“I’m sure if the teams were reversed.”

Lol okay Mr. Whatabout, that’s not how this works

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not just the score line, it's the quality of play. We had no cohesion and only had 38% possession (ESPN number) and only 2 shots on goal. Our two opportunistic goals make the result look more respectable, but we did not look like we belonged on the same field.

Our two goals weren't opportunistic...they both came from very nice build up play.

You are mistaken. The first goal came from a long cross with our midfielder having to sprint extra hard just to get to it. The second one came from a direct two-pass counter (Green to Weah to Wood) with a through ball to Wood who was sandwiched between two defenders. Both goals came from "low probability of success" plays.

I don't see anyone complaining about Colombia's "low probability of success" plays...James' crazy shot on the first goal, the scissor kick, and the gift from Robinson's misplays.
I'm sure if the teams were reversed, you'd be complaining that the US didn't have anyone that could make a pinpoint pass like Weah, or someone with the filed vision to make the long cross to start off the other goal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not just the score line, it's the quality of play. We had no cohesion and only had 38% possession (ESPN number) and only 2 shots on goal. Our two opportunistic goals make the result look more respectable, but we did not look like we belonged on the same field.

Our two goals weren't opportunistic...they both came from very nice build up play.

You are mistaken. The first goal came from a long cross with our midfielder having to sprint extra hard just to get to it. The second one came from a direct two-pass counter (Green to Weah to Wood) with a through ball to Wood who was sandwiched between two defenders. Both goals came from "low probability of success" plays.

Anonymous wrote:It is not just the score line, it's the quality of play. We had no cohesion and only had 38% possession (ESPN number) and only 2 shots on goal. Our two opportunistic goals make the result look more respectable, but we did not look like we belonged on the same field.

Our two goals weren't opportunistic...they both came from very nice build up play.

It is not just the score line, it's the quality of play. We had no cohesion and only had 38% possession (ESPN number) and only 2 shots on goal. Our two opportunistic goals make the result look more respectable, but we did not look like we belonged on the same field.

Losing by 2 goals isn’t getting crushed. But let’s be real, they did not do “pretty well”. They got played off the park. Though to be fair, it was against Colombia.

Anonymous wrote:It's been over a year since USMNT had a head coach. We just got crushed by Colombia. Michael Bradley was called up to provide leadership after his club failed to qualify for MLS play offs. Are we making progress? Who is going to be hired as the head coach? Are we wasting valuable time?

They said the new coach would be announced around Nov. 1.
They didn't get crushed. They were missing their three best midfielders and did pretty well against one of the better teams in the world.
The core of the team is both younger and better than the US has ever had, with far better team pedigrees.
Heading in the right direction.

And yes, Bradley should never be on the field again.

It's been over a year since USMNT had a head coach. We just got crushed by Colombia. Michael Bradley was called up to provide leadership after his club failed to qualify for MLS play offs. Are we making progress? Who is going to be hired as the head coach? Are we wasting valuable time?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyways, how did you guys think our boys did against Mexico?

I think they struggled until the Mexican player had an unnecessary and reckless tackle that resulted in a red card. I did like how Miazga taunted Lainez though.

That was one of the most cringeworthy moments I've seen in sports in quite a while. Not because he read trash talking or trying to get under his skin.

It was just soooo lame!

Short jokes? Really? That's the best we could do? Weak.

But he did get under their skin. The red card came within a couple of minutes and the player who got it for reckless tackle admitted that he was upset about the taunts.

^^ *was* not read. Autocorrect...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyways, how did you guys think our boys did against Mexico?

I think they struggled until the Mexican player had an unnecessary and reckless tackle that resulted in a red card. I did like how Miazga taunted Lainez though.

That was one of the most cringeworthy moments I've seen in sports in quite a while. Not because he read trash talking or trying to get under his skin.

It was just soooo lame!

Short jokes? Really? That's the best we could do? Weak.

The players need a real coach to realize their potential. They'd better hire a world class coach given that they took almost a year to look around.

There’s some potential at least

Anonymous wrote:Anyways, how did you guys think our boys did against Mexico?

I think they struggled until the Mexican player had an unnecessary and reckless tackle that resulted in a red card. I did like how Miazga taunted Lainez though.

Anyways, how did you guys think our boys did against Mexico?