English (League Soccer) for Americans: Jordan and Paolo Tackle the EPL as the "Football" Season Gets Rolling

Contrary to the notice of numerous North Americans, soccer isn't only played once every four years, during the World Cup.

In fact, club soccer leagues comprised of privately-held teams have existed in England since 1888, over 40 years before the first World Cup (the most prestigious tournament within the realm of "International Soccer" played among countries, as opposed to "Club Soccer," primarily played among teams within a given country).

Almost every country you can think of around the world has its own league--or several, at different tiers of quality--of professional "football" teams. As common among U.S. baseball, basketball and hockey teams, club soccer teams aren't limited to players from their home country, and per a club's ability to attract players based on money, location, team prestige and other factors, rosters often include a mix of players from many nationalities.

Fans' fervor for their local or favorite soccer club(s) can be far more intense than even their passion for their country when playing in International tournaments. As a fan of hockey's Chicago Blackhawks I can relate to this, for I care more about their competing for the Stanley Cup than I do about U.S. Hockey in the Winter Olympics, especially as the latter--like the World Cup--happens only every 4 years.

Because of the continuity of club soccer teammates playing full seasons with each other--and perhaps also in competitions with teams from other countries--the quality of play for elite club teams can often be better than one may see in the World Cup.

In the United States, Major League Soccer (MLS) is the premier professional league, but the lower-level North American Soccer League (NASL) and United States Leagues also field teams in sizable cities.

World soccer league rankings by Dave Clark of SB Nation/Sounder at Heart
See story and data tables here.

Yet in terms of popularity within their home country, prestige around the world, ability to attract top tier players and the money involved--in terms of team value, player contracts & transfer fees, sponsorships, merchandising, etc.--the top club soccer leagues in England, Germany, Italy, Spain and elsewhere far outrank MLS, in that order per in-depth data compiled by one soccer blogger. (The International Federation of Football History and Statistics concurs on the top four leagues, but orders them Spain, England, Germany, Italy.)

The English Premier League, in which 20 teams compete each season, is the top league for soccer--or locally, football--in the United Kingdom, and among the most elite worldwide. With due deference to the top Spanish, Italian and German leagues, and other other leagues I know less about, the EPL is the world league of which I'm most aware. (Many of its games are now televised on major U.S. outlets.)

The table (i.e. standings) for Barclays Premier League (the EPL, Barclays Bank
is the sponsor) after one game of the 2014-15 season. From premierleague.com

But I am not nearly the avid fan or follower that my friends Jordan and Paolo are, so with the 2014-15 EPL season having begun this past weekend, I thought I would engage them in some analysis, as I did for the World Cup. (You can find those three articles on Seth Saith--1, 2, 3--but I've also set up a Futbol Fanatical blog to compile any soccer pieces, including this one).

As you'll see, I posed some questions that they responded to; Jordan provided his answers before the first EPL games were played last Saturday, and Paolo mostly provided a bit of color off of Jordan's responses on Sunday .

Thanks to both of them for their detailed insights.

As I explained to them in asking the questions, I am hoping this piece may be of interest avid fans of English soccer but perhaps just as much enlighten relative newbies to the EPL.

1. Is the English Premier League still the world's premier soccer league? If so, why?
Jordan: If you are asking if it is the best soccer league in the world you'd have to define what you mean by "best." Some people would say the Bundesliga (Germany) is best and some would say La Liga (Spain) is the best. Those two along with England would likely be the main three leagues that anyone would cite as the "premier" league for varying reasons. I think the Premier League is the most exciting.

Paolo: The EPL is probably the most watched and followed league in the world - helped in no great part in recent years by satellite TV deals that beam it across the globe, including the U.S. In terms of depth of competition I think that currently it is the top world league - and the game is played faster than in any other league. Both La Liga and the Bundesliga are the world's other top leagues (with Serie A in Italy a distant third) but all lack the overall global exposure of the EPL. 

A match between Manchester United and Real Madrid at Michigan Stadium
on August 2 drew 109,318 fans, the most ever for a soccer game in the U.S.

2. U.S. interest in soccer seems to be peaking, given ratings for the World Cup and attendance for games among European powers, such as the record-setting Manchester United-Real Madrid match at Michigan Stadium. But with the MLS and club soccer teams around the world that people in America may follow based on cultural or previous residential allegiance, why should the EPL demand the attention of "football" fans looking to build on their interest?

Jordan: I think the league is very exciting and interesting. For me I think part of the reason I follow the Premier League closer than other leagues is the fact that there is so much coverage of it and it is all in English and therefore easy to follow.

Paolo: Well frankly, for the U.S. neophyte, the attraction should be natural. The game is in our language, and despite some linguistic and cultural eccentricities, the spirit of the game is readily accessible to the U.S. fan. Americans are great sport fans, and as witnessed by this year's World Cup, they are beginning to understand the beauty and poetry of the world's game. 

3. Please clarify how and when EPL games will be televised in the U.S. I saw an ad saying all the games (in English) would be on NBC or NBCSN, but I saw the ad on ESPN-TV. Is ESPN or Fox still involved?

Jordan: All Premier League games are on some form of NBC. Usually that will mean NBCSN. Some games might be on NBC. Every game is available to watch live streaming and most are available to watch online throughout the week after the games have aired. No games will be on Fox or ESPN. Most games are on Saturday and Sunday mornings (United States central time) with occasional weeks having games on a Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday afternoon.

Paolo: Jordan explains the US broadcast perfectly. The games are all available in different configurations, but I was disappointed yesterday that only one game was available on free TV.

4. As we've discussed, although I'm not nearly the fan of the game itself that you are, I like the global majesty of the EPL and--sans the hooliganism--the football culture that pervades the U.K. (and most everywhere else). The one game I've been to in London, a Chelsea match with Paolo, was a lot of fun. 

But a couple aspects seem to be at odds with my American-ingrained sports fandom: 

a. The EPL itself seems to only have a "regular season" with the champion being the first-place team, not a tournament winner as in the American sports. The Brits--and you--seem perfectly fine with this. Help us philistines preferring a "knockout stage" better embrace this longstanding tradition. 

b. During any season, there seems to be a lot going on beyond each team trying to win the most EPL games. In any week, teams can not only be playing games against other EPL teams, but also clubs from lower English divisions (is this the FA Cup?) and from across Europe (if qualified for the Champions League or Europa League). During the same week, their players may play international matches for their country (i.e. England, Spain, Germany, etc.), which may be World Cup or Euro Cup qualifiers, but possibly just friendlies. Yet club teammates from opposing countries are expected to play hard against each other, even if injuries can be devastating to their club's prospects. Plus, a team's EPL rank determines Champions league qualification and also the possibility of Relegation.

Jordan: I have come to prefer no postseason. It is logical. The team that wins the most games is the winner. It's pretty simple. Playoffs are much too small a sample and random things are bound to happen that can cause the best team to not win. Following soccer has changed my thinking to the point that I can't get as excited as I used to about the World Series because to me the best team is the one with the best record at the end of the season. And don't even get me started on hockey where a team can sneak into the playoffs in 8th place or something then go on to win the championship. What's the point of playing the regular season? (Another advantage that soccer has is that everyone plays the exact same schedule.)

Paolo: The regular season championship - fairly standard across world football leagues - allows the entire season to be meaningful either by winning the league, qualifying for UEFA or Europa Cup slots, or avoiding relegation. U.S. style playoffs de-emphasize the best team record being declared the victor. There seems to be something not quite fair about that.

Jordan: But if you want tournaments, in England there are four of them that run concurrent with the season. The two English tournaments are the League Cup and the FA Cup and they are knock-out tournaments that every club from all levels throughout the country are entered in. (The Premier League clubs don't enter these tournaments until later rounds)

Then for the best teams there are the Europe-wide tournaments (maybe somewhat confusingly referred to as "leagues"), the Champions League and the Europa League (in order of prestige; teams play in one or the other). This "tournament running concurrent with the regular season" thing has often seemed to be the most difficult thing for non-fans to grasp.

All Champions League (and some domestic Cup matches) are played mid-week (meaning Tuesday or Wednesday). Europa League games are played on Thursdays. International qualifiers and friendlies recently changed the days on which they play. Now they are usually on Thursday/Friday and Monday/Tuesday.

The Champions League is actually a tournament of club teams
that qualify based on their season finish in the EPL and leagues
in several other European countries. Learn more here.

The number of teams from each country's top league that qualify for the Europa League and the Champions League is not set in stone. It depends on a lot of complicated calculations (UEFA's coefficients) designed to determine the relative strength of each league. The stronger the league the more spots they get in Europe. Right now England gets four Champions' League spots. The top three finishers in the Premier League automatically qualify right into the group stage. Whoever comes in fourth has to play a two-legged qualifier to get into the group stage. Arsenal came fourth last year so they will be playing mid-week games against Besiktas, a Turkish club, in the first two weeks of the season. 

Qualifying for Europe (especially the Europa League because the games are on Thursdays and many of the opponents can be in far Eastern or Northern Europe) can be detrimental to a team's home league campaign. One of the reasons Liverpool did so well last year was that they did not have to play in Europe so they had more time to practice and were also able to stay fresh. Many people expect Everton and Hull to struggle this season because they are in the Europa league. In recent years both Swansea and Newcastle were badly affected by their European exertions.

5. OK, let's look at the 2014-2015 EPL season itself. Action begins with a slate of games on Saturday, August 16. How many games do each of the 20 teams play in a season and when does it end?

Jordan: Each team plays every other team once at home and once away, so 38 games. The last day of the season is May 24th. 

6. Who do you expect to wind up on top, and why?

Jordan: I expect Chelsea to win because they spent a gabillion pounds, have one of the two best squads, and may be hungrier than Manchester City.

Paolo: Chelsea should win the league, challenged by Liverpool, Arsenal, Man City and Tottenham. Man U will suffer another terrible season. Overall Chelsea has the best squad, both balanced offensively and defensively. 

7. Who will the next 3 finishers (and thus, Champions League qualifiers) be?

Jordan: Manchester City, Arsenal, and....uh... tough one. I'll go with Manchester United partly because they don't have to play in Europe this season because they stunk to high heaven last season.

Paolo: Arsenal, Liverpool, and Man City (with Tottenham nipping at their heels). 

8. Who else has a good shot?

Jordan: Liverpool and Tottenham. Some people think Everton, and I am rooting for them, but I think they'll end up 7th. (I must note that Ross Barkley just injured his knee and could be out 6-8 weeks. That will seriously harm Everton.) 

9. Which trio of teams are likely to finish at the bottom and be relegated?

Jordan: Burnley, West Brom, and.... again, tough call. A bunch of teams could be down there. Likely candidates for me are Hull City, Aston Villa, Crystal Palace, and Leicester City.

Paolo: Crystal Palace, Hull City and West Bromley. 

See Wikipedia for more information.

10. Who might surprise, one way or the other?

Jordan: I was going to go with Crystal Palace but their manager just got canned so now I think they'll be battling relegation. I don't have any predictions for surprises. If Tottenham finish fourth (or above) that would be a big surprise. Their new coach is well respected and it will be really interesting to see if he can get a club used to disappointment to the next level. I expect a lot of congestion in the bottom half of the table.

I don't know if Stoke will exactly surprise but they are in the process of changing their style from a big, bruising, physical team to a much more skilled and attractive to watch team.  

11. If not previously chronicled, please discuss Manchester United and how they look this year. They're coming off a very subpar season, finishing 7th in the EPL, and replaced their Manager (head coach). What's going on?

Jordan: They look decent so far. Their new manager, Louis Van Gaal, is a real piece of work and should be very entertaining. He has a lot of experience as well, having previously managed Barcelona, Bayern Munich, and Ajax.

He has already made tons of changes, including to going to a 3-5-2 formation (3 defenders, 5 midfielders (two of which are wingbacks), and 2 forwards) which looks like it is putting Rooney and Mata in their ideal positions. They still need to strengthen the defense. They are lacking in quality and experience there.

Paolo: Simply, they need more defense, and didn't really strengthen. 

12. Name some great players to follow, including any notable Americans. I think Tim Howard is still the starting goalie for Everton, right?

Alexis Sanchez

Jordan: The flashiest new player to the league is Alexis Sanchez on Arsenal. He starred for Chile in the World Cup and has been on Barcelona the last few years. He's very good. My only problem with him is that he often does this with his shorts and I have no idea why, but I do know that I don't care for it. (see nearby photo)

I'm not even sure where to start with players to follow. I guess if you're talking about players exciting to watch and/or who will score goals here are a few: Sergio Aguero (Manchester City), Daniel Sturridge, Raheem Sterling, Phillipe Coutinho (Liverpool), Eric Lamela, Christian Eriksen (Tottenham), Diego Costa, Eden Hazard, Oscar, Willian (Chelsea), Ross Barkley, Romelu Lukaku (Everton), Marko Arnautovic, Bojan Krkic (Stoke City), Wilifried Bony, Gylfi Siggurdson (Swansea City), Juan Mata, Wayne Rooney (Manchester United), Loic Remy, Junior Hoilett (QPR), Siem DeJong, Remy Cabella (Newcastle)

There aren't many Americans, I don't think. Jozy Altidore is on Sunderland but it's safe to say his career is not on the upswing. Goalkeeper Tim Howard on Everton was great last season (and in the World Cup). Goalkeeper Brad Guzan was Aston Villa's player of the year last season. He was really good but it should tell you something when a team's player of the year is a keeper. Geoff Cameron is a defender/midfielder on Stoke and was good last year but it's not clear if he has lost his starting spot to new signing Phil Bardsley. 

Yaya Toure

13. Best guesses for the EPL's Player of the Season and Golden Boot (top scorer). (Last season, Luis Suarez won both while playing for Liverpool, but he's now with Barcelona in Spain's La Liga.)

Jordan: If Yaya Toure can come close to what he did last season he will be player of the year. Otherwise probably someone from one of the big clubs. Maybe Wayne Rooney or Vincent Kompany.

Golden Boot: Edin Dzeko (Manchester City), Aguero (but he probably can't stay healthy), Olivier Giroud (Arsenal), Sturridge

Paolo: Player of the year? Alexis Sanchez or Kompany.

