Did It Really Matter?

Yesterday's game was a good effort by the U.S. team. The bottom line is, they made it to where they should have, and anything more would have been icing on the cake. It's probably better that they went out valiantly against Ghana, because quite frankly, I think it would have been ugly had the U.S. had to play Uruguay in the quarterfinals. We saw it happen in three out of the four games that the U.S. played; they gave up the early goal, and it's extremely hard to come back in soccer. The fact that they managed to come back two of the three times is pretty incredible in itself. Yes, it's hard to accept defeat against a team in consecutive World Cups, but sometimes that's just the way things go. I'm not sure how much this will help soccer in the long run, but it certainly hasn't hurt the popularity in the U.S. like another early exit in the group stage would have done.

On the bright side, at least we won't have to wonder "what could have been" for the next four years as England and Mexico will likely have to do. Both were the victim of missed calls by the referees; in the England game, a shot by Frank Lampard that clearly crossed the goal line was not ruled a goal. This would have tied the game at 2-2 in the first half, and although Germany went on to win the game 4-1, could have had an impact on the game. According to England coach Fabio Capello, "We could have played a different style" had the goal counted. So, are you saying that had the goal gone in, you would have changed your style of play from that point on? Since we're in the knockout stage, I'm pretty sure the name of the game is to aggressively attack and try to win instead of play for a tie. How exactly does that style of play change whether the game is 2-1 or tied? The fact of the matter is, England did not play well throughout their stay in this World Cup, and one goal was not going to change the way they played. Germany was the better team, and that was evident by the fact that they scored four goals for the second time this World Cup.

Mexico on the other hand was victim of those all too common offside calls that aren't called. In the 26th minute, Argentina's Lionel Messi headed the ball to Carlos Tevez, who was clearly behind all the Mexican defenders, and Tevez promptly put the ball into the back of the net. However, like the England vs. Germany game, you're splitting hairs if you argue that the missed call was a game changer. Argentina won the game 3-1, and was in control for most of the game other than the first couple of minutes. With this being said, what we have here are a couple of cases of overmatched teams on the wrong end of a call arguing that they were cheated. Sorry guys, but regardless of the calls, you didn't deserve to win.

Tomorrow I'll begin with my "Live from Omaha" posts. It's not really anything special; basically, I'll just be writing about my experience at the College World Series finals in addition to the other topics that I would originally cover. Other than the actual baseball part, I'll also comment on the waiting in line, the food, the atmosphere, and of course, the ladies. I'm looking forward to it, and hopefully this lighter tone in my writing will attract more than my usual readership, which typically maxes out at about four.



- K. Becks

Time To Exceed Expectations

Two weeks ago when the World Cup began, the United States advancing to the knockout round and keeping it close against predicted Group D winner Germany would have been enough to satisfy both hardcore and casual fans in the States. Those set of expectations have been wiped right off the board, however, as the United States looks at a game against Ghana and a potential quarterfinal match against either Uruguay or South Korea. When you think of soccer powerhouses, none of those names come to mind (unless you want to go back to the 1930's, in which case Uruguay would probably be on your short list). So, does that mean that the United States should be the favorite to advance to the semi-finals? Well, let's see.

Uruguay

This team looked very good in the group stage, getting a tie against France and then dispatching both South Africa and Mexico. What is scary about this team is that not only can they score (they had three goals against South Africa), but they didn't allow even one goal throughout the entire group stage. Teams that can score are the ones that do well in the knockout stage, but it also helps to have a stifling defense in case of an off day offensively. Also, Diego Forlan is the best player on any of the four teams in this section of the knockout stage.

South Korea

Of the teams in this section, South Korea is the only team with recent experience playing in a game beyond the Round of 16. With that being said, it is obvious that South Korea will not be intimidated by any of the teams that they may have to play. The Koreans did not look good against Argentina, and unfortunately, they have to play another South American team in their first knockout round game. Uruguay plays a similar style of soccer that Argentina plays, so South Korea will need to be more sound defensively if they want another shot at the semi-finals.

