Americans unique view on sport

  So as I contemplate relevant perspectives that come up in covering international soccer issues, I am frequently faced with the different way the United States views sports. The current NBA playoffs are a prime example. The Golden State Warriors won an NBA record 73 games this season. They only lost 9 times all season, yet here they are 1 game from being eliminated from the playoffs. Pundits are claiming that their season record will be a waste if they do not bring home the championship. This ultimate value placed on some little tournament at the end of the season is a uniquely American obsession. In all the sports leagues of Europe and especially soccer, since they were the O.G. of sports leagues, it is the season that matters, not a crap shoot at the end. If the top 8 teams in the English premier league had entered into some sort of tournament after the season and Arsenal or Man City had prevailed, what a shame that would have been for Leicester. Instead, soccer places prime emphasis on the months long season and how a team performs over that period.
  So why does every American sport insist on having some contest after the season, a second season if you will? I think the genesis for this phenomenon can be traced to baseball. Baseball was the original sports league in the USA. There were two leagues and the teams played all summer, only against those in their league. Winning the pennant, the season, was the ultimate goal, just like the soccer leagues of Europe, but then the question of which league was better persisted. As such a post season contest was held. the World Series. The champions of the two leagues played each other in "best of" format until 1969 when the leagues each expanded and split. They then held a divisional series to determine the league winners and the ever growing playoff format was hatched.
  As other sports leagues came online, first hockey, then football and basketball, they each looked to emulate the successful format of baseball. The teams would play a season that would qualify the top teams for the chance at the end of the season tournament and the league championship. Of course as critics would point out, the lure of money has forced the growth of the playoffs, the season has become less and less meaningful. In the NBA, more than half the teams make the playoffs, and often with losing regular season records.
  The MLS has also fallen victim to this Americanization. While adopting many of the traditions of their mother leagues around the world, they still call  champion the team that wins the end of season playoffs. They do give the regular season winner a title. They call it the Supporters Shield, but it pales in significance to the MLS Cup.
  So what is the significance of these American differences? I purpose that they are a function of a couple uniquely American traits; the fondness for second chances and the obsession with fairness. The second chance principal is in full view in the playoff system, where mistakes undertaken during the season can be overcome at the end. Europe feels no such need to coddle its sports teams, or its citizens. The fairness doctrine, which was chronicled as far back as De Tocqueville in his observation in the 1800's, is even more ingrained. All the major American sports have a draft, where the worst teams get a chance to build by adding the best new players. The leagues all offer some sort of revenue sharing to make sure the small clubs have a chance to compete. most of the leagues have type of salary cap to limit the powerful from taking over. The only league without a salary cap, baseball, is also light on the other restraints as well. This makes sense, being that they are the oldest sport and were originally founded more organically and less top down, but even baseball has started to worry about parity and the draft, a previous MLB afterthought, is gaining in importance.
  European soccer leagues have none of these controls. Teams do not draft. They can spend whatever they want, and often do. There is little to no revenue sharing. The big get bigger and leagues have little top down balance. Europe is comfortable with a sort of class system. They realize the world is not fair, that the rich get rich and the poor will probably spend their whole lives wrapped in the nobility of poverty. Americans are aware that the world works this way, but we bristle at such unfairness when it comes to sport. In sport we hope to offer a fair chance to everyone; a level playing field.
  Such a mirror on life is one of the main reasons that I enjoy sports. It reflects us at our best and at our worst. It highlights our differences and it shows our common humanity. Success and failure played out on a stage for us to cheer. Soccer, with it roots in almost every country on the planet does this better than most, and as the vines of the sport continue to envelope and overtake the American fan we too become a section of the garden known as World Football.

What is the Copa America?

   This summer the Copa America comes to the United States. It is the 45th playing and 100th anniversary of this tournament that pits the nations of North, South, and Central America against one another. Due to the minimal history of the game in the U.S., we do not have a storied past in this tournament and we have never hosted.
  There are 16 teams set out in 4 groups playing in 10 cities around the country. The tournament runs from June 3-26. The USA plays on the first day, June 3rd, against Columbia in Santa Clara and the final will be held on the 26th in Met-life stadium in East Rutherford N.J.
  I will be going over the 4 groups and the match-ups that they present this week, along with my picks, but for now here is a list of the teams.


