OT: Boneyard "Other Football" World Cup Thread

[Carl Spackler]

BTW: Aside note - Klinsmann is quickly becoming an entertaining and interesting coach to me. THe guy is clearly a competitor. Big time, and doesn't beat around the bush with BS. Was watching post game interviews late last night, and Dempsey is pretty sure his nose is broke, and while he played through it, it was clear when he walked off the field that he wanted back on the field, and wasn't coming off - had trouble breathing - wasn't the same player before taking that shot rest of the game. Love it. That's our captain for the USA team.

Klinsmann, after the game, was asked about Dempsey's nose, and he said somethign to the effect paraphrasing: "Ja - it's broken, but that's fine, he'll be sore a few days then fin ok in a few days, I broke mine 3 or 4 times too. It happens"

I"m sure it's out there somewhere on the interwebs to watch. THat's the kind of American attitude I wanted to see, and I do believe that having that kind of physicality out there, will force the referee's hands, and make the officiating less of an obstacle, when that kind of physical play and not faking being hurt, early = nd when an old pro like Jermaine Jones, gets a warning for scissoring a guys neck with his legs in response to hard after a hard tackle early in the game, and then does flop and act a bit late? Well - it's part of the game right?

 

[meyers7]

Man - a tie is a loss! LOL.

Just pretend Jennifer is your sister.

Really, I get the concept, but I'm pure in american football, soccer is very interesting to me, but it's simply another game, where you need to impose what you want to do on the other team to win. To do so, you need the requisite talent, skill, and physical ability to compete with the opponents on your schedule. Then you need the plan to do it that can work, and you need to prepare and be mentally tough enough to execute the plan and get the job done.

Yea, I don't know if we have the requisite talent, skill to impose what we want to do on Portugal. We might be more athletic (outside of Ronaldo and Eder). But they are (even without Pepe, Coentrao, and Almeida) better than us. However, without them, with the heat, etc. we have as good a chance as we are gonna get to beat/tie them.

So far, from what I've seen, Ghana looks to be a much more difficult opponent for the USA than Portugal. They weren't very tall, but they were fast, very athletic and had significantly better ball skills.

Portugal is significantly more technical and tactical than either us or Ghana. And Germany is beyond that. Which made Portugal look really bad.

But, on any given day.......

 

[DarthGrumpy]

3-1, decent start, but big tests awaiting all. Mexico v Brazil (Tuesday)

If Brazil plays like it did against Croatia, our neighbors to the south have a chance, assuming the referees don’t hand the game to Brazil. Brazil looks and is playing like all of their country’s hope, dreams, and problems are riding on the team’s shoulders.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Any one else notice him pull up a little with a hamstring tightness also? They froze a long ball by Ghana for an offsides call and he was standing right next to the passer hopping. They didn't even mention it and he played the whole game. So hopefully it doesn't pop up after the adrenalin is done.

Bedoya was also limping around for a bit. It was a rough game and Sunday's game will even be worse weatherwise.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

This certainly played out about as well as it could have for the USA. Minus the injuries. Getting the 3 points, having Portugal lose badly (goal diff) and having them lose 2 defenders and their main striker, having to play a huge portion of the game with 10 men, having the next game in Manaus. Really all the pieces are falling in place for the USA to get out of the group. We just have to do our job. Get a point off Portugal.

Not to mention that Ronaldo had to play the entire game on a bum leg. I doubt was part of Portugal’s plan. More likely, get a goal, go for a tie, and then sub out and rest. His fitness on Sunday could be an issue.

 

[Carl Spackler]

It seems to me that everybody is hurting and will be hurting and losing players. The USA bench, without a doubt will be tested. I think that we lack ability to control the ball in the field well, that seems to be pretty much all ball skills. I think Bradley is pretty important player for that to happen with us and without him controlling the ball in the field, we don't have much depth behind him on the roster that can. I think everybody is underestimating the talent and skill level of the USA roster though, and that includes the knowledgeable fans here.

There is definitely a difference in skill level from the elite world players to the USA roster, when ball handling, and that is a weakness, but clearly - it can't be that much a game breaker when you look at our W/L record since 2012, and now into this World Cup.

I tend to trust people at their word, and then verify. To a man, I say again, coaches and players, they have ALL been consistent publicly that they think they have the talent and ability to compete with anybody on their schedule. So far, the verifiable evidence agrees.

 

[whaler11]

I've remarked on this before - I don't get this soccer attitude. Why the hell would Klinsmann get the team prepared NOT to play to win????

