Deutschland ist Weltmeister!

[JasonEvans]

We can't just go on in the CONCACAF thread. This needs its own home!

Ok, you've got an hour and a half... prediction time.

Please, please, please let us get Belgium or Switzerland as our Pot 1 team. Please!! I actually think we would have a chance against those teams. I don't like our odds with any of the other pot 1 clubs.

I would be pleased with either Cameroon or Algeria from Pot 2. Getting Chile or the Pot 4 spillover or Ivory Coast would be unfortunate.

Pot 4 contains no good news, but I would not frown with Croatia in our group. I could live with BH or Russia too. England would be a fun match. But, we will likely be in the "Group of Death" if we get Italy, Portugal, Netherlands, or France. Cross your fingers on that!

With the Pot 4 spillover, I suppose it is possible for a group to contain Spain, USA, Portugal, and Italy isn't it? That would be absurd -- but it could happen, right? Ugh...

-Jason "a good draw can make all the difference" Evans

[InSpades]

Stealing some analysis from another forum I frequent...

There are 720 possible groups for the USA to be drawn in. (70 of them are the duplicate groups, just with the Euro teams switching whether they came from pot 2 or 4).

(4 SA * 5 Africa * 9 Europeans + 4 SA * 9 Europeans * 8 Europeans + 4 Europeans * 7 pot 2 * 9 Europeans)

According to average ESPN's SPI, the 5 hardest groups the USA can be drawn into are:

ESP, CHI, FRA (86.93)
GER, CHI, FRI (86.67)
ESP, CHI, NED (86.6)
BRA, FRA, NED (86.43)
GER, CHI, NED (86.33)

The 5 easiest groups are:

SUI, ALG, CRO (71.20)
SUI, ALG, GRE (72,06)
BEL, ALG, CRO (72.23)
SUI, ALG, POR (72.80)
SUI, ALG, RUS (72.80)


Again using SPI:

There are 10 groups (out of the 650 unique) where the US is the highest ranked team. (SUI + African team + GRE or CRO).

113 groups where the US is the 2nd best team.

350 groups where the US is the 3rd best team.

177 groups where the US is the 4th best team.

[InSpades]

With the Pot 4 spillover, I suppose it is possible for a group to contain Spain, USA, Portugal, and Italy isn't it? That would be absurd -- but it could happen, right? Ugh...


You can't get 3 european teams in the same group actually. The european team pulled out of pot 4 (into pot 2) will be paired w/ 1 of the south american teams from pot 1 in order to avoid 3 european teams being in the same group.

That's why all the "worst groups" I listed include either Chile or Brazil.

[JasonEvans]

Again using SPI:

There are 10 groups (out of the 650 unique) where the US is the highest ranked team. (SUI + African team + GRE or CRO).

113 groups where the US is the 2nd best team.

350 groups where the US is the 3rd best team.

177 groups where the US is the 4th best team.

That is a truly fascinating analysis and help to point out how truly lucky we will have to be in order to be expected to make it out of the group stage.

US best = 1.5% chance
2nd best = 17.3% chance
3rd best = 53.8% chance
4th best = 27.2& chance

Worth noting that the US is rated lower in the ESPN rankings (#17) than in the FIFA rankings (#14). It is not a big difference but probably greatly affects the chance we will be 3rd versus 2nd because so many of the Pot 4 teams are bunched around us in the rankings. I best our 2nd best percentage goes up at least 15 points if you used FIFA rankings instead.

-Jason "ten minutes to go... and then the real analysis can begin!" Evans

[toughbuff1]

If we are lucky enough to get a team like Algeria, and beat them like we should, a draw against one of the other two teams should be enough to get us to the group stage. And there are many teams in pot 4 that we can bunker down and draw with. That would be a success in my book.

[Mal]

over Brazil or Argentina. Even if it's Spain. Given the history of European play in the Americas, I'd also rather have Germany than the hosts or Messi, and probably about equal with Colombia and Uruguay. Clearly with Jason on the hopes for Switzerland or Belgium, though.

We're almost certain to be in a Group of Death by necessity, due to our high ranking and our spot in the same pot with Asia, unless we get a really weak African team. We're assured of a seeded team, another European team likely to be in the top 15 or 18 in ranking, and ourselves, ranked 14th. After the year we've had and the team's trajectory, though, I think it's different this time, in that we'll be arguably the 2 seed in our group. If it's Italy, the Dutch or France, their names and history push us to third and we'll be the underdogs, I guess.

I read that the average ranking of qualified teams this year was like 6 spots lower than 2010. Some of that is the difference between South Africa and Brazil, of course. But overall, it's just a really strong field, so there will likely be multiple groups whose inhabitants come out of today thinking "Man, that's a brutal draw. We're in the Group of Death!"

[Mal]

We're hosed if France or England.

ETA - nope, not too bad.

[JasonEvans]

Germany (very tough), Portugal (very tough), and Ghana (not so terrible but certainly not easy).

Congrats USA... you got the Group of Death. Sigh...

-Jason

[Mal]

Germany (very tough), Portugal (very tough), and Ghana (not so terrible but certainly not easy).

Congrats USA... you got the Group of Death. Sigh...

-Jason

Well, one of them. Group B's even more brutal. I'm not scared of Portugal despite their ranking, and we should have revenge on our minds and go destroy Ghana. Of the seeded teams, Germany would have been 5th on my list if we could choose, and of the Pot 4 teams Portugal would probably have been ahead of Italy, France or the Dutch. And I guarantee those two teams had us No. 8 on their list of desired Pot 3 squads.

[JasonEvans]

Wow, how easy is Group H?!?! Belgium, Algeria, Russia, and Korea?!?! Are you kidding me?!?! USA would be the best team in the group. ARGH!!

Groups C and F also seem somewhat easy.

-Jason "ugh, can't believe we got Portugal, who probably should have been a Pot 1 seed... grrr" Evans

[InSpades]

Definitely not a good draw, but not the worst either. Do we always seem to be in a group w/ Ghana?

France was given an absolute gift draw.

I think part of the problem was we were in the pot w/ most of the worst teams. Oh well. Gonna be tough but we can do it!

[JohnGalt]

Natal
Mexico vs Cameroon


Recife
Ivory Coast vs Japan


Natal
Ghana vs USA


Natal
Japan vs Greece


Fortaleza
Germany vs Ghana



Welp, so this is how it worked out for me. Grabbing that USA/Ghana match and the chance to cheer AGAINST Ghana when they play Germany make the other [pretty disappointing] draws worth it.

[Mal]

could ESPN's soccer site be worse? Pathetic.

[JasonEvans]

Group B's even more brutal.

Spain (#3 ESPN, #1 FIFA), Netherlands (#9, #9), Chile (#5, #15), and Australia (#53, #59). That is a nightmare of a group. The Socceroos are quite badly outmatched.

You are correct that it is probably harder than Germany (#4, #2) Portugal (#16, #5), USA (#17, #14), and Ghana (#24, #24), though not much harder. I think the fact that Ghana is actually capable of being competitive with the top 3 may make for more drama in this group versus the poor Aussies who will just be overwhelmed, I suspect.

-Jason "gonna be a great tourney, that's for sure!" Evans

[Mal]

the poor Aussies who will just be overwhelmed, I suspect.

Yes, poor Aussie, indeed. They're gonna look like North Korea last time around, I fear.

The gap between FIFA ranking and ESPN's for Portugal is fairly mindboggling. They barely made it into the draw from a poor qualifying group, needing a playoff against Sweden due to an inability to get W's against Northern Ireland and Israel (twice), and haven't otherwise beaten a relevant team in the past 18 months. So FIFA must be putting a lot of weight behind their making the Euro semi's last year.

Ronaldo's great, and our defense is our weakness, so that will be a tactical nightmare for Klinsmann, but I trust him to figure out how to neutralize Ronaldo more than I would have Bradley, so there's that. And if anyone should be able to find and probe the weaknesses of Germany's squad, it would be our coach, so that helps, too. Basically, we have to beat Ghana, salvage a tie with one of the European teams, and hope for Ghana to play good defense in their games against Portugal and Germany us to help with goal differential. It should help (I think) that Germany and Portugal play each other first, so we'll know what we have to do against whom.

[duke23]

Spain (#3 ESPN, #1 FIFA), Netherlands (#9, #9), Chile (#5, #15), and Australia (#53, #59). That is a nightmare of a group. The Socceroos are quite badly outmatched.

You are correct that it is probably harder than Germany (#4, #2) Portugal (#16, #5), USA (#17, #14), and Ghana (#24, #24), though not much harder. I think the fact that Ghana is actually capable of being competitive with the top 3 may make for more drama in this group versus the poor Aussies who will just be overwhelmed, I suspect.

-Jason "gonna be a great tourney, that's for sure!" Evans

The thing to remember is that Group B and Group G may be currently at the same level, but if we were in Group B, we'd be replacing Australia. Obviously that would be horrendous compared to our current position. I think replacing Costa Rica in Group D (Uruguay-England-Italy) would also be worse. Certainly replacing South Korea in Group H would have been ideal, but this isn't half bad. It's the "Group of Death" BECAUSE we're in it - Group B is a "Group of Death" DESPITE our absence.

[Udaman]

Yep - we got absolutely hosed. All the talk about Group B maybe being harder is nuts. Ours is (in my opinion) by far the toughest pod. We have Germany - a clear favorite to make the semi-finals or finals. We have Portugal, who only has the best player in the world on their team. We have Ghana - who made it to the round of 8 last time by beating us, and should have made the semi-finals had it not been for the blatant red card hand ball that was done in the last minute (and then the guy missed the penalty shot). I mean....it's just as awful as it could be for us.

People say this all the time, but the ping pong balls just seems completely unfair. I mean look at Mexico. They BARELY squeaked into the World Cup, and they get Brazil, Croatia and Cameroon. Basically they get a cake walk to the round of 16. Same thing with France, that barely made it in, and gets Switzerland, Ecuador and Honduras. They are a lock for the round of 16. So two teams that barely, barely, barely got it get the luck of the draw and will almost certainly make it to the 2nd round, while USA, which won our grouping, ends up with a horrific draw. We get no bonus at all for being the best qualifier. And don't get me started on Group F. This might be the easiest group in the history of the World Cup. Argentina basically has a bye to the 2nd round. Totally sucks.

I'll say it right now - we have no chance at all of making it to the 2nd round now. None.

And if I were ranking the Pods I would say

1) Group G. Our Group

By far toughest

2) Group D. Uruguay, Costa Rica, England, Italy

Next level
3) Group B. Spain, Netherlands, Chile, Australia
4) Group C. Columbia, Greece, Ivory Coast, Japan
5) Group H. Belgium, Russia, Algeria, South Korea

These two aren't brutal, but at least have 3 teams that could compete

6) Group A Brazil, Mexico, Croatia, Camerooon
6) Tied Group E Switzerland, France, Ecuador, Honduras

Two teams locked into the next round

8) Group F Argentina, Bosnia, Iran, Nigeria.

Total joke of a group. Awful.

[JasonEvans]

I think our path is clear.

Beat Ghana in match 1 while Germany beats Portugal.
Play for a tie against Portugal while Germany beats Ghana.
Then, hope that a 2-0-0 Germany is perfectly happy to play for a tie against us as it sends them through as the #1 seed and us as the #2 seed from our group.

-Jason "Playing Germany last, while Portugal plays them first, could be a very good thing" Evans

[JohnGalt]

I'll say it right now - we have no chance at all of making it to the 2nd round now. None.


We did get hosed, but how do you figure we have zero chance? It took a herculean effort from Cristiano to make it past Sweden of all teams just to qualify. There are many people that think he'll win the balon d'or because of that performance. And even though its Cristiano, that's not likely to happen internationally again. Sure, defense is our ongoing issue but I'm confident Klinsmann will adjust to at the very least contain Cristiano. I'm all for shelling or doing whatever it takes to get that draw...soccer purity be damned. But as Jason illustrates, we got a tough group but a good draw within the group. The schedule is rather favorable although beating Ghana in the first match is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL.

[duke23]

I'll say it right now - we have no chance at all of making it to the 2nd round now. None.


For a less Chicken-Little perspective, see the following.

http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1639248/spi-world-cup-group-stage-projections?cc=5901

(Forgive the snark, but seriously, can we as a society please stop treating everything that ever occurs as "best ever", "worst ever", etc?? And people wonder why the country is so polarized...)

[luburch]

If we can get three points from Ghana and one from Portugal then I like our chances.

[alteran]

I think our path is clear.

Beat Ghana in match 1 while Germany beats Portugal.
Play for a tie against Portugal while Germany beats Ghana.
Then, hope that a 2-0-0 Germany is perfectly happy to play for a tie against us as it sends them through as the #1 seed and us as the #2 seed from our group.

-Jason "Playing Germany last, while Portugal plays them first, could be a very good thing" Evans

I'm going to be an optimist here.

If you're going to play Germany in group play, best to play them in the last match. They will likely have cinched and may be holding back their stars. We'll obviously be playing to survive, and if we're lucky they'll be playing to win, with a heavy dose of DON'T GET HURT. Stranger things have happened.

Just don't mention the war (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfl6Lu3xQW0).

The draw didn't do us any favors, but I imagine if we would had to pick an order, this would have been it.

--rob wildermann

[OldPhiKap]

For a less Chicken-Little perspective, see the following.

http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1639248/spi-world-cup-group-stage-projections?cc=5901

(Forgive the snark, but seriously, can we as a society please stop treating everything that ever occurs as "best ever", "worst ever", etc?? And people wonder why the country is so polarized...)

Best post ever.

Oh drat, I did it myself. ;>)

But yeah, we have a tough road. It is what it is. Win the games you've got in front of you, no reason to worry about things outside your control.

[Udaman]

I'm not sky is falling at all. I think if you took all the "Groups of Death" from the last 10 World Cups and compared them, we would be the "Group of Death" out of that bunch. That's how tough our group is.

Here's the issue - Germany and Portugal are basically going to be playing for a tie as well. They are thinking, "just get through this game, and then we both beat the USA and Ghana and it doesn't matter." And if Portugal somehow manages to win, then we get a fired up Germany going against us in the 3rd game in a likely must win. Worst part is that our first round game becomes a must win for both us and Ghana, because if one of those two loses, they are almost certainly out.

I think Ronaldo is going to shine this World Cup. He's taken a ton of heat over not scoring last WC, and he's been (by far) the best player on the planet for the past four years. I predict Portugal goes 3-0. Germany goes 2-1, and what we do against Ghana won't matter (but I predict we'll lose 2-1 or tie 1-1).

The crummy thing, to me, is just how easy a draw Mexico and France got. The system is messed up when two teams that barely squeak in get put in groups where they are all but assured a trip to the next round. We should be in one of their groups, and they in ours - that would be fair given the qualifying. As it is, (as I said before) we have no chance.

Certainly hope I'm wrong.....

[luburch]

I'm not sky is falling at all. I think if you took all the "Groups of Death" from the last 10 World Cups and compared them, we would be the "Group of Death" out of that bunch. That's how tough our group is.

Here's the issue - Germany and Portugal are basically going to be playing for a tie as well. They are thinking, "just get through this game, and then we both beat the USA and Ghana and it doesn't matter." And if Portugal somehow manages to win, then we get a fired up Germany going against us in the 3rd game in a likely must win. Worst part is that our first round game becomes a must win for both us and Ghana, because if one of those two loses, they are almost certainly out.

I think Ronaldo is going to shine this World Cup. He's taken a ton of heat over not scoring last WC, and he's been (by far) the best player on the planet for the past four years. I predict Portugal goes 3-0. Germany goes 2-1, and what we do against Ghana won't matter (but I predict we'll lose 2-1 or tie 1-1).

The crummy thing, to me, is just how easy a draw Mexico and France got. The system is messed up when two teams that barely squeak in get put in groups where they are all but assured a trip to the next round. We should be in one of their groups, and they in ours - that would be fair given the qualifying. As it is, (as I said before) we have no chance.

Certainly hope I'm wrong.....

I'm sorry, but until this year Messi has been the better player.

[Udaman]

OK....Messi has been outstanding, and you're probably right over the four year period. But Ronaldo has been a beast this year, and he's on the hook for how he did last World Cup (so is Messi, by the way). History has clearly shown that a superstar can carry a team, and we have nobody that could even come close to shutting him down if he's on.

I'll admit, the best thing that could happen to us would be for Germany to beat Portugal and for us to beat Ghana. That happens and we at least have a chance. If Germany and Portugal tie, or if Portugal wins, we are in huge, huge trouble, needing a win over Ghana and likely a win over either Portugal or Germany.

[blazindw]

JG, I will see you in Natal! We got the toughest draw, IMO and we have by far the most travel of any team in the World Cup in the shortest time frame. We got the beach and we got the jungle. But, I couldn't be more excited for it all! I'll be at all the U.S. matches for at least the group stage and hopefully can make some side trips to some other matches as well.

[burnspbesq]

I'm not sky is falling at all. I think if you took all the "Groups of Death" from the last 10 World Cups and compared them, we would be the "Group of Death" out of that bunch. That's how tough our group is.

Here's the issue - Germany and Portugal are basically going to be playing for a tie as well. They are thinking, "just get through this game, and then we both beat the USA and Ghana and it doesn't matter." And if Portugal somehow manages to win, then we get a fired up Germany going against us in the 3rd game in a likely must win. Worst part is that our first round game becomes a must win for both us and Ghana, because if one of those two loses, they are almost certainly out.

I think Ronaldo is going to shine this World Cup. He's taken a ton of heat over not scoring last WC, and he's been (by far) the best player on the planet for the past four years. I predict Portugal goes 3-0. Germany goes 2-1, and what we do against Ghana won't matter (but I predict we'll lose 2-1 or tie 1-1).

The crummy thing, to me, is just how easy a draw Mexico and France got. The system is messed up when two teams that barely squeak in get put in groups where they are all but assured a trip to the next round. We should be in one of their groups, and they in ours - that would be fair given the qualifying. As it is, (as I said before) we have no chance.

Certainly hope I'm wrong.....

In an earlier post, you said you hated the "random" draw procedure. Would you really trust a FIFA selection committee?

[InSpades]

If you believe the SPI rankings... this draw is only slightly worse than 50% as far as how bad things could have been.

Again... it's the matter of being grouped in a bad pot. If we were in Group B, we would replace Australia, and then that would be one of the worst "group of deaths" ever.

If we were in Group D it would be w/ Uruguay, England and Italy. No thanks there either.

So we were in like the 3rd worst group for us. And I think 1 or 2 of the others would have been equally as bad.

[Duvall]

I'll say it right now - we have no chance at all of making it to the 2nd round now. None.

Would you say that it is...over?

[JohnGalt]

JG, I will see you in Natal! We got the toughest draw, IMO and we have by far the most travel of any team in the World Cup in the shortest time frame. We got the beach and we got the jungle. But, I couldn't be more excited for it all! I'll be at all the U.S. matches for at least the group stage and hopefully can make some side trips to some other matches as well.

Yea that would be cool to meet up. I imagine you'll be with the American Outlaws? Did you request tickets through them or how does that work? Do you know that you'll be sitting in the supporters section? It would be cool if I could organize sitting over there but I have a feeling it's out of my hands now. I've got category 1 tickets if that makes any difference.

I actually have a house we're renting a little over an hour south of Natal in a town called Pipa (I'm with 7 friends) so I'm expecting a pretty big time. The only problem is that it's still a ways off haha.

[YmoBeThere]

Salvador is the best city to see Carnival in according to my Brazilian friends(I was down there in 2002 for half the year and worked for a Brazilian company for several years). I'm curious how people feel about the cities the games will be in and the potential impact to crowds?

[throatybeard]

Benjamin Torbert ‏@throatybeard

After the World Cup draw, a vision came to me: Jürgen Klinsmann with his last few men, floating down the Amazon on a monkey-infested raft.

^ allow myself to quote... myself.

[blazindw]

Yea that would be cool to meet up. I imagine you'll be with the American Outlaws? Did you request tickets through them or how does that work? Do you know that you'll be sitting in the supporters section? It would be cool if I could organize sitting over there but I have a feeling it's out of my hands now. I've got category 1 tickets if that makes any difference.

I actually have a house we're renting a little over an hour south of Natal in a town called Pipa (I'm with 7 friends) so I'm expecting a pretty big time. The only problem is that it's still a ways off haha.

I indeed will be on the AO plane. I haven't secured tickets yet but will request through US Soccer. I'm not sure how the process will work with where tickets are, but hopefully I will be in the main section (I too am going for Cat 1 tickets). Either way, I'm sure we will see each other in Natal!

[throatybeard]

I indeed will be on the AO plane. I haven't secured tickets yet but will request through US Soccer. I'm not sure how the process will work with where tickets are, but hopefully I will be in the main section (I too am going for Cat 1 tickets). Either way, I'm sure we will see each other in Natal!

You are an event attendance powerhouse, man!

[gurufrisbee]

We got a very tough group. Not sure if I think it's worse than Group B. We have a stronger 4th team than they do, but I think they have a stronger 3rd team. There definitely are some much easier groups (E, F), but you take what you get.

I'm just so excited for this summer and the chance to be a World Cup junkie again.

[Mal]

History has clearly shown that a superstar can carry a team...

That's all well and good, but the operative word here is "can." Messi has failed to carry his team in the WC thus far. Rooney likewise. The winner of the last three major titles has a bunch of stars but not the sort of trancendently talented striker you're talking about. And the superstar at hand here barely managed to get his team past Sweden and into the World Cup, denying another of Europe's superstars, Ibrahimovic, a berth. Whether that's all because the operative theory about teams with a superstar needs some parsing, or it's an indication that the rest of the Portugal squad just isn't all that good, I don't know, but I don't think it matters. They're a team that drew with Israel twice and Northern Ireland once this year in European qualifying. Their midfield from 2010 has almost completely turned over, and that was the secondary strength of the team.

Anyway, I think we all remember the last time Portugal came into the World Cup riding the best player in the world. Didn't turn out so well, and if memory serves, we were one of the teams to beat them in the group stage. I guarantee no one in Lisbon was psyched when they drew the U.S. We'll be just the sort of team with a dangerous counterattack and solid (if unspectacular) midfield play that tempts them to play the way they did in the 2010 Cup, when they left Ronaldo unsupported in attack out of fear, and had no discernible personality in style of play. Or, if they do go aggressive, we'll be the sort of team that can punish them if they're not careful and/or don't take advantage of their opportunities. They've seen what Jozy and Donovan are capable of on the break, and it may dissuade them from exploiting our biggest weaknesses, contra Germany, who's never afraid to go after your weak links for fear of your offense. Portugal doesn't match up well with Germany, so there's a pretty decent chance we'll find ourselves in decent shape if we can just get a draw here, if we can take care of business against Ghana and then face Germany in a spot where a 0-0 tie is perfectly acceptable for them.

[luburch]

At first I was pretty frustrated with the draw, but now after I've had some time to reflect on it, I like our chances. As Jason hinted at above, Portugal's back four leaves something to be desired. If we hold our shape, we should be able to hit them on the counter attack with success. Also Jozy provides great holdup play, for our other players to make some runs and test their line. I wouldn't be surprised to come away with three points, but I'd take one as well.

[JasonEvans]

At first I was pretty frustrated with the draw, but now after I've had some time to reflect on it, I like our chances. As Jason hinted at above, Portugal's back four leaves something to be desired. If we hold our shape, we should be able to hit them on the counter attack with success. Also Jozy provides great holdup play, for our other players to make some runs and test their line. I wouldn't be surprised to come away with three points, but I'd take one as well.

