Looking back at Team USA (WC-related)

[Butter]

I think that looking back, maybe the tournament wasn't as bad as it first appeared, but it was still far from respectable. It was embarrassing to be a USA soccer fan.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Would Adu have made a difference? He's pretty fast, isn't he?

Adu wouldn't have made a difference. He's too small, and not good enough. Give him 4 years and then let's see though. As for Theo Walcott ... he would have been a star on the US team. Oh wait, Arena would have probably still opted for only one striker on the field.

[Desnudo]

Eddie Johnson is strong and fast. It's like a broken record, but he at least should have been given more of a chance.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Eddie Johnson is strong and fast. It's like a broken record, but he at least should have been given more of a chance.

Agreed he should have been given a chance (especially earlier against Ghana when we needed a freakin' goal). EJ of 2004-2005 would be perfect. EJ post injuries though is still a question mark in my mind at least.

Side note: Why can't FIFA adopt a video replay rule for diving? If the 10,000 (hyperbole) tv cameras at the game show it's a clear dive why not give the player a 2 match ban? It wouldn't eliminate all the diving (if there's slight contact it'd be tough to justify a ban) and it wouldn't be applicable until after the game (potentially too late), but it would cut down on some of the more obvious flopping that goes on. FIFA already uses video replay for retroactive suspensions for things like fighting/spitting/stomping so why not diving?

[Desnudo]

I agree. I think the problem has reached the point where it's obvious the ref on the field alone isn't enough to police the problem. The harder question is, what do you do if you implement that rule and the player's dive had resulted in a penalty that affected the outcome of the match?

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

The harder question is, what do you do if you implement that rule and the player's dive had resulted in a penalty that affected the outcome of the match?

Very simple answer: you do nothing. Shit happens, and you can't go changing game results. You still penalize the guy after the fact though.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by MalcPow

We seemed to want to play a conservative defense-first style but we lack the skill to turn possession and a slow build-up into attacking chances and the pace up front to hit people quickly on counter attacks.

Johnson, Woolf, Dempsey, Beasley, Donovan, etc. We've got plenty of guys with pace/speed to spare and decent 1v1 ability up front, they were just on the bench or playing too far back.

I realize that sometimes a chef is only as good as his ingredients but still, the squad selection and tactics did not seem to make much sense in this tourney.

Word. I don't know if we would have won, but I'd rather have guys like Johnson out there in a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-1-2 with wings pushing forward often and trying to pressure the defense with runs/long balls than this defensive possession build-up crap when we only have a one guy - Reyna - with good touch. Especially when we NEED A WIN and we're losing in the second half!

I mean, Beasley looked to be by far the worst player on the field for long stretches, losing every ball with a poor first touch, but he was still responsible for our only goal with a great ball to Dempsey and scored the (offsides through no fault of his own) goal against Italy. If playing ugly/scrappy soccer and getting cheap trashman goals is the way to win, go for it. It reminds me of growing up making the state finals every year playing scrappy soccer then going to high school with the same teammates and struggling to make the tournament because the coach tried putting us in a possession system we didn't have the talent for. Then beating those same teams again during the summer when he wasn't coaching and trying to force us to play soccer "the right way."

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Ryche

I watched several games from the World Cup and enjoyed them much more than I expected. Two things that really annoy me though.

Penalties - The flopping and bitching were just ridiculous. And they end up being too important as many game winning goals come on penalty kicks or you red card someone and their team is forced to play shorthanded the rest of the way.

Shootouts - I still don't understand how the most important game in soccer every four years can be decided by a shootout. For other games, sure, no problem. But for a championship game?

That said, I'm much more likely to watch soccer on TV now than I was before. Now if only Ireland had a good team I could root for.

I enjoyed the games and would be more likely to watch them in the future as well. But the "Soccer Smarts" better never be complaining about flopping in an NBA ever game ever again. It was like Dwyane Wade or Vlade Divac were out in the midfield selling some of those "fouls."

