World Cup Fever
 

its heating up (referring to soccer, not baseball)

Seeding, draws, and ties will be simulcast live across the world this Friday. Many soccer authorities have the U.S. ranked as high as #8 in the world. Will this be enough to propel the U.S. to their 1st-ever #1 seed? I doubt it, since their poor showing in France 1998 will surely knock them out of favor with many World Cup Seeding officials.

What're some juicy match-ups that you'd like to see?
List of Qualifiers

here's one i'd like to see:
U.S. vs Iran
-this would be a great rematch of these bitter political rivals who last played in WC1998 in France, where Iran came out on top. the current team of americans is more experienced & deep than the '98 team, but the iranians play with pure heart and will be tough to beat in an emotion-packed match

another question i have that some euro posters may have better insight on. what type of home-field advantage is there in a Euro-site WC compared with a non-Euro site?

The US did better than expected in WC1994 in america. South Korea went well deep into the tourney in the last WC as well. Does Germany have as big of a home-field advantage as the US & S. Korea did in past world cups given the fact that it is so easy for european fans to travel to germany from other european nations which will be heavily represented at the WC? i realize that france recently hosted the world cup ... and won; and that fact may, in & of itself, be a simple answer to my question. but, couldnt it be argued that france would have fared well in that WC despite the home-field due to them fielding arguably one of the best players of all-time (Zidane)?
qué dices

Re: World Cup Fever
 

The US is not seeded. Germany and Brazil get autoseeds. ESPN Article.

Home field advantage is enormous. US did MUCH better in '94 than anyone thought they would, in fact, the US was ranked in the 30's that year and probably would not have even qualified. Both Korea and Japan reached the knockout phase last year which was very surprising. And although France had the best player in the world in '98 (as they do today) HFA went a LONG way.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

The US is highly unlikely to be seeded, whereas Mexico will probably get seeded due to their lofty FIFA ranking.

Hopefully the US can avoid Brazil or Germany in their pool. Mexico or the underachieving Spaniards wouldn't be a bad draw.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
Does Germany have as big of a home-field advantage as the US & S. Korea did in past world cups given the fact that it is so easy for european fans to travel to germany from other european nations which will be heavily represented at the WC?

[/ QUOTE ]
I've heard that Germany is selling very small amounts of tickets to foreigners comparing to past Cups. I think their advantage will be huge, not least because their fans don't mind watching the no-goals boring grabass they call soccer.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

U.S. can't get grouped with Mexico per WC draw rules.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
U.S. can't get grouped with Mexico per WC draw rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's right. Meant to say I hoped we would get grouped close to them. This Eagles loss is hurting my thinking.

I'd hope to not have Brazil and a strong European non-seeded team like the Dutch or Czechs in the group with the US

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]

another question i have that some euro posters may have better insight on. what type of home-field advantage is there in a Euro-site WC compared with a non-Euro site?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's huge.

Before Brasil won in France '98 South American teams had won all the world cups in the Americas and European teams had won all the cups in Europe.

Home field advantage is obviously huge in the world cup. No host nation has ever been knocked out in the first round and considering weak countries like the US, Japan, and South Korea hosted recently that says a lot. Beyond that though, playing close to home is also very big. The number of fans for Spain and the Netherlands will be much higher than Argentina and Brasil. Traveling will be easier as well since the European countries probably will go home if they have more than a couple days off.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

Wow, did I really type in that Brasil won in France '98. I clearly need some sleep and it's too late to edit.

The point is made even stronger given the actual result - everytime the world cup has been in the americas an american team has won. Every time it's been in europe a european team has won.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

Still incorrect. Brazil won the 1954 World Cup in Sweden. But yes, all the other times the WC has been in Europe, a European team has won. All the times its been in the Americas a South American team has won.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

I'm clearly on fire.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
Still incorrect. Brazil won the 1954 World Cup in Sweden. But yes, all the other times the WC has been in Europe, a European team has won. All the times its been in the Americas a South American team has won.

