BigDogsHunt
Prove It!
ckb2001 said:How do YOU define overachieve? Just curious.
Well let me first start by saying I dont think WC teams can overachieve....just by making it proves you have talent to belong if you execute....and if both teams play up to their level of talent, the better (more talented) team wins.....(excluding ref calls )
We were unknown in 2002 more than anything, and based on our horrible 1998 performance, following the excitement that playing on home soil in 1994, we surprised some teams that didnt prepare or know how to prepare for us in 2002. But we had talent, and we executed to the maximum level it could.
But to overachieve to me is when "your talent" produces higher results than expected based on your opponents performance with "their talent". The key is the losing team playing up to its talent, but not coming out on top. It happens but very rarely.
So if both teams play their best, and a less talented team somehow wins (which rarely happens), then I would say we overachieved.
But if the USA played to its talent, but our opponent with more talent played less then their talent would allow, I dont call that overachieving.
Thats what happened in 2002 more than anything.
P.S. Detriot winning the SB is overachieving, KC winning the WS is overachieving. LOL!