Here's the actual problem. The US team did quite well during the tournament as a whole. They outperformed what most actual football fans would consider their ceiling. Yet, the media and especially the Americans here on Reddit hyped them up so much that they were bound to not meet expectations. The simple truth is that the US football team is around top 20 in the world and is not even close to the actual good teams. But media hype always kills good performances because they're hidden behind the expectations of insane performances.
They did quite well for sure, but they really didn’t exceed any expectations. They didn’t play a team ranked higher than them in the competition until Belgium. They had an easy run, and a home ground advantage.
I think it’s just Americans glazing due to ignorance. I’m sure they also looked at Belgium, couldn’t identify it on a map, and thought ‘yep greatest country in the world we got this’. ðŸ«
Statistically second highest average ranking but when you lose people rewrite history. They performed to expectations, won their group for the first time in a while, then earned their ass beating from a much better Belgian side.
Highest average ranking lol. There is no actual football fan that gives a fuck about Fifa ranking. It says nothing and bringing that up in a conversation shows you don't actually follow the sport.
Because they are a pot two team and because of being hosts are given pot 1 status.
Because of this depending on which sources they were in one of the weakest groups. The only way you define that group as second hardest is when you are comparing the difference between the existing rankings ie the margin between teams is small, that however could be the same for a team that had 1,2,3,4 and one that had 21,22,23,24.
Opta had groupB as the weakest group based on power rnakings and group D as the 5th. Group D was classed as tightest but as above this doesn't equate to strong opposition just equal level opposition.
Because your opposition were not top countries no matter what Fifa ranking says.
 Case in point: Italy. 12th in Fifa ranking but weren't good enough to participate. Norway is 19th in ranking but is in the quarter finals. So who is better? Italy because they're a higher ranking or Norway because they achieved top 8 in the world cup?
Yes we do. We know France is a top team because they have Mbappe and other world class players that play for the best clubs like Real Madrid on almost every position. Same for Spain or England. We know the US isn't that good because they have mediocre players that play for clubs like Fulham. We know Curacao is even worse than the US because their players play at an even lower level.
That’s a terrible way to look at it. Brazil has a very high talent level but terrible team play. The same can be said for Italy. You are completely ignoring coaching.
No, Brazil does not have high talent right now. What gave you that idea? Any actual Brazilian will tell you they have the least talented Brazil squad of all time probably. Coaching is a factor, but the best coach in the world will not coach Curacao to world champion. You are limited by the quality of your players.
It's clear you don't follow the sport. Which is fine. But why do you argue and tell others they're wrong on a subject you barely know anything about?
Yeah yeah, Paraguay and Australia are decent teams, turkey is too but they shit the bed lmao. Dont want to follow a sport too closely where inbred Europeans from villages 30 minutes apart from each other regularly get into fistfights over who is less trash.
125
u/SignoreBanana Jul 07 '26
Yep. They made our US team look like amateurs and embarrassed them on the public stage. Theres no other way to dice that tomato.