By Andrew Dixon -- MIAMI, FL (Oct 9, 2009) USSoccerPlayers -- Whenever critics around the world want to minimize the accomplishments of the United States National Team, the one refrain they always come back to is that relative weakness of the CONCACAF region. It's always "The only reason you qualify for so many World Cups is that you play in a weak confederation. If you put the US in (insert-superior-confederation-here) you'd NEVER make the World Cup."
Now some of that might have died down when the US was 44:30 from winning the Confederations Cup. They also 1) never say this about Mexico or 2) ever acknowledge the Faroe Islands, Lichtensteins, Lesothos, Kenyas, Thailands or Bolivias in their midst.
Don't get it twisted. I'm not saying qualifying from CONCACAF is the same as the year and a half marathon in CONMEBOL or is as daunting as trips to Wembley or Berlin. But this year's edition of the Hex has been a lot more challenging than anyone could have imagined. Just four points separates first from fourth going into these two final match days.
It's this Grown Man's Opinion that this competitive Hex bodes well for the US at the 2010 World Cup, assuming we go through.
In 2005 the US finished first on goal differential and qualified with a few games to spare. We secured those tickets to Germany beating Mexico, who had been talking enough trash to get jump start the sustainability movement on their own. That masked how relatively easy our final qualification round had been. We only dropped points in the Azteca and in Saprissa when it mattered. The draw in Guatemala City happened after we had qualified. We basically steamrolled every one else.
Yes, you could argue that Trinidad and Tobago eventually qualified for the 2006 World Cup, but the US beat them handily both times. Guatemala was overwhelmed and Panama's lack of experience was quite apparent, especially after their most experienced player, Julio Dely Valdes, retired right before the start of the Hex.
Contrast this with the Hex of 2001. The US qualified behind an impressive Costa Rican side and another strong Mexico side. What made that particular Hex so competitive, was the collective strength of the teams that didn't make it.
Jamaica held the US to a tie in Kingston and was trying desperately to repeat their feat of four years earlier. That squad had several European and MLS based players that were capable. Same with T&T, though they exited early. Honduras had an exciting offense led by Carlos Pavon and a tough defense that Samuel Caballero marshaled. They were fearless on the road as the US found out of their own building in RFK, but couldn't win at home.
The overall strength of those five other sides had the US sweating until Honduras inexplicably lost at home to T&T. It made the US rely a little more on daring creativity and skill, such as the unpredictability of Clint Mathis and the confidence of a finally healthy John O'Brien. It also showed what the US didn't have, that bite in the middle of the park that eventually became Pablo Mastroeni.
In other words, when the US cruised through the final round of qualifying none of their weaknesses were exposed and it may have created a false sense of security ahead of the tournament. When they were truly made to sweat, as they were during that late summer and early fall stretch of the 2001, it allowed the US to address their shortcomings and be more prepared for the coming year.
Now, of course, when it comes to preparation, the qualification process isn't the end-all and be-all for any CONCACAF team. The preparation matches teams play in the run-in to the World Cup are equally important. The past three World Cup cycles have been no different.
When I think back to Steve Sampson's greatest failures as coach of the 1998 World Cup you have to start with his dropping John Harkes. He also apparently started over-coaching when he felt the pressure of the Hex. With Eric Wynalda still recovering from injury leaving out an in-form Roy Lassiter didn't make much sense to me either. But to me his choice of friendlies in the run-in to the Cup was no less criminal.
After the Gold Cup, he scheduled Holland and Belgium, which were sensible choices considering their relative strengths. Yes, they lost both games but it was experience that was of paramount. He also scheduled a match against Paraguay which also was a solid choice. It was after this match that Harkes was dropped.
After changing the lineup but winning 3-0 against Austria, he played two matches against teams that, quite frankly, should have played not part in anyone's World Cup preparations, Macedonia - a country with a population about the size of Brooklyn - and Kuwait.
Kuwait? Really?
Obviously that didn't turn out so well. They drew 0-0 with Macedonia and beat a Kuwaiti side that were just happy to be there. The timing of playing such weak competition, especially when the team was trying to adjust to the ill-fated 3-6-1 and the loss of its captain, was ridiculous.
The 2006 build up wasn't much better. After getting whipped by Germany in Dortmund in a March friendly, the US beat a Jamaica side that didn't even make the Hex, lost to a Morocco side that finished second in their qualifying group, but then finished their preparations up with matches against South American perennial also-rans Venezuela and Latvia.
Really? And people wonder WHY the US was unprepared, as Brian McBride said after the debacle against the Czechs?
Compare that with the USA's preparations for the 2002 World Cup. After capturing the Gold Cup, they had friendlies against against Italy, Ecuador, Germany, Mexico, Ireland, Uruguay and Holland. Yes, there were some friendlies in which they dominated CONCACAF foes Honduras and Jamaica, but those two games were exceptions. Considering the caliber of the other teams they faced in the spring of 2002, the US was clearly more prepared for the World Cup than they were in '98 or '06. I don't doubt that it played a major role in their successful World Cup campaign.
