I'm sure you're right. The celebration in the locker room didn't look like they'd just lost 2-0 to Costa Rica's B team. But the goal for US soccer should be higher than backing into the last direct qualifying spot on goal differential. It should be to win the group.
Soccer Post: CONCACAF & Oceania matches...
- Thread starter Maroon Eagle
- Start date
My thoughts on last night and going forward:
- We didn't back into a WC spot. The US did what they needed to in the first 2 games of this window to essentially guarantee automatic qualification. If the US had qualified in 2017 despite losing to T&T, that would have been backing in because it would have required results that were out of the US's control. The US controlled its destiny the entire night and did what it knew it had to do. It wasn't pretty but they qualified.
- I am no Berhalter defender and have a lot of issues with his coaching style and team selection but the goal was to qualify for a WC and he did that with basically a game to spare. We didn't do that in 2017. He took the youngest, most inexperienced team in basically all of major WC qualifying and did the job.
- Not sure what the coaching plan was last night but to me it looked like the goal was to give it legitimate shot in the 1st half. The US was the better team in the first 45 and if not for Navas (the best GK in CONCACAF history) the US would have gone into HT up 1-0. It looked like when the US got to HT 0-0 that Berhalter decided to just see the game out in a way that would insure qualification.
- Adams is the most important player on the field for the US. His positional play and cutting out attacks is so important to the way the US plays that when he is out the whole dynamic of the team changes. If he plays the whole 90 and I think the game ends up 0-0 at worst.
- The US just doesn't seem to be able to break the Costa Rica away jinx. The team just doesn't get points in San Jose. This loss was a disappointing way to close out qualifying but better (not more talented) US teams have lost to worse Costa Rica teams away.
I think there are a handful of questions that the US needs to address going into Qatar:
1) Berhalter has to settle on a style of play and line-up. The constant rotation during the earlier rounds of qualifying is part of the reason for the inconsistent play and what made qualifying more "exciting" than it should have been.
2) Finding a #9 is the most important personnel issue to address between now and November. This is why a style of play is so paramount because it dictates the type of #9 we play with going forward. In my opinion, the US needs to use a player like Ferreria because the best attacking players on the team are wingers (Pulisic, Aaronson, Weah, etc.) so a #9 that likes to drop in between the defensive and midfield lines and play in the in-cutting wingers is the US's best attacking option. A true central, #9 just doesn't fit the way the wingers like to play as much as a CF type players does.
3) Need to settle on a GK and stick with one. Steffen doesn't give me confidence and I think Turner is a better shot stopper.
4) Got to find someone who can play Adam's position before we go to Qatar. Adams is not the most durable player and as we have see when he is out the US is a different team. Berhalter has to find someone in the pool who can at least do the defensive work that he does so if he goes down at Qatar the US at least has a serviceable replacement.
Bottom line, I will take 3rd in CONCACAF any day over sitting at home like the US was in 2018. It wasn't pretty but going to Qatar is a lot better than the alternative.
- We didn't back into a WC spot. The US did what they needed to in the first 2 games of this window to essentially guarantee automatic qualification. If the US had qualified in 2017 despite losing to T&T, that would have been backing in because it would have required results that were out of the US's control. The US controlled its destiny the entire night and did what it knew it had to do. It wasn't pretty but they qualified.
- I am no Berhalter defender and have a lot of issues with his coaching style and team selection but the goal was to qualify for a WC and he did that with basically a game to spare. We didn't do that in 2017. He took the youngest, most inexperienced team in basically all of major WC qualifying and did the job.
- Not sure what the coaching plan was last night but to me it looked like the goal was to give it legitimate shot in the 1st half. The US was the better team in the first 45 and if not for Navas (the best GK in CONCACAF history) the US would have gone into HT up 1-0. It looked like when the US got to HT 0-0 that Berhalter decided to just see the game out in a way that would insure qualification.
- Adams is the most important player on the field for the US. His positional play and cutting out attacks is so important to the way the US plays that when he is out the whole dynamic of the team changes. If he plays the whole 90 and I think the game ends up 0-0 at worst.
- The US just doesn't seem to be able to break the Costa Rica away jinx. The team just doesn't get points in San Jose. This loss was a disappointing way to close out qualifying but better (not more talented) US teams have lost to worse Costa Rica teams away.
I think there are a handful of questions that the US needs to address going into Qatar:
1) Berhalter has to settle on a style of play and line-up. The constant rotation during the earlier rounds of qualifying is part of the reason for the inconsistent play and what made qualifying more "exciting" than it should have been.
2) Finding a #9 is the most important personnel issue to address between now and November. This is why a style of play is so paramount because it dictates the type of #9 we play with going forward. In my opinion, the US needs to use a player like Ferreria because the best attacking players on the team are wingers (Pulisic, Aaronson, Weah, etc.) so a #9 that likes to drop in between the defensive and midfield lines and play in the in-cutting wingers is the US's best attacking option. A true central, #9 just doesn't fit the way the wingers like to play as much as a CF type players does.
