The Plastic Cup Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 World Cup < Stanley Cup World Cup < Red Dixie Cup World Cup < Common UNIX Printing System Dixie cup??? WTF! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 It's not all that black and white. From top to bottom, obviously uefa tops concacaf. But in the last WC, Mexico, USA and Costa Rica all made it to the knockout rounds. Costa Rica won their group (over Italy, England and Uruguay) and very nearly made it to the semis. I think Mexico and CR could do well next summer too. Honduras and (maybe) Panama, not so much. I think Chile would easily top CONCACAF this year and they didn't even make in out down south. It's a very weak region. I agree they somehow luck into some success in WC finals (and being honest it is a LOT of luck, esp by US) but getting absolutely dominated in the first knockout round by Belguim...I don't really see that as making a strong case for CONCACAF getting three/four spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 I think Chile would easily top CONCACAF this year and they didn't even make in out down south. It's a very weak region. I agree they somehow luck into some success in WC finals (and being honest it is a LOT of luck, esp by US) but getting absolutely dominated in the first knockout round by Belguim...I don't really see that as making a strong case for CONCACAF getting three/four spots. Chile is a good team. I was surprised they got bounced. Agree to disagree about CONCACAF, I guess. I think 3.5 spots out of the 32 in the tournament is about right. Some not-so-great teams make it from the other regions too. Everybody can't be Germany or Brazil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 I personally would rather watch a football, baseball, or hockey preseason game rather than a USA World Cup game, but this sucks for those who do follow soccer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockpile233 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 The away team gets to choose which network broadcasts the game, Goku. I'm confused, wasn't the USA the "away" team? Why was it not broadcast on a major network? I don't get beIn so I had to hunts through the Spanish language channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 I'm confused, wasn't the USA the "away" team? Why was it not broadcast on a major network? Something called ratings indicates how many people watch something. When there is interest, advertisers will pay to run their ads and networks will broadcast the show. When it is soccer, there are no ratings, thus no advertising, thus no broadcasting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Chile is a good team. I was surprised they got bounced. Agree to disagree about CONCACAF, I guess. I think 3.5 spots out of the 32 in the tournament is about right. Some not-so-great teams make it from the other regions too. Everybody can't be Germany or Brazil. YOU BASTARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You got all upset about this stupid soccer game and you worked it out with /de/v/n/ull/ to win the Last Post thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 YOU BASTARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You got all upset about this stupid soccer game and you worked it out with /de/v/n/ull/ to win the Last Post thread. You're half right (I am a bastard) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 I personally would rather watch a football, baseball, or hockey preseason game rather than a USA World Cup game, but this sucks for those who do follow soccer. Or watch paint dry-- at least there is some action in that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 The US can't play the game to the highest levels it achieves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 (edited) The US can't play the game to the highest levels it achieves. Congratulations, you have successfully stated the obvious. Even though your sentence makes no sense (I think maybe you meant to use the word "aspires" instead of "achieves," or something like that.) Anyway, bravo. Edited October 12, 2017 by Cugalabanza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 It's funny how sarcastically so many of you are talking about people not caring about a team on a Buffalo Bills forum.... Im the number 5 poster here and I dont care about the Bills. Whats your point? Oh BTW, this is not a Bills forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Congratulations, you have successfully stated the obvious. Even though your sentence makes no sense (I think maybe you meant to use the word "aspires" instead of "achieves," or something like that.) Anyway, bravo. I thought you would respond with the US beating England in 1950 or whenever it was. You don't know the difference between ASPIRE and ACHIEVE? Are you really slow??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 I was wondering, almost expecting it to be 1984. Seriously not one bite? Panama! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 I thought you would respond with the US beating England in 1950 or whenever it was. You don't know the difference between ASPIRE and ACHIEVE? Are you really slow??? Your sentence was, "The US can't play the game to the highest levels it achieves." Makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 (edited) Your sentence was, "The US can't play the game to the highest levels it achieves." Makes no sense. I agree. If they've achieved something, obviously they've played to the level that was necessary in order to achieve it. But maybe we're both slow, Gringo. Edited October 12, 2017 by Gugny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 I agree. If they've achieved something, obviously they've played to the level that was necessary in order to achieve it. But maybe we're both slow, Gringo. I guess I must be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 I guess I must be. Maybe he'll come back and enlighten us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 But with all the young talent brought up from the 80's and 90's and the millions of acres of soccer fields created why aren't we good? We were supposed to care! Cross country kickball was to be the revolutionary thing! But,nope. It's still gay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 (edited) This is a good exploration of the strange gap in US soccer development (it ignores the foreign born US players) from the kids born in 1990-96. The years before yielded today's best players at a rate of about 2 a year. 1983: Clint Dempsey, Bobby Convey, Ricardo Clark, Chris Wondolowski 1984: Jonathan Bornstein, Michael Parkhurst, Brad Guzan, Eddie Johnson, Justin Mapp, Chad Marshall, Santino Quaranta, Luis Robles, Frank Simek, Heath Pearce 1985: Geoff Cameron, Benny Feilhaber, Robbie Findley, Stuart Holden, Sacha Kljestan, Brad Evans 1986: Maurice Edu, Michael Orozco, Jonathan Spector, Graham Zusi, Lee Nguyen, Edgar Castillo, Charlie Davies 1987: Tim Ream, Robbie Rogers, Alejandro Bedoya, Matt Besler, Michael Bradley, Jose Torres, Chris Pontius, Dax McCarty, Tony Beltran 1988: Omar Gonzalez, Eric Lichaj 1989: Jozy Altidore, Jorge Villafana, Freddy Adu [!!!], Sean Johnson And the years after are stacked with talent. But for a 6 year window (except 1995), look at this who's who of dreck (with a couple notable exceptions): 1990: Darlington Nagbe, Joe Corona, Brek Shea, Bill Hamid, Matt Hedges, Ethan Finlay, Miguel Ibarra 1991: Greg Garza, Kelyn Rowe, Gyasi Zardes, Steve Birnbaum 1992: Bobby Wood, Sebastian Lletget, Ventura Alvarado, Perry Kitchen, Joe Gyau, Juan Agudelo 1993: DeAndre Yedlin 1994: Jordan Morris If you're looking at Brek Shea as the 3rd best domestic player you've produced in 5 years, there's a problem. When you look at the success of the U23 and U17 teams, the future looks bright for 2022, but sadly there won't be a generation of Clint Dempsey's to hand off an identity to the younger players. Pulisic and the gang will have to find out who they are for themselves. 1995: Matt Miazga, Kellyn Acosta, Paul Arriola, Cristian Roldan, Lynden Gooch, Ethan Horvath, Jesse Gonzalez 1996: Emerson Hyndman 1997 and beyond: Christian Pulisic, Weston McKennie, Tyler Adams, Jonathan Gonzalez, Josh Sargent, Justen Glad, Erik Palmer-Brown, Nick Taitague Combine that with the academy system set up by Klinsy under MLS's leadership, and the future is bright. I just hope they dump Bradley/Arena and the old guard. They have no place in this future vision. Edited October 13, 2017 by BeginnersMind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts