RECAPS
EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
cudevil
Post #61
Thursday July 18, 2019 3:11am

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 962
@lilshmike...you think people would have forgotten losing to T&T and a generally dreadful stretch of play had we backed into the WC? I think you are wrong on that.

The Dutch started de Ligt in a world cup qualifier after he had had 2 league starts with Ajax and he was like 17. The idea that some of these young kids arent ready is wholly unknown. We should be using this time to find exactly how ready (or not) they are. At least Sarachan was doing that. There is frankly no reason to keep calling in Bradley and the like right now. The Gold Cup is a joke and if we need Bradley (or similar) later on, we can call them in...we know exactly what we have with them.

Know Nothing
Post #62
Thursday July 18, 2019 3:26am

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 1,653
Original post from Lilshmike

A guy here and there on occasion isn't an issue. Thats to be expected every once in a while - when they've earned it.

The problem is when people are claiming for Richards, CCV, Weah, Sargent, Holmes, EPB, Soto, etc. you name it all to get called in. Most (if not all) aren't ready yet to be called in, and most (if not all) aren't better than the options we have in front of them. And its not like everyone on the roster is a dinosaur. Most guys in the pool right now are in the age range where they will be in prime age for this WC cycle and potentially next, so they are going to be in the picture for the foreseeable future until younger players emerge and push them out. Those younger players will emerge once they've broken through their club teams. If they haven't done that yet, they aren't ready and we are still stuck with the same guys until something changes.


No, they are not dinosaurs, but does one have to be old to be forced out? They can still be good players being forced out by better players...and the team reaps the benefit. Sargent and Weah have/had the misfortune of being on the books of teams with a squad full of players better than the teams of the current USMNT incumbents.

blaise213
Post #63
Thursday July 18, 2019 7:31am

Joined Sep 2012
Total Posts: 2,964
Original post from Kamphgruppe

This is the way the US have always played TBH, really does not have anything to do with MLS, but by all means, continue with your crusade.


Yeah I wasn't talking shit directly, I could've worded it better. No crusade for me, US Soccer is a corrupt federation handicapping itself to promote a D league and has a toxic work environment! Ha

hamsamwich
Post #64
Thursday July 18, 2019 11:58am

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 3,176
So if Mexico was the better team (I'm not so sure about that, I think we got out coached on the day and Gregg selected guys like Omar instead of more attacking options for his bench so we really had nowhere to go in that game)- and guys like Jozy and Bradley aren't good enough to beat Mexico, then why are they on that field still?? We should keep cycling through players until we get better ones out there that can win the game....

hamsamwich
Post #65
Thursday July 18, 2019 1:03pm

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 3,176
Looking forward to a few more players:

How about instead of Trapp we get Keaton Parks?

Sabbi is doing the best he can to be called in. Surely if Morris is a winger then Sabbi can be one as well.

Novakovich: he has skills for a big guy and moves well. I can't be the only one thinking pigeon holding ourselves permanently into a one striker formation (and then only having two strikers) is allowing the other coaches to really narrow down what the USA can do. How about an option for 4-4-2 (we already play defense in that formation) or 3-5-2....?

bjelks
Post #66
Thursday July 18, 2019 2:11pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,291
This is great and progressive dialogue folks.

I'm happy that I'm not the only one not going for the "this is the best we got narrative".

To tell me Bradley and Jozy are the best options, when they're mediocre MLS players at this stage is hard to believe.

Even if they are, I don't understand all the resistance to trying out other guys considering Bradley and Jozy aren't world beaters. How do we even know Jozy and Bradley are the best options when we can't see anyone else?

We know Jozy struggles with finishing and fitness in meaningful games and Bradley doesn't have the pace or engine to keep up at the international game.

I also resoundingly disagree Mexico was the better side. I think they had a better coach who did a much better job of picking a team based on quality, designing tactics and making adjustments.
Not seeing any signs of progress from our Program #BerhalterOut.

