phdinsports said:
So the bookies know more than FIFA? The same bookies that had Indy favored against New England last year? The same bookies who had England laying down for the Aussies in the Ashes this year?
The bottom line is that the US went to the quarter finals in the last World Cup and a shitty goal beat them. Since then, nobody has done anything to knock them off except for the one bad game in Mexico City.
Have you seen what Italy has been doing recently? Hardly a world power. Have you seen how France is doing?
When a team like Greece can win the European Cup, it doesn't say much for European soccer, does it?
It'll take you a while, but you'll see the light. Europe is not what it used to be.
cincy_ said:
Yup they know a hell of alot more than Fifa, (Indy was +3 and +1 in both games vs Pats). Germany lost in the finals and England lost to Brazil. Germany England and Italy will make it much further than Mexico and US!!! Alot of bookmakers have the US at 100 to 1, you're sitting pretty cincy, considering their the sixth best nation.
Fifa/Coca-Cola uses a points system program to rank the national teams. It includes friendly matches, Continental and WC preliminaries, etc. It's not as if the US didn't deserve their ranking.
But obviously, it is difficult to imagine the US beating Germany, England, Spain, Italy...
I remember when Columbia, financed by the cartel, was ranked among the top 5 before the US World Cup. They didn't even get past the 1st round.
But you never know...
BlueWolf
But obviously, it is difficult to imagine the US beating Germany, England, Spain, Italy...
I remember when Columbia, financed by the cartel, was ranked among the top 5 before the US World Cup. They didn't even get past the 1st round.
But you never know...
BlueWolf
phdinsports said:
Indy started out as favorites - meaning the bookies had them as favorites. It was action that changed the line.
Yeah Germany was a great team - I hope you didn't have to actually watch them play. They were the worst team EVER to make the finals. EVER.
As far as the US is concerned, I compare European teams to the US basketball Dream Team - all flair, superstars and prima-donnas but no TEAM. The US will make the quarters again next year - just watch - and an African team will make the semis and maybe even the finals.
European soccer dominance is no more. The clubs will always flourish because of the interest, but once we get into the World Cup, they have 11 players and no TEAM.
cincy_ said:
Wow Germany worst team to ever make finals!!! 14 goals for one late goal against, that's the best ratio of goals for/against of any team in world cup history!!!!!!!! They were also missing their best player Ballack, in the finals. Yeah they played terrible. Khan also won best player of the tournament, (over Rinaldo) Don't think you watched them play Cincy. Anyhow good luck to the States and Mexico, they need it if they play Germany, England or Italy!!!
phdinsports said:
UHHHH
You gave me Mexico (I never talked about them) and took three teams (including the home team) for yourself?
Gee thanks.
I will take the top two African qualifiers and the US over your three teams next year - and we'll talk or make a wager through the RX with a set of rules.
The US can beat Italy and France right now if it is in a game where they put the best team together on the field. Those two squads have nothing that anyone in the world should fear, whether its a team from here or in Africa.
One issue European teams don't have to deal with is the incompatibility of the schedules of the MLS and the rest of the world. As a result the US usually goes into games with mostly MLS or foreign born players, but the best mix at the moment is one of 7 European players and 4 MLS players. This last game against Mexico probably was the closest to a full squad they have had since 2002 and it was a very potent squad. Lots of speed and an attacking group, with a fairly solid defense. Those are things US squads have never had much of and I have been following the national team since the mid 80s. Barring any injuries this team is going to be much better than even the 2002 squad. Maybe they aren't 6th best (probably 5th in the next ratings), but they are a top ten squad who can hold their own against anyone except probably Brazil and Argentina.
One issue European teams don't have to deal with is the incompatibility of the schedules of the MLS and the rest of the world. As a result the US usually goes into games with mostly MLS or foreign born players, but the best mix at the moment is one of 7 European players and 4 MLS players. This last game against Mexico probably was the closest to a full squad they have had since 2002 and it was a very potent squad. Lots of speed and an attacking group, with a fairly solid defense. Those are things US squads have never had much of and I have been following the national team since the mid 80s. Barring any injuries this team is going to be much better than even the 2002 squad. Maybe they aren't 6th best (probably 5th in the next ratings), but they are a top ten squad who can hold their own against anyone except probably Brazil and Argentina.
European soccer is so far ahead of the Concacaf its not even funny....
US Soccer is four times as good as it was in 1990 but are no where near contenders to win a world cup.
In fact, whenever the draws come out, we'll have to wait and see who the opponents of the US will be....chances are they might not make it out of the first round....
US Soccer is four times as good as it was in 1990 but are no where near contenders to win a world cup.
In fact, whenever the draws come out, we'll have to wait and see who the opponents of the US will be....chances are they might not make it out of the first round....
cincy_ said:
if we are talking about the Playoff game - NO THEY DID NOT!
Pats OPENED a few point fave ten got bet down to about the "Pick" range - and that was NOT the books who caused that move - it was the betting public who did that
Pats OPENED a Fave in the P'off game and i am 100% POSITIVE about that one!
WildBill said:
The problem with world cup is that it takes part early summer, for the closing of the soccer season. The real stars are exhausted then, thinking more of vacation, curing injuries etc than playing. Consider that top class player can play from 60 up to even 100 games a year This is the only advantage the rest of the world (apart from Europe and Brazil and Argentina) can have. This is why focused, determined and well organized team of medium class players can do well in the tournement (example Greece). Especially that commercialisation of soccer leads to the sort of decrease of national teams pretige. Sorry but I think that US team playing serious games against top class team will lose 9 of 10 games - however this 10th may happen in the world cup. So I think that with some luck the Americans can cause some trouble in the WC.
And those official ranks are so dumm there's no need to write about them.
"I will take the top two African qualifiers and the US over your three teams next year - and we'll talk or make a wager through the RX with a set of rules".
Cincy, I'l take that bet too, lol. Is there ONE American player who could make either of those 3 teams? I highly doubt it. I realize it's the sum of the parts that matters, but cmon.
In one game, anything can happen, surely. But if the USA were to play England, France, Italy or Germany in an extended series, they'd get crushed.
The seeding system is absurd and could give the Americans an unfair advantage with a top seeding and potentially a weak group.
Good to see the soccer interest at the Rx.
Cincy, I'l take that bet too, lol. Is there ONE American player who could make either of those 3 teams? I highly doubt it. I realize it's the sum of the parts that matters, but cmon.
In one game, anything can happen, surely. But if the USA were to play England, France, Italy or Germany in an extended series, they'd get crushed.
The seeding system is absurd and could give the Americans an unfair advantage with a top seeding and potentially a weak group.
Good to see the soccer interest at the Rx.
