there was a way to compensate for no competitive preparation......
the owners of the ponzi-scheme exhibition (i.e., mls) could have said fuck it, given our political vector, fifa will not consider the us as host until the year 2100, so let's try to win next year, and push a billion dollars to the middle of the table, buy up every us player in europe for 1 year on loan, and create two (2) TEAM USA sides that play in mls as 100% road teams
during the year prior to the '94 tournament 80% of what would become the us roster were actually employed by the federation which gave bora the opportunity to instill his full-sam bunker 442 system and practice it on a daily basis
the nasl created a Team America in 1983 but it finished 10-20 in last place and never had the opportunity to fulfill it's purpose, i.e. create a competitive nats side to compete for '86 qualification
the precedent was there, but at the end of the day, the entire soccer establi$hment in the us is only interested in profiting from their exhibition attended and supported by customers with no understanding of the international soccer economy
+++
The U.S. men’s national team has fallen to 48th in the world in the Elo ratings—its lowest position of the 21st century. The Elo system, adapted from chess, is widely regarded as a more accurate measure of a team’s strength (see how it’s calculated here) than Fifa’s official ranking, which currently places the USMNT 15th. See Fifa’s rankings here.
Mauricio Pochettino took charge with the USMNT ranked 37th in Elo. After 17 matches, his side has not beaten a team ranked above them, slipping to 45th after a 4-0 defeat to Switzerland in June. Saturday’s 2-0 loss to South Korea dropped them to their new modern-era low.
Historically, the USMNT climbed to 15th in Elo after beating Portugal at the 2002 World Cup and reached 12th following a 2005 qualifier win over Mexico. Their peak came after defeating Spain in the 2009 Confederations Cup, when they rose to 11th, briefly jumping to 9th later that summer.