I think they didn’t predict great things for the Rockets but just gave them credit for having ‘done something’ however on this same site they were saying the best move for good teams is the opposite of ‘doing something’: to instead stay good and wait in the wings in case one of the top contenders gets hit with an…

Great font choice as well.

What is the point of a $700 sound bar if it’s not great for music? That sounds insane.

What is the point of a $700 sound bar if it’s not great for music? That sounds insane.

phantasmagorical!! (as ray hudson might say)

I think they get those three back for the third place match though. (Maybe not Jones.) I still want to see what Nagbe and Pulisic can do!! I agree with you in principle but also hold out hope for a surprise performance.

Yeah I could go with that. Hard to call it a landmark since it wasn’t a win, but they looked nearly like Germany’s equals in that match. Crazy to think such an enormous gap had emerged by 2014, yet with the same scoreline.

I’d view that and the lead against Brazil in 2009 as the two tent poles of U.S. achievement in…

oh man this is the funniest friday bear post yet

Y’know, when I first saw Ayesha’s tweet, I cringed. But after reading her apology and her dig here at SAS, I’m fully on board with her again. In fact, if she could just spend most of her time taking digs as Stephen A Smith, that would be delightful.

Yeah I think your overall point was interesting I was just nitpicking about Colombia’s recent strength on the soccer field coming at a time where the country also appears to be opening up and prospering.

You’re just incorrect here.
A) There was absolutely nobody who considered the U.S. anything worse than a slight underdog against Mexico in ‘02.
B) Between 1990 and 2002 WC the USMNT head-to-head record against Mexico was 8 wins, 7 losses, and 5 draws. That included a win against Mexico in the Copa America quarterfinals…

Not against Mexico though. Definitely WC’s a more prestigious tournament, but as long THIS Argentina squad brings its best players and wants to win, this is a bigger hill to climb and means more about U.S. progress. Agreed this tournament as the whole means less—but Argentina wants that hardware. Doesn’t matter either…

If he had a good game against Argentina, it could be worth a lot of money for him!

Don’t forget third place match!!

I see it both ways. If we somehow snaked to the finals, I don’t really care how it happens. If we hold our own against Argentina, that will be satisfying in it’s own right, win or lose. Losing to Venezuela would be depressing and getting demolished by Argentina would also suck.

Our form so far in the tournament is a step up in our class and skill. Some degree of that is a prerequisite for beating Argentina by any score, in any fashion. Taking the two squads right now, we already know Argentina would win AT LEAST 8 out 10 times, likely 9 out of 10 times and possibly 10 out of 10 times. But…

Argentina BROUGHT an A team! They are in their own dry spell and want to win this tournament!

Beating Argentina this year would be more of an achievement. The reason that victory against Mexico is remembered is because it advanced U.S. to the final eight, not because it was Mexico that was vanquished. In fact, Mexico being the opponent is half the reason the U.S. made it to the final 8.

Yeah but it was Mexico. We had already beaten them numerous times in qualifying and gold cups and friendlies before WC 2002.

Well, Colombia’s latest surge in quality has come after the reforms in that country so this phase doesn’t really fit your narrative. But agreed on the Valderrama era. (They kind of sucked in between though.)

That 5-0 shellacking was a B- squad for the U.S. though. Not really a good example. That said, I do believe Argentina is capable of beating U.S. by 4 goals or more. They would probably take their foot off the gas at around 3 though.