• This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:

    1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.

    2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.

    3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.

    Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.

    Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.

    Thank you!

Most Underrated (or Overrated) Team?

NerazZurRo

Youth Team
Originally posted by Broadside
qualifying top of Oceania does not qualify Australia for the World Cup educate yourself

could the US beat Uruguay in Uruguay I don't think so

Australia had their chance in 1998, but they lost to Iran.. If you can't beat the 4th Asian team then I don't think you deserve to be in the World Cup.
Uruguay is another story, I think the best thing to do is go back to playing the 4th Asian team (which could be Iran, Saudi, China...)
 

pxpx35

Youth Team
Originally posted by ArsenalFC_DB10
I know this doesn't have to do with football but...



The reason for the Canadian teams not having money, is they have to pay their players in US dollars but only bring in Canadian money from tickets and other things. Its not like the games are not being sold out or anything. In Edmonton even though they aren’t the greatest team they still sell out most of their games.

If this was already said sorry didn't read every single post.

A Canadian fellow brought it up.

The Colorado Avalanche have sold out EVERY game since moving from Quebec.
 

Broadside

Club Supporter
NerazZurRo you are quite right, Oceania should be disbanded as a grouping and Australia should qualify through Asia

if they don't cut it then, fair nuff, fairer than the present system
 

[mouta-FCP]

Starting XI
Originally posted by NerazZurRo
Hmm i think 3.5 out of 5 is just right for Porto... if they had 4 or more stars then they would be among the best in the world which i don't think they are. and with all due respect, winning the UEFA cup still means that you're behind all other teams who played in the Champions League.

you might be right about the players ratings though.. EA always get them screwed up.

Man you're completely wrong. Last year we won UEFA but if we were on CL we could had a chance to win it. But this year we are in CL, we'll pass to the 2nd phase and then all can happens. Did you saw European Supercup? FC Porto crushed AC Milan we are one of the top team, see IFFHS Ranking and some of our European games...
 

CKA_Imparfait

Red Card - Life [Warez]
Life Ban
"The reason for the Canadian teams not having money, is they have to pay their players in US dollars but only bring in Canadian money from tickets and other things. Its not like the games are not being sold out or anything. In Edmonton even though they aren’t the greatest team they still sell out most of their games."

Street Spirit- That is the reason we lose our teams lol. And don't worry, no one brought that point up yet. It is true, most games are sellouts. For instance, the Ottawa Senators is one of the best teams in the NHL (when they aren't being lazy and losing) and they sell out most games, yet they almost went bankrupt. The reason? They had to pay increadibly high PROPERTY taxes, as well as high american wages with canadian money. Corporations here tend to pay there taxes :)
 

NerazZurRo

Youth Team
Originally posted by [mouta-FCP]
Man you're completely wrong. Last year we won UEFA but if we were on CL we could had a chance to win it. But this year we are in CL, we'll pass to the 2nd phase and then all can happens. Did you saw European Supercup? FC Porto crushed AC Milan we are one of the top team, see IFFHS Ranking and some of our European games...

I follow football and I know how good Porto are, maybe they could have got 4 stars but 3.5 is fair and acceptable IMO.
and as I said before, winning the UEFA cup doesn't mean much, you're telling me Liverpool is one of the best sides in the world? :rolleyes:
 

theworldgame

Youth Team
stop talking about how you have qualified for the last 4 world cups - as you should realise that if Australia were in your little CONCACAF they would make it every tournament

and about the fed cup - we sent not even our youth reserves, lol
the team representing australia were not even the pick of the NSL - they were second string NSL players who were willing to gain a little prestige - not even getting paid much at all


look at each player of australia against the usa and you will see who is best?

kalac, one of the top keepers in serie A,
schwarzer, one of top keepers in England
lucas neill - right back of the season 2002/03
craig moore - rangers captain
hayden foxe/tony popovic - quality defenders
stan lazaridis - brilliant speed and fans favourite at birmingham
paul okon - player of the year a few years ago in serie A - career winding down though now
marko bresciano - going very well and scoring goals from midfield in serie A
brett emerton - skillful and performing very well in england, and excellent when at feyenord
scott chipperfield - man of the match against Newcastle a couple weeks ago - greatly underrated
john aloisi - playing in Primere League and scoring regualrly for Osasuna
mark viduka - huge interest across europe, including AC Milan among others
paul agostino - bundesliga regular for 1860 munich
clayton zane - 91 stats in fifa 2003!
kevin muscat - voted most hated player in britain 2 years ago, lol
mark bosnich - cocaine - even got a song named after him "COCAINE"
danny tiatto - injury problems recently, but gutsy performer
vince grella - strong midfielder (defensive) in serie A
lille sterjovski - regular in lille starting line-up, famous for long range inaccurate shots, lol
patrick kisnorbo - regular in hearts centre of defence and building a good reputation
tony vidmar, tim cahill, luke wilkshire, invincible, mckain, lovell and many other regular european performers
and forgo harry kewell - 'nuff' said


how does US team compare - they dimply don't!!!!

i can't be bothered doing senegal - but if this doesn't show that aussies better than USA, nothing does
just get both to play full strength squads in friendly and watch aussies dominate
 

pxpx35

Youth Team
Dude, you can give me a list of the entire Australian population, but it won't change the fact that they haven't done anything in major competitions.

You didn't send anyone to the Confeds Cup. You didn't make it.

If anything, its rather disturbing a nation coud have so much relative European success and nothing to show for it.

I don't really see the point in speculating over who wins USA v Australia, though.
 

theworldgame

Youth Team
but the whole time you've been arguing how good US soccer is - and now you say there is no point speculating who would win a match

all i'm simply trying to say is that compared to even other not so highly rated teams such as Australia - America is not that good and this whole forum was started by someone complaining that the US were underrated, when if anything they were overrated
that's all

it wasn't meant to be some personal vendetta between us 2, lasting a few days. I just feel that the US team was overrated, rather than underrated - just got bit out of hand

And about the confederations cup - it is impossible for big european teams to release players to come home and play the easy games (which I understand) - but the better players are needed to defeat NZ, who are actually a reasonable team but mainly made up of NSL players.

It would be very unrealistic and very unlikely to release top Aussie players to play the meaningless games, but it would be nice if they were allowed to play the final to at least get into the competition.
 

pxpx35

Youth Team
Originally posted by theworldgame
but the whole time you've been arguing how good US soccer is - and now you say there is no point speculating who would win a match

all i'm simply trying to say is that compared to even other not so highly rated teams such as Australia - America is not that good and this whole forum was started by someone complaining that the US were underrated, when if anything they were overrated
that's all

it wasn't meant to be some personal vendetta between us 2, lasting a few days. I just feel that the US team was overrated, rather than underrated - just got bit out of hand

And about the confederations cup - it is impossible for big european teams to release players to come home and play the easy games (which I understand) - but the better players are needed to defeat NZ, who are actually a reasonable team but mainly made up of NSL players.

It would be very unrealistic and very unlikely to release top Aussie players to play the meaningless games, but it would be nice if they were allowed to play the final to at least get into the competition.

Understandable.

My point is your reasons for overrating the US are illegitamate and unfounded.

I'm not here to argue US supremacy in the world of soccer - just respectability.

Underrating their achievements to this point would be an ugly mistake - ask Portugal.

As for Confed Cup qualifying, the US faces similar problems with its European base, especially contending with Mexico whose talent pool is strongly domestic.

Granted, more fixtures on the Australia national team play in Europe. Still, that gives credibility to MLS and its ability to field and cultivate competetive talent, which has translated overwhelmingly to the US national team's competetive success - something Australia can't boast at this point.
 

pxpx35

Youth Team
Originally posted by lil_kewell
Most underated.............Yeovil Town.

Most overrated..............Manchester United.

who the hell is Yeovil town?