As others have said, the draw is bad, the travel is bad, but the schedule is good. Our path is so clear and it starts with a win over Ghana. Do that and then get draws in our next two and we are through, I'd wager. I do agree that 3 points against Portugal seems possible. I am just so happy that we get Germany in the last game of the group stage. I think that will serve us well as Germany may not have much motivation.

-Jason "but we must get 3 versus Ghana... must" Evans

[alteran]

Submitted for entertainment value...

World Cup Draw Truthing (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/12/09/was_the_2014_world_cup_draw_fixed.html): because everything that doesn't go your way should have a conspiracy theory.

[greybeard]

His name is Jozy Altidore, and his little friend Brandon Donovan. If Altidore comes to the ball and gets it, his little friend, Brandon Donovan showed pretty good in making sure of that, the guy is quite formidable, in moments, perhaps world class (I defer to the soccer experts on that). You combine them with Clint Demsey, who starts in the middle but comes up front in the last 1/3 or sooner, and we're seeing an offense that will make you stand up and look. Hey, how many goals can Ronaldo score?

There are lots of other people we can all mention (or you guys can all mention), but the ace in the hole, if Altidore gets to handle on offense, is the little guy in the back, that would be, DaMarcus Beasley, and his ability to hurt you in a number of ways coming forward, most importantly, as a distributor and as always a potential threat to get behind the defense if someone isn't watching, and I do mean watching. Having to devote a resource or resources to protecting against the potentiality that this guy poses changes the way a team has to play, how it would otherwise choose to play against the U.S. No one likes to be dictated to in that fashion. And, like I said, you fall asleep and maybe boom goes the dynamite.

I say let them play 'em first.

Besides: two armies are equal, Army A and Army B. Each is surrounded by identical overwhelming forces, comprising the most vicious and ruthless warriors the world has known. They threaten to kill every last man, that is, after skinning alive anyone who survives being torched alive, which is the torture of choice. The soldiers in Army A spend the night before scared out of their minds about what is to come, how "bad" it's gonna feel to get roasted or skinned alive. Those in Army B say to one another, who says that they win, they got lances, we got lances, they got balls of fire, we got balls of fire, these guys only think that they know the outcome. And, besides, even if we lose, and those of us who survive the battle might well wish they had not (you think), we're gonna take a whole lot of those bastards with us, and, when we chop, we'll be aiming for the good spots (ouch). So, the guys in Army B then call in the babes and party like crazy.

I ask you, who has a better chance in battle the next morning. And, who, my friends, had the better last night. Remember Lake Placid!

[blazindw]

As others have said, the draw is bad, the travel is bad, but the schedule is good. Our path is so clear and it starts with a win over Ghana. Do that and then get draws in our next two and we are through, I'd wager. I do agree that 3 points against Portugal seems possible. I am just so happy that we get Germany in the last game of the group stage. I think that will serve us well as Germany may not have much motivation.

-Jason "but we must get 3 versus Ghana... must" Evans

The team will be based in Sao Paulo, so while there are long trips involved to each match, they are in one of the best training spots in Brazil according to all I've seen and read. Teams usually secure training locales the year before the draw, which is why our team will not be based in Recife or Natal...we had to hope we wouldn't be in the jungle of Manaus and on the northwest coast, but now that we are we will take it.

Also, if you're in Miami, expect one of the sendoff matches to be located there. Lots of teams are hoping to line up matches there in advance of the World Cup. I've heard that we might be playing England in Miami because they too have a match in Manaus and want to get acclimated to the hot and humid tropical weather (we were set to play them here in DC before the draw). I imagine there will be other matches down there that don't involve the U.S. as well.

[throatybeard]

That's all well and good, but the operative word here is "can." Messi has failed to carry his team in the WC thus far. Rooney likewise. The winner of the last three major titles has a bunch of stars but not the sort of trancendently talented striker you're talking about. And the superstar at hand here barely managed to get his team past Sweden and into the World Cup, denying another of Europe's superstars, Ibrahimovic, a berth. Whether that's all because the operative theory about teams with a superstar needs some parsing, or it's an indication that the rest of the Portugal squad just isn't all that good, I don't know, but I don't think it matters. They're a team that drew with Israel twice and Northern Ireland once this year in European qualifying. Their midfield from 2010 has almost completely turned over, and that was the secondary strength of the team.

Anyway, I think we all remember the last time Portugal came into the World Cup riding the best player in the world. Didn't turn out so well, and if memory serves, we were one of the teams to beat them in the group stage. I guarantee no one in Lisbon was psyched when they drew the U.S. We'll be just the sort of team with a dangerous counterattack and solid (if unspectacular) midfield play that tempts them to play the way they did in the 2010 Cup, when they left Ronaldo unsupported in attack out of fear, and had no discernible personality in style of play. Or, if they do go aggressive, we'll be the sort of team that can punish them if they're not careful and/or don't take advantage of their opportunities. They've seen what Jozy and Donovan are capable of on the break, and it may dissuade them from exploiting our biggest weaknesses, contra Germany, who's never afraid to go after your weak links for fear of your offense. Portugal doesn't match up well with Germany, so there's a pretty decent chance we'll find ourselves in decent shape if we can just get a draw here, if we can take care of business against Ghana and then face Germany in a spot where a 0-0 tie is perfectly acceptable for them.

Well dude, you may know lots about soccer and I don't. But I need to ask this! What of Portugal's near upset of Spain in Euro 2012? (Went to penalty kicks, IIRC?) What's going on with that? Educate me about what happened in regulation of Spain-Portugal.

This is why I love the Germans. Sometimes they get too aggressive against a Spain or an Italy, and they lose. But that's what I love. They actually try to score. All day.

Soccer ignoramus out.

[Mal]

Well dude, you may know lots about soccer and I don't. But I need to ask this! What of Portugal's near upset of Spain in Euro 2012? (Went to penalty kicks, IIRC?) What's going on with that? Educate me about what happened in regulation of Spain-Portugal.

This is why I love the Germans. Sometimes they get too aggressive against a Spain or an Italy, and they lose. But that's what I love. They actually try to score. All day.

Soccer ignoramus out.

Didn't see it. According to this report: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/18355311 Portugal did a good job of clogging up the midfield to keep Spain from holding the ball for 65 minutes and getting into rhythm with some aggressive and physical play, leaving Ronaldo to do his thing when he got free, but he was a little rusty, as well. They beat the Dutch prior to that, with a clinical fast break goal for the winner. So clearly there's some ability there, and it's possible they didn't have the full squad for one or more of those somewhat baffling draws against significantly inferior teams in WC qualifying. I don't want to come across as dumping on them too much, but rather wanted to temper Udaman's doomsaying, as he seems to have pencilled Portugal into the finals due to Ronaldo in full bloom, and gives us about a 5% chance of advancing from the group stage. I'm just saying they're not a juggernaut, and I tend to agree with the ESPN power ranking more than I do the FIFA ranking.

I'm with you on Germany. When I was younger, I didn't like their reliance on aerial play, preferring the beautiful game, but I've come to appreciate their style, fitness and pressure.

ETA: uhmmm, greybeard: it's Landon, not Brandon.

[blazindw]

Didn't see it. According to this report: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/18355311 Portugal did a good job of clogging up the midfield to keep Spain from holding the ball for 65 minutes and getting into rhythm with some aggressive and physical play, leaving Ronaldo to do his thing when he got free, but he was a little rusty, as well. They beat the Dutch prior to that, with a clinical fast break goal for the winner. So clearly there's some ability there, and it's possible they didn't have the full squad for one or more of those somewhat baffling draws against significantly inferior teams in WC qualifying. I don't want to come across as dumping on them too much, but rather wanted to temper Udaman's doomsaying, as he seems to have pencilled Portugal into the finals due to Ronaldo in full bloom, and gives us about a 5% chance of advancing from the group stage. I'm just saying they're not a juggernaut, and I tend to agree with the ESPN power ranking more than I do the FIFA ranking.

I'm with you on Germany. When I was younger, I didn't like their reliance on aerial play, preferring the beautiful game, but I've come to appreciate their style, fitness and pressure.

ETA: uhmmm, greybeard: it's Landon, not Brandon.

The best player in the world don't always win the World Cup. I think the last team to include someone you could argue was in the Top 3 in the world at the time is Brazil in 2002 (Ronaldo). France almost continued that in 2006 but for "The Headbutt" by another player who was top 3 at the time (Zidane). Italy had a great team made up of good-to-great players and Spain consisted of awesome players but no one that would be considered Top 3 best in the world in 2010.

To win the World Cup, you must have hot goalkeeping, consistent scoring and any additional elements of luck, good defense and a couple game-changing plays or playmakers. Most of the teams that have made it to the quarters of the past few World Cups have almost all of those elements. Take, for example, the 2002 U.S. team that made it to the quarters. We had some hot goaltending, consistent scoring from our strikers (Mathis, McBride), some good defense when it mattered and some game-changing plays (McBride's goal against Portugal, Mathis' "That's Why He's Here" goal against South Korea, Donovan's goal against Mexico in the Round of 16). What happened against Germany? We ran out of luck...the German handball on the goal line that wasn't called that denied us a goal, a couple Donovan breakaways that were stuffed by Germany's Oliver Kahn). If we get a few more bounces or we get a red card called on Frings that would have given us a penalty shot seen Germany go down a man the rest of the match, maybe we advance to the semis for a rematch with South Korea (who we tied in the group stage).

We haven't had any hot goaltending since 2002 in the World Cup. Timmy will have to show one last bit of fire with his performance next summer in Brazil. Our strikers will have to score consistently (Jozy, Aron Johannsson) and we must get big play from our big players (Deuce, Bradley, Donovan). It's quite possible we will walk into the World Cup with a back line with no World Cup experience, so we must play well up front to take the pressure off them and Howard. And, with this group, we can't make any mistakes. These teams will capitalize on mistakes and with arguably one of the best teams (Germany) and the #1 or #1a player in the world depending on who you support (CR7), you can't give them chances to score. Every point will matter in this group.

The good thing about this group is that I can see the two teams to advance out of this group advancing very far. Groups E, F and H aren't too strong save for a couple of teams, and it could very well be two teams from G in the semifinals. For that to happen, we will need a little luck on our side in addition to the above. But, it's just as possible for us to have a run for the ages as it is for us to watch 3 matches and then go home.

[greybeard]

Well dude, you may know lots about soccer and I don't. But I need to ask this! What of Portugal's near upset of Spain in Euro 2012? (Went to penalty kicks, IIRC?) What's going on with that? Educate me about what happened in regulation of Spain-Portugal.

This is why I love the Germans. Sometimes they get too aggressive against a Spain or an Italy, and they lose. But that's what I love. They actually try to score. All day.

Soccer ignoramus out.

I seem to recall Germany having a brilliant game against Spain last year by physically dominating Spain's midfielders. I don't see Germany as being more aggressive scorers, only more forceful.

Spain's game seems to be occupy the ball, go, and then lock you up before you can clear, and then occupy some more, go, etc, until the real attack presents, and then it often becomes an all out assault.

Germany I thought played its version of Spain-ball by focusing so much on locking up Spain's midfielders and keeping them out of the pressure turn-over defense upon which the assault rests. It then had the ability to initiate the offense quickly, without the usual traps/swarms that Spain uses so effectively to turn teams over near the mid field.

It has been Germany's ability to bring dominance to the midfield defense that has made it so formidable and permitted it to soundly defeat Spain. Playing aggressively on offense was successful, imo, only because of its ability to prevent Spain's turn over defense that normally stops an opponent's offense from beginning over long stretches.

I seem to recall that Portugal used a similar strategy in its defeat of Spain last year in the Euros.

I think that Spain began developing a counter to the strategy I think I saw, and might have gotten quite good at it. The strategy is to quickly make much more penetrating passes into the defense than usual to not only deflate the outside pressure, but also to permit Spain's higher skilled up front players to turn and attack without facing the double teams most defenses try to deploy. I think that we will see a melding of these two styles of play from Spain such that the outside pressure will get bounced around more, and the ability of Germany to predict and defeat play will be weakened. Going early and aggressively on offense will, at least in my theory, become much less productive of good chances, and more likely to reflect disorganization that just ain't German.

What do I know?





Germany was effective at that, and thus had numbers

[JohnGalt]

The best player in the world don't always win the World Cup. I think the last team to include someone you could argue was in the Top 3 in the world at the time is Brazil in 2002 (Ronaldo). France almost continued that in 2006 but for "The Headbutt" by another player who was top 3 at the time (Zidane). Italy had a great team made up of good-to-great players and Spain consisted of awesome players but no one that would be considered Top 3 best in the world in 2010.

Good post, but one point...Cannavaro and Buffon finished 1 and 2 in the Balon d'or in 2006. Interestingly, Henry - Zidane's countryman - finished 3rd.

[wilson]

Brandon DonovanSeriously?

[blazindw]

Good post, but one point...Cannavaro and Buffon finished 1 and 2 in the Balon d'or in 2006. Interestingly, Henry - Zidane's countryman - finished 3rd.

That's true, however back then the Balon d'Or was more of a MVP/POY type of award instead of a "who is the best in the world" contest. Cannavaro had a great year that year as did Buffon (hell, Buffon has had a ridiculous career), but If you asked anyone back then who the best player in the world was, Zidane would be at or near the top of everyone's list. Buffon would likely have been in that discussion, but a lot of people don't usually throw in keepers into the best in the world conversation.

I think the Balon d'Or now is more of a "who is the best in the world" conversation which is why Messi and CR7 have been the two guys dominating the final 3 placings the past 3 years.

[greybeard]

Is it always scorers who are considered "the best" in the World in soccer also? One would have thought that Iniesta would be in the running. He does make the Spanish side, and Barcelona who they are, right? And, if there is anyone in any game that has better balance, awareness, and the ability to surprise in order to control the play and set up an attack, orchestrate tempo, and enable others to play an approximation of what he brings, I'm all ears. The guy is an impresario, more vital to "team" than anyone in the game, and he isn't mentioned. I completely understand why, but not.

[blazindw]

Is it always scorers who are considered "the best" in the World in soccer also? One would have thought that Iniesta would be in the running. He does make the Spanish side, and Barcelona who they are, right? And, if there is anyone in any game that has better balance, awareness, and the ability to surprise in order to control the play and set up an attack, orchestrate tempo, and enable others to play an approximation of what he brings, I'm all ears. The guy is an impresario, more vital to "team" than anyone in the game, and he isn't mentioned. I completely understand why, but not.

Iniesta finished 2nd in 2011 I believe in the Ballon d'Or, but no one has him on their lips now in the conversation of best in the world. Iniesta is really sweet, but scoring goals is going to be his downfall. And it's not like the players who you consider in the conversation today of best in the world (Messi, CR7, Ibrahimovic) are one dimensional players. They can do it all. Also, Iniesta's fault, unfortunately, is playing with Messi. Because of that, he'll never be considered one of the world's best because he's not even the best on his team and a lot of his stats--particularly on the assists--can be attributed to players that many would consider even better than him.

[throatybeard]

Here's what a dingus I am, w/r/t soccer. During Euro 2008, I honest-to-God thought the announcers were saying "Lunesta" when talking about Iniesta.

[greybeard]

Iniesta finished 2nd in 2011 I believe in the Ballon d'Or, but no one has him on their lips now in the conversation of best in the world. Iniesta is really sweet, but scoring goals is going to be his downfall. And it's not like the players who you consider in the conversation today of best in the world (Messi, CR7, Ibrahimovic) are one dimensional players. They can do it all. Also, Iniesta's fault, unfortunately, is playing with Messi. Because of that, he'll never be considered one of the world's best because he's not even the best on his team and a lot of his stats--particularly on the assists--can be attributed to players that many would consider even better than him.

Thanks for the info and analysis. I guess that Messi is so fabulous with the ball on his scoring forays that take place close to the goal that I they become of a piece in my mind with those passes of his, especially in tight, that lead to beautiful play.

That said, for me, there is something magical about Iniesta; the company I am in, you guys I am certain know what I mean and I am equally certain understand and can describe it better. I played basketball with a guy who is infamous by the name of Edie Garde who was in the middle of the college basketball scandals in the early 1950s, I was just a kid, late teens, but it was unlike any game I had experienced or watched since. Iniesta-like but basketball is not football, and Garde had no opportunity to see how his talents might have manifest if he had.

As a kid I tried to capture some of Garde's game in my own. If I played soccer and Iniesta was in Garde's shoes, no way. If he slipped one to me, I'd have picked it up and run.

[JohnGalt]

Iniesta finished 2nd in 2011 I believe in the Ballon d'Or, but no one has him on their lips now in the conversation of best in the world. Iniesta is really sweet, but scoring goals is going to be his downfall. And it's not like the players who you consider in the conversation today of best in the world (Messi, CR7, Ibrahimovic) are one dimensional players. They can do it all. Also, Iniesta's fault, unfortunately, is playing with Messi. Because of that, he'll never be considered one of the world's best because he's not even the best on his team and a lot of his stats--particularly on the assists--can be attributed to players that many would consider even better than him.

He finished 2nd in 2010, 4th in 2011, and 3rd in 2012. Unless you mean 20 years from now, looking back on him, that he won't be considered one of the best, I could see that, but I think it's a little crazy to not consider Iniesta one of the best in the world over the last few years. He scored the winner in the 2010 WC final and his movement creates a tremendous amount of the [still small amount of] space Messi operates in. He's not old, but at 29 it's likely that his prime is behind him...something which is starting to show this year, but I think you have to say that as long as the FIFA Balon'Dor has been around, Don Andres has been one of the best in the world.

I agree that it's probably his great misfortune that 2 players as sensational of goal scorers as Messi and Cristiano play in his same generation, and for that he won't be remembered as highly as perhaps he should be...but if you look back at who won the POY award over the last 10 years, it's full of some powerhouse names. He's been at the center of perhaps the most successful run in the history of the Champions League as well certainly the most successful run in the history of country competition.

[JasonEvans]

Here is the Guardian's list of the 100 best footballers (http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/dec/24/world-best-footballers-top-100-list-2013-lionel-messi)in the world... not a single American name in the mix.

-Jason "Germany with the top defender and goalie. 6 of the top 25 players. We don't have a chance against them, right?" Evans

[luburch]

I saw that yesterday and found it interesting. In all fairness I can't think of any American that should be close. I think Bradley would probably be rated the highest at the moment. You could make arguments for Dempsey, Altidore, and Howard as well.

[blazindw]

Yeah, if they list Eden Hazard at #100, then there's no way an American approaches that list. I would imagine if they expanded that list to 200, you'd see some Americans on there. But really, after the top 3, you can throw argue any other spot for any other player on that list.

Despite not having any Top 100 players, we are still in the top 14 in the world. That alone speaks volumes as to how strong our team can be.

[greybeard]

Query: is it the case that the voters do not look to South American players, in particular, who might chose to stay home rather than scoot for the money on the Continent. My son, who is quite knowledgeable on the level of many of you here, has written that Columbia has enough outstanding players to comprise two World-Cup elevens. How crazy is it that Cesc Fabregas is ranked so high and yet does not start for Barcelona? Neymar ranked too high perhaps, on potential yet unseen on "the big stage?"

Very illuming and to the point discourse here. Much appreciated.

[JohnGalt]

Query: is it the case that the voters do not look to South American players, in particular, who might chose to stay home rather than scoot for the money on the Continent. My son, who is quite knowledgeable on the level of many of you here, has written that Columbia has enough outstanding players to comprise two World-Cup elevens. How crazy is it that Cesc Fabregas is ranked so high and yet does not start for Barcelona? Neymar ranked too high perhaps, on potential yet unseen on "the big stage?"

Very illuming and to the point discourse here. Much appreciated.

It's probably only natural that a UK-based paper is somewhat biased toward the continent. And the money is so much greater in moving to Europe that the far majority of players talented enough to make the move make it happen. Colombia is certainly a contender in the World Cup but I think their ability to create two World Cup-11s is a stretch. Jackson Martinez and Radamel Falcao are both exceptional, world-class forwards (which is maybe where that line of thought stems from) but Colombia's success in the tournament will most likely depend on who can get them the ball (the #10) - whether Quintero is ready for the jump, Torres can have a steady run of games, or either Falcao/Rodriguez is willing to play below the other one. Quintero started very brightly for Porto but is just making his way back from a hamstring injury. And as one of the standout players in the U-20 world cup, look out for him to be the reason Colombia either meets or falls to expectation.

As for Cesc and Neymar...I'm not sure what you mean. Cesc and Neymar have started joint-third most matches for Barcelona this year. And Cesc leads the team in La Liga starts. Cesc's playing time is largely a result of Messi's injury issues but his play has merited it as well - he leads Europe in overall assists. He's not a natural goal scorer as Messi is...to expect that of him is unfair (heck, to expect anyone not named Cristiano to produce like Messi is unfair). That being said - 7 goals and 9 assists from 14 matches is a tally most any team would take. Neymar also did a superb job in the Confed Cup last summer. I understand that tournament is a somewhat B-level tournament, but Neymar showed he's willing to defend intensely and not just await play higher up the pitch, something many of the South American playmakers have been accused of. Those Guardian rankings are gimmicky more than anything (Hazard below Lampard? Really?). Take them with a grain of salt.

[greybeard]

It's probably only natural that a UK-based paper is somewhat biased toward the continent. And the money is so much greater in moving to Europe that the far majority of players talented enough to make the move make it happen. Colombia is certainly a contender in the World Cup but I think their ability to create two World Cup-11s is a stretch. Jackson Martinez and Radamel Falcao are both exceptional, world-class forwards (which is maybe where that line of thought stems from) but Colombia's success in the tournament will most likely depend on who can get them the ball (the #10) - whether Quintero is ready for the jump, Torres can have a steady run of games, or either Falcao/Rodriguez is willing to play below the other one. Quintero started very brightly for Porto but is just making his way back from a hamstring injury. And as one of the standout players in the U-20 world cup, look out for him to be the reason Colombia either meets or falls to expectation.

As for Cesc and Neymar...I'm not sure what you mean. Cesc and Neymar have started joint-third most matches for Barcelona this year. And Cesc leads the team in La Liga starts. Cesc's playing time is largely a result of Messi's injury issues but his play has merited it as well - he leads Europe in overall assists. He's not a natural goal scorer as Messi is...to expect that of him is unfair (heck, to expect anyone not named Cristiano to produce like Messi is unfair). That being said - 7 goals and 9 assists from 14 matches is a tally most any team would take. Neymar also did a superb job in the Confed Cup last summer. I understand that tournament is a somewhat B-level tournament, but Neymar showed he's willing to defend intensely and not just await play higher up the pitch, something many of the South American playmakers have been accused of. Those Guardian rankings are gimmicky more than anything (Hazard below Lampard? Really?). Take them with a grain of salt.

Poor construction on my part. I was not suggesting that Cesc did not disserve the ranking, Steven has been all in for this guy for years, but rather that it was crazy that he doesn't start for Barcelona. (I don't get many Barcelona games, and do not scout for those that are on, so was unaware that he has been starting; also, embarrassingly, didn't know that Messi was hurt. I must have made a wrong turn; clearly don't belong among the heavy hitters.)

In Neymar's case, there seems to be a certain awkwardness to his play that I do not associate with Barcelona. By that I mean that he spends a fair amount of time with the ball on occasion dancing, looking to create, when there is nothing there. This is as I've said on a small sampling. Also, I believe someone here pointed out that Neymar was being tentative because he was trying to figure out the place for his aggressive style with Messi on the other side of the pitch. Neymar's assent might portend a transition to a more Brazilian style of play as the great one around whom the clock turns loses a second or two each time the clock turns.

