The Official 2007 Copa America thread | Page 18 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

The Official 2007 Copa America thread

The C team is a valid excuse. The roster is filled with young guys with little to no Caps. Yes, Europe may watch this and think, man they suck, but who cares. We know who our Best 11 are, and who the best reserves are.
 
Anyway, two cool stories from the Argentina game. I guess Tevez was impressed with Johnson's run and calmly kicked PK, because at halftime, Tevez jogged over to Eddie and asked him if they could exchange jerseys after the game, which they did. Pretty cool.

And supposably an unnamed US Soccer player was told by an unnamed Argentinian soccer player, that he was considering going into the MLS. Now was it just light chit chat or serious talk? Who knows?
 
Anyway, two cool stories from the Argentina game. I guess Tevez was impressed with Johnson's run and calmly kicked PK, because at halftime, Tevez jogged over to Eddie and asked him if they could exchange jerseys after the game, which they did. Pretty cool.

And supposably an unnamed US Soccer player was told by an unnamed Argentinian soccer player, that he was considering going into the MLS. Now was it just light chit chat or serious talk? Who knows?

Johnson could be really good, but he needs a LOT of work.

I heard that Crespo might accept going to the MLS if the money is right but It was probably just a rumor :unsure:
 
Anyway, two cool stories from the Argentina game. I guess Tevez was impressed with Johnson's run and calmly kicked PK, because at halftime, Tevez jogged over to Eddie and asked him if they could exchange jerseys after the game, which they did. Pretty cool.

And supposably an unnamed US Soccer player was told by an unnamed Argentinian soccer player, that he was considering going into the MLS. Now was it just light chit chat or serious talk? Who knows?

maybe he just wants a lot of money to finish his career... i know I would.
 
Well, that info is probably sufficient to reconstruct the calculations. Anyway, like I said, if I can't verify it I won't claim it to be true, but I do know the difference point-wise between Mexico and the US was very small the last time around.

By the way, you lost that bet about Mexico winning the WC qualification. The US did last time :wink:

And I think it was the 2-0 US win over Germany in the Confed Cup in Mexico where I remember some quotes, but I'm still not yet sure.

I think Mexico came in first and the US second. But I have to look it up.

The Confed Cup, unless played on home soil or in Europe is for European teams unattractive and considered a pain in the behind. I recall some of the big countries abondining the Confed Cup. It was considered just an additional strain in an otherwise off year. The European top players were faced with 2 years of EC qualification than the EC tournament, then 2 years of WC qualifications, then the WC tournament, and add that to the top players schedule of regular season games, Champions or UEFA cup and regional cup games. The FIFA argued and set the Confed Cup up as a warm up and test for the host nation of the next WC.

IOf you look at the history of the Confed Cup it was started in 1992 in Saudi Arabia. The next two were in Saudi Arabia as well.
The first time as a warm up for the host it was played in 2001 in SK and Japan. The additional confed cup in France in 2003 almost put the stagger through the tournament. FIFA changed its entire Confed Cup and made it a 'test tournament' for the host of the next WC. Germany in 2005 was the first host for the WC in 2006. The next one is in 2009 in South Africa for the 2010 WC. It is now being held every 4 years to give it more of a reason and not just add useless games to another already filled schedule.

I remember the 1999 Confed Cup. Germany's player went on sorta strike because of that uselessness of that tournament. They were forced by FIFA to participate as the reigning EC Champion. I remember that they were clobbered by Brazil and barely slid by New Zealand.

It was the year between WC (1998) and the EC (2000).

Regarding the WC Qualifying: I see one standing having the US listed as 1 and one as Mexico listed 1. I don't know if FIFA would apply its regular tiebreaker rule (goal differential) over "head-to-head".

Both had 22 points. Mexico had the better goal differential. The US won the head-to-head.

I highly doubt that either you nor a regular soccer fan can calculate based on the FIFA info (as I posted in the link). Because once one result changes all other remaining requirements change as well.

It doesn't matter though. Bottomline is, in a desperation attempt to lift the Gold Cup to a new level and excuse the showing at Copa America it is being told that with the Gold Cup win the US will be seeded.

US Soccer and its fans have to come out of the bubble. I can see it now that just based on the Gold Cup victory the screaming will be huge to be seeded in the top 8. And if that doesn't happen than everybody is an US hater. Bottom line is that FIFA does not apply short term "somewhat" success but rather sticks with consistency. You have to work yourself up to become a seeded, a top nation in the world of soccer. And to work yourself up is NOT dumping on an honorary invitation to the Copa America with a lower-rated team. Then why even accept that tournament. You might as well set some friendlies up.

Like I said I want US Soccer to succeed. There will be no greater thing for me than to see the US and germany face each other in the WC final. It would be a no lose-only win situation for me. I party afterwards regardless who wins. But I also realize that the US can only became a top nation through hard work and through respect to all international tournaments they are invited too. Not just the Gold Cup, or the Confed Cup but also Copa America. The way to test your young players is to play friendlies or to play them when you locked up group play in any of the tournaments. Not any other way.

And if you look at 'consistency': all the good points they made through the Gold Cup will be, at least partially, lost by a poor showing in Copa America.

Having said that I certainly hope that the US will beat Paraguay.

:wink:
 
I was thinking Crespo too. He hasn't played in Argentina in years and hasn't mentioned of going back. I could see him going to the MLS.
 
maybe he just wants a lot of money to finish his career... i know I would.

Thats the problem with US Soccer. They need top players in their prime not players who want to finish their carriers.

But to have that opportunity a player or agent has to be able to negotiate with the club not with the league. And with one corporation owning or have a significant stake in almost half the league, the attraction is further diminished. To get foreign players in their prime is also helpful for young players. Players who want to finish their carrier will be playing just enough to survive. The fire is burned out.

