OT: Boneyard "Other Football" World Cup Thread | Page 77 | The Boneyard

OT: Boneyard "Other Football" World Cup Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Carl Spackler said:
by contrast from 1916 until Dan's favorite Bora -
Expand ...

Just to put in context how good of a coach Bora Milutinovic really was: He was one of only two coaches to bring 5 different nations to the World Cup (including China, which is nothing short of a miracle of God!). He is the ONLY coach to have brought 4 different countries to the knockout stage of the World Cup. And his nickname? "Miracle Worker". I'm not making that up. The worst move that the US Soccer Federation ever made was to let that guy go...
 
UConnDan97 said:
Just to put in context how good of a coach Bora Milutinovic really was: He was one of only two coaches to bring 5 different nations to the World Cup (including China, which is nothing short of a miracle of God!). He is the ONLY coach to have brought 4 different countries to the knockout stage of the World Cup. And his nickname? "Miracle Worker". I'm not making that up. The worst move that the US Soccer Federation ever made was to let that guy go...
Expand ...

Bill Parcells of soccer huh. I learned something new today. Thanks.

If the list I put up from wikipedia is accurate though, I have a big question about scheduling that doesn't make sense to me. How/who sets up schedules. I understand there are regular tournaments and things, but what about these friendly things? It looks to me that the USA starting having international success at teh same point in time where we starting playing a whole heck of a lot more on a yearly basis, under the same coaches for a couple of years. is this a chicken and egg thing? Are there more games because they were winnign more and playing more in tournaments, or where there actually more games scheduled - regardless of tournament play? It makes sense that playing more, is going to give you greater chance of success, becuase it's not a sport like football, where the human body simply can't handle game competition year round.
 
Carl Spackler said:
Bill Parcells of soccer huh. I learned something new today. Thanks.

If the list I put up from wikipedia is accurate though, I have a big question about scheduling that doesn't make sense to me. How/who sets up schedules. I understand there are regular tournaments and things, but what about these friendly things? It looks to me that the USA starting having international success at teh same point in time where we starting playing a whole heck of a lot more on a yearly basis, under the same coaches for a couple of years. is this a chicken and egg thing? Are there more games because they were winnign more and playing more in tournaments, or where there actually more games scheduled - regardless of tournament play? It makes sense that playing more, is going to give you greater chance of success, becuase it's not a sport like football, where the human body simply can't handle game competition year round.
Expand ...

Well, there are a couple of things to consider. The first is how many "friendlies" you schedule with other nations, and to your point, I'm sure that we have increased that number when compared to 1988. The second is how many tournaments / qualifiers you are eligible for. That number has most certainly increased. Not just being in the World Cup, but qualifying for the different stages of the World Cup qualifying rounds (i.e., "the hexagonal"). And not just World Cup related games, but also the different side tournaments that occur that need to be qualified for, like the Confederations Cup and such.

In other words, success breeds more opportunities to play against other nations. Playing against other nations breeds more opportunities to develop players. And so on, and so on. There's no secret why the final stages of the World Cup seem to feature the same countries every year for the past 80 years... ;)
 
SAMCRO said:
I'm going to guess, if all added up, somewhere around what Hazard makes on his own, or maybe Hazard and half of Kompany combined.
Expand ...

Rough guess. But the total value of the USMNT may be about 85 million.
 
UConnDan97 said:
Well, there are a couple of things to consider. The first is how many "friendlies" you schedule with other nations, and to your point, I'm sure that we have increased that number when compared to 1988. The second is how many tournaments / qualifiers you are eligible for. That number has most certainly increased. Not just being in the World Cup, but qualifying for the different stages of the World Cup qualifying rounds (i.e., "the hexagonal"). And not just World Cup related games, but also the different side tournaments that occur that need to be qualified for, like the Confederations Cup and such.

In other words, success breeds more opportunities to play against other nations. Playing against other nations breeds more opportunities to develop players. And so on, and so on. There's no secret why the final stages of the World Cup seem to feature the same countries every year for the past 80 years... ;)
Expand ...

Makes sense.

Winning is a habit.

Sorry to keep pursuing, but are there more international tournaments now than there were before? By what I can tell, again by the simple list of numbers and assuming it's accurate, is that we went from about 60-70 years of playing literally less than 5 times a year, to playing about 6-9 games a year tops under some more consistent coaching, to once 1991 and your guy Bora showed up - playing 18-20 times a year, which has continued through to Klinsmann now.