I'll add to @lilshmike's comments about playing young players and fringe players over mls vets. As a 4th division player at Bayern, Julian Green scored a goal in the WC that Wondolowski whiffed on and also our WC 2002 team had 2 guys that rarely played for their clubs in Eddie Lewis and Frankie Hejduk and they did pretty well. Also Gregg wasn't even an everyday starter at his club in the English 2nd division when he was a WC player.
goalsense
Lilshmike
Post #67
Thursday July 18, 2019 3:27pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,224
Original post from cudevil

@lilshmike...you think people would have forgotten losing to T&T and a generally dreadful stretch of play had we backed into the WC? I think you are wrong on that.

The Dutch started de Ligt in a world cup qualifier after he had had 2 league starts with Ajax and he was like 17. The idea that some of these young kids arent ready is wholly unknown. We should be using this time to find exactly how ready (or not) they are. At least Sarachan was doing that. There is frankly no reason to keep calling in Bradley and the like right now. The Gold Cup is a joke and if we need Bradley (or similar) later on, we can call them in...we know exactly what we have with them.
Forgotten the T&T game? What are you talking about? Seriously, what are you talking about? I'm not talking about forgetting anything. I'm only saying that player turnover is normal. What is happening this cycle happened last cycle, and the cycle before that. What is different in this scenario is that we failed to qualify for the last WC. As a result, the perception that people have of the situation is worse than the reality. This isn't some monumental turning point. This is legitimately normal and what happens every cycle (qualification or not). Players come in, players go out. That is not unusual.

And I get the example of de Ligt, but hes one of the best CBs in the world. Not a single player in our pool is on his level. Thats an apples to oranges comparison. We don't have players like that. Thats not a debate. And its not like "if we just try some player who is a bench/youth/reserve team guy, maybe he will turn out to be the next thing and we will unearth some hidden gem".

Essentially what you're arguing is that the club managers don't know the skills of these players, and that its up to our national team manager to determine that. Thats kind of ridiculous, considering the club managers see these kids every day in training and know more about them than any of us or Berhalter.

Lilshmike
Post #68
Thursday July 18, 2019 5:01pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,224
Original post from Know Nothing

No, they are not dinosaurs, but does one have to be old to be forced out? They can still be good players being forced out by better players...and the team reaps the benefit. Sargent and Weah have/had the misfortune of being on the books of teams with a squad full of players better than the teams of the current USMNT incumbents.
No, not at all. Players can be forced out when other emerge and force them out by proving they are better options.

Would Tyler Boyd be around if he wasn't producing at the club level and only sitting on the bench? No, absolutely not. How about Duane Holmes? The kid has been bouncing around English lower levels and not getting much game time until recently... and then he got called in.

The problem isn't that I'm opposed to bringing in new players or don't want other guys to come up through the system. Seems like you and others are misinterpreting my point.

My point is that the guys we have are legitimately the best we have got right now. Are there others who, by the time the WC rolls around, will be better than the guys on our current roster? I'm positive of that. However, those players need to prove it first with their clubs before being called into the national team. This isn't controversial and its a statement that I have stood by continuously on this site.

In addition, the other point I have is that we are not in a crisis period. The WC is 3 years away. We haven't started qualifying yet. Think about that for a second... 3 years away... and we haven't started qualifying... A lot can, and will, happen in 3 years.

We have some guys who phased out, some guys who phased in, and a bunch of players who have been in the pool/on the team and aren't newcomers to the program. This is legitimately normal for any national team. We have a new manager, a new style of play, and it takes time to implement/adapt when you only get together for 1-2 weeks at a time a couple times a year. People want immediate results - but that is not going to happen. People want these young guys to magically overnight become starters and bag double digit goals. Thats not going to happen.

Our expectations need to be realistic. Right now, a lot of people on this site and others are becoming hysterical over something that is legitimately a normal process and cycle... and people keep mixing up potential with talent at this time. Does Richards have potential? Yes. Is he better than our current CBs right now? No.

Weah is a great example of what the kids should be doing. He went to PSG. Was not getting playing time. Pushed for a loan to get first team minutes. Came back and was going to be on the bench. Pushed for a move away in order to get first team minutes and to continue to progress. Hes doing it. Others are not. Our young players should be doing this if they arent getting into the first team at their clubs. If they aren't serious about getting first team minutes, then they aren't serious about being in the national team picture right now.

Instead of people getting tight about players for not being good enough (Zardes for example), we should be getting irritated at the other guys who have potential in Europe who should be pushing for those spots and aren't. Its the national team manager's job to select the best players available to him. If those guys aren't getting first team minutes at their club or trying to go somewhere where they can, then thats on them.