A Third Division club in England, if I'm not mistaken.
 

theworldgame

Youth Team
australia can boast reasonably success

in the last couple years we have
beaten england
drawn and beat france
beaten brazil
beat uruguay

beaten oceania teams of course (nothing too impressive - 31-0 bit of a joke)

aussie soccer is more impressive than you think
the only real bad performance put in recently was our loss in montevideo against uruguay

i personally watch some MLS games (thanks to ESPN) and there is not much standard difference between NSL and MLS - only that MLS brings in old top players well past their peak for promotion

only a couple years ago - south melbourne only lost 1-0 to man united, which is not a bad effort at all
 

beastie bhoys

Club Supporter
I think three stars for the American football (soccer) team is kinda reasonable, you could argue three and a half if you really wanted but anymore would, for a lot of people, be pretty much unfounded.

The reason for this ranking is that they are still an improving side. Yes they do have quality players and they were an exciting and organised team in the world cup, but for a lot of people outside of America, they will have to produce a good showing at the next world cup in Germany to be considered genuine contenders. Consistently good results/ narrow losses doesn't really cut it when compared to actual championship form when it matters.

I don't mean to take anything away from the current side, the victory over Portugal was one of the highlights of the last world cup, I just feel that only time can tell how much progress the US will make. Likewise with the group of talented youngsters they have at the moment. Only time will tell if they will develop into strong players or nearly-rans.
 

FKPartizan

Reserve Team
most overated: Chelsea, I know they now have a fantastic group of players but they have yet to prove that they function 100% as a team.

most underated: Uraguay, I watched them handidly defeat Mexico here in Chicago a month ago, that team played fantastic soccer and it really was no contest.
 

NerazZurRo

Youth Team
Originally posted by theworldgame

only a couple years ago - south melbourne only lost 1-0 to man united, which is not a bad effort at all
One friendly game is definitely not a measure of how strong a team is.. A couple of years ago Al Ahly (Egypt) beat Roma in a pre-season friendly, the year before that they also beat Real Madrid (with all their stars).. of course Al Ahly is one of the best teams in Africa but to compare them with Real Madrid just because they beat them in a friendly is ridiculous.
 

#1 Stunna

The Alpha Mexican
Originally posted by FKPartizan
most underated: Uraguay, I watched them handidly defeat Mexico here in Chicago a month ago, that team played fantastic soccer and it really was no contest.

cuz Mexico didnt send their "A" squad. ;)
 

swezwakov

Club Supporter
Ok, a couple more points about the U.S. and to clear up some issues that I've mentioned (although I understand that it is completely off the topic that I started).

Everton is reportedly interested in signing DaMarcus Beasley, who probably just played his last game for the Chicago Fire.

Landon Donovan is playing with San Jose to a) promote soccer in America and b) just get a little bit more mature before he heads back to Germany. He'll most likely be either a starter or top reserve for his team.

Chris Armas is also expected to sign with a European club during the MLS off-season (probably in the January transfer window) and not continue with the MLS.

Clint Mathis was also attracting attention from a top German club, but he's a major slacker and wasn't given the chance. Not defending him - just saying that they noticed the talent and his training methods (or lack thereof) were the main reason why he wasn't signed and didn't play much for the World Cup 2002 squad.

As was mentioned, we have three goalkeepers in the Premiership. Not going to go much more on that topic, at all. Also, John O'Brien starts for Ajax - his ratings, as well as EVERY PLAYER IN THE GAME, are much more realistic in CM4, compared to FIFA 2004. Claudio Reyna also starts for Sunderland - just more wood on the fire.

The players aren't superstars, and I haven't said that. But the respect has to be there for the American side and its movement into the top European clubs!

I respect the Australians that are in the game over in Europe - Viduka, Vieri, Kewell, Schwarzer, Emerton, Tiatto, et al. Matched up against the U.S., do I think Australia will win? Maybe. Maybe not. I certainly didn't think the U.S. or Senegal had a chance in their first round games in the World Cup, but that's why the games are played. It should be said, also, that Senegal won not because they were the better team, but because they were lucky and were better PREPARED to beat France. With the French background that the team had, the upset was possible from the beginning - not likely, but possible.