14. Tell me about some interesting or potentially intriguing storylines involving teams, players, managers, owners, etc.

Jordan: The top seven teams look pretty well set, and the top three are pretty much agreed on as well. Some order of Chelsea, Manchester City, and Arsenal followed by Liverpool, Manchester United, Tottenham, and Everton. The battle for fourth place will be intense. 8th is a place where Newcastle often ends up but they have made a number of changes and some people think they are weaker than last year. I think Newcastle and Stoke are most likely for 8th/9th. After that is almost a complete free for all. Any one of the other teams could just about finish anywhere.

Jose Mourinho, Chelsea manager

Man U's new manager Van Gaal is going to say all kinds of interesting things and between him and Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho (who can also be referred to as "The Devil") they are going to cause all kinds of mischief. Though the two supposedly get along well Mourinho has already started trying to cause trouble by making derogatory comments about Manchester United's signing of Luke Shaw. Van Gaal didn't rise to the bait.

I shouldn't let Mourinho get to me but I am often unsuccessful in my attempts to ignore him. My standard description of him is that he is a disingenuous jackass who brings the game into disrepute basically every time he opens his mouth. As I'm writing this I just read some more garbage that he said today which I won't even dignify with a response. He's a bad person.

Southampton was fantastic last season but they have been stripped of their manager (Mauricio Pochettino, who is now at Tottenham) and many of their best players, most of whom went to Liverpool. Southampton is known for having a great youth academy but it is likely they are going to struggle this season.

Hull City (or Hull Tigers, depending who you ask) were promoted last year and amazingly qualified for the Europa League by virtue of making it to the FA Cup final. I expect that the extra competition will stretch their squad and if they don't get relegated I wouldn't be surprised if they barely survive. Last season the owner, Assem Allam, didn't get support for additions he wanted to make around the stadium so he said he wanted to change the name of the club from "Hull City" to "Hull Tigers" to generate more revenue (don't ask me how a name change would do that). (They have long been known by the nickname of "Hull City Tigers" but taking out the "City" and formally changing the name was a huge deal and many of their supporters freaked out. That sort of thing is just not done over there. Last year the owner of Cardiff City changed the team's home shirt color from blue to red and people went nutso over that) Allam, who is a businessman who has lived in Hull since the 60's (as opposed to being a absentee/distant foreign owner) did all manner of deceitful things in order to effect the name change. I think as it stands now they are technically "Hull Tigers" but don't know how permanent it is. People are still fuming.

Old Trafford, home of Manchester United

Aston Villa has traditionally been one of the biggest clubs in England but have fallen on hard times and barely stayed up last year. The manager, Celtic legend Paul Lambert, did well in his previous job at Norwich but has been struggling at Villa. He has brought in the notorious red-ass Roy Keane (who is also currently the assistant coach of the Ireland national team) as an assistant to try to fix things. We'll see what happens. It seems like a volatile situation.

Manchester City has extended the contracts of Aguero, Silva, and Kompany but has just announced they are not extending Yaya Toure's contract. This could prove troublesome as Toure has some history of being a little, shall we say, sensitive. Right after last season ended he expressed his displeasure about the club's substandard happy birthday wishes and threatened to leave.

The manager of Crystal Palace quit two days before the season started because he wanted more control. What looked like a team with a chance at finishing around 10th place is now likely looking at a much worse finish.

15. How might a new-to-the-EPL fan choose a team to root for, and how should they follow them?

Jordan: I have no idea how to pick a club. I still don't even have one club I root for. It is all relative and can depend on all kinds of things, from the manager to the players. The only constant is that I always root against Chelsea no matter what.

Following a club is easy nowadays. I used to not be able to see any games and followed via a once a month magazine from England. Twelve years ago my local ABC affiliate did not show the World Cup final; instead they showed the farm report. Eleven years ago I had to drive over 100 miles (and pay $20) to see the UEFA Cup (now called Europa League) final. Now soccer is all over the TV and internet. 

Paolo: Unlike Jordan I'd say root for Chelsea. Seriously, unless you are Manchester-centric, pick a London club to root for. You'll find more overall coverage for these clubs. 

16. I like following match results and standings on the FotMob app that Jordan introduced me to. There's also a FotMob.com website and ESPN has great coverage on ESPNFC.us. Another good site (and related app) is Goal.com. Anything else you recommend?

Men in Blazers, formerly of ESPN, now on NBC and NBCSN

Jordan: I don't use many apps but I do listen to multiple podcasts throughout the week. My favorites, Men In Blazers, just got signed away from ESPN by NBC. I think they will be having a show on NBCSN.

For up to the minute news I often listen to Talksport Radio via the TuneIn app.  

17. If a newly devoted American soccer fan travels to England and wants to see a match, where should they?

Jordan: No idea. Never been there. But I guess if you went to London you'd have several choices. Selhurst Park (where Crystal Palace plays) looks awesome to me. And they sing "Glad All Over" before every match. 

Selhurst Park, south of London, home to Crystal Palace

18. Anything else you would like to add about the new EPL season?

Jordan: Nah. I'm running out of time. The season starts soon and I have to get my fantasy team in order.

The one thing I haven't mentioned yet is that a lot of my predictions could change to some degree depending on what happens in the next few weeks. I don't like the way it works but teams are allowed to continue to buy and sell players until two weeks after the season has begun. The deadline is August 31st. After that date teams have to stick with what they have until January when there is another window for them to acquire players. There are still a lot of rumors that Manchester United is going to add some big-name players. 

19. What other global soccer leagues do you follow closely?

Jordan: Serie A and La Liga.

Paolo: I'd add the Bundesliga to Jordan's list. I also personally follow a bunch of Central and South American leagues (all in countries I lived in). 

20. When should I check back about the Champions League getting hot & heavy or anything else major in the soccer year?

EPL play began on Saturday, August 16. Among the surprising results
were league newcomer Leicester City tying Everton 2-2 (shown above)
and Manchester United losing to Swansea City 2-1.

Jordan: I don't know the dates yet. In a few weeks they will know all the teams that made it into the final 32 and will have a draw to split them into 8 groups of 4 teams. The group stage will probably start in September or October and it is run sort of like the World Cup. Each team plays each of the other 3 teams in their group but in this tournament they play two games against each team, one home and one away. The top two teams from each group advance. Once they get down to the last 16 teams they have a draw and it is a knockout tournament from there with each round except for the final being two games where each team plays one at home and one away. 

Thank you very much for taking the time to provide some great insight and opinions. Enjoy the season.

Jordan: That's what I'm here for. You, too.

Paolo: Jordan covers things very well, I'm just adding color. :-)

Their World Cup Runneth (Almost) Over: Jordan and Paolo Provide the Final Analysis

I've really enjoyed the 2014 World Cup, which seemed to be a bigger deal in America than ever before.

I didn't watch all the games, but quite a few and most of the major ones (though I can't deny writing blog posts, perusing nonsense on my phone and reading the newspaper throughout some low-scoring halves).

As I wrote or referenced in introducing their initial World Cup preview and their observations leading into the Knockout Stage, the avid interest of my close friends Jordan and Paolo have largely abetted whatever interest I've had in soccer over the years--and their insights, graciously shared here, have certainly heightened my appreciation of this World Cup.

With Germany v Argentina set for the final on Sunday afternoon at Maracana stadium in Rio de Janeiro, preceded by a somewhat silly Third Place game between Brazil and the Netherlands on Saturday--now especially cruel for the host nation after their humiliating 7-1 loss to Germany--I've once again asked my pals to kick around their thoughts about the big game and the Cup as a whole.