3) Need to settle on a GK and stick with one. Steffen doesn't give me confidence and I think Turner is a better shot stopper.
4) Got to find someone who can play Adam's position before we go to Qatar. Adams is not the most durable player and as we have see when he is out the US is a different team. Berhalter has to find someone in the pool who can at least do the defensive work that he does so if he goes down at Qatar the US at least has a serviceable replacement.
Bottom line, I will take 3rd in CONCACAF any day over sitting at home like the US was in 2018. It wasn't pretty but going to Qatar is a lot better than the alternative.
World Cup Pots for tomorrow's draw...
FIFA confirms the pots for the 2022 World Cup draw after revealing its latest rankingwhich has Brazil ending Belgiums reign at the tophttps://t.co/A3gSSWQVa8 pic.twitter.com/bhQtzQtTAF— SI Soccer (@si_soccer) March 31, 2022
FIFA confirms the pots for the 2022 World Cup draw after revealing its latest rankingwhich has Brazil ending Belgiums reign at the tophttps://t.co/A3gSSWQVa8 pic.twitter.com/bhQtzQtTAF— SI Soccer (@si_soccer) March 31, 2022
On the one hand, we won't have Germany, Switzerland, Croatia, Denmark, Netherlands, Mexico, or Uruguay in our group. That's a win.
But we could be in a group with Brazil, Senegal, and Wales. That's not a win.
But we could be in a group with Brazil, Senegal, and Wales. That's not a win.
Is there an equivalent in sports in which a team enters a game with the goal of "not getting blown out" as a success for the night?
Late in the season for teams that have clinched playoff spots in other sports... resting starters and putting in subs is common. But typically those subs are playing to improve their standing within the teams' eyes so they are forcefully trying to win the game in front of them.
But in soccer... it feels like it's not totally uncommon to enter into a match with the goal of "just not getting blasted".
I guess maybe teams in MLB and NFL that working hard to improve their draft position go into this space, but at least there's a huge benefit to actually losing instead of winning. For the USMNT last night, winning and "not getting blasted" provided the same outcome, right?
Late in the season for teams that have clinched playoff spots in other sports... resting starters and putting in subs is common. But typically those subs are playing to improve their standing within the teams' eyes so they are forcefully trying to win the game in front of them.
But in soccer... it feels like it's not totally uncommon to enter into a match with the goal of "just not getting blasted".
I guess maybe teams in MLB and NFL that working hard to improve their draft position go into this space, but at least there's a huge benefit to actually losing instead of winning. For the USMNT last night, winning and "not getting blasted" provided the same outcome, right?
Help me understand the pots system a little bit. I'm guessing that each group will have one team drawn from each pot on that graphic?
Honestly, there wasn't much for the US to play for other than "pride". They were already in Pot 2 for the draw since those are based on FIFA Rankings and winning last night would not have improved their grouping in the WC draw pot. Basically, they could have finished 2nd instead of 3rd in the CONCACAF table and that is it. Btw, the US's best finish at a modern WC was in 2002 when they got to the Quarter Finals and were a missed handball call way from the Semi's and they finished 3rd in that round of CONCACAF WC Qualifying as well.
Yep. The main restriction is that there can't be more than one national team from a confederation in a group with the one exception being UEFA.
UEFA has 13 World Cup qualifiers so there can be two national teams from that confederation in a group.
When a team is drawn from a Pot (e.g., Uruguay is drawn to be in Brazil's group) and can't go into that group then it's allocated to the next available group.
UEFA has 13 World Cup qualifiers so there can be two national teams from that confederation in a group.
When a team is drawn from a Pot (e.g., Uruguay is drawn to be in Brazil's group) and can't go into that group then it's allocated to the next available group.
Last edited:
Not taking it— it seems like most of the time the USMNT being in a group is the reason why it’s the Group of Death.
Winning the group is meaningless. There's no advantage for winning the group over finishing third.
And we didn't back in. You have to take the whole of the final group into consideration. We had done basically everything needed to qualify before the match started.
This is usually guaranteed just based on how the teams are assigned to pots. CONCACAF is usually put into a pot with one of the weakest other confederations, guaranteeing we didn't get one of the weaker teams in our group and we would more than likely be drawn with 2 European teams and 1 South American or African team.
But this time, the pots were assigned based on world ranking. We could technically avoid any UEFA teams (think Qatar, Tunisia, Ecuador).
Wish they had allowed qualifying to finish before assigning pots. Those playoff placeholders in Pot 4 include some teams that would otherwise be at the top of Pot 3 (based on ranking, at least).
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White
1-on-1: Mississippi State's emerging leaders on both sides of the ball
-
02
Maroon and White
Mississippi State Preseason Camp Takeaways
-
03
Maroon and White
Mississippi State Baseball adds Jackson, Tenn. fall exhibition date
-
04
Maroon and White
Jahron Manning begins search for new team
-
05
Maroon and White
Knowns and Unknowns for Mississippi State as football season approaches