USA vs Egypt - Spoilers inside.

[Axxon]

Great result for us and amazing win by Brazil. Now, we get Spain. I think that one may be a bit harder though.

[Lathum]

I personally don't care, but you may want to change the thread title, could be a spoiler to some people.

[Crapshoot]

nah, its a live sporting event on a sunday - fair game. I was watching Brazil-Italy, but good for them. Spain will destroy them though.

[Lathum]

I disagree, people DVR live sporting events all the time and I don't think it's to much to ask for it not to be spoiled by visiting the front page, but meh.

[miked]

Amazing, we lose 3-1 and 3-0 to Italy and Brazil, but get to move on after roughing up Egypt 3-0. Talk about lucking out!

[Axxon]

I'd be glad to edit it Lathum but I'm not sure how.

edit to add - Wow, I must be really dense this afternoon but I'm not seeing how to change it. I could just start another thread "Congrats Egypt - Bring on Italy!!!!" to throw people off? Of course, we'd all have to post in the other thread to keep it believable.

[Sublime 2]

Wow, unreal luck but I'll take it.

[Big Fo]

Meh, if we're talking about luck what about those two awful red cards in the Italy and Brazil games, the handball not called against Egypt, the two posts hit against Brazil that would have totally changed the goal differential scenarios, etc.

Fully deserved.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Axxon

I'd be glad to edit it Lathum but I'm not sure how.

edit to add - Wow, I must be really dense this afternoon but I'm not seeing how to change it.

You can change the title by editing your first post, and then clicking on the "Go Advanced" button.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by cartman

You can change the title by editing your first post, and then clicking on the "Go Advanced" button.

Changed. Thanks. I wasn't thinking when I posted the first time.

[ISiddiqui]

What a pair of amazing games! Almost miraculous. Everyone thought the US was done, re: going to the semis.

But Spain is going to be veeeeery tough!

[Karlifornia]

USA soccer blows. It's funny how FIFA tried to get some money by ranking us #3 in the world at one point.

EDIT: Hoping USA proves me wrong against Spain

[ISiddiqui]

Based on the formulas we DESERVED to be ranked that high at that point. It tends to happen when you advance to the Quarterfinals of the World Cup and then kick ass in qualifying matches for the next WC (IIRC, the US only lost once in Qualifying for WC06 and that was to Mexico in Azteca).

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

Meh, if we're talking about luck what about those two awful red cards in the Italy and Brazil games, the handball not called against Egypt, the two posts hit against Brazil that would have totally changed the goal differential scenarios, etc.

Fully deserved.

Your position is that the US deserves to be in the semifinals? Deserves? They played 135 minutes of the most embarrassing soccer I've ever seen.

The Brazil game had a better chance of being 6-0 then it did 3-2.

The red card against Italy was bad, the one against Brazil not nearly as bad and the game was well over before it happened anyway.

[bob]

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the US moves on. But I hate the way three-way tie breakers are decided. In my opinion, once you get it down to 2 teams, it should go back to head to head. In this case, goal differential was the same, but the US scored more goals so they move on. Given that Italy beat the US, to me it seems they should go on.

My opinion was the same given the Texas-Texas Tech-Oklahoma tie last year (I think) in the Big 12.

[terpkristin]

I missed the game.

Stunned the US is moving on, they really have no business doing so. But, I also did think we got a tougher draw than some.

Yay for tiebreak rules..
/tk

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

Your position is that the US deserves to be in the semifinals? Deserves? They played 135 minutes of the most embarrassing soccer I've ever seen.

The Brazil game had a better chance of being 6-0 then it did 3-2.

The red card against Italy was bad, the one against Brazil not nearly as bad and the game was well over before it happened anyway.

+1

I said to my brother after watching the Italy game.

"If this is the core of the team that goes to WC 2010 without significant changes, this team will lose all 3 games and will be outscored best case scenario 9-2 (with 1 goal on a PK and one from the run of play)."

I don't really think there are enough changes that can be made to make this team good enough to avoid going "3 and out" at the WC. Best case scenario they keep the goal differential in the 3 games to like a max of -4.