My son, who is working out of Medellin as an investigatory journalist, see Steven Cohen www.beaconreader.com, wrote a wonderful piece on a game he attended between Medellin's top two teams. Actually, two stories in one: the first, a wickedly written story about his adventures through the city's streets, and then around and inside the stadium; the second, what to me reads as a pretty sophisticated storyline about the game itself and the state of Columbian soccer. For $5 a month, you too can read Steven's stuff--mostly on human rights, labor, environmental, and other socio/political issues in Columbia and other countries he might find himself in. I call this appeal, "So Steven Might Eat," Paid for the Guy Who Wants To Pay No More, Not That His Kid Would Let Him If He Felt Differently. Cheers

[JohnGalt]

Awful news for Colombia. Falcao appears to be out of the World Cup.

http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1690426/radamel-falcao-acl-surery-world-cup-play-doubt?cc=5901

[JasonEvans]

Awful news for Colombia. Falcao appears to be out of the World Cup.

I didn't even know that he played futball?
Oh wait... wrong guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVikZ8Oe_XA

-Jason :now, can someone arrange for Neuer, Schweinsteiger, or Ronaldo to get hurt? Just kidding!" Evans

[A-Tex Devil]

Awful news for Colombia. Falcao appears to be out of the World Cup.

http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1690426/radamel-falcao-acl-surery-world-cup-play-doubt?cc=5901

And Group C becomes even more of a joke than it was already

[greybeard]

Perhaps of interest, a perspective on Colombia's chances still:

http://colombiareports.co/falcao-dont-sleep-colombia/

[Reisen]

Even is on!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BkRbPTCCEAIGxHb.jpg

[luburch]

I'm much less concerned about the offside call, and much more concerned with the poor play that led to two goals.

[gumbomoop]

Even is on!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BkRbPTCCEAIGxHb.jpg

IMO, the single most important factor in keeping goal-scoring pretty low is what appears to me to be a near-universal default position among linesmen to bias the offside call in favor of the defensive line. It's as if a nose-hair in front of the nearest defender constitutes offside, ignoring other defenders and even the closest defender's actual position vis-a-vis the attacker.

I suppose the offside call is the football equivalent of block-charge, in terms of difficulty getting it right. And certainly sometimes the linesman gets it wrong the other way, not calling it when the attacker was actually offside. But I'd be interested in hearing from those of you who've been footy mad longer than I on this issue.

Ditto on another of my pet peeves: the wall being allowed to set up 8.5 yards away, creeping up to about 7 just before the ball is struck.

And a third: the back-pass to the goalie. A noticeable % of the time, it leads to disaster. Whenever this particular disaster strikes, I cheer -- make that jeer -- madly. Admittedly, this 3d peeve, when "successfully" botched by back-passer, does produce more goals, so maybe I better get my priorities straight.

[Reisen]

IMO, the single most important factor in keeping goal-scoring pretty low is what appears to me to be a near-universal default position among linesmen to bias the offside call in favor of the defensive line. It's as if a nose-hair in front of the nearest defender constitutes offside, ignoring other defenders and even the closest defender's actual position vis-a-vis the attacker.

I suppose the offside call is the football equivalent of block-charge, in terms of difficulty getting it right. And certainly sometimes the linesman gets it wrong the other way, not calling it when the attacker was actually offside. But I'd be interested in hearing from those of you who've been footy mad longer than I on this issue.

Ditto on another of my pet peeves: the wall being allowed to set up 8.5 yards away, creeping up to about 7 just before the ball is struck.

And a third: the back-pass to the goalie. A noticeable % of the time, it leads to disaster. Whenever this particular disaster strikes, I cheer -- make that jeer -- madly. Admittedly, this 3d peeve, when "successfully" botched by back-passer, does produce more goals, so maybe I better get my priorities straight.

I've played soccer all my life, including for 11 years in Europe. I'm completely with you on #'s 1 and 2. I don't even think the issue is that offside is as ambiguous as charge/block, it's just that the default for many linesmen is to throw the flag if it's close. I see way, way more flags go up when they should stay down, than vice versa.

I disagree on #3, though. It can lead to some tricky situations, and even goal scoring opportunities for the other team, but I'm generally in favor of it, both as a player and as a fan. That's assuming you have a keeper who can actually clear the ball, even with a forward charging at him. It also assumes your fullback plays a decent ball to the keeper (ie. doesn't just lay a lazy ball in his general direction, there's not a forward directly between the two, plays it when the keeper is ready for it, and doesn't blast a bouncing ball at him).

That's a lot of caveats, but many teams do this dozens of time a game without issue. My bigger issue is defenders trying to dribble out of their own box in traffic, or trying to cross the ball across their own box.

We had a great discussion on DBR a few years ago of how the offside call could be changed, along with options for overtime situations / PKs. I'll see if I can find it.

[gumbomoop]

I disagree on #3, though. It can lead to some tricky situations, and even goal scoring opportunities for the other team, but I'm generally in favor of it, both as a player and as a fan. That's assuming you have a keeper who can actually clear the ball, even with a forward charging at him. It also assumes your fullback plays a decent ball to the keeper (ie. doesn't just lay a lazy ball in his general direction, there's not a forward directly between the two, plays it when the keeper is ready for it, and doesn't blast a bouncing ball at him).

That's a lot of caveats, but many teams do this dozens of time a game without issue.

Thanks for response. For now we'll probably agree to disagree, but I'll comment a little more. I do of course agree that the back-pass is standard play, and occurs frequently. But my view is that, given goals are so hard to come by [partly due to pet peeves 1&2], the defending team needs to be really careful not to give the ball away near the 18-yard box. And your caveats accurately depict the several ways a tricky situation can lead to a one v. one with the goalie. The number of times I see a defender make a bad pass, usually mis-hit and thus too slow, or fail to notice a lurking forward, is striking.

What if 1% of the time this leads to a give-away goal? Does that make it a bad play, or good odds and thus a perfectly good play. Or maybe 0.5% of the time?

[bedeviled]

I've played soccer all my life, including for 11 years in Europe. I'm completely with you on #'s 1 [bias toward calling offensive player offside] and 2 [wall encroachment before a free kick]

Hmmm....Reisen, were you a striker, by chance?

Well, strike that, lol. My first question is, 'what is your tendency when refereeing?'

I don't even think the issue is that offside is as ambiguous as charge/block, it's just that the default for many linesmen is to throw the flag if it's close. I see way, way more flags go up when they should stay down, than vice versaIt makes sense to me that the tendency would be to call offsides rather than not. Since goal scoring is at such a premium, the perception is that mistakenly allowing a goal has much more impact that mistakenly not allowing it....which, I believe, is also the reason why so many whistles are swallowed during infractions in the penalty box.

*** Oh, while I'm at it, I should say the the #1, #2, and #3 pet peeves should all be diving! (Have you noticed my defensive bias yet? :) ) ***

Anyway, I suppose one could argue that mistakenly allowing and mistakenly disallowing goals are equally impactful (each making a difference of 1 goal). Yet, they "feel" different when reffing. When in doubt, it feels much more equitable and right to keep a balanced sheet and make the teams clearly earn their marks.

My perception is that the offside call has become somewhat more favorable to the offensive player over time....and I'm not happy with it. Take a look at the photo above. Although the feet were "even," the forward's body and momentum were already past the defender's. Imagine how difficult it is to defend someone who has a running start, facing the goal, whereas the defender has to turn and then accelerate. The only saving graces for defenders are positioning and timing (hence, making the game both physical and mental). No amount of positioning, though, will help the defenders if the referees become lenient on the timing. It would just be impossible to catch up to the offensive player. It would simply be a case of who can run faster (with the offensive player getting a head start). And, defenders, who are usually physically stouter, are likely to frequently lose such a race. If this were the case, the only way to combat the scenario is to stop the entry pass from being made in the first place. This is nearly impossible, though, as the space is too great on the soccer field to fully deny passing lanes from the midfield to a through-ball or ball over the top. The necessity of proper timing significantly aids in denying such passing. As a defender, it frequently made me mad when midfielders would 'hold' the attacking player from advancing, but wouldn't actually prevent the attacking player from picking out whatever pass he wanted to make. If the offensive midfielder has the opportunity to sit and wait for appropriate timing, they will surely be able to send in a favorable pass.

The way I see it, is that more leniency in offsides would see the sport degrade into more of an under-10 style "boom ball," where the attacking third becomes a flat out foot race. It would detract from the strategy and cleverness of _both_ defense and offense.

Regarding pet peeve #3, passing back to the goalkeeper, I agree with Reisen that this is fraught with peril, yet still a LOT more favorable than having the defender engage someone in a 1-on-1 battle. As the last line of defense, each mistake is magnified. If the striker makes a mistake in positioning, timing, or dribbling, everyone sighs and just resets. When the defender makes a similar mistake, a goal is scored.

Yes, scoring goals in tough in soccer. But, paradoxically, that is the reason why it is necessary to support defenders, not a reason to take away their ability to function.

[gumbomoop]

Regarding pet peeve #3, passing back to the goalkeeper, I agree with Reisen that this is fraught with peril, yet still a LOT more favorable than having the defender engage someone in a 1-on-1 battle. As the last line of defense, each mistake is magnified.

Maybe we're talking past each other a little on this issue. The choice I [think I] see is not between the defender back passing or engaging 1-on-1, but between turning toward the touch line and kicking it out or back passing. If back passing is too often fraught with peril, why isn't kicking it out more sensible, most of the time? I'm claiming that I frequently see the defender choosing to back pass, rather than choosing to kick it out.

Precisely because I agree with your last sentence, the back pass seems too often reckless. Kicking it out does usually mean the opponent gets the throw-in closer to the goal than would be the case if the goalie receiving the back pass boots it upfield. But it doesn't seem accurate to describe kicking it out as fraught with peril.

[gurufrisbee]

Seven weeks!!!

[blazindw]

Figured this was the best place to put this...some of you have seen the new ESPN commercial, "I Believe," that showcases U.S. fans. Well, some of you may recognize the guy at the 0:18 mark and the voice that carries the commercial after that. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pjliE37ENY

[Reisen]

And we're down to a 30 man roster:

http://soccer.si.com/2014/05/12/jurgen-klinsmann-usa-roster-selection/

Brian Straus seems to take issue with some of Klinsmann's selections, but I'm overall pretty happy with it. That includes Eddie Johnson's omission. 10 years ago, I had as high hopes for him as anyone, but I just don't think he's the answer at this point.

The only omission I'm fretting over at all is Feilhaber, who I'm still a big fan of.

I agree that getting to 18 players or so of the 23 man team is pretty easy, and, as always, it's those last 5 where you really have some debate. I'd like to see Mix included, as I'm also high on him.

[-jk]

Figured this was the best place to put this...some of you have seen the new ESPN commercial, "I Believe," that showcases U.S. fans. Well, some of you may recognize the guy at the 0:18 mark and the voice that carries the commercial after that. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pjliE37ENY

Cool. Does it count as a cameo or starring role of you get only a few moments of screen time but a lot of scream time?

-jk

[blazindw]

Cool. Does it count as a cameo or starring role of you get only a few moments of screen time but a lot of scream time?

-jk

Haha, they've made it into a 30 second spot (where I'm featured twice including leading off the commercial and voice throughout) and a 15 second spot (that also has me once and a me in a group shot). Others have referred to it as "my commercial" so I'm running with it! :)

[awhom111]

I have no major complaints about the squad. Personally, I would have excluded any players in midseason who I felt were longshots to make the Final 23 and contribute in Brazil and let them carry on with their club responsibilities.

I guess that would mean Yedlin, Diskerud, and Davis out and probably some combination of Spector, Ream, Williams, Kljestan, and Agudelo in.

[Reisen]

I didn't mention it because it wasn't terribly unexpected, but Gooch didn't make the 30 man team either. Here is his reaction:

http://soccer.si.com/2014/05/15/oguchi-onyewu-usmnt-world-cup-camp-jurgen-klinsmann/?eref=sihp

My take: I feel similarly about Gooch to how I feel about Eddie. Maybe I had higher hopes for Johnson, but actually liked Onyewu better as a player.

Both are physical specimens, but I felt never really developed the finesse skills necessary to be superstars, and now in their 30's, are being replaced by younger players. Guys like Reyna were able to have longer careers by continuing to grow their skills really until the end, but I never saw Eddie do that, and Gooch seemed to regress a little (maybe due to injuries).

Who knows... both of those guys were proven commodities, that I could have seen a different coach taking. If we have a poor Cup, they will likely have an argument that they could have helped. Hopefully Klinsmann knows what he's doing leaving them home.

[COYS]

I didn't mention it because it wasn't terribly unexpected, but Gooch didn't make the 30 man team either. Here is his reaction:

http://soccer.si.com/2014/05/15/oguchi-onyewu-usmnt-world-cup-camp-jurgen-klinsmann/?eref=sihp

My take: I feel similarly about Gooch to how I feel about Eddie. Maybe I had higher hopes for Johnson, but actually liked Onyewu better as a player.

Both are physical specimens, but I felt never really developed the finesse skills necessary to be superstars, and now in their 30's, are being replaced by younger players. Guys like Reyna were able to have longer careers by continuing to grow their skills really until the end, but I never saw Eddie do that, and Gooch seemed to regress a little (maybe due to injuries).

Who knows... both of those guys were proven commodities, that I could have seen a different coach taking. If we have a poor Cup, they will likely have an argument that they could have helped. Hopefully Klinsmann knows what he's doing leaving them home.

I've been wanting to jump into this thread for a while, but had been too busy to do so until now. Anyway, I can't wait for the start of the World Cup.

As for Gooch, I don't think it's fair to put him in the same boat as Eddie Johnson. Gooch improved tremendously from when he first emerged, reaching his peak at the Confed Cup in 2009 when he, Bocanegra, and the rest of the USA defense somehow managed to hold Spain at bay and reach the finals. That's when he also secured a deal to play with AC Milan. Then, a few months later he tore his ACL, was out for a year, suffered some set backs, and, unfortunately never was able to regain his old form. One of Bob Bradley's big mistakes in South Africa was rushing a rusty and out of form Gooch back to play a big role in the squad.

In fact, because Gooch wasn't really fully fit and ready for World Cup competition in 2010 and because he was the victim of a bogus penalty call against Ghana in 2006, it is easier to overlook just how good he was for a while. He was always unlikely to ever become a truly world class defender, but for my money, his career highs are far beyond Eddie Johnson's, and I think his ACL injury and subsequent set backs were absolutely the reason he didn't find even more success.

Also, I'm with you on liking Gooch more than Johnson from a personal standpoint.

[JohnGalt]

I've been wanting to jump into this thread for a while, but had been too busy to do so until now. Anyway, I can't wait for the start of the World Cup.

As for Gooch, I don't think it's fair to put him in the same boat as Eddie Johnson. Gooch improved tremendously from when he first emerged, reaching his peak at the Confed Cup in 2009 when he, Bocanegra, and the rest of the USA defense somehow managed to hold Spain at bay and reach the finals. That's when he also secured a deal to play with AC Milan. Then, a few months later he tore his ACL, was out for a year, suffered some set backs, and, unfortunately never was able to regain his old form. One of Bob Bradley's big mistakes in South Africa was rushing a rusty and out of form Gooch back to play a big role in the squad.

In fact, because Gooch wasn't really fully fit and ready for World Cup competition in 2010 and because he was the victim of a bogus penalty call against Ghana in 2006, it is easier to overlook just how good he was for a while. He was always unlikely to ever become a truly world class defender, but for my money, his career highs are far beyond Eddie Johnson's, and I think his ACL injury and subsequent set backs were absolutely the reason he didn't find even more success.

Also, I'm with you on liking Gooch more than Johnson from a personal standpoint.

I agree completely that the injury hampered his development, but with one quibble: he ruptured his patella tendon, not his ACL. I think that's a notable distinction because it appears to me the ACL surgeries (ligaments in general, I guess) are much more common than the tendon ones (patella or Achilles). As such, I'd imagine that the timetable for recovery is much better established, as well. I don't have any medical knowledge to back that up...it just seems to be something I've noticed with Gooch being a prime example of my hunch. Anyway, I'd be interested it hear if anyone with a medical background has an opinion.

[COYS]

I agree completely that the injury hampered his development, but with one quibble: he ruptured his patella tendon, not his ACL. I think that's a notable distinction because it appears to me the ACL surgeries (ligaments in general, I guess) are much more common than the tendon ones (patella or Achilles). As such, I'd imagine that the timetable for recovery is much better established, as well. I don't have any medical knowledge to back that up...it just seems to be something I've noticed with Gooch being a prime example of my hunch. Anyway, I'd be interested it hear if anyone with a medical background has an opinion.

You were totally right. My mistake. And, from my non-medical perspective, I've always thought that ruptured patellas are worse than ACL tears.

If I'm not mistaken, Gooch's 3 month run with Sheffield at the end of this year is his longest sustained run of health and good form since that injury. That's a tough run of fitness issues for anyone to overcome.

[A-Tex Devil]

I'm not sure how I feel about this yet. It feels wrong, but if any other player had the last 2 years he did, form wise, I'm not sure I can disagree. JK is clearly looking to 2018 a bit too with this squad.

[CDu]

I'm not sure how I feel about this yet. It feels wrong, but if any other player had the last 2 years he did, form wise, I'm not sure I can disagree. JK is clearly looking to 2018 a bit too with this squad.

I would not have believed 2-3 years ago that Donovan would be off while Beasley would be on the roster.

There is certainly a youth movement on the roster, though. Altidore, Johannson, Green, Yedlin, Brooks, Chandler all under 25.

It is somewhat surprising. There is a lot of talent, but the roster is a bit short on experience for sure.

[Acymetric]

I was initially shocked, but the more I think about it the more it makes sense to me. Landon could certainly help this team, I don't think anybody (coaches included) think he would be ineffective. But he's admitted he can't go all out all the time himself, and we're obviously looking for a "90 minutes of hell" kind of thing. Not necessarily in a high octane high scoring offense, but in the sense that we will be running around, moving and chasing the ball all game. Given the group we have and how we have fared in the past, maybe something this crazy is what we need to go somewhere in this WC. Lets see who steps up and what kind of play we can put together for these guys...the "pundits" claiming this is a huge distraction for the team are way off base if you ask me. If anything, this is just going to lock the guys who made it in, if you got picked over Donovan you know that its time to get serious.

[OldPhiKap]

Would really like to have an experienced play setter and steady foot. Landon has played well the last year. I am not in a position to really second-guess the guys who live this and see it all, but -- did not see his coming.

[JohnGalt]

The real question is what the hell do I do with my Donovan panini now. Leave it blank or still stick him in?

:confused:

[toughbuff1]

I'm not sure how I feel about this yet. It feels wrong, but if any other player had the last 2 years he did, form wise, I'm not sure I can disagree. JK is clearly looking to 2018 a bit too with this squad.

I'm so mad at Klinsmann right now. As far as Landon's form over the last two years, he tied for the Golden Boot, and won the Golden Ball as the best player in the 2013 Gold Cup, and he assisted on the first goal and scored the second goal in the latest dos a cero qualifier against Mexico, which we needed to win to clinch a spot in the World Cup. Tim Howard was interviewed just a couple days ago, and said that Donovan is one of our top two players when he is on the pitch, and is crucial to out advancing out of group G. http://www.goal.com/en-au/news/4034/world-cup-2014/2014/05/21/4831112/donovan-key-to-us-chances-says-howard You can't tell me Julian Green, Brad Davis, or Kyle Beckerman deserve to be there over Donovan, and that's just counting the midfielders.

Klinsmann clearly has had a personal problem with Donovan since Donovans sabbatical at the beginning of 2013. Did you see the since deleted tweet Klinsmann's son posted on twitter? He has to have gotten that animosity from his dad.

http://www.soccerbyives.net/2014/05/klinsmanns-donovans-omission.html

I feel like Klinsmann put his own pride above the national team, and I think it will cost us in Brazil. I hope we go far, but if we don't advance out of the group (which admittedly would have been tough anyway, even with Donovan) Klinsmann deserves to be fired.

[A-Tex Devil]

I feel like Klinsmann put his own pride above the national team, and I think it will cost us in Brazil. I hope we go far, but if we don't advance out of the group (which admittedly would have been tough anyway, even with Donovan) Klinsmann deserves to be fired.

I won't go that far. If we put up a France 1998 showing, then perhaps. But if we get more than a point, and don't get our doors blown off, I frankly see that as respectable [edit: originally said "success". It would not be a success] in this group regardless of whether LD was on the team or not.

I get that LD looked good in the Gold Cup (note... it was the Gold Cup), and against Mexico. But he's been average to apathetic in the MLS this year. That said, I still do struggle to grasp how he isn't in the top 23 over Brad Davis and Wondo (who has scored exactly one goal against a quality team for the USMNT). I'm not saying those guys haven't played well enough to earn a spot, but not over Landon, I don't think.

That said, it's done, and LD is still an alternate, so this may all be moot if someone gets injured in the lead up. Although based on what JK is saying, it would have to be a forward because he doesn't see LD as an attacking mid anymore apparently -- also puzzling, but I'm the amateur.

[cato]

I am a very casual fan of US Soccer -- I watch the World Cup games and key qualifiers, but that is about it. I am not at all qualified to opine on Landon being left off the squad.

So, a question: if Landon had been included, would he have started? If the answer is no, then I could see why a coach may wanted to leave him off the team.

At any rate, I will always have great memories of Landon. I recall watching him in the qualifying game at Foxboro against Jamaica in the run-up to the 2002 world cup. That was October 2001! We heard about airstrikes in Afganistan while waiting to get into the stadium.

And, of course, there was the 2010 goal against Algeria. I was holding my weeks-old daughter, pacing the room, watching time expire. I was so delerious when he scored that I almost threw her in the air and dropped her. (Well, I did throw her in the air, but I came to my senses and caught her).

It is sad to see these guys left off the team, but we have a coach for a reason. Hopefully he knows what he is doing.

ETA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=k29wBfLmNP0

[COYS]

That said, it's done, and LD is still an alternate, so this may all be moot if someone gets injured in the lead up. Although based on what JK is saying, it would have to be a forward because he doesn't see LD as an attacking mid anymore apparently -- also puzzling, but I'm the amateur.

This from the coach who thought Danny Williams was a winger, didn't bother to call Bradley in for a few games and when he did call him in, made him play wide on the right at first, thought Eddie Johnson was a left winger, and actually played Jones, Williams, and Bradley together in the midfield at the same time.

I don't think Klinsmann is incompetent, and the USMNT had a great run last year in qualifying and the Gold Cup. However, when he first took over, he had, um, interesting ideas about the best positions for players in the pool.

Basically, I'm pretty upset about Landon being left off. If Donovan is too slow to play the wing now (he's not. That's total BS), then how is Brad Davis on the team? He and Yedlin would make the worst right sided midfield in the World Cup. They won't sniff the field (they better not). Even a diminished Donovan is better than both those guys. (I'm not trashing Davis and Yedlin. I like Davis' abilities to deliver in set pieces and Yedlin is full of potential, but they are not ready for the WC).

[cato]

This from the coach who thought Danny Williams was a winger, didn't bother to call Bradley in for a few games and when he did call him in, made him play wide on the right at first, thought Eddie Johnson was a left winger, and actually played Jones, Williams, and Bradley together in the midfield at the same time.