But you have to open yourself up and sacrifice. You have to say "hey, we want our champion to play the best in Europe, for that we are willing to travel." Or take tournaments like Copa America seriously.
 
I think Mexico came in first and the US second. But I have to look it up.

The Confed Cup, unless played on home soil or in Europe is for European teams unattractive and considered a pain in the behind. I recall some of the big countries abondining the Confed Cup. It was considered just an additional strain in an otherwise off year. The European top players were faced with 2 years of EC qualification than the EC tournament, then 2 years of WC qualifications, then the WC tournament, and add that to the top players schedule of regular season games, Champions or UEFA cup and regional cup games. The FIFA argued and set the Confed Cup up as a warm up and test for the host nation of the next WC.

IOf you look at the history of the Confed Cup it was started in 1992 in Saudi Arabia. The next two were in Saudi Arabia as well.
The first time as a warm up for the host it was played in 2001 in SK and Japan. The additional confed cup in France in 2003 almost put the stagger through the tournament. FIFA changed its entire Confed Cup and made it a 'test tournament' for the host of the next WC. Germany in 2005 was the first host for the WC in 2006. The next one is in 2009 in South Africa for the 2010 WC. It is now being held every 4 years to give it more of a reason and not just add useless games to another already filled schedule.

I remember the 1999 Confed Cup. Germany's player went on sorta strike because of that uselessness of that tournament. They were forced by FIFA to participate as the reigning EC Champion. I remember that they were clobbered by Brazil and barely slid by New Zealand.

It was the year between WC (1998) and the EC (2000).

Regarding the WC Qualifying: I see one standing having the US listed as 1 and one as Mexico listed 1. I don't know if FIFA would apply its regular tiebreaker rule (goal differential) over "head-to-head".

Both had 22 points. Mexico had the better goal differential. The US won the head-to-head.

I highly doubt that either you nor a regular soccer fan can calculate based on the FIFA info (as I posted in the link). Because once one result changes all other remaining requirements change as well.

It doesn't matter though. Bottomline is, in a desperation attempt to lift the Gold Cup to a new level and excuse the showing at Copa America it is being told that with the Gold Cup win the US will be seeded.

US Soccer and its fans have to come out of the bubble. I can see it now that just based on the Gold Cup victory the screaming will be huge to be seeded in the top 8. And if that doesn't happen than everybody is an US hater. Bottom line is that FIFA does not apply short term "somewhat" success but rather sticks with consistency. You have to work yourself up to become a seeded, a top nation in the world of soccer. And to work yourself up is NOT dumping on an honorary invitation to the Copa America with a lower-rated team. Then why even accept that tournament. You might as well set some friendlies up.

Like I said I want US Soccer to succeed. There will be no greater thing for me than to see the US and germany face each other in the WC final. It would be a no lose-only win situation for me. I party afterwards regardless who wins. But I also realize that the US can only became a top nation through hard work and through respect to all international tournaments they are invited too. Not just the Gold Cup, or the Confed Cup but also Copa America. The way to test your young players is to play friendlies or to play them when you locked up group play in any of the tournaments. Not any other way.

And if you look at 'consistency': all the good points they made through the Gold Cup will be, at least partially, lost by a poor showing in Copa America.

Having said that I certainly hope that the US will beat Paraguay.

:wink:


US came in first, though the point total was the same. I forget what the tie-breaker was though:
http://www.soccerphile.com/soccerphile/wc2006/q-groups/america.html

And while what you say about the Confed Cup is true, it's still true that the game wasn't as meaningless as a friendly, that we beat you 2-0, and that German fans dismissed it for similar reasons as we are dismissing the Argentina result: you didn't take your best team.

Here was the roster you had;
http://www.soccertimes.com/usteams/1999/games/jul30.htm

"Germany: Jens Lehmann, Thomas Linke, Christian Worns, Lothar Matthaeus (captain), Joerg Heinrich (Mustafa Dogan 42), Heiko Gerber (Ronald Maul 75), Dariusz Wosz, Bernd Schneider, Horst Heldt (Paulo Rink 60), Oliver Neuville, Michael Preetz."
------------------

So, I count what? Maybe 4 starters on that team (Lehmann wasn't a starter back then)? That was more like your B team. And yes, it was a valid excuse.

So is the excuse this is our C team.


And finally, why do you keep misrepresenting what I said? NO ONE said that with a Gold Cup win the US is seeded. Stop making that assertion!! I said that if we are only going to take an A team to ONE of the two tournaments, doing exactly what we did is the correct decision IF we want to make it more likely we are seeded, since we have a much higher probability of winning the Gold Cup. The points gained through this far exceed what would have happened if we took the A team to the Copa but sent a B team to the Gold Cup. Obviously, sending an A team to both is the best, but that was never argued.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

And NO, most of the points earned at the Gold Cup will NOT be lost at the Copa. Even with 3 losses, that leaves us with all the wins in the knock-out stages and even higher-weighted final. Send an A team to Copa and a B team to the Gold Cup and we probably come out even. PLUS, we compete in the Confed Cup. We'd have to lose all our games in the Copa AND Confed Cup and that would maybe cancel themselves out point-wise.
 
Venezuela won yester 2-0 over Peru. Uruguay beat Bolivia 1-0.

So the group stands like this

Venezuela 4 pts
Peru 3 pts
Uruguay 3 pts
Bolivia 1 pt

It all comes down to the final games :)
 
and brazil won 3-0 on chile, with a beautiful goal by robinho, and now mexico is leading 1-0 against ecuador with a goal by Nery... Still don't like how this team plays, but Nery is certainly a crack
 
what's the score in the mexico game? I just wanna know the score, too boring to watch it :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom