Walking into my parent's house with a tummy full of Fourth of July fried hot dogs and fried dough to give my father some company for the all-time epic grudge match between the U.S. and Grenada in the opening match of the 2009 CONCACAF Gold Cup Saturday night, my first impressive probably summed up the ensuing 90 minutes.
Looking at the images beaming from Fox Soccer Channel on the flat screen television, it was like somebody smeared Vaseline all over the camera lenses at Seattle's Qwest Field and instead of a full-blown international match, it was 22 murky claymation figures running around on a green background.
The high definition beauty of the Confederations Cup on all levels, this wasn't. Looking at the screen was all you needed to know that this was a bit of a let down from an intensity standpoint.
And really, there's not much to say about the U.S.'s 4-0 victory over a team nicknamed of all things the'Spice Boys.' Grenada barely even bothered to put up a fight -- they might have well just worn the standard 'Opponent' jerseys. My rough estimate was the U.S. had the ball at least 80 percent of the time.
Suffice to say, not exactly a game to form any strong opinions one way or the other.
Regardless, Bob Bradley stuck with his now preferred 4-4-2 system with the holding midfielder rolls falling to Logan Pause alongside a leftover 90s era grunge bassist he found aimlessly roaming the streets of Seattle, err, Kyle Beckerman. Outside we got Robbie Rogers on the left and Stuart Holden on the right -- each impressing and scoring a goal.
Up top it was the continued progression of Charlie Davies and the first Freddy Adu sighting of the season. And no, and even though the game was in the Pacific Northwest, it wasn't a Sasquatch-like hoax. Adu actually played and scored a goal, to boot! There is film of it here. Adu doesn't even look back at the camera, either.
The defense? It was four guys and they're not even worth mentioning considering how little Grenada actually attacked during the match. It was a 25-3 advantage in shots for the U.S., 'nuff said. Troy Perkins made one save.
If anything, this match let this new-look U.S. team of fringe players get their footing going forward into the tournament. Rogers -- who assisted on a pair of goals on nice crosses from the left -- should continue to get looks throughout the tournament regardless of the opposition. Let's see if he can hack it since it's not like natural left-sided players with good delivery are growing on trees in the U.S.
Davies kept up his momentum from the Confederations Cup, scoring a nice goal -- albeit with a strange celebration -- on a nifty jump-kick cross from Heath Pearce after a ball was played over the top deep from the defense.
As for Adu, it took me this long to get into him.
In fairness, it was a mixed bag performance that leaned toward the "good" column. You had his one-touch goal inside of 10 minutes, coupled with some decent set piece delivery and a lot of good facilitating of the offense all over the field.
Two plays probably encapsulated Adu's night. First, early in the second half he stuck out his leg and stole the ball right off a Grenada defender for a breakaway on goal. Instead of going for goal, he laid it off to Davies on the left who had a lesser angle. Then later, he stole a terrible clear from the Grenada keeper and tried to beat him with a cheeky chip/strike. It hit the right corner where the crossbar meets the post. Nice play. Except the ball stayed in bounds while Adu was lamenting the miss.
Overall, Adu remains the ultimate U.S. wild card. Let's just see which cards he is best used alongside.
That's really it. I'd have to think this was the most time any of the U.S. players actually had on the ball since their youth days.
I've highlighted the four guys the U.S. ought to get as much playing time as the tourney goes forward -- Rogers, Davies, Holden and Adu. They're all offensive-minded players and had they been available in the second half of the Confederations Cup vs. Brazil last month maybe things could have finished different.
Wait a second, that last sentence opens up a can of worms, doesn't it?
Let's move onto other stuff.
Other stuff:
* Jake Slade sounds more like a male porn actor than a soccer player, no?
* U.S. defender Clarence Goodson probably deserves a place in Bill Simmons' 'Reggie Cleveland All Stars'.
* Since it was a CONCACAF game, we got some terrible officiating, even in a match with one or two maximum slide tackles. First Brad Evans got a yellow card for coming on for Steve Cherundolo too early. Hm? Later Adu got a yellow for handling a ball inside the opponents box, negating a goal. Harsh.
Where do they find these CONCACAF officials? If I go down to the drug store and buy some bronzer and work up a tan does it qualify me for the position?
* Good to hear the South African horns made the trip back with the U.S. They're like killer bees -- but noisier!
* Great through ball by Pause, setting up Roger's goal. Hey, it's not his fault you could have driven a convoy through the Grenada defense. Take the chances you're given, though overall, with a little more edge in the final third this game could have ended closer to 6 or 7-0.
* Grenada's keeper (sorry too full of grease to look up his name) was a good shot-stopper, but as Max Bretos noted, his distribution was nothing short of shambolic. If the Brit press were watching they might have needed to coin a new term for it.
* Grenada actually had a dude with Bubb as a surname. At least it gives me a chance to post this link. (Whoo-woo.)
Yeah, it was that kind of game.
Looking at the images beaming from Fox Soccer Channel on the flat screen television, it was like somebody smeared Vaseline all over the camera lenses at Seattle's Qwest Field and instead of a full-blown international match, it was 22 murky claymation figures running around on a green background.
The high definition beauty of the Confederations Cup on all levels, this wasn't. Looking at the screen was all you needed to know that this was a bit of a let down from an intensity standpoint.
And really, there's not much to say about the U.S.'s 4-0 victory over a team nicknamed of all things the'Spice Boys.' Grenada barely even bothered to put up a fight -- they might have well just worn the standard 'Opponent' jerseys. My rough estimate was the U.S. had the ball at least 80 percent of the time.
Suffice to say, not exactly a game to form any strong opinions one way or the other.
Regardless, Bob Bradley stuck with his now preferred 4-4-2 system with the holding midfielder rolls falling to Logan Pause alongside a leftover 90s era grunge bassist he found aimlessly roaming the streets of Seattle, err, Kyle Beckerman. Outside we got Robbie Rogers on the left and Stuart Holden on the right -- each impressing and scoring a goal.
Up top it was the continued progression of Charlie Davies and the first Freddy Adu sighting of the season. And no, and even though the game was in the Pacific Northwest, it wasn't a Sasquatch-like hoax. Adu actually played and scored a goal, to boot! There is film of it here. Adu doesn't even look back at the camera, either.
The defense? It was four guys and they're not even worth mentioning considering how little Grenada actually attacked during the match. It was a 25-3 advantage in shots for the U.S., 'nuff said. Troy Perkins made one save.
If anything, this match let this new-look U.S. team of fringe players get their footing going forward into the tournament. Rogers -- who assisted on a pair of goals on nice crosses from the left -- should continue to get looks throughout the tournament regardless of the opposition. Let's see if he can hack it since it's not like natural left-sided players with good delivery are growing on trees in the U.S.
Davies kept up his momentum from the Confederations Cup, scoring a nice goal -- albeit with a strange celebration -- on a nifty jump-kick cross from Heath Pearce after a ball was played over the top deep from the defense.
As for Adu, it took me this long to get into him.
In fairness, it was a mixed bag performance that leaned toward the "good" column. You had his one-touch goal inside of 10 minutes, coupled with some decent set piece delivery and a lot of good facilitating of the offense all over the field.
Two plays probably encapsulated Adu's night. First, early in the second half he stuck out his leg and stole the ball right off a Grenada defender for a breakaway on goal. Instead of going for goal, he laid it off to Davies on the left who had a lesser angle. Then later, he stole a terrible clear from the Grenada keeper and tried to beat him with a cheeky chip/strike. It hit the right corner where the crossbar meets the post. Nice play. Except the ball stayed in bounds while Adu was lamenting the miss.
Overall, Adu remains the ultimate U.S. wild card. Let's just see which cards he is best used alongside.
That's really it. I'd have to think this was the most time any of the U.S. players actually had on the ball since their youth days.
I've highlighted the four guys the U.S. ought to get as much playing time as the tourney goes forward -- Rogers, Davies, Holden and Adu. They're all offensive-minded players and had they been available in the second half of the Confederations Cup vs. Brazil last month maybe things could have finished different.
Wait a second, that last sentence opens up a can of worms, doesn't it?
Let's move onto other stuff.
Other stuff:
* Jake Slade sounds more like a male porn actor than a soccer player, no?
* U.S. defender Clarence Goodson probably deserves a place in Bill Simmons' 'Reggie Cleveland All Stars'.
* Since it was a CONCACAF game, we got some terrible officiating, even in a match with one or two maximum slide tackles. First Brad Evans got a yellow card for coming on for Steve Cherundolo too early. Hm? Later Adu got a yellow for handling a ball inside the opponents box, negating a goal. Harsh.
Where do they find these CONCACAF officials? If I go down to the drug store and buy some bronzer and work up a tan does it qualify me for the position?
* Good to hear the South African horns made the trip back with the U.S. They're like killer bees -- but noisier!
* Great through ball by Pause, setting up Roger's goal. Hey, it's not his fault you could have driven a convoy through the Grenada defense. Take the chances you're given, though overall, with a little more edge in the final third this game could have ended closer to 6 or 7-0.
* Grenada's keeper (sorry too full of grease to look up his name) was a good shot-stopper, but as Max Bretos noted, his distribution was nothing short of shambolic. If the Brit press were watching they might have needed to coin a new term for it.
* Grenada actually had a dude with Bubb as a surname. At least it gives me a chance to post this link. (Whoo-woo.)
Yeah, it was that kind of game.
Labels: concacaf, Freddy Adu, Gold Cup, Soccer, USMNT
As you probably know, I don't just post silly quickee links. Not my style. In honor of the birth of our great nation, I felt like sharing.
1. Can 2011 get here quick? In case you missed it, the Seattle Sounders/Portland Timbers U.S. Open Cup game was an outlier for a couple reasons, namely people actually were excited for an Open Cup game. Just check out some of the stuff on Portland message board. Great stuff, aside from the guy in the Green Man suit. Hope this kind of stuff doesn't scare Don Garber.
And big thanks for my pal Richard for sending me a couple pics from the match. I will restrain myself from posting a bedsheet with a picture of a rifle stating, "Keller Do the Cobain." Poor taste.
I will, however, post something from some traveling San Jose ultras -- Man Boobs FC -- featuring Drew Carey, Paul Allen, and Sigi Schdmid.
2. And speaking of man boobs ... Fashion is one of my least favorite things in the world, but this year's crop of Premier League kits are tragically awful. Brutal. Whoever designed the Everton and Manchester United home shirts must be from the near future or something. Horrendous.
Have a good Fourth. Enjoy Michael Owen at Old Trafford (trying not to laugh).
1. Can 2011 get here quick? In case you missed it, the Seattle Sounders/Portland Timbers U.S. Open Cup game was an outlier for a couple reasons, namely people actually were excited for an Open Cup game. Just check out some of the stuff on Portland message board. Great stuff, aside from the guy in the Green Man suit. Hope this kind of stuff doesn't scare Don Garber.
And big thanks for my pal Richard for sending me a couple pics from the match. I will restrain myself from posting a bedsheet with a picture of a rifle stating, "Keller Do the Cobain." Poor taste.
I will, however, post something from some traveling San Jose ultras -- Man Boobs FC -- featuring Drew Carey, Paul Allen, and Sigi Schdmid.
2. And speaking of man boobs ... Fashion is one of my least favorite things in the world, but this year's crop of Premier League kits are tragically awful. Brutal. Whoever designed the Everton and Manchester United home shirts must be from the near future or something. Horrendous.
Have a good Fourth. Enjoy Michael Owen at Old Trafford (trying not to laugh).
Labels: links, portland timbers, Soccer
"There's gold out there I tells ya, gold." -- colloquial prospector talk, possible from 'The Treasure of the Sierra Madre'
So...here we are, the 2009 CONCACAF Gold Cup, a.k.a. a poor excuse for Jack Warner to pick a man's pocket every two years.
