USA in group with Germany, Portugal, and Ghana for the World Cup.

So, I mis-read the knock out round structure. If we manage to finish runner up in our group, then we will likely get either Belgium or Russia in the round of 16, probably Belgium I know everyone is high on Belgium, but, for me, they are what Portugal always has been in the past. I think that if we play well enough to face them we will play well enough to beat them. If we do, we probably get a relatively weak team from the 1E - 2F match up, say France or, maybe, maybe Nigeria. Really, we have a relatively easy path to the semis if we can get out of our group.

nynjmetro wrote:

Nut up or shut up 2014

This ^

If you want to do anything worthwhile at World Cup you are going to have to beat good teams. If you want to say, "Yea! We made it out of our group because our group was weak and then we got destroyed!", go back to kindergarten.

Serious question for anyone who knows soccer better than me. Why shouldn't I bet on Argentina to win it all? They have an easy through to tournament play and might have some better home support, being in SA. Also, why the hell would you ever bet AGAINST Messi? Or do people overvalue Argentina because of Messi and realistically their odds should be 10-1 instead of 5-1?

USA should not waste any money sending a team to Brazil based on this draw. The economy is in a mess and this would be a frivolous splurge of public funds. They will lose every match.

Wørd wrote:

Fair enough, I didn't look at the bracket. I wouldn't expect that all those teams win their groups, but Brazil and Germany probably will.

I think Argentina actually are strong this time. They've been underperforming at the last few World Cups thanks to some bizarre coaching decisions. Messi seems to finally be performing in the national team and Agüero looks very strong this season. Argentina also has much more talent and depth defensively than, say, Uruguay or Colombia. Argentina is the only American team besides Brazil with a realistic chance of getting through the quarters. On the European side, I think all of Germany, Spain, Italy, Holland and Belgium have a decent shot. A Holland vs Belgium QF could be epic but it's probably not too likely.

Thank you word.

I am an Argentine fan and I think they are being overlooked.

The way Argy won the South American qualifying tournament was something.

Brazil didn't play and therefore, no one can say much about them woth regard to all the friendly games they played.

Germany is tough. I hope we (Argentina) don't have to face them until,the finals or the semis.

I hope messi will recover in time to get his fitness back.

Messi, Kun, Higuain, Di Maria and Banega form an intimidating pentagon.

We now have a coach. Maradona ruined Argy in South Africa but Allejandro Sabella seems like he knows what he is doing.

He knows how to utilise Messi unlike Basile and Maradona and all those other mediocre coaches.

Oh, we have a very easy group. We should get 9 points.

LET THE!GAMES BEGIN!

USA is not beating Germany. Simple as that. All they can try to do is keep the score low.

Portugal is obviously a good team but they have some serious faults. Portugal relies INCREDIBLY on Cristiano Ronaldo, so if the USA can contain him or even get him out of the game we have a very good shot of tying or even winning that match.

Ghana is an enigma. The USA just has to outplay them. Ghana can be weak or quite good, they're hot and cold.

Messi will lift the cup in Rio de Janeiro by beating Neymar.

It is written in the stars.

Ha ha ha!

Mark my words.

Josh Hamilton's Addiction wrote:

Serious question for anyone who knows soccer better than me. Why shouldn't I bet on Argentina to win it all? They have an easy through to tournament play and might have some better home support, being in SA. Also, why the hell would you ever bet AGAINST Messi? Or do people overvalue Argentina because of Messi and realistically their odds should be 10-1 instead of 5-1?

Their defense is no where near the quality of the rest of their squad. Zabaleta is probably the only one I would call world class and that is debatable. Also Messi has been injured for some time this season when historically he has been healthy. That could screw up his form/fitness come the WC if it nags. I would take Spain at 7/1. The road to the final could be tough, but I think their group is being overrated. Chile is good, but their defense is a mess. They were 2-1-5 against the other 4 qualifying teams in South America, including 4-0, 4-1, and two 3-1 defeats.

Don't get too hung up on the FIFA rankings. USA is severely overrated by the rankings because they rack up points against weak opposition in qualifying. They're not a bad team and Klinsmann is a good coach, but their current team relies more on MLS players than their last 3 World Cup teams. They have an advantage from being in peak shape come June whereas the European-based players are gonna be tired, and I wish them well but I think they're a long shot this time.

Look how Messi & Barca did against Bayern Munich in champions league lost 8-1 agragate. Germanys team is arguably better than Bayern Munich and Argentinas team is not as good as Barcalona. Thats one good reason to bet against them. Every player is a fixture on a Major Champions League team, Bayern, Borsia, Real, Barca, etc. If Germany does not win it is because they screwed up, but this is why we play the tournament instead of hand out the trophies.

