Just a note: Casey came in for Clark, not Dempsey.
No doubt Brazil was the better team. But when you are dominating 2 to 0 and the officials give you another goal (by taking away one from Brazil) there is no reason you should lose. No excuse really.
Hehe well maybe it was all for the best. Give those trust-fund boys a taste of victory, then let them taste and ferment on self failure. I"m not sure what is a better regimen for next years contest.
They did give it a hell of a effort though.
But out of curiosity. Anybody now what the odds the bookies were giving on the U.S. to win it all before the Egypt game?
If Brazil was the better team, then how could we have been dominating? Even though goals are not scored frequently in this sport, it only takes a moment to score and being up by two against Brazil is no guarantee. Giving up half of your lead in the first minute after intermission does little for your confidence all the more and only sets the tone of what will happen.
Incidentally, who was the white-haired old man standing next to Sunil Gulati at the medals ceremony? I was annoyed because I thought he was the European president (later remembering that Platini is now in that position) and he was so cozy with the Brazilian players but shaking hands with the Americans like they were peasants. Of course, I now realize that he’s likely Gulati’s Brazilian counterpart, which would make sense of his closer relationship with the Brazilian players.
IMO they weren’t dominating at 2-0, they were holding. That’s because they were playing a far better side. That being said, I would expect a team in that position t be able to hold off most teams. I had hopes that they could get another goal and finish the game. But it is far too strong to say they had “no excuse” to lose, IMO.
Who, exactly, are the trust fund boys?
-Chris
Did you watch? We played “up” in the first half and ran out of gas in the second. Brazil was definitely the better side; don’t let the scoreline fool you. When Brazil went to the dressing room at the half all of our myriad faults were detailed and - then - dealt with.
You’re not talking about Sepp Blatter, are you?
I watched most of the game through my fingers while biting the nails off on my other hand, so I won’t be the best judge. But I agree with your sentiments and my comment does not dispute that. It was in reference to the comment that we were supposedly dominating when we were up 2-0, which wasn’t the case. You’re right that the scoreline doesn’t tell the whole story.
No, Blatter was all the way on the right. This guy was on the left, next to the US soccer president, which seems to make sense now that he was the Braizlian soccer president. He only got my attention because I thought he was the former pres of Europe (some similar looking guy with a Swedish name). But then I remembered that Platini is the president now.
Naw, I don’t have a problem with something along the lines of “the US dominated the first half” because we did - we played “up”. But then the 7th day came around and you know how that goes. 
I know jack about Brazilian football (and didn’t pay attention to the scene) but perhaps the white-haired man could be the equivalent of Prince William (President of the English FA)?
I believe it was like 500:1 to make the final. I’m not terribly confident, I might be mistaken and that was the odds to win.
Actually, we were not dominant, nor were we even the “better” side the first half. We soaked up a LOT of Brazillian pressure during the first half, and if it hadn’t been for the stubborn insistence of Brazil in going to the wings for crosses that we proved we were capable of cutting off, we probably would have conceded in the first half.
We played the first 10 minutes quite well, got our first goal, and started into our shell. We got ONE lucky counter-attack that had a chance, made the most of it, and had the lead. From then until late in the second half, when we were forced to come out of the shell to try and get a third goal, we simply let the Brazilians have the ball. We seemed to be incapable past minute 15 or so of utilizing someone down the flanks, prefering to send balls up route 1.
Our defense (and our 'keeper) played a hell of a game the first half. That they were unable to do so well the second half is attributable to Brazil figuring out how to crack us open, and to our players slowly becoming fatigued. On the second goal, Kaka walked around Jonathan Spector as if he wasn’t there before delivering the cross that lead to the goal. That shows me Spector had gotten tired, since he was doing much better with the efforts to get around his end in the first half.
Take nothing away from their play, but we were lucky to be up, and we knew it, I bet.
I disagree. We managed to crack Brazil in the first half the same way we cracked Spain earlier in the week, by playing up the middle and forcing the play off to the wings. But the result was a lot like Hull in this year’s Premier League - did good to start, but once the pros figured us out we were taken apart.
You’re absolutely correct that we soaked up a lot of pressure but that speaks well about our defenders (and particularly some guy from Everton ), because the same thing happened against Spain. And, yet, despite our reliance on our defenders, we didn’t play like Greece circa 2002 which means that we are certainly capable of creating chances.
We sucked SO BAD in the first two matches but really stepped it up in the last two. I just have this mental image of a mythological giant futily trying to jam a puzzle piece into the mat at 30 degrees to true. If we could turn the piece just THISMUCH…
You did good but there was no way you were gonna win that game.
At 2-0 you should have mustered an 11 man defence instead of trying for a 3rd goal. By doing this you gave Brazil just what they wanted, they had you figured out and it was just a matter of time.
I was pulling for the US but it was not to be
No cite, but I’m sure I read somewhere that 12,000 to 1 was the going rate.
I’m crestfallen. I figured they could bend but not break in the second half. However, I clearly recall thinking to myself before the game even started that we could be up 2 - 0 with 15 minutes left, and if Brazil scores 1, they’ll score 3.
Honestly, going into the second half, I was hoping for some girding of the loins in defense and I was ready for the celebration. But they ended up being completely over-matched. Altidore didn’t even try in the second half. Mostly it looked like out guys just gassed out and gave up. At that point, a loss was pretty much inevtible.
Having reached the final of a semi-major tournament maybe you guys will now bow to the inevitable and take up soccer with a vengeance.
Throw away that baseball and that egg shaped ball, you know it makes sense
Dude, we hosted the friggin’ World Cup in this country in 1994 (and we made the second round) and that barely made a dent.
Well all I can say is: Your fellow Americans just aint been paying attention
I gave those odds earlier in the thread. I’ve since heard (on ESPN, I think) that many bookmakers had them completely off the board prior to the Egypt game.
Funny you should say that…
On July 4, 1994, I was at Stanford Stadium for USA v Brazil. As I took the train up the San Francisco Peninsula from San Jose, I could look down into backyards along the way. As I passed house after house with barbecues going, and people enjoying their holiday, it dawned on me that the vast majority of Americans were paying zero attention to the fact that the USA was playing against the number one team in the world in the only sport that much of the rest of the world cares about, and it was happening in their own country (indeed, in the case of the people I was looking at, within a few miles of their homes!).
Put the whole thing in perspective right there, though I did not share that perspective with my kids, who were with me with their faces painted and their jerseys on. 
To be fair DSYE it was July 4th and the Yanks are somewhat well known for their patriotism