There's probably no way to sugar coat or dilly-dance around the fact that in the wake of the Confederations Cup last month, this tournament is going to be a bit of a step down. Think of it of dining on fillet mignon and swapping it for a McDonald's MacWrap -- at least there's some special sauce potential, though, for the U.S.
In short, it's a chance for some fringe players, namely Kenny Cooper, Stuart Holden and Michael Parkhurst to show Bob Bradley they warrant a call for consideration in 2010. It's also possibly the time a certain sector of U.S. fans have waited for -- unleashing Freddy Adu to see if he's got the chops to be an impact player. Then there's the veterans Brian Ching and Steve Cherundolo showing that even if they missed the Confederations Cup, they're still worthy.
And, well, that's about it. (I highly recommend just reading the Bradley/Gulati quotes, lots of stuff on Jermaine Jones here.)
Not to sound like an 'elite, insufferable, soccer snob' but it's hard to go from watching thrilling games against Spain and Brazil in one week to matches against Grenada and Haiti the next. (You could, if you wanted, argue the actual games might be tricker in the Gold Cup initially with the opponents playing a defensive, packed-in style. Admittedly, it's a stretch.)
On the plus side, the U.S. has progressed along far enough that there are enough players out there in order to fill out a competitive roster for the Gold Cup while leaving stalwarts like Landon "Peach Salad" Donovan, Clint Dempsey and the entire starting defense at home.
Bradley -- or specifically CONCACAF -- threw the U.S. a bone, allowing seven player adds for the tournament. On the plus side there's a chance to see Jozy Altidore teamed up with Charlie Davies again or Benny Feilhaber given the keys in the midfield. Then again, Connor Casey and Jon Bornstein also were added.
If there's one big question that can or needs to answered for this tournament is if Bradley, based on the final three matches of the Confederations Cup, is satisfied with a standard 4-4-2 lineup. Can the Gold Cup roster groom capable replacements/subs in this system going forward? It would be good to see the team add some depth, particularly in the wide positions on the field.
One thing we know is that Donovan and Dempsey are versatile and can slide all over the field. Can the Gold Cup roster produce a capable outside midfield backup should one of them need to slide into a more forward role?
Even if this tournament isn't all that compelling for us fans, only judged in the light of the Confederations Cup, it should be pretty pressurized for the players as they need to show Bradley they're worth a spot.
It's not fun to single players out, but here's who probably needs to impress the most over the run of the Gold Cup.
* Freddy Adu -- We all realize he's in the doghouse, big time. Yet there is certainly a potential inside his feet (which may or may not taste like timber) unlike most U.S. players. Adu doesn't need to dribble through an entire team or score on bending free kicks. What he needs to do -- if given playing time which is no sure bet -- is instill some confidence in Bradley that's he worth all the effort. Let's see if he's creative enough to make stuff happen in congested lanes filled with bodies. Right now if pressed, I'd guess Adu isn't on the 23-man roster for the World Cup. Whether its his attitude or lack of playing time, Adu has ruffled Bradley's feathers. A good Gold Cup could allay some fears in the coach -- assuming Bradley is loathe to play him due to the second guessing game.
* Steve Cherundolo -- For years, the long-time Hannover-man was the proverbial turkey sandwich for the U.S. team. He didn't bring the most to the table, aside from reliable, dependable professionalism, but he didn't take away from it either. Yet after Jonathon Spector's breakout at the Confederations Cup, did Cherundolo move down in the pecking order? That said, having depth a traditionally thin position for the U.S. isn't a bad thing.
* Heath Pearce -- Considering Bradley finally opted to try Carlos Bocanegra out wide, coupled with Jay DeMerit's fine showing in South Africa, Pearce's default grip on the left back spot is tenuous to say the least. He simply can't afford a poor tournament.
* Kenny Cooper -- I was going to list Brian Ching, but unless the Hawaian is missing a limb he'll be in South Africa next year. Bradley just loves him. Loves him. Anyway, with the ascendancy of Charlie Davies and to a lesser degree Altidore, Cooper has a long way to go to be considered for the World Cup. He'll need an excellent Gold Cup and a good season -- wherever he ends up -- to have a shot.
As for the rest of the team? Hard to say. Maybe we're all blinded by the showing at the Confederations Cup in terms of lineup building. The tournament certainly reaffirmed a pecking order, but going forward to assume the U.S. 'A-Team' can capture lightning in a bottle might be foolish.
If anything, the Gold Cup ought to Bradley a good chance to look at some other options if the first choice team slumps or scuffles over the next year. At the very least the Gold Cup can help create some players who can form a 'Plan B' if things go wrong either with a player's form or during a match.
We still need to remember, for all the bows the team took, it'd be a whole different story at the Gold Cup and going forward if Andrea Dossena doesn't decide to score on Gigi Buffon. That's maybe the biggest thing to keep in mind, the team took huge strides but it still has a ways to go. As evidenced in the second half vs. Brazil, there is still a substantial gap in terms of soccer players between the U.S. and the rest of the world.
If a player or two can emerge as an asset during the Gold Cup, it'll be worth it.
Double that if Mexico gets stomped along the way.
So...here we are, the 2009 CONCACAF Gold Cup, a.k.a. a poor excuse for Jack Warner to pick a man's pocket every two years.
There's probably no way to sugar coat or dilly-dance around the fact that in the wake of the Confederations Cup last month, this tournament is going to be a bit of a step down. Think of it of dining on fillet mignon and swapping it for a McDonald's MacWrap -- at least there's some special sauce potential, though, for the U.S.
In short, it's a chance for some fringe players, namely Kenny Cooper, Stuart Holden and Michael Parkhurst to show Bob Bradley they warrant a call for consideration in 2010. It's also possibly the time a certain sector of U.S. fans have waited for -- unleashing Freddy Adu to see if he's got the chops to be an impact player. Then there's the veterans Brian Ching and Steve Cherundolo showing that even if they missed the Confederations Cup, they're still worthy.
And, well, that's about it. (I highly recommend just reading the Bradley/Gulati quotes, lots of stuff on Jermaine Jones here.)
Not to sound like an 'elite, insufferable, soccer snob' but it's hard to go from watching thrilling games against Spain and Brazil in one week to matches against Grenada and Haiti the next. (You could, if you wanted, argue the actual games might be tricker in the Gold Cup initially with the opponents playing a defensive, packed-in style. Admittedly, it's a stretch.)
On the plus side, the U.S. has progressed along far enough that there are enough players out there in order to fill out a competitive roster for the Gold Cup while leaving stalwarts like Landon "Peach Salad" Donovan, Clint Dempsey and the entire starting defense at home.
Bradley -- or specifically CONCACAF -- threw the U.S. a bone, allowing seven player adds for the tournament. On the plus side there's a chance to see Jozy Altidore teamed up with Charlie Davies again or Benny Feilhaber given the keys in the midfield. Then again, Connor Casey and Jon Bornstein also were added.
If there's one big question that can or needs to answered for this tournament is if Bradley, based on the final three matches of the Confederations Cup, is satisfied with a standard 4-4-2 lineup. Can the Gold Cup roster groom capable replacements/subs in this system going forward? It would be good to see the team add some depth, particularly in the wide positions on the field.
One thing we know is that Donovan and Dempsey are versatile and can slide all over the field. Can the Gold Cup roster produce a capable outside midfield backup should one of them need to slide into a more forward role?
Even if this tournament isn't all that compelling for us fans, only judged in the light of the Confederations Cup, it should be pretty pressurized for the players as they need to show Bradley they're worth a spot.
It's not fun to single players out, but here's who probably needs to impress the most over the run of the Gold Cup.
* Freddy Adu -- We all realize he's in the doghouse, big time. Yet there is certainly a potential inside his feet (which may or may not taste like timber) unlike most U.S. players. Adu doesn't need to dribble through an entire team or score on bending free kicks. What he needs to do -- if given playing time which is no sure bet -- is instill some confidence in Bradley that's he worth all the effort. Let's see if he's creative enough to make stuff happen in congested lanes filled with bodies. Right now if pressed, I'd guess Adu isn't on the 23-man roster for the World Cup. Whether its his attitude or lack of playing time, Adu has ruffled Bradley's feathers. A good Gold Cup could allay some fears in the coach -- assuming Bradley is loathe to play him due to the second guessing game.
* Steve Cherundolo -- For years, the long-time Hannover-man was the proverbial turkey sandwich for the U.S. team. He didn't bring the most to the table, aside from reliable, dependable professionalism, but he didn't take away from it either. Yet after Jonathon Spector's breakout at the Confederations Cup, did Cherundolo move down in the pecking order? That said, having depth a traditionally thin position for the U.S. isn't a bad thing.
* Heath Pearce -- Considering Bradley finally opted to try Carlos Bocanegra out wide, coupled with Jay DeMerit's fine showing in South Africa, Pearce's default grip on the left back spot is tenuous to say the least. He simply can't afford a poor tournament.
* Kenny Cooper -- I was going to list Brian Ching, but unless the Hawaian is missing a limb he'll be in South Africa next year. Bradley just loves him. Loves him. Anyway, with the ascendancy of Charlie Davies and to a lesser degree Altidore, Cooper has a long way to go to be considered for the World Cup. He'll need an excellent Gold Cup and a good season -- wherever he ends up -- to have a shot.
As for the rest of the team? Hard to say. Maybe we're all blinded by the showing at the Confederations Cup in terms of lineup building. The tournament certainly reaffirmed a pecking order, but going forward to assume the U.S. 'A-Team' can capture lightning in a bottle might be foolish.
If anything, the Gold Cup ought to Bradley a good chance to look at some other options if the first choice team slumps or scuffles over the next year. At the very least the Gold Cup can help create some players who can form a 'Plan B' if things go wrong either with a player's form or during a match.
We still need to remember, for all the bows the team took, it'd be a whole different story at the Gold Cup and going forward if Andrea Dossena doesn't decide to score on Gigi Buffon. That's maybe the biggest thing to keep in mind, the team took huge strides but it still has a ways to go. As evidenced in the second half vs. Brazil, there is still a substantial gap in terms of soccer players between the U.S. and the rest of the world.
If a player or two can emerge as an asset during the Gold Cup, it'll be worth it.
Double that if Mexico gets stomped along the way.
Labels: bob bradley, Freddy Adu, Gold Cup, Soccer, USMNT
"You can try the best you can
If you try the best you can
The best you can is good enough" -- Radiohead, 'Optimistic'
As explained in the quickee recap post, I needed to walk this one off. There was simply so much swirling after Brazil's nearly epic 3-2 comeback over the U.S. at the 2009 Confederations Cup final that it was like watching a mindblowing 'Lost' episode. I needed to hit pause on the DVR, pick the melted ooze that was once my brain off the floor and collect myself.
Funny thing happened on my stroll.
Listening to my iPod, I hoped to find inspiration in music. Then, when early on I saw a lone dude juggling a soccer ball in the middle of a park full of other people playing softball and baseball, I figured that was a sign. (Nah, too pedestrian or too Mitch Albom-y.)
For a mile or two, nothing.
When I finally reached this seawall where these walks usually end something happened. I decided to run back, telling my barking knees -- which might need to get scoped out -- to be damned.
For the first mile, great stuff. Good rhythm, no plodding. Most important, no pain.
Then about halfway home my sneaker came untied forcing me to stop. The rest of the way I huff and puffed my way back, never catching the momentum I had over that first stretch. I even started listening to those chirps from my ACLs and contemplated stopping.
Seemed sort of like the U.S. game. Great first half, forgettable and regrettable second. Like my shoe coming untied, it all went to pot in an instant when Luis Fabiano made a perfect turn on Jay DeMerit and beat Tim Howard less than a minute into the second half, making it 2-11.
As far as metaphors go, admittedly it's not exactly Arthur Miller using the backdrop of the Salem witch trials in the 'Crucible' as critique of 1950s McCarthyism.