So assuming the US gets through these next two matches, I think the relative difficulty of this qualification process will help them in the long run. At the same time, it will be equally important that the coaching staff and the Federation line up top notch friendlies for the team next year. I think history has shown that a combination of the two produces the best chance for the US to make its mark at World Cup level.
Then again, hey, all this is just the Opinion of One Grown Man, looking for a place to handover my fifteen bucks for Saturday night's game.
In 2005 the US finished first on goal differential and qualified with a few games to spare. We secured those tickets to Germany beating Mexico, who had been talking enough trash to get jump start the sustainability movement on their own. That masked how relatively easy our final qualification round had been. We only dropped points in the Azteca and in Saprissa when it mattered. The draw in Guatemala City happened after we had qualified. We basically steamrolled every one else.
Yes, you could argue that Trinidad and Tobago eventually qualified for the 2006 World Cup, but the US beat them handily both times. Guatemala was overwhelmed and Panama's lack of experience was quite apparent, especially after their most experienced player, Julio Dely Valdes, retired right before the start of the Hex.
Contrast this with the Hex of 2001. The US qualified behind an impressive Costa Rican side and another strong Mexico side. What made that particular Hex so competitive, was the collective strength of the teams that didn't make it.
Jamaica held the US to a tie in Kingston and was trying desperately to repeat their feat of four years earlier. That squad had several European and MLS based players that were capable. Same with T&T, though they exited early. Honduras had an exciting offense led by Carlos Pavon and a tough defense that Samuel Caballero marshaled. They were fearless on the road as the US found out of their own building in RFK, but couldn't win at home.
The overall strength of those five other sides had the US sweating until Honduras inexplicably lost at home to T&T. It made the US rely a little more on daring creativity and skill, such as the unpredictability of Clint Mathis and the confidence of a finally healthy John O'Brien. It also showed what the US didn't have, that bite in the middle of the park that eventually became Pablo Mastroeni.
In other words, when the US cruised through the final round of qualifying none of their weaknesses were exposed and it may have created a false sense of security ahead of the tournament. When they were truly made to sweat, as they were during that late summer and early fall stretch of the 2001, it allowed the US to address their shortcomings and be more prepared for the coming year.
Now, of course, when it comes to preparation, the qualification process isn't the end-all and be-all for any CONCACAF team. The preparation matches teams play in the run-in to the World Cup are equally important. The past three World Cup cycles have been no different.
When I think back to Steve Sampson's greatest failures as coach of the 1998 World Cup you have to start with his dropping John Harkes. He also apparently started over-coaching when he felt the pressure of the Hex. With Eric Wynalda still recovering from injury leaving out an in-form Roy Lassiter didn't make much sense to me either. But to me his choice of friendlies in the run-in to the Cup was no less criminal.
After the Gold Cup, he scheduled Holland and Belgium, which were sensible choices considering their relative strengths. Yes, they lost both games but it was experience that was of paramount. He also scheduled a match against Paraguay which also was a solid choice. It was after this match that Harkes was dropped.
After changing the lineup but winning 3-0 against Austria, he played two matches against teams that, quite frankly, should have played not part in anyone's World Cup preparations, Macedonia - a country with a population about the size of Brooklyn - and Kuwait.
Kuwait? Really?
Obviously that didn't turn out so well. They drew 0-0 with Macedonia and beat a Kuwaiti side that were just happy to be there. The timing of playing such weak competition, especially when the team was trying to adjust to the ill-fated 3-6-1 and the loss of its captain, was ridiculous.
The 2006 build up wasn't much better. After getting whipped by Germany in Dortmund in a March friendly, the US beat a Jamaica side that didn't even make the Hex, lost to a Morocco side that finished second in their qualifying group, but then finished their preparations up with matches against South American perennial also-rans Venezuela and Latvia.
Really? And people wonder WHY the US was unprepared, as Brian McBride said after the debacle against the Czechs?
Compare that with the USA's preparations for the 2002 World Cup. After capturing the Gold Cup, they had friendlies against against Italy, Ecuador, Germany, Mexico, Ireland, Uruguay and Holland. Yes, there were some friendlies in which they dominated CONCACAF foes Honduras and Jamaica, but those two games were exceptions. Considering the caliber of the other teams they faced in the spring of 2002, the US was clearly more prepared for the World Cup than they were in '98 or '06. I don't doubt that it played a major role in their successful World Cup campaign.
So assuming the US gets through these next two matches, I think the relative difficulty of this qualification process will help them in the long run. At the same time, it will be equally important that the coaching staff and the Federation line up top notch friendlies for the team next year. I think history has shown that a combination of the two produces the best chance for the US to make its mark at World Cup level.
Then again, hey, all this is just the Opinion of One Grown Man, looking for a place to handover my fifteen bucks for Saturday night's game.
Andrew Dixon is a soccer writer based in Miami and a weekly columnist for USSoccerPlayers. Contact him at: golnoir@golnoir.net
