I don't think that USA fans are embarrased of the World Cup results, because their are no fans to speak of.

Hmmm... what a professionally ignorant way to apprach something you know little about, thanks for the feedback (and I am sincere about the thank you.)

I am not ignorant on the subject I am just pointing out the obvious that there aren't too many US citizens who get all excited about the World Cup soccor. Nothing against the sport but it is definately appreciated more in other countires, maybe that is why they perform better at the World Cup than the US does.

I'll admit that I let that #5 FIFA ranking go to my head. After the Italy game, though, I quickly understood that FIFA's refs were doing all they could to ensure that we would not advance.

I've watched the last 4 Cups and have always been left shaking my head at the refereeing, and not just in US games. For what is supposed to be the world's ultimate sports event, the refs are the center of the story far too often.

World Cup Fever, A.K.A.
American Sleeping Sickness

After the Italy game, I thought that maybe the ref had a bad day. BUT, after seeing what the ref did to us in the Ghana game and watching other World Cup games (Portugal-Netherlands), I'm convinced that FIFA wants a Germany-Brazil final, so everyone else has to be shown the door. But, then what else would you expect from a large, mutinational organization run by third-world countries just like the UN?

Now that the US is out - I am turning my attention to the Real American Football - the NFL and College Football and High School Football.

I am going to follow all the action at a cool new website - www.mysportshomepage.com

Well I've been following the sport since world cup '98 (with a little stint @ world cup '94, hey it was in the USA!).. I'd have to say it was luck at having been put in the group we were in...the shitty referees who seemed to dislike Americans (or the USA's style of playing), and a little bit of too much preperation. I've played the game quite a bit when I was young, and I'd have to say TOO much preperation about the other team can really ruin your mindset. I think too much stock was put into the Czech Republic's #2 ranking in the mindset of the American players, and they came out timid as hell. They finally realized...ah fuckit we really are this good, what the hell happened? and against Italy...we should have done better ('cept for the ref). Against Ghana....well we played our hearts out, Ghana gave as good as we did (I'd say two evenly matched teams...was a battle) but the ref decided..I don't like the US, and let's give them a screwball penalty kick.

I say either part from FIFA (just like we need to part from the UN) or go on an international drive to change the way FIFA wants the referees to call games...did anyone catch the Portugal-Netherlands game? Just horrible as well!

By the way, Soccer has a following most OLD PEOPLE in American can't fathom. Ask any person 25 years old and younger...and you'll find someone who played AYSO at the beginning of the "soccer mom" era, or someone who played in a club (like I did), or at least someone who knows about it!

Look at the growth of Sam's Army...the official fan club of the United States National Teams. Please stop spouting your ignorance before the rest of us (speaking of...Glenn Beck needs to be educated, spouting the ignorance he did on his TV show and radio program) who actually care about it.

My heart literally stopped when we elevated to the quarterfinals in 2002 when we defeated Mexico 2-0 in Korea/Japan. I think what killed us was this is the first cup where we went in with ANY expectations at all.

The bigger upset was the Czech republic, ranked 2nd (to our 5th!)...ALSO got sent home, losing to Ghana in an even worse loss than the USA game. I'd say we were on par with Italy and Ghana...all fairly evenly matched team.

Excuses, excuses, excuses. No team can blame their loss on anyone or anything but themselves. If you lose, you lose. So the ref makes a bad call, who put him in that situation in the first place? What keeps a team from overcomming bad calls? It happens to everyone but someone has to win. So rankings are higher, every game is mental, only a true player and team can get past that. And, is anyone super surprised anyway? Did you all really expect the US, a nation without much pride, to win this thing? If you did, open your eyes. It's not going to happen anytime in the near future.

Nobody expects us to win, even I don't expect that, but I was at least hoping for a strong enough showing to at least get to the round of 16...but we had the bad luck of the draw to be put into the "group of death", so named because of the difficulty of the bracket. In fact, most football (soccer) pundits put the Czechs and Italians going through in our group.

Who put the ref in that situation? I'd have to say the organization that analyzed him and decided he was going to be the select few to ref in the world cup. USA has quite a few FIFA Level 1 referees...none of them were chosen as referees, in fact none of the FIFA Level 2 USA refs were chosen as Assistant referees. The only USA Officials there are Fourth and Fifth officials. Bad refereeing can decide a game. In the Italy-Australia game, a penalty kick was awarded to Italy in the last 10 seconds of the game...and it was a dive...a complete and utter dive. That penalty kick ended in a goal that propelled Italy to the quarterfinals.

In the USA-Ghana game, same thing, just in the last moments of the first half. As in any sport, psychological effects of being a goal down like that can be devastating, especially when it was a screwed up call.

And besides Jill, just because you don't have any national pride or pride in our men's national soccer team, doesn't mean the rest of us can't have our own pride.

No offense, but you mispelled Pablo Mastroeni's last name ;)

I disagree that Eddie Pope did that well though, Gooch did amazing, so did Carlos Bocanegra (the other two defenders)

Henry, you get so defensive because you just can't see the big picture. Yes, I think it's great that you have such passion for the sport and for the team, but the truth is you really know nothing. If someone has to blame the failure of their team on the refs then they are completely clueless and won't accept the fact that their team may just not be good enough. I admit, many calls in this tournament have been horrific at best, but how many minutes are in a soccor game? Seriously, what keeps the team from scoring in all the time given to them? If you are a true athlete you know, the ball never lies. Plain and simple. And tell me this, how is a person to have pride in their nation when its people are more interested in wealth and power than those who are in need?

I think you're misreading my commentary. I in no way am "blaming" the referees. I'm actually a referee myself, so most of what I do is critiquing. Oddly enough, so is my dad, and when we watch games together, we tend to view it from a very interesting perspective, he from an accomplished referee's point of view (he's a state referee in California, now I believe he is emeritus, and he's done some college games as well), and me from a player's and basic referee's point of view.

I do however believe there is a host of reasons why we're going home. Over preperation ruined us against the Czech republic. As you said, the game is mental. Our team is quite good, which is WHY I was so dissapointed with their efforts against the Czechs. The team you saw play Italy was our team at its best, on par with some of the best of Europe. What I saw against the Czechs...I was unhappy with the way they played and the way Arena coached. That being said, someone had to go home anyway. We weren't called the "group of death" for nothing. The only surprise was Ghana, coming out like they did.

In a group of 4, 2 have to go home, 2 go on. We just happened to go home. But you know what? It's all behind me..and I'm looking forward to South Africa 2010. And besides...we can only get better!

That's the truth.

I saw in an article at www.ussoccer.com (if you want I can go re-find the link, but I'm too lazy right now), MLS is starting to showcase and sponsor young talent at an early age, sort of the way a lot of European clubs are doing. And as the article mentions, the program is only 2 years old in the states, while in England...the program is over 100 years old.

As an American who has followed the English Premier League and the World Cup for years (decades), I can tell you that I was more than disappointed. It's not just the the US team didn't go on: they were one of the worst teams there. Look at the statistics. Even better: look at the games themselves. Sure it's tough to be a goal down or to play in must-win games, but you play hard. You give it all, and you play to win.

The US team almost never had a sense of urgency, and didn't generate much of anything offensively. All that talent, and we put together a team that's about as good as Saudi Arabia. If they can't do better than that, then the US should be placed in a qualifying section with Mexico: if we can't beat Mexico we stay home. That will make room for another African or South American team.

I was thinking about this more last night, and I still believe that the US needs to compete directly against Mexico to qualify for the World Cup. FIFA was smart to put the US and Mexico into a league of their own with various Central American and Caribbean countries to let them get to the world cup. However, FIFA is cheating the rest of the world by picking too many countries from this league to qualify. The quality of play is just not good enough.

I got to thinking about Mexico and the US. What is the probability that if there was only one qualifying slot -- so that both teams would go all-out -- that the US could beat Mexico to go to the World Cup? I think it's only 5-10%. OK, what's the probability that Mexico can advance to the semi's? I'd say 10-20%. That says a lot about the US team doesn't it?

Another idea worth considering is the Cup of the Americas, one of the oldest tournaments around. I looked it up: there are 10 teams in the Copa América. What if the US, Mexico, Costa Rica, and a few others joined to make it 16? That would be interesting, wouldn't it. (Mexico has done it before and did well.) I'd like to see the US and Mexican teams play regularly against the South American teams in conditions that really matter. Let's see if the US can do something.

Kevino I've considered your feedback and I have a couple of points for you to consider.

The point of the CONCACAF Region is to improve the level of soccer in the area. After watching T&T compete in their group and the continued improvements in the federations of Panama, Costa Rica, T&T and the US has shown over the last 8 years and the teams continue to improve. If we reduce the amount of teams that come out of this region then we should also cut down the Asian Confederation because they seem about on par with CONCACAF. The world doesn't cater to the needs of US Soccer and it shouldn't at any point cater to our needs.

As to your (and ESPNSoccernet.com's) want for US Soccer to participate in Copa America; I think that it would greatly help our program advance. But we have problems with making that jump right away: first is the fact that the CONCACAF Gold Cup runs at the same time (or just about) the same time as Copa America and the USSF would have to move heaven and earth to get the Confederations to change their plans to allow the US to play in both tournaments. The simple answer would be leaving the Gold Cup but the USSF is what keeps the tournament in the region afloat.

The USSF is the major federation in our region, because of that we hold the responsiblitiy to the other federations to help the confederation to grow and develop so that world slowly comes to a more competitive playing field. We have to remember as much as we want to think of different ways to have a quick fix to the 2006 disapointment, our program has to go through the processes nesessary to get the results we need at World Cups. Right now the right process is to keep building soccer specific stadiums in the US so that MLS teams can control their own revenue and bring in better talent to our domestic league, while also using revenue to devlop the players of my generation (1980s born players) through reserve teams and youth academies. I would even go so far as to suggest that 2010 will be a good world cup for the US, but we won't see anything major from the US as a footballing nation until the years between 2010 and 2014 when the 80s kids and early 90s kids are the main generation of footballers in this country.

RE: The point of the CONCACAF Region is to improve the level of soccer in the area.
Yes, and preserve the interest of US and Mexican fans in particular. It's a good idea, but those teams cannot remain that isolated.

RE: They have improved [over more than 8 years]
Yes, and so has the rest of the world. Football has really come a long way in the last 20 years or so. Fans in England, for example, got used to a certain type of football over the years. Then Satellite TV showed them what other teams were doing, and it was eye-opening. A real revolution occurred in the game -- in England and elsewhere. (Now, of course, many of the best players are in the Premiership.)

RE: Cutting down the Asian conference
I agree 100%.

RE: Copa America
It's got to happen. If ESPN gets behind it, then maybe it will. Whatever it takes. If the US and Mexico expect to be able to compete at this level, then that's where we have to prove themselves.

RE: MLS stadiums
I'm sorry, but I just can't watch the MLS. While fan interest may depend on the MLS, the quality of play at this level may not. Good players -- IMHO -- should go to Europe or South America. They need to have those trainers, those managers, and play with other players who really know how the game should be played.

RE: 2010
I think that it will be more of the same. The state of the art is being developed on the fields of Europe and South America. While the USA develops in semi-isolation, they will still lag behind in creativity. When 2010 comes around, we'll see.