Hate the Shootout. I'd much rather see an additional 2 substitutions or something, and another 30 minutes of play. After that "Vicious Headbutt(tm)" the French only were really penalized for about 10 minutes.

[DaddyTorgo]

without reading this whole thread i must summarize my thoughts on Team USA´s performance thusly: BARF . We looked BAD.

[ISiddiqui]

The problem with 'letting them play' is someone would drop dead from exhaustion. Hell, at the end of the 2nd OT, Italy was dying.

[rexallllsc]

It's odd - why not at least bring Adu along for the trip? It's not like we used the bench all that much. Get him the experience at least.

[ISiddiqui]

Don't want to give him too big of a head... and this WC may not have been the best one to bring him too .

[Critch]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Don't want to give him too big of a head...

I think the horse may have already bolted on that one.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Critch

I think the horse may have already bolted on that one.

Heh .

Well, no need to expand that cap size .

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by John Galt

I saw some ESPN Page 2 writer talked about what people would say if each goal counted as 7 points. And although the writer didn't say it, we could have penalty kicks count as 3 points. So the score of the WC final was 22 to 16.

This was the pretty much the lowest scoring WC ever. If you translate a different year to football scores, you suddenly see how "low-scoring" American football really is.

Wouldn't it be more analogous to a college football game that ended up 0-0 in regulation and under their overtime rules, the final score was 15-9?

Soccer has (slowly) changed in the past and it should change again as defense is dominating. Hockey, I believe, has done it, so has baseball. I don't watch football or baseball games to see penalties or errors (real or imagined) constantly throughout the game.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Wouldn't it be more analogous to a college football game that ended up 0-0 in regulation and under their overtime rules, the final score was 15-9?

Soccer has (slowly) changed in the past and it should change again as defense is dominating. Hockey, I believe, has done it, so has baseball. I don't watch football or baseball games to see penalties or errors (real or imagined) constantly throughout the game.

How is defense dominating? Watch the English Premier League or the number of goals in Champions League finals of late (Liverpool's win a couple years ago being very high scoring, 6 goals total, before penalty kicks). I mean this was the lowest scoring tourney since 1990 but 2002 was a fairly decent scoring finals.

The only changes I see that need to be made is video review of diving. But aside from that, I don't see any need for rule changes to increase offense.

[Galaril]

Having Taylor Twellman the best scorer in MLS would have been a good move.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by FrogMan

Theo Walcott is also said to be very fast

FM

I actually read a post that made me laugh out loud. Good job!


-Anxiety

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

How is defense dominating? Watch the English Premier League or the number of goals in Champions League finals of late (Liverpool's win a couple years ago being very high scoring, 6 goals total, before penalty kicks). I mean this was the lowest scoring tourney since 1990 but 2002 was a fairly decent scoring finals.

The only changes I see that need to be made is video review of diving. But aside from that, I don't see any need for rule changes to increase offense.

The Liverpool/AC Milan CL Final was uhmazing.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Having Taylor Twellman the best scorer in MLS would have been a good move.

He would've played as much as Ching.

Arena deferred to his "stars" way too much.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The problem with 'letting them play' is someone would drop dead from exhaustion. Hell, at the end of the 2nd OT, Italy was dying.

Give teams an extra sub or two every 30 minutes. Hell take a break every 30 minutes for all I care. It's no different than playing 'next goal wins' at the park or at the end of practice. If you're tired and want to go home, score a damn goal.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

Give teams an extra sub or two every 30 minutes. Hell take a break every 30 minutes for all I care. It's no different than playing 'next goal wins' at the park or at the end of practice. If you're tired and want to go home, score a damn goal.

Yeah, one extra sub or two would really help all that much . You still have 5 other position players absolutely dying out there. The players run enough on the pitch for 90 mins, and then another 30 they have to go for, I can imagine that they'd all say fuck it and go home if they were told they had to go another 30 or more .

