are the americans just missing the point..?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Soccer is a great game.

How long do you figure before the US wins a World Cup?

I'm pretty sure we ought to make a serious run in at least one of the next three.

"Do you believe in miracles?"

Originally posted by howardgee
America's love affair with insipid, over-hyped tedious sports such as baseball and American "football" (cough, cough) is indicative of their shallow, vacuous society where fast-food rules and words like foetus have to be simplified so that their moronic populus can spell properly.

What a worthless idiot you are.

Originally posted by Red Night

How long do you figure before the US wins a World Cup?

I'm pretty sure we ought to make a serious run in at least one of the next three.

It's possible, although personally I think it unlikely (depending on what you mean by 'a serious run'😉. I'd put the US in the same category as quite a lot of other teams that could put a run together given good organisation and a bit of luck (like Turkey in 2002, Greece in Euro 2004). There are lots of teams at that level, so picking one out isn't easy.

For the US to become one of the teams I'd expect to be challenging for the title, I think one of the following needs to happen:

- the bulk of your team is successfully playing in the major European leagues (or South American at a push), prefereably for big clubs, or

- the US domestic league moves up in intensity a couple of notches

Originally posted by mtthw
It's possible, although personally I think it unlikely (depending on what you mean by 'a serious run'😉. I'd put the US in the same category as quite a lot of other teams that could put a run together given good organisation and a bit of luck (like Turkey in 2002, Greece in Euro 2004). There are lots of teams at that level, so picking one out isn't easy.

F ly for big clubs, or

- the US domestic league moves up in intensity a couple of notches

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Good one mtthw.

One thing is for sure there was certainly a lot of parity in the World Cup the last time around. So, if that continues, it will take a certain amount of luck for anyone to win.

Here is a riddle for you: On it's way to winning the 2006 World Cup, Italy defeated every country it faced, save one. Name the one Team Italy didn't beat?


Here's another one: 5 of the 10 greatest players of all time all played in the same league at the same time. Name that League.


P.S. i think we got hurt in the short run by the fact that so many of our younger players decided to stay and play in the US, rather than accept contracts to play in the major european leagues. BUT, that should help us in the long-run.

Originally posted by Red Night
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Good one mtthw.

One thing is for sure there was certainly a lot of parity in the World Cup the last time around. So, if that continues, it will take a certain amount of luck for anyone to win.

Here is a riddle for you: On it's way to winning the 2006 World Cup, Italy defeated every country it faced, save one. Name the one Team ...[text shortened]... t contracts to play in the major european leagues. BUT, that should help us in the long-run.

Now you're being delusional. You're really kidding yourself about the value of your league and your national team.

mtthw was spot on with his analysis.

Everyone tries to make a serious run on the title. Do you think they're there to lose? That say, national teams do set-up intermediate objectives. The US' main objective that is appropriate for its quality is to overcome the group stages. Anything beyond that should be seen as bonus.

But like I said, nobody plays to lose.

Originally posted by Red Night
One thing is for sure there was certainly a lot of parity in the World Cup the last time around. So, if that continues, it will take a certain amount of luck for anyone to win.

Here is a riddle for you: On it's way to winning the 2006 World Cup, Italy defeated every country it faced, save one. Name the one Team Italy didn't beat?

Here's another on ...[text shortened]... test players of all time all played in the same league at the same time. Name that League.

I was trying to be fair. It's true that any team needs luck to win, but obviously some teams would need more than others. The US drew with Italy. They also lost to the Czech Republic and Ghana, and I'd be surprised if either of those wins the world cup in the near future either.

And I know about the NASL. But how many of those players were near their peak when they played there?

Anyway, as I said, having your players at home is fine if you raise the intensity of the league (and I do mean intensity, rather than skill levels). But that's doesn't come easily.

Originally posted by mtthw
I was trying to be fair. It's true that any team needs luck to win, but obviously some teams would need more than others. The US drew with Italy. They also lost to the Czech Republic and Ghana, and I'd be surprised if either of those wins the world cup in the near future either.

And I know about the NASL. But how many of those players were near their pe ...[text shortened]... league (and I do mean intensity, rather than skill levels). But that's doesn't come easily.

They were all past their prime. But, it's still interesting that they all played in that one league at the same time.

Becks will be playing here in a year or two. He's past his prime as well. But, it will be fun to see him playing for the MetroStars.

Let's not forget, we came into the last world cup ranked 4th or 5th in the world. Which was too high. Now we're ranked 30th or 31st. Which is too low.

The best young player in the world is an American and set to go play for Man U.

2 of the best goalies in the world are Americans.

10 years ago all the European "experts" were saying that the US would never catch up.

In four more years we'll be even better.

As for having a more intense home league: England has one of the most intense in the world and it has done them any good.

Originally posted by Red Night
Let's not forget, we came into the last world cup ranked 4th or 5th in the world. Which was too high. Now we're ranked 30th or 31st. Which is too low.

The best young player in the world is an American and set to go play for Man U.

2 of the best goalies in the world are Americans.

10 years ago all the European "experts" were saying that the US wo ...[text shortened]... me league: England has one of the most intense in the world and it has done them any good.

The rankings have a whole lot of flaws, but that's another story.

But do you think you've particularly improved in the last four years? The US looked more effective in 2002 than 2006.

