User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.6689 seconds
55 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Well, there has to be a goalkeeper that is better than England's alternatives.
"Henry is a cheater! A filthy cheater just like Maradona!"
I don't remember exactly, but I could've sworn I saw Houston playing a Costa Rican/Honduran league team a while back. Maybe it was even a Primera Division club. This was like a month or 2 back.
Doesn't the MLS All-Star team play an EPL team or some such?
Speaking of, here's as good a place to ask as I'll run across: Does FIFA overrate the young players of Aston Villa, or are they going to be a ####### unstoppable force in 2-3 years?
Yes. There's a North American version of the Champions League.
Me? I was talking about FIFA 10, referenced in my previous post. But I'm asking whether the real A/V team, as constructed right now, looks to be a dominant force starting in a year or two and going for 3-4 years.
For context, it has Ronaldo rated right now as an 82, Thierry Henry an 87, Drogba an 86, Rooney a 90, and Cristiano Ronaldo a 91.
The A/V team:
Strikers - Agbolahor is 23 and an 83, at age 26 projects to be an 89, Delfonueso is 18 and an 80, projects to 87 by age 21
Midfielders - Milner is 23/85, projects to 25/88; Young is 24/85, projects to 26/89; Delph is 20/74, projects to 23/86, Bannan 20/73, projects to 23/82
Back - Davies 24/82, projects to 26/86
So that would be a striker the level of Henry/Drogba along with another the level of Rooney, a midfield that is basically Rooney/Rooney/Drogba/Ronaldo level (or their equivalents at midfield now, I don't know the name guys at those positions), and another Henry in the back.
So is FIFA overrating those guys' potential, or if not, am I overrating what that caliber of team would produce?
Particularly when people in the former crowd don't understand that this is the situation.
No, Aston Villa's young players are not that good. And yes, the MLS teams do play in a competition that theoretically could pit them against a European squad: the CONCACAF Champions League. The winner of that goes to play in the World Club Cup against the champions from the other confederations. MLS teams traditionally do ridiculously bad in that competition, though.
1) Low salary cap
2) The cap on roster size imposed by MLS
3) Fixture congestion (League matches, US Open Cup, Champions League and Superliga)
The CBA is up for renegotiation, and the hope is that the league will raise the salary cap so that teams can actually get some more decent players.
I have conducted my draw under different rules than those FIFA will use. More importantly, instead of just using the seeding rankings to determine the top 8 seeds, I have used them to fill all four pots. The pots are:
Pot 1: South Africa, Italy, Brazil, Germany, Spain, England, Argentina, France
Pot 2: Portugal, Netherlands, Mexico, United States, Switzerland, Paraguay, Ghana, South Korea
Pot 3: Cameroon, Japan, Australia, Greece, Ivory Coast, Serbia, Denmark, Nigeria
Pot 4: Uruguay, Chile, Honduras, Slovakia, Slovenia, Algeria, New Zealand, North Korea
To make the groups closer to what could result from the official draw, I have also established that there should be at least one and no more than two UEFA teams in each group. Also, no group can have two teams from the same confederation, other than UEFA.
As in the real draw, South Africa is preassigned to Group A. I also preassigned Italy to Group F.
So, the results were...
Group A: South Africa, Netherlands, Japan, Honduras
Group B: Argentina, Switzerland, Serbia, North Korea
Group C: Germany, Paraguay, Nigeria, Slovakia
Group D: England, Ghana, Greece, New Zealand
Group E: Spain, Portugal, Australia, Chile
Group F: Italy, South Korea, Ivory Coast, Uruguay
Group G: France, Mexico, Denmark, Algeria
Group H: Brazil, United States, Cameroon, Slovenia
I will say that I'd definitely prefer if a UEFA team was the No. 2 team than an CAF or COMENBOL team. Europeans historically do poorly on the road, though based on the Confed Cup it's not going to be the sweltering steam cooker that Japorea was.
Incidentally, Shooty, a few of us are getting together at NYY Steak next Tuesday (12/1) if you have any interest in eating expensive meat and talking to smug Yankee fans.
Smug Yankee fans I don't mind--the meat is stringy but it's not bad with enough A-1. Other than that, I don't eat meat so I'll pass on the steakhouse. Let me know if you guys are going to head somewhere after and I'll try to pop by.
what a dumb way to decide a title
Donovan choked!
If nothing else, it would encourage more hijinks in less-noticed regions.
Perhaps a bonus should be given as well for mischievousness.
Usually the rules are too mundane.........
The Wigan players have said they will refund the costs of their fans' tickets.
They did play brutally. I felt sorry for that Edman guy on Wigan. I think Lennon gave him vertigo. (My girlfriend, when she saw the Wigan guy with the unusual hair, said "I bet he's Austrian." That gave me a good laugh.
Or maybe I'm overly cynical.
I'm taken aback the Champions League is mixed up with this. Ruh roh.
Yeah, they were atrocious. But it is cool that the players decided to refund fans out of their own pocket.
Pot 1
Brazil
Spain
Netherlands
Italy
Germany
Argentina
England
South Africa
Pot 2
Australia
Japan
Korea DPR
Korea Republic
Honduras
Mexico
USA
New Zealand
Pot 3
Algeria
Cameroon
Côte d’Ivoire
Ghana
Nigeria
Chile
Paraguay
Uruguay
Pot 4
Denmark
France
Greece
Portugal
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Switzerland
Best Case for US:
South Africa
USA
Algeria
Slovenia
Worst Case for US:
Brazil
USA
Ivory Coast
France
Median Case for US:
Germany
USA
Ghana
Denmark
Mock Draw:
Group A
South Africa
Australia
Algeria
Denmark
Group B
Argentina
Japan
Cameroon
France
Group C
Brazil
North Korea
Ivory Coast
Greece
Group D
England
South Korea
Ghana
Portugal
Group E
Germany
Honduras
Nigeria
Serbia
Group F
Italy
Mexico
Chile
Slovakia
Group G
Netherlands
USA
Paraguay
Slovenia
Group H
Spain
New Zealand
Uruguay
Switzerland
To bring this back from the dead...my girl and I actually spent a half hour or so making fun Real Salt Lake. What a dumb name for a US sports team.
I was just exaggerating. We're ok. It's pretty clear what FIFA thinks of Asian and CONCACAF from those pots. I think the US and Mexico and possibly Australia are getting screwed being lumped win with the rest of those teams. I don't like it at all.
But at least they don't have fake salt in their lake.
True. There's always a silver lining...
Mostly tradition and a desire to have geographical diversity in the groups.
Though conspiracy theorists could ask why the Confederations are arranged as they are -- one might suggest that a more balanced arrangement would be CONCACAF with CAF and UEFA with CONMENBOL for example.
The pots for the US are about the worst case. A bad draw or even a medium-bad draw means suddenly that the US has to beat a good European or African club just to get one win, let alone a chance to advance. Bad Bad mojo. Imagine Spain, Portugal, Cameroon, US group. Clearly odds favor one or both of Mexico and US to be stuck in the "group of death".
What this also highlights for me is that in 2006, the US was one spot away from being seeded, which is really the ultimate protection.
The US's really inconsistent results in WCs has really hurt it in this regard. Strong in '94, dead last in '98. Strong in 2002, mediocre in 2006. If we swap the '94 and '98 results, we'd certainly have been seeded in 2006, and then who knows what happens. The key for the US is to somehow through luck or skill, string together, say, a QF and R16 performance at least, along with strong qualifying in between. Then, get seeded and try to get entrenched.
No surprise really then why they seem to always have the fuzzy end of the lollipop come draw time.
But you can have geographical diversity within the groups while still having a fully seeded draw. Which brings me to....
Mock draw, part two! (Yeah, I'm that bored)
Done the same way as I did before, except teams are now ordered according to their median rank among FIFA, ELO and Voros' rankings. The pots are thus:
Pot 1: South Africa, Italy, Brazil, Spain, Netherlands, England, Germany, Argentina
Pot 2: France, Portugal, Mexico, Uruguay, Chile, United States, Ivory Coast, Denmark
Pot 3: Serbia, Cameroon, Australia, Switzerland, Greece, Japan, Nigeria, Paraguay
Pot 4: Honduras, South Korea, Ghana, Slovakia, Slovenia, Algeria, New Zealand, North Korea
All you fans of Team USA can look away now...
Group A: South Africa, Mexico, Serbia, Slovakia
Group B: Germany, USA, Paraguay, Ghana
Group C: Brazil, Denmark, Greece, North Korea
Group D: Netherlands, Ivory Coast, Switzerland, New Zealand
Group E: England, Uruguay, Cameroon, South Korea
Group F: Italy, Portugal, Japan, Honduras
Group G: Spain, Chile, Nigeria, Slovenia
Group H: Argentina, France, Australia, Algeria
Ha! Fans would just start complaining about penalties not being awarded when they should and players being unfairly punished. When a dive is super obvious they usually result in nothing or are punished, it's just there is a huge grey area where you can make a convincing case for or against. The Eduardo thing doesn't happen that often, maybe once or twice a season.
And Henry didn't 'pass' the ball with his hand, he knocked it down then passed with his foot.
Also re diving, it's also not said that it's a chicken/egg question. Players often will go down easy because a penalty isn't given for a clear foul in the box unless the player does go over, he can be tripped then stumbled and stay on his feet and getting nothing but a stony faced stare from the ref.
And, yes, the bloody vuvuzelas are awful. sounds like a swarm of angry wasps buzzing around the stadium
They want to move on, but given their goalkeeping talent, I'm not sure if they will.
What a great draw for the US. The next question is what order does the US play these teams? I can see playing Algeria first, winning, playing England tough, but losing, and then forgetting to come out vs Slovenia and once again missing the second round. I haven't been more interested in a first round game (US-England) ever really, and only Germany-US for overall World Cup games.
My picks to make it out of the groups in bold:
GROUP A
South Africa
Mexico
Uruguay
France
GROUP B
Argentina
Nigeria
South Korea
Greece
GROUP C
England
United States
Algeria
Slovenia
GROUP D
Germany
Australia
Serbia
Ghana
GROUP E
Netherlands
Denmark
Japan
Cameroon
GROUP F
Italy
Paraguay
New Zealand
Slovakia
GROUP G
Brazil
North Korea
Ivory Coast
Portugal
GROUP H
Spain
Switzerland
Honduras
Chile
Wiki says the US will be playing England first, followed by Slovenia & Algeria.
I was also at work during the draw, but I was in the warehouse, so a friend & I watched via a cool live draw-thing they had on ESPN.com. He's a Mexico fan, and just about lost his #### when they were grouped with South Africa. He then laughed at me when the US drew England. Then came the France and Uruguay draws... in the end, I'd rather have the US' group over Mexico's.
He sort of laughed off Uruguay, but I think they're as good (if not better than) Mexico. They beat Paraguay and tied Chile during CONMEBOL and Nate Silver's rating system has them at 10 (is this a good index? Better than Fifa's?).
Folks are saying that a host country has never been eliminated during group stage play. This might be the case, but has there ever been a team as bad as South Africa to host the World Cup?
I'd take USA '94 over South Africa '10. The latter didn't even qualify for the African Nation's Cup to be played next month.
The fortunate part for the USA back then was Colombia (a pre-tournament dark horse candidate) imploding. OTOH, they held their own against Brazil in the round of 16.
I was pretty worried about the draw. Our pot precluded us from being drawn against five teams that are probably among the bottom dozen in the tournament. Not that we couldn't lose to Japan, New Zealand, Honduras, or the Koreas - but I'd rather play them than most other teams. Toss in the possibility of drawing a seeded team, the unseeded France or Portugal, and a team like Ivory Coast or Cameroon and there were a lot of possibilities for a seriously scary group.
But this is just about as good as you could hope for. England is clearly a favorite against us, but they're beatable. As for Algeria and Solvenia, well, they're certainly not terrifying. Both of them beat very, very good teams a couple weeks ago in playoffs to qualify (Egypt and Russia) but the US also thwomped Egypt pretty badly a few months ago and I don't think anyone would say that Slovenia would have a good chance of repeating their feat.
There's still a lot of ways that this could go poorly. But the US really should qualify out of this group. Which could set up a matchup against Germany in the round of 16, by the way - creating the opportunity for some payback over the 2002 quarterfinals.
A fully fit US team - with Onyewu, Demerit, Jones, Edu, and especially [fingers-crossed] Davies - has the potential to do pretty well. They could also go three and out, of course, but there's really only about a dozen teams in the world that are significantly better than us.
A fully fit US team - with Onyewu, Demerit, Jones, Edu, and especially [fingers-crossed] Davies - has the potential to do pretty well. They could also go three and out, of course, but there's really only about a dozen teams in the world that are significantly better than us.
Let's just hope Clint Dempsey is in peak form. I think he's going to be the key as he seems to be the one guy on the US team who seems to thrive playing the top teams. I'd bet a few pints he scores against England.
Freddy Adu apparently was on twitter immediately after the US drew England and Alexei Lalas made an on-air douchey comment towards Adu. Don't get me wrong -- unless a lot changes in six months Adu is nowhere close to the US' roster -- but there was nothing at all wrong with Adu's comments (IIRC, they were along the lines of, "I've never wanted anything more than to play in the World Cup next summer and I'm gonna work my ass off to try and be there.").
The hype for USA v England is going to be ridiculous. I'm glad the US gets England first rather than in game two or three when England has had some time to round into form a bit.
Does Italy have the easiest path to the second round? Possibly England or the Netherlands.
I think that alone changes it from "Draw at best" to "We might have a real shot"
It's not a "pitch", it's a field. You're a ####### American. It doesn't become a "pitch" because you're talking about soccer, any more than a truck becomes a "lorry" because it's carrying lemon curd.
I also have Serbia beating Ghana to the knockout phase. But I agree with the other 14 picks.
Yeah, not much between those two at the moment. I think Portugal's a bit deeper, but it'll probably come down to who's in better form between Ronaldo and Drogba. The former's still recovering from injury, whereas the latter's absolutely playing out of his mind at the moment. Honestly, I think Drogba could pretty much beat any team in the tournament almost single-handedly right now; I don't know what Ancelotti's done to him, but he's just looked unplayable lately.
Anyway, that's what tipped it for me when I was going through these earlier. I definitely reserve the right to change my mind before June.
Another tough decision. Serbia has some really impressive youngsters and are quite a technically gifted side. I just worry that they might be too wet behind the ears. And I really like Ghana's midfield core with Essien, Muntari, Annan, and Appiah (if he's fit) all in the mix. With those guys patrolling the middle of the park, Ghana will be tough to break down.
Geez. Am I allowed to call a cricket pitch a pitch?
Also, is anyone picking South Korea over Nigeria in B? I guess I thought they were a pretty decent team, but I'm only going from colloquial memory on that one.
Essien is perennially underrated, and is the main reason I'd pick Ghana over Serbia. The guy is ridiculously good. Over the past five years who in the world has been better?
That said, Serbia are a very, very good team. And Australia isn't bad, either. That's a rough group for everyone - including Germany.
Nigeria is not the team they were 10-15 years ago, but I don't think many people will.
Plus, while it would have been nice to draw South Africa from a winning standpoint, England is a fun matchup for us.
I think we are definitely favored to advance.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main