Ghana

Quite honestly, I would have expected Ghana to look a little better in group play than they did. Other than a penalty kick goal against Serbia, Ghana did not do much on the offensive end. Talent wise, Ghana has a slight edge on the United States. However, Ghana is a young team, and will be going up against a squad that remembers the loss they suffered in group play in 2006 that sent them home early. The key for this team will be to capitalize on their scoring opportunities, and try to create those opportunities often.

United States

There is no doubt that they like to keep things interesting for the entire game, scoring late goals that make us all breathe a sigh of relief. Based on FIFA's rankings, the U.S. is the best team in this section. However, as I mentioned earlier, rankings mean little when you actually put the men on the field to play. The United States has looked much more capable of scoring goals than Ghana, and although not all of them have counted, I see the U.S. having the edge offensively. However, other than Tim Howard, I am still a little uneasy about the defense, especially early on in the match. This is really true of every team from here on out, but the United States truly needs a complete game on both ends if they want to make it to the semi-finals.

So, who is moving on and who is going home? Well, take a look at my Knockout Round Predictions: Version 2 to find out what I think will happen.

Round of 16

Uruguay vs. South Korea
Winner: Uruguay
United States vs. Ghana
Winner: United States
Netherlands vs. Slovakia
Winner: Netherlands
Brazil vs. Chile
Winner: Brazil
England vs. Germany
Winner: Germany
Argentina vs. Mexico
Winner: Argentina
Paraguay vs. Japan
Winner: Paraguay
Spain vs. Portugal
Winner: Spain

Quarterfinals

Uruguay vs. United States
Winner: Uruguay

Am I anti-American? No. I will be cheering for the United States and I absolutely hope that the Americans pull off the win and prove me wrong. However, from a neutral standpoint, I see Uruguay as the better team. The U.S. hasn't seen anyone like Diego Forlan, and yes, I am aware that they have already faced Wayne Rooney. However, unlike Rooney, Forlan is playing well in this tournament, and will be a handful for the U.S. defense. My heart is with the Americans, but my head tells me Uruguay.

Netherlands vs. Brazil
Winner: Brazil
Germany vs. Argentina
Winner: Argentina
Paraguay vs. Spain
Winner: Spain

Semi-Finals

Uruguay vs. Brazil
Winner: Brazil
Argentina vs. Spain
Winner: Spain

Third Place Game

Uruguay vs. Argentina
Winner: Argentina

Final

Brazil vs. Spain
Winner: Spain


So, there are my updated predictions. South America has proven, both in this World Cup and in past ones, that they travel extremely well, and I believe that in the knockout round, they will continue to play outstanding soccer. However, when all is said and done, I still believe that Spain will be hoisting the trophy. Now all that's left is for the games to begin. Tomorrow at around 2:30 p.m. Eastern time, we will see if the United States will in fact exceed expectations.



- K. Becks

That's How We Like It? Yea, Actually, It Is

Once again the United States soccer team defined "late game drama" in their 1-0 heart stopping victory over Algeria that propelled them to the top of Group C and earned them a date with Ghana in the Round of 16. If any team in the World Cup deserved to make it to the knockout round, it was the U.S. team. They battled back from not one, but two, missed calls that cost them crucial goals. I understand that in soccer this kind of thing happens quite frequently as they do not have instant replay to fall back on (I'm not saying that they should institute instant replay into soccer, either). However, you still have to feel for a team that did everything right on two separate occasions and had nothing to show for it. Luckily, it didn't matter in the end, because the important thing is that the U.S. is moving onto the knockout stage, which is where they should be.

