USA 3-0 Panama: Perfectly Adequate, Utterly Undramatic

There are many fruit-based comparisons available, but this one is mine.

I'll start with this: if you've missed Major League Soccer during the offseason, the U.S. Men's 3-0 win over Panama should have scratched that itch. Even going beyond (MLS-exclusive) personnel, that match came as close to, say, Columbus Crew SC pushing around, say, the Colorado Rapids as you're likely to see outside the real thing (yeah, yeah, the latest edition ended differently, the three points wound up in the same column). Better still, it all held up, all the way down to the U.S. fucking around with fire inside its own defensive third; pure Gregg Berhalter that, the high-risk, high(?)-reward of playing out of the back...god knows what a more accomplished national team than Panama will do with that high-wire act.

Credit where it's due, though: even if Panama put a couple chances on the American goal (I'd call Abdiel Arroyo's near-self-assisted goal they're best look), the U.S. never looked worse than strained - pretty much exactly what one would expect from a U.S. C-team playing Panama's B/C team. For what it's worth, I'd argue Panama ceded possession more than the U.S. maintained it, but the beginnings of something good lurk in that detail. Whether or not the Central Americans played to practice defending deep (who's to say?), their relative comfort on the ball when they had it stands as the only real warning sign I picked up from Berhalter's first outing as U.S. Men's coach. It's hard to lose sleep over that because, if a game between the U.S. and Panama's A-Teams is an apples-to-apples comparison, this was tangerine-to-tangerine, and nobody really starts its tangerines in the games that matter. Still, it was good to see the tangerines have their day. The question is, how many will one day become apples? (And...thus ends the fruit analogy.)

I'll get to that, but I want to flag one deeply and personally satisfying shift from the Jurgen Klinsmann era to tonight. In his post-game comments, Berhalter made a very clear point in directing a question about what coaching his first game for the U.S. Men meant to him (from a notably close-talking Sebastian Salazar) to praise for the players. If he follows this up by taking full responsibility for the first crushing loss, Berhalter will get a solid year of slack from me. Now, back to the tangerine thing...

A fairly constant stream of chatter plays under friendlies like this, one that acknowledges that the "real starters" wait in the wings to take over when the real games come to town. Anyone who wants to change that equation has to stand out - and several players did that for the U.S. Men tonight, including the San Jose Earthquake's Nick Lima's balls-out tackle and next-level cross to pick out Walker Zimmerman for the U.S.'s second goal; or just everything Zimmerman did with his head all day long (that he might be better with his head than he is with his feet speaks volumes about how goddamn good he is with his head); there was also Jonathan Lewis' nifty change of pace against [Panamanian fullback] (sorry!) to set up the U.S.'s third goal; which went to Christian Ramirez who, in his few minutes on the field, managed to play a cleaner, striker role than Gyasi Zardes managed all night and, golly, did anyone else feel the weight of Taylor Twellman going after Zardes' game? Jinkies....

Gold Cup: The U.S. Frustrates Panama, and Honduras/Haiti Bores Neutrals

That some serious, long-term casting for bully and toady.

Holy shit, that was fun! The U.S. v. Panama was a damn good game. The way the first half ended with that roiling boil that threatened to pour over every side of the pot? It rarely gets better than when an underdog pops the Alpha with a surprise shot to the chin. Good times, good times...

Know what wasn't good times? Honduras' tournament-ending loss to a, let's face it, solid Haitian side. Somewhere in the middle of a lengthy rant that shifted from a specific point – e.g. the prolonged, pointless whine that Honduran coach Jorge Luis Pinto directed at that match's fourth official – to a general one – e.g. the general, embarrassing bitchy petulance toward referees by Major League Soccer players and coaches – the commentating crew noted that the second half of Haiti v. Honduras boiled down to Haiti inviting Honduras to try to break them down. And, lord did they have time for that rant about whining players. That game contained more dead air than a coffin.

They never did it. Honduras, I mean. They barely accepted the invitation to attack, and came close all of once. So, beyond congratulating Haiti for going through, the less said about that game, the better.

Fortunately, the night's second act made up for a grimly poor first and on multiple levels. Panama came out firing on all cylinders, pinning the U.S. back into their own half for large portions of the, well, the half. The Central American side put a young, fairly untried defensive set through a tricky set of wringers before the whistle blew for halftime. As someone who watched the game with me pointed out (and please claim via tweet, if you read this), the Panamanians serve up a mean cross – and that's something they carried into the second half. Panama knocked, knocked, and knocked again, until they finally scored the goal they needed to lift them over Haiti in the Group A standings.

U.S. Tops Honduras in the Main Course (After a Nice Appretizer)

We are the world! We are the Turkey!

"...I only laced it with PCP."

And that's why I love the bar where I watch soccer most often. Because that's quality eaves-dropping...

One other note before getting into the nitty-gritty. Like most of you, I read two (or more) things today that bunched my undies, e.g.: 1) the record-breaking number of people who watched the Women's World Cup Final; and 2) reports on the comparatively shitty pay that members of that same team made during the tournament leading up to said World Cup final. Yes, yes, women's sports don’t draw with anything like the same consistency as men's leagues do around the world, and, yes, that translates into what they get paid. Still, and even if just domestically, those same women drew a shit-ton of eyeballs for that final, so call this my (extraordinarily modest) call to see them reap some (meaningful) measure of the dollars spinning off that whirlwind. Because they earned it, goddammit. And if it's because the sponsors failed to show up, leverage that shit into the next contract because people, Americans, especially, totally watch the women's game. Make it right. I don’t care how it's done, but fucking pay these women what they absolutely earned.