Yet the more and more I thought about what unfurled over 90 minutes in Jo-Burg Sunday there was only one basic question to ask.
Is the glass half full or half empty?
Was it good enough that the U.S. was a) playing in the final to begin with b) almost magically went ahead 2-0 at the half?
Or, do you take the approach that opponents be damned, the team was up 2-0 and should have found a way to hold the lead?
That's really up to each and everyone to decide for his or herself.
Everything else -- such as how this affects the team in the mainstream and going forward -- can be addressed as time goes by (and later in this post).
One thing's for certain, it'll be a game to be talked about and remembered for a time to come.
Perhaps the other big question I've asked over the last two weeks is what exactly is the Confederations Cup and how to put it in perspective? It's been mentioned, Mexico won the tournament a few years back, and right now El Tri is barely on track for the next World Cup, let alone worldwide elite status.
Sunday it was a good thing it was only the Confederations Cup.
The U.S.'s surprising run to the final definitely attracted more non-hardcore/casual fans to the television than usual.
This is nothing new, big soccer events like the World Cup final and the Champions League final, do tend to rate with a more mainstream audience. The problem usually is that these finals produce some of the most forgettable soccer known to mankind. There's so much at stake, far too often teams will play it close to the vest waiting for the opponent to make a mistake. Look at the last World Cup final, forgettable aside from Zidane's red mist headbutt, as an example.
Since Sunday was only the Confederations Cup, there didn't seem to be a lot of undue pressure on either side. The U.S. obviously came out with an offensive game plan, which it did against Spain and to a lesser extent against Italy last week. And Brazil, especially down by two at the half, pressed forward with a kitchen sink-worthy attack for the final 45 minutes.
So if you never watch soccer, this match certainly thrilled and entertained. This was end-to-end, high wire stuff for almost 90 minutes.
In particular, the Landon Donovan goal on the counter attack to make it 2-0 was one of the best tallies in recent U.S. history due the speed of the movement. And of course Brazil became Brazil in the second half with Kaka moving with such majestic command it was almost like he was a cavalry man moving amongst grunt foot soldiers atop a steed.
Throw in the whole Kaka header that went over the line and wasn't called a goal, and you potentially had a great talking point should the U.S. have held on for the victory. (FIFA, you've got some 'splainin' to do before next year.)
And thank goodness it ended in regulation, rather than potentially penalty kicks. Mainstream writers, who don't know the sport as it is would have easily latched onto the idea that deciding a game by PKs is 'stupid' therefore taking away from the match as a whole.
To answer a question, maybe one I didn't even ask, even with the defeat the U.S. showed enough to win over some of the casual fans ahead of 2010? Or did the U.S. come up short in a clear, would-be tipping point? (Something I don't necessarily agree it was anyway.) Or was did the gutty defeat exhibit even "heart" and "guts" to win over the American ethos regardless of the final score?
It could even be argued from a Devil's Advocate perspective, that losing Sunday is a better scenario going forward because it keeps some potential hype from the mainstream in check. Even if the U.S. did hold on and win, it still isn't as consistently good enough from a talent standpoint to just walk on the field every match and expect to win.
I'd guess that the U.S. did enough to win over a portion of the audience, for merely sticking with Brazil and putting them on the ropes. (Granted, the close-minded folks will never care, and that's okay, too.)
As we saw the match progress, the gulf between the U.S. and Brazil is still fairly wide. But it's probably closing, as witnessed in the first half.
This is perhaps the one conclusion to draw from the match, but it's totally open to interpretation.
The only people that can honestly tell us if the team choked/ran out of gas in the second half or if it was the dreaded moral victory are the 23 guys inside the U.S. locker room. It doesn't matter how we the fans react, either, it's how the players progress and learn from this loss that matters today.
And if you gave them truth serum, the answer is probably closer to the fact that they had a chance to make history, but couldn't withstand the second half gauntlet thrown down by Kaka & Co. in the second half.
There's no shame in losing to the five-time world champs, but that also doesn't take the sting out of a golden opportunity either.
Other thoughts
* After today, the Gold Cup is officially going to look like a major come down, unless we're treated to the Freddy show. Still, it'll be nice if some of the people that watched Sunday's match, turn out in force at the matches, even if all the star players will be taking a much needed vacation. Just be prepared for a reverse scenario, with the opponents -- not the U.S. -- camped out behind the ball and defending.
At least we can see if the 'A' team can keep up its momentum in August at Azteca.
* Maybe the biggest kernel of wisdom gained from the entire tournament is that the four-man defense of Jonathon Spector, Oguchi Onyewu, Jay DeMerit and Carlos Bocanegra is pretty competent. Spector, though, remains much more of a positive attacking -- see the cross to Dempsey (x 2) -- compared to his defending, though there's no shame in being chumpatized by Kaka. I'll say it again, too, Onyewu probably made himself a rich man over the last week.
That said, expecting to play 180 minutes vs. the consensus two best teams in the world and hoping to get a head or body part to every shot or cross is unrealistic. Not even a vintage Maldini-led Italian team can weather and withstand that much pressure.
Eventually a team like Brazil is going to find a way to score, especially as those legs get heavy.
* Speaking of pressure, the only criticism I may lob at the U.S. Sunday was up 2-0 and then quickly 2-1 in the second half, there was no possession or passing whatsoever. Then again, the way Kaka was conducting the Brazil offense from the midfield, not sure anyone this side of Xavi may have been able to keep the ball for more than a few seconds.
In the second half, Jozy Altidore and Charlie Davies became almost non-factors. Going forward, Davies needs to refine his game past simply being a speed player and Altidore needs to get some games under his belt and probably hit the weight room.
* Did the U.S. miss Michael Bradley Sunday? Hard to say. Ricardo Clark did as best he could tracking Kaka -- I mean this is an MLS regular vs. the best player in the world. Benny Feilhaber was in my mind okay in the middle, too.
If anything, the loss of Bradley killed the U.S. depth, since Feilhaber had to start and once he came off the options on the bench were limited at best. Even though it might have been the best long shot option, down 3-2 we knew we wouldn't get potential magic from Freddy Adu, instead the plodding Connor Casey.
As I mentioned before, Dunga had the likes of Dani Alves and Elano off the bench. Bradley had Sacha Kljestan and and Jonathon Bornstein. Still, with the game level thanks to Fabiano's goal, removing Altidore and Feilhaber for those two seemed questionable in the 75th minute. Was there time to withdraw the sub request?
Again, down 3-2 with about 10 minutes it would have probably taken a miracle and the U.S. had nothing on the bench.
* Weird thought I had driving home from Baltimore late last night. Suppose Frankie Hejduk and Brian Ching were healthy? Would the U.S. still have made the final?
Hejduk? He has the passion, but he probably would have been expose or carved up by Spain and is one bad tackle from being sent off. He's old and I like what Frankie has given the team over the last decade, so nothing wrong with have a veteran like him around who you know will provide a tireless work effort when the whistle sounds.
The bigger question is Ching. The big Hawaiian still has a role in the U.S. setup, namely against CONCACAF teams that pack 10 players behind the ball. He can throw his big body around and tire out the defense.
Yet, can he bring against against the elites of the world? And would his presence in South Africa this month have led Bob Bradley to playing a 4-5-1?
It's pretty clear for the U.S. to be a potent team, they need two forwards, or at least one elite level player to at least threaten opposing back lines. Let's just pray Altidore stays healthy and finds some playing time at his club between now and next year.
Or maybe by then we can convince Brian McBride to un-retire.
* What goes around, comes around. The U.S. got the unlikely result it needed last Sunday beating a clearly gassed and beat up Egypt side 3-0. In the final, the U.S. came off two grueling, emotional wins and by the middle of the second half had nothing left.
* So, Lucio, you really do love six-pound, eight-ounce baby Jesus, eh?
* Let's be honest, did anyone out there rate Luis Fabiano as Brazil's best forward before this tournament? Of course, it must be nice to be able to pluck somebody that's scored double-digit goals in La Liga and put him up top whilst leaving some of the big names home.
Brazil is probably a bad example to compare the U.S.'s overall lack of quality depth. Still if you add up all the U.S. goals scored in Europe this year, it's probably right around Fabiano's 17 for Sevilla.
* By reaching the final, the U.S. certainly quieted a lot of concerns fans like us had entering this tournament. My one lingering question remains, will the team be able to capture lightning in a bottle again come 2010? If one or two key players pick up a knock between now and then, we're in deep trouble. Can lightning strike twice? And was the turnaround simply a reaction to the criticism?
* Another question: Who exactly are the 'elite' teams in the world? Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Germany and the Netherlands? Do we count England and Italy, still? At the moment the U.S. is No. 14 in the mythical FIFA rankings, behind the likes of Croatia, Russia, France, Portugal, Turkey and Paraguay. At the moment Croatia, Russia, France and Portugal are on the onside looking in for 2010. Just throwing this out there, perspective, you know.
* Clint Dempsey, hard to say I trust him, but the more forward he plays the more I like him. Wonder if he lost any street cred for his post-match tears? (How he wins a bronzed trophy over Donovan is a head scratcher.)
* Tim Howard, you shut up and doubts about your ability in net. Great shot blocking display and almost pulled a Brad Friedel and willed the team all by yourself. Nice sell on the Kaka header over the line, too. Granted, goalkeeping is the least of the U.S. problems.
* As mentioned by many people, Landon Donovan had the tournament of his life. It finally looks like he justified having that star icon over his head in some previous 'FIFA' incarnations. I was also impressed be his blank-stare interview after the match how he wasn't content with respect, instead wanting a win.
* Again, I'm curious how much traction this match and tournament give the U.S. team moving forward.
Final thoughts:
We learned two important things from this Confederations Cup.
1. On a given day, if everyone shows up, the U.S. can compete with the best teams. Beating them consistently, remains a major work in progress, although it seems much more realistic now than three weeks ago.
Hopefully this loss keeps the team hungry for the next 365 days and beyond. They certainly won't sneak up on anybody next year when it counts.
2. Lionel Messi's feet taste like timber in a crackling fire.
If you try the best you can
The best you can is good enough" -- Radiohead, 'Optimistic'
As explained in the quickee recap post, I needed to walk this one off. There was simply so much swirling after Brazil's nearly epic 3-2 comeback over the U.S. at the 2009 Confederations Cup final that it was like watching a mindblowing 'Lost' episode. I needed to hit pause on the DVR, pick the melted ooze that was once my brain off the floor and collect myself.
Funny thing happened on my stroll.
Listening to my iPod, I hoped to find inspiration in music. Then, when early on I saw a lone dude juggling a soccer ball in the middle of a park full of other people playing softball and baseball, I figured that was a sign. (Nah, too pedestrian or too Mitch Albom-y.)
For a mile or two, nothing.
When I finally reached this seawall where these walks usually end something happened. I decided to run back, telling my barking knees -- which might need to get scoped out -- to be damned.
For the first mile, great stuff. Good rhythm, no plodding. Most important, no pain.
Then about halfway home my sneaker came untied forcing me to stop. The rest of the way I huff and puffed my way back, never catching the momentum I had over that first stretch. I even started listening to those chirps from my ACLs and contemplated stopping.
Seemed sort of like the U.S. game. Great first half, forgettable and regrettable second. Like my shoe coming untied, it all went to pot in an instant when Luis Fabiano made a perfect turn on Jay DeMerit and beat Tim Howard less than a minute into the second half, making it 2-11.
As far as metaphors go, admittedly it's not exactly Arthur Miller using the backdrop of the Salem witch trials in the 'Crucible' as critique of 1950s McCarthyism.
Yet the more and more I thought about what unfurled over 90 minutes in Jo-Burg Sunday there was only one basic question to ask.
Is the glass half full or half empty?
