• Facebook
• Twitter
• Facebook Messenger
• Pinterest
• Email

So far, the 2017 CONCACAF Gold Cup hasn't been kind to the U.S. or Mexico, as both teams have struggled to hit top form. What's going on, and is it that bad? ESPN FC's Jeff Carlisle and Tom Marshall weigh in on the tournament's big two.

Are their respective rough starts really that rough?

Jeff Carlisle: The U.S. has certainly had worse. You don't have to go back very far to find the one time the U.S. didn't finish first in the group stage. That was 2011, when it was beaten out by Panama, though it's worth nothing that the Americans still made the final that year. Looking back two years ago, according to ESPN Stats & Information, the U.S. had an expected goal differential (expected goals - expected goals against) of minus-1.69, compared with this year's plus-3.09, so an argument can be made that 2017 hasn't been that bad for the U.S.

Still, much was expected of this team -- perhaps too much -- and with manager Bruce Arena looking to find some rough diamonds to help him in World Cup qualifying, the overall performance has veered more toward disappointing.

Tom Marshall: Ask fans or read the Mexican press and the answer you will get is that it has certainly been rough. Aesthetically, it hasn't been pretty, but coach Juan Carlos Osorio is playing a longer game with this group of players, only a handful of whom can realistically hope to be at next year's World Cup.

Osorio has used 21 of the 23-man squad during the group stage and El Tri still finished top of the group, conceding only one goal over the three matches. If you rewind to the 2015 Gold Cup, Mexico failed to advance in first place, drawing against both Guatemala and Trinidad and Tobago at the group stage. The crucial difference is that last time out Mexico fielded more or less its best squad, whereas in the present edition, it is clearly experimental.

Things could have been much worse this time ...

What's causing this sluggish start?

Carlisle: Arena certainly took a risk by attempting to blood so many players lacking in international experience at the same time. He also pushed players, like Kellyn Acosta, who have accumulated a lot of minutes recently in order to take on bigger roles. That has pushed numerous players (dare I say) out of the comfort zone. The result has been some wild fluctuations in play, even within the same game.

An argument can be made that there weren't enough veterans around to guide some of the newer elements through some rough patches, but ultimately, I think Arena did the right thing in leaning heavily on some of the fringe elements. Whether a data point is negative or positive, it still has value -- Arena collected plenty of both during the group stage.

Marshall: There is a lack of chemistry in the team, which isn't helped by Osorio's rotations, and the squad is a long way from Mexico's best. This is the first time the Colombian has worked with this group of players, and his avant-garde methodology takes time to bed in, like it has in his club career.

And maybe it really isn't as easy to get results in these games as is the general perception. Managers and players stress over and over that other nations are developing and the globalization of football knowledge is closing the gap between the "minnows" and the "giants," but fans still seem to expect thrashings.

Time to panic yet? Yes/no and why?

Carlisle: Not at all for the U.S., especially now that Arena has called in the proverbial "pros from Dover." Thanks to the rather forgiving Gold Cup roster rules, Arena was able to call in six players, four of whom -- Michael Bradley, Jozy Altidore, Clint Dempsey, and Tim Howard -- have over 100 caps apiece. Darlington Nagbe has been a consistent presence for the U.S. this year, so he'll bring some experience as well.

That infusion of know-how, placed through the spine of the team, is huge and should see the tension and anxiety that has been present in the team throughout the group stage largely dissipate. Instead of panic, this will be a confident, experienced U.S. team that takes the field in the knockout stages.

Marshall: No. Mexico has to improve, work on not being so open defensively and find more cutting edge up front, but Osorio is unlikely to experiment too much now that the knockout rounds are here. And El Tri's path to the final is relatively simple, with a quarterfinal against Honduras (which hasn't scored in the Gold Cup so far) and then a semi against Jamaica or Canada to potentially follow.

It's also entirely debatable whether the word "panic" should be used to judge this experimental group of Mexico players, whatever happens from here on in. However, if El Tri doesn't win the competition, Osorio will continue to feel the heat.

What do you make of their respective policies about call-ups?

Carlisle: As I wrote on Sunday, Arena was well within his rights to use the rules to the maximum. That said, I wouldn't have minded seeing how the original 23-man roster would have fared in the remainder of the tournament. El Salvador would have represented the next logical step in determining just how much progress this group has made this month.

Now that the veterans have been brought into the fold, the U.S. is better positioned to win a trophy but will perhaps learn less than it might have about some players further down the depth chart.

Marshall: Osorio doesn't have much choice. Mexico's best players went to Russia for the Confederations Cup and clubs are under no obligation to release them for yet another tournament. Osorio actually said he had wanted seven players from that squad but wasn't able to get any of them.

In some ways, it makes the knockout stages more exciting for Mexico. This El Tri side is fragile, youthful and desperate to impress. A final against the U.S. would turn the recent tide, with the Stars and Stripes the real favorite against Mexico (outside of Columbus) for the first time since before the last World Cup.

Which teams are best-placed to take advantage?

Carlisle: The addition of five starters puts the U.S. in prime position to win the tournament, but the U.S. will also have no excuses given that Mexico has taken a different route and declined to call in reinforcements. Certainly, the U.S. crash and burn that took place in 2015 shows that the Americans can't take anything for granted. That will be especially true regardless of which team it faces in the semifinal, be it Panama or Costa Rica.

Los Canaleros have shown they can play the U.S. tough anytime, anywhere. The central midfield tandem of Gabriel Gomez and Anibal Godoy is as tough as they come and will not be fazed by playing the U.S. Costa Rica has been a trendy pick to win the whole tournament and break the hegemony of the U.S. and Mexico. In Bryan Ruiz, it has the kind of playmaker who on his day can turn any match.

Marshall: If Mexico plays like it did against Curacao or Jamaica, any team in the bottom half of the draw -- Honduras, Jamaica or Canada -- could take advantage. El Tri hasn't got the luxury of slotting in experienced first-team players halfway through the tournament and needs to find balance internally. Of the others, Costa Rica or Panama overcoming the United States in a semifinal and then winning the tournament wouldn't be a huge shock given what we've seen so far.