And, with that, time for the two-course meal that was tonight's CONCACAF Group A kick off.

Confirmation Bias and the U.S. Win over Panama

As we all know, you don't always get to view games in environments that foster complete focus. You can be at a bar, for example, in a seat miles away from the TV showing the game with some god-awful regional college football game hogging the rest of the atmosphere and all of the volume. And anyone who takes any interest in the game you're watching only does so long enough to tell you he/she hates soccer. Which is nice. It’s also possible that you're spending that time with family who feel like friends and friends who feel like family. I had the latter, better experience on Sunday when the United States took on Panama.

So, no, I didn't watch the game too closely, just enough to form a general impression. A Panamanian attack or two produced a mildly anxious start, but that only afflicted the U.S. like a low-grade fever till Michael Bradley broke it with that silky Olimpico. Gyasi Zardes and Clint Dempsey combined for a slick little goal a few minutes later and that ended the game in just about every way. Panama's efforts foundered after that and generally in the U.S. midfield. If I'm not mistaken, Sean Johnson, the U.S. 'keeper for the second half, touched the ball just once.

The win was nice, but only in the same way as a 50-degree day in January: fine, but only remarkable due to circumstance. When I got home, though (again, see visiting), I sat down and read a bunch of match analysis. Most of that confirmed what I was able to piece together in between watching toddlers careen around over hardwood flooring. Hold on...taking a break to pat myself on the back...wait, not as flexible as I used to be...OK, got it. There, that felt good.

Now, to delve a little deeper...hold on, one more. I saved Matt Doyle's "Three Things" article for my last read yesterday because I generally agree with his thinking enough that I feel smart when I'm done. So, read that. I'll wait. Back yet? OK, good. Now...to the nitty-gritty.

As pointed out by Doyle and elsewhere, the U.S. reverted to its familiar 4-4-2 (or maybe it was a 4-2-3-1), Bradley lined up deeper, Jermaine Jones had Matt Besler to cover him, etc. I think this was better, but, to credit some guy named "Kev," who posted a comment on SBI's breakdown, the U.S. would have been wiser to experiment with a 3-5-2 against Panama instead of Chile because that's a better measuring stick for a variety of reasons (good on ya, Kev!). By common consent, though, Bradley played looser and better than he has in months, but that applied to just about everyone whose name contains neither  "DeAndre" nor "Yedlin." Basically, every time I looked up, I saw the U.S. rolling toward Panama's goal, with either Bradley or Zardes or Dempsey leading the charge. And that's good.

Relevant to that, I read/heard/saw someone deflect away Zardes' assist to Dempsey to celebrate the same player's chest-bump near-assist to Michael Bradley (ah, there it is; in the body of SBI's breakdown). That’s a good thing to flag, because there's no replacement for having good ideas in and around the area. This is definitely a place where more meets merrier.

After that, it seems like Jurgen Klinsmann can't say or do anything lately without inviting a lot of second guessing. His choices of personnel with whom to experiment proved no exception. As Goal.com asked in their write-up, where was Wil Trapp, or more minutes for Luis Gil or Lee Nguyen? I second those questions with Trapp and Gil, in particular, especially given what Herr Klinsmanns's musings about what he might do with next January's camp (related: does this smack of arrogance and an inability to trust others to anyone else?) . This time around, at least, Klinsmann came up aces with Zardes by universal assent. Against that, fewer people bought into the Miguel Ibarra experiment and small wonder - from what I saw, his afternoon amounted to a flubbed cross and running that broke equally between impressively fast and disturbing aimless. Klinsmann, meanwhile, seems a little too eager to prove his reading of this player. Oh, and to claim unseemly credit for Bradley's Olimpico (he comes perilously close to saying he planned it in here).

It's kind of a nothing game in the end, even if the crappy run that came before inflated its importance. In the end, though, Panama is Panama. Only an idiot takes them lightly, but we own the series against them for inescapable reasons like resources, population, interest, etc. They're improving, without question, but zero to one is 100% improvement by definition. A loss here would have been embarrassing, but nothing more, no jobs lost, no one dropped irrevocably from the U.S. Men's set-up and so on. And, yes, that's a problem, if only in context. Another post for another day...

I'll wrap this up by seconding or quibbling with the player ratings posted on MLSsoccer.com (yeah, yeah, I'm working on expanding my sources; gimme time). Here goes:

1) The comment on Besler's passing (e.g. “smooth” at 67 of 68) bears noting for future experimentation with the 3-5-2. I got into a quibble with a (smart) guy on reddit about using Besler (or someone else) as a stopper and Jones as a sweeper; he assumed I meant in terms of formation, but I was really talking about function. I don't care if Klinsmann wants to play Jones as a defender and let him wander, but only if he's got someone who stays at home behind/beside him. In other words, I like a four-man back-line, or a loosely-interpreted three-man backline.

2) I saw Mix Diskerud, but only when he was closing down the opposition. I don't remember any clearly positive contributions, but I might have on closer viewing.

3) I don't think Jozy Altidore earned a 6.5 (nor did Ibarra). He did look eager, though (as did Ibarra). That said, I won't mind seeing him again (or Ibarra).

4) I was pretty well tuned out by the time the subs came on. So, um, their ratings don't mean much to me.

All for now. Like a lot of people, I think we'll learn more from the next camp and set of friendlies. Camp Cupcake/Struedel was definitely a wash this year. Unfortunately, the stuff that came before it, notably the blowout loss to Ireland, was emphatically not a wash. More later...and, hopefully, on some different people.