would be a much bigger crap shoot than the format they have now. And I also think that UEFA would be better served to go to "stages" as well, with the minnows knocking each other out prior to getting to a group phase. I mean, let's face it, Luxembourg, San Marino, Andorra, Liechtenstein, and the Faroe Islands are never going to make it to the World Cup. Why pretend that they even have a chance by mixing them all into qualification groups?
Actually, 8-0 flatters Barbados, so complete was the US domination. The Bajans rarely got within 20 yards of goal. The US essentially had its foot of the gas for at least half the match. I give the team credit for knowing they didn't have to run up the score to advance; but took advantage of key stretches to exploit the Bajan defense and score goals. They do need to learn how to better take care of the ball and hold posession. I just don't see these as uncorrectable/unforgivable errors.
Some stages is better than only one stage, but not too many stages like CONCACAF. I'd like to see CONCACAF qualifying in 2 stages, with the 2nd and final stage being a large, single group of 8 teams, similar to the South American Qualifying. The top three after round-robbin play automatically make the Cup. The 4th place team gets the 1/2 place for a playoff against another confederation. The top 4 nations from the previous qualification cycle would automatically qualify into the Final Round. The 4 remaining spots in the final round would have to be earned though a series of home/away knockout rounds among the remaining teams. Let the minnoes compete with each other for a shot at the big final round.
Agreed. While I have been converted to the "Fire Bob Crowd", I can't fault him much with this game. I might have taken out Gooch after his yellow card just in case by some fluke he got another card. Of course, him sitting the next game is not a big deal. You can't take anything from this game. Yes, I would have liked to save some of the luck for another game, but it happens. I have been around long enough to remember when we struggled with these games. Glad to see a laugher... After three good games, Pearce didn't have his best game. Adu wasn't particularly good either. Otherwise, everyone else did fine...
I got a better idea: The US and Mexico auto-qualify for the World Cup. The remaining 9 countries, which are Canada, Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, and the Copa Caribe winner play each other in a 2-legged knockout tournament for the 3rd Concacaf spot. The runner-up in the tournament plays the 4th placed South American team for the .5 spot. Since there are 9 countries, the Copa Caribe winner and Canada play a play-in game in the USA to get into the 8 team knockout tournament. The strongest minnow gets to play, while not making other countries waste their time playing lost causes like Barbados and St. Lucia.
the return leg might get ugly, maybe bradley should call Marsch and Franchino in to play Defensive mid positions
Except Donovan and Beasley were both tucked inside and the fullbacks crossed rarely. And Barbados - yes, they are that stupid - didn't really bunker. So there go Bob's theories. BTW, given Eddie's header, I bet he can do anything Brian can and with speed to boot. Chinger gets a benefit of the doubt here because he sat out the three major friendlies. Had he played, chances are he would have gotten as much accomplished as Josh Wolff. But, at least, then you would have chosen your starting eleven based on how they played against the good teams. With Bob deferring to MLS, this is one thing that you never found out. And it was not a pleasant surprise. PS, C'CAF should give the US and Mexico a free-be to the first group stage but Mexico-in-the-US is too much of a money maker for the smaller nations.
I read all your reasons, but didn't really see a good reason why we shouldn't start the Olympic team. There's very little chance they'd lose and it'd be good experience.
Still, any coach would have expected Barbados to bunker. Besides which, it's stupid to expect them not to bunker - because if there's any chance that they do, you might find yourself grinding out a result with less-than-ideal personnel.
And I was there to witness it! I was waiting for Guzan to score a goal, too. Okay, the US play wasn't spectacular, but anytime you actually see what the US is supposed to do - that is, kick a minnows butt in a WC qualifer - with a score of 8-0 no less, that's something that should be commended. I'm sure BigSoccer would be absolutely rabid if the scoreline were 4-3 or 2-1. Enjoy the win, US fans. It's what we support the USMNT for, right? Go USA!
To be fair, three of our goals came from fullback crosses. And another was partially the result of Pearce pushing up into the box. edit: I just read the post you were responding to, and yours makes sense to me now. But to respond to a point you've been making in other posts, I still do think that our fullbacks pushed up enough to provide some width in this game.
Ching has for the past couple of years held up the ball better than EJ by a very significant margin. That got the pinched-in wingers highly involved. To his credit, he didn't rely too much on the header from the fullbacks route, though I was afraid he'd rely too much on that one. So... that was less than idiotic. With this team playing as they did, either guy could've gone out there and we would've scored some goals. Games like this mean very little in terms of evaluation. The only evaluation that can be done in a game like this is looking at the intangibles; handling the pressure to perform, professional tidiness, keeping one's head, that stuff.