Josh Hamilton's Addiction wrote:

Serious question for anyone who knows soccer better than me. Why shouldn't I bet on Argentina to win it all? They have an easy through to tournament play and might have some better home support, being in SA. Also, why the hell would you ever bet AGAINST Messi? Or do people overvalue Argentina because of Messi and realistically their odds should be 10-1 instead of 5-1?

I saw this quote from Jurgen Klinsmann on the site of the Portugal game. Supposedly a total nightmare location in the Amazon, which everyone was hoping to avoid:

"We hit worst of the worst. Every coach I talked to said, 'Everything but Manaus.' We get Manaus."

-- Jurgen Klinsmann on the USA being drawn into a position that includes a trip to Manaus in the Amazon -- against Portugal on June 22.

Reason #1 a draw against Germany is very unlikely: Miroslav Klose. He is 2 goals short of being the all-time world cup goal scoreer. The only reason he is on this roster is to get those two goals. He is no longer good enough to play top minutes for the team so he will only be in non-presure games - like already having a big lead on Ghana or team has already advance. SO it is likely he will play big minutes against USA with the teams only ambition to set Klose up with goals.

Wørd wrote:

Don't get too hung up on the FIFA rankings. USA is severely overrated by the rankings because they rack up points against weak opposition in qualifying. They're not a bad team and Klinsmann is a good coach, but their current team relies more on MLS players than their last 3 World Cup teams. They have an advantage from being in peak shape come June whereas the European-based players are gonna be tired, and I wish them well but I think they're a long shot this time.

I agree they have no shot to win the tournament, and the FIFA rankings are obviously shite (Switzerland ahead of Brazil?!). But, in the case of the US, I don't think 14 is so far off. There's obviously a few teams behind us who would beat us 9 times out of 10, but I think there's a few teams ahead of us who don't deserve to be as well - Greece and Switzerland in particular.

In any case, other than giving Europe a few too many slots, I think qualifying does a pretty good job of identifying the 32 best teams in the world. The US is among them - as they have been in every cup for the last 24 years.

Link wrote:

I think qualifying does a pretty good job of identifying the 32 best teams in the world. The US is among them - as they have been in every cup for the last 24 years.

I doubt that qualifying identifies the best 32 teams. The qualifying process guarantees that we have some teams from every region of the world.

If you were to pick the 32 best teams in the world you'd have more South American and European countries and fewer from everywhere else.

You'd be right if every region had the same number of representatives, but they don't.

Do you really think that the 14th best UEFA team is consistently significantly better than the 5th best CONCACAF (who was Mexico this time around)? or the 7th best CONMEBOL is consistently better than the 6th CAF (this time around probably Paraguay and Egypt)? Maybe in certain years, but there's much more parity in global football than you imagine.

Link wrote:

You'd be right if every region had the same number of representatives, but they don't.

Do you really think that the 14th best UEFA team is consistently significantly better than the 5th best CONCACAF (who was Mexico this time around)? or the 7th best CONMEBOL is consistently better than the 6th CAF (this time around probably Paraguay and Egypt)? Maybe in certain years, but there's much more parity in global football than you imagine.

There are some teams that have qualified that clearly cannot be in the best 32 in the world. Teams like Japan, Australia, South Korea and Iran are just not that strong. They're not better than teams like Sweden, Denmark, Czech Republic, Romania and Serbia, who have not qualified.

I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing. Football is a global game and its a good thing that there are teams from all corners of the globe present at the world cup. But the qualification process is not designed to find the best 32 teams and clearly that's not what it does.

The FIFA ranking themselves are not a terribly good guide to the strength of teams - they effectively penalise you for playing friendlies. Look at the ranking of Switzerland - clearly higher than can possibly be justified by true merit.

sgh wrote:

Miroslav Klose. He is 2 goals short of being the all-time world cup goal scoreer. The only reason he is on this roster is to get those two goals. He is no longer good enough to play top minutes for the team

You have no clue. Loew doesn't take anyone to Brazil just to do them a favor. Klose has been injured for a while but if he can get through the rest of the season injury free, he will still be the best German striker.

Germany's team is very good, but except for Klose, we don't have any world class strikers. Gomez is ok, but when Klose is fit, he is clearly no.1.

The Bayman wrote:

Ghana is an enigma. The USA just has to outplay them. Ghana can be weak or quite good, they're hot and cold.

I agree that we will need to see how Ghana shows up. Essein isn't having a great year at Chelsea this season thus far. Andre Ayew blew out his knee and is done for the year. But Ghana always seem to play the US tough. No gimmes here, but it is certainly a possible win. And if the USA go through, it won't be a terribly bad second round match up.

sgh wrote:

Germanys team is arguably better than Bayern Munich

Nope.

Bayern Munich's team consits of Germany's best soccer players + Robben + Ribery + Alaba + Manzukic + Thiago + ...