Now that they have advanced, it is time for the team to focus on the next game. In winning their group for the first time since 1930, the United States will have a chance to avenge their loss to Ghana in the 2006 World Cup. Obviously, this matchup is much more favorable than a match against Germany would have been. In this World Cup, Ghana has only scored one non-penalty kick goal. As I have said, the teams that want to continue to advance are the teams that are willing to attack instead of sit back and defend. If any of my readers watched the Australia vs. Serbia game this afternoon, you likely agree with me. The bottom line is, Ghana isn't Algeria. What I saw from Algeria today was a team that was going to be satisfied just by preventing the U.S. from advancing. Unlike Algeria, Ghana will be looking to score; to move on. The United States has the talent to beat the Black Stars, but they absolutely need to attack. The Round of 16 is not kind to teams content with sitting back and defending.

While everyone was watching the U.S. soccer game, there was another equally spectacular match going on at Wimbledon. The first round match between John Isner and Nicolas Mahut has lasted for over nine hours, has been suspended due to darkness two straight days, and is currently in the fifth set tied at 59 games. Go ahead and read those italicized words again, and remind yourself that what you're reading is true. It's no surprise that this match has shattered the marks for longest match played and most games played in a match. I had a chance to watch a replay of the fifth set at work today, and I watched as the match was halted so that the players could take a bathroom break. Needless to say, this is incredible, and probably won't happen again for a long time, if ever again. The next piece of information may be the craziest of the entire story. You'd think that after a match like this, their next opponent would have a huge advantage over them. This isn't exactly the case though, as the winner will face Thiemo De Bakker, who won 16-14 in the fifth set in his first round match, meaning he'll be very tired as well. Who's to say the winner of Isner vs. Mahut can't pull off another?



- K. Becks

The Sad Truth For African Teams

As teams prepare for their final game in group play, I have come to the very sad realization that only one African team has a legitimate shot of moving on to the knockout round. This is not only sad due to the fact that I picked three of the six participating African nations to advance, but because they probably feel as if they've underperformed on their home continent. Disappointing play, as well as bad luck, has played a part in this sad showing. To start, South Africa is the first host nation to not advance to the knockout stage. If it weren't for Mexico scoring a goal in a moment of confusion for the South African defense, the Bafana Bafana may very well have advanced. Nigeria didn't have any points coming into today's game against South Korea, but were still in position to advance with a win. They had the perfect opportunity to do so in the 66th minute, but Nigerian striker Yakuba missed possibly the easiest shot ever. Had Yakuba capitalized on the chance and Nigeria gone on to win the game, they would have moved on to the knockout stage because of goal differential. Cameroon, who supposedly had a high octane offense that was sure to produce goals, has only scored one goal in this World Cup. They were the first team to be mathematically eliminated from the tournament, which is obviously a tough pill to swallow for a team that thought they had a legitimate shot at moving on to the knockout stage. The Ivory Coast would have had a shot at advancing if they were to win their final group play game, but didn't receive any help from North Korea. Thanks to the Korean's 7-0 loss to Portugal, the Ivory Coast would have to make up a nine goal differential in order to jump Portugal in the standings and advance.

With all that being said, the hope of the African continent lies with the Black Stars of Ghana. Leading Group D, Ghana can move on with either a win or a draw against Germany. They can also lose and potentially move on, but that situation is much more complicated, and it means that their fate is decided by another team (if you would like to learn exactly what that situation is, send me an email). I think it would be a travesty if not one African team were to move on, because South Africa hosting the World Cup is bigger than just South Africa. It is huge for the entire continent, for all the nations trying to make strides in bettering their countries and becoming respected in the world. So, sorry to all you fans of Deutschland, but along with an entire continent, I will be pulling for the Black Stars tomorrow afternoon.

