At current form Mexico should be able to beat ANY U.S. team on U.S. soil - 7 out of 10 matches. Logic would say Mexico wins its 5th Cup in 8 Tournaments (3rd on U.S. soil).
And yet, the Bible says otherwise... And I qoute: The US shall do maneuvers such that the pudgy bastards from on south shall concede defeat... And it shall be observed that those from up above had pounded upon the short fat gits in a manner such that they shall be sent back unto whence they came... And they shall drive on down, on their sloths, and their donkeys, and their orangutans, and their fruit bats... So sayeth the Lord...amen.
Just goes to show you shouldn't believe in sh1tty books written by Sun Strok Crazied Jews & then edited by American Redneck Zealots Mexico 5 USA 2 Canada 1 Does this look familiar?
Mexico has already beaten the US and in American soil 1-0 in the final for the gold cup Mexico really doesnt give a ******** who is the host.
It is the championship standings of this tournament that has been held almost exclusively in the U.S. (It includes the result of the 2005 version as well)
I don't understand why: I don't understand why so many people voted for the U.S. to win the 2005 Gold Cup. Could you please explain the reasons of why you think the U.S. could possibly win? Thank you.
Re: I don't understand why: Umm, well aside from the fact that you probably have a bunch of us fans voting, I think since the USA is fielding one of the stronger teams and playing on home soil is reason enough to predict us Champions. Apparently all of the other countries are bringing their b, c, and d teams (really people that excuse is getting thrown around way too much) so we should stomp them.
Re: I don't understand why: Well I didn't even vote, but I certainly consider the US to be co-favourites if not the favourites. Reasons: in a field full of non-full strength teams, the US is as close, if not closer to a full side as most other teams. On paper they look like one of the best teams in the tournament. Also, they're at home. They (and Mexico) are also afforded a better schedule. If both top their groups they would play a third-place team, while the Group A winner gets the Group B second place. The Group B and C winners also don't travel between their final group game and the quarterfinals. Which will also help in a pretty tight schedule. Finally if it does prove to be a US/Mexico final, the US has had a lot of recent success in the US and on neutral soil beating Mexico. Would that continue at Giants stadium? I think we'll find out. Had Costa Rica, Honduras or even Jamaica brought a really strong team then maybe I can see them unseating one of the favourites. Both of the guest teams are bringing depleated teams. I'm really curious how Guatemala does. I think they're bringing the closest to first team at the tourney and I think they'll make the semis. Are they good enough to beat a not full strength Mexico or US? I'm going to say no, but it could happen. To me they're the darkhorses unless Costa Rica's extreme blend of youth and experience catches fire. I think this could be a tough tournament to call with a lot of upsets, but an expected final. Maybe a bit like 02 when Martinique and Haiti made the quarters and Canada and South Korea made the semis and yet the final wasn't a shock (the Ticos were a mild surprise granted). cheers, hobbes
Re: I don't understand why: My exact thoughts... Don't be suprised if they even advance to the finals!!!!!!!! Recently in WCQ, Guatemala had absent significant players. They're results were decent considering the absences. Now, knowing that they are fielding pretty much their A team where as other teams are not, it would be no suprise to me if they made it to the semi-finals or finals. A full strength Guatemalan side could do alot of damage even if they were up against other CONCACAF A squads. I have a feeling our semi-finals will look like this: MEX-COL, USA-GUA
Re: I don't understand why: Has Mexico beat the US any where outside of Azteca the last few years? Look it up, is that reasonable enough for you?
Re: I don't understand why: Well, even if I gave you that & didn't point Mexico's obvious dominance of Gold Cups held in the U.S. relative to their disregard for Friendly Matches, when the U.S. can't even make the Final most of the times they host the event, Mexico & USA head to head record becomes irrelevant....now doesn't it?
Re: I don't understand why: Has Mexico ever beaten Brazil 3 times (and have a 1-0-1 record against Argentina) in the 2 years leading up to a Gold Cup? Look it up....
Re: I don't understand why: The only time I can actually remember Mexico actually beating the US IN the US during the gold cup was in 1997 when Mexico beat us 1-0 in the final - after we beat Brazil in the semi's. Our failures to reach the gold cup final in previous years has been down to us being beaten by teams like Brazil and Colombia in earlier rounds - often on penalties, extratime, or a solitary goal in a close game. Anyhow, about 1997, our team has improved a great deal since then (don't need to explain much more) - but so has Mexico. Hopefully this time we'll get to see a US-Mexico final for the first time since when ... 93?
Re: I don't understand why: I hope to see the Final with Mexico and the US, that would just be PERFECT.
Actually I was at the game...even the majority of White Americans there booed the decision and thought it was offsides...and yes it clearly was, but: (1) The linesman was 30 meters behind the play (why, I have no idea) (2) The linesman had been booed for making several questionable calls...so he was either compensating or traumatized Cuba was more than a decent rival for about 40 minutes in each half. As a matter of fact if the U.S. had Lester More instead of Casey Connor, the U.S. would have been ALOT better team. The U.S. had 2 or 3 starters that were just complete dead weights...but more than that, Arena had players out of position & they were completely out of the game...and that made the U.S. look very mediocre for long periods of the match. Very unsuccessful experiment by Arena. As far as the red card...it didn't look that bad in person, it definitely did not seem intentional...the Cuban player was just a little slow. Further, Cuba advanced its lines when #18 came in...and was starting to get the better of the game. After the 2-1, they visably fell apart morally and the defense lost its shape completely...combined with Arena fixing his Tactics (bringing in O'Brien in the middle, allowing for Hedjuk & Beasely to own the flanks)...and the Cubans physically ran out of gas, lead to a very misleading score line. The U.S. is going to have to improve ALOT, to not lose to Mexico by a blowout...should they meet later in the tournament.
As much as it pains me to say this... I actually agree with you on this one mate. That was a horrendus display and the fact that we needed Donovan to again rescue us against Cuba, of all teams shows that there's a severe lack of depth on our team. It's pathetic that we can't even beat a 10 man Cuba team on our own soil. On the optimistic side, it's not unusual that favorites in tournaments like these get off to a slow start - especially in the opening match, before stepping up a gear in the latter stages of the tournament. If that's the case than we're going to have to step up a couple of gears if we are to beat Mexico. Should be interesting to see how Mexico do today.