Here's their Final analysis:

1. So it's down to Germany v Argentina. Your thoughts...

a. On what led us here:

Jordan: Argentina, though they have looked increasingly solid defensively, has never looked all that convincing, doing just enough to get through.

Germany started off on fire the first match, then showed some vulnerabilities in two of their next three. An illness for center-back Mats Hummels causing him to miss the game against Algeria did not help but the main problem was twofold; central defender Per Mertesacker looked awful and the German manager kept playing his world-class right back, Philipp Lahm, in midfield. When Germany reached the quarterfinal against France, Hummels was back (and scored the only goal) and Lahm was back in his best position and Mertesacker was grabbing bench.

Paolo: Obviously not the preferred final match, either for the Brazilians--who seemed unable to cope with the pressure of playing at home--or the Dutch,  who are still the best footballing nation not to win a World Cup. Germany has looked great most of the tournament, and Argentina has looked tenuous but has done what is necessary to get it done.

b. On the game itself and possible outcome:

Jordan: I don't expect a game as dire as Argentina-Netherlands but I don't expect a classic either. I have a hard time envisioning a scenario where Argentina wins. Germany is just better. They can play with the ball or play on the counter-attack. I would give Argentina about a 10% chance to win.

Paolo: The head says Germany wins it, as they have been the best side overall of the tourney. The heart wants Argentina to win on some magical Messi goal.

Angel di Maria

2. Germany clearly looked much better in its blitzkrieg of host Brazil than Argentina did in beating the Netherlands on free kicks after a rather lackluster 0-0 tie over 120 minutes (or even how the Argentines looked vs. Switzerland and Belgium). But two things may bolster Argentina's chances: the health of Aguero and Di Maria (and also Mascherano, who was rather banged up against the Dutch) and simply the possibility of Lionel Messi being game-changing.

a. Please address what you've heard about the Argentinean injuries and where things may stand on Sunday. Or aren't they as important as I may think?

Jordan: Aguero is not 100% fit and has not been for a while. He is in poor form and while he is a fantastic player when healthy he likely will at best be a late game substitution. Missing Di Maria is a bigger issue. I'm still not sure if he will play but if he does I doubt he will be anywhere near 100%.

Javier Mascherano concussed

Mascherano has been heroic and is possibly Argentina's most important player but I have a big problem
with the fact that he was allowed to continue playing after being knocked almost unconscious in their last match against the Netherlands. Alvaro Pereira on Uruguay was literally knocked unconscious against England in the group stage but was allowed to continue playing. It's outrageous that players who have been pretty clearly concussed have been allowed to continue playing. I blame Sepp Blatter.

Paolo: Mascherano is the heart of the defense, although not the best tactical defender. But heart has its place in the game, and I think he will play. It's a once in a lifetime opportunity.

Lionel Messi

b. Is there anything tactically about the way Germany plays that may enable Messi to get better chances to find space, score and assist than it seemed he had against the Netherlands (and some earlier games)? It seems he not only has the weight of being "the world's best player" on him, but the weight of Maradona. What's necessary for him to be a difference-maker on Sunday?

Jordan: Mats Hummels seems to have an issue with a knee but I believe he is still expected to play. Even if Mertesacker has to play I don't think Argentina has shown enough attacking competence to make it an issue.

I expect Germany to alter their strategy just a bit to account for Messi. Either Schweinsteiger or Khedeira may be charged with keeping a close eye on him and will stay back more than normal. Though I am rooting for him I don't think Messi will be able to influence the game all that much.

Paolo:  The Germans mark forwards very well, and are very disciplined in keeping their defensive form. But Messi only needs a small amount of space to move in -- that is the genius of his game, My belief is that the truly great players rise to the occasion. I hope Messi can fulfill his legacy with a WC win. 

Thomas Müller with Sideshow Bob, aka David Luiz

3. Give me your Golden Ball (MVP) winner for the entire Cup, dependent, of course, on what happens Sunday. And perhaps a few runners-up and best goalies.

Jordan: Thomas Müller of Germany is the odds-on favorite. If Messi dominates and Argentina win he would get it.

Runners up for me: Toni Kroos (Germany), James Rodriguez (Colombia). Arjen Robben (Netherlands) and Neymar (Brazil) will get votes. Javier Mascherano (Argentina) has been heroic but as a defensive midfielder is not likely to be considered.

Several goalkeepers were awesome: Neuer (Germany), Ochoa (Mexico), Navas (Costa Rica), Enyeama (Nigeria), and Howard (U.S.A.) stood out.

It may be something of an anomaly but the goalkeepers for three of the four semi-final teams are rated as very sub-par. Romero (Argentina), Cillessen (Netherlands) and Julio Cesar (Brazil) are universally considered to be poor.

Paolo: Nothing to add, Jordan's  list is complete

 
4. Without simply belittling a poor effort, can you address the destruction of Brazil vs. Germany? To me, they hadn't looked superior throughout the whole World Cup, and unfortunately Neymar--their best player--was hurt in the waning minutes of their quarter-final game against Colombia. Perhaps that shook their confidence going in against Germany, but they--and especially their defense, which has little to do with Neymar--folded like a cheap suit after the first goal.  

Any explanation?

Jordan: Brazil was not good throughout and their effort against Germany was shocking. Theoretically the loss of Thiago Silva, their captain and best defensive player, should have been at least as concerning as the loss of Neymar. I think there are three factors to explain the way Brazil played:

1) They weren't that good a team.

2) They were under a ton of pressure.

3) They were completely overcome by emotion. (this being partly related to #2)

Many of the Brazilian players had been criticized for weeping earlier in the tournament but the lengths they went to to commemorate Neymar before the game against Germany was ridiculously overboard. As many people have pointed out they seemed to be acting as if Neymar had died. They completely lost their heads. Germany lost one of their best players (Marco Reus) a week before the World Cup started but you didn't see them wailing and gnashing their teeth at any time.

I would, however, like to take this opportunity to do some belittling. Marcelo and Fernandinho were exceptionally and implausibly terrible but I am saving the knives for one of my least favorite players, David Luiz (also known derisively as Sideshow Bob). He was the captain of the team with Thiago Silva out and he played like a complete freaking idiot. He was meant to be in the center of their defense but went charging around the field like a chicken with his head cut off leaving chaos and empty spaces where he was supposed to be. 

   

And if you'd like to have a visual example of why I have a problem with David Luiz, take a look at this:

For context, this heinous assault was committed off the ball and was committed against a 19-year-old player, Jake Reeves, on a team in England's third division (called League One) in the dying minutes of a game that Chelsea was winning 4-0 in the fourth round of the FA Cup.

David Luiz is a dirty, dirty player and a bad person. His tears at the end of the game against Germany made me happy. Screw him.

Paolo: Completely agree with Jordan's assessment. The Brazilians didn't have to qualify for the Cup so they did not play a tough competitive schedule and I believe missed the opportunity for the team to bond under that process. What I saw was a lack of on the field chemistry and cohesion.

Plus, as mentioned before, the pressure of playing at home (and all the backlash over WC expenditures) just discombobulated them. Once they were down 2-0 they gave up. I'm surprised they didn't lose by more.

5. Somewhat facetiously, should Brazil show up for the Third Place game vs. the Netherlands? And more literally, will they? I can't help but sense another blowout.

Jordan: I don't think there will be a blowout. No one cares about this game, not even the players. The third place game shouldn't even be played.

Paolo: I respectfully disagree with Jordan. This is Brazil s opportunity to show the world and its fans that the semi-final was an aberration and that they can win playing their type of game. I pray they win. Losing, and or losing badly, would further wound the world's greatest footballing nation -- and that would be a tragedy. Some semblance of dignity needs to be restored to the nation, I hope they play great and win. 

6. Though we discussed last time that this has been a very competitive, well-played and entertaining World Cup, it's not hard to imagine that it will be recalled primarily for Spain's disappointment, Suarez' bite and Brazil's humiliation. Why should World Cup 2014 be remembered for more than that?

James Rodriguez' goal against Uruguay

Jordan: It should be remembered for the Suarez bite and for Brazil's humiliation. That doesn't mean it
hasn't been a really great spectacle. Though the games seemed to get less exciting after the group stage there have been plenty of fantastic performances and moments.

The goals by Van Persie (against Spain), Cahill (against the Netherlands), James Rodriguez (against Uruguay), and Jermaine Jones (against Portugal) were all worthy of all-time World Cup commemoration. I'm not enough of a World Cup historian to be in a position to compare it to other World Cups but I think the consensus is that this has been the best one since 1998.

Paolo: Also, because finally even non-football fans in the U.S. have to at the very least admit that the World Cup is the greatest sports tourney in the world. And U.S. fans coalesced around a team that they learned to love. 30 years from now this tourney and squad will be cited as the defining moment in U.S. soccer. 

7. From this World Cup, how do you forecast International soccer in years to come, leading up and into World Cup 2018, which will be held in Russia? Which teams' stature has substantive shifted, for better or worse?

Jordan: I don't have a forecast. The gap in quality does seem to be narrowing between the traditional powers and some of the smaller countries. Brazil's stature has been shattered. They need to regroup.

Paolo: I think that CONCACAF proved it deserves a 4th qualifying team. Africa and Asia also need more teams in the tourney. I think the US has proved it can play with anyone, as well as Costa Rica.  

8. Anything else you would like to add...

   
Jordan: Someone should do something to stop Sepp Blatter and get rid of the corruption of FIFA but I'm not holding my breath. (See this 2013 article from The Guardian.)

I especially like how FIFA says they are opposed to racism and discrimination yet have awarded the next two World Cups to Russia and Qatar. Great job, FIFA.

The popularity of soccer in the U.S. is certainly increasing. Being able to watch so many games of the European leagues (Premier League, Serie A, La Liga, Bundesliga, League 1, Portugese Liga, Champions League, Europa League, etc.) can only increase interest.

Paolo: Yes, the 2022 Cup needs to be moved to the US!

As with before, thank you very much for your time and great insights. 

Jordan: Any time dude. 

I don't know about you, but I think Jordan and Paolo warrant a regular gig, or perhaps their own blog, analyzing international and club soccer around the world. But enjoy the Final, and may  your Cup runneth over.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: As It Enters the Knockout Stage, Jordan & Paolo Assess a World Cup Worth Sinking Your Teeth Into

Prior to the start of the 2014 World Cup, I posted a preview that predominantly included the insights of my soccer-loving friends Jordan and Paolo.

Now that the Group Stage has concluded and 16 teams--including the U.S.--have made it to the Knockout Stage (played in a one-and-done tournament format), I thought I'd get their assessments and perhaps revised predictions, while sharing some of mine.

Of the 48 games played in the Group Stage, I watched 16 of them, and followed most of the results, but Jordan has seen them all except one, and Paolo has seen most of the major ones.

I've largely been impressed, though--as seeps into some of my conversational-type questions here--I have been troubled by certain aspects, and not just Luis Suarez' biting incident, which I imagine has united the entire world in condemnation.

So rather than pontificate any further myself, I'll simply provide below the e-mail-based trialogue.

1. What are your thoughts on the World Cup so far? Mine, likely not uncommon, are that it's largely been great--good games throughout, several superb goals, surprises among teams that have been really good, good but not advancing and pretty bad, etc.--but marred significantly by the Suarez biting incident and some poor refereeing.  

Jordan: This World Cup has been fantastic. There have only been a handful of sub-par games. I've watched every game live except Spain-Australia.

Paolo: The play of CONCACAF and CONMEBOL has shown that the Americas have loads of talent, and a lot of it is playing in Europe but also in the Mexican league and even in MLS.

The new disappearing chalk that is being used to demarcate where the wall should stand and where the
ball should be on free kicks. Brilliant idea and not sure why it hasn't been used before. Also worthy to note that the ball has NOT been a distraction like it was in South Africa in 2010 and also that the vuvuzela has not really been replaced (although the Brazilians have something similar).

  
2. Weird things often seem to happen in the World Cup--e.g. the Zidane headbutt in 2006, handballs affecting games, etc.--but the cream of the crop (in terms of teams) frequently rise to the top nonetheless. Yet, for me--and I was no great fan of them coming in--what happened to Italy (knocked out by Uruguay after losing a player to a red card, the at-the-time non-penalized Suarez bite, a goal by Uruguay's Godin who arguably should have been red-carded against England and therefore not playing, the WC end for stars like Buffon and Pirlo) casts a bit of a pall over the rest of the Cup. How do you feel?

Jordan: Nah. No pall. Yeah, Italy got pretty screwed by a very debatable red card, Godin not getting a second yellow against England in the previous game, and the referee not seeing Suarez try to take a chunk out of Chiellini's shoulder, but as you note in your first question there were several bad decisions made by the referees throughout the group stage. Maybe Italy got it worse than others and maybe I would feel a little differently if I thought Italy was playing well but aside from being okay against England I didn't think they offered very much.

Paolo: The World Cup is a global celebration of the world's most popular game and also indirectly of our cultures. I find it fascinating to see how fans dress and cheer on their teams. So no pall.

But the Suarez incident, and some poor refereeing have impacted a few games. The Italians got screwed. 

3. Luis Suarez has now been banned by FIFA for the rest of the World Cup and beyond, for a total of 4 months (and 9 international games). Is this just? Should it have been worse?

Jordan: I don't know exactly what the scope of FIFA's authority is and I think I have heard some talk that they may be overreaching by suspending him from Premier League games for Liverpool. We'll have to wait and see about that.

I don't know if it's enough of a punishment. How many times can he be allowed to bite people? If he continues biting people at this rate he will next bite someone on January 18th, 2015 and by August 3rd, 2015 he will be biting a person every day. (Credit for those calculations goes to these tweets from Bootiful Game: 1, 2)

He needs to stop biting people but I've seen no evidence that he is going to. (Here is Suarez' lame defense of the incident, which was a particular shame given how well he showed against England, scoring 2 goals just a month removed from knee surgery.)

Paolo: I applaud FIFA for handing down a stiff sanction. Suarez has issues. I'm worried because Barcelona has been looking to add him. 

4. Let's talk about the U.S.A., who have advanced to the knockout stage. I didn't see the Ghana match, but heard the U.S. was outplayed despite winning; they were better than Portugal, but gave up a stunning goal to settle for a draw. They lost to powerhouse Germany--in the rain after playing in stifling Manaus--but surprisingly made it through the "Group of Death." Assess their play, success, chances and any revised world stature.