As for the United States, the message is simple: win and you're in, lose and you're out, and let's not even mention the word tie. Algeria hasn't showed that they are capable of offensive firepower thus far. With that being said, pulling men back to defend would be a poor decision for Bob Bradley to make. The U.S. needs to play like they did in the second half of the Slovenia game if they want to win. This is the final game of group play, and the teams that win their final game are the teams that go out and attack and come away with goals. The U.S. is fortunate enough to be more talented than their opponent, so if they go out and attack, conventional wisdom says they should come away with the win. The entire country will be watching; if the U.S. Soccer Federation wants that to happen ever again, they better hope that the United States delivers and moves on to the Round of 16.

Eventually, I will cover Wimbledon, and although we are still in the early rounds and some big names have already been knocked out (James Blake, Fernando Verdasco, Juan Carlos Ferrero to name a few), I haven't had a chance to watch any matches and thus can't give a educated analysis on the tournament. Friday will be my first chance to watch some of the tournament, so I will likely write something about it then.



- K. Becks

Some People Are Missing The Point

Okay, so the United States didn't get the win today, even though it was pretty clear to everyone but Koman Coulibaly that they had scored the go-ahead goal in the 86th minute. However, many people are missing the bigger picture; the U.S. is still in great position to move on to the next round. Sure, they only have two points, but with all the parody in Group C, they still control their own destiny. With a win against Algeria, the U.S. will move on, regardless of what happens in the England vs. Slovenia game. The only reason that a tie was unacceptable going into today's game is because everyone thought England was going to pick up three points against little Algeria. After England's nil-nil snorefest with Algeria, every team but Algeria has the capability of propelling themselves into the knockout round without help from another team. So, before we start grilling Mr. Coulibaly for his mistake (because trust me, I think the rest of the world can pick up the slack for us), let's remember the more important thing; we did enough today to assure ourselves of moving on with a win against Algeria. In the long run, that's all that matters.

While on the topic, here's another thing. The late game foul call was not the sole reason that the U.S. didn't win the game today. Go back to the first half, when Slovenia somehow snuck not one, but two, goals past the U.S. defense, and there lies why they didn't win the game. Here's what I don't understand; if the U.S. has the ability to play like they did in the second half, then why don't they start playing that way...oh...I don't know...when the game starts? Instead of trying to rely on their supposed superior athletic talent to carry them to a win, maybe they should play with the tenacity of a team that is down 2-0 for the entire game. If they did that, then their superior athletic talent would actually show up, and they would run away with games against teams like Slovenia and Algeria.

If the U.S. does manage to move on the knockout round, they may have a better chance of moving on further than most people would have thought when the World Cup started. Serbia's 1-0 win over Germany created as much parody in Group D as there is in Group C, with three teams (Germany, Ghana, Serbia) sitting atop the group lead with three points. My prediction is that after tomorrow, Ghana will be alone at the top with six points (they play Australia tomorrow), but the Germany vs. Ghana game next week will be very important concerning the final standings. If the U.S. finishes second in their group, they may very well have a rematch with the Black Stars of Ghana; a game that is much more winnable for the U.S. than a game against Germany.

I feel that this post was very short, so if you're looking for a little more substance when you sit down to read, I'm am sorry. However, if you would like to converse about U.S. soccer, the World Cup in general, or anything else sports related that is on your mind, leave me a comment in the comments section or shoot me an email at aroundthecornsportsblog@gmail.com. Also, thank you to all of you who joined the fan page on Facebook.



- K. Becks

Okay, I Guess I Understand, But...