Lilshmike
Post #69
Thursday July 18, 2019 5:07pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,224
Original post from hamsamwich

So if Mexico was the better team (I'm not so sure about that, I think we got out coached on the day and Gregg selected guys like Omar instead of more attacking options for his bench so we really had nowhere to go in that game)- and guys like Jozy and Bradley aren't good enough to beat Mexico, then why are they on that field still?? We should keep cycling through players until we get better ones out there that can win the game....
Because they're still better than most, if not all, of our other options. And you don't just cycle through random guys until you get a result. Thats not how you get results and build a team.

And if there are better options, you will see them playing first team minutes for their club team. If they can't get on the field for their club, or move on loan somewhere to get first team minutes, then they aren't better options and/or they aren't ready. Plain and simple.

cudevil
Post #70
Thursday July 18, 2019 5:13pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 962
Original post from Lilshmike

Forgotten the T&T game? What are you talking about? Seriously, what are you talking about? I'm not talking about forgetting anything. I'm only saying that player turnover is normal. What is happening this cycle happened last cycle, and the cycle before that. What is different in this scenario is that we failed to qualify for the last WC. As a result, the perception that people have of the situation is worse than the reality. This isn't some monumental turning point. This is legitimately normal and what happens every cycle (qualification or not). Players come in, players go out. That is not unusual.

And I get the example of de Ligt, but hes one of the best CBs in the world. Not a single player in our pool is on his level. Thats an apples to oranges comparison. We don't have players like that. Thats not a debate. And its not like "if we just try some player who is a bench/youth/reserve team guy, maybe he will turn out to be the next thing and we will unearth some hidden gem".

Essentially what you're arguing is that the club managers don't know the skills of these players, and that its up to our national team manager to determine that. Thats kind of ridiculous, considering the club managers see these kids every day in training and know more about them than any of us or Berhalter.


You literally said that had we lost to T&T, but still qualified because Panama didn't get the result it needed (and whoever else), that we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The absolute natural implication of that statement is that we, as fans, would have moved and been happy to have qualified, and wouldn't be talking about being in a developmental phase for the US. I believe that is a wholly unfounded supposition.

And de Ligt wasn't one of the best CB's in the world when he was capped by the Netherlands. They took a chance based on his potential, and it paid big dividends.

No, I'm not arguing or even hinting that a club coach doesn't understand the skills of the players. Just because someone isn't playing for his club doesn't mean that he's not good enough to do so nor that he's not good enough to be effective for the Nats. Maybe he's stuck behind a world class player. Maybe the team is in a relegation fight, and the manager prefers veterans in that circumstance. Maybe the player is looking to move and the managers wants to play guys that will be there beyond the next season. None of those circumstances bear directly on the player's ability to contribute to the Nats. Let the manager of the national team make the decision of whether someone can contribute or not.

Lilshmike
Post #71
Thursday July 18, 2019 5:20pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,224
And candidly, the examples of Green in the last WC are nonsense. Seriously, its self defeating.

He was brought in because of "potential". The true reason was that an agreement was made between Klinsmann and his dad that he would bring him to the WC if he switched from Germany to the US. Yes, he scored a goal in a game on his first touch - a miss hit. He legitimately miss hit the ball and luckily it went top shelf. Lets call it for what it is. Not a single person can look at a clip of that goal and not say that he hit that off the side of his toe, and the redirect was extremely fortunate.

Green scored, and the hype train started. Where is he now though? Hes barely in the conversation because he just isn't good enough. People got caught up in the romance of having a young player who was emerging at a big time club who could be the savior US Soccer needed to elevate our program to the next level.

The problem is that potential is not the same as talent. Its like falling back into the Freddy Adu trap all over again. But everyone always says "no, its different this time, we havent had a player like this before", but the reality is we have. We have a laundry list of young prospects who didnt pan out.

Once they pan out - call them in. We will know when they do once they are featuring regularly for the first team at their club. Until then, they are nothing more than youth prospects who aren't ready. And again, there can certainly be an exception... but not 10.

