eat shit.. that wasn't even clever

11/17/2005 9:33:52 PM

^^^ http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=268159

^^ http://www.nike.com/nikesoccer/dtom/dtom.html?promoID=USSO_AD_101205_bigsoccer

[Edited on November 17, 2005 at 9:34 PM. Reason : .]

11/17/2005 9:34:02 PM

hmm interesting, after reading some of that it started making no sense...soccer rankings are retarded, i dont see how spain would get in a better seed over us seeing how they had to go to a playoff with another team to get in the world cup

11/17/2005 10:37:46 PM

^ Look at it this way.

Lets say NC State goes 18-12 and finishes 5th in the ACC and only gets in to the tournament on an at-large bid. Lets also say Princeton goes 25-5 and wins their conference to get an automatic invite. That doesn't mean Princeton gets a higher seed than NC State in the NCAA tournament come March.

In this case, the USA are Princeton and Spain are NC State. Qualifying from regions are not equal cause the strength of each region is not equal. Going to a playoff does not matter, just qualifying regardless.

Half of the formula is the farcical FIFA ranking, on which we're pretty much even. The other half of the formula for seeds are the previous 3 World Cups with the more recent the World Cup the higher its component. The reason for this is to ensure the "right" nations are top seeds - the traditional powers - just like in college basketball with the RPI.

Current FIFA World Ranking:

USA - 7th
Spain - 8th

Our previous 3 World Cup finishes:

94 - 14th out of 24 (8.3%)
98 - 32nd out of 32 (16.7%)
02 - 8th out of 32 (25%)

Spain's:

94 - 8th out of 24
98 - 17th out of 32
02 - 5th out of 32

That pretty much explains why Spain is ahead of us.

11/17/2005 10:55:29 PM

No seed for the US

Quote :

"Hosts Germany and defending champions Brazil were named among the top eight seeds for the World Cup finals as expected on Tuesday, along with England, Spain, Mexico, France, Argentina and Italy."

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=351289&cc=5901

12/6/2005 10:02:52 AM

I think it's stupid for Mexico to get a #1 over us.

And Bruce Arena agrees.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/grant_wahl/12/02/us.draw/index.html

12/6/2005 10:07:23 AM

well yeah, I totally agree with that. Even though they didn't use '94 results, '98 results still factor in and teams are almost completely different now.

Until the US really makes a statement in the World Cup (02 was a big step) we'll never get any kind of consideration for something like this

with that said, I sure as hell hope we don't end up in the group with Holland

12/6/2005 10:12:51 AM

Draw's Friday.

Seeded teams: Germany (host), England, Spain, Italy, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, France

Bottom Line: The USA cannot be drawn with Mexico in the group stage. Of the remaining seven, you never want to play the host, and we do not want Brazil. Spain are perennial underachievers, although of the rest it's really just a pick 'em.

Pot 2: Australia, Togo, Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Angola, Tunisia, Ecuador, Paraguay

Bottom Line: Australia's one of those teams that have good players that play in Europe, but their lack of time together is a hindrance, although that shouldn't be a concern in the World Cup. Would rather not play an African team, they come from nowhere and tire teams out by running, running, running, although they are inexperienced. The USA rarely plays African teams. Under Bruce Arena's tenure (1999-current), he has one win, one loss, and two draws. Ghana would be a nice storyline game if Freddy Adu makes the team, it's his country of birth. Paraguay are the best of the two South American sides here.

Pot 3: Croatia, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine

Bottom Line: Do not want the Czechs or the Dutch. If they are in the USA's group, that group would automatically get "The Group of Death" tagline. Of the remaining six, Portugal will be tough and out for revenge after we defeated them 3-2 in 2002. We lost to Poland in 2002 after we had qualified for the knockout stages. Ukraine have Andriy Shevchenko. The Swedes are decent.

Pot 4: USA, Costa Rica, Trinidad and Tobago, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea, Iran, Serbia and Montenegro*

The USA are the best team in this pot. It would have been better if the USA's region had been paired with the African teams instead of the Asian teams. Asian teams are generally pushovers in World Cups if they are not hosting, while the African nations are always fighting sides that make you earn victories. Serbia and Montenegro may help out the USA's chances of a favorable draw. No group can have more than two European nations. So Serbia and Montenegro can only be a group where the seeded team is one of Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina. This improves the USA's chances of not drawing Brazil.

[Edited on December 6, 2005 at 10:33 AM. Reason : .]

12/6/2005 10:29:55 AM

I'd rather deal with Holland than with a front six of Owen-Rooney-Defoe-Gerrard-Lampard-Beckham.

Yeesh.

12/6/2005 10:31:47 AM

^

O-ver-ra-ted

(clap clap clap clap)

O-ver-ra-ted.