I don't think Klinsmann is incompetent, and the USMNT had a great run last year in qualifying and the Gold Cup. However, when he first took over, he had, um, interesting ideas about the best positions for players in the pool.

Basically, I'm pretty upset about Landon being left off. If Donovan is too slow to play the wing now (he's not. That's total BS), then how is Brad Davis on the team? He and Yedlin would make the worst right sided midfield in the World Cup. They won't sniff the field (they better not). Even a diminished Donovan is better than both those guys. (I'm not trashing Davis and Yedlin. I like Davis' abilities to deliver in set pieces and Yedlin is full of potential, but they are not ready for the WC).

If Donovan were included on the team, do you think he would have started?

[COYS]

If Donovan were included on the team, do you think he would have started?

To be honest, I'd be fine with him not starting if that's how things worked out. I'd even be fine with him not playing at all but at least being available in case of yellow card accumulation or injury during the competition.

That being said, not having Donovan gives us far fewer options on the wings. Unless Johnson is going to move to the left wing and Beasley (a lesser left back) starts at left back, there are no great options for us to give us speed AND defense on both wings. Davis is slow. Zusi is not fast. Bedoya is a hard worker and the best defender of the group but he can only play one side. I hope he plays the left because allowing Johnson to make overlapping runs and attack with the confidence that his left midfield partner will get back on defense if necessary is essential. Johnson is often overlooked but is also one of our most important players. Donovan, with his defensive ability, is a perfect fit with Johnson on the left, even as a sub off the bench.

Also, if either Zusi or Bedoya need to come off or aren't able to start, then there are NO proven wingers left on the roster. Green certainly has potential to be world class. But he hasn't sniffed Donovan's success, yet. He also has hardly played for the USA and is not defensive oriented, at all. Davis is simply too slow and old for the World Cup and, quite frankly, even at his peak, wasn't a number one or two option. Again, the only option that makes sense to me is to put Beasley in at LB and move Johnson to LM, which means we really better hope that Johnson can play 90 min or more every single match.

I'd dislike the move just a little less if Corona had been included instead of Mix. I hate cutting Mix, but in the absence of Donovan, Corona's ability to be a creative force on the right and in the center makes him a bigger asset, in my opinion.

I just really feel like the team's options are more limited and our ceiling is lower. We can still advance with some luck (it would always take some luck), but I feel strongly that whatever problems Klinsmann and Donovan are/were having should not have had Donovan stay home in favor of Yedlin and Davis. Now he's not even an option off the bench or in a pinch.

[blazindw]

I don't think the question is whether Donovan would have started. I think even Donovan would tell you he was unlikely to start. The question is, we're facing Portugal in the jungle of Manaus, we're down a goal and a goal keeps our World Cup chances alive. In the 70th minute, who do you call in? I think most fans would want Donovan to be available to be called at that major moment. Saying it's likely going to be Davis or Green--the latter of whom has a grand total of 32 minutes of action with the national team or in the last 2 months--is what has people up in arms.

Also, the 23 you take should be the best 23 you got at those various positions. Few believe JK when he says that all the midfielders and forwards that we have on the 23 are better than Donovan or even Boyd (who would have served as direct backup to Jozy if we need someone up front who can score in the air or be a back to the basket player). That just doesn't ring true.

[cato]

I don't think the question is whether Donovan would have started. I think even Donovan would tell you he was unlikely to start. The question is, we're facing Portugal in the jungle of Manaus, we're down a goal and a goal keeps our World Cup chances alive. In the 70th minute, who do you call in? I think most fans would want Donovan to be available to be called at that major moment.

I'm not sure I buy the premise. I could see the coach deciding it's counterproductive to bring back the former alpha player to sit on the bench.

Using your analogy, which is better for the first 70 minutes? Perhaps a team who isn't thinking about the most prolific scorer sitting on the bench.

[COYS]

I'm not sure I buy the premise. I could see the coach deciding it's counterproductive to bring back the former alpha player to sit on the bench.

Using your analogy, which is better for the first 70 minutes? Perhaps a team who isn't thinking about the most prolific scorer sitting on the bench.

I don't buy the idea that the team would be distracted by having Donovan sitting on the bench. You really think experienced professionals (and accomplished players in their own right) like Howard, Bradley, Dempsey, Jones, Johnson, etc. are going to play poorly because Donovan is on the sidelines? No way.

I get that Donovan isn't as good as he used to be. He's still better and more versatile than Davis and he is WAAAAAY more likely to be able to make a difference on the pitch than someone like Yedlin is. As I said in a previous post, the United States can still advance out of the group with some luck. But the ceiling of the team is lower if Donovan is not available even as an emergency option. Zusi and Bedoya absolutely must stay healthy and avoid yellow cards.

[blazindw]

I don't buy the idea that the team would be distracted by having Donovan sitting on the bench. You really think experienced professionals (and accomplished players in their own right) like Howard, Bradley, Dempsey, Jones, Johnson, etc. are going to play poorly because Donovan is on the sidelines? No way.

I get that Donovan isn't as good as he used to be. He's still better and more versatile than Davis and he is WAAAAAY more likely to be able to make a difference on the pitch than someone like Yedlin is. As I said in a previous post, the United States can still advance out of the group with some luck. But the ceiling of the team is lower if Donovan is not available even as an emergency option. Zusi and Bedoya absolutely must stay healthy and avoid yellow cards.

I agree with that. And it's now coming out that players like Brad Evans were training the entire time at positions that they don't normally play at for the national team or club, which leads one to suspect--whether wrong or right--that JK had his mind made up before he came to camp about who his 23 were going to be.

[gumbomoop]

I'm disappointed in JK's decision. And I guess I'm disinclined to credit fully the rationale offered in this piece. But it's worth a look, and perhaps some of you can comment on this perspective.

http://www.mlssoccer.com/worldcup/2014/news/article/2014/05/23/smorgasborg-five-reasons-why-jurgen-klinsmann-left-landon-donovan-his-world-?utm_source=Outbrain&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=web&utm_campaign=Paid

[blazindw]

I'm disappointed in JK's decision. And I guess I'm disinclined to credit fully the rationale offered in this piece. But it's worth a look, and perhaps some of you can comment on this perspective.

http://www.mlssoccer.com/worldcup/2014/news/article/2014/05/23/smorgasborg-five-reasons-why-jurgen-klinsmann-left-landon-donovan-his-world-?utm_source=Outbrain&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=web&utm_campaign=Paid

I don't hold a lot of credence to the possibility the media would jump on Klinsmann for not starting Donovan in Brazil. Most people that I know in the soccer world did not expect him to start for this team. But, just look at the press conference that Klinsmann had on Friday about the team. Almost every question was about Donovan not being on the team. If we drop any points in Brazil, expect that those questions to intensify worse than any questions about him not being in the starting lineup.

As for the other things, tactics are one thing that you can always argue a player doesn't fit. But tactics can also be abandoned or altered, and they are every single match when you introduce a substitute.

Landon Donovan may not be 2006 or 2010 Landon Donovan. But, in my mind, he is one of the best 23 players we got. Opinions may obviously vary, but in my world, he's better than 4-5 players on the 23. And you want that on the team. If it was personal or that Klinsmann didn't trust Donovan, then he should just out and say that and people would be okay with it. Different coaches, different players that he loves and all that. But this whole "there are better players than him" mess just doesn't hold water with anyone who closely follows the team.

[Acymetric]

I don't buy the idea that the team would be distracted by having Donovan sitting on the bench. You really think experienced professionals (and accomplished players in their own right) like Howard, Bradley, Dempsey, Jones, Johnson, etc. are going to play poorly because Donovan is on the sidelines? No way.

I get that Donovan isn't as good as he used to be. He's still better and more versatile than Davis and he is WAAAAAY more likely to be able to make a difference on the pitch than someone like Yedlin is. As I said in a previous post, the United States can still advance out of the group with some luck. But the ceiling of the team is lower if Donovan is not available even as an emergency option. Zusi and Bedoya absolutely must stay healthy and avoid yellow cards.

Its not just that he isn't as good as he used to be, its that Brazil plays directly to Landon's weaknesses (conditioning, going full throttle in less than optimal conditions). Keep in mind he wasn't competing with Yedlin for a spot, they play completely different positions and you have to have depth all over the field. He was basically competing against two guys and lost out.

As far as professionals like the ones you listed not being bothered with him there but on the bench, I'm not so sure. It is one thing to say that Donovan would have accepted his lesser role (I think he would have), but would the rest of the team have accepted it, or, down 2 goals in the second half would they be looking over to see if Donovan was on his way to save the day (which he can't anymore). Tim Howard said soon after Landon was cut that he is one of the 2 best players on the field for the US when he plays. That is a problem, and it isn't even true...you will have a hard time convincing me that both Dempsey and Bradley aren't better at this point in their careers than Donovan, and although not as relevant since he isn't running the field I would say Howard is better as well. So Donovan is 4th best (at best), but guys as experienced and with leadership responsibilities such as Howard do not see it that way. That is a problem for team chemistry. Now the guys on the squad know that Donovan isn't going to be the one to step up and save the day which wouldn't really have been likely even if he came. Better that the guys on the field a month from now know that the only people they can count on to get it done is themselves. Time to get focused.

This is all not to say that Donovan isn't a good piece, he could contribute almost certainly but he is no longer a game changer. His speed is gone and he was never particularly crafty on ball, so now he is left essentially as a good passer with good vision (feel free to replace good with great but that only applies if you compare him to US players, WC is a global competition. Good is appropriate). We have other midfielders who can handle that, which is why he was competing with forwards. Tough but correct call mentally for the team and tactically. And we are going to have a tough time finding success this go 'round no matter who we bring.

[gurufrisbee]

Donovan not being a starter is far less of a distraction than him not even being on the team. So that argument is bogus.

The excellent point has already been made, but yes, even if he is not a starter (and half of them won't be), he is so valuable to be able to bring in as a sub.

There is a good chance 2-3 of these guys never see a minute of game action in Brazil - unless they lead the US to WINNING the World Cup in 2018, I'll never believe the experience they gained just being on the team in 14 was more valuable than having the talent and experience of LD.

[ICP]

Donovan not being a starter is far less of a distraction than him not even being on the team. So that argument is bogus.

The excellent point has already been made, but yes, even if he is not a starter (and half of them won't be), he is so valuable to be able to bring in as a sub.

There is a good chance 2-3 of these guys never see a minute of game action in Brazil - unless they lead the US to WINNING the World Cup in 2018, I'll never believe the experience they gained just being on the team in 14 was more valuable than having the talent and experience of LD.

Using an experienced player as a sub can be tricky... Such veteran players, particularly in soccer, have strong personalities who don't take kindly to just playing 10-20 min a game, so maybe Klinsi felt that having him on board would a potential distraction, and lead to unproductive debates of the "why didn't you put Donovan as a starter/insert him earlier?" type... Team chemistry is a funny thing, and there is something to be said for going with young players who click well with one-another, even if Donovan is more talented than some of them. Addition by subtraction, if you will.

[COYS]

Its not just that he isn't as good as he used to be, its that Brazil plays directly to Landon's weaknesses (conditioning, going full throttle in less than optimal conditions). Keep in mind he wasn't competing with Yedlin for a spot, they play completely different positions and you have to have depth all over the field. He was basically competing against two guys and lost out.

As far as professionals like the ones you listed not being bothered with him there but on the bench, I'm not so sure. It is one thing to say that Donovan would have accepted his lesser role (I think he would have), but would the rest of the team have accepted it, or, down 2 goals in the second half would they be looking over to see if Donovan was on his way to save the day (which he can't anymore). Tim Howard said soon after Landon was cut that he is one of the 2 best players on the field for the US when he plays. That is a problem, and it isn't even true...you will have a hard time convincing me that both Dempsey and Bradley aren't better at this point in their careers than Donovan, and although not as relevant since he isn't running the field I would say Howard is better as well. So Donovan is 4th best (at best), but guys as experienced and with leadership responsibilities such as Howard do not see it that way. That is a problem for team chemistry. Now the guys on the squad know that Donovan isn't going to be the one to step up and save the day which wouldn't really have been likely even if he came. Better that the guys on the field a month from now know that the only people they can count on to get it done is themselves. Time to get focused.

This is all not to say that Donovan isn't a good piece, he could contribute almost certainly but he is no longer a game changer. His speed is gone and he was never particularly crafty on ball, so now he is left essentially as a good passer with good vision (feel free to replace good with great but that only applies if you compare him to US players, WC is a global competition. Good is appropriate). We have other midfielders who can handle that, which is why he was competing with forwards. Tough but correct call mentally for the team and tactically. And we are going to have a tough time finding success this go 'round no matter who we bring.

Yedlin is totally a throw-in. Between Chandler, Cameron, Beasley, and Johnson the fullback spots are fine. There would have been no shame dropping Yedlin for Donovan, even though they play different positions.

The rest of your post concerning chemistry is speculation that really doesn't add up. The team has won with and without Donovan in the lineup over the past few years. They've won with him sitting on the bench for entire halves of the match and they've own with him winning the Golden Boot in the Gold Cup. Of course the other experienced players are complimentary to Donovan. But, quite frankly, this has been Bradley's team for a long time. And yes, Dempsey has been in better form of late, but he had a horrible past year. He didn't do well or play much at Spurs the entire second half of last season, had a lackluster return to MLS, and has only recentl gotten on a hot streak. Donovan had a great season last year, a terrific Gold Cup, and seems to be a little off form now. You say he's two steps slower but I am certain he is still faster than Davis. He's better in possession that Davis (Davis' passing on anything but set pieces leaves a lot to be desired) and he still puts in a higher workrate.

Meanwhile, Yedlin has been completely mediocre this season and has never shown that he can even reach the level of Donovan's current underwhelming form. And, as mentioned before, we already have plenty of cover along the back line.

We might just have to agree to disagree on this one, but I just don't understand how even a Donovan with diminished skills is dropped in favor of Yedlin and Davis. I also think our midfield is now very thin, as I talked about in a previous post.

I'm rooting for the guys with my whole heart, obviously. I'm also hoping that everyone steps up and makes Klinsmann look like a genius. I'd rather be proven wrong than right. I don't even have a problem with a starting 11 that didn't include Donovan. I just think not including Donovan in the squad ultimately gives us fewer midfield options and makes us weaker, over all.

[awhom111]

I guess Bruce Arena sent Klinsmann a thank you note after tonight's game.

[Acymetric]

Yedlin is totally a throw-in. Between Chandler, Cameron, Beasley, and Johnson the fullback spots are fine. There would have been no shame dropping Yedlin for Donovan, even though they play different positions.

The rest of your post concerning chemistry is speculation that really doesn't add up. The team has won with and without Donovan in the lineup over the past few years. They've won with him sitting on the bench for entire halves of the match and they've own with him winning the Golden Boot in the Gold Cup. Of course the other experienced players are complimentary to Donovan. But, quite frankly, this has been Bradley's team for a long time. And yes, Dempsey has been in better form of late, but he had a horrible past year. He didn't do well or play much at Spurs the entire second half of last season, had a lackluster return to MLS, and has only recentl gotten on a hot streak. Donovan had a great season last year, a terrific Gold Cup, and seems to be a little off form now. You say he's two steps slower but I am certain he is still faster than Davis. He's better in possession that Davis (Davis' passing on anything but set pieces leaves a lot to be desired) and he still puts in a higher workrate.

Meanwhile, Yedlin has been completely mediocre this season and has never shown that he can even reach the level of Donovan's current underwhelming form. And, as mentioned before, we already have plenty of cover along the back line.

We might just have to agree to disagree on this one, but I just don't understand how even a Donovan with diminished skills is dropped in favor of Yedlin and Davis. I also think our midfield is now very thin, as I talked about in a previous post.

I'm rooting for the guys with my whole heart, obviously. I'm also hoping that everyone steps up and makes Klinsmann look like a genius. I'd rather be proven wrong than right. I don't even have a problem with a starting 11 that didn't include Donovan. I just think not including Donovan in the squad ultimately gives us fewer midfield options and makes us weaker, over all.

Comparing the World Cup to the Gold Cup and various friendlies is apples to oranges. Landon excelled in the gold cup, certainly, but against who? Mexico's B team? Their squad fell completely off the rails, so I'm not sure a strong performance against their backups is compelling evidence to bring him along.

Look, I'm not saying that leaving Landon home was clearly the right decision, or even probably. I'm just sick of the hand wringing and conspiracy theories. There are good, reasonable reasons not to have him on the squad, but damn near everyone is running around like chicken little with this sky is falling attitude like its the worst decision in sports history.

And keep in mind, people keep pointing to "last year" and the gold cup, but for an aging player a year can be an awful long time. If those games took place today would he have the same success he had a year ago? The MLS does not have Klinsman's, the world's, or my respect with regards to high quality soccer...there are a lot of players who play at a "high level" in our domestic league that wouldn't even sniff success internationally (coincidentally, you can look to any adventure overseas from Landon Donovan for evidence). Calling up players from MLS is like USA basketball calling in guys playing professionally in Turkey and France, unfortunately we don't have the talent pool to pull from anywhere else. I was and still am disappointed that Dempsey ended up back stateside, but at least he showed that he belonged in Europe for a significant part of his career. Donovan was either never driven enough or never skilled enough to do that (its pretty obvious which, and it may inform this discussion that this deficiency may have cost Klinsman his job years back...team USA is not his first experience coaching Landon).

Also, although you kind of glossed over it as though it was totally insignificant, I would be curious to get your take on Howard believing that Donovan is currently one of the two best USA players straight up. He can't be the only one who believes that, and as I mentioned in my first post I think that is a far bigger problem then wondering whether Landon himself could accept a lesser role on the team. Having guys looking to a hero who is no longer a hero on the field is a problem.

[gumbomoop]

The MLS does not have Klinsman's, the world's, or my respect with regards to high quality soccer...there are a lot of players who play at a "high level" in our domestic league that wouldn't even sniff success internationally (coincidentally, you can look to any adventure overseas from Landon Donovan for evidence). Calling up players from MLS is like USA basketball calling in guys playing professionally in Turkey and France, unfortunately we don't have the talent pool to pull from anywhere else. I was and still am disappointed that Dempsey ended up back stateside, but at least he showed that he belonged in Europe for a significant part of his career. Donovan was either never driven enough or never skilled enough to do that (its pretty obvious which, and it may inform this discussion that this deficiency may have cost Kinsman his job years back...team USA is not his first experience coaching Landon).

Although Donovan's several adventures in Germany were unsuccessful, he displayed plenty of skill during two loan spells with Everton in the EPL. He was Everton's Player of the Month in January 2010, and the Toffees definitely wanted to extend his loan, but the Galaxy said no. He went back to Everton on a short loan in Jan 2012, and recorded an impressive 7 assists, including in victories against Man City and Chelsea. No one at Everton thought him a disappointment. Quite the opposite.

These facts don't by themselves negate your overall point. I, too, have low regard for the overall quality of the MLS, though if I lived in an MLS city, I'm sure I'd be excited to attend a few games.

As for how Donovan's absence will affect the US performance in its Group of Death, maybe not much. It's tough, tough sledding, and would be even if Donovan were on the team and at his Everton-best.

[A-Tex Devil]

I guess Bruce Arena sent Klinsmann a thank you note after tonight's game.

Speaking of which, Arena didn't do Landon any favors by not allowing him to go to England during the loan period this year.

I'm over it. I believe Landon probably should have made it, but I also wasn't in camp, and am not one for tenure treatment in sports when there are real stakes, coaches or players.

[OldPhiKap]

I'm over it. I believe Landon probably should have made it, but I also wasn't in camp, and am not one for tenure treatment in sports when there are real stakes, coaches or players.

That is kinda where I come out. Ad someone who always says that Our MBB minutes are rightly decided by the coaches who are there every day, same applies here. Wish DL was on the team, but so be it. I have been happy with our new(ish) coach, his call to make.

[COYS]

That is kinda where I come out. Ad someone who always says that Our MBB minutes are rightly decided by the coaches who are there every day, same applies here. Wish DL was on the team, but so be it. I have been happy with our new(ish) coach, his call to make.

I don't think comparing how Coach K, one of the indisputably best college basketball coaches of all time, awards playing time vs. how Klinsmann, a coach with a mixed bag of results (success with an extremely talented German national team in 2006 but a rocky time at Bayern Munich) is really fair. Klinsmann's tenure as coach of the USMNT started off very rocky and he made some very questionable roster selections early on. If not or dempsey's heroics, we could have even missed the Hexagonal round of qualifying. That being said, he's done a lot to expand the player pool and he learned from his early roster mistakes which helped us roll over the qualifying competition last year in the Hex.

However, leaving Donovan off the roster reminds me a lot more of his earlier roster decisions (like freezing Bradley out at first) than it does his more pragmatic decisions from last year. I have a hard time simply being at peace with it. There is no real justification for it considering the players that replaced Donovan on the roster. And Klinsmann doesn't have 35 years of success like K does for me to give him the benefit of the doubt. I like the USA team. I think we can still surprise people and advance. But that doesn't change the fact that Donovan would have improved the team. To be honest, I'm surprised anyone is really defending the decision. The USA roster is not Brazil's. Yes, Donovan is older and slower than he once was. No, he's not worse than Davis or Yedlin (or for that matter, Zusi or Bedoya) yet. If we had youngsters who were clearly better than an aging star, then replace him. But we don't. Davis and Yedlin play decently well in MLS, not a top European league. Davis, one of the guys who replaced him on the roster, is a bit older and a LOT slower and has never once in his career been as good. And all the chemistry concerns are pure speculation and fly in the face of the history of the past year where the USMNT won with and without Donovan (but looked better in a lot of the matches with him). So what if Donovan never became a star in Europe? So what if he hasn't dominated MLS this season like he has every other year? He's still one of the top options for the USMNT and he should be on the plane.

[A-Tex Devil]

I don't think comparing how Coach K, one of the indisputably best college basketball coaches of all time, awards playing time vs. how Klinsmann, a coach with a mixed bag of results (success with an extremely talented German national team in 2006 but a rocky time at Bayern Munich) is really fair. Klinsmann's tenure as coach of the USMNT started off very rocky and he made some very questionable roster selections early on. If not or dempsey's heroics, we could have even missed the Hexagonal round of qualifying. That being said, he's done a lot to expand the player pool and he learned from his early roster mistakes which helped us roll over the qualifying competition last year in the Hex.

However, leaving Donovan off the roster reminds me a lot more of his earlier roster decisions (like freezing Bradley out at first) than it does his more pragmatic decisions from last year. I have a hard time simply being at peace with it. There is no real justification for it considering the players that replaced Donovan on the roster. And Klinsmann doesn't have 35 years of success like K does for me to give him the benefit of the doubt. I like the USA team. I think we can still surprise people and advance. But that doesn't change the fact that Donovan would have improved the team. To be honest, I'm surprised anyone is really defending the decision. The USA roster is not Brazil's. Yes, Donovan is older and slower than he once was. No, he's not worse than Davis or Yedlin (or for that matter, Zusi or Bedoya) yet. If we had youngsters who were clearly better than an aging star, then replace him. But we don't. Davis and Yedlin play decently well in MLS, not a top European league. Davis, one of the guys who replaced him on the roster, is a bit older and a LOT slower and has never once in his career been as good. And all the chemistry concerns are pure speculation and fly in the face of the history of the past year where the USMNT won with and without Donovan (but looked better in a lot of the matches with him). So what if Donovan never became a star in Europe? So what if he hasn't dominated MLS this season like he has every other year? He's still one of the top options for the USMNT and he should be on the plane.