  The top 2 teams in each group advance to the quarter finals. You can see from the draw that the USA is by no means assured of advancing, although they need to believe they can, and the bookmakers have them just ahead of Costa Rica and Paraguay.
  Every game will be carried on TV on Fox Sports 1 and Fox Sports 2. Since the tournament is on our turf, we have the advantage of the games being played at near normal times. None of the 4am kick offs that international soccer sometimes submits us to.
  So clear out some time, and wash your lucky jersey and lets get ready to watch some soccer. Remember, what the lesson of 5000-1 Leicester, Champions of English Football has taught us, anything is possible.
  I.......I BELIEVE...I BELIEVE THAT....I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN WIN!!!

COPA America!

http://www.ca2016.com/matches

It promises to ba a great tournament this summer. Great excuse for sitting indoors in air conditioning and watching TV. Overview on the tournament and teams to follow!

USA

So what a super exciting game yesterday. Obviously the US fans are disappointed, since we came 30 seconds from a great win and a spot in the next round. It is strange how these things work. If the US had scored the equalizer 30 seconds before the end, the fans would be ecstatic. Yet here we are with the same result and we are down. The US gave up a stupid goal in the first few minutes and then struggled to get the lead the rest of the game. In some ways, conceding the early goal was good for the US. It opened up play and allowed the US to show what they can do. The US looked dangerous at times, and outside the early mistake, the defense looked solid. When the 2 US goals came, they felt deserved, but Portugal showed their class, and even though they were 2ounded and playing chase most of the afternoon, they did not give up. Following a mistake from Bradley at midfield (I thought Bradley played a weak game all day), they found the one moment of skill at the very end to tie the game.
  So what now? The US has numerous ways to progress...and a few ways to be eliminated.  Lets look at how scoring in the group stage is calculated. A team gets 3 points for a win, and 1 for a tie, and 0 for a loss. At the end of group play, if two teams finish with the same points, than the first tie breaker is goal differential, and the second is goals scored. So a 2-0 win is better than a 1-0 win, and a 2-2 tie, is better than a 0-0 tie. Head to head play does not come into the tiebreaker.
   The USA's next game is against Germany who have the same number of points as the US, but are ahead on goal differential. Both teams have 4 points. Ghana and Portugal each have 1 point.  If either the US or Germany win the last game, they win the group. The loser would have 4 points. If one of the teams in the Ghana/Portugal game wins, they will have 4 points. So the tiebreaker will depend goals scored. If the Ghana/Portugal game ends in a tie, then both Germany and the US advance no matter what. Also, if the US/Germany game ends in a tie, than they both advance with 5 points. The games are played simultaneously in a hopes to avoid match fixing. So this leaves the question, should the US and Germany just play for a tie? I would say yes. Being aggressive and fighting for the win, leaves you exposed and open to losing. If the goal is to win the WC, than advancing is the goal.  It is really not a lot different than a team resting their players in the last games of a season once they made the playoffs. Why risk it, whether you are Germany or USA? I know it is not a popular view, but I hope to see the worlds most boring 0-0 tie on Thursday.