I'll give you the goalkeepers though. The US has produced several top class ones in recent years - an area England has been struggling with (which is disappointing, given some of the keepers we've had in the past: Banks, Shilton, Clemence, Seaman etc).

As for England's league - to be honest, I'm quite happy with our record. We've been consistently reaching quarter-finals. The only teams that have a clearly better record over recent years are the real big guns. Although I would like to see more of our players in other European leagues - that would give them more exposure to other styles of play.

Originally posted by Palynka
Now you're being delusional. You're really kidding yourself about the value of your league and your national team.

mtthw was spot on with his analysis.

Everyone tries to make a serious run on the title. Do you think they're there to lose? That say, national teams do set-up intermediate objectives. The US' main objective that is appropriate for its qual ...[text shortened]... ges. Anything beyond that should be seen as bonus.

But like I said, nobody plays to lose.

Portugal was an exciting team the last time around. I loved watching them play.

Every four years there are a couple of teams that make runs well past where they are supposed to. This year Portugal was one of those teams. In 2002 one of those teams was the US.

We made it to the final 8 before losing to eventual runner-up Germany 1-0.

I know it's painful to think about, but the US will win a World Cup sooner than you think.

Originally posted by Red Night
Portugal was an exciting team the last time around. I loved watching them play.

Every four years there are a couple of teams that make runs well past where they are supposed to. This year Portugal was one of those teams. In 2002 one of those teams was the US.

We made it to the final 8 before losing to eventual runner-up Germany 1-0.

I know it's painful to think about, but the US will win a World Cup sooner than you think.

Why is it painful?

Like I said, anything is possible in football. But it's not realistic to think that the US should set their goals on winning one of the next three cups.

I don't think our run was well past where we were supposed to be. We won against teams that were not as good as ours (even on paper), despite what the English may say (and we beated them in 2000, 2004 and 2006).

Originally posted by mtthw
The rankings have a whole lot of flaws, but that's another story.

But do you think you've particularly improved in the last four years? The US looked more effective in 2002 than 2006.

I'll give you the goalkeepers though. The US has produced several top class ones in recent years - an area England has been struggling with (which is disappointing, given ...[text shortened]... s in other European leagues - that would give them more exposure to other styles of play.

That is an interesting point. More exposure to different leagues is probably a good idea.

No question we were more exciting in 2002. I think in 2006 we made the same mistake as Brazil and England and relied a little too much on our veterans. It is funny to even think about the US having veterans.

I think we're better now than 2002 because we have a deeper talent pool. There was a lot more competition for positions this time than in 2002. We probably should have played some more of the young guys.

Going forward, I think that yesterdays coaching change will be huge for us. Arenas wasn't the right guy to take us to the next level. I'm very excited about Klinsmann. I think the players will respect him and I think we'll play a more sophisticated passing attack under his guidance.

Originally posted by Palynka
Why is it painful?

Like I said, anything is possible in football. But it's not realistic to think that the US should set their goals on winning one of the next three cups.

I don't think our run was well past where we were supposed to be. We won against teams that were not as good as ours (even on paper), despite what the English may say (and we beated them in 2000, 2004 and 2006).

That is just the way American's are. We set our goals high. We hire the best coaches and we play to win.

I seriously doubt that Jurgen would be here if he thought we were playing to lose.

Forget about winning one of the next three. Right now we are gearing up to win in 2010.

Originally posted by Red Night
That is just the way American's are. We set our goals high. We hire the best coaches and we play to win.

I seriously doubt that Jurgen would be here if he thought we were playing to lose.

Forget about winning one of the next three. Right now we are gearing up to win in 2010.

It is quite possible that the US will win the world cup in 2010.
Last world cup was very disappointing with the best teams freezing at the knockout stage, and anyone could have won it. If Australia hadn't been robbed by the cheating Eyeties, then they may well have gone on to win it.

Let's just hope that you don't resort to the cynical diving tactics used by France, Portugal and Italy in the last world cup.

Originally posted by howardgee
It is quite possible that the US will win the world cup in 2010.
Last world cup was very disappointing with the best teams freezing at the knockout stage, and anyone could have won it. If Australia hadn't been robbed by the cheating Eyeties, then they may well have gone on to win it.

Let's just hope that you don't resort to the cynical diving tactics used by France, Portugal and Italy in the last world cup.

Australia was another team that REALLY surprised this last time around.

Like all national team sports, the national team in soccer has become less important to the the players as the salaries for club teams have risen.

Countries send their all-stars. The younger players care more for their club and their next contract.

I know that it would have sounded absurd 10 years ago, but don't count out the USA. In many ways we have a lot more to play for than many other countries. We have a lot of young people playing the game and a ton of money to throw at getting better.

Originally posted by Red Night
Australia was another team that REALLY surprised this last time around.

Like all national team sports, the national team in soccer has become less important to the the players as the salaries for club teams have risen.

Countries send their all-stars. The younger players care more for their club and their next contract.

I know that it would have ...[text shortened]... We have a lot of young people playing the game and a ton of money to throw at getting better.

The Australian team have got many players playing in arguably the best club league in the world. (English Premiership - our 4 teams all topped their leagues in the European Cup today).

At the time of the last world cup, they included: Schwarzer, Viduka, Cahill and Kewell. Any team with players of that quality at the spine of the team will always have a chance of winning.