Toss out the word fantastic.

While you're at it, reject incredible, unbelievable, miraculous and all the other adjectives used to describe Greece's ascent to the Euro 2004 soccer crown.

Unexpected, sure, but on analysis, it was a logical outcome that was merely shrouded by some quiet pluses in the leadup.

Underdog status was conferred on the largely unknown side at the outset, and never changed right up to Sunday's final against Portugal.

The Greek players and their coach didn't think that way and, as the tournament unfolded, the oddsmakers shouldn't have either. German coach Otto Rehhagel and his Hellenic heroes knew what they were doing.

Did Greece have the most talented players in the tournament? Hardly.

But they did have the best team. Greece was best at what it sought to do and it prevented other teams from doing the things they do best.

The cult of the superstar too often blinds us to the reality that this remains a team game. When a group of players can be selected on their varied strengths and moulded into a cohesive, disciplined unit for a short and intense tournament, they can kill some giants.

We've seen it often enough in the NHL, where the team that comes out on top after the long regular season more often than not fails in the Stanley Cup playoffs.

Talent isn't enough. There has to be a solid system fitted to the players' abilities, a lot of hard work and an unshakable belief.

The Greeks had it. In fact, it turns out they used their outsider status to advantage right from the start.

First, it should be made clear that the players on the Greek team were not a bunch of amateurs. The talent gap between the best players of Euro 2004 and the least-gifted isn't as great as some people think. Every player in the tournament deserved to be there.

That said, Rehhagel possessed a bit of an automatic edge. While other federations were faced with the taxing job of picking 11 starters and subs from thousands of players on the glamour teams of Europe, tiny Greece had a much easier chore.

Rehhagel, whose coaching status shot higher than his players with this result, had a tournament plan and was more readily able to fit the players needed to implement it from a smaller pool.

Speaking of pool, Greece played the tournament with the credo of a snooker ace: It's not what you make, it's what you leave.

They didn't leave very much and when they earlier knocked out powerful defending champion France, a selection unbeaten in 22 consecutive games, you could see a pattern developing.

I watched the final with a half-dozen diehard soccer fans, none of Greek or Portuguese extraction. Four were rooting for Portugal. One thought the Greek approach "set back soccer two decades."

But in the end, everyone agreed both teams deserved to be in the final over the so-called soccer powers.

There was commentary on the egos of some superstars, including England's David Beckham and Zinedine Zidane of France, as being negatives.

That implied another hidden Rehhagel advantage. His players took on all the mundane and unheralded tasks consistently and whatever their motives (some fat contracts await a few), the result was seamless soccer.

They did the things superstars aren't asked to do and probably wouldn't if they were. Five Greeks made the tournament all-star team and captain Theodorus Zagorakis was named MVP.

A setback for soccer?

Only if other nations decide the route to the final involves an unrelenting defensive pose. More likely they'll conclude they'd better be just as good at their game as the Greeks were at theirs and find ways to score against a defensive wall that didn't allow a goal in three knockout-round games.