The 2017 Confederations Cup has concluded with Germany defeating a rising Chile with one goal getting behind Chile’s Claudio Bravo. But before lifting the cup Germany faced Mexico in a semifinal matchup. Excitement and aspiration ran rampant throughout Mexican households as we envisioned Mexico defeating Germany’s secondary squad on course to lifting the Confederations Cup.

In the context of the World Cup, or even the Copa America for Mexico, this tournament is rather insignificant as it pertains to laurels. Nevertheless, thousands upon thousands of Mexican soccer loyalists would view this as an omen of an enhanced pool of Mexican talent that could compete with the best on the international stage. However, we have seen this movie before for the last decade plus. Mexico pumps adrenaline into the media cycles and fans as they tie Portugal, the champions of Europe, and defeat New Zealand and Russia to tie for the top spot in Group A.

Within the first eight minutes of Germany v. Mexico, Joachim Löw’s young squad, led by Man. City’s Julian Draxler, put the game away heading into the final behind Leon Goretzka’s two goals. This catalyzed the inevitable flood of criticism from the Mexican sports media about yet another mediocre Mexican performance.

In the midst of this agony, Germany played Chile, a national team that appeared to be on the same tier as Mexico, Ghana, or the United States after losing to Brazil in penalties in the round of 2016 of the 2014 tournament. Similarly, Mexico’s fate was decided by a Dutch penalty after Arjen Robben’s dive drove a machete into the necks of Mexican fans. If Chile was truly on Mexico’s tier, that 2014 defeat would have prompted a digression of Chilean football. People from every occupation would be calling for the head of the manager and an expedited process of players to Europe’s best leagues.

But that wasn’t the case because the Football Federation of Chile strives to succeed in the game of football by winning tournaments and defeating high-octane opponents, not settling for ties. Chile’s style of play, although emulating Spain’s methodical passing and Germany’s affinity for set pieces, synchronizes a total football method with a relentless pursuit of the ball to craft a menacing approach to the game that has defeated Argentina twice for the Copa America.

Alternatively, Mexico appears satiated with constant mediocrity and dominating lackluster competition within the CONCACAF. Sure, many Mexican football pundits who claim Mexico’s backline was the Achilles' heel for the tournament certainly hold a pool evidence to substantiate that claim. But focusing on the poor Mexican play merely scratches the surface. The crux of this dilemma begins when the first pundit calls for the resignation of the team’s manager; in this case, Juan Carlos Osorio.

This dynamic is constant after every defeat in a tournament. From Hugo Sanchez to Miguel Herrera, Mexican pundits and fans seem to acquire a sense of comfort from firing a manager. But, truly, how important is a manager to a team? Whether it be a top club in the Premier League or the Mexican nation, it is widely accepted outside circles of former managers turned pundits, that the manager position is expendable, especially at the national stage. Within a club organization, a manager can make decisions that impact the financial future of the team. Any manager for the Mexican squad faces narrower decisions, especially when operating under the flag of the megalomaniacal football federation that is the FMF.

The impact a manager can make to change the course of a game occurring on the pitch is limited and negligible. With this in mind, the decision to fire a manager as retribution for a defeat appears to be an empty symbolic gesture, futile just like every Mexican goal scored in a tournament. If this is the case, then why do Mexican football executives keep doing it? Because they do not care about winning games, they care more about marketing.

Any football fan will tell you that the Bundesliga, La Liga, the Premier League, and Serie A have a definitive characteristic woven into their style of play. Mexico’s football league, Liga MX does not. The game of football really has two purposes. One is to build pride and prominence via domination on the pitch. Second is to act as a marketing vehicle for goods and services. In most cases, the former often supplements the latter, but rarely is it mutualistic. Every club and nation have a choice to make when it comes to their mission in the game. Mexico has clearly chosen the latter.

The FMF is satisfied with qualification to the World Cup because it presents more opportunities to gain fame and push particular players, rarely the best player, into new markets for more monetary opportunities. As long as this mentality persists, Mexico’s style of play will continue to consist of an amalgamation of schoolyard nonsense with rare dashes of brilliance. Mexicans who go abroad will continue to fill the mid- and lower-tiers of those football markets. Mexican football will continue to blunder and fans will grow closer with heartbreak.