Was it good enough that the U.S. was a) playing in the final to begin with b) almost magically went ahead 2-0 at the half?
Or, do you take the approach that opponents be damned, the team was up 2-0 and should have found a way to hold the lead?
That's really up to each and everyone to decide for his or herself.
Everything else -- such as how this affects the team in the mainstream and going forward -- can be addressed as time goes by (and later in this post).
One thing's for certain, it'll be a game to be talked about and remembered for a time to come.
Perhaps the other big question I've asked over the last two weeks is what exactly is the Confederations Cup and how to put it in perspective? It's been mentioned, Mexico won the tournament a few years back, and right now El Tri is barely on track for the next World Cup, let alone worldwide elite status.
Sunday it was a good thing it was only the Confederations Cup.
The U.S.'s surprising run to the final definitely attracted more non-hardcore/casual fans to the television than usual.
This is nothing new, big soccer events like the World Cup final and the Champions League final, do tend to rate with a more mainstream audience. The problem usually is that these finals produce some of the most forgettable soccer known to mankind. There's so much at stake, far too often teams will play it close to the vest waiting for the opponent to make a mistake. Look at the last World Cup final, forgettable aside from Zidane's red mist headbutt, as an example.
Since Sunday was only the Confederations Cup, there didn't seem to be a lot of undue pressure on either side. The U.S. obviously came out with an offensive game plan, which it did against Spain and to a lesser extent against Italy last week. And Brazil, especially down by two at the half, pressed forward with a kitchen sink-worthy attack for the final 45 minutes.
So if you never watch soccer, this match certainly thrilled and entertained. This was end-to-end, high wire stuff for almost 90 minutes.
In particular, the Landon Donovan goal on the counter attack to make it 2-0 was one of the best tallies in recent U.S. history due the speed of the movement. And of course Brazil became Brazil in the second half with Kaka moving with such majestic command it was almost like he was a cavalry man moving amongst grunt foot soldiers atop a steed.
Throw in the whole Kaka header that went over the line and wasn't called a goal, and you potentially had a great talking point should the U.S. have held on for the victory. (FIFA, you've got some 'splainin' to do before next year.)
And thank goodness it ended in regulation, rather than potentially penalty kicks. Mainstream writers, who don't know the sport as it is would have easily latched onto the idea that deciding a game by PKs is 'stupid' therefore taking away from the match as a whole.
To answer a question, maybe one I didn't even ask, even with the defeat the U.S. showed enough to win over some of the casual fans ahead of 2010? Or did the U.S. come up short in a clear, would-be tipping point? (Something I don't necessarily agree it was anyway.) Or was did the gutty defeat exhibit even "heart" and "guts" to win over the American ethos regardless of the final score?
It could even be argued from a Devil's Advocate perspective, that losing Sunday is a better scenario going forward because it keeps some potential hype from the mainstream in check. Even if the U.S. did hold on and win, it still isn't as consistently good enough from a talent standpoint to just walk on the field every match and expect to win.
I'd guess that the U.S. did enough to win over a portion of the audience, for merely sticking with Brazil and putting them on the ropes. (Granted, the close-minded folks will never care, and that's okay, too.)
As we saw the match progress, the gulf between the U.S. and Brazil is still fairly wide. But it's probably closing, as witnessed in the first half.
This is perhaps the one conclusion to draw from the match, but it's totally open to interpretation.
The only people that can honestly tell us if the team choked/ran out of gas in the second half or if it was the dreaded moral victory are the 23 guys inside the U.S. locker room. It doesn't matter how we the fans react, either, it's how the players progress and learn from this loss that matters today.
And if you gave them truth serum, the answer is probably closer to the fact that they had a chance to make history, but couldn't withstand the second half gauntlet thrown down by Kaka & Co. in the second half.
There's no shame in losing to the five-time world champs, but that also doesn't take the sting out of a golden opportunity either.
Other thoughts
* After today, the Gold Cup is officially going to look like a major come down, unless we're treated to the Freddy show. Still, it'll be nice if some of the people that watched Sunday's match, turn out in force at the matches, even if all the star players will be taking a much needed vacation. Just be prepared for a reverse scenario, with the opponents -- not the U.S. -- camped out behind the ball and defending.
At least we can see if the 'A' team can keep up its momentum in August at Azteca.
* Maybe the biggest kernel of wisdom gained from the entire tournament is that the four-man defense of Jonathon Spector, Oguchi Onyewu, Jay DeMerit and Carlos Bocanegra is pretty competent. Spector, though, remains much more of a positive attacking -- see the cross to Dempsey (x 2) -- compared to his defending, though there's no shame in being chumpatized by Kaka. I'll say it again, too, Onyewu probably made himself a rich man over the last week.
That said, expecting to play 180 minutes vs. the consensus two best teams in the world and hoping to get a head or body part to every shot or cross is unrealistic. Not even a vintage Maldini-led Italian team can weather and withstand that much pressure.
Eventually a team like Brazil is going to find a way to score, especially as those legs get heavy.
* Speaking of pressure, the only criticism I may lob at the U.S. Sunday was up 2-0 and then quickly 2-1 in the second half, there was no possession or passing whatsoever. Then again, the way Kaka was conducting the Brazil offense from the midfield, not sure anyone this side of Xavi may have been able to keep the ball for more than a few seconds.
In the second half, Jozy Altidore and Charlie Davies became almost non-factors. Going forward, Davies needs to refine his game past simply being a speed player and Altidore needs to get some games under his belt and probably hit the weight room.
* Did the U.S. miss Michael Bradley Sunday? Hard to say. Ricardo Clark did as best he could tracking Kaka -- I mean this is an MLS regular vs. the best player in the world. Benny Feilhaber was in my mind okay in the middle, too.
If anything, the loss of Bradley killed the U.S. depth, since Feilhaber had to start and once he came off the options on the bench were limited at best. Even though it might have been the best long shot option, down 3-2 we knew we wouldn't get potential magic from Freddy Adu, instead the plodding Connor Casey.
As I mentioned before, Dunga had the likes of Dani Alves and Elano off the bench. Bradley had Sacha Kljestan and and Jonathon Bornstein. Still, with the game level thanks to Fabiano's goal, removing Altidore and Feilhaber for those two seemed questionable in the 75th minute. Was there time to withdraw the sub request?
Again, down 3-2 with about 10 minutes it would have probably taken a miracle and the U.S. had nothing on the bench.
* Weird thought I had driving home from Baltimore late last night. Suppose Frankie Hejduk and Brian Ching were healthy? Would the U.S. still have made the final?
Hejduk? He has the passion, but he probably would have been expose or carved up by Spain and is one bad tackle from being sent off. He's old and I like what Frankie has given the team over the last decade, so nothing wrong with have a veteran like him around who you know will provide a tireless work effort when the whistle sounds.
The bigger question is Ching. The big Hawaiian still has a role in the U.S. setup, namely against CONCACAF teams that pack 10 players behind the ball. He can throw his big body around and tire out the defense.
Yet, can he bring against against the elites of the world? And would his presence in South Africa this month have led Bob Bradley to playing a 4-5-1?
It's pretty clear for the U.S. to be a potent team, they need two forwards, or at least one elite level player to at least threaten opposing back lines. Let's just pray Altidore stays healthy and finds some playing time at his club between now and next year.
Or maybe by then we can convince Brian McBride to un-retire.
* What goes around, comes around. The U.S. got the unlikely result it needed last Sunday beating a clearly gassed and beat up Egypt side 3-0. In the final, the U.S. came off two grueling, emotional wins and by the middle of the second half had nothing left.
* So, Lucio, you really do love six-pound, eight-ounce baby Jesus, eh?
* Let's be honest, did anyone out there rate Luis Fabiano as Brazil's best forward before this tournament? Of course, it must be nice to be able to pluck somebody that's scored double-digit goals in La Liga and put him up top whilst leaving some of the big names home.
Brazil is probably a bad example to compare the U.S.'s overall lack of quality depth. Still if you add up all the U.S. goals scored in Europe this year, it's probably right around Fabiano's 17 for Sevilla.
* By reaching the final, the U.S. certainly quieted a lot of concerns fans like us had entering this tournament. My one lingering question remains, will the team be able to capture lightning in a bottle again come 2010? If one or two key players pick up a knock between now and then, we're in deep trouble. Can lightning strike twice? And was the turnaround simply a reaction to the criticism?
* Another question: Who exactly are the 'elite' teams in the world? Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Germany and the Netherlands? Do we count England and Italy, still? At the moment the U.S. is No. 14 in the mythical FIFA rankings, behind the likes of Croatia, Russia, France, Portugal, Turkey and Paraguay. At the moment Croatia, Russia, France and Portugal are on the onside looking in for 2010. Just throwing this out there, perspective, you know.
* Clint Dempsey, hard to say I trust him, but the more forward he plays the more I like him. Wonder if he lost any street cred for his post-match tears? (How he wins a bronzed trophy over Donovan is a head scratcher.)
* Tim Howard, you shut up and doubts about your ability in net. Great shot blocking display and almost pulled a Brad Friedel and willed the team all by yourself. Nice sell on the Kaka header over the line, too. Granted, goalkeeping is the least of the U.S. problems.
* As mentioned by many people, Landon Donovan had the tournament of his life. It finally looks like he justified having that star icon over his head in some previous 'FIFA' incarnations. I was also impressed be his blank-stare interview after the match how he wasn't content with respect, instead wanting a win.
* Again, I'm curious how much traction this match and tournament give the U.S. team moving forward.
Final thoughts:
We learned two important things from this Confederations Cup.
1. On a given day, if everyone shows up, the U.S. can compete with the best teams. Beating them consistently, remains a major work in progress, although it seems much more realistic now than three weeks ago.
Hopefully this loss keeps the team hungry for the next 365 days and beyond. They certainly won't sneak up on anybody next year when it counts.
2. Lionel Messi's feet taste like timber in a crackling fire.
Labels: bob bradley, Brasil, confederations cup, kaka, Landon Donovan, Soccer, USMNT
Word to the wise, never start writing a blog post at the halftime of a game. Up 2-0 at the half I was digging up video of Benny Feilhaber's 2007 Gold Cup Golazo. I was examining all the Facebook status updates from people who usually don't give a lick about the game. I was trying to figure out a way to gauge how historic this match would be, even if its a tournament that exists somewhat inside a vacuum.
It was all setting up on a plate.
Until the wheels fell off against a comprehensively better team, as Brazil notched an impressive 3-2 comeback over the U.S. Sunday in Johannesburg in the 2009 Confederations Cup final.
Even with all the mitigating factors, folks, this stung.
In fact, I'm going to have to walk this one off and compose myself for something to put this one in proper perspective. I mean, I tried to make a phone call during the game and my hands were shaking.
Three quick thoughts, while I wallow and digest this one before coming back with a little more:
1. Even with the loss, I pray the U.S. won over some casual fans with a hearty performance. Considering finals usually stink, this one actually entertained for 90+ minutes. Hell, Bill Simmons twittered the entire match, and actually seemed upset the U.S. lost.
Probably a story for another day.
2. Immediately after Brazil leveled it at 2-2, who were the subs Bob Bradley put in? Sascha Kljestan and Jon Bornstein. Not to single these two guys out. But on the other side Dunga is throwing on Elano and Dani Alves.
So the talk of the U.S. closing the gap worldwide still has a ways to go. And truly elite teams don't cough up 2-0 leads, especially that easily in the second half.
3. Kaka is transcendent. Completely on his own plane of reality and took over the match in the second half. You can't see his level. As my buddy Suppe labeled him, he's a force of nature on the field.
Until the U.S. can produce players even a fraction as good as the Real Madrid ace, we've still got a ways to go.
At least it was only the Confederations Cup.
To use my favorite line in recent memory, "That's the way she goes."
It was all setting up on a plate.
Until the wheels fell off against a comprehensively better team, as Brazil notched an impressive 3-2 comeback over the U.S. Sunday in Johannesburg in the 2009 Confederations Cup final.
Even with all the mitigating factors, folks, this stung.
In fact, I'm going to have to walk this one off and compose myself for something to put this one in proper perspective. I mean, I tried to make a phone call during the game and my hands were shaking.
Three quick thoughts, while I wallow and digest this one before coming back with a little more:
1. Even with the loss, I pray the U.S. won over some casual fans with a hearty performance. Considering finals usually stink, this one actually entertained for 90+ minutes. Hell, Bill Simmons twittered the entire match, and actually seemed upset the U.S. lost.
Probably a story for another day.
2. Immediately after Brazil leveled it at 2-2, who were the subs Bob Bradley put in? Sascha Kljestan and Jon Bornstein. Not to single these two guys out. But on the other side Dunga is throwing on Elano and Dani Alves.
So the talk of the U.S. closing the gap worldwide still has a ways to go. And truly elite teams don't cough up 2-0 leads, especially that easily in the second half.
3. Kaka is transcendent. Completely on his own plane of reality and took over the match in the second half. You can't see his level. As my buddy Suppe labeled him, he's a force of nature on the field.
Until the U.S. can produce players even a fraction as good as the Real Madrid ace, we've still got a ways to go.
At least it was only the Confederations Cup.
To use my favorite line in recent memory, "That's the way she goes."
Labels: Brasil, confederations cup, kaka, Soccer, USMNT
"To be the man, you gotta beat the man. Whoo." -- Ric Flair
In the wake of the Wednesday's crazy 2-0 win by the U.S. over Spain in the Confederations Cup semifinals, we've seen the term 'Miracle on Grass' tossed around.
Pardon me while I go vomit.
Not to turn this post into another media examination, but drawing comparisons to the 1980 U.S. hockey win over the Soviets at the Lake Placid Olympiad is simple-minded thinking.
The comparisons between Spain and the Soviets is somewhat apt, if you forget you're comparing dandy guys with faux hawks and hair product to grim Communists playing for the Red Army team. Both sides were considered the best in the world, to be upset by the U.S. in the semifinals of a competition whilst wearing red shirts, no less.
On the other hand, drawing similarities to the U.S. hockey team and the U.S. team on the field Wednesday in Bloemfontein is a bit of a stretch. Bob Bradley -- who'll never get the Kurt Russell treatment -- had a team full of professionals at his disposal, not a group of college kids. Granted, it's not like the U.S. pros were in the same class as the Spanish nationals, but they still draw paychecks from European clubs.
Plus, there wasn't any Cold War backdrop involved here. Unless you're ardently anti-Ricky Rubio and the other Spaniards slowly invading the NBA, there was really nothing geopolitical about Wednesday's match.
In short, it was a colossal upset, yes, but labeling the win a miracle is going overboard. Plus, the U.S. came out and rattled Spain inside the first 20 minutes before Jozy Altidore scored. Yes, the 'scoring chances' graphic looked lopsided in the end, but how could it not after the U.S. went ahead 1-0?
It was a great defensive effort, but it wasn't a miracle. A miracle would discount too much of the work the team put in. The fact the U.S. actually was alive to play in the semifinals -- that was the real miracle.
Saying all that, it's not going to take a miracle, either, to defeat Brazil on Sunday in the final.
Simply, the U.S. is going to need to retain its focus and commitment. Most importantly, the U.S. cannot flub any chances Brazil gives it during the run of play or on set pieces.
What's worrisome, is that in some corners (Grant Wahl for instance) following Brazil's narrow 1-0 win over South Africa on Thursday, there's a chorus that thinks this game is right there for the U.S. to steal perhaps somewhat aided by chilly temperatures in South Africa.
Not to simply be a contrarian, but Thursday's performance by Brazil is probably the worst thing that could have happened leading up to the final. If Brazil trounced South Africa, say, 3-0 it might enter the final overconfident and possibly still taking the U.S. lightly. Now, after squeaking past South Africa -- via a free kick by Dani Alves w/turtleneck no less -- you'd think logic would dictate Brazil will be ready to play from the opening whistle vs. the U.S.
The Brazilian public, unlike the U.S., actually demands results from its national team. And not simply results, but winning with flair, too. Considering some of these players for the time being still play in Brazil, they'll probably not want to return home losers ... especially losers to the U.S.
In the two days he'll have, Brazil coach Dunga (more on him later) will certainly drill a better gameplan into his team. In fact, South Africa packing it in deep might help Brazil because the U.S. will likely be forced to play a similar way Sunday. Plus all the Brazil players can watch the tape of the Egypt and Spain games and figure out a different way to attack the U.S. (My guess, through Kaka in the gaping hole left by Michael Bradley's red card suspension.)
Is Landon Donovan going to be given any room to operate? Survey says ... no.
Beside all this, there's always a natural leveling off.
Overall the U.S. isn't as good as it was against Spain and Brazil isn't as poor as it was against South Africa. On any given day, anything can happen, but ask yourself what's more likely -- the U.S. playing its third straight great game or Brazil rebounding from one 'meh' effort?
Or let's ask it this way. If we're drafting a team between players from the U.S., Brazil, Spain and even Italy, where and when is the first Yank selected?
That's why a lot of the talk of the U.S.'s arrival on the world stage is a little premature. The U.S. is capable of playing good soccer and has solid, athletically fit professionals. We're still a ways from that transcendent star that can win games in a blink of an eye without all the eternal circumstances breaking correctly.
As great as beating Spain, and ending their 15-match winning streak was, the result alone isn't enough to vault the U.S. into the ranks of the world elites. Its not enough to offset the performances at the 1998 and 2006 World Cup, which will weight just as much into a potential 2010 World Cup seeding as anything else.
Taking nothing away from the performance against Spain, but don't forget that less than a week ago we all wanted Bob Bradley fired and eleven new players. Or the fact that an extremely unlikely string of results had to go the U.S.'s way on Sunday to advance.
And though I'm loathe to play the 'What if' game, what if Tim Howard doesn't stick his leg out to block Fernando Torres shot at the end of the first half? Or if David Villa gets a little more accuracy on one of his numerous attempts?
Basically, the U.S. played a perfect defensive game by throwing itself at anything and everything vs. Spain and to expect that performance each and every time is unrealistic. Eventually, if you play a game like that, the ball is going to take a bad hop or a bad deflection.
On the plus side, U.S. showed on a given day it can show up and compete with the world's best something we've all been clamoring for probably since Jan Koller ran over Eddie Pope in the first five minutes of the 2006 World Cup opener.
Is the U.S. among the elite footballing nations of the world yet? Time will tell. One result certainly doesn't do it, but it at least pushes the program forward.
A second straight upset of a world power will open some eyeballs.
Even if that happens, there's plenty of work still to be done come 2010. At least, win or lose Sunday, we can take a deep breath and realize it won't take a miracle for the U.S. to do anything positive come the real deal in South Africa next year.
Other stuff:
* Hate to beat a dead horse, but if I'm Bradley the Elder I'd put a $100 fine for any player that attempts a two-foot slide tackle in every single U.S. practice or game from now until 2010.
Three red cards from three different officials throws a little cold water on the theory the refs are out to get the U.S.
* On that note, no stupid free kicks. Thanks.
* Jay DeMerit has quickly become my favorite guy in the U.S. shirt. If it's possible, he's certainly the most outright "American" player on the field -- all heart and hustle. He gives it 100 percent every play. Plus he's got some pretty rugged tattoos, which as you know are a requirement of all European-based players.
My only wonder, if Bradley decides to stick with a DeMerit/Onyewu pairing going forward, are they too similar a player? Or do they have the potential to form a Ferdidnand/Vidic tandem, albeit without the pedigree and passing abilities.
* Honestly, I have no idea how to replace Michael Bradley in the center of the field. Other than Landon Donovan, there isn't a bigger loss or more irreplaceable player for the U.S. on its current roster.
Right now, those two are probably a lot like Jack and Sawyer on 'Lost'. You can kill off any other character and life goes on, but even if you hate Jack, he's irreplaceable to the mythos of the show. And Sawyer, men and women -- a t.v. rarity -- around the globe would riot if he caught a bad one before the finale.
Let's say Jack is Donovan in this scenario, since both act with similar emotion, or lack thereof. And Sawyer, at least his initial incarnation was like a fiery Michael Bradley stopping around the Island/center of the field. Let's hope Bradley can mature like Sawyer and his whole LaFleur act. Anything that keeps him from seeing the red mist.
Back to reality, even if Maurice Edu were healthy, he couldn't replicate Bradley's box-to-box skills. (Jermaine Jones, another story all together.)
Simply dropping in a player next to Ricardo Clark in a 4-4-2 in the center of the field is asking for trouble. Benny Feilhaber, despite his positive passing, is prone to giveaway and mistakes. I'm already getting chills if he and Clint Dempsey are on the same side of the field and Brazil stealing it away for a rapid counter-attack. Feilhaber probably gets the nod, so he better be accurate in his passing. Maybe he ought to go to sleep watching a Xavi highlight reel.
At the same time, dropping in Jose Torres -- who hasn't played in the tournament -- would be a huge risk. Double that for Sacha Kljestan.
The ultimate gamble would be Freddy Adu, but that's not going to happen. If, and stress if, this scenario played out and the U.S. won with Adu breaking out, my god. (Let's just stop thinking that way, it's probably for the best.)
* Is anyone else's Spidey sense tingling that Kaka is due to for a big game?
* One big difference, if not the biggest, between Spain and Brazil is speed. After the loss to the U.S., Spain credited with the Americans for its athleticism and speed. Sunday, the U.S. probably loses that advantage. (And also Maicon and or Dani Alves is bringing a lot more to the table than Sergio Ramos or Joan Capdevila did Wednesday.)
* Another thing to worry about, Brazil does have some size on its back line with Lucio and Luisao in the middle.
* Will the U.S. have any gas left in the tank, or will the team lose its lungs like Egypt did after two grueling matches?
* It needs to be stressed again, the U.S. can only walk on the thin ice of turning the ball over a midfield so many times. Robinho, Kaka, Ramires, whomever. If the U.S. is sloppy with the ball, Brazil will make them pay.
This comes from the immortal 30f, who at this point must be my brother from another mother. I swore I said the same thing during the first U.S./Brazil match. To quote Bucho from 'Desperado' -- "He'll never dance again."
* Since I mentioned it, in the 0.000000001 percent chance there's ever a movie made about the U.S., who plays Bob Bradley? My long standing vote goes to Christopher Guest.
Lineup guess:
Bradley, due to his son's recklessness, is facing a big decision. Stick with what got you here -- 4-4-2 -- or try something new?
I'll bet on Bradley's track record and say he sticks with the hand he's been dealt, for better or worse.
GK -- Howard
DEF -- Bocanegra -- Onyewu -- DeMerit -- Spector
MID -- Donovan -- Clark -- Feilhaber -- Dempsey
FOR -- Davies -- Altidore
Honestly, the other options could lead to disaster in the form of a Brazil goal within the first two minutes.
Final thoughts:
There are two ways a fan can go into this one.
1. The happy to be there scenario.
2. The Jake Taylor scenario, specifically -- let's win the whole fucking thing. (Even if it's only the Confederations Cup.)
It's your choice as a fan which way you want to go, though option No. 1 is more of a fallback after a loss.
Let's hope the team itself can muster its reserve energy and take option No. 2.
In the wake of the Wednesday's crazy 2-0 win by the U.S. over Spain in the Confederations Cup semifinals, we've seen the term 'Miracle on Grass' tossed around.
Pardon me while I go vomit.
Not to turn this post into another media examination, but drawing comparisons to the 1980 U.S. hockey win over the Soviets at the Lake Placid Olympiad is simple-minded thinking.
