2022 FIFA World Cup

nyc-cowboy said:
To be honest, haven't seen Denmark at all so cant really say...

Looking at the schedule tho just noticed Spain vs Germany tomorrow...nice.
Click to expand...
Denmark had beaten them twice earlier in the year.
Mbappe was enough to carry France but injuries mean some holes in that French lineup.
Giroud scored two in game 1 but that guy is largely toast and can't press.
France splitting possession 50-50 is just weird but they but hey it worked.
 
Flamma said:
As of right now I think 2002 was better. We'll see what happens against Iran. But you might be right, on paper.
Click to expand...
This is absolutely the best American team we have fielded in raw talent.
Young, and very, very good.
4-5 of these guys are getting major European league promotions after the tourney.

Man United is chasing Pulisic to replace Ronaldo and McKennie/Adams/Aronson have major appeal to Euro clubs.
Antonee Robinson is also really opening eyes.

Many of these kids have played together for a decade plus so they are poised to have good games like the England match where skill. engine and athleticism was on par with a top 5 team in the world.
Hopefully the slow start game 1 doesn't hurt them in the long run.

Iran/US bitter rivalry will make Tuesday super interesting, but the US is a better side on paper.
 
I've only been able to watch 1 5AM game. And I'm on vacation. That's just too early.
 
2 pretty entertaining games so far this morning...Camaroon and Serbia finished tied at 3 and Ghana leading 3-2 over South Korea, 70th min.
 
Flamma said:
As of right now I think 2002 was better. We'll see what happens against Iran. But you might be right, on paper.
Click to expand...

The US has never had so many players on teams like Chelsea, Juventus, Barcelona, Borrussia Dortmund.....Arsenal, let alone players who regularly start for them. The 2002 team was mostly MLS , English Championship teams, and had 2 bench guys on Everton and that's about it. Our most reputable international was the goalie, Kasey Keller.

The international chops aren't even close.
 
atlantacowboy said:
The US has never had so many players on teams like Chelsea, Juventus, Barcelona, Borrussia Dortmund.....Arsenal, let alone players who regularly start for them. The 2002 team was mostly MLS , English Championship teams, and had 2 bench guys on Everton and that's about it. Our most reputable international was the goalie, Kasey Keller.

The international chops aren't even close.
Click to expand...

Competition matters too. That changes from WC to WC. That 2002 USA WC team lost to Germany 1-0 in the final 8. They played Germany evenly IMO. Had a ton of chances to even the score. That Germany team went to the WC finals. Lost to Brazil. Brazil was just too good in 2002.

That's basically what I'm going by. If this team doesn't even make it out of the group stage, what am I to think? I don't really care if they're more talented.
 
Flamma said:
Competition matters too. That changes from WC to WC. That 2002 USA WC team lost to Germany 1-0 in the final 8. They played Germany evenly IMO. Had a ton of chances to even the score. That Germany team went to the WC finals. Lost to Brazil. Brazil was just too good in 2002.

That's basically what I'm going by. If this team doesn't even make it out of the group stage, what am I to think? I don't really care if they're more talented.
Click to expand...

We are also the 3rd youngest team in the world cup. All of our best players are under 25.

The 2002 team had many veterans and were a defensive team. They had no real individual quality on the field (no stars) but played well as a team and got a shock result getting to the final 8. We kinda got lucky drawing a familiar foe in the round of 16 vs Mexico. It was a respectable loss to germany for sure. But, every country in the world can point to a 1-0 defeat that kept them claiming greater glory.
 
This US team is by far the most impressive, little snake bit on bounces, to be honest it is the most sustained pressure I have ever seen from a USMT in the world cup....if they break the damn goal seal the flood gates could open for them. Just look at our control numbers compared to past teams its night and Day with how we are controling the play. Usually we play with 5 in the box and hope for counters, this team is actually Attacking 50% more than the teams they are playing and one was England... just need to start scoring and they will be dangerous.
 
CowboyFrog said:
This US team is by far the most impressive, little snake bit on bounces, to be honest it is the most sustained pressure I have ever seen from a USMT in the world cup....if they break the damn goal seal the flood gates could open for them. Just look at our control numbers compared to past teams its night and Day with how we are controling the play. Usually we play with 5 in the box and hope for counters, this team is actually Attacking 50% more than the teams they are playing and one was England... just need to start scoring and they will be dangerous.
Click to expand...
They do not have the talisman goal scorer to be elite but they have Euro level skill and fitness.
That midfield is nasty,

Wish we had a Rudiger and a real 9.
 
jterrell said:
They do not have the talisman goal scorer to be elite but they have Euro level skill and fitness.
That midfield is nasty,

Wish we had a Rudiger and a real 9.
Click to expand...
That’s what this team lacks. If they found a consistent 9 they would be top tier.

It’s frustrating to see them push guys like Josh Sargent, Haji Wright, Jordan Morris down our throats and expect them to just magically become great at this level
 
Last edited:
I am torn on my prediction for today.

We lack scoring and are terrible from set pieces.

I feel like we go up 1-0 around the 38th minute. GGG park the bus the entire 2nd half and Iran gets a draw late.

Similar to the Wales game
 
Carson said:
I am torn on my prediction for today.

We lack scoring and are terrible from set pieces.

I feel like we go up 1-0 around the 38th minute. GGG park the bus the entire 2nd half and Iran gets a draw late.

Similar to the Wales game
Click to expand...

I think the US's talent will show through here. It is do or die. The lack of goals is kind of puzzling to me. If this team could score at even a slightly above average clip they would be a top 8ish squad.

Iran is a tough opponent, but I think this team has got what it takes through. I will say, I am not as high on Pulisic as many are though. He is a fantastic player, but does not seem to level up his game when playing for his country like some of the great ones do for other nations.

I think American soccer might be starting to round the corner. This country simply has too many resources and athletes to not field a top-flight national team eventually.
 
i literally know nothing about soccer, but watch the WC every time we are on....it looks like we are being more agressive so far in this game vs Iran, hope that it pays off....another 0-0 would be a frustrating way to leave the tourney
 
Wow, how fitting that Pulisic puts it all on the line to score a goal when I just say he hasn't leveled up his play. :clap:

Hope that he is OK. An injury would be devastating.

Edit: It appears he is ok and up walking again.
 
The USA should be up 2-0. That guy was not offside. They go to the video enough to take away goals, but never the opposite?
 
Flamma said:
The USA should be up 2-0. That guy was not offside. They go to the video enough to take away goals, but never the opposite?
Click to expand...
I’m not 100% certain in soccer. But doesn’t the entire body need to be offside for it to be called? Therefore that’s a goal
 
Carson said:
I’m not 100% certain in soccer. But doesn’t the entire body need to be offside for it to be called? Therefore that’s a goal
Click to expand...

Looks like his knee might be just in front of the defender.

Edit: found this
You should note that when talking offsides in soccer, by the attacking player one means any part of the player’s body with which they can play the ball legally, and not necessarily the whole player.
Click to expand...

FiwaEuOXkAU1u1y
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 94 more.
Total: 6,316 (members: 194, guests: 6,122)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,122
Messages
13,790,038
Members
23,772
Latest member
BAC2662
Back
Top