[bulletsponge]

as a US soccer fan im only dissapointed in the fact the thay worthless coach Bradley will probably keep his job, unless maybe Spain totaly humiliate us

[rowech]

Originally Posted by bulletsponge

as a US soccer fan im only dissapointed in the fact the thay worthless coach Bradley will probably keep his job, unless maybe Spain totaly humiliate us

I thought the team played really well six to eight months ago. Now some of these guys have no heart/passion at all. Agreed with some others that if this is our team, it's going to be ugly next year. (if we qualify)

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

Your position is that the US deserves to be in the semifinals? Deserves? They played 135 minutes of the most embarrassing soccer I've ever seen.

The Brazil game had a better chance of being 6-0 then it did 3-2.

The red card against Italy was bad, the one against Brazil not nearly as bad and the game was well over before it happened anyway.

The US deserved to advance more than Italy or Egypt, yes. That is different from playing well. Italy was shocking against Brazil, not much better against Egypt, and had some breaks against the US. Egypt actually played alright over the course of the tournament but with qualification on the line laid a total sticker today.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by bulletsponge

as a US soccer fan im only dissapointed in the fact the thay worthless coach Bradley will probably keep his job, unless maybe Spain totaly humiliate us

i don't think the USSF is likely to change coaches in the run-up to a cup. unfortunately. hopefully right after though.

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

i don't think the USSF is likely to change coaches in the run-up to a cup. unfortunately. hopefully right after though.

Yeah, even if the US lost every match 4-0 Bradley would still have been the coach next summer. I bet the US failing to qualify for the WC would be the only way they'd fire him. I'm not a big fan of him either but that's my impression.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

The US deserved to advance more than Italy or Egypt, yes.

They deserved to advance more than South Africa too. They stunk in every game. They only got through cos of the weak group, tell me that draw wasnt fixed to keep the hosts in it.

[B & B]

What better for chance?

S.Africa beating Brazil

or

USA beating Spain

or

My ass taste like strawberries???

[Radii]

I think option 3 is the most likely but good luck proving it.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Based on the formulas we DESERVED to be ranked that high at that point. It tends to happen when you advance to the Quarterfinals of the World Cup and then kick ass in qualifying matches for the next WC (IIRC, the US only lost once in Qualifying for WC06 and that was to Mexico in Azteca).

Seriously, whoopity fucking do. We beat the likes of Canada and Guatemala in the Gold Cup for a couple of years and Mexico on a neutral field. We advanced in the 02 World Cup with 4 points thanks to some incredible luck, and did so again (with only 3) in the FIFA needs a paycheck cup yesterday. We have maybe five quality players on the whole team and that's with counting some players as half.

We're about as good as Scotland or Norway, only we've been luckier than they have. We haven't deserved a GD thing outside of beating the other teams from this continent.

[MJ4H]

I think the entire point was that USA was ranked that high because the formula is flawed (it is a really difficult thing to get right when opponents are segregated as much as they are in this game) not because FIFA was looking to make money.

[Big Fo]

The FIFA Rankings have always been crap. ELO Ratings ftw.

eloratings.net

[gstelmack]

Something's up there as well with the US jumping from 25th to 14th just by beating Egypt...

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Something's up there as well with the US jumping from 25th to 14th just by beating Egypt...

I think its pretty difficult to do an accurate soccer ratings formula. How many games do countries play at comptetitions that they go all out to win?

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I think its pretty difficult to do an accurate soccer ratings formula. How many games do countries play at comptetitions that they go all out to win?

insert boston celtics joke here

[Cringer]

As I just posted in the soccer forum, I was happy watching the game but in the end it kind of sucks because Spain will probably crush the US and Bob Bradley will keep his job. Not only will Bradley keep his job, but since he won one game, he will probably keep going on as is. Screw Adu, screw Torres, screw trying to give other backs a chance even though our defense has been horrible for the most part.

Great win by the US. If Kljestan and Beasley never see the field again then something good came out of this. I doubt I am that lucky though.