Saturdays games

Saturday saw both Group F games as well as one of the Group G games.
  In the morning game, Argentina struggled with Iran for 90 minutes before a Messi strike from the top of the box gave the South American team the win. To be truthful, it was not a very impressive display from Argentina. They showed a lack of width in the forward third. They had only one point of attack and that was through the middle. They are extremely adept at this, but it does not work when a team packs in the middle on defense. Argentina will have success against offensive minded teams, but against teams with strong disciplined central defenders, it will be a struggle. We also saw Iran have some success on the break. The Argentinian defenders lack of speed was shown. Watch for this to be an issue as the tournament progresses.
  The second game saw Bosnia fall to Nigeria, and thus out of the tournament. While I picked Nigeria to advance, and it looks like they will, I must say that I felt Bosnia was the better team on the field. They had a beautiful goal disallowed for a poor offsides call, and they have an argument that the Nigerian goal was the product of an offensive foul. I am sure they feel cheated, but these things happen in soccer. Over time, the fates balance out, but on any given day, it can be cruel. Nigeria will have to show more than speed to get results in the knockout round.
  The other  game on Saturday was half of Group G. Germany played Ghana in a tremendously exciting back and forth match that saw Germany score a late goal and earn a tie. The Germans looked the better team for most of the first half but failed to score. In the second half they got an early goal, and just when it looked like they might take charge, Ghana struck twice on the counter and took the lead. For the rest of the match Ghana showed that a good offense was the best defense. They outplayed Germany, but a couple substitutes on the deep German bench turned momentum a the tied was deserved.  For the US, this was a good result, because now a win against Portugal guarantees a spot in the second round. Ties and loses , also leave a chance, but why make it so difficult? They need to take out the guess work and secure the 3 points. We shall see.

Results of Group D games

Well Group D has now played 2 games, and 2 things are clear. England is going home after the first round, and Costa Rica, and perhaps the CONCACAF  region as a whole are better than people think.
Yesterday England and Uruguay played in a game that both needed to win. England lost 2-1, after losing to Italy 2-1 in the previous game. After the loss, they had only the slimmest chance to get out of the group, and those hopes were dashed when Costa Rica won today. The failure to advance is particularly painful for England because they really did not play that poorly. They have played worse in other tournaments and still advanced. Yet what plaques England is what always does. They play scared and tight and nervous. Despite any false bravado, they do not believe they will win. They are always waiting for the other shoe to drop. It is the same reason they fail in penalty kick shoot-outs. Everyone knows nerves kill in shoot-outs. England played tight and that led to the defensive mistakes that resulted in goals ( somewhat against the run of play) in both loses. Of course losing reinforces the doubt and the nerves and now England is mired in a 50 year old cycle that talent alone will not erase.
  Uruguay found a way to win. The return of Suarez from a knee injury was the key. He was out of shape, and not uber aggressive, but he has the touch of a goal scorer, and he pounced on the England miscues and made them pay. After watching Uruguay play their 2 games, I am not convinced they will beat Italy, but they have given themselves a chance, and that is all their fans asked for.
     Today, Costa Rica got a great result and beat Italy to ensure a place in the knock out round. It is only the second time that they have gotten that far, but it is no fluke. They out hustled and out played the Italians for most of the match. They created goal scoring chances from midfield, never letting Italy get in a groove. After beating Uruguay, they actually look to be the best team in this group. No one will want to play them in the round of 16. If the US can get a result in the next two games, we will probably have 3 teams from our region in the final 16, and that has never happened in any previous WC.
  Italy did not look sharp today, and most of that credit can go to Costa Rica, but they are still my favorite to get out of the group over Uruguay. They will not make the kind of mistakes that the South Americans capitalized on in the win over England. Italy will play with in themselves and find away to penetrate the Uruguayan defense. Still, it will be a winner take all game and it should be a classic. The kind of match the World Cup is all about.

Nightly Telecast

So I am going to write about today's games in the morning, but I wanted to comment a little bit about the nightly WC studio telecast. The show has a great set, and a decent format, but it is so amateurish it is amazing, but what is kind of surprising, I really like it. The announcers all have good insight and great information, they are just not polished. Mike Tirico is the only professional broadcaster, and he tries to keep it moving. He might feel frustrated, but it does not show. He seems to enjoy the different personalities. They have players from around the globe who add some perspective. They do some human interest, but not to much. I even enjoy Alexi Lalas on this show. He is loud and opinionated, but he is the worst soccer player they have on the set, so the other guys keep him in line. I guess it is refreshing to see an under produced, yet information filled show with what appear to be real guys + Julie Foudy.