The comparisons between Spain and the Soviets is somewhat apt, if you forget you're comparing dandy guys with faux hawks and hair product to grim Communists playing for the Red Army team. Both sides were considered the best in the world, to be upset by the U.S. in the semifinals of a competition whilst wearing red shirts, no less.
On the other hand, drawing similarities to the U.S. hockey team and the U.S. team on the field Wednesday in Bloemfontein is a bit of a stretch. Bob Bradley -- who'll never get the Kurt Russell treatment -- had a team full of professionals at his disposal, not a group of college kids. Granted, it's not like the U.S. pros were in the same class as the Spanish nationals, but they still draw paychecks from European clubs.
Plus, there wasn't any Cold War backdrop involved here. Unless you're ardently anti-Ricky Rubio and the other Spaniards slowly invading the NBA, there was really nothing geopolitical about Wednesday's match.
In short, it was a colossal upset, yes, but labeling the win a miracle is going overboard. Plus, the U.S. came out and rattled Spain inside the first 20 minutes before Jozy Altidore scored. Yes, the 'scoring chances' graphic looked lopsided in the end, but how could it not after the U.S. went ahead 1-0?
It was a great defensive effort, but it wasn't a miracle. A miracle would discount too much of the work the team put in. The fact the U.S. actually was alive to play in the semifinals -- that was the real miracle.
Saying all that, it's not going to take a miracle, either, to defeat Brazil on Sunday in the final.
Simply, the U.S. is going to need to retain its focus and commitment. Most importantly, the U.S. cannot flub any chances Brazil gives it during the run of play or on set pieces.
What's worrisome, is that in some corners (Grant Wahl for instance) following Brazil's narrow 1-0 win over South Africa on Thursday, there's a chorus that thinks this game is right there for the U.S. to steal perhaps somewhat aided by chilly temperatures in South Africa.
Not to simply be a contrarian, but Thursday's performance by Brazil is probably the worst thing that could have happened leading up to the final. If Brazil trounced South Africa, say, 3-0 it might enter the final overconfident and possibly still taking the U.S. lightly. Now, after squeaking past South Africa -- via a free kick by Dani Alves w/turtleneck no less -- you'd think logic would dictate Brazil will be ready to play from the opening whistle vs. the U.S.
The Brazilian public, unlike the U.S., actually demands results from its national team. And not simply results, but winning with flair, too. Considering some of these players for the time being still play in Brazil, they'll probably not want to return home losers ... especially losers to the U.S.
In the two days he'll have, Brazil coach Dunga (more on him later) will certainly drill a better gameplan into his team. In fact, South Africa packing it in deep might help Brazil because the U.S. will likely be forced to play a similar way Sunday. Plus all the Brazil players can watch the tape of the Egypt and Spain games and figure out a different way to attack the U.S. (My guess, through Kaka in the gaping hole left by Michael Bradley's red card suspension.)
Is Landon Donovan going to be given any room to operate? Survey says ... no.
Beside all this, there's always a natural leveling off.
Overall the U.S. isn't as good as it was against Spain and Brazil isn't as poor as it was against South Africa. On any given day, anything can happen, but ask yourself what's more likely -- the U.S. playing its third straight great game or Brazil rebounding from one 'meh' effort?
Or let's ask it this way. If we're drafting a team between players from the U.S., Brazil, Spain and even Italy, where and when is the first Yank selected?
That's why a lot of the talk of the U.S.'s arrival on the world stage is a little premature. The U.S. is capable of playing good soccer and has solid, athletically fit professionals. We're still a ways from that transcendent star that can win games in a blink of an eye without all the eternal circumstances breaking correctly.
As great as beating Spain, and ending their 15-match winning streak was, the result alone isn't enough to vault the U.S. into the ranks of the world elites. Its not enough to offset the performances at the 1998 and 2006 World Cup, which will weight just as much into a potential 2010 World Cup seeding as anything else.
Taking nothing away from the performance against Spain, but don't forget that less than a week ago we all wanted Bob Bradley fired and eleven new players. Or the fact that an extremely unlikely string of results had to go the U.S.'s way on Sunday to advance.
And though I'm loathe to play the 'What if' game, what if Tim Howard doesn't stick his leg out to block Fernando Torres shot at the end of the first half? Or if David Villa gets a little more accuracy on one of his numerous attempts?
Basically, the U.S. played a perfect defensive game by throwing itself at anything and everything vs. Spain and to expect that performance each and every time is unrealistic. Eventually, if you play a game like that, the ball is going to take a bad hop or a bad deflection.
On the plus side, U.S. showed on a given day it can show up and compete with the world's best something we've all been clamoring for probably since Jan Koller ran over Eddie Pope in the first five minutes of the 2006 World Cup opener.
Is the U.S. among the elite footballing nations of the world yet? Time will tell. One result certainly doesn't do it, but it at least pushes the program forward.
A second straight upset of a world power will open some eyeballs.
Even if that happens, there's plenty of work still to be done come 2010. At least, win or lose Sunday, we can take a deep breath and realize it won't take a miracle for the U.S. to do anything positive come the real deal in South Africa next year.
Other stuff:
* Hate to beat a dead horse, but if I'm Bradley the Elder I'd put a $100 fine for any player that attempts a two-foot slide tackle in every single U.S. practice or game from now until 2010.
Three red cards from three different officials throws a little cold water on the theory the refs are out to get the U.S.
* On that note, no stupid free kicks. Thanks.
* Jay DeMerit has quickly become my favorite guy in the U.S. shirt. If it's possible, he's certainly the most outright "American" player on the field -- all heart and hustle. He gives it 100 percent every play. Plus he's got some pretty rugged tattoos, which as you know are a requirement of all European-based players.
My only wonder, if Bradley decides to stick with a DeMerit/Onyewu pairing going forward, are they too similar a player? Or do they have the potential to form a Ferdidnand/Vidic tandem, albeit without the pedigree and passing abilities.
* Honestly, I have no idea how to replace Michael Bradley in the center of the field. Other than Landon Donovan, there isn't a bigger loss or more irreplaceable player for the U.S. on its current roster.
Right now, those two are probably a lot like Jack and Sawyer on 'Lost'. You can kill off any other character and life goes on, but even if you hate Jack, he's irreplaceable to the mythos of the show. And Sawyer, men and women -- a t.v. rarity -- around the globe would riot if he caught a bad one before the finale.
Let's say Jack is Donovan in this scenario, since both act with similar emotion, or lack thereof. And Sawyer, at least his initial incarnation was like a fiery Michael Bradley stopping around the Island/center of the field. Let's hope Bradley can mature like Sawyer and his whole LaFleur act. Anything that keeps him from seeing the red mist.
Back to reality, even if Maurice Edu were healthy, he couldn't replicate Bradley's box-to-box skills. (Jermaine Jones, another story all together.)
Simply dropping in a player next to Ricardo Clark in a 4-4-2 in the center of the field is asking for trouble. Benny Feilhaber, despite his positive passing, is prone to giveaway and mistakes. I'm already getting chills if he and Clint Dempsey are on the same side of the field and Brazil stealing it away for a rapid counter-attack. Feilhaber probably gets the nod, so he better be accurate in his passing. Maybe he ought to go to sleep watching a Xavi highlight reel.
At the same time, dropping in Jose Torres -- who hasn't played in the tournament -- would be a huge risk. Double that for Sacha Kljestan.
The ultimate gamble would be Freddy Adu, but that's not going to happen. If, and stress if, this scenario played out and the U.S. won with Adu breaking out, my god. (Let's just stop thinking that way, it's probably for the best.)
* Is anyone else's Spidey sense tingling that Kaka is due to for a big game?
* One big difference, if not the biggest, between Spain and Brazil is speed. After the loss to the U.S., Spain credited with the Americans for its athleticism and speed. Sunday, the U.S. probably loses that advantage. (And also Maicon and or Dani Alves is bringing a lot more to the table than Sergio Ramos or Joan Capdevila did Wednesday.)
* Another thing to worry about, Brazil does have some size on its back line with Lucio and Luisao in the middle.
* Will the U.S. have any gas left in the tank, or will the team lose its lungs like Egypt did after two grueling matches?
* It needs to be stressed again, the U.S. can only walk on the thin ice of turning the ball over a midfield so many times. Robinho, Kaka, Ramires, whomever. If the U.S. is sloppy with the ball, Brazil will make them pay.
This comes from the immortal 30f, who at this point must be my brother from another mother. I swore I said the same thing during the first U.S./Brazil match. To quote Bucho from 'Desperado' -- "He'll never dance again."
* Since I mentioned it, in the 0.000000001 percent chance there's ever a movie made about the U.S., who plays Bob Bradley? My long standing vote goes to Christopher Guest.
Lineup guess:
Bradley, due to his son's recklessness, is facing a big decision. Stick with what got you here -- 4-4-2 -- or try something new?
I'll bet on Bradley's track record and say he sticks with the hand he's been dealt, for better or worse.
GK -- Howard
DEF -- Bocanegra -- Onyewu -- DeMerit -- Spector
MID -- Donovan -- Clark -- Feilhaber -- Dempsey
FOR -- Davies -- Altidore
Honestly, the other options could lead to disaster in the form of a Brazil goal within the first two minutes.
Final thoughts:
There are two ways a fan can go into this one.
1. The happy to be there scenario.
2. The Jake Taylor scenario, specifically -- let's win the whole fucking thing. (Even if it's only the Confederations Cup.)
It's your choice as a fan which way you want to go, though option No. 1 is more of a fallback after a loss.
Let's hope the team itself can muster its reserve energy and take option No. 2.
Labels: Brasil, confederations cup, Soccer, USMNT
I'm just going to come right out and say it, I was a big fan of ESPN's 'Cheap Seats.' Yeah, it's hard to believe that since the Sklar Brothers were in the film 'Wild Hogs' which nearly mitigates their entire career.
Still, 'Cheap Seats' was quality. It's hard to naysay a show that features cameos from guys like Ian Roberts, H. Jon Benjamin and Michael Showalter.
Some of the clips from the old shows were beyond priceless. The Steve Garvey 'Billfishing' promo tape featuring the immortal Michael Floorwax sets the Simmons-Unintentional Comedy Scale to new heights. (Really, after reading click here and favorite this on your YouTube account. Quality.)
Each episode of 'Cheap Seats' featured a segment 'Do You Care?' where the brothers fired off the phrase a couple times with quick facts.
So right now, in the wake of U.S. 2-0 result over Spain in the Confederations Cup semifinal, do you care?
It's an open ended question, without a right or wrong answer.
This is a question I'm posing to every human being on earth, no matter race, creed, ethnicity, sexual preference ... or even if you watch the Jim Rome show.
Here's my thoughts/questions. (Sorry about all the numbered lists recently.)
1. Will Europe/the World care?
Did the result make the world stand up and take notice? Hmmm....probably mixed. In all honesty I'm not sure how wrapped up the world, particularly Europe is about the Confederations Cup. Really, in a sentence define what the tournament is, and why it's important?
To be brutally honest, in this edition, it was probably to test out progress of South Africa as a host country. In that case we learned two things 1) they needed plenty of free tickets 2) the vuvuzela is annoying and already has the Brit media in a tizzy.
This isn't to paint Euros, etc. as snobs. Most of them are coming off the long and grueling league season and want to enjoy a month or two without the sport. Would a tournament which had the likes of New Zealand, Iraq, South Africa, Egypt ... and yes, the U.S., have piqued your interests?
The U.S. beating Spain, yes, probably made some people around the globe take notice. But considering the competition, they're not going Francesa-level 'GaGa' over it.
Still, the result, at least for the time being will earn the U.S. a modicum of respect internationally. Will we ever win over the British football media? Never. Should we even care? Of course not. As I've heard thousands of high school and college kids chant at sporting events -- "Scoreboard, Scoreboard."
