Sigh. I know the article is from GP, but still ... publications really should find someone with at least a cursory knowledge of the sport to write soccer stories.
The difference between the World Cup and Olympic tournament formats is important. The World Cup is played over a longer time period. This allows a much larger field in group play. The compressed Olympic time period means that most of the culling gets done in pre-Olympic qualifications conducted by the regional federations.
This disadvantages the U.S., by the way. We play through CONCACAF, which is North Ametica, Central America and the Caribbean. This is a formidable task for the U.S. men, who struggle to beat Haiti, T&T, and Jamaica. On the women’s side, however, this format basically means that the U.S. and Canada have a bye into the Olympics. The qualifying rounds actually bring us down, as it is hard to stay sharp on a steady diet of Caribbean microstates without any serious year-round training environment. It’s U.S. and Canadian professionals vs. Latin amateurs. It’s generally pretty one-sided. It’s easy to get sloppy and then have to readjust quickly when you get to the Olympics or World Cup and start to hit highly professional, peer group teams again.
Anyhow, in this Olympics there are three groups of four. Eight teams — the top two from each group and the two best third place teams— will advance to the knockout rounds. If that sounds ridiculous, it is. It is forced by the compressed schedule. It reminds me of a famous Bill Russell quote about the NBA’s bloated playoffs: “First we play 82 games to eliminate the Knicks, and then the season begins.” But the NBA doesn’t have a short Olympic window to blame.
The U.S. women’s team is the best in the world and if soccer tournaments were run MLBNHLNBA style, best of seven, the U.S. would be a heavy favorite. But single elimination is a different animal. It’s like the NCAA men’s basketball tournament. The regular season #1 team may have a walkover in the first game and be a very heavy favorite in the second. But then it will have to win four straight against teams that on any given night can beat you. Two and maybe three of these games — the regional finals on— will be against peer group teams that can match up and play almost dead even. The #1 team comes in with a bullseye on its back and with all the added pressure of high expectations. It takes everyone’s best shot. The #1 ranked team usually doesn’t win the tournament.
Sweden is a peer group team for the USWNT. In a seven game series, the U.S. would probably win 4-2. On any given day ....
Sweden knocked the U.S. out of the last Olympics, was the runner-up in the last World Cup and played to a draw the last time the two teams met. Sweden winning is not really a surprise. Winning 3-0 is worrisome because it puts the U.S. in a hole on goal differential if tiebreakers become a factor in moving past group stage. That won’t matter if the U.S. wins its next two games, but Australia with Sam Kerr is dangerous and New Zealand is competent enough to bunker in and hang close for an upset.
In the knockout rounds there are several peer group teams that on any given day ... well, if I were making odds, I’d put the probability of a U.S. win against each of these peer group teams at 60-40 or even 55-45. Assuming it gets to the knockout stage, the USWNT has to win four of those in a row. You do the math.
No team in women’s soccer has ever won a World Cup AND the succeeding Olympics. The U.S. and Germany are the only teams ever to have won back to back Women’s World Cups. If the U.S. wins the gold in Tokyo, it will be the first team in history to have swept three of the premier tournaments in a row. The odds are against them. Getting a bad game out of the way early is probably a good thing.
Personally I think the U.S. team is too old. It’s hard to break up success, and this group of players has won back to back World Cups. But they have aged together, and it’s starting to show. A U.S. defense that was nearly impervious in 2015 and only slightly less impressive in 2019 is starting to show some holes. That won’t matter against lesser teams, and CONCACAF competition doesn’t really help in asking the tough questions. But age creeps up, and elite teams will start finding space. Sweden made it look easy.