Utah leaving the Mountain West Conference on Thursday for the Pac-10 makes me scratch my head a little bit. They are leaving a conference where they and Boise State would have been the class of a very respectable football lineup, which also features TCU and BYU. I understand that the Pac-10 has the automatic bid to the Rose Bowl, but with all the conference swapping and uncertainty, things could change quickly. I still believe that this conference swapping will lead to the institution of a college football playoff, which would make having an automatic bid to a BCS bowl meaningless. Also, with the lineup that the Mountain West would have had, I think that they would have been given an automatic bid in a playoff. Also, the top of the Mountain West is much more stable and predictable year in and year out than the Pac-10. Every year, you can count on Boise State, TCU, and BYU to put together a competitive team. In the Pac-10, USC and Oregon are really the only teams that have been good most years during the past decade. In fact, here is a stat that backs up this claim: the Mountain West Conference's record against the Pac-10 in bowl games in the last ten years? Try 6-5. What I'm saying is that I understand why Utah moved to the Pac-10. The automatic bid is there, and the Pac-10 gets more respect from the media than the Mountain West. However, it's instant gratification, because in a few years, there won't be any more automatic bids to BCS bowl games. With Utah, the Mountain West would have been better than the Pac-10, and might have even secured an automatic bid to a BCS bowl game while automatic bids are still around. Now, all we have are two conferences that both need another good team to legitimize their claim as a true elite football conference.

I think that Boston's Glen Davis needs to give up the nickname "Big Baby" so that the man who truly deserves the name can have it. That man would be Washington Redskins defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth. Haynesworth, who signed the biggest contract ever by a defensive player last year, decided not to show up to the team's mandatory minicamp this week because he is unhappy with the Redskins instituting a 3-4 defense. His teammates are right; he is being completely selfish here. Not only has he decided not to show up to practice, but he has also reportedly demanded a trade out of Washington. Well, Albert, your ticket out of Washington would be giving back the one-hundred million dollar contract that you signed last year. Considering his selfishness, he won't do it, and will likely come back to the Redskins stomping his feet like a little kid whose mom didn't buy him a candy bar at the store. Albert, while you're making a stink about the defense you'll have to play in, consider this: Mike Shanahan has a Super Bowl Ring, and you don't. Maybe you should just do what he says, and you'll have a chance of getting one too.

Today at the U.S. Open, both Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson failed to make even one birdie. That's not exactly a way to attract the attention of the casual golf fan, but on the bright side, Tiger is only five shots off the lead. Considering the difficulty of the course, and the fact that Tiger had a very mediocre first round, I wouldn't be surprised if Tiger is right in the thick of things as we head into the weekend. Maybe, just maybe, he can save the U.S. Open after all.

Tomorrow morning's soccer match between the United States and Slovenia will determine whether or not the majority of the United States will continue to follow the World Cup. A tie is not enough, and the U.S. already received their gift. Hopefully Clint Dempsey & Co. can pull through, because I don't want to be the only person left still wanting to talk about the World Cup.



- K. Becks

Actually, We're Going To Stay

Apparently, Texas did not think that it would be a good idea to move to the Pac-10, set off what would have been a chain of events that would have led to the creation of a collection of "super" conferences, and invoke talk of a college football playoff. Instead, now we essentially have what we started with; a twelve team conference and a ten team conference. The only thing left to do now is switch the names of the conferences to avoid confusion. I still believe that in a few years, Texas will bolt for another conference. As I have said before, it is all about the money. Texas is the Big 12, and therefore is content to stay in it and rack in all the benefits. However, when it becomes clear to all the college presidents that a college playoff is on its way, Texas will realize that they can make even more money by helping create a super conference. It may be a few years, but Texas will eventually be a member of the Pac-10, and the Big 12 will become defunct.

While on the subject of conference expansion, let me correct a mistake from my last post that was brought to my attention by a few of my readers. I had said that the Big 10 would end up with thirteen teams by adding Nebraska, Missouri, and Notre Dame, when the total should actually be fourteen. Thank you to those who pointed that out to me. With that being said, it would be even more logical for the Big 10 to do something like this if the conference swapping were to take place, because having fourteen teams would allow for two seven-team divisions.