[Fighter of Foo]

Who, exactly, is Bradley supposed to play? It's not like the guys on the bench are appreciably better. You're pining for Adu and Torres? Those two are going to make the difference? All the anti-Bradley stuff is just thinly veiled frustration at the players. It's not like you're going to get an appreciably better coach either.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Cringer

As I just posted in the soccer forum, I was happy watching the game but in the end it kind of sucks because Spain will probably crush the US and Bob Bradley will keep his job. Not only will Bradley keep his job, but since he won one game, he will probably keep going on as is. Screw Adu, screw Torres, screw trying to give other backs a chance even though our defense has been horrible for the most part.

Great win by the US. If Kljestan and Beasley never see the field again then something good came out of this. I doubt I am that lucky though.

exactly. and that's why i'm unhappy. i would have rather they lost and then he realized that he needed to change things up, etc. or best case scenario he got canned (although i don't think that was ever gonna happen before the WC i suppose). Now we're stuck with "same old same old."

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Something's up there as well with the US jumping from 25th to 14th just by beating Egypt...

There isn't a big difference between the 14th best team and the 25th best anyway. 200 points separate Spain (#1) and Italy (#6), 200 points also separate Russia (#7) and Poland (#44). On the field there isn't a big difference between the good teams except for the very best I think these rankings reflect that reality pretty well.

The US came in ranked 15th in the rankings, dropped to 19th after the Italy game, to 25th after the Brazil match and are back to where they started. The losses were to top teams so they didn't hurt near as much as losing to someone on a similar level or below. Egypt are the champions of Africa and were ranked similarly to the US coming into the third game. Confederation Cup matches are also more heavily weighted than friendlies or even World Cup qualifiers.

The ELO Ratings would never have put the US fifth as they were in the FIFA rankings going into the 2006 World Cup (US was 14th then according to the ELO ratings).

[Big Fo]

I like Adu as much as anyone but he need a move to a club that will play him this summer.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

exactly. and that's why i'm unhappy. i would have rather they lost and then he realized that he needed to change things up, etc. or best case scenario he got canned (although i don't think that was ever gonna happen before the WC i suppose). Now we're stuck with "same old same old."

I do not understand. If we had other players who were any good, they'd already be playing.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

Who, exactly, is Bradley supposed to play? It's not like the guys on the bench are appreciably better. You're pining for Adu and Torres? Those two are going to make the difference? All the anti-Bradley stuff is just thinly veiled frustration at the players. It's not like you're going to get an appreciably better coach either.

Adu, Torres and Charlie Davies are all appreciably better than Beasley, Kljestan, the Dempsey we've seen on the field for the US, Feilhaber, and Conor Casey. (Bornstein also sucks, but I'll accept there's no good left backs, unless you want to move Bocanegra or Spector there considering they play it for their clubs.) And anyone on the bench would be a better choice in the 80th minute, either when you're down to 10 men or when you're up 3-0 and desperately trying to hold on (even against a team missing its top 3 strikers), yet Bradley's continued sub pattern is shockingly bad. And yes, there are better options, even in MLS. Kinnear, Nicol, even ex-assistant Nowak, not to mention U-20 coach Thomas Rongen who manages to get the US to advance while playing attacking football (and if he doesn't in Egypt, it'll just reinforce that Adu was a special player who led them past Brazil etc. in 07).

But sure, let's accept mediocrity, 9 behind the ball with a lone striker up top and trying to grind out results off long balls, sloooooowww counter-attacks and set pieces. It's only the way we played 20 years ago when we were running out college players.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

I do not understand. If we had other players who were any good, they'd already be playing.

Because there's no way over the hill players who don't even dress for their club like Beasley would still get run out game after game when they don't have it? Even if you want to say Bradley finally got it right and didn't play him against Egypt, it took 3 games too long. How long did Jozy Altidore take to finally get significant playing time (and he still comes off for Benny Feilhaber when we need a 3rd goal?)