[/ QUOTE ]

Still incorrect...

Brazil won the WC in Sweden in 1958. Pele's first WC! He was a 17YO and scored twice in the 5-2 victory over host nation Sweden.

West Germany won the 1954 WC which was held in Switzerland 3-2 over Hungary after being down 2-0 to great Puskas and scoring the winner late in the game.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
The US is highly unlikely to be seeded, whereas Mexico will probably get seeded due to their lofty FIFA ranking.



[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Mexico (7th) is ranked only one spot higher than USA (8th).
No bias here to you Yanks, but this is clearly a misnomer.

The seedings for the WC Final Groups was calculated on a far more complicated and elaborate system which took in account previous WC Final performances and Mexico edged out USA on the count that USA failed miserably in the 1998 WC.

Arena was just recently quoted as saying Australia & Trinidad & Tobago will be a laughing stock at this coming WC. He has a lot of balls saying this coz outside the US the Yanks are the laughing stock in this sport!

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The US is highly unlikely to be seeded, whereas Mexico will probably get seeded due to their lofty FIFA ranking.



[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Mexico (7th) is ranked only one spot higher than USA (8th).
No bias here to you Yanks, but this is clearly a misnomer.

The seedings for the WC Final Groups was calculated on a far more complicated and elaborate system which took in account previous WC Final performances and Mexico edged out USA on the count that USA failed miserably in the 1998 WC.

Arena was just recently quoted as saying Australia & Trinidad & Tobago will be a laughing stock at this coming WC. He has a lot of balls saying this coz outside the US the Yanks are the laughing stock in this sport!

[/ QUOTE ]

USA ended up being seeded #9 in the WC this year - 1 spot ahead of Holland.

If USA is a laughingtsock, then I guess so is Holland. And Sweden. And the Czech Republic. etc, etc

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[

USA ended up being seeded #9 in the WC this year - 1 spot ahead of Holland.

If USA is a laughingtsock, then I guess so is Holland. And Sweden. And the Czech Republic. etc, etc

[/ QUOTE ]

Seeded 9th means they have to face a real team for the once in 4 years.

Do I have to remind you how badly the US performed in the 1998 WC?

Holland has a far more impressive record going into this WC than the US and are ranked 3rd in the WC. Undefeated in the UEFA Group 1 qualifying group which had the high ranking Czech Republic and Romania. The only reason they didn't get seeded is because they failed to make the WC last time.


Here is the pot that the US was placed into:
Asia, CONCACAF and the lowest UEFA ranked team Serbia&Montenegro.

Iran
Japan
Saudi Arabia
South Korea
Costa Rica
Trinidad & Tobago
United States
Serbia & Montenegro

Yep - Thats about right!

Re: World Cup Fever
 

I'm going to at least one of the USA games.

Whose with me??

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do I have to remind you how badly the US performed in the 1998 WC?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, b/c you seem intent on mentioning this useless fact in every post.

instead:

1) how about you tell me why this matters to the current US team

2) why don't you tell me why you are ignoring the last World Cup, where we reached the quarterfinals and outplayed eventual finalist Germany.

3)Tell me why you think 1998 is more important than 2002.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]

no, b/c you seem intent on mentioning this useless fact in every post.

instead:

1) how about you tell me why this matters to the current US team



2) why don't you tell me why you are ignoring the last World Cup, where we reached the quarterfinals and outplayed eventual finalist Germany.

3)Tell me why you think 1998 is more important than 2002.

[/ QUOTE ]


1. It was a reason why Mexico was a seeded team and the US wasn't.

2. Yes, the USA qualified after the Round Robin Stage - but barely. Losing to Poland and drawing with South Korea. The Portugal victory was ok, but if they played today Portugal would be favourites. A victory over CONCACAF rivals Mexico. Fair enuff! But Germany is not what it used to be. Sure USA has improved but if you think you are worth your number 8 ranking in the world - Then you must think think the world only exist in Columbus, Portland and Salt Lake City.

