Rooney to Play in Germany

[Fallen Hero]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fallen Hero,

Why have a balanced team when you can maintain possesion the entire game and score 4 goals?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because they can't, everytime they were considered huge favourites going into the world cup they lost and were actually outplayed pretty badly (3-2 against Italy in 82 when they thought they had the best team ever assembled in world cup history is a good example).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm confused. are you saying that Brazil isn't the most successful team in the world? or are you saying that Brazil would be even more successful if they played a different style?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying they are more successfull when they play a different style. Parreira in 94 and Scolari in 02 both tried to implement solid defenses and build a team from the back, both were tremendously criticized in Brazil and both won the world cup.

PS: and brazil almost didn't qualify in 2002 before Scolari took over.

[KDawg]

[ QUOTE ]
with Rooney playing I'm putting England as a big favourite to win this world cup, probably higher than Brazil (no, I'm not english).

[/ QUOTE ]


I fully agree with this. Rooney has been a talismanic player for england when he has played and even a 80% Rooney on the pitch is tons better then 98% of the players in the world. This is a very strong England team and they hae solved some of the problems that they had at Euro 2004 and WC2002. Paul Robinson is light years better then David James and the aging David Seamen in goal. This defensive unit is much more cohesive and the midfield may very well be one of the best in the world. They also have a strike partnership that has worked well together(Shearer and Owen never fully clicked with each other).

I don't think that brazil will win this WC, and its not due to a lack of talent. Its more on the fact that any year that they have come in as big favorites to win the WC, they haven't won it. 66, 82, 90(they weren't as massive of favorites as this year, but there was a ton of talent on that squad), and 98. I believe that a european squad will win it this year, and if not a european team, then argentina. I actually think that this may be England's or Holland's year to win it. I think that france may have made a good run until Cisse's leg break

[junglewarfare]

[ QUOTE ]
Its more on the fact that any year that they have come in as big favorites to win the WC, they haven't won it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic doesn't do very much for me.

[Fallen Hero]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its more on the fact that any year that they have come in as big favorites to win the WC, they haven't won it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic doesn't do very much for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

the problem is that they're usually considered favourites because they managed to put in the same team 5 or 6 of the worlds' best players. It doesn't mean that they're actually the better team in theory.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its more on the fact that any year that they have come in as big favorites to win the WC, they haven't won it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic doesn't do very much for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

as always, people want what happened 45 years ago to have some relevance to what is happening now. Brazil was favored a couple times 45 years and lost, and that matters today how????

they lost 1 game to an excellent, excellent French team in 98 (when Ronaldo had panic attack), and that is somehow proof that they were overrated or put a bad team together?

I don't get it.

[KDawg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its more on the fact that any year that they have come in as big favorites to win the WC, they haven't won it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic doesn't do very much for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

as always, people want what happened 45 years ago to have some relevance to what is happening now. Brazil was favored a couple times 45 years and lost, and that matters today how????

they lost 1 game to an excellent, excellent French team in 98 (when Ronaldo had panic attack), and that is somehow proof that they were overrated or put a bad team together?

I don't get it.

[/ QUOTE ]



its trends. Trends always get thrown out for american football, basketball, baseball, etc. This has been something that is tried and true. There is also the trend that england has done well in major tournies with lame duck managers. If the logic doesn't work for you, whatever, I just don't think that brazil have a team as much as they have a group of great individuals. The fact being though, is that the last time that Brazil had a team this stacked was 82, but they didn't have a full out team, that is what I think is the problem with this team. Everytime that they have won the WC they have had more of a team then a bunch of great individuals

[Fallen Hero]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its more on the fact that any year that they have come in as big favorites to win the WC, they haven't won it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This logic doesn't do very much for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

as always, people want what happened 45 years ago to have some relevance to what is happening now. Brazil was favored a couple times 45 years and lost, and that matters today how????

they lost 1 game to an excellent, excellent French team in 98 (when Ronaldo had panic attack), and that is somehow proof that they were overrated or put a bad team together?

I don't get it.

[/ QUOTE ]



its trends. Trends always get thrown out for american football, basketball, baseball, etc. This has been something that is tried and true. There is also the trend that england has done well in major tournies with lame duck managers. If the logic doesn't work for you, whatever, I just don't think that brazil have a team as much as they have a group of great individuals. The fact being though, is that the last time that Brazil had a team this stacked was 82, but they didn't have a full out team, that is what I think is the problem with this team. Everytime that they have won the WC they have had more of a team then a bunch of great individuals

[/ QUOTE ]

my thoughts exactly.

[daveymck]

The thing Brazil have lost a bit is the mystery, the top eurpean players are well used to playing against the South American players as most of them are in Europe. With the Champions League they play each other a lot more and on top of that can watch a lot of the games they play.

In the UK we get matches weekly from the Spanish, Italian and German leagues a lot more than even the previous World Cup and certainly compared to the late 80's early 90's WC's.

I dont think the top euro teams will be as intimidated as in the past.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

[ QUOTE ]
is that the last time that Brazil had a team this stacked was 82, but they didn't have a full out team, that is what I think is the problem with this team.

[/ QUOTE ]

and here is what happened in 1982: they were 3-0 in the first round (+8 goals), beat Argentina 3-1, and lost to Italy (the eventual champion) 3-2. Italy went on to beat Poland 2-0 and West Germany 3-1.

So Brazil killed 4 teams, and lost to 1 excellent team by 1 goal, and you point to this as failure?? Almsot any country would kill for a result like this.

I think what you guys aren't appreciating is the short term variance inherent in an elimination tournament like the WC. Brazil may have been the best team in the tournament -it doesn't matter, of course, b/c they played 1 'bad' game.

Compare this to the NFL playoffs or March Madness - the 'better' team loses all the time. Tournaments like this don't determine who the best team is. They do let you know who won on any given day.

Honestly, it's laughable to point at one 3-2 defeat to an eventual champion (after killing 4 teams) as some evidence that the team was flawed.

[Fallen Hero]

"Honestly, it's laughable to point at one 3-2 defeat to an eventual champion (after killing 4 teams) as some evidence that the team was flawed."

the games recently reaired here, they were hugely outplayed by Italy. It wasn't just a bad game, Italy proved they were the better team wich seemed inconceivable at the time, everyone thought Brazil had not only the best team in the world, but the best team ever.
Of course I understand the short term variance in football, that brazilain team wasn't flawed because it lost one game, it was flawed because it was a group of the best players they could find at the time.