Also, in America its close to scientific proven fact that we love stats. Love 'em. Loooooooove 'em. Around the world, yeah, the fact that Spain won an international record 15-straight is important, but they're not as hung up on the numbers as we are. It's a big deal the U.S. snapped Spain's unbeaten run, but what the actual number is, not as much.
Spain's 35-game-unbeaten run isn't hanging up next to Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak. Maybe in Spain, but not in my mind. They were, and still are, an elite team that will be defined by their flashy play, their brilliant passing, their borderline sexuality questioning togetherness, not the number. (Paging No. 6)
For whatever the reason, stats and numbers just don't resonate as much in the world of soccer. The fact Stan Musial batted over .350 five times in his Major League career, carries some weight. There's simply not enough numbers in soccer, coupled with the endless leagues around the world, to qualify them properly. (One astounding fact, Nicolas Anelka has scored double-digit goals for nine different teams. Prolly says more about him than anything else.)
2. Will Americans care?
For like a day or two, yeah.
Look at some of the stuff that the sports media/media at large have made people interested in over the last couple years. Hell, just as an example that I think every form of human media must use by the end of the month -- Jon and Kate. Does anyone really give two proper fucks about those two?
Sorry, a little off tangent, but the way the news works these days its all cycles.
Right now its a down sports cycle, so the U.S. doing something comes at the perfect time. It'll be hot news for about a week, and then (poof) forgotten. Over that time, casual fans will get inundated with oodles of info about U.S. soccer.
Expect whatever footage from 1950 vs. England that can be exists to be dusted off and recycled, never mind that the circumstances are borderline incomparable. Prepare yourselfs for vintage clips, mullets included, from 1994 and 1998 (Kasey Keller w/hair!) Expect to hear Alexi Lalas talking to you in your sleep -- hopefully without shotgunning an 'energy' drink.
And maybe after all those things running on a loop on ESPNEWS, some people might just plop down in front of their set on Sunday afternoon and watch the final.
After that match ends, some minds will be won over. Yet I'd guess the majority of casuals will tune in, care for all of about 12 seconds, win or lose, and move onto the next thing. Though, a win over possibly Brazil might make it so that all bets are off.
This isn't the worst scenario in the world. If we can ever move the general discourse about soccer in American beyond "heh heh soccer sucks", then well, we've accomplished something, nearly a breakthrough. It's unfortunate there aren't enough qualified media types to rationally discuss the game.
If it's just another false spring, I can live with that too.
Deep down, I just hope that whatever goodwill this stunning result yields, it doesn't get the U.S. soccer team lumped in with the Danica Patricks of the sports world, a curiosity to be dusted off from time-to-time.
One other thing
Underrated story that will develop from the U.S. Confederations Cup run -- money.
As in the money guys like Oguchi Onyewu, Charlie Davies and maybe even Landon Donovan put in some C.R.E.A.M.-worthy displays that should upgrade their club status. (I'd mention Jonathon Spector, but why would he leave the tutelage of Gianfranco Zola, and why now would Jay DeMerit ditch Watford?)
Onyewu probably can take his pick of Europa League or maybe even some fringe Champions League squads after his imposing performance. Yeah, as U.S. fans we know all his limitations -- namely his ability to complete a pass to a teammate, but don't tell me some club president wouldn't want to sign him up to toss strikers around for a season.
The latest rumor was Fenerbache, after that false Birmingham City report. Who knows now.
As for Davies, you'd think someone out there would like his speed. Or it would be better utilized than the Swedish Allsvenskan.
And Donovan. Maybe he convinced a European club to take a shot on him. Why wouldn't a promoted Bundesliga team or heck, why not Michael Bradley's Borussia M-gladbach take a gamble? He might not be good enough for Bayern, but he could play and bring some energy to a team if he were motivated to try it. He does have an offensive skill set which would help teams. Would he be the focal point of a team? No. But he could be an asset for a team in search of a secondary goal-scorer/creator.
Not sure what MLS would charge for a transfer or try to hold up Donovan, but he could use a better World Cup tuneup that what the league has to offer.
Something that also bears watching is the fate of Altidore. Will Villareal want to bring him back even more after he scored against Spain? Or will they loan him out once again? Or what about Xerez? (And what about them, does Altidore count for playing there even if he never appeared in a match. This whole loan process hurts my head sometimes.)
Altidore, it's obvious, needs steady playing time next season because he's still not sharp. Let's be honest, his shot, powerful as it was went directly at St. Iker, who must not have said his prayers that morning, with the bad bad bounce off his hands and all.
(Consider this a companion post to Wednesday's post game rambling. It was hard to try to pin down everything in a timely manner.)
***
Here's your Gold Cup roster:
GOALKEEPERS (3): Jon Busch (Chicago Fire), Troy Perkins (IK Start), Luis Robles (FC Kaiserslautern)
DEFENDERS (7): Steve Cherundolo (Hannover 96), Jimmy Conrad (Kansas City Wizards), Clarence Goodson (IK Start), Jay Heaps (New England Revolution), Chad Marshall (Columbus Crew), Michael Parkhurst (FC Nordsjaellands), Heath Pearce (Hansa Rostock)
MIDFIELDERS (8): Davy Arnaud (Kansas City Wizards), Kyle Beckerman (Real Salt Lake), Colin Clark (Colorado Rapids), Sam Cronin (Toronto FC), Brad Evans (Seattle Sounders), Stuart Holden (Houston Dynamo), Logan Pause (Chicago Fire), Robbie Rogers (Columbus Crew)
FORWARDS (5): Freddy Adu (AS Monaco), Brian Ching (Houston Dynamo), Kenny Cooper (FC Dallas), Charlie Davies (Hammarby IF), Santino Quaranta (D.C. United)
Still, 'Cheap Seats' was quality. It's hard to naysay a show that features cameos from guys like Ian Roberts, H. Jon Benjamin and Michael Showalter.
Some of the clips from the old shows were beyond priceless. The Steve Garvey 'Billfishing' promo tape featuring the immortal Michael Floorwax sets the Simmons-Unintentional Comedy Scale to new heights. (Really, after reading click here and favorite this on your YouTube account. Quality.)
Each episode of 'Cheap Seats' featured a segment 'Do You Care?' where the brothers fired off the phrase a couple times with quick facts.
So right now, in the wake of U.S. 2-0 result over Spain in the Confederations Cup semifinal, do you care?
It's an open ended question, without a right or wrong answer.
This is a question I'm posing to every human being on earth, no matter race, creed, ethnicity, sexual preference ... or even if you watch the Jim Rome show.
Here's my thoughts/questions. (Sorry about all the numbered lists recently.)
1. Will Europe/the World care?
Did the result make the world stand up and take notice? Hmmm....probably mixed. In all honesty I'm not sure how wrapped up the world, particularly Europe is about the Confederations Cup. Really, in a sentence define what the tournament is, and why it's important?
To be brutally honest, in this edition, it was probably to test out progress of South Africa as a host country. In that case we learned two things 1) they needed plenty of free tickets 2) the vuvuzela is annoying and already has the Brit media in a tizzy.
This isn't to paint Euros, etc. as snobs. Most of them are coming off the long and grueling league season and want to enjoy a month or two without the sport. Would a tournament which had the likes of New Zealand, Iraq, South Africa, Egypt ... and yes, the U.S., have piqued your interests?
The U.S. beating Spain, yes, probably made some people around the globe take notice. But considering the competition, they're not going Francesa-level 'GaGa' over it.
Still, the result, at least for the time being will earn the U.S. a modicum of respect internationally. Will we ever win over the British football media? Never. Should we even care? Of course not. As I've heard thousands of high school and college kids chant at sporting events -- "Scoreboard, Scoreboard."
Also, in America its close to scientific proven fact that we love stats. Love 'em. Loooooooove 'em. Around the world, yeah, the fact that Spain won an international record 15-straight is important, but they're not as hung up on the numbers as we are. It's a big deal the U.S. snapped Spain's unbeaten run, but what the actual number is, not as much.
Spain's 35-game-unbeaten run isn't hanging up next to Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak. Maybe in Spain, but not in my mind. They were, and still are, an elite team that will be defined by their flashy play, their brilliant passing, their borderline sexuality questioning togetherness, not the number. (Paging No. 6)
For whatever the reason, stats and numbers just don't resonate as much in the world of soccer. The fact Stan Musial batted over .350 five times in his Major League career, carries some weight. There's simply not enough numbers in soccer, coupled with the endless leagues around the world, to qualify them properly. (One astounding fact, Nicolas Anelka has scored double-digit goals for nine different teams. Prolly says more about him than anything else.)
2. Will Americans care?
For like a day or two, yeah.
Look at some of the stuff that the sports media/media at large have made people interested in over the last couple years. Hell, just as an example that I think every form of human media must use by the end of the month -- Jon and Kate. Does anyone really give two proper fucks about those two?
Sorry, a little off tangent, but the way the news works these days its all cycles.
Right now its a down sports cycle, so the U.S. doing something comes at the perfect time. It'll be hot news for about a week, and then (poof) forgotten. Over that time, casual fans will get inundated with oodles of info about U.S. soccer.
Expect whatever footage from 1950 vs. England that can be exists to be dusted off and recycled, never mind that the circumstances are borderline incomparable. Prepare yourselfs for vintage clips, mullets included, from 1994 and 1998 (Kasey Keller w/hair!) Expect to hear Alexi Lalas talking to you in your sleep -- hopefully without shotgunning an 'energy' drink.
And maybe after all those things running on a loop on ESPNEWS, some people might just plop down in front of their set on Sunday afternoon and watch the final.
After that match ends, some minds will be won over. Yet I'd guess the majority of casuals will tune in, care for all of about 12 seconds, win or lose, and move onto the next thing. Though, a win over possibly Brazil might make it so that all bets are off.
This isn't the worst scenario in the world. If we can ever move the general discourse about soccer in American beyond "heh heh soccer sucks", then well, we've accomplished something, nearly a breakthrough. It's unfortunate there aren't enough qualified media types to rationally discuss the game.
If it's just another false spring, I can live with that too.
Deep down, I just hope that whatever goodwill this stunning result yields, it doesn't get the U.S. soccer team lumped in with the Danica Patricks of the sports world, a curiosity to be dusted off from time-to-time.
One other thing
Underrated story that will develop from the U.S. Confederations Cup run -- money.
As in the money guys like Oguchi Onyewu, Charlie Davies and maybe even Landon Donovan put in some C.R.E.A.M.-worthy displays that should upgrade their club status. (I'd mention Jonathon Spector, but why would he leave the tutelage of Gianfranco Zola, and why now would Jay DeMerit ditch Watford?)
Onyewu probably can take his pick of Europa League or maybe even some fringe Champions League squads after his imposing performance. Yeah, as U.S. fans we know all his limitations -- namely his ability to complete a pass to a teammate, but don't tell me some club president wouldn't want to sign him up to toss strikers around for a season.
The latest rumor was Fenerbache, after that false Birmingham City report. Who knows now.
As for Davies, you'd think someone out there would like his speed. Or it would be better utilized than the Swedish Allsvenskan.
And Donovan. Maybe he convinced a European club to take a shot on him. Why wouldn't a promoted Bundesliga team or heck, why not Michael Bradley's Borussia M-gladbach take a gamble? He might not be good enough for Bayern, but he could play and bring some energy to a team if he were motivated to try it. He does have an offensive skill set which would help teams. Would he be the focal point of a team? No. But he could be an asset for a team in search of a secondary goal-scorer/creator.
Not sure what MLS would charge for a transfer or try to hold up Donovan, but he could use a better World Cup tuneup that what the league has to offer.
Something that also bears watching is the fate of Altidore. Will Villareal want to bring him back even more after he scored against Spain? Or will they loan him out once again? Or what about Xerez? (And what about them, does Altidore count for playing there even if he never appeared in a match. This whole loan process hurts my head sometimes.)