Jordan: You heard right about the Ghana game but part of the reason that game may have unfolded the way it did was due to Dempsey's goal in the first minute. The U.S. wasn't very good and Michael Bradley had the worst game I think I've ever seen him have. They were better against Portugal but Portugal was well below full strength and also not in good form. Germany didn't look great against them but they still seemed very dangerous and on a different level. Maybe Germany just felt like they didn't need to do too much more than they did.

I'm not trying to take away any credit (even though as I read what I just wrote it may seem that way). The U.S. fully deserved to advance. As for their chance against Belgium, they certainly have a chance. Belgium won all three of their games but did not look great in their first two. (In their third game they rested about half of their first team so I'm not really counting that one.) I do remember the U.S. playing Belgium in a friendly in May of 2013 in Cleveland and Belgium really smoked the U.S. 4-2 (you can read about that game here). The lineups will not be exactly the same when they play on July 1st, and Belgium is missing their star striker Chistian Benteke while the U.S. is missing Jozy Altidore. You can read about that game here:

If Belgium plays well I don't think the U.S. can beat them. I give the U.S. about a 30% chance of winning.

Paolo: The U.S. should be proud of advancing out of the Group of Death and making the knockout round for the second straight cup. They lost by a goal to the number 2 team in the world (Germany), and tied the number 4 team (Portugal). They said they had to beat Ghana and they did. They still haven't played a complete game, and I predict they will against Belgium. On paper Belgium wins, but who doesn't love an underdog better than Americans?

I say they shock everyone, beat Belgium and meet Argentina in the Quarters. There, however, the dream ends... but (Coach Jürgen) Klinsmann chose a young squad thinking about the next World Cup. I think the U.S. continues to make huge strides and wouldn't be surprised with a quarterfinal appearance in 2018. 

5. To paraphrase My Fair Lady, why has the reign of Spain gone mainly down the drain?

Jordan: Spain just finished an era of unprecedented dominance but their core players have gotten older. Their central defense especially was lacking. They also played two of the best teams in the world in their first two games. They have a lot of very good young players and there is no reason why they shouldn't be among the best teams again very soon.

Paolo: Spain's dominance over 8 years is unmatched in European football. Two Euro Championships sandwiched around the World Cup make them team for the ages and the tiki-taca football they invented is now used by many. But they got old, seemingly overnight. Casillas was a mistake in goal and the defense just plain didn't show up. But new blood is on the way and Spain will remain a world power. 

6. Which teams have impressed you, not just in advancing, but in the way they played. Jordan, I know you liked how Australia showed, even though they wound up with 0 points in the group stage.

Jordan: I was expecting Australia to get crushed but they were great in their first two games against Chile and the Netherlands (the same teams that Spain played). They easily could have drawn both of those. France was mostly awesome. Colombia was great and very entertaining, scoring some of the best goals so far. Costa Rica surprised me (and pretty much everyone) and was really solid.

Paolo: No one has looked AWESOME for all three games, but the Brazilians, Argentines, Germans, and Dutch look to be the most complete teams.

Chile, Colombia and Costa Rica have also impressed. And the Greeks and US and the Aussies showed some grit. Kudos to all of them. 

7. To my untrained eyes, no team has looked completely dominant. Obviously the Netherlands impressed against Spain, but not against Australia. Argentina went 3-0, but largely thanks to Messi and their defense seems suspect. Germany was strong but drew vs. Ghana. Brazil has been solid, but not awesome, and were fortunate to survive Croatia thanks to a terrible call. Costa Rica and Columbia were impressive, but probably far from favorites to win it all. How do you view the group stage play & results, and how it may foretell what happens in the knockout stage.

Jordan: Aside  from Spain getting knocked out the biggest surprises were probably Costa Rica, Greece, and Algeria advancing. France looked like a very, very good team.

Paolo: Agree. 

Follow match results at FIFA.com

8. 16 teams are now left in the tournament-style "knockout" stage. Who are your picks to advance to the semis, finals and win it all? I'll guess Brazil v Germany and Netherlands v Argentina. It can really go any way from there, but given the locale, would love to see Brazil play Argentina, with Neymar vs. Messi. I'd root for Argentina, but wouldn't be shocked if Netherlands or even Belgium were to beat them, let alone Brazil.

Jordan: I mostly agree. Even though Brazil have not been that good I can't pick against them. I wouldn't be that surprised though if they lost to Chile in the round of 16 or in their next game which I am guessing would be against Colombia. I think the Netherlands has the easiest route, playing Mexico (who I don't rate even though other people seem to like them) then, if they win that, would face the winner of Costa Rica-Greece. (I have heard the Netherlands have injury concerns with a bunch of their best players, including Robben, so that could affect things)

France looks so good (and don't look like they are going to implode) so maybe I would pick them to beat Germany and face Brazil in one semifinal, Argentina-Netherlands in the other. If I had to pick a winner I still think Brazil is the most likely. If I was going to pick a winner on how the teams look I'd take France. They have great depth as well.

Paolo: Seth, I think you have the 4 finalists. France looks better, but no way they beat Germany. 

9. Who have been the best players so far, and of those still in play, who should have the most impact? Besides strong play from Neymar (Brazil) and big goals by Messi (Argentina), I've been impressed by Robyn van Persie and Arjen Robben of the Netherlands, and Mexican goalie Guillermo Ochoa. But they've been pretty obvious, so feel free to go a good bit deeper.

Jordan: James Rodriguez from Colombia has been brilliant. Also on Colombia, Cuadrado and Jackson Martinez. And 38-year-old Mario Yepes on defense has been great. Mueller of Germany and Shaqiri of Switzerland each have a hat trick so they are kind of obvious. Benzema (France) has been excellent and is unlucky to not have more than three goals. Slimani, Halliche, and Feghouli on Algeria. Blind on Netherlands. Aranguiz and Diaz on Chile.

Paolo: Agree. 

10. Especially given the success of the U.S., and that of countries with large U.S. populations--Mexico, Germany, Greece, Dutch and others, it certainly seems like the World Cup is bigger in the United States now than throughout our lifetimes. Two questions related to this:

a) I've read about Americans complaining about games ending in ties, players flopping and/or faking injury and bad calls affecting outcomes. Will or should any of this impact future "football" fandom in the U.S.

Jordan: I don't know. If that's what people focus on not much can be done. I don't get what's wrong with a tie. They should have them in baseball. Sometimes the most representative result of a game is a tie. (And it's okay, you don't have to call it "football". The game is called soccer here (among other places)). 

Paolo: I think that the pendulum has swung in favor of soccer. Look at the crowds cheering the team on and it is obviously younger demographic. The old stuffy reporters who for decades have spoken about how much they hate the game, are being put out to pasture. Younger reporters who grew up around the sport understand its significance. 

Story at ChicagoTribune.com

b) It seems the media is speculating about the popularity of the World Cup spurring an increase in MLS popularity (there's a story on the front page of Thursday's Chicago Tribune but registration may be required to see it online). There seems to be plausibility in this, but the logic is a bit askew, as from what you've both previously imparted, MLS lags well behind the top leagues in England, Spain, Italy, Germany and likely elsewhere in terms of fielding the world's truly elite players at the peak of their careers. This sense of "second-tier" play also differentiates MLS from MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL. Please discuss.

