USSoccer

The fact that this is even being debated seriously is proof enough that there's nary a sane mind in a management position for the Chicago Cubs. In no universe is platooning Murton with a player like Freddie Bynum acceptable, except for apparently here at Wrigley. I'm becoming less and less emotionally attached to this team

Have you forgotten when Dusty ripped into Corey after hitting a walkoff HR, in full view of the camera and crowd?

But did he do the robot? I'm watching on the spanish channel because its more exciting, and I heard "Mr. Roboto". :lol: But no, he didnt Weak...

But did he do the robot?

Why sub out Joe Cole? That doesn't make sense to me.

Eriksson is the Dusty Baker of football managers for leaving Crouch on. Somewhere, Sir Alex is throwing a fit. Height never goes away. But speed never slumps. Does Crouch's height trump Owen's pace? What would Dusty say? Speed could slump in soccer if your legs get tired. My legs never got tired. :P Kidding. I was speaking like Dusty. I'm sure Owen was subbed because he's still not fully back from his broken foot.

Eriksson is the Dusty Baker of football managers for leaving Crouch on. Somewhere, Sir Alex is throwing a fit. Height never goes away. But speed never slumps. Does Crouch's height trump Owen's pace? What would Dusty say?

Eriksson is the Dusty Baker of football managers for leaving Crouch on. Somewhere, Sir Alex is throwing a fit.

The coach wouldn't, but as a player, if you have a perception of an opponent, it can play a powerful role in how focused you are on the field. I think the Italians are showing signs of overlooking us. To be so clueless about an opponent 2 days before a game is a very dangerous thing, and if they solely watch tape of the CZR game, or even the CZR game plus the send off series games, they're going to get a misleading, negative impression of us. Is it really misleading? They've been looking pretty damn awful lately. Sure they have the potential to play better, but will they? Yes and no. The send off games weren't great indicators because instead of using lineups he'd be likely to use in the WC, Arena used different combos like he still needed to find guys out. That, IMO, was stupid. Given that our full squad hadn't played together in about a year, he should have had starters out there the whole time. So while we didn't look good, a lot of that was due to weird combos of players who would never see the field in WC play. Also, the fact that he didn't play a starting lineup the whole time impacted the CZR game. It was the first time those guys had been on the field together, starting, in a while, and it's not shocking, for instance, that Lewis and Convey screwed up so badly leading to the first goal. So the question ends up being how quickly can the US gel? It was stupid that Arena didn't play the team together because the three send off games should have been preparation games. By the third game you should have had your team figured out. I think that's one of the questions. It was stupid, for instance, not to play McBride and Donovan up front more if Arena was going to use them that way opening up. Likewise, to not have the back four woking together all 3 games was stupid. I think Arena was more intent on evaluating the roles of his role players when he should have been making sure his team knew where each other would be in game-speed situations. It should have been much, much more important to get a shaky back line used to each other than getting John O'Brien from 70 to 75%, and getting Bob Bradley's kid in at the end of games.

The coach wouldn't, but as a player, if you have a perception of an opponent, it can play a powerful role in how focused you are on the field. I think the Italians are showing signs of overlooking us. To be so clueless about an opponent 2 days before a game is a very dangerous thing, and if they solely watch tape of the CZR game, or even the CZR game plus the send off series games, they're going to get a misleading, negative impression of us. Is it really misleading? They've been looking pretty damn awful lately. Sure they have the potential to play better, but will they? Yes and no. The send off games weren't great indicators because instead of using lineups he'd be likely to use in the WC, Arena used different combos like he still needed to find guys out. That, IMO, was stupid. Given that our full squad hadn't played together in about a year, he should have had starters out there the whole time. So while we didn't look good, a lot of that was due to weird combos of players who would never see the field in WC play. Also, the fact that he didn't play a starting lineup the whole time impacted the CZR game. It was the first time those guys had been on the field together, starting, in a while, and it's not shocking, for instance, that Lewis and Convey screwed up so badly leading to the first goal.

That surprises me. Well, now that I think about who the Italian coach is, it doesn't really surprise me. Italy looking so good in its first game surprised me. Maybe it means that Ghana is weaker than we all thought...

The coach wouldn't, but as a player, if you have a perception of an opponent, it can play a powerful role in how focused you are on the field. I think the Italians are showing signs of overlooking us. To be so clueless about an opponent 2 days before a game is a very dangerous thing, and if they solely watch tape of the CZR game, or even the CZR game plus the send off series games, they're going to get a misleading, negative impression of us.