Anything can happen in a game between two sides that its worthless to bicker about who has the better squad UNTIL the teams play each other. Its possible that the U.S. and Brazil could meet each other in the next World Cup final, and the U.S. could win as most of the Brazilians tore an ACL. Is it likely to happen? Of course not. But its possible. Just as its possible to stick your hand through a glass window without actually breaking the glass (Physics stuff...).

My comment about the U.S. being underrated in the game was only due to what I felt was a lack of respect to where the U.S. game has gone over the years. I distinctly remember saying that I didn't consider the U.S. to be in the top tier of international soccer. The MLS obviously isn't the top league - its not meant to be, either. Its meant to be a springboard into the top leagues of the world, and an opportunity for players that normally wouldn't have a chance to play with a pro team that chance. Its like a JV squad to the higher up Varsity squad of England, Spain, Italy, Germany, etc.

Furthermore, the fact that the U.S. did so well in the World Cup is a little misleading. Keep in mind that when the World Cup is played, the U.S. is in the middle of its MLS season while the European squads are just getting out of their LONG seasons. Its not an excuse, just a fact that some players were a little bit better rested for the World Cup than others. Good teams just take advantage of the opportunity in front of them, and the U.S. did just that.

Long post, I know, but I'm almost done, and I have more to do with my time than to keep responding to what others say, so I'm trying to tie up any loose ends.

Go back to what my pro-American ally in this case mentioned about the scores that the U.S. has gotten against other teams, most notably Mexico. In the game, Mexico is GROSSLY overrated compared to the U.S., as can be seen by the fact that the U.S. is over .500 against them, and has dominated them recently. This is the point that I'm trying to make - if two teams of relatively equal caliber can battle it out each time they play, why aren't they considered equals in a rating system? On that note, I'd also like to mention that when I made the comments of the U.S. team's games against Holland and Germany, I don't remember ever saying that the U.S. squad was better than them. As a matter of fact, for the Holland game, I mentioned something that Holland's coach said after the game (it was meant as a respectful gesture on his part to honor the fact that the U.S. team is improving). Being at the game and watching O'Brien turn easily on Davids in the first half, only to JUST MISS THE SHOT, the game could've easily gone either way. It just wasn't a lucky day for the U.S. and they couldn't finish the chances when presented to them. Same goes for the Germany game - many international announcers were surprised that the Americans even came close to the German squad, and a few even predicted the Americans would win the game, prior to kick-off. And if you look at the final stats, the tell-all of the games, the Americans held their own against a German squad. They just got a little bit unlucky at times.

That being said, do I think soccer has arrived in America? Nope. Not even close. However, the U.S. has set a goal to win a World Cup in 2010, and I think that by then, the U.S. could very well be considered a strong team and be almost cosidered in the same vein as some of the top nations in the game. The "stars" of their current roster are going to be a little bit older, more experienced, and more skilled at the game. Does this always translate into success - no, of course not. Look at Portugal and the way they played at a World Cup they were supposed to contend for.

Mainly, all I'm looking for is respect. I respect what others have in their squads and nations, and I think respect should be given back to other squads. That's what this whole post was about, when asking who felt what team was overrated (too much respect) or underrated (lack of respect).

And now, I'm going to step off the proverbial soapbox and proceed to go dominate against Brazil with the United States in FIFA 2004.
 

#1 Stunna

The Alpha Mexican
Originally posted by swezwakov
In the game, Mexico is GROSSLY overrated compared to the U.S., as can be seen by the fact that the U.S. is over .500 against them, and has dominated them recently. This is the point that I'm trying to make - if two teams of relatively equal caliber can battle it out each time they play, why aren't they considered equals in a rating system?

USA is not over .500 against Mexico...Mexico has won around 29 matches, while the US has around 10 victories. I agree that the US has caught up to Mexico...but they havent passed them...i'm not saying u said that but it is true that they are equally matched now.

But then by your argument Brazil and Mexico should also be ranked equally...they enver blow us out and our matches are always decided by one goal or less...they havent beaten us in about 6 matches (though 2 were against the U23 squad).
 


Top