Jordan: I hardly watch the MLS. The quality isn't great and I don't have any space left in my brain to follow it. There is just too much other (and better) soccer available to watch. That being said I wish I was able to see more of the league below the Premier League (called the Championship).

Paolo: Most of the U.S. squad and about another 15 or so members from other squads play in the MLS. While it is still not a European league, it is increasingly becoming a destination for players from Latin America. MLS will continue to grow as a result.  I'd also point out that teams playing well (France, Holland, Greece, Costa Rica, Mexico) have 2nd tier leagues as opposed to La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, and the Premier League. While some of that talent does play in those leagues, a lot of it doesn't. They play in other leagues. 

11. Anything else you'd like to mention about what you've observed in World Cup 2014 so far, what you expect, what you've liked and hated, etc.?

Jordan: I expect the Brazil-Chile game to be a barn burner. In their last game against the Netherlands the Chile players did not cover themselves in glory with the way they conducted themselves. Brazil also has some players inclined to histrionics and I expect it to be a very difficult game to referee. England's Howard Webb will be the ref. Good luck.

It wouldn't be a World Cup without a team imploding and this year we have Ghana to thank. (Cameroon gets special mention as well) Ghana players threatened to strike unless they got their bonus payments in cash so Ghana's president flew $3,000,000 over to Brazil. Then, for whatever reason, Sulley Muntari physically attacked a Ghana official and was kicked off the team, as was Kevin Prince-Boateng for some type of verbal altercation.

Honduras was just trying to hurt people. Glad they're gone.

Outside of Spain, England, Ivory Coast, and Japan were very disappointing. Croatia and Bosnia generally did well but were unfortunate.

This has nothing to do with anything but two players have been kicked in the face. Dempsey got his nose broken and I don't believe a foul was even called. Von Bergen on Switzerland had his cheekbone/orbital bone broken (and is out of the World Cup) by a Giroud kick. In neither case was a card given when at a minimum a yellow was deserved and I don't know that a red would have been out of order.

One last note about the refereeing. I can complain about referees with the best of them but I think it should be remembered that it is a very difficult job. Many of the players, for lack of a better word, cheat. Ultimately they are the ones more to blame. It is one thing to exaggerate contact to draw attention to being fouled. It goes to a different level when players are trying to get an opponent carded. Then there is also the subject of pretending to be injured in order to waste time, which is also unsavory.

I'm not sure what the solution would be to cut down on that stuff. Diving is a whole other subject and in cases of diving I'm in favor of retrospective punishment. I know it is not always easy to conclusively prove a dive but sometimes they can (I'm looking at you, Fred), and when they can I think players should be suspended. I think that if the players knew that a suspension was a possibility it would at least somewhat curtail the diving.

Paolo: Hate the diving and shows of poor sportsmanship. Love the shows of solidarity and the time held tradition of trading jerseys with the team you just played.

Jordan brings up a good point about how blood can be drawn and no card be awarded? I also think that the goal line cam has been used well.

Well, there you have it. Thanks to Jordan and Paolo for all their great insights, provided quite expeditiously. Enjoy the rest of the World Cup even if your team doesn't "go to Rio."

Are You Ready For Some Futebol? Jordan and Paolo Preview the World Cup (Providing Help for Neophytes Like Me)

On Thursday, June 12, the 2014 World Cup kicks off with a match between host country Brazil and Croatia.

I am not certain I will watch the game, but if I can, I will.

Not because I love soccer, or outside U.S. shores, football. (And in the Brazilian tongue of Portuguese, futebol.)

I'm really not an aficionado, not in the sense of avidly following a 90+ minute game that may well not even include a single goal.

With apologies to the billions who fervently love soccer--including, as featured below, two of my best friends--the game itself kind of bores me.

That said, I love the culture of soccer and how it--and the World Cup--unifies the world likely more than anything else.

So while I will not be watching every minute of every World Cup game, I will closely follow the tournament and relish what I do see.

This is in large part due to two of my closest friends, who are huge soccer fans.

Jordan, my best friend since kindergarten, is still a big baseball fan as we were growing up, but now watches much more soccer. Pretty much everything I know about what's happening in "football," whether in the English Premier League, Europe's Champions League or elsewhere, is because of his enlightening me.

Paolo, who I met at work in 2008, has not only lived in a good number of participating World Cup countries, he played soccer at Harvard. And as he did with the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, he will be traveling to Brazil for all of the final matches--at Maracana Stadium in Rio de Janeiro--and perhaps a few others.

From www.fifa.com/worldcup/

So rather than trying to bluster my way through a half-fast World Cup preview cobbled from other sources of information, I just asked them for their help.

With hopes, in part, to enlighten rather casual fans like myself, what follows are their answers to my questions, with almost no editing on my part.

I'll simply add that I want Argentina to win because of superstar Lionel Messi, and not knowing any better, will even pick them to win. But Jordan and Paolo's predictions are undoubtedly much better than mine.

1. Best guess, who wins?

Jordan: Brazil. It's awful tough to discount the home field advantage. Assuming Brazil make it out of their group they do face possibly the toughest first round of 16 game. They will have to play one of Spain, Netherlands, or Chile. Yikes.

Paolo: Tough one. Spain COULD repeat, Brazil is home and formidable, but I'm worried about the Germans.

2. Three other teams that could win it all:

Jordan: Argentina, Spain, and Germany.

Paolo: Just the three I named, anything else would be considered a major upset. Super outside shot? Belgium and Argentina.

3. Who do you want to win?

Jordan: Argentina. Mostly because of Messi. Spain would be my second choice. They are already reigning two-time Euro champions and reigning World Cup champions. Three consecutive major titles is unprecedented but a fourth would be another order of magnitude of incredible.

Paolo: Spain

4. Which teams may do surprisingly well?

Jordan: Hmm. I guess South Korea and Japan. If either gets out of their group that would be a surprise possibility. Also I guess if Switzerland can win their group they would have a good chance to make it to the quarterfinals. It may sound weird but Italy could surprise. They never seem to be mentioned with the favorites but they have a chance to go very far. Unfortunately they lost Riccardo Montolivo to a broken leg in the friendly against Ireland. That could hurt them.

Paolo: Belgium, Croatia, and I really think the U.S.

5. Which teams may do surprisingly bad?

Jordan: The team that is pretty popular to call overrated is Belgium. I might overrate them as well. They have a bit of a "Golden Generation" happening right now but I think the reason I (and others) may overrate them is that they have a ton of very good to great players playing in the Premier League (Fellaini, Vermaelen, Vertonghen, Mirallas, Kompany, Lukaku, Hazard, Chadli, Mignolet (even though he's a back-up), and Dembele, They also have possibly the best goalkeeper in the world in Courtois) so a lot of people are very familiar with them.

Belgium are in the easiest group but they don't have a ton of international experience. If they come in second in their group they will probably face Germany in the round of 16 and that would likely end their tournament. If they win their group they could well face Portugal which isn't a walk in the park either.

Paolo: Mexico and England.

6. Assess the U.S. chances. Do you agree with the exclusion of Landon Donovan?

Click here to enlarge
Click here for a PDF

Jordan: I could well be wrong but I expect the U.S. to be defeated heavily. Their defense looks like a shambles to me and I could see especially Germany and possibly Portugal putting a big score on them.

I probably don't know enough about the U.S. team to say if leaving Donovan out was the right move or not. Klinsmann (the U.S. head coach) knows better than I do though, that's for sure.