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yeah, one extra sub or two would really help all that much . You still have 5 other position players absolutely dying out there. The players run enough on the pitch for 90 mins, and then another 30 they have to go for, I can imagine that they'd all say fuck it and go home if they were told they had to go another 30 or more .

I've said it before. 1 extra sub for the 30 minute silver goal extra time.

Then unlimited subs and golden goal. Let the match be decided the way soccer is intended to be played.

[law90026]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yeah, one extra sub or two would really help all that much . You still have 5 other position players absolutely dying out there. The players run enough on the pitch for 90 mins, and then another 30 they have to go for, I can imagine that they'd all say fuck it and go home if they were told they had to go another 30 or more .

Not really, the more tired players become, the lower the standard of the game. I don't really want to see players stumbling around and not doing much.

[ISiddiqui]

So you'd make the 30 minute OT a 'silver goal'? Why?

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

Give teams an extra sub or two every 30 minutes. Hell take a break every 30 minutes for all I care. It's no different than playing 'next goal wins' at the park or at the end of practice. If you're tired and want to go home, score a damn goal.

Because for the previous 120 minutes they were just kicking it around before they had to really try and score...

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Because for the previous 120 minutes they were just kicking it around before they had to really try and score...

Actually, yes. THat's exactly the freakin' problem.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Am I the only one that thinks Adu is terribly overrated and has the potential to be a bust?

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Am I the only one that thinks Adu is terribly overrated and has the potential to be a bust?

Nope... he's really only a decent prospect if you believe he is as young as he says he is. I have not heard anything in the way of interest from any big european clubs and, even at his "young" age he should be lighting MLS up if he's really that good.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Nope... he's really only a decent prospect if you believe he is as young as he says he is. I have not heard anything in the way of interest from any big european clubs and, even at his "young" age he should be lighting MLS up if he's really that good.

Really? Because there have been rumors that ManU and Ajax are interested in his services. Of course they all deny it because Adu is underage, but when's the last time we trusted a team denying they were interested in a player?

And then there was that rumor in The Times of London that Chelsea almost had Adu for a $8.5mil fee earlier this year.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Am I the only one that thinks Adu is terribly overrated and has the potential to be a bust?

He's 17 - of course he has the potential to be a bust, like Lampey before him - but the talent is there to be very very good. It seems a tad early to judge IMO. He's never going to be Wayne Rooney or Lionel Messi - but Adu has the potential to be the best player the US has ever produced (admittedly damning with faint praise).

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Really? Because there have been rumors that ManU and Ajax are interested in his services. Of course they all deny it because Adu is underage, but when's the last time we trusted a team denying they were interested in a player?

And then there was that rumor in The Times of London that Chelsea almost had Adu for a $8.5mil fee earlier this year.

Like United denied they were ever interested in Jon Obi Mikel when he was underage? There is no law against contact with an underage player, meeting his parents, I'm pretty sure you are even allowed to offer them "scholarships" to your academy, you just can't sign them to a full contract. I have yet to see the big clubs fight openly over Adu like Mikel or Walcott.

And you should know that 8.5 million for Chelsea is like 500k for most other clubs

I could well be way off the mark with Adu, I just think that his development is already behind other wunderkinds (even if he is that young), he's in a very weak league developmental wise and he's not even doing well in that league. I think, all things considered, he's overrated and will not be as good as advertised.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Hey Crapshoot, yeah, I've been relying on the fact that his impact has been minimal in the MLS. And guys like Messi and Rooney are 5 times the player at the same age. That makes him overrated in my opinion then. When word first came out it was like he was World Class, the next Pele for god's sake (ok, a little overstated there), but still if all we're talking now is the best U.S. player, then that's a far cry from what was being talked about before.

He just seems damn small. Short is alright (e.g. Maradonna) but he only weighs about 95 pounds. If you're short, you have got to be stocky and able to hold your position somewhat.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Like United denied they were ever interested in Jon Obi Mikel when he was underage? There is no law against contact with an underage player, meeting his parents, I'm pretty sure you are even allowed to offer them "scholarships" to your academy, you just can't sign them to a full contract. I have yet to see the big clubs fight openly over Adu like Mikel or Walcott.