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Because there's no way over the hill players who don't even dress for their club like Beasley would still get run out game after game when they don't have it? Even if you want to say Bradley finally got it right and didn't play him against Egypt, it took 3 games too long. How long did Jozy Altidore take to finally get significant playing time (and he still comes off for Benny Feilhaber when we need a 3rd goal?)

Beasley I'll grant you, but the rest just proves my point. This is standard US Fan BS.

Adu, Torres and Davies are the textbook definition of mediocre. And I LIKE Torres and think he could develop into a legitimately good player. Dempsey is one of our half decent players, you really want him to sit so someone like Adu can play? Really? Altidore hasn't been particularly good either, though he played well against Egypt but was obviously gassed after 70 minutes.

Every year, we have some player who is under 24 and in form who played well for the national team and every year, there is clamoring for him to get significant playing time over mediocre option X. That's valid. What's stupidly annoying is assuming that:

a) New young player is particularly better
b) New young player will get appreciably better by playing more (This is true, but WAY overemphasized)
c) New young player's form will continue

For any given game, we have around 5 good players (Using fractions). Whoever fills out the rest of the team does not alter this fact. Change coaches or players it does not matter. All the quibbling in the world will not change this and I wish our superfans would stop because it's fucking annoying.

It's like a .500 baseball team complaining about their fifth starter. There are much bigger problems and it doesn't really matter.

And one more thing, how do you complaing about the decision to move Dempsey up top when he scored the third goal? The man hadn't made a tackle all tournament.

[rowech]

I'd like to see what Adu can do at this point. He's 20 so if I see anything good from him (and I have when I've watched him) I'd start to go with him a bit more.

They need to be willing to move some of these players around a bit out of their comfort zones to make sure they have the best 11 on the field. I feel like they're locked into this guy plays this position, this guy plays this position, etc. I'd like to simply see our best 11 players on the field in some shape/form.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

Beasley I'll grant you, but the rest just proves my point. This is standard US Fan BS.

Adu, Torres and Davies are the textbook definition of mediocre. And I LIKE Torres and think he could develop into a legitimately good player. Dempsey is one of our half decent players, you really want him to sit so someone like Adu can play? Really? Altidore hasn't been particularly good either, though he played well against Egypt but was obviously gassed after 70 minutes.

Every year, we have some player who is under 24 and in form who played well for the national team and every year, there is clamoring for him to get significant playing time over mediocre option X. That's valid. What's stupidly annoying is assuming that:

a) New young player is particularly better
b) New young player will get appreciably better by playing more (This is true, but WAY overemphasized)
c) New young player's form will continue

Oh, I think I've been very consistent in which young players I've wanted to see play for the NT. Freddy played once recently - late against Costa Rica - and we looked markedly better, generated more chances with him in for 20 minutes than the 70 without, and we scored our only goal with him out there. Then he sits for the next 4 games, even when we go down 3-0, even when we desperately need goals late, even when we have unused subs leftover.

On point B, we had 3 players tear it up at the U-20's. Baby Bradley has received every minute of playing time since for the MNT, and has clearly progressed as a player. Altidore has finally broken in within the past couple months as our best striker, and has clearly gotten better despite being misused as a target striker against good competition when he's clearly infinitely better with a 2nd striker, whether that's Davies, Ching, Adu, Dempsey or Donovan (clearly not Conor Casey). Adu meanwhile did more in his first 2 months with Benfica than Altidore did last season in Spain, was our best field player against both Spain and Argentina despite limited time and can't seem to get on the field since. Whenever he does, our attack immediately looks more dangerous, we don't give up goals, yet somehow his detractors always find a new reason to discredit him.

And the sitting Dempsey thing has nothing to do with in-form Dempsey (as a Revolution/MNT fan, god knows what that even means), but as you yourself point out, the one who hadn't done anything in 250+ minutes.

And one more thing, how do you complaing about the decision to move Dempsey up top when he scored the third goal? The man hadn't made a tackle all tournament.

Because he scored on a header off a cross and we took out our best heading attacker? Even if I were to accept the line that Altidore was gassed, which I didn't see, there are other options. Feilhaber has always looked terrible as a wing and isn't going to give any more defensive help.