Paolo: If the U.S. loses respectfully vs. Germany (enabling goal differential to apply as a possible tie breaker), they need to draw with Portugal and beat Ghana. That possibly gets them into the second round. Once there they can upset anyone to get to the quarters.

Regarding Donovan, he was out of shape and I think he didn't set a good example. He's probably the greatest American player of all time, but he lost out to a youth movement.

7. Which teams should casual fans pay most attention to?
 
Jordan: That's a tough one. It sort of depends why someone is watching. If you can pick a team to root for that can help. Casual fans can't really tell much about the quality of play, and the quality of play is not always great, partly due to the players not playing together very much and partly because a lot of teams in the World Cup play a tight and cagey game. It's a huge deal and no one wants to make a mistake so a lot of the play can end up being pretty cautious.

France has some fantastic players and they can be exciting. Sometimes they implode but they can't implode any worse than they did in 2010 because that would be impossible. They left Samir Nasri off the team because he is a wanker, which made me laugh because I don't care for him. Nasri's girlfriend, upon finding out he had been left off the team, went on twitter and insulted the French team's manager, for which he is suing her. Ha ha.

As for style of play Chile might be the best team to watch. They're crazy. They go after people. It's very unfortunate that they are grouped with both Spain and the Netherlands which really limits their chances of advancing, but anything is possible. They are very, very good and I could see them taking second in their group behind Spain.

Argentina has superb attacking talent (including Messi of course) and a suspect defense which is an entertaining combination.

Brazil is always a must-watch but they do not play with the kind of flair that they have long been famous for. They are a little more workmanlike but they are still pretty awesome.

Paolo: Spain, Germany, Italy, Belgium

8. What will be the toughest group(s)?

Jordan: Group B is insanely brutal. Groups D and G after that. Groups C and H seem to be the most wide open as to who will advance.

Paolo: The U.S. are in the group of death (Group G, with Germany, Portugal and Ghana)

9. Please remind/enlighten us casual observers how World Cup play is formatted, in terms of the group stage and advancement from there.

Jordan: There are 8 groups--labeled A through H--of 4 teams each. A team plays one game against each of the three other teams in their group. 3 points are awarded for a win, 1 point for a draw. After the 3 games, if teams are tied on points the first tiebreaker is goal difference. The second tiebreaker is goals scored. The top two teams in each group advance to the round of 16. Teams that come in first place in their group are matched up against a team from another group that came in second. Once it gets to the round of 16, it is just a straight bracketed knock-out tournament.

10. Which games in the group stage are you most excited to watch?

Jordan: The order in which the games are played has an effect on this. Ghana v U.S. play their first game against each other on June 16th. That one is huge. If the U.S. can win that game they actually have a chance because their third game is against Germany. If Germany already have the group wrapped up by then that could benefit the U.S.

In theory England v Italy in the first game could be one to watch but it could end up being the type of game where neither team wants to take any chances and a 0-0 draw is a likely result. Also, it is being played in the jungle in Manaus and the heat will probably be a big factor.

Spain v Netherlands is massive. Two of the biggest teams. Argentina v Bosnia-Herzegovina could be a goal-fest. Serious attacking forces and not the best defenses could mean a chance of a lot of goals. Chile v Australia could be a big time beatdown (with Chile doing the beating down).

Otherwise we just need to wait until the third game of each group when we will know all the possible permutations.

Paolo: U.S. vs Portugal

11. Cite a good handful of players that fans should note besides Lionel Messi (Argentina) and Cristiano Ronaldo (Portugal).

Jordan: Kerzhakov (Russia), Rakatic (Croatia), Pogba (France), Matuidi (France), Shaqiri (Switzerland), Sanchez (Chile), Di Maria (Argentina), Hazard (Belgium), Lukaku (Belgium), Pjanic (Bosnia-Herzegovina), Neymar (Brazil), Oscar (Brazil), Paulinho (Brazil), Gotze (Germany), Reus (Germany), Muller (Germany), Sterling (England), Sturridge (England), Barkley (England), YaYa Toure (Ivory Coast), Wilfried Bony (Ivory Coast), Joao Moutinho (Portugal), Guarin (Colombia)

Some players that would qualify but for serious injury concerns: Falcao (Colombia), Suarez (Uruguay), Diego Costa (Spain)

Not a comprehensive list by any means but here are some major players that come to mind who are out with injury: Montolivo (Italy), Benteke (Belgium), Montes (Mexico), Edwin Valencia (Colombia)

Paolo: So many. Look for the young U.S. striker Aron Jóhannsson, also don't sleep on Iniesta (Spain)

12. What are some compelling storylines, whether about country rivalries, FIFA, coaches in trouble, etc.?

Jordan: The most compelling storyline has to be a combination of the upcoming (and continuing) civil unrest in Brazil and the despicable corruption of FIFA. I'll admit I don't even know close to all of the details and won't try to list the things I am aware of here. Perhaps Paolo has a more informed perspective. What I do know is that FIFA is utterly corrupt and I believe its president, Sepp Blatter, should be in prison.

Especially where events like the Olympics or the World Cup are involved there is always a massive amount of corruption and human rights violations involved.

This is an article about the kind of corruption to which I'm referring, and I will be reading this book as
soon as I can get my hands on it.

On the sporting side, the second game of the group stage between  Uruguay and England and the possibility of Suarez facing many of his Premier League opponents and also many of his teammates at Liverpool is fascinating.

Also, Coach Jurgen Klinsmann taking the U.S. to face Germany.

Paolo: Brazil will be considered a disaster if they don't get to the at least the semi-finals, same for Spain and Germany.

13. Please cite any helpful resources for following the World Cup; television outlets, websites, apps, media coverage, etc.

Jordan: Every game will either be on ESPN, ESPN2 or ABC. All games will also be available streaming on ESPN3.

This link shows all games and the American broadcast outlet on a daily basis.

I tend to stick to the U.K. for most of my information, mostly the Guardian and the BBC.

I listen to a quantifiable butt load of podcasts. Some of them are:

The Guardian, Football Weekly

The Football Ramble

World Soccer Talk (they are also doing a series with individual episodes devoted to previewing each team)

Second Captains - This is an Irish podcast and I'm not sure what the extent of their coverage will be and it may be interspersed with Gaelic football and hurling.

Men In Blazers - For me, this is the most entertaining podcast of all, though it may not be everyone's cup of tea as it has a lot of inside jokes and therefor may not seem to be the most informative, but I think it is the funniest.

Also, the FotMob app has real-time soccer scores from around the world, so should be a good resource for those who just want the scores. There is also FotMob.com.

Paolo: FIFA.com; FIFA.com/worldcup

(Seth: This Grantland.com article provides more in-depth tips for following the action, but could be helpful for non-full-time football aficionados.)  
 

Maracana Stadium, Rio de Janeiro

14. Paolo, what games will you likely be attending?

Paolo: Have tickets to semifinal, the third place and final games Secured. May scalp a quarter final if possible.

15. Anything else not covered above.

Jordan: I'm sure I could go on but I decided to keep it brief.

And there you have it. Enjoy the action and all the communal aspects of the World Cup.

Many thanks to Jordan and Paolo for providing great insight. And if Argentina doesn't win, well, don't cry for me. I won't be betting on it.