Unless they're Spain. Seth, how are you feeling about the Italy game Saturday? Alternatingly optimistic and pessimistic. I like what I've heard from the US camp since the debacle, and that makes me encouraged. Then I think about their actual performance in the debacle, as well as the fact that Italy looked very very good, and Gattuso looks like he'll be fit, and I get discouraged. I gotta sit and think more about this one. I'm thinking that it's very possible that Italy might be thinking the US is going to be an easy win, and might let down a little. Buffon has been quoted as being "suprised" at the US and saying he "thought they were better than they are". I think they're going to overlook us a little bit, which would be fanastic, really. As long as the US comes out with any kind of intensity, with the right lineup, I'm thinking they can win. EDIT: Quoted for proof: If I were Arena I'd remind EJ, Donovan, Dempsey (especially), Gooch, Keller and McBride of this every chance I got.

Unless they're Spain. Seth, how are you feeling about the Italy game Saturday?

But this isn't going to happen... right? Which part, the "beating Italy" or the "winning out and still not advancing" part?

That's not going to last long. We're going to beat Italy. BTW, you had posted earlier that the US could win out and still finish 3rd in the group with 6 points. For this to happen, the Czechs would have to beat Ghana and lose to Italy. Italy would then end up with a GD of no worse (from their perspective) than +2. Obviously the margin of loss vs the US and the margin of victory vs CZR would impact that number. Basically if we won out and ended up 3rd, it would mean that our margin of victory vs ITA and GHA would likely be 1 goal per game, leaving us with a GD of -1. For us to win out and finish 3rd, ITA would have to beat CZR by no fewer than 5 goals (depending on the final score of the CZR/GHA game; if CZR wins by 2, then the ITA margin of victory must be greater than 5 for the US to advance). The final wild card is if the US beats Ghana by enough to pass ITA up in GD. For that to happen, assuming the US beats ITA by 1, whatever ITA beats the CZR by, we have to add 2 to tie on GD, and then I THINK we go through on head to head. Am I making sense here? So, essentially Saturday's games will entirely determine our WC fate. I'd say the best possible weekend outcome would be for the CZR to lose or tie Ghana, and we beat ITA, preferably by more than 1. EDIT: If we finish with 6 points and finish 3rd on GD, I'd consider it a successful cup, still. To wni 2 of your 3 games is no small feat.

Because he's fat?

i understand, and agree that it will work with some players, and the key phrase that you mentioned is "if you can get away with it." but previous games have shown that it doesnt work with dmb on the right and, to a lesser extent, donovan up top. if you are going to play your strongest 11, and convey is stronger than beasley, then i feel bruce shouldve asked himself whether dmb is stronger than dempsey/anyone else on the right, etc. agreed on dempsey and lewis as our wingers. One problem with Arena's pregame thinking seemed to be that he put waaaay too much stock in Convey's form in the send-off games. Yes, he looked very good, but look who he looked good against! Not exactly top teams, which should have led him to think that maybe he wasn't the best option to start in our most important game. That decision-to start Convey-directly contributed to the 1st goal which deflated us like a balloon. Bruce definetly was off for that game. He's going to have to raise his tactical and strategic thinking to beat Italy.

My dad did the same thing. I wanted to call him at work and tell him to not get excited but I couldn't because I knew he would be ticked if I did. I haven't talked to him yet but I'm sure he's not pleased that he went with media blackout all day and had to watch that atrocity of a match. It was a horrid thing. Such a letdown. Like getting kicked in the gut. From the start of the game you could tell that baaad things were happening. I feel for your dad, since he and I probably went thru the same range of emotion on it. I woke up this morning, though, feeling a bit better knowing that there was still at least 1 more meaningful game, and knowing that there's nowhere to go but up, since I think that's the worst they could have possibly played. Should we give you a heads up somehow if the next one is horrible too? I'll be in a birthing class with my wife until 5 on Saturday(5 weeks to go!). I think I'll be safe, unless you're able to skywrite the score as I walk to the car... :D

My dad did the same thing. I wanted to call him at work and tell him to not get excited but I couldn't because I knew he would be ticked if I did. I haven't talked to him yet but I'm sure he's not pleased that he went with media blackout all day and had to watch that atrocity of a match. It was a horrid thing. Such a letdown. Like getting kicked in the gut. From the start of the game you could tell that baaad things were happening. I feel for your dad, since he and I probably went thru the same range of emotion on it. I woke up this morning, though, feeling a bit better knowing that there was still at least 1 more meaningful game, and knowing that there's nowhere to go but up, since I think that's the worst they could have possibly played.

but defensively, dempsey is superior to convey, so that doesnt make sense. it wasnt ever really convey vs dempsey, but dmb vs dempsey. and bruce's stubborn insistance on dmb, added to his seeming lack of faith in dempsey means he lost out. putting your best 11 on the field isnt going to do a darn thing if you play them out of position. Prior to the Cup starting Arena was quoted as questioning Dempsey's defensive work rate. I agree with you that Dempsey is the superior player, both offensively and defensively, over Convey, who should have been used as a late game sub to put pressure on tired defenders. Arena, obviously, didn't see it that way. Given DMB's quotes after the game, and Arena's responses, DMB might not see the field again, which wouldn't be a terrible thing given his current form. Boca for Lewis makes a ton of sense, but I don't know if Arena will sit Lewis. He really likes Eddie on the wing. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked to see Eddie and Dempsey play the wing mid positions, with Boca at left back and O'Brien in the middle and Mastro on the bench. Your last statement there I do disagree with to a point. You should always put your best 11 on the field, and worry about positioning later if you can get away with it. I think Dempsey can play anywhere in the middle and be fine.

FWIW, Arena said he's going to make "tactical" changes for Saturday. I can only hope that means that Dempsey starts on the same side as Cherundolo, and O'Brien starts on the same side as Lewis. In fact, I'd play a 3-5-2 with Reyna, Mastro, Donovan, Dempsey & O'Brien in the middle and EJ and McBride up front. Certainly, though, as Seth mentioned Arena can't have Lewis and Convey on the same side. Defensively they were atrocious, which is hilarious since the only possible explanation behind Convey over Dempsey is defense. Also, set pieces have to be better. How many times did they play a set piece short only to have it played eventually all the way back? I'd much rather see every single set piece within 35 yards of goal go goalwards. Make opposing defenses defend McBride and Johnson in the 18. Italy can be beaten. Maybe this beatdown by the Czechs wakes our guys up, and they rally and play with a bit of inspiration, since they're playing for their tournament lives.

The best thing that might come out of the US v CZR game: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=370957&cc=5901 As bas as he looked, I can't say this is a bad thing.

Not to burst your bubble, but even if we beat Italy and Ghana, we might not advance. Let's just say that everybody in the group beats Ghana. If we beat Italy but Italy beats Czech Republic, all three would end up with 6 points. Then it would come down to goal differential. Considering the fact that we are already -3 on GD, we are in some serious trouble. If we win our remaining games the GD is sure to change to at least -1. If Italy beats the Czech Republic theirs is sure to change as well. Best Case=US wins out, Ghana beats Czechs and loses to the US, Italy loses to us and beats the Czechs. Italy 6, US 6, Ghana 3, Czech 3. Middle Case=US wins out, Czechs win out. US & CZR both with 6, Italy with 3, Ghana with 0. Uh-Oh=US wins out, Italy loses to the US but beats CZR, Ghana lose out. We must win both games by 2+ and Czechs must lose to Italy by 2+ OR if US beat ITA by 2 or more, ITA must beat Czechs by no more than 1, then US finish 2nd due to head to head vs ITA because goal differental is +1 for both, assuming the US don't beat Ghana by more than 2. Worst Case: US tie ITA and beat Ghana, CZR win out. US must beat Ghana by at least 4 and ITA must lose to CZR by at least 2. Super Choke Job Case: US lose out. USSoccer is depressed. Basically, we no longer can win the group-and we no longer control our destiny-unless we absolutely go on a scoring rampage, which is unlikely. The most optimistic I can be is that since the Czechs lost at least 1 player for the rest of the Cup yesterday, they may be vulnerable, so it's not out of the question that they could lose out. What may be out of the question is out ability to win out. Best I can see is us scratcing a 1 goal win against Italy and going into the Ghana game needed to win by at least2 and possibly more, depending on the Ghana-CZR game. What a nightmare start. Losing by 3 really puts us in a bind.

bruce's quotes after the game (speaking of, i dunno if anyone read beasleys, but im even more pissed with him after reading those) were criticizing landon and others for not being aggressive enough, and said something to the extent of "at least convey tried to run at defenders". it makes it even harder to understand why he didnt put clint in. hes the only one bold enough to try stuff, but he'll still run his socks off if it doesnt work. i wonder about bruce's sanity if the first name that comes to mind when someone says "fearless creative attacking flair" is josh friggin wolff. he has to put faith in clint- hell, he cant do much worse than dmb or convey. if dempsey doesnt start after arenas comments, i will be completely baffled. Praising Convey's game is a joke. It's not like he was creating any problems for the Czechs today. EVERYONE sucked. It was as if they time warped back to 1998.