World Cup Discussion Thread

[WMR]

We started some World Cup talk in another thread, figure I'd move it over here for further pontification.

Twellman has been such a no-show at the International level that we really need to see similar performances against better opponents. The Norway game was great, for a number of reasons, and he has come on as of late, and is great in the MLS, but he has been spotty in Int. competition, although we need another goal-scorer BAD.

I'd like to see the US play a modified 4-4-2.

Basically a
4-1-2-1-2

You've got your 4 defenders. Claudio Reyna, an excellent tackler and field general, is your defensive midfielder.

Beasley on the left; whoever on the right.

Donovan as the back-forward:

Feeding the ball to McBride & Johnson

That's sort of how they run things at times and I LIKE IT A LOT.

[WMR]

From other thread:

Here's how I'd use McBride:

First game, against Czech Republic (OUCH) he should start. Depending on how things go, play him between 65-75 mins. At this point, what US soccer fans have to understand is that we have a BIG dearth of proven goal scorers. Eddie Johnson has been great, and is very young with young legs, but he's been unable to stay consistently healthy. If he's at 100% come WC, he'll start next to McBride, no question. At that 65-75 minute mark, though, I would agree with you that, at this point, Twellman is probably the first forward off the bench. McBride is used to logging lots of minutes and his level of fitness, playing in the EPL, is still very high, his age notwithstanding.

Beasley and Donovan will both start, obviously.

Here's my starting 11 for the WC:

Keller
Cherundolo -- Onyewu -- Pope/Berhalter(that's a toss-up at this point although I'd probably give the nod to Berhalter at the moment with Pope as first man off the bench -- Bocanegra
Midfield: This is another tough one, For the right winger at this point, you probably going to see Ralston, but if Clint Dempsey can play like he did vs. Norway in the remaining matches then I'd love to see him step up to that role, Donovan, Reyna, Beasley
Forwards: Eddie Johnson, Brian McBride

[WMR]

Anyone want to comment on how badly the US got jobbed in the WC draw?? Mexico got an overall #1 seed even though WE won CONCACAF?????

The World soccer establishment thought the US got a little too feisty in the last world cup; they're looking to knock us down a couple pegs.

[WMR]

You know who the US plays if we finish 2nd in our group? (The most likely scenario)

The #2 team to advance from our group will play the #1 team from the group that contains..... yep, you guessed it: BRAZIL!! LOL.

Even though we'd really struggle to beat the Brazilians, they're my 2nd favorite team, and it would be really cool to see a US v. Brazil World Cup Classic (hopefully!!!)

[M2]

Originally Posted by WilyMoROCKS

Anyone want to comment on how badly the US got jobbed in the WC draw?? Mexico got an overall #1 seed even though WE won CONCACAF?????

The World soccer establishment thought the US got a little too feisty in the last world cup; they're looking to knock us down a couple pegs.

Our guys were more than feisty, I thought the Germans got about as lucky as a team can get in getting past the U.S. in 2002. I hate those Teutonic flop artists.

Just to continue the discussion we were having in the other thread. I'm a big advocate of marrying style to temperament and, IMO, the U.S. needs to play a fast, attacking style in order to advance. I actually like the tough draw at the Brazilians looming for a 2nd place finish because I think it might convince Arena to pin his team's ears back.

Anyway, I'm all for sliding a midfielder closer to the front. The Spanish used to do that with Michel back in the '80s and I think the Dutch did it in '70s.

[westofyou]

I haven't spent much time looking at the whole thing yet, however the US needs to be stronger up front than they have in past WC's that's a given and this might be the year that they do just that. However their bracket is tough and Italy always shows up.

Group A


Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 Germany	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Costa Rica	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Poland	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Ecuador	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Group B


Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 England	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Paraguay	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Trinidad 	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Sweden	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Group C


Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 Argentina	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Côte d'Ivoire	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Serbia		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Netherlands	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Group D


Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 Mexico		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Iran		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Angola		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Portugal	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Group E


Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 Italy		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Ghana		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 USA		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Czech  	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Group F


Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 Brazil		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Croatia	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Australia	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Japan	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Group G


Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 France		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Switzerland	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Korea Republic	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Togo		0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Group H
 
Team		MP	W	D	L	GF	GA	Pts
 Spain		0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Ukraine	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Tunisia	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
 Saudi Arabia	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

[Betterread]

Originally Posted by M2

Our guys were more than feisty, I thought the Germans got about as lucky as a team can get in getting past the U.S. in 2002. I hate those Teutonic flop artists.

Just to continue the discussion we were having in the other thread. I'm a big advocate of marrying style to temperament and, IMO, the U.S. needs to play a fast, attacking style in order to advance. I actually like the tough draw at the Brazilians looming for a 2nd place finish because I think it might convince Arena to pin his team's ears back.

Anyway, I'm all for sliding a midfielder closer to the front. The Spanish used to do that with Michel back in the '80s and I think the Dutch did it in '70s.