The World Cup is now well underway, and thanks to a certain musical instrument, the fans in South Africa are making sure that the world is paying attention. Personally, I kind of like the vuvuzelas; after about five minutes, you almost forget that the noise is there. It has apparently been a tradition in South Africa to blow the horns during games for a long time, and telling a country that they cannot partake in their traditions is unfair. Regardless of what some players say, it's not hurting anyone. That is why I am glad that FIFA will not ban the horn. As for the U.S. team, they should be feeling confident about their chances of moving on if they stay focused. They got a gift in the game against England, but they have the talent edge over both Slovenia and Algeria. Slovenia did not look impressive in their win over Algeria on Sunday (they also received a gift from Algerian goalkeeper Farouzi Chaouchi), and assuming that the U.S. attacks and does not sit back and defend, they will beat Slovenia. As for Algeria, again; it comes down to staying focused. If the U.S. goes into the Algeria game with a good mindset, then they will end the group stage with seven points, and will move on to the knockout round. Anything less will be a disappointment.

Once again, Stephen Strasburg did not fail to impress, striking out eight and getting his second win in as many starts against Cleveland on Sunday. Many people have been wondering if Strasburg will cool off once he faces a team that has a winning percentage over .410. I believe the answer to that question is no. It would be one thing if Strasburg had just one pitch. But he doesn't. He doesn't have just two, either. He has three dominating pitches. In the major leagues, batters study pitchers enough to have at least somewhat of an idea what the pitcher may throw depending on the count. However, because of Strasburg's control with multiple types of pitches, the hitters are almost guessing at what he may throw next. There shouldn't be too much of a drop-off from that kind of command, even in a few months when hitters have had time to figure Strasburg out. The bottom line is this guy is just that good.



- K. Becks

I Can See The Light!

So can the rest of the fans at Roland Garros, where the match between thirteenth seeded Frenchman Gael Monfils and Italy's Fabio Fognini was just completed. This match was actually scheduled yesterday, however, due to darkness, the game had to be postponed until today. It was so bad that the Shot Spot technology wasn't working correctly (it uses shadows to determine where the ball landed, and since there were no shadows...). I just finished watching the match, in which Fognini upset the Frenchman. After watching this match, the score stands: Number of French Open matches watched: 1, Number of NBA Playoff games watched: 0. I can only assume that the gap will widen as the French Open continues, unless by some miracle the Celtics recruit Maria Sharapova to play for them.

Speaking of the NBA playoffs, it seems that we actually have something to pay attention to now. After the Suns figured out that the Lakers don't want to move on offense and are content with just throwing up three pointers all day, they have used a zone defense to crawl back into the series. As for the series in the East, it seems like the Magic do want to play basketball after all. Although I don't see either the Suns or the Magic making it to the Finals, it's nice to see that they are at least putting on somewhat of a show for the viewers. I don't happen to be one of those viewers, but I'm sure that whoever is watching...wait, what? No one outside of Boston, Orlando, Los Angeles, and Phoenix cares? No, that can't be right, can it?

I'm not sure how many of you watched the United States' international friendly against the Czech Republic on Tuesday night, but just in case you did and were concerned with the outcome of the game (the Czech Republic won 4-2), I have good news: this means very little. Very few of the players that you'll see on the pitch for the U.S. in the upcoming World Cup actually played in this game. Rather, it was really a way for the coaches to get a last look at some of the guys before they made final cuts for the World Cup roster. I don't want to give away too much (since I'll be breaking down all the Groups for the World Cup soon), but I still like the U.S.'s chances to move on. While we're on the subject of the World Cup, check out this commercial by Nike. If this doesn't get you pumped for the World Cup, then I don't know what will.

It seems like the majority of my readers agreed with me about Floyd Landis, as most people voted "no, I do not believe what Floyd Landis says about Lance Armstrong" in the last poll. The latest poll really has nothing to do with anything that I talked about in this post; rather, it is a discussion that I heard on the radio a few days ago. My local sports radio station was discussing whether or not MMA style fighting would be a good idea to offer as a sport or club in high school. I want to hear your opinions on this, so vote on the poll, and if you'd like to comment on the issue, leave one in the comment section or email me at aroundthecornsportsblog@gmail.com. Thanks guys.



- K. Becks