Toggle sidebar

GWT: World Cup - Group B (England and USA Advance)

Who Advances?

  • England

    Votes: 95 97.9%

  • United States

    Votes: 59 60.8%

  • Wales

    Votes: 23 23.7%

  • Iran

    Votes: 11 11.3%
  • Total voters
    97
bluesfan94

bluesfan94

Registered User
Jan 7, 2008
30,951
8,207
St. Louis
Savant said:
Right. But again I don’t think this is a top 16 team. They might get to R16 because their group sucks, but I don’t think they are too 16 by any other metric
Click to expand...
There are only 11 teams with a better goal differential; 4 more have the same goal differential. United States would be tied for 12th; the next team would be 17th. United States has played the Pot 1 team in its group; three teams with better or the same goal differential have not.
 
Savant

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,781
10,584
bluesfan94 said:
And they've also been able to give up goals. I think you forget that's part of soccer too.

I think Belgium is a top 16 team at the World Cup even if they haven't looked great in two games. Sometimes that happens in soccer. Hell, I think there's a very real possibility they don't get out of their group and it all comes down to losing to a worse team in Morocco.

Okay so are we doing points or are we doing performances? Japan has looked good for all of one half of the World Cup, it just happened to get them three points. If we're doing points, talk to me again about South Korea, Uruguay, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Serbia, and Cameroon being better than the US. This is what I mean about how you decide something matters until it doesn't.
Click to expand...
I mean I watch the games and I call it like I see it. USA has scored one goal. They haven’t looked like scoring any more than that, so I don’t think they are winning fire fights with these teams that have scored multiple goals in harder groups. I don’t think there is a ton of evidence that USA can score. Serbia can score (without Vlahovic). Korea can score (without Son). Cameroon scored three goals against a good defensive team.

So again if I don’t think USA can score against BAD teams, why would I favor them against teams that have shown they can put goals up? You need goals to win games last time I checked; and it’s not like USA is a defensive juggernaut either

bluesfan94 said:
There are only 11 teams with a better goal differential; 4 more have the same goal differential. United States would be tied for 12th; the next team would be 17th.
Click to expand...
Stop. This is so misleading. This is so misleading I don’t even need to explain why this is misleading
 
bluesfan94

bluesfan94

Registered User
Jan 7, 2008
30,951
8,207
St. Louis
Savant said:
Cameroon scored three goals against a good defensive team.
Click to expand...
Serbia has given up as many goals as Qatar and Canada and now they're good defensively? The only teams that have given up more goals than Serbia are Costa Rica and Iran.
Savant said:
Korea can score (without Son).
Click to expand...
Son is actually playing, and Korea scored 0 goals in its match against Uruguay. South Korea has scored one more goal than the United States and is about to play the best team in its group.
Savant said:
USA has scored one goal.
Click to expand...
And Uruguay has scored 0, yet you have them down as being better than America.
Savant said:
They haven’t looked like scoring any more than that
Click to expand...
I take it you skipped the weekend's game?
Savant said:
Serbia can score (without Vlahovic).
Click to expand...
Only against Cameroon, whose backline doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
Savant said:
I don’t think they are winning fire fights with these teams that have scored multiple goals in harder groups.
Click to expand...
Yeah, true. For example, the United States could never stop a team that scored 6 goals in their first match, has a striker among the world's best, and has made it to at least the semi-finals of the last two major tournaments it was at. Never.
Savant said:
and it’s not like USA is a defensive juggernaut either
Click to expand...
The only teams that have given up fewer goals than the US are Morocco, Poland, and Brazil. Morocco and Poland are about to play the best team in their group and Brazil is Brazil.
Savant said:
You need goals to win games last time I checked
Click to expand...
You also need to not concede a ton of goals to win games.
Savant said:
So again if I don’t think USA can score against BAD teams, why would I favor them against teams that have shown they can put goals up?
Click to expand...
This is just a non-sensical take given some of the names you've mentioned as being better than the US. South Korea has scored one more goal. Japan has scored one more goal. Morocco has scored one more goal. Germany has scored one more goal. Uruguay hasn't scored this World Cup. Cameroon was shut out in its first match. Serbia and Cameroon were shut out in their first match. Switzerland has scored one goal. Canada has scored one goal.

Savant said:
Stop. This is so misleading. This is so misleading I don’t even need to explain why this is misleading
Click to expand...
It's misleading because it requires you to also look at goals conceded instead of your magical goals scored in games that count on days that Savant says are acceptable against teams that are good enough to make it meaningful and factoring in certain injuries but ignoring others metric.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Basement Cat
Savant

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,781
10,584
bluesfan94 said:
Click to expand...

i opened FotMob and saw England as higher. Not abnormal for different places to have different xG though. England did have more shots on target though and that’s a more concrete figure

3755BC72-C2A0-4013-8FA5-BD190F226713.png


I’m also not going to keep arguing that word vomit you posted. Let’s see USA beat Iran, and if you want me to apologize for not saying USA is top 16 let’s see them get in the quarterfinals. I’m not wasting more energy on this..