The style you favor benefits an attacking mentality and would be attractive to watch. Depending on the matchup, however, it may be superfluous. The first step is for the US to advance out of the group stage. That means that not only do you need points out of every contest, you must ensure your opponent cannot take points from you. That means defensive formations and emphasis on counter-attack. We will be killed by the Czechs (if they are on - which is not a given) if we stretch our defense. You remember who they can run out on the field - Nedved, Rosicky, Baros. Their strength is in attack, but their defense is vulnerable. So if we can play a boring style but tie and share the points - we can get our points from Ghana and pray that Italy takes us lightly and doesn't show up. I am looking forward to the tournament and I would love it if we beat Italy.

[WMR]

maybe Italy will be Portugal a la 2002. HOWEVER: Not playing them 1st hurts. BAD. They're notoriously slow starters.

[Red Heeler]

Originally Posted by Betterread

The style you favor benefits an attacking mentality and would be attractive to watch. Depending on the matchup, however, it may be superfluous. The first step is for the US to advance out of the group stage. That means that not only do you need points out of every contest, you must ensure your opponent cannot take points from you. That means defensive formations and emphasis on counter-attack. We will be killed by the Czechs (if they are on - which is not a given) if we stretch our defense. You remember who they can run out on the field - Nedved, Rosicky, Baros. Their strength is in attack, but their defense is vulnerable. So if we can play a boring style but tie and share the points - we can get our points from Ghana and pray that Italy takes us lightly and doesn't show up. I am looking forward to the tournament and I would love it if we beat Italy.

The U.S. doesn't have the size to play a defensive game. Germany showed that in '02. The best players on the U.S. team are skinny little guys who can run like deer. They need to play an up tempo, Brazilian style, game to play to the strengths of the team. Unfortunately, Arena seems to prefer the English style of bring it up the sides and cross into the box.

[westofyou]

Arena seems to prefer the English style of bring it up the sides and cross into the box.

That's where McBride gets the nod.

[Red Heeler]

Originally Posted by westofyou

That's where McBride gets the nod.

True. I just got through watching McBride eat ManU alive in the air. His EPL experience will be a big help. I still think that Donovan, Beesley, and Johnson make the team better suited to through balls on the ground, though.

[Betterread]

Originally Posted by Red Heeler

The U.S. doesn't have the size to play a defensive game. Germany showed that in '02. The best players on the U.S. team are skinny little guys who can run like deer. They need to play an up tempo, Brazilian style, game to play to the strengths of the team. Unfortunately, Arena seems to prefer the English style of bring it up the sides and cross into the box.

Size and defensive ability are not necessarily commensurate. How about Franz Beckenbauer from the past, or Fabio Cannovaro or Juan Pablo Sorin or Roberto Carlos. None of the guys mentioned are larger than 5'8" yet they consistently draw difficult marking assignments, including tall strikers for their clubs and countries.
I wasn't aware that the Brazilian style of football was called up-tempo. I think of the Brazilian style as short pass, possession-centered attacking football.
I would be interested in what you mean by up-tempo? Perhaps you are describing another tactical dimension that I am ignoring.

[M2]

Brazil plays with an elegance and flair that no one can match.

But the U.S. has crazy legs. I don't think it has to expose the defense to attack.

Betterread, given the draw I don't think the U.S. should play for second in the group. Advancing out of the group strikes me as a been-there, done-that goal.

The team can't afford to play for a tie with the Czechs. That's not even an advancement strategy. If goal differential is the plan then the U.S. ought to stay home.

The U.S. can attack. So can the Czechs. Coaches hate exciting matches, but I would urge the U.S. to dare to play one (and win). One of these days a U.S. coach is going to let American players be American players. We're a hard-charging people and we need a play hard-charging brand of football.

Also, the U.S. has a choice -- beat Italy or beat Brazil or forget about the round of 8. I chose beat Italy. That's the game where I think McBride's aerial assault will be of the most use.

[Red Heeler]

Originally Posted by Betterread

Size and defensive ability are not necessarily commensurate. How about Franz Beckenbauer from the past, or Fabio Cannovaro or Juan Pablo Sorin or Roberto Carlos. None of the guys mentioned are larger than 5'8" yet they consistently draw difficult marking assignments, including tall strikers for their clubs and countries.
I wasn't aware that the Brazilian style of football was called up-tempo. I think of the Brazilian style as short pass, possession-centered attacking football.
I would be interested in what you mean by up-tempo? Perhaps you are describing another tactical dimension that I am ignoring.

Up-tempo was a poor choice of wording. I certainly don't think the U.S. should try to play basketball on grass. The Brazilian style is about creating space through player movement with and without the ball. They may not go up and down the field any faster than anybody else, but there is a lot more player movement to their style. The U.S. has one of the most athletic teams around, so they should play to a style that takes advantage of it.

[WMR]

One of the MOST athletic teams? Sorry, I've got to disagree with ya there.

If the US wins in the World Cup, it will be through organization, accurate passing, and an effective offsides trap.

Most teams in the World Cup will be more athletic than the USA.