What Brazil's loss in the Olympics means

I've been surprised not to hear more wailing and knashing of teeth about the Mexican win over Brazil for the gold medal at the London Olympics. My three reasons for concern are 1. Mexico were the poorer team: They won on the day, but you can't tell me that the Brazilians weren't the better team throughout the tournament. Neymar is very, very good if a little lightweight, Marcelo is the best left back currently playing, and Damiao is lethal in front of goal. The better side lost. 2. It means that the Brazilians are going to go home having learned the wrong lesson: They fielded an awesome and brilliant to watch attack, and they attacked and scored goals without worrying or seeming to worry about the defensive side. Don't you want Brazil to play like that? Or do you want the team filled with Emersons, Dungas, and Gilberto Silvas? I worry that the next time you see them in action, there will be many more defensive midfielders anchoring the side, making it so less fun to watch. They don't have qualifying matches to play to get the side right and they are banking on winning the World Cup on home soil. 3. Mexico winning is horrible for the USA's role in CONCACAF. I predict that the recent first win by the USA in the Azteca is a reprieve, at best. I watched that match through splayed fingers, and without the hopelessness of Chicharito's finishing, and again, Tim Howard's heroics, the USA should have received our customary hiding and loss. When we have to play them for real, they are going to tread all over us. Jonathan Wilson of the Guardian has this to say about Brazil and their future plans for 2014. Click here to read his thoughts