Ready, Set Confederations Cup

Ah, the Confederations Cup. Can't you just smell the excitement?

Since it's inception in 1992 as the King Fahd Cup, it's been a bit of a curiosity. Is it a full-fledged International tournament? Is it simply a dry run for the World Cup? Is it something the nations and players participating even care about?

The answer is probably a little bit of each and we'll find out a little more when the tournament kicks off Sunday in South Africa when the hosts play Iraq in Johannesburg.

Before jumping into the actual game scenarios, a thought about the dry run aspect of the tournament. Ever since it was announced South Africa would host the 2010 World Cup, there have been countless doubters that the nation could pull it off. In fact, almost immediately after the 2006 World Cup in Germany there were stories of how South Africa and its construction of new stadiums would be ready, with speculation turning to backups.

So, the Confederations Cup might be a bit of an afterthought, or at the very least some light viewing during the first month of most leagues summer vacation. For South Africa, though, there is probably a lot on the line to show FIFA -- and importantly the world -- it can host a major tournament without incident. The newly constructed stadiums will not be used for the Confederations Cup. The four in play for the tournament have each received renovations.

Will a successful Confederations Cup put to rest the doubts about construction and infrastructure upgrades or the lingering doubts about safety and transportation? Or even the bigger question to South Africa, if the nation should have spent all that money on those upgrades?

Probably not, but it will at least showcase the sporting aspect of South Africa and hopefully quell some nerves about FIFA President Sepp Blatter's idea to bring the World Cup to Africa.

As for the sporting part of the tournament, if there's one clear storyline to pay attention to early on, it's the clear dichotomy between the two groups. Group A features the hosts, South Africa, Spain, Iraq and New Zealand. Meanwhile Group B has Italy, Brazil, Egypt and the United States.

From a U.S. perspective, there's two ways to look at this. If the Nats were, say, flip-flopped with New Zealand or Iraq, they'd have a much easier chance (on paper) to progress into the knockout stages. Yet, the way the draw broke down gives the U.S. two extremely tough tests against two of the top five teams in the world with Italy and Brazil, plus a final match with a feisty Egyptian side.

And if there is any pressure on the teams participating, it's probably on the U.S. and the hosts. For the U.S., it's the growing unrest of fans that want to see the team make progress from the disaster in 2006 and show it can compete with the world elites. After back-to-back less than convincing results in CONCACAF qualifiers, Benny Feilhaber's wonderstrike in the 2007 Gold Cup final against Mexico -- which qualified them for the Confederations Cup -- seems like a long time ago.

How coach Bob Bradley juggles a lineup of inconsistent regulars like Clint Dempsey and younger guys who aren't getting playing time at the club level -- Freddy Adu and Jozy Altidore -- will probably make or break the U.S. team, which will have to bring its 'A-game' to have any chance to advance out of its rugged group. On the plus side, the U.S. finished third at both the 1992 and 1999 Confederations Cups.

As for South Africa, it would probably have a hard time even qualifying for the World Cup were it not the host. They certainly don't want to face the humiliation of failing to advance from the group stage next year. The Confederations Cup -- especially with the soft draw -- gives them a chance to give something for the home fans to get behind and build for in the coming year. Everton winger Steven Pienaar, at least, offers some hope for the Bafana Bafana.

Spain, Italy, Brazil -- the heavyweights -- they've won plenty of trophies are are regarded as world elite powers. Does the Confederations Cup do anything to add to that prestige? Obviously these teams aren't going to throw the trophy away, but it's probably a step down from what they're trying to accomplish. If anything it's a showcase for some fringe players to declare some intent for the future.

Dunga is bringing a somewhat different look side for Brazil, which has won the competition twice including in 2005. Standbys like Kaka and Robinho are on board, but some lesser know players like Felipe Melo, Josué and Nilmar have gotten the call. Also, ex-Premier League midfielders Gilberto Silva and ex-Manchester United flop Kleberson also made the roster.

Italy, now that coach Marcelo Lippi has returned, look very similar to their 2006 World Cup winning team, with a few new faces -- Davide Santon and Giuseppe Rossi -- mixed in with the old guard of Fabio Cannavaro, Andrea Pirlo and Luca Toni. The only question here is if the aging Azzurri squad can coax another run over the next year.

As for Euro 2008-winning Spain, the side looks almost identical to the one that beat Germany in Vienna last June, with the only big-name missing Andres Iniesta who is out with an injury. It's not too bad when you can call on Cesc Fabregas or Xabi Alonso to fill in. Guess that's why they're No. 1 in the mythical FIFA rankings. Spain hasn't lost a match since 2006 and they likely won't until they get out of the group, if they did it would be a massive upset. A possible Spain/Brazil final would be a late-June treat for soccer fans worldwide.

Iraq is coached by Bora Milutinovic, who's attempting to coach every national team in the world before he retires. The Lions of the Mesopotatamia were a good story, winning the 2007 Asian Cup. But a lot of turmoil, as you'd expect from the war torn nation, has engulfed the team and by now are probably just happy to be there since it failed to qualify for the 2010 World Cup and hasn't won a game in 2009.

The same could be said of New Zealand, the Oceania representative. Ever since Australia jumped ship to the AFC, FIFA ought to consider revoking the OFC's place in this tournament just as certain states lose seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, sorry Kiwis. (For what it's worth, the All Whites roster features four players employed by Major League Soccer -- one less than the U.S. roster.)

Egypt looked absolutely amazing last year, winning the 2008 African Cup of Nations on its home soil. Yet for this tournament its two biggest names, at least to followers of the Premier League -- Amir Zaky and Mido -- are not on the roster. Instead it's a mostly domestic-based group, with Borussia Dortmund striker Mohamed Zidan counted on to provide some pop.

So what does this all mean?

Though it lacks the drama or history of the World Cup, for all it's warts the Confederations Cup is a nice way to whet the appetite for the soccer feast coming next year. There are certainly a few matches that even by generous standards cannot be called 'Must See TV', yet when Spain, Italy and Brazil are involved in a tournament it's worth watching.

And if you're a U.S. fan, who knows, maybe the stars will align and the team will advance and build some positive a momentum, even if it is only the Confederations Cup.

As an added bonus for fans in the United States, every match will be available on the ESPN family of networks, along with ESPN360.com, listings are here.