MaNuMaNiAc
06-09-2006, 06:28 PM
Found the above poll in SI.com and thought it would be interesting to see what people in this forum thought.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/grant_wahl/06/09/us.preview/index.html
The road is rougher
U.S. faces a more daunting challenge out of Group E
HAMBURG, Germany -- Four points. A win, a tie and a loss. It was enough to get the U.S. through the first round of the 2002 World Cup. But would it do the trick here? After doping out the first round, game by game, I don't think so. (More on that later.)
An equally intriguing question as the U.S. nears its Monday opener is: How should the U.S. define success at the World Cup?
It's a tricky question, not least because the Americans face a giant task if they want to match their quarterfinal run in '02. The Yanks would merely have to:
1. Beat out the Czech Republic (Monday's opening-game opponent) or Italy -- two legitimate title contenders -- in their first-round group, and then ...
2. Take out likely second-round foe Brazil -- the runaway Cup favorite -- in the Round of 16. (To avoid Brazil, the U.S. would almost surely have to win Group E.)
"To me, great success would be advancing out of our group," U.S. coach Bruce Arena argued to me earlier this year, not long after the World Cup draw. "It's a tremendous challenge, but I don't think it's any more challenging than 2002 was. [That group also] didn't look real good on paper. And thank God we're not playing these games on paper, or else we'd have no chance."
I don't buy all of that. This is a tougher draw than in '02, and you can be sure Arena isn't singing the "no chance on paper" tune to his players behind closed doors. From what I know of the way Arena's staff prepares its scouting reports, there is almost zero possibility that the Americans will be caught unprepared heading into these games.
So what are the U.S.' chances of advancing out of the first round? If you checked out Sports Illustrated's World Cup preview, you saw that I picked the Yanks to finish third in their group behind the Czechs and Italy. What you didn't see, unfortunately (due to limited space), was my prediction that the U.S. would play some good soccer, gain four points -- from a tie against the Czechs, a respectable loss to Italy and a win against Ghana -- and still finish behind the two European teams.
First off, let me issue the usual caveats. My predictions are often wildly wrong. The World Cup is especially difficult to forecast, and I'm due for a lifetime of karmic payback after correctly tabbing France to win it all in SI's World Cup '98 preview issue. Nor am I a big fan of predictions in general.
But the problem is that the U.S. could find itself in this situation heading into Game 3 against Ghana:
Czech Republic = 4 pts (after a tie against the U.S. and a win against Ghana)
Italy = 4 pts (after a tie against Ghana and a win against the U.S.)
U.S. = 1 pt (after a tie against the Czechs and a loss against Italy)
Ghana = 1 pt (after a tie against Italy and a loss against the Czechs)
Because the Czechs and Italy meet in the final group game, they could both play for the tie and ace out the U.S., even if the Americans beat Ghana to finish with four points.
Four years ago, South Korea and Portugal could have gone for a tie in Game 3 and eliminated the U.S. in an almost identical situation, but fortunately for the Americans, the Koreans didn't play along and pushed forward for the late winning goal to keep the U.S. alive.
I envision the Czechs and Italy being a lot more calculating if the same situation arises, which could create this final standing in the group (right).
Would I be upset if I'm wrong? Nope. Could the Yanks play reasonably well and go three and out? Yes. Could the main lesson of 2006 be how remarkable the quarterfinal run in '02 really was? You bet. This is what happens when you draw an excruciatingly hard group in a tournament where fortune is so fickle. (It's also fodder for another debate on why FIFA should seed every team in the draw instead of just the top eight teams, the better to ensure a fairer distribution of good teams.)
Of course, there could be a wild card in such a scenario: None of the Group E teams want to face Brazil in the Round of 16, which could force all four nations to push as hard as possible to win the group.
But even that may not be the case. "If you ask me right now, 'Are you willing to play in the Round of 16 against Brazil?' I'd take that," Arena told me in January. "After playing the Czech Republic and Italy and Ghana, do you think Brazil is going to be that awesome? Stand 'em up and knock 'em down, I guess."
Fair enough. While we're on the topic of wild speculation, here's one man's last stab of a guess at the U.S. lineup for the Czech game:
GK: Kasey Keller
D: Steve Cherundolo, Eddie Pope, Oguchi Onyewu, Eddie Lewis
M: DaMarcus Beasley, Pablo Mastroeni, Claudio Reyna, Bobby Convey
F: Landon Donovan, Brian McBride
If his health and stamina weren't still in question, John O'Brien would have been my pick to start instead of Mastroeni or Convey, but O'Brien's inability to go 90 minutes was enough reason in my mind to keep him out of the starting XI. After a lot of thought, I've also reasoned that Donovan will get the call up top instead of Eddie Johnson, which allows the U.S.' best finisher to play at forward and opens up a spot for the in-form Convey on the left wing (as Beasley switches to the right).
Can this lineup get a result against the Czechs? I think it's enough to maximize the U.S.' speed against a somewhat slow Czech back line and come away with, say, a 1-1 tie. What do you think? Send in your (suitably civil) comments to the World Cup mailbag, and we'll go from there.
Enjoy the start of the World Cup!
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/grant_wahl/06/09/us.preview/index.html
The road is rougher
U.S. faces a more daunting challenge out of Group E
HAMBURG, Germany -- Four points. A win, a tie and a loss. It was enough to get the U.S. through the first round of the 2002 World Cup. But would it do the trick here? After doping out the first round, game by game, I don't think so. (More on that later.)
An equally intriguing question as the U.S. nears its Monday opener is: How should the U.S. define success at the World Cup?
It's a tricky question, not least because the Americans face a giant task if they want to match their quarterfinal run in '02. The Yanks would merely have to:
1. Beat out the Czech Republic (Monday's opening-game opponent) or Italy -- two legitimate title contenders -- in their first-round group, and then ...
2. Take out likely second-round foe Brazil -- the runaway Cup favorite -- in the Round of 16. (To avoid Brazil, the U.S. would almost surely have to win Group E.)
"To me, great success would be advancing out of our group," U.S. coach Bruce Arena argued to me earlier this year, not long after the World Cup draw. "It's a tremendous challenge, but I don't think it's any more challenging than 2002 was. [That group also] didn't look real good on paper. And thank God we're not playing these games on paper, or else we'd have no chance."
I don't buy all of that. This is a tougher draw than in '02, and you can be sure Arena isn't singing the "no chance on paper" tune to his players behind closed doors. From what I know of the way Arena's staff prepares its scouting reports, there is almost zero possibility that the Americans will be caught unprepared heading into these games.
So what are the U.S.' chances of advancing out of the first round? If you checked out Sports Illustrated's World Cup preview, you saw that I picked the Yanks to finish third in their group behind the Czechs and Italy. What you didn't see, unfortunately (due to limited space), was my prediction that the U.S. would play some good soccer, gain four points -- from a tie against the Czechs, a respectable loss to Italy and a win against Ghana -- and still finish behind the two European teams.
First off, let me issue the usual caveats. My predictions are often wildly wrong. The World Cup is especially difficult to forecast, and I'm due for a lifetime of karmic payback after correctly tabbing France to win it all in SI's World Cup '98 preview issue. Nor am I a big fan of predictions in general.
But the problem is that the U.S. could find itself in this situation heading into Game 3 against Ghana:
Czech Republic = 4 pts (after a tie against the U.S. and a win against Ghana)
Italy = 4 pts (after a tie against Ghana and a win against the U.S.)
U.S. = 1 pt (after a tie against the Czechs and a loss against Italy)
Ghana = 1 pt (after a tie against Italy and a loss against the Czechs)
Because the Czechs and Italy meet in the final group game, they could both play for the tie and ace out the U.S., even if the Americans beat Ghana to finish with four points.
Four years ago, South Korea and Portugal could have gone for a tie in Game 3 and eliminated the U.S. in an almost identical situation, but fortunately for the Americans, the Koreans didn't play along and pushed forward for the late winning goal to keep the U.S. alive.
I envision the Czechs and Italy being a lot more calculating if the same situation arises, which could create this final standing in the group (right).
Would I be upset if I'm wrong? Nope. Could the Yanks play reasonably well and go three and out? Yes. Could the main lesson of 2006 be how remarkable the quarterfinal run in '02 really was? You bet. This is what happens when you draw an excruciatingly hard group in a tournament where fortune is so fickle. (It's also fodder for another debate on why FIFA should seed every team in the draw instead of just the top eight teams, the better to ensure a fairer distribution of good teams.)
Of course, there could be a wild card in such a scenario: None of the Group E teams want to face Brazil in the Round of 16, which could force all four nations to push as hard as possible to win the group.
But even that may not be the case. "If you ask me right now, 'Are you willing to play in the Round of 16 against Brazil?' I'd take that," Arena told me in January. "After playing the Czech Republic and Italy and Ghana, do you think Brazil is going to be that awesome? Stand 'em up and knock 'em down, I guess."
Fair enough. While we're on the topic of wild speculation, here's one man's last stab of a guess at the U.S. lineup for the Czech game:
GK: Kasey Keller
D: Steve Cherundolo, Eddie Pope, Oguchi Onyewu, Eddie Lewis
M: DaMarcus Beasley, Pablo Mastroeni, Claudio Reyna, Bobby Convey
F: Landon Donovan, Brian McBride
If his health and stamina weren't still in question, John O'Brien would have been my pick to start instead of Mastroeni or Convey, but O'Brien's inability to go 90 minutes was enough reason in my mind to keep him out of the starting XI. After a lot of thought, I've also reasoned that Donovan will get the call up top instead of Eddie Johnson, which allows the U.S.' best finisher to play at forward and opens up a spot for the in-form Convey on the left wing (as Beasley switches to the right).
Can this lineup get a result against the Czechs? I think it's enough to maximize the U.S.' speed against a somewhat slow Czech back line and come away with, say, a 1-1 tie. What do you think? Send in your (suitably civil) comments to the World Cup mailbag, and we'll go from there.
Enjoy the start of the World Cup!