3. It just shows you that the US can perform better than other times. In 1998 the US was crowned the worst team at the WC tournament. 2002 was a much better performance. But I reckon the time zone of Asia helped. This time in Europe lets see which teams are drawn out of the hat Dec. 9th.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here is the pot that the US was placed into:
Asia, CONCACAF and the lowest UEFA ranked team Serbia&Montenegro.

Iran
Japan
Saudi Arabia
South Korea
Costa Rica
Trinidad & Tobago
United States
Serbia & Montenegro


[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't this have a lot more to do with draw rules than how good the U.S. is? All the non-seeded European teams went into one pot so that the there wouldn't be more than two European side in each group, so the U.S. (and the rest of CONCACAF -- an admittedly weak region, particularly outside the top two) were bound to be placed with either the African nations or the Asian nations.

And as someone pointed out, it's weird that you are ignoring 2002, when the U.S. upset Portugal in group play and lost a very tough match to eventual finalists Germany in the round of 8.

-McGee

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
2. Yes, the USA qualified after the Round Robin Stage - but barely. Losing to Poland and drawing with South Korea. The Portugal victory was ok, but if they played today Portugal would be favourites. A victory over CONCACAF rivals Mexico. Fair enuff! But Germany is not what it used to be. Sure USA has improved but if you think you are worth your number 8 ranking in the world - Then you must think think the world only exist in Columbus, Portland and Salt Lake City.


[/ QUOTE ]

Portugal were seeded AND two years later were finalists at the European championships. South Korea were a semi-finalist in this World Cup. Germany were finalists. There is no viable way to discredit the U.S.' performance in 2002. I'm not saying they are deserving of a seed in 2006 (although as has been pointed out, the U.S. were just barely beaten out for the final seed by Italy), but you seem to be going out of your way to mock the U.S., when all recent signs point to them being an up-and-coming nation on the international scene.

-McGee

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]


And as someone pointed out, it's weird that you are ignoring 2002, when the U.S. upset Portugal in group play and lost a very tough match to eventual finalists Germany in the round of 8.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not ignoring the 2002 campaign. In terms of seeding it helped of course.

The Portugal victory was a shock. Ithough they played better against a Mexico team that was intent on playing physical rather than playing the ball.

Even though Germany made it to the Finals, you could hardly equate that team to the 1974 West German team.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]

Portugal were seeded AND two years later were finalists at the European championships. South Korea were a semi-finalist in this World Cup. Germany were finalists. There is no viable way to discredit the U.S.' performance in 2002. I'm not saying they are deserving of a seed in 2006 (although as has been pointed out, the U.S. were just barely beaten out for the final seed by Italy), but you seem to be going out of your way to mock the U.S., when all recent signs point to them being an up-and-coming nation on the international scene.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

I think they are overranked at 8th in the world.

I doubt that they will perform at to that ranking and I will bet against the US in doing it.

If I'm proven wrong - I will lose $$$.

BUTT

Thats my problem!

Re: World Cup Fever
 

ok, it's becoming clear you won't be convinced on this one. I'll play anyway...

[ QUOTE ]
1. It was a reason why Mexico was a seeded team and the US wasn't.

[/ QUOTE ] duh, yes. but tell me why the poor skill and play of the 1998 team will negatively effect the skill and play of the 2006 team.


[ QUOTE ]
. Yes, the USA qualified after the Round Robin Stage - but barely

[/ QUOTE ]
ok, I guess barely doesn't count

[ QUOTE ]
The Portugal victory was ok, but if they played today Portugal would be favourites

[/ QUOTE ]
which may or may not be true, and either way, is meaningless

[ QUOTE ]
But Germany is not what it used to be

[/ QUOTE ]
they were good enough to make the finals

[ QUOTE ]
Sure USA has improved but if you think you are worth your number 8 ranking in the world - Then you must think think the world only exist in Columbus, Portland and Salt Lake City.