I understand that you need to be realistic about expectations and matchups and your ability to compete - that is always the case, in any sport, at any level of competition individual or team - but in every single interview and media piece I've seen for weeks leading up to this tournament, every single player and coach has been consistent that they believe they have the talent and ability to compete!!

Win and advance. No time for losing.

If you only need a field goal to win a football game at the end do you wildly throw balls into the endzone and risk an interception?

The goal is to advance in the tournament - not to coach the team to meaningless cliches.

If you only need a draw and are in position to get it - you would be an idiot to risk losing to pound your chest over meaningless things.

 

[whaler11]

Man - a tie is a loss! LOL.

Really, I get the concept, .

Your first two lines contradict themselves. Ties are not losses. That seems pretty obvious from the way they calculate the standings but....

 

[Carl Spackler]

Your first two lines contradict themselves. Ties are not losses. That seems pretty obvious from the way they calculate the standings but....

Whaler......you are sooooooo "that" guy. LOL.

I put the LOL after that win/loss/tie comment there because I was making a point. Given the choice of playing a game to win loss or tie, I choose win every time. Ties don't mean much to me. I understand they happen in soccer, and in other sports like hockey, and count towards standings and rankings - but seriously - whatever - you are "that" guy. I mean this in a good way.

 

[Carl Spackler]

If you only need a field goal to win a football game at the end do you wildly throw balls into the endzone and risk an interception?

The goal is to advance in the tournament - not to coach the team to meaningless cliches.

If you only need a draw and are in position to get it - you would be an idiot to risk losing to pound your chest over meaningless things.

You're talkign about somethign different now, than what I'm talking about. The overall objective, IMNSHO is to win - always. The only reason, a team would ever be in position to do what you are saying, is if they are already qualified to advance in a competitive format. THis happens in pro football every year, when teams qualify for the playoffs early. You might choose to rest players, and play a different strategy...

but in the case of the USA, unless we've already qualified to advance, I don't see any point in developing a game plan that is designed to gain a tie at the end over a win, and even then I don't see the purpose. I highly doubt that Klinsmann is the type of coach that would do that, perhaps previous USA coaches did - and maybe they had to, because they knew they had very little chance to win based on physical matchup. THe only reason to design a game plan that would be that conservative to look for the outcome to be a tie would be because physical matchups are so overwhelming. The physical matchups - I don't believe put us at that kind of disadvantage against what I've seen of Portugal. I think Ghana was a much more athletic, fast, and physical and mentally tough team than Portugal. DId portugal have a bad game? Maybe so - but they crumbled discipline wise in the middle of their game, and when a team does that, it's hard for them to be able to recover for another game in a competitive situation like a touranment like this.

I'm less concerned about Portugal, than I was about Ghana. I think we will take care of business against them, the real test will be Germany. I think Ghana will beat Germany. How's that!

 

[Husky25]

Whaler.you are sooooooo "that" guy. LOL.

I put the LOL after that win/loss/tie comment there because I was making a point. Given the choice of playing a game to win loss or tie, I choose win every time. Ties don't mean much to me. I understand they happen in soccer, and in other sports like hockey, and count towards standings and rankings - but seriously - whatever - you are "that" guy. I mean this in a good way.

There are no longer any ties in Hockey. Every non-playoff game goes to penalty shots and playoff games go to sudden death. They play 20 minute periods until someone scores.

 

[Waquoit]

Not to mention that Ronaldo had to play the entire game on a bum leg.

That was where the witch doctor stuck the needle in the doll. USA caught a break that the guy was looking past us.

 

[Carl Spackler]

There are no longer any ties in Hockey. Every non-playoff game goes to penalty shots and playoff games go to sudden death. They play 20 minute periods until someone scores.

Once this qualifying round is over they probably got to PK's too right? There are no ties in a single elimination format.

 

[Carl Spackler]

That was where the witch doctor stuck the needle in the doll. USA caught a break that the guy was looking past us.

We really can't schedule them again.

 

[Husky25]

Once this qualifying round is over they probably got to PK's too right? There are no ties in a single elimination format.

THey play 2 15 minute extra time periods (i.e. non-sudden death). If they are still tied, then they go to PKs. I remember the 1994 World Cup Final (Roberto Baggio missed his PK over the cross bar) when the commentators harkened back to soccer matches in the early days where teams would play extra time and then continue a tied game days later.