Altidore, it's obvious, needs steady playing time next season because he's still not sharp. Let's be honest, his shot, powerful as it was went directly at St. Iker, who must not have said his prayers that morning, with the bad bad bounce off his hands and all.
(Consider this a companion post to Wednesday's post game rambling. It was hard to try to pin down everything in a timely manner.)
***
Here's your Gold Cup roster:
GOALKEEPERS (3): Jon Busch (Chicago Fire), Troy Perkins (IK Start), Luis Robles (FC Kaiserslautern)
DEFENDERS (7): Steve Cherundolo (Hannover 96), Jimmy Conrad (Kansas City Wizards), Clarence Goodson (IK Start), Jay Heaps (New England Revolution), Chad Marshall (Columbus Crew), Michael Parkhurst (FC Nordsjaellands), Heath Pearce (Hansa Rostock)
MIDFIELDERS (8): Davy Arnaud (Kansas City Wizards), Kyle Beckerman (Real Salt Lake), Colin Clark (Colorado Rapids), Sam Cronin (Toronto FC), Brad Evans (Seattle Sounders), Stuart Holden (Houston Dynamo), Logan Pause (Chicago Fire), Robbie Rogers (Columbus Crew)
FORWARDS (5): Freddy Adu (AS Monaco), Brian Ching (Houston Dynamo), Kenny Cooper (FC Dallas), Charlie Davies (Hammarby IF), Santino Quaranta (D.C. United)
Labels: bob bradley, confederations cup, Soccer, USMNT
Wow, wow, wow, wow.
U.S. 2, Spain 0 ... it happened? Are you sure?
If you glance at it quickly, it seems like a typo. Or if not that, a fluke.
Watching this unfold, it wasn't a fluke. It wasn't luck. It wasn't Spain playing poorly.
See, what the heck do I know. (Oh right, starting Carlos Bocanegra at left back, but who's counting.)
The U.S., to cue the Offspring, came out and played.
Before the match started, I figured the U.S. had no chance. None.
Yet, from the whistle, the U.S. came out and didn't just hunker down. They came at Spain, and Charlie Davies alone must have had the Euro champions collectively say, who? what? Or at least reach for some new hair product.
As much as I've personally ripped Bob Bradley, finally he put the oars in the water and allowed the team to play. There was no fear of the No. 1 team in the world. Or kissing the European Champions ring, which I'm guessing a couple players on Spain were expecting.
Wasn't this display what we fans had been screaming into the darkness, well message boards and blogs, for the last couple years? Don't be afraid and show you belong among the world elite? After what we've been witness two for the last seven years, it's almost hard to the brain to process these developments actually unfurling.
How this team transformed from a bunch of sick puppies vs. Italy and Brazil to a competent, cohesive unit in less than a week is a marvel. Was it just the team responding to the criticism? Really, I'm asking. Has a team in any sport undergone such a transformation in such a short a time?
Did Jozy Altidore get a semi-lucky bounce to score the first goal? Maybe? But the way thing went, the U.S. were due a bounce of the ball.
Plus, as the game evolved, it did truly look like one of those classic Arsenal games from early in last Premier League season, when the Gunners went down early and then attacked the rest of the way, only to be undone by the 'lesser' opponents, who committed to defending as a team.
Cross-after-cross, the U.S. was there to throw a body or head in the way. Oddly enough, the only really great chance for Spain seemed to be that ball Fernando Torres played to himself, which Tim Howard kicked away with his foot. (Howard silenced my would-be goal keeping controversy, eh?)
Right around maybe the 55th minute I figured it was going to be the U.S.'s day. Believe me or not.
The second goal? Terrible mistake by Sergio Ramos, but credit Clint Dempsey once again for being in the right place at the right time.
Perhaps the biggest credit should go to Landon Donovan, who finally, just may have morphed into the player we'll all wanted him to become the last eight years over the last two weeks. For all the crap Lando has taken, he's been equally epic in South Africa.
Equally amazing, both Donovan and Ricardo Clark -- the only two MLSers active for this one -- played out of their minds.
Is it worth complaining, now, about the harsh red card on Michael Bradley that will force him to miss the final on Sunday? Yeah, but let's worry about that game later and the U.S. surely ought to lodge a protest, though I'm sure FIFA will curry no favors for Sunil & Co.
Right now I'm stunned that the U.S. win is the top news on every major sports site around the Inter-tubes. Hell, even WFAN's John Minko read the result during a 20/20 update.
In fact, on ESPN.com a poll is running about 81 percent for people who care that the U.S. won, compared to only six percent at 'not at all'. This is after about 40,000 votes, too. (It was also the top item on 'PTI', too bad there aren't very many talking heads at the WWL qualified to talk intelligently about the game, no Tommy Symth doesn't count.)
It all all makes me wonder, is this that long awaited win that the U.S. has waited for these last decades and decades? Could it actually be the tipping point?
Time will tell, but there are factors working in its favor.
1. It came against the No. 1 team in the world, which not ever the most ardent Frank Deford soccer haters in the world can naysay.
2. It came after everyone, even the diehard fans like ourselves had written off the team.
3. It was aired on ESPN, which will give the match tons of traction over all its platforms the next few games ahead of Sunday's final.
Essentially, it was the perfect storm and the U.S. capitalized. I'm curious to see how the mainstream media reports and reacts to this. Will they finally realize it's a big deal? Or will it lead to another hype machine like pre-2006, settling the U.S. up for another letdown?
However it all plays out, this was certainly a legitimizing win for the U.S. in lieu of the last three years. Again, let's hope it doesn't lead to unparalleled levels of expectations on the U.S., since we've seen the team clearly plays its best when its been written off.
Spain is obviously a lot better than the U.S. from a talent standpoint and thanks to this result alone, the U.S. isn't catching anyone off guard at the real deal in South Africa next year. Also, as good as the U.S. played Wednesday, it's unrealistic to expect it every time on going forward -- it was probably the perfect storm.
Yet, at least the U.S. now has these result in its back pocket to draw upon. It doesn't have to sneak up on the elite teams or catch them on an off-day to win.
Believe me, I'm as stunned as everybody else. I wish there was a better way to capture all this, but who on earth saw this coming? I'm sure I'm not the only person left speechless with a goofy grin on his or her face right now.
For once, though, it's time to pop the cork and celebrate, even if its only a semifinal. The U.S. deserves to take a bow today. Who cares what happens next game or next year.
And since I can't end without curbing my enthusiasm just a little, as pointed out, Mexico has won the Confederations Cup. Just saying.
That said, let's go down to Azteca in a couple of weeks and make this win stand up.
P.S. -- Clint Dempsey can never play a game for the U.S. without the beard ever again.
U.S. 2, Spain 0 ... it happened? Are you sure?
If you glance at it quickly, it seems like a typo. Or if not that, a fluke.
Watching this unfold, it wasn't a fluke. It wasn't luck. It wasn't Spain playing poorly.
See, what the heck do I know. (Oh right, starting Carlos Bocanegra at left back, but who's counting.)
The U.S., to cue the Offspring, came out and played.
Before the match started, I figured the U.S. had no chance. None.
Yet, from the whistle, the U.S. came out and didn't just hunker down. They came at Spain, and Charlie Davies alone must have had the Euro champions collectively say, who? what? Or at least reach for some new hair product.
As much as I've personally ripped Bob Bradley, finally he put the oars in the water and allowed the team to play. There was no fear of the No. 1 team in the world. Or kissing the European Champions ring, which I'm guessing a couple players on Spain were expecting.
Wasn't this display what we fans had been screaming into the darkness, well message boards and blogs, for the last couple years? Don't be afraid and show you belong among the world elite? After what we've been witness two for the last seven years, it's almost hard to the brain to process these developments actually unfurling.
How this team transformed from a bunch of sick puppies vs. Italy and Brazil to a competent, cohesive unit in less than a week is a marvel. Was it just the team responding to the criticism? Really, I'm asking. Has a team in any sport undergone such a transformation in such a short a time?
Did Jozy Altidore get a semi-lucky bounce to score the first goal? Maybe? But the way thing went, the U.S. were due a bounce of the ball.
Plus, as the game evolved, it did truly look like one of those classic Arsenal games from early in last Premier League season, when the Gunners went down early and then attacked the rest of the way, only to be undone by the 'lesser' opponents, who committed to defending as a team.
Cross-after-cross, the U.S. was there to throw a body or head in the way. Oddly enough, the only really great chance for Spain seemed to be that ball Fernando Torres played to himself, which Tim Howard kicked away with his foot. (Howard silenced my would-be goal keeping controversy, eh?)
Right around maybe the 55th minute I figured it was going to be the U.S.'s day. Believe me or not.
The second goal? Terrible mistake by Sergio Ramos, but credit Clint Dempsey once again for being in the right place at the right time.
Perhaps the biggest credit should go to Landon Donovan, who finally, just may have morphed into the player we'll all wanted him to become the last eight years over the last two weeks. For all the crap Lando has taken, he's been equally epic in South Africa.
Equally amazing, both Donovan and Ricardo Clark -- the only two MLSers active for this one -- played out of their minds.
Is it worth complaining, now, about the harsh red card on Michael Bradley that will force him to miss the final on Sunday? Yeah, but let's worry about that game later and the U.S. surely ought to lodge a protest, though I'm sure FIFA will curry no favors for Sunil & Co.
Right now I'm stunned that the U.S. win is the top news on every major sports site around the Inter-tubes. Hell, even WFAN's John Minko read the result during a 20/20 update.
In fact, on ESPN.com a poll is running about 81 percent for people who care that the U.S. won, compared to only six percent at 'not at all'. This is after about 40,000 votes, too. (It was also the top item on 'PTI', too bad there aren't very many talking heads at the WWL qualified to talk intelligently about the game, no Tommy Symth doesn't count.)
It all all makes me wonder, is this that long awaited win that the U.S. has waited for these last decades and decades? Could it actually be the tipping point?
Time will tell, but there are factors working in its favor.
1. It came against the No. 1 team in the world, which not ever the most ardent Frank Deford soccer haters in the world can naysay.
2. It came after everyone, even the diehard fans like ourselves had written off the team.
3. It was aired on ESPN, which will give the match tons of traction over all its platforms the next few games ahead of Sunday's final.
Essentially, it was the perfect storm and the U.S. capitalized. I'm curious to see how the mainstream media reports and reacts to this. Will they finally realize it's a big deal? Or will it lead to another hype machine like pre-2006, settling the U.S. up for another letdown?
However it all plays out, this was certainly a legitimizing win for the U.S. in lieu of the last three years. Again, let's hope it doesn't lead to unparalleled levels of expectations on the U.S., since we've seen the team clearly plays its best when its been written off.
Spain is obviously a lot better than the U.S. from a talent standpoint and thanks to this result alone, the U.S. isn't catching anyone off guard at the real deal in South Africa next year. Also, as good as the U.S. played Wednesday, it's unrealistic to expect it every time on going forward -- it was probably the perfect storm.
Yet, at least the U.S. now has these result in its back pocket to draw upon. It doesn't have to sneak up on the elite teams or catch them on an off-day to win.
Believe me, I'm as stunned as everybody else. I wish there was a better way to capture all this, but who on earth saw this coming? I'm sure I'm not the only person left speechless with a goofy grin on his or her face right now.
For once, though, it's time to pop the cork and celebrate, even if its only a semifinal. The U.S. deserves to take a bow today. Who cares what happens next game or next year.
And since I can't end without curbing my enthusiasm just a little, as pointed out, Mexico has won the Confederations Cup. Just saying.
That said, let's go down to Azteca in a couple of weeks and make this win stand up.
P.S. -- Clint Dempsey can never play a game for the U.S. without the beard ever again.
Labels: confederations cup, Soccer, USMNT