[/ QUOTE ]

who cares if we are #8 or #9 or #15? your original point was that we are a laughingstock, which I think I've proven to be ridiculous

[ QUOTE ]
2002 was a much better performance. But I reckon the time zone of Asia helped.

[/ QUOTE ]

rrrright. b/c the USA is much closer to Asia than Europe? much more likely is that the time zone change put Americas teams and European teams on equal ground

[ QUOTE ]
This time in Europe lets see which teams are drawn out of the hat Dec. 9th.

[/ QUOTE ]

um, ok

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think they are overranked at 8th in the world.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's your opinion, and that's fine. I think it's a little high for them, as well. My quarrel with you was that you called them the laughingstock of the sport, and that just simply isn't the case anymore.

-McGee

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


And as someone pointed out, it's weird that you are ignoring 2002, when the U.S. upset Portugal in group play and lost a very tough match to eventual finalists Germany in the round of 8.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not ignoring the 2002 campaign. In terms of seeding it helped of course.

The Portugal victory was a shock. Ithough they played better against a Mexico team that was intent on playing physical rather than playing the ball.

Even though Germany made it to the Finals, you could hardly equate that team to the 1974 West German team.

[/ QUOTE ]

What about France? They got killed in 2002. Therefore they are the laughing stock! Ha ha smelly frogs.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]

What about France? They got killed in 2002. Therefore they are the laughing stock! Ha ha smelly frogs.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you forgot about Turkey...

3rd in 2002. Failed to qualify for 2006.

This WC is in Europe though and I'm banking that the US is going to find it much tougher this time.

Bookies are offering 100/1 for the US to win the WC.

A list of bookie odds from the UK.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What about France? They got killed in 2002. Therefore they are the laughing stock! Ha ha smelly frogs.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you forgot about Turkey...

3rd in 2002. Failed to qualify for 2006.

This WC is in Europe though and I'm banking that the US is going to find it much tougher this time.

Bookies are offering 100/1 for the US to win the WC.

A list of bookie odds from the UK.

[/ QUOTE ]

and according to Betfair, they have the 13th best chance to win. that is some laughingstock.

and as everybody in this thread has already proven, of course the US will have a tougher time this year. being in Europe gives the European teams a big edge, just as Asian teams got a bit boost in 2002. this doesn't prove anything.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
and according to Betfair, they have the 13th best chance to win. that is some laughingstock.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep...
13th best chance and Rank #8 in the World...

Bwahahahahahahahahaha


[ QUOTE ]

and as everybody in this thread has already proven, of course the US will have a tougher time this year. being in Europe gives the European teams a big edge, just as Asian teams got a bit boost in 2002. this doesn't prove anything.


[/ QUOTE ]

Proves that you Yanks rank yourself better than what you are really worth.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and according to Betfair, they have the 13th best chance to win. that is some laughingstock.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep...
13th best chance and Rank #8 in the World...

Bwahahahahahahahahaha


[ QUOTE ]

and as everybody in this thread has already proven, of course the US will have a tougher time this year. being in Europe gives the European teams a big edge, just as Asian teams got a bit boost in 2002. this doesn't prove anything.


[/ QUOTE ]

Proves that you Yanks rank yourself better than what you are really worth.

[/ QUOTE ]

For a sport *virtually* no one cares about here, I'd say that's not bad.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]


For a sport *virtually* no one cares about here, I'd say that's not bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee whiz...

You've insulted every soccer mum that dreamed of her kid doing something constructive in his life.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


For a sport *virtually* no one cares about here, I'd say that's not bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee whiz...

You've insulted every soccer mum that dreamed of her kid doing something constructive in his life.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can guarantee that 90% of soccer "mums" don't even know where the World Cup is held, and probably not even know what year it is.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]


I can guarantee that 90% of soccer "mums" don't even know where the World Cup is held, and probably not even know what year it is.

[/ QUOTE ]


Too much Wisteria Lane???