 

[whaler11]

You're talkign about somethign different now, than what I'm talking about. The overall objective, IMNSHO is to win - always. The only reason, a team would ever be in position to do what you are saying, is if they are already qualified to advance in a competitive format. THis happens in pro football every year, when teams qualify for the playoffs early. You might choose to rest players, and play a different strategy...

but in the case of the USA, unless we've already qualified to advance, I don't see any point in developing a game plan that is designed to gain a tie at the end over a win, and even then I don't see the purpose. I highly doubt that Klinsmann is the type of coach that would do that, perhaps previous USA coaches did - and maybe they had to, because they knew they had very little chance to win based on physical matchup. THe only reason to design a game plan that would be that conservative to look for the outcome to be a tie would be because physical matchups are so overwhelming. The physical matchups - I don't believe put us at that kind of disadvantage against what I've seen of Portugal. I think Ghana was a much more athletic, fast, and physical and mentally tough team than Portugal. DId portugal have a bad game? Maybe so - but they crumbled discipline wise in the middle of their game, and when a team does that, it's hard for them to be able to recover for another game in a competitive situation like a touranment like this.

I'm less concerned about Portugal, than I was about Ghana. I think we will take care of business against them, the real test will be Germany. I think Ghana will beat Germany. How's that!

You don't really get the concept of a trade off between risk and reward.

 

[Carl Spackler]

You don't really get the concept of a trade off between risk and reward.

Now that's funny. We're talking about sports and competiting for championships. You don't seem to understand that I believe that we are not physically overmatched by our opponents. WHen physical ability is matched, the difference in the game will always be in preparation, plan, execution of plan and when opportunity arises to make game changing plays - to make them. If your plan is designed to gain a tie at the end rather than a win, that's stupidity IMNSHO.

If you are physically overmatched, you need to still plan to win, but have much different tactics. One of the players last night was talking about after the Ghana goal, thinking to hold on for the 1 point. only a few minutes left. Klinsmann did NOT allow that to happen - he told the players on the bench they will continue to get opportunity if they keep pushing for it, and they did.

Klinsmann himself his fighting this mentality that you exude. Pukey. Win the games.

 

[Carl Spackler]

THey play 2 15 minute extra time periods (i.e. non-sudden death). If they are still tied, then they go to PKs. I remember the 1994 World Cup Final (Roberto Baggio missed his PK over the cross bar) when the commentators harkened back to soccer matches in the early days where teams would play extra time and then continue a tied game days later.

I'm beginning to think that soccer players need to be the most well conditioned athletes in the world at the elite level. To get to PK's would take 120 minutes + whatever extra time they tack on.

 

[whaler11]

Now that's funny. We're talking about sports and competiting for championships. You don't seem to understand that I believe that we are not physically overmatched by our opponents. WHen physical ability is matched, the difference in the game will always be in preparation, plan, execution of plan and when opportunity arises to make game changing plays - to make them. If your plan is designed to gain a tie at the end rather than a win, that's stupidity IMNSHO.

If you are physically overmatched, you need to still plan to win, but have much different tactics. One of the players last night was talking about after the Ghana goal, thinking to hold on for the 1 point. only a few minutes left. Klinsmann did NOT allow that to happen - he told the players on the bench they will continue to get opportunity if they keep pushing for it, and they did.

Klinsmann himself his fighting this mentality that you exude. Pukey. Win the games.

Trying to get three points against Ghana yesterday and being in the same position Sunday if Germany beats Ghana will be a very different thing.

Maybe you think Klinsmann will do something stupid on Sunday if it's tied late and they only need a point but I can promise you that he won't regardless of what you think he's going to do.

As for the US not being physically overmatched in some of their matchups... did you actually see the game yesterday?

 

[ZooCougar]

Whaler.you are sooooooo "that" guy. LOL.

I put the LOL after that win/loss/tie comment there because I was making a point. Given the choice of playing a game to win loss or tie, I choose win every time. Ties don't mean much to me. I understand they happen in soccer, and in other sports like hockey, and count towards standings and rankings - but seriously - whatever - you are "that" guy. I mean this in a good way.

In our case, a tie is one point. It's more useful to think of the first round as one game.

 

[ZooCougar]

Now that's funny. We're talking about sports and competiting for championships. You don't seem to understand that I believe that we are not physically overmatched by our opponents. WHen physical ability is matched, the difference in the game will always be in preparation, plan, execution of plan and when opportunity arises to make game changing plays - to make them. If your plan is designed to gain a tie at the end rather than a win, that's stupidity IMNSHO.

If you are physically overmatched, you need to still plan to win, but have much different tactics. One of the players last night was talking about after the Ghana goal, thinking to hold on for the 1 point. only a few minutes left. Klinsmann did NOT allow that to happen - he told the players on the bench they will continue to get opportunity if they keep pushing for it, and they did.

