Someone emailed me this, comparing WC teams to CFB teams:

Algeria – Kentucky: Just happy to be here. Will be overwhelmed in every game. Teams that have to play them will be relieved to have at least one gimme in their schedule.

Argentina – Florida State: One of the best teams in the tournament with one of the best players in the field. Champions in decades past on the backs of huge stars with huge egos. Since then they’ve been a sleeping giant, but the giant might be waking up.

Australia – Wyoming: A team to put on your schedule to make your cupcake opponent sound like a bit less of a cupcake.

Belgium – Baylor: After a long spell in obscurity, all of a sudden they are a team that no one wants to play against.

Bosnia Hercegovina – Central Florida: A team that is a lot tougher than it sounds on paper.

Brazil – Alabama: The big kahuna. Always the favorite, never an underdog, no matter where they play, no matter who they play.

Cameroon – Cincinnati: Occasional flashes of success, but ultimately a flame-out.

Chile – Texas Tech: Zippy and scrappy, yet never ready for prime time.

Colombia – Stanford: A really good team that at the end never wins anything.

Costa Rica – Fresno State: Solid team that has nothing to lose as a perennial underdog.

Croatia – South Carolina: A team that is capable of playing against anyone, and also capable of inexplicable losses.

Ecuador – Northern Illinois: Scrappy team that on most days can stay in the game with all but real elite teams.

England – Notre Dame: Great tradition, great fans. Should be good. A lot of people hope they are good. They are no good.

France – Texas: A lot worse than they should be. Some success over the years, but basically a habitual underachiever.

Germany – Ohio State: Tradition of excellence and supremacy. Will dominate until paired against other excellent teams.

Ghana – Michigan State: A reputable competitor that will be a tough game for any team facing them.

Greece – Minnesota: Occasionally competitive when playing against average teams. They will get exposed quickly against better competition.

Honduras – Tulane: Glad to be making an appearance.

Iran – Florida International: If they do not lose every game, it will be a miracle.

Italy – LSU: Traditional powerhouse. Some years better than others, but always a very tough team to play against. Also, prone to caring as much about their appearance as the game itself.

Ivory Coast – Louisville: Can play spectacularly at times, but still not a top-tier team.

Japan – Utah: Building itself into credibility with each passing year. Not yet there though.

Mexico - Virginia: A team that once upon a time was a contender, but has slowly and surely fallen off of everyone’s radar-screen.

Netherlands – Auburn: You never know when they will be good but if they are winning you don’t want to play them. If and when they are fully-on, they can win the whole thing.

Nigeria – Clemson: Excellent players on a team that somehow never quite achieves what it is capable of.

Portugal – Texas A&M: A really good team that highly depends on the brilliance of one player who is amazing on the field and amazingly frustrating off of it, and without whom they would be an average team.

Russia – Iowa: Can be good here and there, but no record of real success to speak of.

South Korea – BYU: Always plays with effort and discipline, and often overachieves.

Spain – Oregon: Throughout history regarded as a solid team. In the last couple of decades transformed itself into a total powerhouse.

Switzerland – Northwestern: Used to be a team that everyone would love to have on their schedule. Not anymore.

Uruguay – USC: Despite wild oscillations, a top tier team that no one is going to underestimate.

USA – West Virginia: They sound better on paper than they really are. Teams that have to play them give them respect, and quietly rejoice that they do not have to play someone else.

Saintpat wrote:

Someone emailed me this, comparing WC teams to CFB teams:

USA – West Virginia:  They sound better on paper than they really are.  Teams that have to play them give them respect, and quietly rejoice that they do not have to play someone else.

I identify w/ both of these teams. How ironic?

Inaccurate comparison, tho

But then again, nothing wrong about being West Virginia. We have a proud tradition & a successful program here.

The USMNT should dream to be as prestigious as West Virginia.

And, like Alabama, Brasil had the officials in their pocket in their first game of the tournament.

"Mexico - Virginia: A team that once upon a time was a contender, but has slowly and surely fallen off of everyone’s radar-screen."

^ Owned #truth

We were never "contenders". Plus we've been in the same spot for the last 5 WCs. Truth my fucking ass.

Virginia was only ever a contender in the ACC, so a regional contender.

Makes sense.

The idea that we've fell of anyone's screen is ridiculous, I doubt we've ever been on anyone's screen. If anything we're ascending. We probably have the best group of players we've had.

Seleccion Azteca wrote:

The idea that we've fell of anyone's screen is ridiculous, I doubt we've ever been on anyone's screen. If anything we're ascending. We probably have the best group of players we've had.

 

 

"Portugal – Texas A&M: A really good team that highly depends on the brilliance of one player who is amazing on the field and amazingly frustrating off of it, and without whom they would be an average team."

Are they comparing Ronaldo and Manziel?