I see your points, and the more you debate them the better they become, espically the Copa America/Disney deal. I don't know how TV works and the power they have in the soccer world so I can't really comment on how that would become a possibility. I can comment on the soccer side being in the U-20 National Pool, I can promise you that the level of play in the U-23, U-20 and U-17 levels is on par with other youth teams in the world. We advance to the knockout rounds in European Tournaments on a regular basis. The problem here is that we don't have regular places to play outside of College and the Flordia Academy. After soccer season in college this pass year I was out of range of a USL Premier Development League team location wise and the college team was on break so I had to play Intermurals to get touches on the ball every week in a game situation.

With MLS teams getting control of their own stadiums as they are all the time they can afford the youth academies and reserve teams that European teams have. This would allow more players my age who haven't had an opportunity to be devolped at a professional level.

We've been on par in the youth area for years. Again, look at our current stars, all the 24 year olds...gooch, landon, demarcus, convey, dempsey, bocanegra...all of them were on the same U-17 and U-20 teams that did so well in europe and south america. In fact, in the same tournament (the US got knocked out in the semifinals I think, U-17 in 1999), Landon got the golden ball, Demarcus got the Silver for first and second best players of the tournament respectively. I really think our older stars bowing out to be a good thing. I remember thinking the same thing when our first stars in the international arena bowed out after 94 or 98 (think Lalas, Harkes, Dooley, Caliguri, Ramos, Jones, Balboa, etc...), and the 2nd generation players showed up, we really showed the world what we have the potential to do in 2002. I think any single time there is a transition (old stars leaving, younger stars taking over), we'll do poorly, and I think that happens everywhere! Remember what happened to Portugal in 2002? They were supposedly the "golden generation", however that golden generation were all the older stars! Same thing happened in 1998, now its happening in 2006. When the quality of play has reached a certain point, then I sincerely hope these transition periods won't happen, that we will have enough amazing players that we will be able to do well no matter who we have. I think Brazil is in one of those periods right now, the only reason they scrambled together wins was because of their quality of players. Otherwise, they really did piss-poor as a team.

NGordon:

I agree: I think that youth-wise, the US does well. We have a lot of programs to encourage young players to take up the sport and develop. I also think that having kids go to school instead of signing up with clubs at an early age is a good thing because the ones that don't make it in the pros have nothing. The problem is that at the highest level the real learning of individual skills is done by the seasoned pros teaching the young guns. (Particularly true of my step-son's experiences.) The MLS can hire retired players to teach, but even their knowledge is a bit out-of-date. Hiring foreign players may help, but better is for really good US players to Europe to ply their trade.

Good luck to you!

Henry:

You're right about transitions, but the problems of the US team (and others) is more basic. And we are improving, but everyone else is too. The level of play at the highest level is, at times, astonishing. You sit in the stands and you can see the possibilities. But when you look at a team that is boxed-in, with the defense having everything locked-down, and suddonly the guy with the ball makes a great play and a chance develops, you just look in awe and say, "Look. At. THAT! I didn't see THAT!"

Brazil is one of those teams, at times. Amazing players that never came together as a team this year. I don't think that it was a transition so much as failed chemistry.

You know what I think is funny is that the US has to be good at everything. Why is it unacceptable for the US to lose to another country? Why can't the rest of the world have the power in one part of life since they lose so many other fights? It's like what happened at the last winter olympics, everyone criticited the US teams because they didn't win the most medals, but instead failed to realize that they still won a lot and were very successful. Just give the good teams the glory they deserve and stop shunning those who donnot perform to your oh so demanding expectations.

JoJo:

Your question about American's thirst for being number one is answered so easily that as a people we do forget about it from time to time. The answer is: Read up on the US history with the Soviets in the cold war. Everyone born in this country from 1945 on have been conditioned by our culture to be better then the Soviets at everything that can have a winner and a loser. Since the Wall came down in 1990 the rule has changed from beat the Soviets to "Beat everyone who isn't American." The Cold War is the sole reason that the "American Way" involves winning and everything less then winning is in a way a dissapointment.

That is the lamest excuse I have ever heard. You are looking way too hard to find a reason. All I am saying is that y'all need to chill and realize that the US isn't the best at everything. Seriously.