I don't know... Davis and Zusi has been objectively better than Donovam this year in MLS, even if they don't compare to LD at his peak. Yedlin isn't in the conversation. I disagree that we don't need depth on the back line, and if you are upset with Yedlin, it was because you felt Evans, Parkhurst or Goodson should be on the team, which is fair. Bedoya was really good this year in Ligue 1 which is a several steps ahead of MLS.

Wondo and Green in that order kept LD off the team. I'm not a big Wondo guy unless it's off the bench, and even then, he's an easy handle for all back lines in our group. Green is a head scratcher, and the conspiracy theorist in me might think this was a guaranteed spot for a USMNT commitment. But he is also supposed to be better than any of the guys on our current squad at that age, and I seem to remember some youngsters on that successful 2002 squad.

My guess is that LD coasted through camp with the expectation he would make the team. Or he simply didn't play/practice well. It sucks, and I have my doubts it was the correct call. But if Donovan made a clear case in camp to be on the 23, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[COYS]

I don't know... Davis and Zusi has been objectively better than Donovam this year in MLS, even if they don't compare to LD at his peak. Yedlin isn't in the conversation. I disagree that we don't need depth on the back line, and if you are upset with Yedlin, it was because you felt Evans, Parkhurst or Goodson should be on the team, which is fair. Bedoya was really good this year in Ligue 1 which is a several steps ahead of MLS.

Wondo and Green in that order kept LD off the team. I'm not a big Wondo guy unless it's off the bench, and even then, he's an easy handle for all back lines in our group. Green is a head scratcher, and the conspiracy theorist in me might think this was a guaranteed spot for a USMNT commitment. But he is also supposed to be better than any of the guys on our current squad at that age, and I seem to remember some youngsters on that successful 2002 squad.

My guess is that LD coasted through camp with the expectation he would make the team. Or he simply didn't play/practice well. It sucks, and I have my doubts it was the correct call. But if Donovan made a clear case in camp to be on the 23, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I wish I believed the last sentence in your post. If I did, then I wouldn't be so worried. To me, the whole "Donovan is only a forward and can't play the wing anymore" is nonsense. He's faster and has more defensive ability than Davis. To cut Donovan before we even play any of the tuneup friendlies only reinforces my suspicion that Donovan did not have a chance no matter what he did in camp.

But I guess I just have to live with it. All I can say is that Klinsmann better be right.

[COYS]

I don't know... Davis and Zusi has been objectively better than Donovam this year in MLS, even if they don't compare to LD at his peak. Yedlin isn't in the conversation. I disagree that we don't need depth on the back line, and if you are upset with Yedlin, it was because you felt Evans, Parkhurst or Goodson should be on the team, which is fair. Bedoya was really good this year in Ligue 1 which is a several steps ahead of MLS.

Wondo and Green in that order kept LD off the team. I'm not a big Wondo guy unless it's off the bench, and even then, he's an easy handle for all back lines in our group. Green is a head scratcher, and the conspiracy theorist in me might think this was a guaranteed spot for a USMNT commitment. But he is also supposed to be better than any of the guys on our current squad at that age, and I seem to remember some youngsters on that successful 2002 squad.

My guess is that LD coasted through camp with the expectation he would make the team. Or he simply didn't play/practice well. It sucks, and I have my doubts it was the correct call. But if Donovan made a clear case in camp to be on the 23, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Also, I'd just like to add that I don't think Davis has been objectively better than Donovan this year in MLS. I think Davis has been pretty good but Donovan has still created more scoring opportunities for his team, even if he hasn't had the goals scored or the assist numbers he's had in the past. Donovan also still has a higher workrate, which is essential if the USMNT is going to play a true diamond midfield and if Klinsmann wants his fullbacks to surge forward, like he usually does.

Basically, I don't care if Donovan doesn't start. Bedoya and Zusi are good players and deserve their chance. But it's still dubious to me to argue that Davis is a better international soccer player than Donovan. Still, since Donovan won't be there, I hope he sends one of his patented free kicks into the back of the net or sets up Jozy for a great header.

At the end of the day, I'm going to have to learn to live with it. But I still feel that all the evidence points toward this being a terrible decision that does not serve US soccer well.

[throatybeard]

Figured this was the best place to put this...some of you have seen the new ESPN commercial, "I Believe," that showcases U.S. fans. Well, some of you may recognize the guy at the 0:18 mark and the voice that carries the commercial after that. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pjliE37ENY

I have seen the commercial many times, and I was almost certain that was you (despite how quickly the jump cut occurs), but I hadn't asked, or logged in here in a little while. Congratulations! You're like, way more famous than Viking Guy now. Soccer is global.

[blazindw]

I have seen the commercial many times, and I was almost certain that was you (despite how quickly the jump cut occurs), but I hadn't asked, or logged in here in a little while. Congratulations! You're like, way more famous than Viking Guy now. Soccer is global.

Haha, thanks bud! I'm not global...not yet. I stand here 19 days from my departure from IAH for Natal...then I will be truly global!

[toughbuff1]

Just in case anyone is unaware, we have a pre-World Cup friendly tonight against Azerbaijan at 10:00 on ESPN2.

[A-Tex Devil]

Just in case anyone is unaware, we have a pre-World Cup friendly tonight against Azerbaijan at 10:00 on ESPN2.

I gotta believe we'll see a lot of Green tonight and in these friendlies, or else, what's the point? Excited to see it. From what I'm reading, the starting 11 may be looking something like this.

Howard
FJ Besler Cameron Chandler
Jones Bradley
Bedoya Zusi
Dempsey
Altidore

The back four has potential to be very good (I mean... relatively... for a U.S. squad), but I don't think they've ever played together. Plus I don't think that's FJ's preferred side.

[COYS]

I gotta believe we'll see a lot of Green tonight and in these friendlies, or else, what's the point? Excited to see it. From what I'm reading, the starting 11 may be looking something like this.

Howard
FJ Besler Cameron Chandler
Jones Bradley
Bedoya Zusi
Dempsey
Altidore

The back four has potential to be very good (I mean... relatively... for a U.S. squad), but I don't think they've ever played together. Plus I don't think that's FJ's preferred side.

The back four could be really good, but there are definitely some chemistry concerns. Besler and FJ are almost always solid, though, and Cameron and Chandler are talented, even if Cameron's been playing more right back than centerback of late. I hope they look solid. Personally, I'll be happy not having to rely on Gonzales as he seems to be prone to mental errors at the most inopportune times, despite his impressive physical gifts.

I also hope that the midfield takes more of a diamond shape. In my estimation, the USA is at it's best when Bradley has the freedom to play box to box. In the past when he and Jones have partnered, Jones tends to take a few ill-advised forays up the pitch, forcing Bradley to play a little bit more in his own half than I'd like. He can still be deadly from a deep lying role, but his strength in possession, passing ability, and late runs into the box are all a lot more deadly when he's not worried about his midfield partner leaving the back line exposed.

My other big wish is that we are able to give Jozy a few good opportunities and that he puts one or two away. He had such an amazing season last year at AZ and last summer with the USMNT it's hard to believe just how rough his season at Sunderland was. Granted, a LOT of that had to do with the fact that Sunderland's midfield almost never created any chances for him, but still, it was an ugly year. Clint Dempsey has been heating up in MLS, so it would be nice to get Jozy back to his goal scoring ways.

[OldPhiKap]

Just in case anyone is unaware, we have a pre-World Cup friendly tonight against Azerbaijan at 10:00 on ESPN2.

Wow, too windy to finish the National Anthem!

Too windy for Clint Dempsey too, apparently.

[A-Tex Devil]

Why are we wearing Costa Rica's uniforms?

[OldPhiKap]

Hard game to watch through 30

[tbyers11]

Why are we wearing Costa Rica's uniforms?

I just turned on the game and my first thought was also "what the heck are we wearing?" Our players look like a bunch of upside down Bomb Pops. DISLIKE.

I googled the home unis and while a bit boring and Wimbledon-like I like them much better than the road uniforms.

4139

[OldPhiKap]

Looks cold -- must be summer in Frisco.

[awhom111]

Looks cold -- must be summer in Frisco.

Funny, because I think it was unseasonably warm here today. I just wonder why we have to prolong Candlestick's existence? Nostalgia sets in when it comes time to throw something in the trash?

[throatybeard]

Soccer lingo is so hilarious.

If a game that doesn't count is a "friendly," does that mean one that does count is an "unfriendly?"

"So we're playing an 'up yours' against Ghana next month..."

[budwom]

Looks cold -- must be summer in Frisco.

ooh, they don't like it when you call it Frisco! Get's 'em touchy for some reason.

[COYS]

The announcers mentioned that Klinsmann had the squad training hard right up until match day, which hopefully explains some of the tired legs. Players that are usually really sharp like Bradley and Johnson were just a little bit off kilter, last night. Bedoya also looked a little out of sorts. I'm pretty certain that all of these guys will improve moving forward. Despite not scoring, I thought Jozy actually looked pretty good. He was strong and physical and did a pretty good job with his hold up play. I would have liked to see him put his shot on target after that nifty trap/spin he did at the top of the box in the second half. He just didn't quite get his foot over the ball. Still, it was a reminder of what he is capable of when he's at his best.

Brad Davis also looked good. Despite my continued insistence that I'd rather have Donovan over Davis (if that's what it comes down to), Davis played well. He was better in possession than he usually is. Plus, His delivery on Johansson's goal was, as always, impeccable (although, seriously, no Azerbaijani players even bothered to move in Johnansson's direction . . . that will be the easiest goal he'll ever score). The differences between Davis and Donovan were obvious at one point, though. Davis laid a nifty pass into Jozy's path at one point in the second half. Jozy deftly first-touched it back to him and Davis was, for a moment, just a whisker ahead of his defender. Where Donovan would be able to accelerate and get away from the defense, Davis was quickly overtaken and lost the ball. Oh well, if Davis keeps delivering high quality service on set pieces and the defense continues to leave Johansson unmarked, I guess I can't complain =).

Also, just for future reference, if for some reason Dempsey can't line up with the starters, I like Johansson playing off of Jozy more than Wandolowski. Wando has had a great run, but he really doesn't create any extra space for Jozy nor does he make particularly great runs off of Jozy when he gets the ball. He's also inferior in hold up play. His size means he's always a threat to score on a header (and he almost did, twice!), but things opened up for Jozy and the attack when Diskerud and Johansson entered.

As for the match against Turkey, I'm betting the defense will actually have something to do. Besler looked oddly unsettled at first. Maybe that's because he was playing next to Cameron for only the second time? Gonzales looked ok when he came into the game. He was his usual athletic self and didn't make any horrible errors. He did go to ground inadvisably a few times, trying to win the ball. Against the likes of Ronaldo and Podolski, that probably won't turn out to well. Also, while I really like the idea of giving the talented Chandler every chance to play, I'm also torn because I think Johnson is the better player, over all, and he's just looked so much better on the left than the right. Similarly, with Bedoya looking better on the right than on the left, a part of me wants to see Chandler-Besler-Gonzales-Cameron as the back four with Johnson moving up to left midfield where he has excelled in the past. Then, one of either Bedoya or Zusi (probably Zusi) starts on the right with Bedoya and his defensive ability able to come in to bring some relief to our wingers who will be keeping up with some of the best in the business game in and game out in the group stage. I think it's far more likely we'll continue to see the same back line, which in theory should be capable of great things. I just want to see Johnson at his best, as I've always believed him to be an underrated player and a key for the team. He just hasn't looked his best on the right for the national team, despite playing there at the club level quite frequently.

[OldPhiKap]

ooh, they don't like it when you call it Frisco! Get's 'em touchy for some reason.

"San Fran" is probably right out, then, too.

[awhom111]

"San Fran" is probably right out, then, too.

Frisco is a city in Texas.

I was going to let OPK slide since we are on good terms. I may or may not send chatbot after him now.

[OldPhiKap]

Frisco is a city in Texas.

I was going to let OPK slide since we are on good terms. I may or may not send chatbot after him now.

"There's some satisfaction
In the San Francisco rain;
No matter what comes down
The Mission always looks the same.

Come again.

Walking along
In The Mission
In the rain.

Come again . . . ."

-- Robert Hunter, and some dude who played guitar

[greybeard]

A few things.

First and foremost, I don't think that Klinsman was hired primarily to get this year's world cup team as far as it can go. We all know that that couldn't have been seen as being very far. Nope, Klinsman was hired to build a team that compete with the best on the world stage and have a shot, a meaningful one, on the world's stage. That made old guys expendable, exceedingly so. Klinsman is after speed and guys who are moldable. He want to play the international game, to play it at speed, with young guys who have fresh legs and experience, not just in international play, but play in the world cup, and play on a world cup team together. That Donavan and other guys who can still play were left off this year's team let's the younger guys know that there is no room of sentimentality or banking past accomplishments in Klinsman's world. You play all out every time or the next time might not be there. Klinsman is dead I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. serious and now everybody knows it.

Teams are as good as the second stringers make them, not because of what they can contribute on the pitch when the game is on, but because of what they demand of potential starters on the pitch every single day. No one can say that Landon Donovan could be a meaningful contributor in that role. Heck, even he admitted it. There were plenty of other guys who could well comprise part of the future of US soccer who are. Donovan might have been able to contribute off the bench better than any of the other players on the bench in spot situations that might arise when the Cup begins. But, maybe not. The real point is that the chance that he could does not and cannot get in the way of the future of US soccer when the present is the future as sure as dirt (say what), and that's not just Klinsman talking. I am no soccer maven, but Edie Johnson did put the US in the Cup by scoring within a minute or so when the US was about to fall off the ledge. Johnson has an amazing body, real speed, and plays the ball out of the air on an international level. He had no chance. Goodson, smart, skilled, experienced, tough, and a terrific presence. He's not going to be around 4 years from now so he couldn't be around now.

Landon Donovan has contributed a tremendous amount to US soccer in the past. His grace this past week was a vote for the future, and not even Lombardi would say that for US soccer, "the future is now." Landon has begun his role as an older statesman laudably. He didn't have to, but he did.

Klinsman cares not about likeability but rather using all of him to take US soccer to the world stage in a meaningful way. That is not happening this summer, or the summer after. Donovan knows that. This week he set the stage for being a contributor on that journey, and doing what he can to empower this current team to reach down for their best. Donovan has, and his best is still wondrous to watch. Good for him. He has earned our gratitude. I think that he was won Klinsman's.

[blazindw]

A few things.

First and foremost, I don't think that Klinsman was hired primarily to get this year's world cup team as far as it can go. We all know that that couldn't have been seen as being very far. Nope, Klinsman was hired to build a team that compete with the best on the world stage and have a shot, a meaningful one, on the world's stage.

You never, ever ever ever, ever ever ever treat the World Cup as a building block for the next one. Because the next one isn't guaranteed. He absolutely has a charge of going as far as possible in Brazil. Crashing out of the World Cup in the group stage may mean not just Klinsmann's on the chopping block. It may mean Sunil Gulati's job too.

[throatybeard]

A few things.

First and foremost, I don't think that Klinsman was hired primarily to get this year's world cup team as far as it can go. We all know that that couldn't have been seen as being very far. Nope, Klinsman was hired to build a team that compete with the best on the world stage and have a shot, a meaningful one, on the world's stage. That made old guys expendable, exceedingly so. Klinsman is after speed and guys who are moldable. He want to play the international game, to play it at speed, with young guys who have fresh legs and experience, not just in international play, but play in the world cup, and play on a world cup team together. That Donavan and other guys who can still play were left off this year's team let's the younger guys know that there is no room of sentimentality or banking past accomplishments in Klinsman's world. You play all out every time or the next time might not be there. Klinsman is dead I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. serious and now everybody knows it.

Teams are as good as the second stringers make them, not because of what they can contribute on the pitch when the game is on, but because of what they demand of potential starters on the pitch every single day. No one can say that Landon Donovan could be a meaningful contributor in that role. Heck, even he admitted it. There were plenty of other guys who could well comprise part of the future of US soccer who are. Donovan might have been able to contribute off the bench better than any of the other players on the bench in spot situations that might arise when the Cup begins. But, maybe not. The real point is that the chance that he could does not and cannot get in the way of the future of US soccer when the present is the future as sure as dirt (say what), and that's not just Klinsman talking. I am no soccer maven, but Edie Johnson did put the US in the Cup by scoring within a minute or so when the US was about to fall off the ledge. Johnson has an amazing body, real speed, and plays the ball out of the air on an international level. He had no chance. Goodson, smart, skilled, experienced, tough, and a terrific presence. He's not going to be around 4 years from now so he couldn't be around now.

Landon Donovan has contributed a tremendous amount to US soccer in the past. His grace this past week was a vote for the future, and not even Lombardi would say that for US soccer, "the future is now." Landon has begun his role as an older statesman laudably. He didn't have to, but he did.

Klinsman cares not about likeability but rather using all of him to take US soccer to the world stage in a meaningful way. That is not happening this summer, or the summer after. Donovan knows that. This week he set the stage for being a contributor on that journey, and doing what he can to empower this current team to reach down for their best. Donovan has, and his best is still wondrous to watch. Good for him. He has earned our gratitude. I think that he was won Klinsman's.

Jürgen Klinsmann's name has two Ns at the end.

</Who is Sheldon?>

[CDu]

A few things.

First and foremost, I don't think that Klinsman was hired primarily to get this year's world cup team as far as it can go. We all know that that couldn't have been seen as being very far. Nope, Klinsman was hired to build a team that compete with the best on the world stage and have a shot, a meaningful one, on the world's stage. That made old guys expendable, exceedingly so. Klinsman is after speed and guys who are moldable. He want to play the international game, to play it at speed, with young guys who have fresh legs and experience, not just in international play, but play in the world cup, and play on a world cup team together. That Donavan and other guys who can still play were left off this year's team let's the younger guys know that there is no room of sentimentality or banking past accomplishments in Klinsman's world. You play all out every time or the next time might not be there. Klinsman is dead I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. serious and now everybody knows it.

Teams are as good as the second stringers make them, not because of what they can contribute on the pitch when the game is on, but because of what they demand of potential starters on the pitch every single day. No one can say that Landon Donovan could be a meaningful contributor in that role. Heck, even he admitted it. There were plenty of other guys who could well comprise part of the future of US soccer who are. Donovan might have been able to contribute off the bench better than any of the other players on the bench in spot situations that might arise when the Cup begins. But, maybe not. The real point is that the chance that he could does not and cannot get in the way of the future of US soccer when the present is the future as sure as dirt (say what), and that's not just Klinsman talking. I am no soccer maven, but Edie Johnson did put the US in the Cup by scoring within a minute or so when the US was about to fall off the ledge. Johnson has an amazing body, real speed, and plays the ball out of the air on an international level. He had no chance. Goodson, smart, skilled, experienced, tough, and a terrific presence. He's not going to be around 4 years from now so he couldn't be around now.

Landon Donovan has contributed a tremendous amount to US soccer in the past. His grace this past week was a vote for the future, and not even Lombardi would say that for US soccer, "the future is now." Landon has begun his role as an older statesman laudably. He didn't have to, but he did.

Klinsman cares not about likeability but rather using all of him to take US soccer to the world stage in a meaningful way. That is not happening this summer, or the summer after. Donovan knows that. This week he set the stage for being a contributor on that journey, and doing what he can to empower this current team to reach down for their best. Donovan has, and his best is still wondrous to watch. Good for him. He has earned our gratitude. I think that he was won Klinsman's.

This argument would make a lot more sense if not for the fact that many guys on the team (Howard, Dempsey, Beasley, Davis, Beckerman, Jones, Wondolowski, and Rimando) are also going to be too old to be a part of the future.

[Acymetric]

This argument would make a lot more sense if not for the fact that many guys on the team (Howard, Dempsey, Beasley, Davis, Beckerman, Jones, Wondolowski, and Rimando) are also going to be too old to be a part of the future.

Some of those guys are locks to start, and most would be more likely starters than Landon at this point, so that may have something to do with it. Can we please just move on, quit worrying about why he was left at home whether right or wrong, and enjoy these last two games and get pumped for Ghana? The team is set, its over. Lets talk about the team we have and quit worrying about the guys who didn't make the final 23.

[davekay1971]

Soccer lingo is so hilarious.

If a game that doesn't count is a "friendly," does that mean one that does count is an "unfriendly?"

"So we're playing an 'up yours' against Ghana next month..."

We need to! I wouldn't mind seeing the US employ a bit more "up yours" style in the games that count. Ghana is basically a must-win for the US given the strength of our group.

[Chicago 1995]

You never, ever ever ever, ever ever ever treat the World Cup as a building block for the next one. Because the next one isn't guaranteed. He absolutely has a charge of going as far as possible in Brazil. Crashing out of the World Cup in the group stage may mean not just Klinsmann's on the chopping block. It may mean Sunil Gulati's job too.

Given our draw (and the larger mechanics of the draw that mean we're almost guaranteed a draw into the Group of Death), the US could play very well and not advance. They could play very well and not get a point. Putting Klinsmann on the chopping block because we don't advance when placed in a group with Portugal and Germany is crazy talk.

We've got a long, long way to go before we can begin to expect to advance to the knockout stage, and where failing to do so will be a real disappointment. As long as we're fielding rosters full -- mostly -- of guys playing in MLS, we're not going to be competitive enough to expect to advance.

[blazindw]

Given our draw (and the larger mechanics of the draw that mean we're almost guaranteed a draw into the Group of Death), the US could play very well and not advance. They could play very well and not get a point. Putting Klinsmann on the chopping block because we don't advance when placed in a group with Portugal and Germany is crazy talk.

We've got a long, long way to go before we can begin to expect to advance to the knockout stage, and where failing to do so will be a real disappointment. As long as we're fielding rosters full -- mostly -- of guys playing in MLS, we're not going to be competitive enough to expect to advance.

Not getting a point would be devastating and I'm telling you...from the people that I know, that will not fly at US Soccer headquarters, no matter how hard our group is.

Now, rest assured I'm going down there to ensure that this doesn't happen. ;)

[greybeard]

This argument would make a lot more sense if not for the fact that many guys on the team (Howard, Dempsey, Beasley, Davis, Beckerman, Jones, Wondolowski, and Rimando) are also going to be too old to be a part of the future.

Nope.

[greybeard]

If you read what I said carefully, I did not say that leaving Donovan off the team would make the team less effective. To the contrary, I said that he would not start, and could not contribute in the important role that nonstarters must play--they must compete with all they have every second to make the starters stretch, grow, face as much pressure as possible every second wherever they are on the pitch, in drills, training, and, most of all, full sided all out play. This is a tremendously important role, at least in my view, and Donovan is nowhere near world class at it.

Also, without playing all out leading up to the Cup every day what's the chance that he brings it well enough to think that he might not be Klinsmann's go to guy if the team needs a spark, needs a game changing presence. Depends on what Klinsmann thinks will change the game in any given situation. Back breaking pressure, honed against a group of very high end veterans, every second of every practice might prepare one of these young guys to give Klinsmann what he thinks might make a difference against the likes of Germany and the other powers in the play-in round.

So, I do not pretend to know the odds that, coming off the bench, to the extent he would have, it is likely that Donovan would have brought more than the guys who were kept.

And, gents, you seem to overlook one big thing, and a number of others in dismissing my "theory." What little unique gift was Klinsmann given in unprecedented fashion before the group of 30 was selected. It's okay, you can say it. A four year extension through 2018, right? And, then he selects a group of young players who have the speed and international background in their bones, from the time that they were youngsters, to play the way Klinsmann believes any team must in order to make a real run at the Cup. This, to me, says the focus is on 2018.