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and according to Betfair, they have the 13th best chance to win. that is some laughingstock.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep...
13th best chance and Rank #8 in the World...

Bwahahahahahahahahaha


[ QUOTE ]

and as everybody in this thread has already proven, of course the US will have a tougher time this year. being in Europe gives the European teams a big edge, just as Asian teams got a bit boost in 2002. this doesn't prove anything.


[/ QUOTE ]

Proves that you Yanks rank yourself better than what you are really worth.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand either of your points. I'm done with you.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't understand either of your points. I'm done with you.

[/ QUOTE ]


Of course you don't...

Here's an example why you guys are the laughing stock - Outside the USA!

From The Age - Melbourne

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't understand either of your points. I'm done with you.

[/ QUOTE ]



Of course you don't...

Here's an example why you guys are the laughing stock - Outside the USA!

From The Age - Melbourne

[/ QUOTE ]

We also suck at rugby. And cricket.

Re: World Cup Fever
 

the us is better than what the vast majority of the world gives them credit for, but they are not as good as #8 in the world

as for how the US did in 98, well thats pretty meaningless. thats 8 years ago, and you can't draw too much from it anyway. france and argentina both lost in the group stage in 2002...

Re: World Cup Fever
 

And although France had the best player in the world in '98 (as they do today) HFA went a LONG way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh Brazil have the best player in the world, Ronaldihnio

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
The US is highly unlikely to be seeded, whereas Mexico will probably get seeded due to their lofty FIFA ranking.

Hopefully the US can avoid Brazil or Germany in their pool. Mexico or the underachieving Spaniards wouldn't be a bad draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

The US cannot draw Mexico as they are from the same region

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The US is highly unlikely to be seeded, whereas Mexico will probably get seeded due to their lofty FIFA ranking.



[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Mexico (7th) is ranked only one spot higher than USA (8th).
No bias here to you Yanks, but this is clearly a misnomer.

The seedings for the WC Final Groups was calculated on a far more complicated and elaborate system which took in account previous WC Final performances and Mexico edged out USA on the count that USA failed miserably in the 1998 WC.

Arena was just recently quoted as saying Australia & Trinidad & Tobago will be a laughing stock at this coming WC. He has a lot of balls saying this coz outside the US the Yanks are the laughing stock in this sport!

[/ QUOTE ]


Australia had to beat the 5th best team in South America and two time WC winner to take there place we wont be a laughing stock

Re: World Cup Fever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do I have to remind you how badly the US performed in the 1998 WC?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, b/c you seem intent on mentioning this useless fact in every post.

instead:

1) how about you tell me why this matters to the current US team

2) why don't you tell me why you are ignoring the last World Cup, where we reached the quarterfinals and outplayed eventual finalist Germany.

3)Tell me why you think 1998 is more important than 2002.

[/ QUOTE ]

98 is not more important than 02 and guess what FIFA recognised this point.

The points allocation for seedings was based 50/50 on Rankings and performances in 98 and 02. In the latter the point assigned to 98 comprised 33% or the score and 02 making up 66%.

THE POINT is that the USA's poor performance in 98 cost them a seeding as they scored 43 points total with Italy scoring 44 taking a seed.

Case closed

Re: World Cup Fever
 

it makes sense that 98 factors into seeding but its ridiculous to use that as any indicator of how good usa is now. nearly all of the personell are changed for the better. the coach (arenas) is far better. and the americans now play a style that takes advantage of their strengthes which are athletism, stamina and hustle. also, unlike many teams, usa is very organized and lacks massive egos which allow them to work together welll. in these categories they are far superior to much of the world.

what the usa clearly lacks is technical skill in one on one situations. beasley is the only player i have seen that can consistently beat his defender. also, they are poor at tactical speed so their ball movement is slow and their attacks are straightforward lacking creativity. the us is able to overcome this with speed and strength against weaker teams but will rely on a large amount of luck against the great teams.