Howard

[pfim]

You quoted that too. You do know there's two quotes in there, right?

Got it. Though Brian Oviedo isn't the best player in the Costa Rica side, not even close.

 

[chicoazul]

Got it. Though Brian Oviedo isn't the best player in the Costa Rica side, not even close.

The ghost of Wanchope?

 

[steken1]

Got it. Though Brian Oviedo isn't the best player in the Costa Rica side, not even close.

He's the only one who's played CL football???

Ruiz is a good player on his day too and Campbell could be something.

 

[pfim]

He's the only one who's played CL football???

Ruiz is a good player on his day too and Campbell could be something.

Ruiz has as well. They have a very solid side.

 

[steken1]

Ruiz has as well. They have a very solid side.

They're average I'd say. Yourselves a little bit above that and Mexico too when they settle on a new squad they're happy with. CONCACAF as a whole is very poor. It's not me being euro-centrist it's just honest when you look at the calibre of players overall.

I don't really rate England as much higher than average either BTW.

 

[Allezfan]

They're average I'd say. Yourselves a little bit above that and Mexico too when they settle on a new squad they're happy with. CONCACAF as a whole is very poor. It's not me being euro-centrist it's just honest when you look at the calibre of players overall.

I don't really rate England as much higher than average either BTW.

I think UEFA is as poor as it's ever been. South America are miles ahead in strength of depth.

There's three or four good UEFA teams who are probably the best in the world (Spain, Germany and whichever two of Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia and France have their act together at the moment.).

Then there's the good non uefa teams (Egypt, Japan, South Korea, Ivory Coast, Mexico, USA, everybody in South America) who you'd fancy to beat anyone not in the above.

And then there's all the medicore UEFA teams (England, Switzerland, Croatia, Greece, Belgium etc.) who 2010 and 2012 showed were a distance away from the elite.

And then there's the runners up from elsewhere who aren't as strong as even the mediocre uefa teams (which is why concacaf and afc and caf are so poor, not because the top teams aren't good but because the rest aren't up for it.).

And then theres scotland, wales and northern ireland, below that.

 

[steken1]

I think UEFA is as poor as it's ever been. South America are miles ahead in strength of depth.

There's three or four good UEFA teams who are probably the best in the world (Spain, Germany and whichever two of Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia and France have their act together at the moment.).

Then there's the good non uefa teams (Egypt, Japan, South Korea, Ivory Coast, Mexico, USA, everybody in South America) who you'd fancy to beat anyone not in the above.

And then there's all the medicore UEFA teams (England, Switzerland, Croatia, Greece, Belgium etc.) who 2010 and 2012 showed were a distance away from the elite.

And then there's the runners up from elsewhere who aren't as strong as even the mediocre uefa teams (which is why concacaf and afc and caf are so poor, not because the top teams aren't good but because the rest aren't up for it.).

And then theres scotland, wales and northern ireland, below that.

UEFA region has no real strength in depth but I wouldn't say south america is too far ahead either TBH. Uruaguay and the sides at that level just below the top tier haven't been great either recently.

Other than that I agree. I don't think countries like Serbia, Croatia, the Swiss etc would walk Concacaf but they'd qualify all day.

 

[Yankfootball1]

Aye. I think I know what it is, and I've said it a couple of times, particularly about the likes of Osman and Hibbert, and it applies to Howard too. He's a player that fits the current status of our club, not good enough for Champions League, better than relegation, a decent player who gives 100% to Everton but not technically the best player going.

We have a few of them in our team, and that's fine, we're not good enough or rich enough to afford the luxury of jibbing them off, and I'm proud to have them wear Blue. They're just a bit pants now and then, and it will rightly be commented on. That doesn't make them any less important or special to us.

I think this is completely fair even as a somewhat biased American. In fact there is some debate as to whether Guzman should be the starter

 

[pfim]

They're average I'd say. Yourselves a little bit above that and Mexico too when they settle on a new squad they're happy with. CONCACAF as a whole is very poor. It's not me being euro-centrist it's just honest when you look at the calibre of players overall.

I don't really rate England as much higher than average either BTW.

I think they're close to the Switzerlands, Austrias, Denmarks of the world. I understand it's tough to relate to those teams who have several players playing in top 4 leagues, but often that's down to opportunity and not talent.

Many poke fun of MLS and perhaps it's deserved at some level, but what it's done for CONCACAF teams (not just US) is immeasurable.

 

[Allezfan]

I think they're close to the Switzerlands, Austrias, Denmarks of the world. I understand it's tough to relate to those teams who have several players playing in top 4 leagues, but often that's down to opportunity and not talent.

Many poke fun of MLS and perhaps it's deserved at some level, but what it's done for CONCACAF teams (not just US) is immeasurable.

You'd know better than me if that's true. But I don't think concacaf teams are actually doing any better in the world cups since MLS started.

 

[steken1]

I think they're close to the Switzerlands, Austrias, Denmarks of the world. I understand it's tough to relate to those teams who have several players playing in top 4 leagues, but often that's down to opportunity and not talent.

Many poke fun of MLS and perhaps it's deserved at some level, but what it's done for CONCACAF teams (not just US) is immeasurable.

I may come across anti-american but I'm not. We've got 150 years of development and it's our national game. You's are never embarrassed at the WC and you've shown you can compete with sides like England.

Not bad for a league in it's infancy.

 

[nsmith1721]

UEFA region has no real strength in depth but I wouldn't say south america is too far ahead either TBH. Uruaguay and the sides at that level just below the top tier haven't been great either recently.

Other than that I agree. I don't think countries like Serbia, Croatia, the Swiss etc would walk Concacaf but they'd qualify all day.

It's hard to explain but Concacaf qualifying is difficult for many reasons off the field. I don't even pretend to know what European teams go through but the gamesmenship off the field, tactics on the field, and quality of refereeing all make Confacaf a bit more than meets the eye in term of qualifying.

With that said the US and Mexico should/do walk through qualifying.

 

[Allezfan]

It's hard to explain but Concacaf qualifying is difficult for many reasons off the field. I don't even pretend to know what European teams go through but the gamesmenship off the field, tactics on the field, and quality of refereeing all make Confacaf a bit more than meets the eye in term of qualifying.

With that said the US and Mexico should/do walk through qualifying.

I get that away games in places like costa rica are hard, but mexico and usa just need to win their home games to go through. 15 points will it do for them.

 

[nsmith1721]

I get that away games in places like costa rica are hard, but mexico and usa just need to win their home games to go through. 15 points will it do for them.

I agree. My main point is the "hardness" of qualifying is not necessarily because of the 11 guys you play against. Again, the USA and Mexico should never not qualify out of this region.

 

[ijjysmith]

England would beat Costa Rica.