12/6/2005 10:34:04 AM

^^ Holland isn't seeded. Which means if we're in their group, we'd be in the definite "Group of Death" - Holland, a #1 seed, US, and sombody else (maybe one of those dangerous African teams like Cote d'Ivoire)

Thats why I don't want to be in the same group as Holland.

[Edited on December 6, 2005 at 12:00 PM. Reason : .]

12/6/2005 11:59:53 AM

are they showing the draw live on friday? i read that they are, im assuming it will be on the fox soccer channel on digital cable. any other word?

12/6/2005 12:03:01 PM

What is the Group of Death?

Sorry, I don't really follow international soccer.

12/6/2005 12:06:41 PM

there always seems to be one group in the world cup that is so evenly matched with good teams that you can't really predict who will advance

^^ I think its on espn2 at 3

[Edited on December 6, 2005 at 12:38 PM. Reason : espn2]

12/6/2005 12:37:38 PM

Gotcha, thanks.

12/6/2005 12:42:27 PM

i cannot wait for this, add the czech team as an unseeded team that we definately don't want to be drawn with

12/6/2005 1:58:02 PM

here's the US schedule for the next friendlys before the world cup...germany, poland, and norway should be interesting...

2006 MNT Schedule
Date Match Venue Kickoff/TV Tickets
Jan. 22 USA vs. CAN Torero Stadium (San Diego, Calif.) 5 p.m. PT More Info
Jan. 29 USA vs. NOR Home Depot Center (Carson, Calif.) 2 p.m. PT / ESPN2 & Telemundo More Info
Feb. 10 USA vs. JPN SBC Park (San Francisco, Calif.) 8 p.m. PT / ESPN2 More Info
Feb. 19 USA vs. GUA Pizza Hut Park (Frisco, Texas) 2 p.m. CT / ESPN2 & Telemundo More Info
March 1 USA vs. POL Fritz-Walter-Stadion (Kaiserslautern, Germany) 2 p.m. ET / ESPN2 & TBD / Telemundo --
March 22 GER vs. USA Westfalenstadion (Dortmund, Germany) 2 P.M. ET / ESPN2 & TBD / Telemundo --
June 12 USA vs. CZE * FIFA World Cup Stadium Gelsenkirchen (Gelsenkirchen, Germany) 12 p.m. ET / TBD --
June 17 ITA vs. USA * Fritz-Walter-Stadion (Kaiserslautern, Germany) 3 p.m. ET / TBD --
June 22 GHA vs. USA * Frankenstadion (Nuremberg, Germany) 10 a.m. ET / TBD --

1/25/2006 11:22:38 AM

fyi: we tied canada 0-0.

1/25/2006 11:53:58 AM

that's promising .... cough

1/25/2006 12:29:46 PM

anybody else lookin forward to a complete healthy return of eddie johnson? i think when he's at the top of his game, he's our most dangerous forward

1/25/2006 12:41:04 PM

wait, the US is playing Japan in a baseball stadium from what i understand???

1/27/2006 1:10:00 AM

Yeah, I dunno how that's gonna work.

Still, it can't be any worse than that cricket stadium in Grenada where Landon got a goal because the ball came to a complete stop in a puddle twelve yards out.

[Edited on January 27, 2006 at 1:33 AM. Reason : yaaarrrrrrds]

1/27/2006 1:32:53 AM

Quote :

"wait, the US is playing Japan in a baseball stadium from what i understand???"

That isn't unusual. DC United and the Nationals play in the same park, and that is during baseball season. Now they can easily put grass over the dirt.

1/27/2006 1:39:55 AM

^that stadium was a football stadium for years and only got converted for baseball this past year. Look up a pic of SBC Park. Its a baseball-only stadium.

I'm thinking more about sidelines and such as opposed to dirt on the field, tho.

1/27/2006 2:07:57 AM

oh I got ya.

Well, Looking at the dimensions, they are what seem to me, as a couple of options. They could run one sideline down the left field line. It is 339 ft (113 yds) from homeplate to the wall, and with the backstop, I'm sure they can get another 7 yards to give you the 110 yards (min) . Or they could center it, however I'm not sure if the width will fit this way even if they go with the min of 70 since the diamond itself is less than 45 yrds across. And the rightfield fence is only 309 ft (103 yrds).

Ah, what do I know, they are smart people, they'll figure it out, but I'm going to guess going to left field and maybe temp bleachers?

you know, the more I look at that stadium, the more confused I become, this should be interesting

[Edited on January 27, 2006 at 2:32 AM. Reason : ]

1/27/2006 2:29:48 AM

It can't be any worse than Spartan Stadium, where you can't wind up on throw-ins near the end line.

1/27/2006 2:42:22 AM