Guy McCarthy, a friend and former co-worker, sent me a Christmas greeting in which he veered off to a topic that fascinates both of us:

The U.S. national soccer team. Well, and he also poked fun at the English for getting all excited about their “easy” World Cup 2010 draw in a group with the U.S. and Algeria and Slovenia, and then barely getting out of the group before getting annihilated by Germany.

So, Guy is of the opinion that the U.S. is going to win the World Cup, and perhaps fairly soon. He seems to believe that the award of the 2018 and 2022 World Cups to non-elite soccer countries (Russia and Qatar) improves the Yanks’ chances. And I’m sure he’s thinking of the last three non-soccer-hotbed hosts — the U.S. in 1994, Korea-Japan in 2002, South Africa in 2010 — and recalling how the Yanks did. Final 16 in both 1994 and 2010, final eight in 2002. That is, put the Americans somewhere that isn’t Europe (disasters in France 1998 and Germany 2006), and they have a shot.

So Guy is thinking … why not the whole enchilada?

And my response?

Sorry, but I don’t think so.

Here is what I wrote to him:

“The Yanks winning the World Cup by 2022? Just don’t see it. Who are our great young players? Shouldn’t someone have come along already who is better than Landon Donovan? He’s been the best U.S. player for about seven years now. Or better than Clint Dempsey, even? It’s like the country hit some sort of wall: “Good enough to hang, not good enough to have 10 guys starting in the Premier League.” What’s up with that?

“I can see a World Cup semifinal run. But that’s at the extreme outside. That includes an easy round-of-16 opponent (not an African team; they kill the Yanks) and a serious upset in the quarters, followed by two more even more serious upsets. I can’t see the USofA beating three world-class soccer nations in succession, and that’s what a World Cup championship usually requires. Except in rare circumstances, like this year, when a semifinal run was all set up.

“But they weren’t good enough to take advantage of the grand opportunity presented in South Africa, in a round-of-16 foursome with Ghana, Uruguay and South Korea. In theory, the easiest road to the semis you could envision, and they couldn’t clear the first hurdle.

“Anyway, beating Ghana and Uruguay should have been doable. But the Dutch and Spain would have been major, major problems. I just don’t see us beating teams like that consecutively. And when is the next time we will get what looks like a really soft round of 16 and quarters like this year? Never? A hundred years?

“After 2022 … who knows? Pretty good chance I won’t be here to see it, but I don’t see some big surge of achievement on its way. I keep waiting for the next generation of players, but if they’re coming along, they’re well-hidden.

“I can say this … as of the last days of 2010, about two-thirds of the competent scorers in the world are Brazilians or Africans, and unless we start getting some of those guys naturalized (someone a lot better than Freddy Adu), we’re always going to struggle for goals. Something like 3,000 Brazilians play outside their country, and nearly all of them are attacking players.

“You’re right about South Africa and England. The English media, as is their wont (and which I wrote about a half-dozen times in the run-up to 2010) oversell their team before the World Cup, then are shocked, shocked when it goes out before the semis, and then spends a month or so tearing their guys down.

“They now have realized, finally, maybe, that the Premier League actually is a very bad thing for their national team because 20 PL managers will always play the veteran foreigner ahead of the young English national, because they need results today, not next year, which becomes lethal to the English national side when (also) the young English national then refuses to go overseas. Look at how few English players go outside their country when they’re 19, 20, 21. Almost none, because even as a reserve player in England they can make more money by staying home than by going to France or to a lower-level Spanish or Italian team. And they go stale. The English finally have realized that those guys who flopped in South Africa were maybe their last best hope for years. Decades, even. Meanwhile, the Premier League fulfills the daily/weekly soccer Jones for English fans, and they don’t even have to think about the national team all that much. And they don’t. Only when it’s right there in front of them, and then they put it behind them and go back to rooting for West Ham in that tribal sort of way they have.

“As for where the World Cup is going … I’ve had a change of heart on this. I actually now agree with what Sepp Blatter is doing — even if no money is changing hands. He and Fifa now see the World Cup as a sort of tool for spreading the Good Word of the great game. England is the ultimate example of preaching to the choir. Sure, they could put on a nice World Cup and sell out their stadiums, but so what? Would one single new fan be made? The U.S. is almost as bad. Sure, make some money, and maybe even a few new fans, but it’s not virgin territory. Russia is a huge market that is not fully exploited, and so is the Gulf. And in both cases, the host nations will do just about anything Fifa wants them to do. No pushback, like there would be in a Western democracy. New stadiums, new infrastructure, lots of mineral wealth to bankroll all the new stuff …

“So I think these actually are semi-inspired moves. And if Sepp is still around in 2018, when they award 2026, look for it to go to Australia — unless they change the rule about “can’t go to the same continent consecutively” … because then it’s a mortal lock for China, the biggest potential Fifa market of all, aside from India, which is a mess as a soccer country.

“But, the U.S. winning the World Cup? I’m not sure anyone alive today will see that happen, because it’s going to be the country’s No. 4 sport,  at best, for a long time. Can’t win the World Cup in the margins of your sports program.”