Jump to content

World Cup 2018 Thread


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Gotcha, I did not know that. One last question     ...why is that? 

 

I am am assuming that most players that participate in the World Cup are on Club teams somewhere ... so can there be practices and matches in both simultaneously?

 

i just assumed it was like hockey or basketball, apparently I was wrong! 

 

row_33 is right.  Basically, just too time consuming.  Tons of administrative / organizational stuff on top of the actual playing schedule.  Soccer is a grueling year-long sport, for players and for coaches.  And yes, often international duty overlaps with the club schedules.  Sometimes club coaches will refuse to release certain players for international duty.  The national teams in soccer are much more active throughout the year than for other sports.

 

I often wonder how top players don't fall apart physically.  They play full seasons of league games for their club, plus the handful of tournaments that take place concurrently (example: In England, there is the FA Cup plus the league cup tournaments).  Then, if you're on a top team, you also play tournament games against other European club teams (Champions League or UEFA League).  And if you're on your National team too, that's another bunch of games plus training camp type stuff.  It's pretty grueling.

 

I was curious so I looked about coaches pulling double duty.  There are some examples, most notably Sir Alex Ferguson coached the club team Aberdeen and Scotland leading up to the 1986 WC.  I doubt we'll see something like that again at a top level.  The expectations are just too high for these coaches.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Just saw North America was named 2026 World Cup site. Anyone know why New Era Field was not included as a potential stadium site?

 

60 of 80 matches are to be played in the USA and only 10 metro areas will host those games (NYC already being one of them, the championship match will be at MetLife).  They've narrowed it down to 17 metro areas.  Not surprising to me that Buffalo didn't even make it to that list.

 

Houston, Dallas, Miami, and LA are gimmes due to their locations/populations.  DC probably also a given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

row_33 is right.  Basically, just too time consuming.  Tons of administrative / organizational stuff on top of the actual playing schedule.  Soccer is a grueling year-long sport, for players and for coaches.  And yes, often international duty overlaps with the club schedules.  Sometimes club coaches will refuse to release certain players for international duty.  The national teams in soccer are much more active throughout the year than for other sports.

 

I often wonder how top players don't fall apart physically.  They play full seasons of league games for their club, plus the handful of tournaments that take place concurrently (example: In England, there is the FA Cup plus the league cup tournaments).  Then, if you're on a top team, you also play tournament games against other European club teams (Champions League or UEFA League).  And if you're on your National team too, that's another bunch of games plus training camp type stuff.  It's pretty grueling.

 

I was curious so I looked about coaches pulling double duty.  There are some examples, most notably Sir Alex Ferguson coached the club team Aberdeen and Scotland leading up to the 1986 WC.  I doubt we'll see something like that again at a top level.  The expectations are just too high for these coaches.

 

 

 

My partial Scottish heritage won't discount this exception to the rule... yeah that counts on the world stage...

 

I remember in 1978 when they actually thought they were going to win it all... still shaking my head 40 years aft....

 

 

 

agreed that a top player is on the field way too much for all the games played

 

one of the key factors for taking it a bit easy is the Champions League takes in 4 teams for top countries, so teams just care about top 4 status to qualify and don't care if they are out of the race for first

 

back when only the champion went to the European Cup it was all or nothing and they'd give it all for a league title.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, I just love the World Cup.  I already have a few games circled in the first few days that I have to watch:

 

6/15 at 2pm ET - Portugal vs Spain

6/16 at 10am - Argentina vs Iceland

6/17 at 11am - Germany vs Mexico

6/17 at 2pm - Brazil vs Switzerland

 

4 minutes ago, Canadian Bills Fan said:

Power rankings for the World Cup from thescore.com

 

Top 10

 

1.Brazil

2. Germany

3. Spain

4. France

5. Argentina

6. Belgium

7. England

8. Portugal

9. Uruguay

10. Columbia

 

How they have England above Portugal is a headscratcher.  Also, Belgium has been getting hype for a few years now.  Yes, they have a very strong team, but they keep pooping out early in big tournaments.   They need to earn the right to be counted with the heavyweights.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

Man, I just love the World Cup.  I already have a few games circled in the first few days that I have to watch:

 

6/15 at 2pm ET - Portugal vs Spain

6/16 at 10am - Argentina vs Iceland

6/17 at 11am - Germany vs Mexico

6/17 at 2pm - Brazil vs Switzerland

 

 

How they have England above Portugal is a headscratcher.  Also, Belgium has been getting hype for a few years now.  Yes, they have a very strong team, but they keep pooping out early in big tournaments.   They need to earn the right to be counted with the heavyweights.

 

 


Yeah I was surprised to see England ahead of Portugal. Especially with England having such a young roster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Canadian Bills Fan said:

Power rankings for the World Cup from thescore.com

 

Top 10

 

1.Brazil

2. Germany

3. Spain

4. France

5. Argentina

6. Belgium

7. England

8. Portugal

9. Uruguay

10. Columbia

 

Damn, where are the Azzurri?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LeviF91 said:

 

60 of 80 matches are to be played in the USA and only 10 metro areas will host those games (NYC already being one of them, the championship match will be at MetLife).  They've narrowed it down to 17 metro areas.  Not surprising to me that Buffalo didn't even make it to that list.

 

Houston, Dallas, Miami, and LA are gimmes due to their locations/populations.  DC probably also a given.

 

When you take the ethnic populations on WNY into account you'd think we'd rank higher. Were there issues with the stadium?

Edited by PromoTheRobot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

I took Portugal at 22-1. Odds seemed about right.

 

I think that's a decent bet.  Portugal is capable of winning it.  After Germany and Brazil, I think Portugal has as good a chance as anyone.  Spain may have slipped a bit because of their coaching situation and France did not look spectacular in their final warm up against the U.S.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has the potential to be the least enjoyable World Cup in a very long time. 

 

I've never seen a bigger collection of "so what" teams and lousy match ups in group play.

 

No USA!  No Holland! Worst of all, no Italia!  I still can't believe that one!  

 

But we have Costa Rica, Iran, and Peru!  LOL.

 

I think Germany and Argentina will go deep and if I had to pick a winner now, I'd say Deutschland.

 

Scanning through the first batch of games, I don't see a lot to get excited about.

 

Spain vs. Portugal on Friday at 2pm could be good.

 

I'll watch every game as I always do!

 

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

:lol:  I wasn't sure if you were kidding or not.

 

I know, it's hard to believe.

 

A World Cup without Italy is a borderline "don't bother watching" development for me.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Fadingpain said:

This has the potential to be the least enjoyable World Cup in a very long time. 

 

I've never seen a bigger collection of "so what" teams and lousy match ups in group play.

 

No USA!  No Holland! Worst of all, no Italia!  I still can't believe that one!  

 

But we have Costa Rica, Iran, and Peru!  LOL.

 

I think Germany and Argentina will go deep and if I had to pick a winner now, I'd say Deutschland.

 

Scanning through the first batch of games, I don't see a lot to get excited about.

 

Spain vs. Portugal on Friday at 2pm could be good.

 

I'll watch every game as I always do!

 

 

 

 

 

A World Cup without Italy is a borderline "don't bother watching" development for me.

 

 

There also Iceland!  I just remember the second Mighty Ducks movie as a kid 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...