That does not mean that Klinsmann is tanking for the sake of the future, or that he doesn't want the US to show as best it can in the Brazil games. Klinsmann will have this team playing as close to its capacity as any US team ever. Having a team do that is much greater than the sum of its parts.

In the end, to say it differently, Klinsmann is dead set to make certain that "the future ain't what it used to be." He wants a team that plays Futball, not soccer, and a team that plays with the speed, space and special personal organization that world class soccer demands. This time, unlike how they treated his predecessors, the heads of US soccer gave Klinsmann the ticket he needs to begin building that team now, before even the preliminary selections for this year's national team were made.

Two plus two equals?

[toughbuff1]

We play Turkey today at 2:00 pm on ESPN2. According to the latest FIFA rankings, Turkey is ranked 39th in the world (Ghana is ranked 38th). This should be a good test for our guys.

[YmoBeThere]

Yahoo! put up a Fantasy World Cup game, you pick the group round winners/scores. I'm a sucker for such things, though I'm likely to do very poorly.

[greybeard]

Jürgen Klinsmann's name has two Ns at the end.

</Who is Sheldon?>

The original, that would be the Jewish one, has only one. Assimilation, who could blame them.

[OldPhiKap]

Dempsey, Bradley looked good. So did Altidore, that disallowed goal early on was kinda bogus but do not mind that kind of call if it is called on both ends.

Midfield defense looked good. From 40 yards in, though -- still a big question.

[COYS]

Dempsey, Bradley looked good. So did Altidore, that disallowed goal early on was kinda bogus but do not mind that kind of call if it is called on both ends.

Midfield defense looked good. From 40 yards in, though -- still a big question.

Defensive midfield still a question mark for me. Jones did his usual thing where he looks good for a little while, making a few nice tackles and supporting the back line, only to be out of position and make a few odd giveaways. I really wish the Jones who anchored the midfield for Schalke for so long would show up for the USMNT.

Also, Chandler's game mirrored Jones game, in many ways. Some really great play mixed with some really poor play. Davis, on the left, was underwhelming in defense, as well, which didn't help Chandler.

I agree that Bradley and Deuce looked good. I'd add Johnson to that list, too. His goal was great, but he also got into dangerous spots, repeatedly.

Poor Jozy. Bad luck on having that first goal called back. Then, despite what Twellman said on the broadcast, he made the right play in the second half when he played a perfect ball to Mix who explicably tried to chest the ball down and shoot instead of just heading into the goal. He should have had a nice assist on that play. Then, when he finally did get two breakaways, he had the keeper save the shot both times (though one was called back for yet another questionable foul). I just want to see him put one in the net. Still, he looked good.

It looks like we're headed for a diamond midfield. I like that in many ways. It gets Bradley more involved in the attack, which as he showed with that sublime ball to Johnson for Fabian's equally sublime first goal, is a good thing. Also, it goes with the idea that if the USMNT is really going to make a run in the World Cup, then we need to be more potent in attack.

On the other hand, it puts so much pressure on our back four that have hardly played together while also relying on Jones staying disciplined, a word not often associated with Jones. He's fearless, tenacious, and has a lot of ability, but I still worry about him staying put. And while Johnson and Chandler have speed to spare, Davis, Zusi, and Bedoya are not particularly fast, especially compared to the winged in our group. When the fullbacks push forward, I'm worried about Jones and the two center backs being our only line of defense.

We'll just have to see. I love That the team is built around Bradley's game. I just hope we have the defensive chops to hang in there.

[A-Tex Devil]

Defensive midfield still a question mark for me. Jones did his usual thing where he looks good for a little while, making a few nice tackles and supporting the back line, only to be out of position and make a few odd giveaways. I really wish the Jones who anchored the midfield for Schalke for so long would show up for the USMNT.

Also, Chandler's game mirrored Jones game, in many ways. Some really great play mixed with some really poor play. Davis, on the left, was underwhelming in defense, as well, which didn't help Chandler.

I agree that Bradley and Deuce looked good. I'd add Johnson to that list, too. His goal was great, but he also got into dangerous spots, repeatedly.

Poor Jozy. Bad luck on having that first goal called back. Then, despite what Twellman said on the broadcast, he made the right play in the second half when he played a perfect ball to Mix who explicably tried to chest the ball down and shoot instead of just heading into the goal. He should have had a nice assist on that play. Then, when he finally did get two breakaways, he had the keeper save the shot both times (though one was called back for yet another questionable foul). I just want to see him put one in the net. Still, he looked good.

It looks like we're headed for a diamond midfield. I like that in many ways. It gets Bradley more involved in the attack, which as he showed with that sublime ball to Johnson for Fabian's equally sublime first goal, is a good thing. Also, it goes with the idea that if the USMNT is really going to make a run in the World Cup, then we need to be more potent in attack.

On the other hand, it puts so much pressure on our back four that have hardly played together while also relying on Jones staying disciplined, a word not often associated with Jones. He's fearless, tenacious, and has a lot of ability, but I still worry about him staying put. And while Johnson and Chandler have speed to spare, Davis, Zusi, and Bedoya are not particularly fast, especially compared to the winged in our group. When the fullbacks push forward, I'm worried about Jones and the two center backs being our only line of defense.

We'll just have to see. I love That the team is built around Bradley's game. I just hope we have the defensive chops to hang in there.


- I wasn't as enthused with Bradley's performance (outside the goal), or Dempsey's for that matter. In the diamond, things don't seem to be starting with MB nearly enough - and that may not be his fault. Just doesn't seem like he's the center of the distribution nearly as much.

- Turkey played way too much of the game in our 18 yard box.

- It seems like Green really may have been guaranteed a spot on the team, which is unfortunate, because he's not ready.

- If we get a lead on any of these teams, I feel like Chandler needs to come out as soon as it makes sense in the second half. He was either gassed or careless, or both, twice, costing us one goal on the PK. He seems like the guy most likely to let the other team in the game with a mistake.

- I'd love to figure out how to get Deuce, Jozy and AJ all on the field at the same time. With Chandler and FJ as our wide backs, though, I think that we need more defensive minded wings. But I'd still like to see that combo (with MB of course) get a chance to get some run together before the tourney is over.

[COYS]

- I wasn't as enthused with Bradley's performance (outside the goal), or Dempsey's for that matter. In the diamond, things don't seem to be starting with MB nearly enough - and that may not be his fault. Just doesn't seem like he's the center of the distribution nearly as much.

- Turkey played way too much of the game in our 18 yard box.

- It seems like Green really may have been guaranteed a spot on the team, which is unfortunate, because he's not ready.

- If we get a lead on any of these teams, I feel like Chandler needs to come out as soon as it makes sense in the second half. He was either gassed or careless, or both, twice, costing us one goal on the PK. He seems like the guy most likely to let the other team in the game with a mistake.

- I'd love to figure out how to get Deuce, Jozy and AJ all on the field at the same time. With Chandler and FJ as our wide backs, though, I think that we need more defensive minded wings. But I'd still like to see that combo (with MB of course) get a chance to get some run together before the tourney is over.

All good points. Bradley did have a few more giveaways than we're accustomed to seeing from him, but he also played some great balls. I agree, though, the offense can't go through him too much. Dempsey looked like the usual Dempsey, which is to say he's always good for a some completely insane moves/ideas, 75% of which fail miserably. However sometimes they work and he's able to create something out of thin air. But at least he's always trying to make something happen and, while his goals are often of the garbage variety, he is particularly adept at taking out the trash. I like that he is exclusively playing close to goal.

It might be possible to play AJ, Deuce, and Jozy together if we play a 4-2-3-1 that can morph into a 4-3-3. Deuce and AJ can play as wingers tucked far inside and pretty far up the pitch so that they are effectively forwards with Jozy, just with a little bit more defensive responsibility. I guess Jermaine Jones would have to sit, though, because then Bradley would lie deep as the number 6 and then I'd want Bedoya and Zusi (the two wingers with the best defense) on left and right mid. Both of those guys have the ability to pinch in, a little, too. Then our fullbacks could surge forward, which, clearly, they're going to do whether we like it or not, as long as Zusi and Bedoya are just a little more conservative and focus more on controlling play. I think we have to at least see what this lineup looks like, though, because if we need a goal late in a match, I feel like Johannsson HAS to be on the pitch.

To be honest, though I'd hate to take Dempsey off the pitch for any reason, AJ seems like such a natural complement to Jozy's hold up play. He's so quick and decisive and his one touch passing in tight spaces is superb. Dempsey offers a lot just from his ability to consistently score goals and pull stuff out of his you-know-what, but at the same time, AJ's got so much quality and seems to have a bright future. To me, he probably has almost as much potential as Green and he's far more ready to contribute right now.

I agree with you about Chandler's defensive liabilities. He was never better than mediocre on defense all game, but his really bad giveaways came late. I'm hopeful he can clean that up or that we do as you say, and bring Beasley in to replace him to hold a lead. He offers far more in attack than Beasley, but I'm not sure that he's actually any faster than Beasley. He's also probably a slightly better 1 on 1 defender than Beasley, but he was also out of position far more frequently (more than once he was WWWWWAAAAAAAAYYY out of position). I definitely think Chandler offers the most upside, but if Klinsmann decided to start Beasley against Ghana, I wouldn't mind. However, I'd be curious to see Chandler and Bedoya on the left. Davis really doesn't offer much in defense. It's possible Chandler would look better with Bedoya (a far superior defender to Davis) as his wingman on the left.

To be quite honest, there is a lot more variability in the squad than I'd like, at this point. The diamond seems to clearly anoint Bradley as the lynchpin of the attack, which is good, but at the same time, it has also made the defense look pretty exposed. Jones does not impress me as the solution as the number 6 in a diamond and I'm not convinced Beckerman can hang with international competition (although, I gotta give the guys some credit, he continues to improve and he has a great feel for the game, despite his physical limitations). No one on the back line has world cup experience. Besler hasn't looked completely settled next to Cameron. John Brooks doesn't look like a realistic option save for an emergency (lots of ability but, man, he needs some seasoning) and Omar Gonzalez is coming off an injury and is also prone to mental errors. Jozy looked much better, but still hasn't scored. And Dempsey is 32. There is definitely some real talent on this squad. But a lot needs to click for us to have a chance.

[greybeard]

I thought the Old British guy who does color is difficult to understand. The knowledge, facility, and drive of presentation makes me feel I'm listening to the coaching staff. I have long known that triangles are integral to the game, and have seen them form and reform, etc., but never quite comprehended the reason for the shape and how it all works. There is talk here of the Triangle formation with Bradley in control position. Having someone give a little premier on that would take me a long way.

[greybeard]

Private messages accepted.

[Reisen]

I thought the Old British guy who does color is difficult to understand. The knowledge, facility, and drive of presentation makes me feel I'm listening to the coaching staff. I have long known that triangles are integral to the game, and have seen them form and reform, etc., but never quite comprehended the reason for the shape and how it all works. There is talk here of the Triangle formation with Bradley in control position. Having someone give a little premier on that would take me a long way.

Ian Darke is great. That said, I expect as we get into the actual WC, you'll see a lot of what you're asking for. At this point, it's probably still mostly fans with lots of soccer knowledge.

The general idea of the triangle is incredibly simple. On offense, you don't ever want to be able to draw a straight line through three straight players. If one of the three players has the ball, the effect of a triangle is to move the other two players apart to give him two options. If a defender is standing at my 12 o'clock, having players at my 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock makes it extremely difficult for him to break up my pass.

Diamonds are just a variant on the triangle with an extra player, and are even more effective.

While you can play a diamond on defense (with a sweeper, a stopper, and two defensive backs), you often see teams playing a flat four to leverage the trap and avoid forwards making diagonal runs behind your defensive backs.

[OldPhiKap]

you often see teams playing a flat four to . . . avoid forwards making diagonal runs behind your defensive backs.

How so? Because the forward is picked up by the next defender?

Excellent post.

[JohnGalt]

I'd love to figure out how to get Deuce, Jozy and AJ all on the field at the same time. With Chandler and FJ as our wide backs, though, I think that we need more defensive minded wings. But I'd still like to see that combo (with MB of course) get a chance to get some run together before the tourney is over.

This comment is particularly interesting to me as the EPL (the league I watch most) last season went through a sort of renaissance around the forward line...ie, the return of two forward arrangements. Liverpool had arguably the two best forwards in the league, Man City had 3 excellent options, and even despite the poor results Man United had 2, as well..which actually would have suited Moyes had RVP stayed healthy. Soton also attempted playing both Lambert and Osvaldo up top, but had much more success once Osvaldo was dropped.

Anyways, my point is that playing some sort of 442/352 returned with a vengeance and I found myself wondering if a conservative 352 couldn't work for us...esp against Portugal. I know it's much too late to so drastically alter the formation, but for conversational reasons what do yall think of 3 CBs, lopsided WBs, a double pivot, and a front triangle of Deuce, AJ, and Jozy. It would take advantage of Bradley's mobility, Deuce's quality inside the attacking third, and AJ and Jozy's differing styles. If it wasn't working it could also be relatively easily altered by introducing Beckerman or Zusi or even Green as a winger to shoot through the channels. The lopsided wingbacks would be used to provide width on one side while trying to control Cristiano on the other side.

It kind of comes down to me just not liking the triangle for us. It's like Jurgen tacitly acknowledging we need to suck it up and play a 442, but refusing to let go of at least a little pizzazz. FB is increasingly becoming the most scrutinized position in the game and we just don't have the guys to pull off this formation. Modern-day FBs are expected to defend as if they're purely defenders and attack as if they're old-school wingers. They're expected to be available for stretching the play in attack and for providing back post support when defending. It's interesting that the further we get away from Bob's tenure, it looks as though we're creeping back to needing that simplicity in the system.


I thought the Old British guy who does color is difficult to understand. The knowledge, facility, and drive of presentation makes me feel I'm listening to the coaching staff. I have long known that triangles are integral to the game, and have seen them form and reform, etc., but never quite comprehended the reason for the shape and how it all works. There is talk here of the Triangle formation with Bradley in control position. Having someone give a little premier on that would take me a long way.

I'm not sure I understand your questions, but I can give it a shot. The Dutch and their Total Football brought the discussion of "triangles" in soccer into popular conversation. The thought is that if you have three attackers, you can pass around a defender with minimal movement from the attacking players, thereby making "the ball do the work" as is hammered into the head of so many soccer players. In order to maintain the triangle it requires the players to be open to different angles making turning out of the arrangement relatively easy if another defender begins to close the movement down. If that happens, the attacking player's teammates are expected to shift their positions to provide support and, perhaps, more triangles around other defenders.

Oftentimes "#10" is used describe players in the playmaking position on the soccer field - the "control position" as you termed it. It comes from back in the day when players used to wear numbers according to their positions on the field and the #10 was the attacking midfielder that oftentimes played the incisive passes that put teammates on goal. In some places - specifically Argentina - the #10 position (as well a the actual shirt) is still revered. It was a big deal last year when Neymar was given (or asked for...I can't remember ) the #10 Brazilian shirt. Just google "Greatest #10s" and you can see the list of legendary players to wear it is quite lengthy. It's no coincidence.

So anyways, Bradley was given the #10 position versus Turkey at the top of the Diamond. I'm of the belief that that isn't his best position.

[JohnGalt]

How so? Because the forward is picked up by the next defender?

Excellent post.

The biggest problem with the diamond both in attack and defense is width. In attack, a lot is expected of the FBs to get forward and provide width because the Diamond needs to remain relatively compact in central midfield in order for it to work (ie, maintain reasonable passing angles/distances). That leaves lots of space on the wings to either exploit/lose.

If you slide the Diamond back to defense (something that I don't think anyone does anymore), the same thing results: loads of space on the wings. The flat back four requires coordination between the unit, but once that is achieved it's able to both (a) cover the wings and (b) prevent penetration through the off-side trap by keeping all of the players in one line that steps up just before the throughball is played.

[Reisen]

How so? Because the forward is picked up by the next defender?

Excellent post.

Forwards should and will still try to make diagonal runs regardless of the defensive scheme the other team is playing. But it's generally easier to time and execute them against a team playing with a sweeper than it is a flat four.

For one, the sweeper has to come a little farther to defend (he's in the middle of the field), where as a flat four will have four guys effectively in a line somewhat evenly spaced (in theory), so one of the center defenders will be closer.

Additionally, the sweeper will generally be playing a little behind the right and left fullbacks, sometimes allowing the forward to get behind them right before the ball is kicked without being offside.

A coach that favors a sweeper/stopper setup will counter that a good/fast sweeper shouldn't need to play very far behind his backs (he has to play back a little because he's responsible for the whole field, not just one side), and if an opposing forward is cheating too much against the back, the sweeper will move up suddenly and draw him offside. You also gain the huge benefit of the stopper helping to clear through-balls and control the midfield.

But to answer your question, yes, if a forward successfully makes a diagonal run behind the fullback guarding him, it's up to the sweeper/center mid to stop him as the last man.

[JohnGalt]

Forwards should and will still try to make diagonal runs regardless of the defensive scheme the other team is playing. But it's generally easier to time and execute them against a team playing with a sweeper than it is a flat four.

For one, the sweeper has to come a little farther to defend (he's in the middle of the field), where as a flat four will have four guys effectively in a line somewhat evenly spaced (in theory), so one of the center defenders will be closer.

Additionally, the sweeper will generally be playing a little behind the right and left fullbacks, sometimes allowing the forward to get behind them right before the ball is kicked without being offside.

A coach that favors a sweeper/stopper setup will counter that a good/fast sweeper shouldn't need to play very far behind his backs (he has to play back a little because he's responsible for the whole field, not just one side), and if an opposing forward is cheating too much against the back, the sweeper will move up suddenly and draw him offside. You also gain the huge benefit of the stopper helping to clear through-balls and control the midfield.

But to answer your question, yes, if a forward successfully makes a diagonal run behind the fullback guarding him, it's up to the sweeper/center mid to stop him as the last man.

Do any teams still play with a strictly sweeper/stopper setup? I know that in the flat back four, one of the CBs is generally the man-marker and one is generally the sweeper, but because the goal is to generally remain flat in order to keep the offside trap possible, they generally remain in a line. I thought the outright "sweeper" position sort of passed away in the early 90s with the exception of a quick renaissance in the 04 Greek team that won the Euros.

[Reisen]

Do any teams still play with a strictly sweeper/stopper setup? I know that in the flat back four, one of the CBs is generally the man-marker and one is generally the sweeper, but because the goal is to generally remain flat in order to keep the offside trap possible, they generally remain in a line. I thought the outright "sweeper" position sort of passed away in the early 90s with the exception of a quick renaissance in the 04 Greek team that won the Euros.

Yeah, it's an important historical lineup and one I played often growing up in Europe (I came up through the German soccer system), but I rarely if ever see it used in the pros these days. I do see it pretty often in youth soccer, though.

A couple of fun discussions:

http://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/476/is-the-sweeper-role-obsolete-with-modern-formations

http://www.worldclasscoaching.com/wccforums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=71386&page=all

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/04/22/is-the-sweeper-set-for-a-return-to-prominence/

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2009/sep/22/football-tactics-trends

I've played it both in a 4 man diamond (ie. true sweeper/stopper), and a 5 man defense where the defenders do a lot of attacking. It's somewhat akin to having a deep safety in football allowing your cornerbacks and linebackers to be more aggressive. Per some of those links, I could see it making a comeback, especially if the offside rule is tweaked in favor of the attacker (which I have long advocated for).

[greybeard]

Ian Darke is great. That said, I expect as we get into the actual WC, you'll see a lot of what you're asking for. At this point, it's probably still mostly fans with lots of soccer knowledge.

The general idea of the triangle is incredibly simple. On offense, you don't ever want to be able to draw a straight line through three straight players. If one of the three players has the ball, the effect of a triangle is to move the other two players apart to give him two options. If a defender is standing at my 12 o'clock, having players at my 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock makes it extremely difficult for him to break up my pass.

Diamonds are just a variant on the triangle with an extra player, and are even more effective.

While you can play a diamond on defense (with a sweeper, a stopper, and two defensive backs), you often see teams playing a flat four to leverage the trap and avoid forwards making diagonal runs behind your defensive backs.

This thread has to become a must read, especially as the cup plays out. The one sport I really enjoy to watch. It'll be way cool to finally comprehend what it is behind the play that I find so compelling. This is going to be great! Thanks gentlemen, your grateful student. Cheers.

[JasonEvans]

The Cup hasn't even started yet, and Beats already won the commercial wars. WOW!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v_i3Lcjli84

Question, is Neymar's father allowed to give pep talks to team USA? Dude is chillingly good!

-Jason "the Stuart Scott stuff was pretty silly and felt 'off' compared to the genuine feel of the rest of the spot" Evans

[Ben1029]

Anyways, my point is that playing some sort of 442/352 returned with a vengeance and I found myself wondering if a conservative 352 couldn't work for us...esp against Portugal. I know it's much too late to so drastically alter the formation, but for conversational reasons what do yall think of 3 CBs, lopsided WBs, a double pivot, and a front triangle of Deuce, AJ, and Jozy. It would take advantage of Bradley's mobility, Deuce's quality inside the attacking third, and AJ and Jozy's differing styles. If it wasn't working it could also be relatively easily altered by introducing Beckerman or Zusi or even Green as a winger to shoot through the channels. The lopsided wingbacks would be used to provide width on one side while trying to control Cristiano on the other side.



Who would you put in your 3-5-2?

-----------Deuce-Jozy-------------
FJohnson-Jones-AJ-Bradley-Bedoya
-----Besler-Gonzalez-Cameron----
-------------Howard---------------

Gonzalez is prone to mental lapses and is coming off of an injury but Brooks just isn't ready. And who do you play wide on the right? Bedoya is quick and is responsible defensively. Zusi is slower but provides better crosses/service. Chandler is an option but he got caught out of position quite a bit vs Turkey. Yedlin could also be an option since he is blazing fast but he is inexperienced.

[greybeard]

This comment is particularly interesting to me as the EPL (the league I watch most) last season went through a sort of renaissance around the forward line...ie, the return of two forward arrangements. Liverpool had arguably the two best forwards in the league, Man City had 3 excellent options, and even despite the poor results Man United had 2, as well..which actually would have suited Moyes had RVP stayed healthy. Soton also attempted playing both Lambert and Osvaldo up top, but had much more success once Osvaldo was dropped.

Anyways, my point is that playing some sort of 442/352 returned with a vengeance and I found myself wondering if a conservative 352 couldn't work for us...esp against Portugal. I know it's much too late to so drastically alter the formation, but for conversational reasons what do yall think of 3 CBs, lopsided WBs, a double pivot, and a front triangle of Deuce, AJ, and Jozy. It would take advantage of Bradley's mobility, Deuce's quality inside the attacking third, and AJ and Jozy's differing styles. If it wasn't working it could also be relatively easily altered by introducing Beckerman or Zusi or even Green as a winger to shoot through the channels. The lopsided wingbacks would be used to provide width on one side while trying to control Cristiano on the other side.

It kind of comes down to me just not liking the triangle for us. It's like Jurgen tacitly acknowledging we need to suck it up and play a 442, but refusing to let go of at least a little pizzazz. FB is increasingly becoming the most scrutinized position in the game and we just don't have the guys to pull off this formation. Modern-day FBs are expected to defend as if they're purely defenders and attack as if they're old-school wingers. They're expected to be available for stretching the play in attack and for providing back post support when defending. It's interesting that the further we get away from Bob's tenure, it looks as though we're creeping back to needing that simplicity in the system.



I'm not sure I understand your questions, but I can give it a shot. The Dutch and their Total Football brought the discussion of "triangles" in soccer into popular conversation. The thought is that if you have three attackers, you can pass around a defender with minimal movement from the attacking players, thereby making "the ball do the work" as is hammered into the head of so many soccer players. In order to maintain the triangle it requires the players to be open to different angles making turning out of the arrangement relatively easy if another defender begins to close the movement down. If that happens, the attacking player's teammates are expected to shift their positions to provide support and, perhaps, more triangles around other defenders.

Oftentimes "#10" is used describe players in the playmaking position on the soccer field - the "control position" as you termed it. It comes from back in the day when players used to wear numbers according to their positions on the field and the #10 was the attacking midfielder that oftentimes played the incisive passes that put teammates on goal. In some places - specifically Argentina - the #10 position (as well a the actual shirt) is still revered. It was a big deal last year when Neymar was given (or asked for...I can't remember ) the #10 Brazilian shirt. Just google "Greatest #10s" and you can see the list of legendary players to wear it is quite lengthy. It's no coincidence.

So anyways, Bradley was given the #10 position versus Turkey at the top of the Diamond. I'm of the belief that that isn't his best position.

Hey, this really clarifies things: 352, red, on two, break. Got it. Here's the deal. I thought triangle formations occur all over the field, and serve as a basis for occupying the ball until some one can think of something better to do with it. Or, maybe it's diamonds all over the field. I have kind of noticed the triangle or diamond, can't tell which, forming and reforming, with players moving, but I also thought that sometimes someone will turn away from the formation and find new people to play with, you know, lose 2 and add 2: Iniesta is playing the 10 in a triangle going forward, he gets it back from Xavi, then turns with his ball to the right shaded back to the midline, kicks it back to Tello (?) and a new triangle is formed with two new guys, only somebody can pass it back to Xavi. Neymar, part of the original triangle, has made a diagonal run, the ball is played played down the right side to a defensive back from the wing of a defensive diamond who has made a sideline run forward, who then takes a few touches forward, turns, and hits Iniesta who has come forward and who passes to Fabregas who just to the right of the middle 5 yards above the top of the box. At some point Messi gets it, and then I just get mesmerized. We'll have to talk more.

On a lighter note, there is a series on HBO, Destino: Brasil, that has half hour pieces that interweave current sides with a side that had great historical significance for a country. The ones that fascinated very much were on Columbia, Chille, and Brasil, of the episodes I've watched thus far. In Spanish with subtitles, by the way. I might have mentioned it anyway, but your mention of the no. 10 position and how jerseys used to follow position put in perspective the piece on Brasil. Before the Cup that was played in the US, the coach knocked Pele off the starting team and assigned the 10 jersey to someone else, which was portrayed as a heinous act in the program. It was like watching a made up movie. One of the other stars, Pele's best friend, got 3 other stars and they arranged a meeting with the coach at some fancy hotel is the jungle, and when they came out, Pele had his jersey and his starting job back. I thought that all that mattered was that he was back in the starting lineup, and that the jersey was just sentimental. Now I know that it goes with the territory. I still don't get, however, why I see so many triangles all over the place when there is only one. If they had the old system, it would be much easier just follow the 10.

Hey, I bet that there are still some people who insist that there is no such thing as progress. I remain your humble student, grey--ready, 442, split right, on silent count. Got it!

[greybeard]

I trust it is clear that this was meant to be funny, not sarcastic. I really appreciate the help, and, while I find your exchanges in many cases over my head, I'm picking up bits and pieces, which I am sure will build momentum in comprehension. It undoubtedly bring something new and fresh to watching the Cup. You guys rock.

[gumbomoop]

Meant to pass this along a few weeks back, mostly for the humor in the "suggested fix" recommendations. I particularly enjoyed the suggestions for England, France, Iran.

But most of all, Belgium.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/21/all-32-world-cup-national-slogans-graded-and-in-some-cases-improved/?wpisrc=nl%5Feve

Two years ago I told a couple of football friends to watch out for Belgium in '14. They were skeptical. As it turns out, now Belgium is nearly everyone's favorite dark horse, so much so that they're widely expected to make a deep run in the WC.

Even though I guessed right about their talent, I actually had little knowledge about the existence of any systematic plan -- in two senses -- to nurture good footballers in Belgium. Here's a really interesting article on how the national team -- "as Belgian as Belgium gets" -- developed from a conscious plan.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/jun/06/belgium-blueprint-gave-birth-golden-generation-world-cup-

[greybeard]

Who on cable is broadcasting on Cable? Is it going to be streamed on the net? If I want the most comprehensive access, tell me a don't need a FIOS package with Bien, which I suppose I should have anyway. Would also like to know if is any live net access to significant international play. Thanks.

[greybeard]

Who on cable is broadcasting on Cable? Is it going to be streamed on the net? If I want the most comprehensive access, tell me a don't need a FIOS package with Bien, which I suppose I should have anyway. Would also like to know if is any live net access to significant international play. Thanks.

Just figured it, if you want to know what's available on the net (and cable), use it. for example, http://www.tomsguide.com/us/how-to-stream-world-cup,news-18910.html

[greybeard]

Real impressive reception, touch turn, well placed rocket. Heyyy.

[burnspbesq]

Real impressive reception, touch turn, well placed rocket. Heyyy.

Yes, it was well taken (I assume you're referring to Altidore's second goal against Nigeria), but that was some pretty lame goalkeeping to give up the near post in that situation.

[greybeard]

Yes, it was well taken (I assume you're referring to Altidore's second goal against Nigeria), but that was some pretty lame goalkeeping to give up the near post in that situation.

I always wonder on a play like that. It happens quickly but does a quality player make the read and chose faster than fast, faster than we can imagine, or just shoot and we say someone, in this case, the goalie, made a mistake. Might it not have been the case that, had the goalie positioned himself to cover the near post, Altidore goes to the other side, does not even have to try to get it near the far post? I'm just saying. It's not like there was a tree, other players, that impeded choice here. The play, the reception, the balance and control, the wit to first touch it and get his shoulders and hips clear, and then absolutely lacing the ball where there was not a chance. That is the potential, world class that everybody seems to see in him, that is Altidore. He threw a run of it about a year ago was it, and took the US's holding striker game to a level never seen on a US side before. That play, he makes one every game, and the US plays on beyond the play-in round.

That play belongs. He makes it consistently, so might the US.

[COYS]

USA vs. Nigeria was a relief to see, for me. Looks like the diamond is a thing of the recent past, as the 4-2-3-1 that we trotted out seemed to play to the team's strengths much more. This also might have been the best game I've ever seen Jermaine Jones play in a USA shirt. I saw him do some pretty awesome things for Schalke in the Bundesliga and it was nice to see him look like that player for the USMNT. He made some awesome tackles, supported the defense, made a few, purposeful forays into the attack, and had a few good passes. He still had a few giveaways, but it wouldn't be Jermaine Jones without a few of those. I thought Beckerman was really solid, too. I was unsure if his skills would translate against faster/stronger teams, but he held is own out there. He's really developed a great mind for the game. I was skeptical of pairing both Jones and Beckerman at the same time, but it worked pretty well.

When I saw the formation, I was worried that with both Jozy and Clint (who plays forward regardless of whether he's labelled as a "midfielder" or not) we wouldn't have enough width and Bradley would be forced to provide cover out wide. However, Jones and Beckerman really covered that. Bedoya was great for much of the first half, tracking back and otherwise showing off his huge workrate. We definitely lacked a little width on offense, but I don't mind that because that means the ball is going through the center of the pitch more, which means Bradley gets as many touches in the attacking third as possible.

Jozy looked freed from the responsibility of being almost primarily a hold-up striker, too. He and Clint frequently switched spots as the highest person on the pitch. Jozy got to run at a defenders a few times rather than just having his back to them. I think this gave him more energy because he actually improved as the game went on. He was maybe slightly uncomfortable with the new formation at first, but he grew into the game. Of course, his second goal was the highlight, a rocket into the near post. The keeper might should have done better, but then again, Jozy really blasted that shot after looking like he was going to go for the far post.

The weird thing about the game, though, is that we basically had our strongest defensive unit on the field at the start of the match. I know Klinsmann wanted to give guys like Mix and Gonzales some playing time to keep them sharp, but man, they are not the best people to bring in if we are lucky enough to be leading a match late in the second half. That will be an interesting thing to watch in Brazil.

At any rate, it's time to get excited about Brazil!

[CDu]

USA vs. Nigeria was a relief to see, for me. Looks like the diamond is a thing of the recent past, as the 4-2-3-1 that we trotted out seemed to play to the team's strengths much more. This also might have been the best game I've ever seen Jermaine Jones play in a USA shirt. I saw him do some pretty awesome things for Schalke in the Bundesliga and it was nice to see him look like that player for the USMNT. He made some awesome tackles, supported the defense, made a few, purposeful forays into the attack, and had a few good passes. He still had a few giveaways, but it wouldn't be Jermaine Jones without a few of those. I thought Beckerman was really solid, too. I was unsure if his skills would translate against faster/stronger teams, but he held is own out there. He's really developed a great mind for the game. I was skeptical of pairing both Jones and Beckerman at the same time, but it worked pretty well.

When I saw the formation, I was worried that with both Jozy and Clint (who plays forward regardless of whether he's labelled as a "midfielder" or not) we wouldn't have enough width and Bradley would be forced to provide cover out wide. However, Jones and Beckerman really covered that. Bedoya was great for much of the first half, tracking back and otherwise showing off his huge workrate. We definitely lacked a little width on offense, but I don't mind that because that means the ball is going through the center of the pitch more, which means Bradley gets as many touches in the attacking third as possible.

Jozy looked freed from the responsibility of being almost primarily a hold-up striker, too. He and Clint frequently switched spots as the highest person on the pitch. Jozy got to run at a defenders a few times rather than just having his back to them. I think this gave him more energy because he actually improved as the game went on. He was maybe slightly uncomfortable with the new formation at first, but he grew into the game. Of course, his second goal was the highlight, a rocket into the near post. The keeper might should have done better, but then again, Jozy really blasted that shot after looking like he was going to go for the far post.

The weird thing about the game, though, is that we basically had our strongest defensive unit on the field at the start of the match. I know Klinsmann wanted to give guys like Mix and Gonzales some playing time to keep them sharp, but man, they are not the best people to bring in if we are lucky enough to be leading a match late in the second half. That will be an interesting thing to watch in Brazil.

At any rate, it's time to get excited about Brazil!

Yeah, that game was a fantastic display from our midfielders, most notably Bradley and Jones. I echo your comments on Jones, but Bradley was fabulous as well (after a rough start).

I love the idea of the 4-2-3-1, and it seemed to suit our guys pretty well. And using Johnson and Beasley as the outside backs infuses some serious pace on the outside. Both had their moments pushing forward; if they can just maintain solid play tracking back as well, maybe some of the defensive woes dissipate. Besler and Cameron looked solid back there for the most part.

But it was nice to see some inspired play from our midfield and forwards. I don't think we're ever going to be elite defensively (Howard notwithstanding), so I think we're going to need our midfield and forwards to excel to have any sort of chance, and hope for "just good enough" in front of Howard.

[gumbomoop]

Fascinating story, promising neuroscientific development, Duke prof at World Cup for demonstration of mind-controlled robotic suit.

Read this.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/world-cup-to-debut-mind-controlled-robotic-suit/

[gus]

US soccer fans get a write up in the NY Times, spiced with a few quotes from a poster here (I assume):

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/10/sports/worldcup/american-soccer-fans-adapt-foreign-traditions.html?hp&_r=0

[greybeard]

Fascinating story, promising neuroscientific development, Duke prof at World Cup for demonstration of mind-controlled robotic suit.

Read this.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/world-cup-to-debut-mind-controlled-robotic-suit/

Beyond remarkable. I am somewhat educated on how the brain-nervous system learns to develop and control movement, the on-going process of it beginning with infancy, and the interfaces described here, even the language choices, comport with my take away from years of organized self-exploration and study. Perhaps what we now see as a mix with artificial or augmentation will be seen as of a piece with what comprises all of us.

No two skeletons are alike; nor is how we use them; nor is how we developed the capacity to use them; nor is our facility to learn how to hold and use ourselves in ways that serve us better. How we function is the product of habituation such that we are not aware of the patterns we manifest, what is behind them. We have by and large forgotten the capacity to develop something new that will serve us better.

Moving one's arms/torso to support effective use of the lower extremities are a prime example. If we watch people walk the streets of a city we all will notice those who stand out as using themselves in a manner that appeals because of its ease, effectiveness, coherence. We all also will notice those who have little or no arm swing supported by upper body movement that makes their strides different, a less appealing/effective way of going about things. Then there is everything in between, and so it is with everything we do.

The movement behaviors learned through infancy through the first year astound in their complexity. We figure them out with no instruction, nor words, nor even models to observe. What attracts the brain to create such learning, whatever it is about the learning environment and how the brain works that lead to crawling and the myriad of smaller tasks that it comprises, we seem to gradually forget, as best we once owned it. We are left with what is habitual, even when it disserves us, even when our bodies and our lives scream for something new. The options offered by allopathic therapies are woefully inadequate to produce the outcomes we all would want. Should we wish to be able to walk without the foot or other pain that it carries we are at a loss. How come? The concept that there are localized "problems" to be "fixed," that countless repetitions and how-to instructions will work has been laid bare. Should it be otherwise, we'd have many more piano players who actually create music, and understand the how of it, how to play to expand the choices at hand to do so with more swing.

Those individuals, their brains, the information flow back and forth between parts of them, some of which we now call machines, have learned to create arm swings and body movements that make how they walk better, easier, more balanced, more elegant. They learned that. Perhaps we too can learn the how of it, thus we too can self-learn to do what we want. We stand a much better chance because of them, and those who stand behind them. Their promise is our own.

Bravo to all involved.

[davekay1971]

Fascinating story, promising neuroscientific development, Duke prof at World Cup for demonstration of mind-controlled robotic suit.

Read this.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/world-cup-to-debut-mind-controlled-robotic-suit/

This is just fantastic. What an amazing development, and how liberating it will be, when the technology if further developed, for people suffering from paralysis and debilitating limb weakness.

Obviously proud to have Duke involved, but even more excited for the prospects for millions of people that could benefit from this technology.

[COYS]

I feel bad changing the subject back to soccer after those last few posts (thanks for sharing!), but, with the World Cup starting tomorrow, it's time for some predictions.

Personally, I'm not going out on a limb. I think this is Brazil's cup. However, while their group is really easy, they are very likely face some really tough teams in the early rounds of the knockout stage. Assuming Brazil wins their group, they have to play the second place team in Group B in the round of 16. That group just happens to have the two Finalists from 2010 in Spain and the Netherlands. Unless Chile or Australia shocks the world, Brazil is almost guaranteed to have a seriously difficult match up in the Round of 16. In the quarters, they are likely to face either Italy or Uruguay. Italy are, of course, perennial contenders and Uruguay are a strong side, even if they are not as good as they were when they reached the Semis in 2010. Then, Brazil could be headed to a Semi Final match up with Germany. And all of this comes BEFORE a potential final against arch rival Argentina. What a tough path. As with the NCAA tournament, there are always going to be surprises and upsets, but it seems likely that Brazil will have to defeat the last two World Cup champs in Italy and Spain (and/or the previous runner up in the Netherlands) before facing off against Germany, who has come up third best in almost all of the last 4 major tournaments (Euros and World Cups). I still think Brazil wins it, but it will not be easy.

Meanwhile, as far as the USMNT is concerned, IF, by some miracle, we escape our group (if we do, we are likely to be second in the group), things don't get easier. We'll probably have to play a Belgium team that is everyone's dark horse to make a deep run this year and who thumped us 4-2 last year. Granted, Belgium is facing a few injury questions, but they are definitely the better team. We're also holding a closed door scrimmage against Belgium this week. Maybe Klinsmann will pick up some secret about how to beat them =). If this really is a dream year for the United States and we get by Belgium (say on penalty kicks where Tim Howard gives the USMNT a fighting chance), then next up would most likely be Argentina and Lionel Messi.

Honestly, looking at the World Cup bracket, I'm reminded again just how good the world is at soccer. After the group stage (which always holds one or two surprises), basically all of the remaining teams are elite. Of course, that's what makes it my personal favorite sporting event, ever. I can't wait for tomorrow!

[gumbomoop]

Rather than watching the WC from a bar or his couch, Landon Donovan has a third option. He joins ESPN as WC commentator, "with a particular focus on his former team."

http://www.espnfc.com/fifa-world-cup/story/1873444/former-us-star-landon-donovan-to-join-espn-as-world-cup-analyst

[gumbomoop]

Watching ESPN's 2-hour WC preview right now, and pleased that Roberto Martinez is back for commentary on ESPN. Although his nothing-but-optimism re Everton can get old [understandable, it's Everton], he brings interesting commentary, a sweet demeanor, is a big plus as analyst. Can tell he really studies the game in many countries, knows lots about lots of players, systems.

[COYS]

Watching ESPN's 2-hour WC preview right now, and pleased that Roberto Martinez is back for commentary on ESPN. Although his nothing-but-optimism re Everton can get old [understandable, it's Everton], he brings interesting commentary, a sweet demeanor, is a big plus as analyst. Can tell he really studies the game in many countries, knows lots about lots of players, systems.

I second this. Espn's soccer coverage often leaves a lot to be desired but this is a good sign.

[COYS]

Yeah, that game was a fantastic display from our midfielders, most notably Bradley and Jones. I echo your comments on Jones, but Bradley was fabulous as well (after a rough start).

I love the idea of the 4-2-3-1, and it seemed to suit our guys pretty well. And using Johnson and Beasley as the outside backs infuses some serious pace on the outside. Both had their moments pushing forward; if they can just maintain solid play tracking back as well, maybe some of the defensive woes dissipate. Besler and Cameron looked solid back there for the most part.

But it was nice to see some inspired play from our midfield and forwards. I don't think we're ever going to be elite defensively (Howard notwithstanding), so I think we're going to need our midfield and forwards to excel to have any sort of chance, and hope for "just good enough" in front of Howard.

I re-watched the game ('cause I'm a nerd) and came away even more impressed. First, I absolutely love that Jozy was not forced to sit high up the field, collect long balls, and attempt to hold up play while everyone else ran up the pitch. Jozy's improved with his back to goal, but he has a whole different dimension to his game that has gone unused, recently. Today was different. He got to run at defenders. Deuce was actually often the highest up the pitch (which is good, because I love Deuce but he plays ZERO defense these days) which freed Jozy to play to his strengths. He's especially deadly attacking near the box from the left side of the pitch, which is also complementary to Deuce, who tends to drift slightly to the right.

Also, the defensive shape was even better than I remembered. We had trouble keeping possession early, but Beckerman and Jones stayed compact, breaking up attack after attack in front of our defense, which looked much better. Have both Beckerman and Jones in defensive positions meant that one of them or one of the centerbacks could defend out wide without giving up the center of the pitch whenever Johnson or (much less rarely, Beasley) was caught up the pitch. This will be absolutely key against Ghana's arsenal of talented and fast attackers. Our fullbacks have great recovery speed, but even their great speed won't always be enough against Ghana. We'll need numbers back. As long as we keep a good shape against Ghana, we'll have a real shot.

Additionally, while I don't think anyone would count this as Bedoya's best game, his defensive ability can't be discounted. He was also responsible for breaking up a lot of attacks and needed to be on his toes while Johnson marauded forward. He did just that. The fact that he is comfortable drifting into the center of the pitch is fine, too, because that allows him to support Beckerman and Jones when necessary.

Also, I don't mind having an unbalanced formation. We basically didn't attack down the left, save for a few forays by Beasley. When Chandler entered the game, our shape got really messed up because both fullbacks were caught up the pitch at times. There is much less chance of that happening when we essentially play with no left winger. It also leaves more space out that way for Bradley, Jozy, and Deuce to drift into. I don't like it when Jozy drifts way out into the corner, but he is dangerous making runs from the left side and, as his second goal demonstrated, has an amazing ability to bring the ball back to his right foot and finish (I still remember a match he played for the Red Bull when he was still a teenager. It was David Beckham's big arrival in MLS, highlighted by a Galaxy/Red Bull matchup in New York featuring Beckham, Donovan, and NYRB teenage star, Altidore. The Red Bull won an entertaining shootout with Jozy scoring an amazing goal from the left inside the box when he dribbled to his right, cut the ball back brilliantly and blasted it into the net. I remember thinking, "dude, we need that guy on the USMNT NOW!).

Anyway, with all those guys playing defense, Bradley was allowed to literally do whatever he felt like doing. He ran all over the pitch, as usual, sometimes tracking back to make tackles and launch counters. Sometimes he stayed forward to receive a long pass and hit Jozy or Deuce with a quick one or two touch through ball. Sometimes he ran into the box himself after the defense had collapsed on Jozy or Deuce. Giving Bradley that freedom is absolutely essential as he is unquestionably our best field player yet he's not a traditional attacking midfielder nor his he a traditional defensive midfielder. He really is a true box to box midfielder who can cause some havoc when given absolute freedom to do so.

Bottom line, I love the starting 11 we put out against Nigeria. I hope they continue to gel as a lineup heading into the match with Ghana.

I'm still concerned about our bench. To be quite honest, Maurice Edu and one of Parkhurst or Goodson would look better coming in to help hold a late lead. Omar is either still hurt or has regressed even more with his decision-making. Yedlin is so young, though I guess he hasn't looked terrible. Brooks has all the physical ability in the world but he's also really green. Neither Davis nor Zusi are defensive upgrades over Bedoya. Mix and Aron are attacking maestros who shouldn't be asked to play defense. Re-watching the Nigeria match hasn't reduced my fear of seeing Omar or Yedlin coming in to provide defensive support late in a match we are leading. Still, with the starting 11 we saw against Nigeria, I am hopeful for the first time that we might actually have a late lead to hold.

[COYS]

http://www.soccerbyives.net/2014/06/scrimmage-canceled-concerns.html

Scrimmage against Belgium cancelled.

[COYS]

Also, nerd stats for those interested in advanced soccer statistics. Brazil and Spain are huge favorites according to this. http://www.sbnation.com/soccer/2014/6/11/5793328/2014-world-cup-predictions

[Duvall]

Also, nerd stats for those interested in advanced soccer statistics. Brazil and Spain are huge favorites according to this. http://www.sbnation.com/soccer/2014/6/11/5793328/2014-world-cup-predictions

I think Brazil and Spain are favorites due to much less advanced soccer analysis as well.

[COYS]

I think Brazil and Spain are favorites due to much less advanced soccer analysis as well.

You make a good point :)

[greybeard]

Coys, that was smashing. I am determined, by the end of the year, I'll be understand much, much more than I do now. There's mucho room for growth. Compact means enough to one another to make splitting them down the middle very low probability try. Close I think. "Hold their shape," I've heard since I became a fan. It's one of those phrases whose sound makes you sure that you know but really don't. Something to do with keeping all parts of the defensive end covered by the form originally deployed only the pieces might have changed location and the shape maybe moved forward and back but was not stretched either to the sides or between the compacted (Oy, the images) defensive central midfielders.

When we get unbalanced we lose shape but don't care because the talent in the middle and speed of the central defensive mids can cover?

