The United States advanced on Saturday night with a 2-1 victory over Panama, to continue their unbeaten run in this 2007 edition.

In fact, their Gold Cup unbeaten run extends back to July 23rd, 2003 when a last minute Kaka goal sent the game into extra time where the US were finally finished off by a Brazil penalty.

In this ninth edition, the US has played four games and have come away with four victories in relatively easy fashion, scoring nine times while allowing their opponents only a single goal; Panama scored with 10 men and six minutes left in Saturday's quarterfinal match-up.

Seven different players have scored the nine goals, and the U.S. have the maximum amount of points going into their semifinal match-up with Canada.

All this to say that I'm not very impressed - well, I should say that I'm not surprised for the same reason that I'm wasn't surprised when the Spurs took out Cleveland in four games, or how I'm never surprised when Georgetown beats St. Joe's in their annual November meeting somewhere in Hawaii.

A surprise would have been dropping, or even tying one of the matches, but instead the US did exactly what was expected of them.

Making it into the semifinals of the Gold Cup is a good thing, don't get me wrong, but not a lot can be learned from our "A" side facing off against minnows like Trinidad & Tobago, El Salvador, Panama and Guatemala. Beating teams like these is what the US should be doing.

Well, there are a few things that we can learn, but they don't tell us how far the team has come, but how far that it has to go.

We still know that United States is hardly capable of scoring versus a Guatemala defense that is content to sit back and play defense in hoping they might be able to strike on the counterattack. The Central Americans played that way in March, and they played that way in the opener - this is a team that the U.S. should walk all over, yet who continually frustrates the their northern neighbors.

We know that DaMarcus Beasley can score on minnows, but cries of "He's Back!" are really premature given the level of competition he was playing against when he scored his brace (whether or not Beasley was really ever "gone" is another matter; I'd argue just that teams have figured out that closing down the Jitterbug makes him a lot less dangerous most of the time).

We know that Landon Donovan hardly inspires confidence when he's taking the penalty kicks. His first attempt versus Guatemala was blocked, the second he went down the middle with and while his conversion vs. Panama sent the keeper the wrong way, was hardly hit solidly or placed in the corner. A good goalkeeper will have Donovan for lunch in a penalty situation unless he becomes more authoritative in that situation (He could look at Juan Pablo Angel's conversion with the game on the line against Kansas City, for starters).

I've personally learned that unless Benny Feilhaber is in the match, no one will dare take a shot from beyond 10 yards, and that Clint Dempsey can get a little too cute sometimes.

It's clear that Jonathan Bornstein has a free pass into the left back spot, no matter how he performs on the field. The Chivas USA multi-purpose player has got wheels, but making him the de facto left back when just two years ago he was playing forward in college is short-sighted at the least.

Speaking of the defense, it certainly looked shaky at times versus Panama, and the US has Blas Pérez' poor finishing attempt to thank for not being in a 1-0 hole. Sure, Tim Howard helped make sure it didn't go in, but that wasn't the first time Panama had snuck in behind the backline.

On the offensive end, it has been nice to see Taylor Twellman finally getting some run out with the "A" side, but he's going to need to finish more opportunities. He has been the most consistent goal scorer in MLS over the last four years and needs to bring that nose for the goal to the senior side if he wants to keep being given these starting opportunities.

The reality of this tournament is that the United States, even if they hoist the trophy next Sunday, will exit this "international" tournament without having learned much about their quality, and the new players will have "international experience" against, in a best case scenario, Mexico in Chicago, Illinois - hardly Azteca or even the Rose Bowl.

In short, there's really nothing to see here folks.

Next up for the United States is Canada, a nation more known for scoring goals on ice (though the US has had two tries this year and still haven't scored three against Guatemala like Canada did in the other quarterfinal game), and then either Mexico or Costa Rica, Honduras or Guadeloupe, all four of whom play on Saturday for a trip to the semifinals.

The teams the United States have faced so far are really just fodder for the National Team - and the US should make similar work of Canada in their next match.

There is exactly one team that has the talent level or depth to compete with the US in CONCACAF in Mexico, with Costa Rica and Honduras the only other two teams that have any realistic hope of managing a result.

Now, I would never say that the Gold Cup is a useless tournament, but that is not far off the mark of what it is boiling down to for the United States. None of the remaining teams - well none of the teams, period - have provided any real level of competition for the United States in recent years, aside from Mexico when the games are played in Mexico.

Any match against Los Tricolores is always a tough match, but the last time they won on US soil, people were wondering if Armageddon was upon us because computers wouldn't know how to count from 1999 to 2000.

As for the teams that are left, only Honduras have beaten the Americans on US soil in this millennium: a 3-2 World Cup Qualifying victory at RFK Stadium that not many fans of either side will soon forget.

Costa Rica owns the most victories in the same time period with three, all coming in WCQ matches and all at Saprissa in Costa Rica, maybe the second hardest place for visiting teams in CONCACAF.

Sure, Bob Bradley is using the tournament to experiment with line-ups, but he is still keeping two European players - Jay DeMerit and Frank Simek - on the bench far too much while giving MLS players like Michael Parkhurst and Bornstein too much time.

If experimenting is what he is really doing, great, but why for the love of all things holy is Frankie Hedjuk still a first choice option on this team when playing Simek is what's best for the team?

There are not many bigger fans than I of the World Cup hero, and I love the rabid anticipation I feel waiting for the first TV announcer to mention that he's a surfer (99% of the time on his first touch) but Hedjuk needs to be put to pasture. Playing him in games against CONCACAF small fries serves no purpose.

So have we learned anything so far? Not really, besides that coach Bradley can sometimes be as conservative, if not more, than his predecessor and that we are still better than second tier CONCACAF teams.

Or that if the US is looking for 4-5 warm-up games leading into a possible final match up against Mexico, then the Gold Cup is the place to be.

With the lack of guest invitees like Brazil or Colombia (not to say I advocate bringing in countries from other federations) this Gold Cup is turning out to be a no-win situation for the US. If they win, everyone will say "Well, of course they won. They're the top-ranked team."

But if they lose... really, though, does anyone expect that to happen?