Group D
USA

United States

Coach: Mauricio Pochettino
Group rank
1
Points
6
Played
3
Goal diff.
4
Status
Qualified from group
Fixtures
By date
Fixtures / results
Sat, Jun 13
United StatesvsParaguay
FT 4-1
Group D
Fri, Jun 19
United StatesvsAustralia
FT 2-0
Group D
Fri, Jun 26
TurkeyvsUnited States
FT 3-2
Group D
Thu, Jul 2
United StatesvsBosnia and Herzegovina
FT 2-0
Round of 32
Tue, Jul 7
United StatesvsBelgium
FT 1-4
Round of 16
Countries
Groups overview
Group D
1USAQ
PL 32-0-1GF 8-4GD 4PTS 6
2AUSQ
PL 31-1-1GF 2-2GD 0PTS 4
3PARQ
PL 31-1-1GF 2-4GD -2PTS 4
4TUROut
PL 31-0-2GF 3-5GD -2PTS 3
#TeamPLWDL+/-GDPTSStatus
1United States32018-446Qualified
2Australia31112-204Qualified
3Paraguay31112-4-24Qualified
4Turkey31023-5-23Out
Nation lens
Identity1 / 4
N1 · Identity
balanced · mixed-tempo

How they play

The United States maintains a balanced tactical identity characterized by a mixed-tempo approach. With a 54.1% possession share and an aggressive 7.9 PPDA, the team prioritizes high-intensity pressing while distributing scoring responsibility across the squad.

Playing identity · system ↔ individual × direct ↔ possession
SystemIndividualPossessionDirectSystem-builtpossessionStar-ledpossessionPress-and-transitionStar-ledcounter-attackersUSA

United States is plotted from possession share and top-scorer concentration. PPDA and recent form are supporting context when present.

+Recent form8 · 5W 0D 3L
2026-07-07World Cup 2026HUSA 1-4 BELL
2026-07-02World Cup 2026HUSA 2-0 BIHW
2026-06-26World Cup 2026AUSA 2-3 TURL
2026-06-19World Cup 2026HUSA 2-0 AUSW
2026-06-13World Cup 2026HUSA 4-1 PARW
2025-07-06Gold Cup 2025HUSA 1-2 MEXxG 1.1-1.3L
2025-07-02Gold Cup 2025HUSA 2-1 GUAxG 1.8-1.4W
2025-06-29Gold Cup 2025HUSA 6-5 CRCxG 3.0-1.9W
International friendly matches are excluded
N2 · Scoring
open play 86%

How they score

The United States relies heavily on open play to generate their scoring output. With 86% of their goals originating from open play, the team demonstrates a consistent ability to break down defenses through structured movement rather than set-piece reliance.

Goal source · share of play-type-classified goals
86.1%
Open play86.1%Counter2.8%Corner8.3%Free kick2.8%
11% set piececorner + free kick
Effectiveness · conversion by source vs benchmark
Open play19%avg 20%0 pts
32 goals from 165 shots.
Set piece7.1%avg 4.5%+3 pts
4 goals from 56 shots.
benchmark average higher than field by 3+ pts lower than field by 3+ pts
Goal-source shares use non-own-goal rows with source_class values; own goals are excluded.
+Top scorers · still a threat?41% intact

41% of listed scorer goals come from players still marked in the squad.

Jesús Ferreiraout7 · 19%
Folarin Balogunin squad4 · 11%
Brandon Vázquezout3 · 8%
Christian Pulisicin squad3 · 8%
N3 · Conceding
open play 94%

How they concede

The United States defense is overwhelmingly susceptible to goals originating from open play. With 94% of classified concessions occurring outside of set-piece scenarios, opponents may find success by prioritizing quick transitions and sustained possession to break down the defensive structure.

Conceded goal source · share of play-type-classified goals
93.8%
Open play93.8%Free kick6.3%
6% set piece concededcorner + free kick
Effectiveness · conceded conversion by source vs benchmark
Open play17%avg 20%-2 pts
15 conceded from 87 shots faced.
Set piece2.8%avg 4.5%-2 pts
1 conceded from 36 shots faced.
benchmark average lower than field by 3+ pts higher than field by 3+ pts
Conceded source shares use non-own-goal rows with source_class values.
N4 · Big moments
beats ranking · +0.22 GD residual

Better than their rating?

The United States consistently outperforms their Elo-based expectations. With a positive goal difference residual of 0.22, the team demonstrates a capacity to exceed their ranking, though their performance profile remains notably more volatile than the field median.

Over-performance DNA · beats-its-rating × reliability, the tournament field
Beats rating -><- Falls shortVolatile ^Reliable vHigh-ceilingwildcardVolatileunderachieverReliablyoverdeliversReliablybelow par-1.7-0.90+0.9+1.70.81.41.92.5Beats its Elo rating by (goals/match) ->ESPNORHAICODUSA
USATournament field · 48solid line = rating-neutral · dashed = field-median reliability100 Elo ~= -0.37 goals
+Biggest over- & under-performances25 matches
Residual = actual goal difference minus what the Elo gap predicted.
vs TRI · 2023-07-02GD +6 vs exp +1.99+4.01
vs SKN · 2023-06-29GD +6 vs exp +2.60+3.40
vs TRI · 2025-06-15GD +5 vs exp +1.79+3.21
vs BEL · 2026-07-06GD -3 vs exp -0.12-2.88
vs PAN · 2023-07-12GD -1 vs exp +0.86-1.86
vs NED · 2022-12-03GD -2 vs exp -0.19-1.81