I really like Goodson, have since he was at Maryland. He is present, very smart, quick and decisive. Also, deceptively strong. He is strong minded and dead serious but you know he loves every minute of it. Happy defeats fear, leaves no room for it. Heartbreaking that Edu is not with this team. He has many of the same qualities as Goodson, and just makes plays. Compelling story.

Coys, the way you write about this stuff seems to have the motion of the game in it. I feel my way to a sense of the thing that is the game. Thanks. Now I have to get myself a program so I can keep these guys straight, not so much their names of course, the other stuff so that I can give a shot at whether they are holding shape, loosing compactness, or doing the other things that I am sure I will be hit with as this thing moves forward.

Keep the ball moving guys, game time has arrived in a blink.

[greybeard]

My son, out of Medellin, Columbia, is managing editor of a daily on-line newspaper, columbiareports.com. Occasionally, he squeezes time to author a piece. Here is his latest on the Columbian side.

http://colombiareports.co/getting-know-colombias-world-cup-team-part-1-started-top-now/

[COYS]

Coys, that was smashing. I am determined, by the end of the year, I'll be understand much, much more than I do now. There's mucho room for growth. Compact means enough to one another to make splitting them down the middle very low probability try. Close I think. "Hold their shape," I've heard since I became a fan. It's one of those phrases whose sound makes you sure that you know but really don't. Something to do with keeping all parts of the defensive end covered by the form originally deployed only the pieces might have changed location and the shape maybe moved forward and back but was not stretched either to the sides or between the compacted (Oy, the images) defensive central midfielders.

When we get unbalanced we lose shape but don't care because the talent in the middle and speed of the central defensive mids can cover?

I really like Goodson, have since he was at Maryland. He is present, very smart, quick and decisive. Also, deceptively strong. He is strong minded and dead serious but you know he loves every minute of it. Happy defeats fear, leaves no room for it. Heartbreaking that Edu is not with this team. He has many of the same qualities as Goodson, and just makes plays. Compelling story.

Coys, the way you write about this stuff seems to have the motion of the game in it. I feel my way to a sense of the thing that is the game. Thanks. Now I have to get myself a program so I can keep these guys straight, not so much their names of course, the other stuff so that I can give a shot at whether they are holding shape, loosing compactness, or doing the other things that I am sure I will be hit with as this thing moves forward.

Keep the ball moving guys, game time has arrived in a blink.

Greybeard, thanks for the kind words.

In other news, Brazil vs. Croatia starts now!

[pfrduke]

Has the first goal in a World Cup ever been an own goal before? Whoops.

[Ichabod Drain]

Wow that's crazy. Tough for Marcelo but Brazil seems to be in decent control of the game.

[gus]

Wow that's crazy. Tough for Marcelo but Brazil seems to be in decent control of the game.

One of my co-workers made a bet with another that Brazil would score 6 goals.

When Brazil tied it I asked...

"So, you only need four more now right?"

That started an interesting argument.

[gus]

so is it just me, or does it look like brazil is also trying to win an academy award?

[hurleyfor3]

Brazil gets all the calls

[gus]

BTW, I made that comment before Fred's Oscar worthy moment.

[gumbomoop]

I'm so happy Derek Rae is on board, and look forward to his pairing with Roberto Martinez this weekend. Not happy that Martinez is scheduled to call only that one match, and hope ESPN will reconsider if he and Rae are fabulous this weekend.

http://www.wfaa.com/sports/world-cup/usat/262639211.html

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/06/09/espn-tv-and-radio-commentators-for-2014-fifa-world-cup-week-1-through-june-19/271701/

Like Daniel Mann and Jon Champion, McManaman and Robson. Not a big fan of Keller and Twellman as analysts; prefer the Brits.

[gumbomoop]

Don't know how the Carolina blue works on your visual, but the scoreline is tougher to read than it should be.

Carolina blue and reading don't seem to go together......

[AncientPsychicT]

so is it just me, or does it look like brazil is also trying to win an academy award?

Well, they do have a player named Oscar...

[burnspbesq]

I'm so happy Derek Rae is on board, and look forward to his pairing with Roberto Martinez this weekend. Not happy that Martinez is scheduled to call only that one match, and hope ESPN will reconsider if he and Rae are fabulous this weekend.

http://www.wfaa.com/sports/world-cup/usat/262639211.html

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/06/09/espn-tv-and-radio-commentators-for-2014-fifa-world-cup-week-1-through-june-19/271701/

Like Daniel Mann and Jon Champion, McManaman and Robson. Not a big fan of Keller and Twellman as analysts; prefer the Brits.

I love Macca, but the casual fan may need simultaneous translation of Scouse into English.

[gumbomoop]

I love Macca, but the casual fan may need simultaneous translation of Scouse into English.

I enjoyed him and the interplay with Darke during the 2-3 years they covered EPL on ESPN. And the honest truth is, my priority isn't the casual fan. I've been really happy that NBCSN used mostly Brits/Scots this past EPL season. Not only are they EPL experts, but their Brit football idioms add so much to the game, so refreshingly different from American cliched commentary in multiple sports.

I pretty much limit my viewing to British/European football and college bball. For me, the quality of British commentators on EPL and Champions League is much, much better than any and all college bball announcing teams. I was disappointed that Fox used Gus Johnson/Eric Wynalda for the CL final.

I'd be interested in anyone's opinion re Twellman. I don't prefer him, yet I'm thinking he's a pretty good analyst, but not particularly articulate. Or maybe he doesn't have quite the right voice. Or maybe I'm just biased against him for some reason.

[toughbuff1]

Most people who know me would say that I'm biased against the Mexican National team (I am) but wow, they really got screwed out of two goals and a possible penalty kick in the first half. Thank goodness for FIFA they still managed to win 1-0. The refs so far have had two poor games to start the World Cup; I hope that changes.

[gus]

Wow. That penalty for Spain was the worst I've seen in a while. It's worse than the Fred call.

[pfrduke]

That Van Persie goal was pretty. Fabulous ball from the wing.

[CDu]

That Van Persie goal was pretty. Fabulous ball from the wing.

Amazing cross, and absolutely gorgeous finish by van Persie. A running header from nearly outside the penalty box? Crazy. Just brilliant stuff.

Spain got a freebie on a bad call in the box. Thankfully Netherlands were able to level. Should be a fun second half.

[gus]

Amazing cross, and absolutely gorgeous finish by van Persie. A running header from nearly outside the penalty box? Crazy. Just brilliant stuff.

Spain got a freebie on a bad call in the box. Thankfully Netherlands were able to level. Should be a fun second half.

Entertaining game for sure. that goal was beautiful. The "high" five afterwards was up there in awkwardness though.

[gus]

Wow. How was martens able to walk under his own power after that head butt? They should check him for a concussion. Sheesh.

I love that he actually checked for blood.

[AncientPsychicT]

Spoiler alert:

Spain ain't gonna win the World Cup.

[gus]

Spoiler alert:

Spain ain't gonna win the World Cup.

They lost their first game last time too.

But, they only conceded two goals in the entire tournament, so you may be right.

[CDu]

Some absolutely unbelievable individual play by van Persie and and Robben in this one. We have already discussed van Persie's first goal, which could wind up on the short list of goals of the tournament. But both of Robben's goals were just tremendous as well. His first came on a long cross from the left back, which (while running at pace) he settled cleanly. He then calmly brought the ball back across the defender, took a dribble, and hammered it home. Clinical. His second goal was even more amazing. He chased down Sergio Ramos from past midfield to win the ball. Then as he reached the penalty area, with Casillas charging, he settled the ball, faked twice to discard Casillas, and hammered it past two chasing defenders. Just an amazing individual effort.

The second van Persie goal was mostly an awful play by Casillas, but an opportunistic chance taken by van Persie.

Spain's 5-1 defeat puts them in a BIG hole. If Chile beats Australia (and they should), then Spain will face a Chile team that can potentially get through on a draw with Spain. It's some uphill sledding for them going forward.

But the Dutch were just amazing today. Some of the best football I've seen. They dominated the second half all over the pitch.

[Deslok]

Some absolutely unbelievable individual play by van Persie and and Robben in this one. We have already discussed van Persie's first goal, which could wind up on the short list of goals of the tournament. But both of Robben's goals were just tremendous as well. His first came on a long cross from the left back, which (while running at pace) he settled cleanly. He then calmly brought the ball back across the defender, took a dribble, and hammered it home. Clinical. His second goal was even more amazing. He chased down Sergio Ramos from past midfield to win the ball. Then as he reached the penalty area, with Casillas charging, he settled the ball, faked twice to discard Casillas, and hammered it past two chasing defenders. Just an amazing individual effort.

The second van Persie goal was mostly an awful play by Casillas, but an opportunistic chance taken by van Persie.

Spain's 5-1 defeat puts them in a BIG hole. If Chile beats Australia (and they should), then Spain will face a Chile team that can potentially get through on a draw with Spain. It's some uphill sledding for them going forward.

But the Dutch were just amazing today. Some of the best football I've seen. They dominated the second half all over the pitch.

Phenomenal performance from the Dutch. Lowest expectations for the squad this century... not anymore though. 1st half the inexperience of their backline seemed like it was close to getting overwhelmed by the Spanish attack. If Costa finishes that one break in - tried to be a bit too cute with it - and puts Spain up 2-0, I don't think the Dutch come back from that. Instead, 60 seconds later, Blind hits a great lead in to van Persie, who I thought at first was making a mistake in going for the header when he had a chance to bring the ball down in space. But oh what a perfect header, and boom the Dutch go in to the half level. Then Robben uses and abuses Ramos and Pique and the rout is on. And the scoreline is huge. First, Spain has virtually no shot at finishing atop the group. With a 2-1 loss, they could have hoped for Netherlands to stumble agains Chile and gotten back on top via goal differential. Now, there's no shot at that. And finishing second in the group means a date with Brazil in the round of 16. A matchup many predicted as a final, would be first knockout stage matchup. And that's presuming Spain even advances, because with that score, a slip up(even a tie) against Chile or - less likely - Australia would eliminate them entirely. If Netherlands continues with their strong play, they will certainly go far, and a few of their Eredivisie players are about to make some big paydays on the transfer market.

[OldPhiKap]

Columbia looked impressive. Go Italia this afternoon!

[toughbuff1]

Costa Rica playing the game of their lives! Go CONCACAF!!!

[CDu]

The azzurri got some bad news when it was reported that their keeper (one of the best keepers of all time) GiGi Buffon will miss the match against the Three Lions this evening. This will mark the first time that Italy has gone with someone else at keeper in the World Cup since 1998. It will be interesting to see what effect this has on the Azzurri.

Salvatore Sirigu will likely take the net for Italy tonight. He's a good keeper, but it remains to be seen if he can make up for the absence of Buffon. Buffon is just such a calming influence for Italy, and despite being now past his prime, is still one of the top keepers in the world.

[A-Tex Devil]

Costa Rica playing the game of their lives! Go CONCACAF!!!

That was great to see for a plethora of reasons. Uruguay (other than Diego Forlan) is such a detestable team to me. If Costa Rica is this good, Group D may be the real group of death.

[Deslok]

The Costa Rica result puts some huge questions on that group. Are they that good? Is Uruguay that bad? Most people were thinking the England/Italy loser(if there is one) would have a must win vs Uruguay and then just not slip up against the Ticos. Now Uruguay will have to take down both England and Italy to have any chance of advancing. But if Costa Rica can get any result against England or Italy, its anyone guess as to who goes through. The last day of matches in the group is likely to have a lot of fans holding their collect breaths all game long.

Also idly wondering if, somehow, the Costa Ricans, Mexicans, and Americans all made it to the knock out phase, could CONCACAF pick up an extra 0.5 for the next go round.

[cspan37421]

Wanted to see highlights of Netherlands game ... EPSN videos aren't playing in Firefox for me anymore. I've updated Flash Player but still nothing. Any ideas?

[CDu]

Loving the Costa Rica result for all the reasons mentioned. And, as an Italy fan, it helps to have Uruguay on the ropes.

The Italy/England match has been, as expected, mostly tentative play. I feel that Italy has had the better of possession and the more consistent attacking presence. But England has put together as many if not more truly dangerous balls.

The Italian goal was a thing of beauty on the set piece. Short ball, Pirlo takes a dummy run over the ball to draw the high defending forward (Sturridge, I believe) out of the play. This leaves Marchisio with absolutely all kinds of space. He put that space to good use with a beautiful low strike into the bottom left corner.

Then, England responds with a great counter, taking advantage of their pace. Rooney made a beautiful cross that found Sturridge who hammered it home.

Italy and England both had a few more dangerous chances. Balotelli had a clever chip over the keeper that was only kept out of the net by a well-timed header by a retreating center back.

It will be interesting to see how the second half plays out. England has much better pace, while Italy seems to have found a clever strategy with Candreva attacking in behind Rooney on the right side. Both sides benefit from a draw. Will they push for a win (which would all but assure passage through), or play more conservatively to get the point?

[CDu]

Man do I love Pirlo. That free kick in the 93rd minute was amazing. So much bend on the strike. Sadly, it hit the post, because had it been a half-foot lower, the goalie was about 5 yards off the ball having completely misread it.

Italy was clearly the better side. Even without their left back and keeper available, they controlled possession and just took care of business. Now they are in VERY good position being up 3 points on both Uruguay and England.

Pirlo, De Rossi, and Thiago Motta/Verratti just completely controlled the game from the deep sitting midfield position. Classic Italian football. I will be sad when Pirlo retires (if he ever retires).

[A-Tex Devil]

No draws yet. I imagine that is past or nearing a record number of games without a draw. Also, every time both teams have scored in a game, the team that scored first has given a goal right back, and only Italy actually ended up winning. So many come from behind wins thus far.

[duke74]

Man do I love Pirlo. That free kick in the 93rd minute was amazing. So much bend on the strike. Sadly, it hit the post, because had it been a half-foot lower, the goalie was about 5 yards off the ball having completely misread it.

Italy was clearly the better side. Even without their left back and keeper available, they controlled possession and just took care of business. Now they are in VERY good position being up 3 points on both Uruguay and England.

Pirlo, De Rossi, and Thiago Motta/Verratti just completely controlled the game from the deep sitting midfield position. Classic Italian football. I will be sad when Pirlo retires (if he ever retires).

As a Juve fan, signing Pirlo was a stroke of genius. And he just re-upped I believe for 2 more years.

[gumbomoop]

Enjoyed the Argentina v. Bosnia-Herzegovina match. B-H can go through; likely much better than Iran and better than Nigeria. Messi's run and goal were Messi-like.

Enjoyed even more because of the announcing team, a superb teaming of Derek Rae and Roberto Martinez. I so much enjoy Rae's encyclopaedic knowledge, and especially his prolific research into how to pronounce players' names. I wish he were ESPN's lead announcer, though I understand why he's behind Darke and Champion, both of whom I enjoy, as well. Martinez knows a lot, too.

Hope ESPN will team him again with Martinez, but see I will have to suffer through Rae being teamed this week with Keller for Cameroon-Croatia. Maybe ESPN will pair Rae and Rio-based Martinez together again on the road to Rio. I'll hope for Belgium-Russia next Sunday, an enticing match, to boot.

Second all the praise for the magnificent Pirlo. Vaguely recall a discussion on Off Topic 2 years ago during Euro 2012 of whether he'd still be around for 2014. Hope he's around for 2016 in France.

[InSpades]

Was watching some of the Argentina game with my girlfriend (trying to convert her to a soccer fan). I point out Messi and say "that's the best soccer player in the world". 2 minutes later... "and that's why he's the best soccer player in the world". Amazing goal from an amazing player.

[gus]

NYC?

Since I won't be able to leave work until shortly before kickoff tonight, my assumption is that my friends and I won't be able to get into Dempsey's. Probably true for Nevada Smiths too. Does anyone else have good places to watch? Football is always more fun with a crowd of supporters.

[CDu]

As a Juve fan, signing Pirlo was a stroke of genius. And he just re-upped I believe for 2 more years.

The beauty of what he does is the efficiency with which he plays. So little wasted effort. And he just has the ball on a string when he possesses it - even against the best in the world. There are just few players in the world that have that gift.

[gus]

The beauty of what he does is the efficiency with which he plays. So little wasted effort. And he just has the ball on a string when he possesses it - even against the best in the world. There are just few players in the world that have that gift.

The man's 35. He can't afford to waste any effort!

[gumbomoop]

Watching Portugal-Germany right now. Both so talented. It is a Group of Death. Theoretically anything can happen, but seems to me US's best chance to make it out of group stage is 4 points, go through on goal difference. Must beat Ghana today, preferably by 2+ goals, maybe tie Portugal and hope Germany take 6 points from first 2 games.

[gumbomoop]

Pepe, the red card waiting to happen, just happened.

US should hope Germany go on to score many goals v. 10-man Portugal.

[PSurprise]

I think the US is looking better if they face Germany with nothing on the line in The last game. Of course, US has to beat Portugal and Ghana.

[gus]

I think the US is looking better if they face Germany with nothing on the line in The last game. Of course, US has to beat Portugal and Ghana.

The US gets to play a pepe-less Portugal this weekend, and a sure-to-have-advanced Germany in the last game. That's good news.

But they have to beat Ghana tonight. Portuga

[gumbomoop]

I think the US is looking better if they face Germany with nothing on the line in The last game. Of course, US has to beat Portugal and Ghana.

Say Germany go on today to beat Portugal by 3-5 goals. If so, I'd gladly take a US win v. Ghana and draw v. Portugal, as that would give US a substantial goal difference over Portugal going into Germany game.

[gumbomoop]

Responding to Stewart Robson's random reference to Portugal's performance today, Jon Champion snarked that "performance" might not be quite the right word for what Portugal are doing today.

Portugal won't have Pepe, and maybe not their other most capped center half, Bruno Alves, against US. Alves departed in first half with injury.

[A-Tex Devil]

Say Germany go on today to beat Portugal by 3-5 goals. If so, I'd gladly take a US win v. Ghana and draw v. Portugal, as that would give US a substantial goal difference over Portugal going into Germany game.

That's assuming Ghana can't steal a point off of Germany, of course. I agree that 4 points getting us through looks a lot better than it did 2 hours ago, but there is still a lot that can happen. We still have to win tonight.

[gumbomoop]

Mistake in my above post. Portugal will be without Pepe and, depending, injured Almeida and Coentrao.

As I type, Germany ups it to 4-0. Keep going, Germany. Furthers my hope for US through with 4 points and better goal difference.

[pfrduke]

Rough start to the World Cup for the Iberian Peninsula.

[gus]

I have no idea if this was running through the refs mind (probably not), but I really hope the no-call on in the german box was a result of some boy-who-cried-wolf from the team with one of the most prolific divers in history.

[gumbomoop]

That's assuming Ghana can't steal a point off of Germany, of course. I agree that 4 points getting us through looks a lot better than it did 2 hours ago, but there is still a lot that can happen. We still have to win tonight.

In my best-chance scenario, US beats Ghana, ties Portugal = 4 points. To your point, true, were Ghana to tie Germany, while US beat Ghana and tie Portugal, that would mean going into final game, Germany would have 4, US would have 4, Ghana 1, Portugal 1. Yes, Ghana could beat Portugal, US lose to Germany, and Ghana nip ahead of US on goal difference.

But I maintain that right now, especially given a big win by Germany today, my best-chance scenario is right now US's ..... best-chance scenario.

You're right, a lot to happen. But this big German win helps US chances somewhat.

[COYS]

Imagine having to wait four years between NCAA tournaments and Duke's first game is FINALLY about to start.

That's how I feel right now.

I can't think about anything else.

I agree with everyone that the Portugal-Germany match couldn't have gone any better for the USA, but there's only one thing on my mind now. Time to exorcise some demons against the Black Stars.

I BELIEVE THAT WE WILL WIN

[CDu]

I think the US is looking better if they face Germany with nothing on the line in The last game. Of course, US has to beat Portugal and Ghana.

If the US were to beat both Portugal and Ghana, we will have already advanced. Unless somehow Ghana also beat Germany. Which is unlikely.

But with the goal differential from the Germany-Portugal match, if the US win today then we'll likely only need a draw with Portugal to advance. And without one of their central defenders (Pepe) and possibly Coentrao (their star left back) as well, getting a draw might not be so unrealistic.

But the key is Ghana. We basically HAVE to beat Ghana to have a realistic shot at advancing. So let's get that done today. :)

[JasonEvans]

Here's a big question... if we beat Ghana (MUST MUST MUST HAPPEN!), do we play for a tie against Portugal?

I know, I know... I am getting ahead of myself in a big way.

-Jason "this 4-0 drubbing has got to really be demoralizing for Portugal -- maybe it is time to pounce!" Evans

[A-Tex Devil]

Here's a big question... if we beat Ghana (MUST MUST MUST HAPPEN!), do we play for a tie against Portugal?

I know, I know... I am getting ahead of myself in a big way.

-Jason "this 4-0 drubbing has got to really be demoralizing for Portugal -- maybe it is time to pounce!" Evans

If we play for a tie against Portugal, CR7 is going to have a field day.

[COYS]

If we play for a tie against Portugal, CR7 is going to have a field day.

Yeah. It's one thing to play on the counter, it's another to bunker a la Greece. Sometimes bunkering like that works (see Greece: Euro 2004) but usually we have to at least try to score and get at least some of the possession. Otherwise we'll just look like Greece in every other major tournament they've played in.

Ronaldo is due for a moment of brilliance for his country and our back line has looked slightly suspect. That's a bad combo. If we play for a draw, I think it's more likely to be a 1-1 or 2-2 type of affair and I'm not sure we can really game plan for that until it's tied with ten minutes to go.

[Acymetric]

Unbelievable! Now lets finish out the remaining 89 minutes!

[gumbomoop]

Ghana look by far the more aggressive team, and I don't think that's mostly a result of Altidore's absence. Beasley having big problems, of several sorts. Hope Besler doesn't have hamstring problem, but didn't look good.

Got to have better passes, more possession for some counters.

[CDu]

Wow. Crazy half. Goal in the first minute. Yay. Then Altidore goes off with a hamstring injury. Boo. Then Dempsey gets a kick to the face and possible broken nose. And Besler might be hurt too. Yikes. Hopefully we can hang on. But that Altidore injury could well be a problem.

[OldPhiKap]

We should be down by a bunch.

[gumbomoop]

We should be down by a bunch.

Agree. Brooks ball watching on that last cross. Hard to understand. Inexperience?

Must string together some passes for counters.

Looks like Ghana for about 3-1, but maybe US will actually get a counter miracle or set piece. Probably up to Tim Howard.

[OldPhiKap]

Agree. Brooks ball watching on that last cross. Hard to understand. Inexperience?

Must string together some passes for counters.

Looks like Ghana for about 3-1, but maybe US will actually get a counter miracle or set piece. Probably up to Tim Howard.

Please, and yes.

[OldPhiKap]

Out

Of

Synch.

[gumbomoop]

Brooks looks lost, and with Beasley's mediocre play, left side of back line is constant weakness.

Even Bradley looks unsettled, missing passes.

Fortunately, Ghana shots often going wild.

[OldPhiKap]

First good team defensive stand

[pfrduke]

Feels like Ghana has had the ball for at least 20 of the first 30 minutes this half.

[pfrduke]

That seemed inevitable.

[OldPhiKap]

Crud.

[OldPhiKap]

Wwwwwooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

[pfrduke]

That seemed inevitable.

That didn't! Go Brooks!

[OldPhiKap]

5 minutes?!?