Well there is also the whole thing that MLS wants to keep him for as long as they possible can (ie, which they interpret to be 18). I'm sure discussions the European clubs have had with MLS have revealed this desire by the league not to give up Adu until they absolutely must.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Hey Crapshoot, yeah, I've been relying on the fact that his impact has been minimal in the MLS. And guys like Messi and Rooney are 5 times the player at the same age. That makes him overrated in my opinion then. When word first came out it was like he was World Class, the next Pele for god's sake (ok, a little overstated there), but still if all we're talking now is the best U.S. player, then that's a far cry from what was being talked about before.

He just seems damn small. Short is alright (e.g. Maradonna) but he only weighs about 95 pounds. If you're short, you have got to be stocky and able to hold your position somewhat.

I agree, in a sense. If he was European, he'd be a decent prospect, but nothing more. The Nike machine has made him out to be more than he is. At the same time, most players don't develop until into their 20s, so it's a little tough to pass judgement based on comparisions with players who are peaking earlier than that. I see the Rooney/Messi types as being very good while young, but peaking earlier and retiring earlier.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I think that the US played to the level of their talent. Is that bad? I don't know. We should be disappointed in the effort displayed vs the Czechs, but proud of how hard they played vs. Italy and Ghana.

It is a testament to how much we have improved that we are now considered almost locks to qualify for the WC against the likes of Trinidad and Tobago, whereas that used to be somewhat of a struggle.

But, the US simply does not have the players to compete with the best in the world. The top teams leave players off their 23 man rosters who play in the top 4 or 5 leagues in the world. The US cannot come up with 23 who do. We don't compete with these countries because we don't send Randy Moss, LaDanian Tomlinson, DeWayne Wade and LeBron James (after they have spent their lives learning the sport). The other countries do. We're sending AAA players against major leaguers, and just like that competition, the AAA guys can compete and occaissionally win, but over time, the major leaguers would dominate.

As for "we should send our best players to Europe" - if they were good enough, European teams would get them - the money they make in the US is not even close, so I doubt many would turn down opportunities.

I think this is a pretty good assessment of our soccer outlook now and in the near future.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

But they also must have had the highest conversion rate of any nation. At least they had that going for them.

Actually your conversion rate was 0%, as none of the four shots went in. The OG was a cross that was sliced into his own net

Difficult for me to say how the US performed - I knew from the players in the starting XI that they weren't the 5th best team in the world, but at the same time didn;t expect them to be so insipid in the first two games(didn't see the Ghana match to be fair)

I agree with the fact that you have some decent international level players, but just nothing special.

And before anybody beats me to the punch, it is true that on the evidence of this year's WC, you could quite easily say similar about England

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Celeval

That's the biggest difference, and what I've migrated through while becoming a soccer fan over the last few years. Goals aren't the only things as a fan to appreciate and/or cheer for. As a football fan, do you only cheer touchdowns? Or first downs, great catches, nice defensive stops... even if, eventually, they don't pay off in points?

A great point here. The other one that springs to mind is that is it the case that a points victory in boxing can never be a great fight because there were no knockdowns or knock-outs? Sport isn't all about scoring, it's also about drama, flow, near-misses, great defence, anticipation, etc...

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts

Actually your conversion rate was 0%, as none of the four shots went in. The OG was a cross that was sliced into his own net

I could have swore I saw Dempsey kick in a Beasley cross ... or are you only talking about the Italian game?

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by moriarty

I could have swore I saw Dempsey kick in a Beasley cross ... or are you only talking about the Italian game?

Ah yeah - see above: didn;t see the Ghana game. My bad

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts

Actually your conversion rate was 0%, as none of the four shots went in. The OG was a cross that was sliced into his own net

You are forgetting the goal that was scored against Ghana.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

He just seems damn small. Short is alright (e.g. Maradonna) but he only weighs about 95 pounds. If you're short, you have got to be stocky and able to hold your position somewhat.