Klinsmann himself his fighting this mentality that you exude. Pukey. Win the games.

Klinsmann is a realist. If it is in our best interest to to play for a draw, then he will play the team for a draw. Maybe you should just observe the World Cup, since it is your first and refrain from providing us expert commentary.

 

[BlueMAB]

Now that's funny. We're talking about sports and competiting for championships. You don't seem to understand that I believe that we are not physically overmatched by our opponents. WHen physical ability is matched, the difference in the game will always be in preparation, plan, execution of plan and when opportunity arises to make game changing plays - to make them. If your plan is designed to gain a tie at the end rather than a win, that's stupidity IMNSHO.

If you are physically overmatched, you need to still plan to win, but have much different tactics. One of the players last night was talking about after the Ghana goal, thinking to hold on for the 1 point. only a few minutes left. Klinsmann did NOT allow that to happen - he told the players on the bench they will continue to get opportunity if they keep pushing for it, and they did.

Klinsmann himself his fighting this mentality that you exude. Pukey. Win the games.

Your focus on physicality is making you lose sight of what's most important in soccer, talent.

Guys like Ronaldo can use their size and speed to over match defenders, yes. Zlatan is another example, physical gifts play a role.

But guys like Maradona, Pele, Neymar, Iniesta, Messi. They use their skills and technique. When you have a team like Spain that can make pinpoint one touch passes to each other, you don't need to be bigger, faster, or stronger to make an opponent look foolish.

Footwork, technique, ball skills, all areas where Portugal outclasses the US, and all reasons we could lose to them despite the fact they don't have any huge physical advantage.

 

[ZooCougar]

First of all... I AM SO HAPPY we won. When you're winning in the World Cup, scoring points then watching is so much better. The pressure is off and I can really enjoy watching the other games. Just like when our football team is winning, it just makes taking in the whole sport that much more palatable.

Here are my thoughts. I can't tell you how many times I have seen the USMNT dominate play and LOSE. Winning 2-1 against our Nemesis is huge regardless of the ethereal style points. Both US goals were beatiful by the way.

Look, this team played balls out in qualifying. It's not a top 5 team in the world by any stretch of the imagination. But it is a good side that can find many ways to win. If they are doing what they can do, then I am pretty confident that this is going to be a fun World Cup.

What am I worried about? While losing Jozy may seem killer, we have weapons. What worries me is conditioning. We had too many dudes dinged up from the conditions last night. I am worried that we missed the boat somewhere....

 

[Carl Spackler]

Trying to get three points against Ghana yesterday and being in the same position Sunday if Germany beats Ghana will be a very different thing.

Maybe you think Klinsmann will do something stupid on Sunday if it's tied late and they only need a point but I can promise you that he won't regardless of what you think he's going to do.

As for the US not being physically overmatched in some of their matchups... did you actually see the game yesterday?

This has got to be the hang up then in what I'm writing. What makes you think that I'm advocating that the team being doing something stupid late in a game? I would wager anything, that when the game plan is set up for Portugal - regardless of the outcome of the Germany - Ghana game, that the plan will be designed to get a win, and not a tie. That's all. I've already said that the Ghana team had superior individual talent and ball skills. That didn't win them the game though didn't? Inferior ball skills hasn't gotten this team a 34-7-7 record in the past 2 years in international competition and an opening game win in the World Cup.

I understand that in situations, a tie is preferable outcome than a loss - no duh. I think soccer affecionado's should consider themselves lucky that ties do count for points.

Look - when it comes to competing in sports, my attitude is win. Period. If you are not there to win, then go home. I understand that in the sport of soccer, that a situation may exist very late in a game, where there is a strong argument that it is better to protect a tie than to push for a win. I disagree with that argument, and always will. My counter to that argument is that your game plan, strategy and tactics should account for the opportunities to be generated to win - until the final whistle blows - ESPECIALLY in a situation where the game is tied very late. In game changes are a necessary part of competition, very often, but if the game is tied late, that is the very LAST time that you want to deviate from your plans -especially when it comes to scoring and attack - that's how frigging win! SCORE!

The wild card, and thing - as mentioned - and by no means am I minimizing it - is TALENT level. We'll see what happens on Sunday.

 

[Waquoit]

Footwork, technique, ball skills, all areas where Portugal outclasses the US, and all reasons we could lose to them despite the fact they don't have any huge physical advantage.

But they really seem like a bunch of candy-asses with a good deal of quit in them.