I could be entirely wrong, but it seems to me that there aren't enough tournaments every year to explain that.
 
whaler11 said:
Perhaps I'm not blown away by JK's performance because I had higher expectations for the team than getting bulldozed by a Belgium team that got taken apart in pieces by Argentina?
Expand ...

The results themselves straddled the line of expectation depending on what your original view was on the likelihood of getting out of the group.

As far as play, certain guys did well, others not quite as we hoped. I don't think anyone had a really bad tournament. So, JK overall had the team well prepared.

But, if the bar is playing the style of attacking soccer promised he came up short. 2014 looked a lot like 2010, 2006, and 2002 and in some aspects not favorably.

Until we get world class player or two, this is where we are. If we get within one goal of the quarters or semis, it's a good year. We should be getting out of the group from now on.
 
Carl Spackler said:
Makes sense.

Winning is a habit.

Sorry to keep pursuing, but are there more international tournaments now than there were before? By what I can tell, again by the simple list of numbers and assuming it's accurate, is that we went from about 60-70 years of playing literally less than 5 times a year, to playing about 6-9 games a year tops under some more consistent coaching, to once 1991 and your guy Bora showed up - playing 18-20 times a year, which has continued through to Klinsmann now.

I could be entirely wrong, but it seems to me that there aren't enough tournaments every year to explain that.
Expand ...

Well, that's where the "friendlies" come in. A "friendly" match is simply an exhibition played between two countries based on a mutually agreed date and location. Normally, a country will schedule somewhere in between 3 and 8 friendlies per year (unless you are a World Cup host nation, and might need to schedule many more due to lack of qualifying games). Here is a schedule from 2013 for the USMNT, where the games without a letter in front of them are "friendlies" (3 games):

http://www.sportingnews.com/soccer/...fying-schedule-jurgen-klinsmann-clint-dempsey

EDIT: We had 7 friendlies in 2013. Here is a better list. Not sure why the previous list didn't have all the friendlies there:

http://www.ussoccerplayers.com/results
 
What Might Have Been Department: We should have had Giuseppi Rossi. The guy was born in New Jersey for cryin' out loud. Instead he chose to be snubbed twice for the World Cup by Italy. Would have fit us like a glove.
 
Waquoit said:
What Might Have Been Department: We should have had Giuseppi Rossi. The guy was born in New Jersey for cryin' out loud. Instead he chose to be snubbed twice for the World Cup by Italy. Would have fit us like a glove.
Expand ...

I was commenting about this yesterday with a soccer buddy of mine. I can completely understand Rossi's sentiment for wanting to play for Italy, as I grew up in a similar situation and environment. But I wonder if part of him regrets the decision now, since he hasn't really had an opportunity to shine for the Azzurri, whereas he would have undoubtedly been the star of the show here...
 
Think someone should mark that guy on a set piece?
 
HOLY duckK!!! I leave my desk for 86 seconds and Germany scores 3 MORE goals!?!?!?!?!?
 
Brazil has given up. Has there ever been a forfeit in the World Cup?
 
Lithuania in '92?

Oh wait that was Olympic basketball vs. the greatest single assembly of basketball talent (Minus Laettner) in history.
 
I don't know if comparisons make sense, the apples and oranges thing, but it seems that the USA playing Germany to 1-0 loss, after the Manaus jungle game, and forcing their captain to make an insanely long run to save a late game tying goal was that bad of a performance.
 
It only answers the question of what would have happened if we didn't have Tim Howard against Belgium.
 
This is ridiculous. Germany just made the extra point to take a 7-0 lead early in the 4th quarter.
 
Just watched Germany score something like 4 goals in 5 minutes in an ice cream parlor in southern Spain. That added about 3 more languages to the ones I already couldn't understand. That was nuts.
 
Carl Spackler said:
I don't know if comparisons make sense, the apples and oranges thing, but it seems that the USA playing Germany to 1-0 loss, after the Manaus jungle game, and forcing their captain to make an insanely long run to save a late game tying goal was that bad of a performance.
Expand ...

If one uses the Belgium-Argentina game to disparage the USA-BEL result, wouldn't it be honest to positively reevaluate the USA performance based on this result?
 
Well, just got home from the bar. Needless to say they're pretty content, but none too happy about giving up that last goal. :cool:

Future versions of the dictionary will have, under the definition of 'clinical dissection', a short video of this match.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
264
Guests online
1,137
Total visitors
1,401
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,054
Messages
4,380,458
Members
10,172
Latest member
mangers


.
..
Top Bottom