I agree fully with this. His problem is he doesn't have Walcott (insert England joke here) speed, and he is way too easily muscled off the ball due to his size.

The last Under21 tournament (or was it under 19?) was the most telling. He was supposed to be one of the star players, and he peformed lousy. Granted he was one of the youngest players in the tourney, but up to that point he was dominating against older kids.

I really can't believe there are that many European teams fighting for him at this point.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by moriarty

The last Under21 tournament (or was it under 19?) was the most telling. He was supposed to be one of the star players, and he peformed lousy. Granted he was one of the youngest players in the tourney, but up to that point he was dominating against older kids.

It was under 19. He looked out of his depth, his game was mainly running with the ball til he lost it then throwing himself to the ground in the hopes of a free kick.

I think the main problem is that he needs to be slowly groomed, but he appears to believe the hype and thinks he's a star already.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Critch

It was under 19. He looked out of his depth, his game was mainly running with the ball til he lost it then throwing himself to the ground in the hopes of a free kick.

I think the main problem is that he needs to be slowly groomed, but he appears to believe the hype and thinks he's a star already.

Agreed on all accounts.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by moriarty

I agree fully with this. His problem is he doesn't have Walcott (insert England joke here) speed, and he is way too easily muscled off the ball due to his size.

The last Under21 tournament (or was it under 19?) was the most telling. He was supposed to be one of the star players, and he peformed lousy. Granted he was one of the youngest players in the tourney, but up to that point he was dominating against older kids.

I really can't believe there are that many European teams fighting for him at this point.

I'm sure the American marketing potential is a big factor.

[MalcPow]

Originally Posted by moriarty

His problem is he doesn't have Walcott (insert England joke here) speed, and he is way too easily muscled off the ball due to his size.

Both points are all too true. The other problem is that people talk as though Adu should be dominating the MLS because it's a lesser league, and that may be true but it's also a more physical league that exposes his biggest weakness, strength on the ball. He is skilled, and in space he is dangerous, but that's neutralized in large part by the style of play. He might actually be a better player over in a European league where his technique and touch would be more valuable, and where he might be surrounded by players that might actually be able to create space for him through their own skill. In the games I've seen him play he tries to do too much, and can't overcome the physical play. The upside is still there for him to be a very good player, not a Ronaldinho or Maradona, but a Deco or something.

[Desnudo]

I don't think any US-born player will become like Ronaldinho or Maradona. We just don't have the flair/joy for the game. If he becomes like Donovan, but with determination and drive, I think we should be happy.

[FrogMan]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I don't think any US-born player will become like Ronaldinho or Maradona. We just don't have the flair/joy for the game. If he becomes like Donovan, but with determination and drive, I think we should be happy.

not to nitpick but, oh what the heck, wasn't Adu born in Ghana? So technically, he could have flair

FM

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by FrogMan

not to nitpick but, oh what the heck, wasn't Adu born in Ghana? So technically, he could have flair

FM

They should have shipped him back over there until he was 16. How old was he when he came over, eight?

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Like United denied they were ever interested in Jon Obi Mikel when he was underage? There is no law against contact with an underage player, meeting his parents, I'm pretty sure you are even allowed to offer them "scholarships" to your academy, you just can't sign them to a full contract. I have yet to see the big clubs fight openly over Adu like Mikel or Walcott.

I thought there was a rule FIFA instituted that said foreign players couldn't be purchased from a different country until they were 18 (or it may have been once they stop being 17, not sure).

I think this is the rule for players under 18:
a) Player's parents can move to the country for non-footballing reasons
b) The transfer takes place within the EU (lots of other conditions, but since Adu is in US, it doesn't apply
c)Player lives within 50-100 km of the other country's border (and other conditions)

Adu fits none of these.

http://www.fifa.com/documents/static...ransfer_EN.pdf