Lilshmike
Post #72
Thursday July 18, 2019 5:27pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,224
Original post from cudevil

You literally said that had we lost to T&T, but still qualified because Panama didn't get the result it needed (and whoever else), that we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The absolute natural implication of that statement is that we, as fans, would have moved and been happy to have qualified, and wouldn't be talking about being in a developmental phase for the US. I believe that is a wholly unfounded supposition.

And de Ligt wasn't one of the best CB's in the world when he was capped by the Netherlands. They took a chance based on his potential, and it paid big dividends.

No, I'm not arguing or even hinting that a club coach doesn't understand the skills of the players. Just because someone isn't playing for his club doesn't mean that he's not good enough to do so nor that he's not good enough to be effective for the Nats. Maybe he's stuck behind a world class player. Maybe the team is in a relegation fight, and the manager prefers veterans in that circumstance. Maybe the player is looking to move and the managers wants to play guys that will be there beyond the next season. None of those circumstances bear directly on the player's ability to contribute to the Nats. Let the manager of the national team make the decision of whether someone can contribute or not.
Yes, had we lost to T&T and still qualified for the WC... we would not still be talking about that one game. We continuously reference that one game when talking about the national team because THAT ONE GAME was the game that knocked us out. Had we lost and not missed on the WC, nobody today would be reflecting on that. Period.

And yeah, thats a fair point that just because someone isn't playing doesn't mean they aren't good enough. Totally agree. As I said, there are certainly exceptions. The problem though is when people start listing off 5, 6, 7, 8, 10 different guys. Every once in a while, yes, that happens. When its happening to half the guys people are calling for... its not a coincidence. Those players just aren't good enough yet. If they were, they would at least be making the bench for their club teams.

Thats not controversial. Thats a fact.

Samtom23
Post #73
Thursday July 18, 2019 6:46pm

Joined Jun 2018
Total Posts: 84
I don't know if that is a fact because it is debatable. We look at our player pool and this is what we have. Most of our most promising players are young. How do they get better? By experience. If that experience comes through Club our country, what does it matter?

I do recognise your point and it has some validity. But if GB has vision he actually has players at his disposal. Yes, they are young in some cases but we have to begin somewhere.

bjelks
Post #74
Thursday July 18, 2019 8:08pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,291
Ibra on the quality of mls

http://bleacherreport.com/post/mexico-nationa...
goalsense
Know Nothing
Post #75
Thursday July 18, 2019 8:09pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 1,653
Original post from Lilshmike

Weah is a great example of what the kids should be doing. He went to PSG. Was not getting playing time. Pushed for a loan to get first team minutes. Came back and was going to be on the bench. Pushed for a move away in order to get first team minutes and to continue to progress. Hes doing it. Others are not. Our young players should be doing this if they arent getting into the first team at their clubs. If they aren't serious about getting first team minutes, then they aren't serious about being in the national team picture right now.

Instead of people getting tight about players for not being good enough (Zardes for example), we should be getting irritated at the other guys who have potential in Europe who should be pushing for those spots and aren't. Its the national team manager's job to select the best players available to him. If those guys aren't getting first team minutes at their club or trying to go somewhere where they can, then thats on them.


So your argument then is that we should reward players of moderate to above average skills that have a comfortable time of it in MLS and in all likelihood will not improve? And conversely we should punish players like Dest that are training at prestigious clubs and have to compete with other top level talents for just the opportunity to train with the first team?

Yes, I am being overly dramatic. By all means if a player is playing at a good level then there should be criteria for replacing him (Reggie Canon would deserve to start over Dest). But if there is a player that is not performing to the required level, we should look to replace him and try to find the best player, regardless of situation.

And some times a players club situation dictates their ability to move. Two summers ago Kyle Scott was making the bench for Chelsea's PL matches. He had pushed for a loan move to Reading, a move which may well have got his career started in a more upwardly motion than it is now. The move was denied by Chelsea because they needed midfield cover for the foreseeable future. Sometimes the situation is out of the players hands.

Page 5 of 21
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Next » Last »»

With Jesse Marsch and David Wagner at the helms of teams in the top flight, YA will cover their exploits this season.
RECENT POSTS
YA Transfer Tracker
Yanks Face Relegation in England
Tale of Two Young Yanks in Europe
Wagner Nears Premier League Goal