TLDR - I don’t think USA can score and I don’t think they are a good defensive team. I think they lose to teams that have shown more evidence that they can score than the USA have shown.

See you tomorrow
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Basement Cat
Savant

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,781
10,584
bluesfan94 said:
Such as Uruguay, thanks for clearing that up!
Click to expand...
I dont think that, you think USA is better than Uruguay either.

uruguay similar to England and USA that all are terribly managed, but Uruguay is in one of the hardest groups. England and USA are not. All three teams are in the badly hurt by their manager category
 
bluesfan94

bluesfan94

Registered User
Jan 7, 2008
30,951
8,207
St. Louis
Savant said:
I dont think that, you think USA is better than Uruguay either.

uruguay similar to England and USA that all are terribly managed, but Uruguay is in one of the hardest groups. England and USA are not. All three teams are in the badly hurt by their manager category
Click to expand...
I don't understand it. Uruguay has scored 0 goals and the last time the teams met in a friendly, they drew. USA has more goals scored and fewer goals conceded and more points.

You claim USA isn't good because they can't score. They've scored more than Uruguay.
You claim USA isn't good because they can't defend. They've conceded less than Uruguay.
You claim USA isn't as good as Japan because USA lost a friendly. They drew Uruguay.
You claim USA isn't as good as Japan because Japan has more points. USA has more points than Uruguay.

At this point, you're flailing.
 
bluesfan94

bluesfan94

Registered User
Jan 7, 2008
30,951
8,207
St. Louis
Savant said:
Serbia played Brazil and Cameroon for the record. and are another team putting up more goals that the USA without their best striker being healthy
Click to expand...
Are these good players ever going to actually play well? Cameroon isn't exactly a world beater; they lost to Uzbekistan and drew with Jamaica and Panama. So Serbia's defense not being able to stop Cameroon when Uzbekistan could isn't exactly a feather in Serbia's cap.

Both Cameroon and Serbia have shown an ability to score on each other, that's all. Both have defenses among the worst 7 and Cameroon hasn't even played Brazil yet. This is just mind-bending stuff. Cameroon and Serbia have bad defenses.

Cameroon couldn't score a goal when it played a Swiss defense at about the same level as the American defense. They put up three on Serbia. Serbia's defense is bad. And we'll see what their offense does against that same Swiss defense.
 
Savant

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,781
10,584
bluesfan94 said:
I don't understand it. Uruguay has scored 0 goals and the last time the teams met in a friendly, they drew. USA has more goals scored and fewer goals conceded and more points.

You claim USA isn't good because they can't score. They've scored more than Uruguay.
You claim USA isn't good because they can't defend. They've conceded less than Uruguay.
You claim USA isn't as good as Japan because USA lost a friendly. They drew Uruguay.
You claim USA isn't as good as Japan because Japan has more points. USA has more points than Uruguay.

At this point, you're flailing.
Click to expand...
so Do you think USA is a better team than Uruguay? Do you think USA gets out of Uruguays group?

do you think USA has better attackers than Uruguay? do you think USA has better defenders than Uruguay

Please tell me what you think USA does better than Uruguay
 
Last edited:

StargateSG1

Registered User
Nov 26, 2016
1,787
654
Savant said:
so Do you think USA is a better team than Uruguay? Do you think USA gets out of Uruguays group?

do you think USA has better attackers than Uruguay? do you think USA has better defenders than Uruguay
Click to expand...
If USA had Uruguay's chances from just today, they'd bury that flip-flopping Ronaldo team.
It's amazing how a team of Uruguay's quality of talent can deliver 4-5 "crosses" straight to the goalie.
 
bluesfan94

bluesfan94

Registered User
Jan 7, 2008
30,951
8,207
St. Louis
Savant said:
so Do you think USA is a better team than Uruguay? Do you think USA gets out of Uruguays group?

do you think USA has better attackers than Uruguay? do you think USA has better defenders than Uruguay

Please tell me what you think USA does better than Uruguay
Click to expand...
Score and prevent goals, apparently. Which some believe is actually key to soccer.

Anyway, are we supposed to be judging based on performances at the World Cup or based on the players? You’ve changed your argument.
 
Savant

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,781
10,584
bluesfan94 said:
Score and prevent goals, apparently. Which some believe is actually key to soccer.

Anyway, are we supposed to be judging based on performances at the World Cup or based on the players? You’ve changed your argument.
Click to expand...
No one is changing their argument. From the beginning I’ve said I’m calling it like I see it. That’s how I see it. Judge how you want to judge. I think USAs defense would have been more punished in a tougher group and I don’t think USA would have scored more than a whopping one goal in a tougher group. If you think different or if you think USA has better attackers than Uruguay, you are welcome to feel that way. I think Uruguay would have advanced in Group B and USA finish last in Group H. Hell USA aren’t even out of their own group yet. Lets see what happens tomorrow
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom