RECAPS
EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
Know Nothing
Post #46
Saturday October 10, 2020 4:44pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 1,827
Original post from BG6

I hate to point the obvious but your analogy here only makes sense if you have the seasoned all conference players that these talented freshmen are displacing in the USMNT pool. We do not.


Spot on!

stoked-3
Post #47
Saturday October 10, 2020 5:02pm

Joined Mar 2020
Total Posts: 97
Original post from Lilshmike

I understand the principle of the argument, but that's not how most (and in that post) frame the argument. To bring it back to the high school recruit at an SEC school analogy, those kids don't get shoved into the starting position right away. They start on the bench and work their way up the depth chart. A process that's been taking place with our national team.

However, most mix up being a highly touted high school recruit that has yet to either play a game or make their way up the depth chart, with that recruit somehow being in the conversation of being an all conference caliber player before they've ever stepped foot on the field... and this is before we even compare the recruits of Arkansas relative to that of schools like Alabama and LSU...

I have zero problem with the 11 names he put in that starting lineup... but most of those guys are nothing more than highly touted high school recruits in their freshman year... not seasoned all conference players. The hype train gets out of control sometimes.

Yes, the future is bright, but a lot of stuff needs to be put in context before we get up in arms and emotional about it.


I had Josh at Striker-sure he needs work, is not a finished product, and is not a world class player but he has technical skill and understands the game-he is better than Zardes and will be able to interchange with the guys below

CP-he is number 10 at Chelsea-enough said

Reyan-at 16 and 17 he is bossing games, in fact euor pundits comparing his game to Zidane-i wouldnt go that far but its pretty easy to see he is pure class

Weston: starter last yr and by all accounts was one of the teams top performers week in and out-then moves to Juve starts and has played well in his games

Adams: coach says he is quarterback of the team-scored in a CL game the winning goal-

Weah: sure I think he needs to work on his touch but is faster than zardes, and probably morris-has a high ceiling than both. Will he pan out lets

Brooks-scored in last WC, and is a proven lockdown defender when healthy-I do not think he will stay healthy which is why I want to try to build our depth but he is close to being world class

Richards: the coach this week said the kid is in the lineup bc of his growth and practice-you are fine with zimmerman and gonzolas but this kid is playing at Bayern-will he make it-sure looks like it

Dest: jumped right in and play out of posistion at Barca and he played great

Steffan-Sure he is a back up now but come on he is at one of the top clubs in the world-Pep said he played great when he has played

Robinson: you bag on him for his league which is wierd bc while we were wasting time with Sweat and lovitt this guys was motm for his team question would be could Sweat/lovitt do the same? and could they jump in and play at the level he did for is 1st PL start?

Green: scored in a WC and continues to play well-he played 5th division germany JK saw enough in him to bring him in and he proved he could play at WC level

Arjo: sure his league is weak but he needed to go there bc of his injuries-he talent is undeniable its his health that is the issue

EPB: sure untested but he hasnt been given any chances-we see long/zimmerman/gonzo but his upside is higher

So which of the above players are the high school over hyped players?

And what MLS player would you put into the above starting 11?

I wish you put this much time into critiquing mls players , GB, and US soccer-instead your efforts are to knock Euro nats guys:

Samtom23
Post #48
Sunday October 11, 2020 3:29am

Joined Jun 2018
Total Posts: 455
Original post from BG6

I hate to point the obvious but your analogy here only makes sense if you have the seasoned all conference players that these talented freshmen are displacing in the USMNT pool. We do not.


I think mostly the roster change will be apparent for most positions. FWD, I don't think Sargent has separated himself and we may have a more experienced place holder. Reyna, Dest, Mckennie, have. I am interested to see Robinson because last time he got called in, he clearly had holes but that was 2 years ago under DS. A lot of development can happen in that time and it seems to have but want to see him once or twice before saying he is a lock starter. I will be watching more Fulham's games to see. I will say Mckennie has holds in his game but he has surpassed other options and he is dominant with headers. Richards has earned a call up but not ready to say he is a lock starter considering his limited playing time. Tyler Boyd now also has questions due to his club situation. Some names that should are still present within MLS, Morris and Aaronson both of this have something to offer. Weah is still not playing regular minutes and Aaronson could back up Reyna easily.

hamsamwich
Post #49
Sunday October 11, 2020 2:48pm

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 3,446
We look to be wasting this period of team development while everybody argues over specific players and specific positions. Everyone agrees that player develop and get noticed at their clubs. And if our players are getting noticed this much internationally (and more will pop up here in the next few years), then they will look to be one of those young teams considered to have an upcoming golden generation, much like a Belgium or Colombia or even Ivory Coast from a few years back. What's the difference between some of those teams that have taken that next step with all the talent and those that don't??? People raving about the upcoming talent in the United States should realize there are a lot of talented countries all over the world who do better to maximize what they have got- and if those same people had our players and our resources the results would be infinitely better! @blaise is 100% right that the lawsuit and everything else has helped to mess up the men's game here by embarrassment and the incompetence. The good old boy network. And of course the weird inferiority complex perfectly played out here for us by @lilshmike. The we aren't good enough so why try and who cares who runs it because it can't and won't be any better. To accept our lot in life given to us by the mansion house working lords.
If everyone pulled on the same rope maybe we would be better. It starts with the top- but only a few levels down is the coach who is the face. He bears the second or third most responsibility but it is Greggs decisions that are the last action in a long line of fuck ups. Hard to get too mad when he chooses Zimmerman or whatever- the problem is much greater than him. He just goes along with it.

Lilshmike
Post #50
Wednesday October 14, 2020 1:42pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,509
@BGC6
@Know Nothing
@Stoked-3

Bringing this back to the high school recruit example with Arkansas...

Again... context is required. Context.

In my example, the reality would be that college isn't a 4-year term, but rather a 10 to 12 year term with a conference championship taking place every 4 years. Our high school recruits who have yet to see the field don't know the X's and O's, and although have the potential to be good, in their first freshman year there is a team full of guys who have years and years of experience ahead of them.

Why does all of this matter, and why does it make sense? Because we are talking about the job of the coach. The job of the coach, at a macro level, is win.

Sure, these recruits may have way higher ceilings to the guys in front of them, but the older guys, the guys who have been at Arkansas for 6,7,8 years... they have developed to where their floor is defined, they know the X's and O's, the coach knows what they're going to get out of them, and they've gotten years of experience playing against their opponents and know what they're up against.

So, as a coach who wants to win, that coach wouldn't throw out all those recruits out day one. They would integrate them in slowly, letting them learn, gain experience, and earn their place. EXACTLY as has been happening with the national team.

Why wouldn't shouldn't we throw out all those recruit and say screw the people who are in front of them on the depth chart on day 1? Well again, context. These recruits are in the first year of their 10-12 year college career, entering their first championship cycle... playing against other teams who have both superior recruits and superior experienced veteran players who have been through championships before.

If the coach said on day 1 that all of these high school recruits, with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 veteran players, were now the starters without any games or experience, and then we went into a conference championship with the likes of Alabama and LSU and Georgia... Arkansas would get absolutely smoked.

So, bringing this full circle, and back to my point about this whole situation and WC cycle being a double edged sword for GGG...

Hes damned if he does, damned if he doesn't for most on this site. The job of the coach is to ultimately win games....

If he plays a bunch of veterans or older experienced players and we win some games, everyone is up in arms because some random kid on a youth team in Europe or who has a couple sub appearances to his name wasn't called in, everyone will be up in arms crying about how dumb Berhalter is and how he should be fired for not selecting that kid.

If he plays a mix of experienced guys and young recruits, and we lose lose some games, everyone will be up in arms claiming that its the fault of the experienced players and that Berhalter was dumb for not selecting more young recruits.

If Berhalter plays a bunch of freshman and high school recruits (which has not happened yet), a bunch of guys that are youth players on teams in Europe, or to this point have been reserve players at their clubs with little to no first team playing experience... well the reality is that we would likely lose most games and have absolutely no shot at winning a conference championship against teams filled with equally if not higher talented recruits and a squads full of far superior veterans. At which point, everyone will be up in arms about how it wasn't the fault of the kids, it was Berhalters fault because he is a bad coach and doesn't know what he is doing...

There is no scenario where you guys won't get mad and cry about the result and blame Berhalter. None. The reality is that while everyone has been crying about some of these MLS guys... at the time, in context, they were the best we had (and in some situations, still have).

The reality is that when you stack our pool up against other nations in the world... we are still a far ways off. Right now we are a good CONCACAF team. We can't even say that we are the best team in our region. We are realistically still behind Mexico. And thats before we get compared against South America and European teams. We have a lot of promise coming up and should be able to have a good team in 2026 so long as all of our young guys continue developing, but in the near term we still are far behind our rivals.

And to bring this full circle once more... the job of the coach is to win. So Berhalter needs to try and win games where he can (in competitive competition). For 2022, he has no way to win with anyone on this site. Its a double edged sword and hes doomed for failure because he either way we will likely be outmatched by our opponents, or it will require playing some guys who are potentially unfavorable to the fanbase but help get the job done (think Beckerman with Klinsmann).

If y'all don't comprehend what I have laid out, or can't understand why some of these young kids have not (and should not) been called in... there is no rationalizing with you.

I keep saying the same thing. The same things continue to happen.

Lilshmike: Player X is in a youth team in country Y. There is no way he will get called in and doesn't deserve to be called in. Player A should be getting called in because he is outperforming player X, as well as players B, C, and D, relative to their positions and leagues.
YA posters: You're stupid, a fanboy, don't understand, and want to pump MLS.
*roster comes out*
*Player A is selected, Player X is excluded*
YA Site: Blasphemy!!! Out with Berhalter!!! Hes an idiot!!!
Lilshmike: Guys, I told you. This isn't rocket science.
YA Site: The smartest guys int he room schtick is getting old, and you just want to defend the coach and pump up MLS...

I mean, it gets fairly comical when you step back and take a look at it...

Lilshmike
Post #51
Wednesday October 14, 2020 1:48pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,509
Original post from hamsamwich

We look to be wasting this period of team development while everybody argues over specific players and specific positions. Everyone agrees that player develop and get noticed at their clubs. And if our players are getting noticed this much internationally (and more will pop up here in the next few years), then they will look to be one of those young teams considered to have an upcoming golden generation, much like a Belgium or Colombia or even Ivory Coast from a few years back. What's the difference between some of those teams that have taken that next step with all the talent and those that don't??? People raving about the upcoming talent in the United States should realize there are a lot of talented countries all over the world who do better to maximize what they have got- and if those same people had our players and our resources the results would be infinitely better! @blaise is 100% right that the lawsuit and everything else has helped to mess up the men's game here by embarrassment and the incompetence. The good old boy network. And of course the weird inferiority complex perfectly played out here for us by @lilshmike. The we aren't good enough so why try and who cares who runs it because it can't and won't be any better. To accept our lot in life given to us by the mansion house working lords.
If everyone pulled on the same rope maybe we would be better. It starts with the top- but only a few levels down is the coach who is the face. He bears the second or third most responsibility but it is Greggs decisions that are the last action in a long line of fuck ups. Hard to get too mad when he chooses Zimmerman or whatever- the problem is much greater than him. He just goes along with it.
What inferiority complex are you talking about?

You trying to take random cheap shots that make no sense to win debate points here? Please, enlighten me.

hamsamwich
Post #52
Thursday October 15, 2020 3:44am

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 3,446
I literally said the following sentences why. I hate to break it you but you have a strange way of trying to monopolize the debate as if there's one viewpoint- and your view is an extremely low bar to shoot for. It's not a cheap debate point it's how you present yourself and the corner of the fan base you sit in. It's a rather conservative view, I bet you saw eye to eye with Sunil Gulati. And that's ok. But recognize your wing of fandom and own it. Most people on here come with things they think would improve and or change things for worse or better. Some people use lineups, some strategy and tactics, some developmental changes and some say play more different players. And those are their views. I have yet to see you come up with anything constructive and new to improve- only reasons why what we do is good enough, yet in your own estimation the team isn't good enough. It's a strange dichotomy to present. Maybe I'm the only one who views you in this light and if I'm wrong I'll say so. But in the vast community of soccerdom you back the status quo. And that's ok. For you.

Lilshmike
Post #53
Thursday October 15, 2020 2:49pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,509
Original post from hamsamwich

I literally said the following sentences why. I hate to break it you but you have a strange way of trying to monopolize the debate as if there's one viewpoint- and your view is an extremely low bar to shoot for. It's not a cheap debate point it's how you present yourself and the corner of the fan base you sit in. It's a rather conservative view, I bet you saw eye to eye with Sunil Gulati. And that's ok. But recognize your wing of fandom and own it. Most people on here come with things they think would improve and or change things for worse or better. Some people use lineups, some strategy and tactics, some developmental changes and some say play more different players. And those are their views. I have yet to see you come up with anything constructive and new to improve- only reasons why what we do is good enough, yet in your own estimation the team isn't good enough. It's a strange dichotomy to present. Maybe I'm the only one who views you in this light and if I'm wrong I'll say so. But in the vast community of soccerdom you back the status quo. And that's ok. For you.
So here we go, you said the following:

"And of course the weird inferiority complex perfectly played out here for us by @lilshmike. The we aren't good enough so why try and who cares who runs it because it can't and won't be any better. To accept our lot in life given to us by the mansion house working lords.
If everyone pulled on the same rope maybe we would be better. It starts with the top- but only a few levels down is the coach who is the face. He bears the second or third most responsibility but it is Gregg's decisions that are the last action in a long line of fuck ups. Hard to get too mad when he chooses Zimmerman or whatever- the problem is much greater than him. He just goes along with it."


Ok, so I put in bold the "things" that stood out as points. The rest is somewhat nonsensical rambling. I will address each point:
We aren't good enough so why try
I've never said we shouldn't try. Never. I do though continue to maintain the viewpoint that we are far behind the talent level of other nations, both in our potential starting 11 and in our pool. Thats just a fact, bud. There is no disputing that. We are catching up, but right now we are still far behind. Its a process that will take time, and we have some young kids developing... but they are still young kids that need to develop.

The difference here is that you (and others) take the approach of "we should throw out all these kids, many of whom have little to no senior club experience and play in youth and reserve teams, and force them into our starting 11... because hopefully it will pay off in the long run". Thats a decent thought, and in very limited circumstances, maybe that could work... but that differs from my opinion of "our objective is to win games, and we are matched and ranked against other teams in the world by our ability to win games against those nations... and by throwing out a bunch of youth and reserve team kids to play against nations fielding far superior skilled and experienced players, we are almost guaranteed to lose... which is the opposite of our objective, and what I believe will move us forward"

There is a distinct difference there... and it has nothing to do with an inferiority complex.

Who cares who runs it because it can't and won't be any better
I've never said who cares who runs it because we won't be any better. Never. What I have said is that our problems are not all down to the manager and USSF. I've also said that our problem is a player pool problem, and not a manager problem. Gregg has called in some unpopular guys, I agree... but look at my previous post for a thorough explanation on that.

The difference here is that you (and others) take the approach of "If we lose a game, its because of Gregg... either because he didn't call up [insert random Euro based youth or reserve kid, or bench warmer name here] or because he played too many MLS players. If we play a game and win, its unsatisfactory because either the opponent was some crappy dinky country, we didn't play well enough, or because Gregg didn't play or give enough time to [insert random Euro based youth or reserve kid, or bench warmer name here]." This is quite literally the case with you and others. Almost every time. Its continually the case. There is absolutely nothing that you'll be satisfied with.

I on the other hand take the approach of "Well, lets put this in context. Who was called in? Who was available for selection and/or healthy? Where was the game and who was it against? Should we, on paper, have expected to win the game? Who did we start and who played in the game?" All of this needs to be considered before grabbing torches and pitchforks. Sometimes, yeah, I think that he has made some poor decisions. Other times, I think he has just been dealt a crappy hand and tried to make the most of it. Again, at the end, his job is to win games. Sometimes selections will be unpopular, but if his job is to win, and we win... job done.

Hard to get too mad when he chooses Zimmerman or whatever
See my previous posts... this is covered thoroughly. Not wasting time.

You are very similar to bjelks in some respect to differing opinions. But instead of tossing out racism and calling people fanboys... you lob the ole "you agree with USSF and the coach, you see eye to eye with Sunil Gulati, are fine with the status quo and good ole boy system" line.

To you, all of our problems start with USSF and the manager. You have legitimately stated this exact thing. The reality, is that there are factors outside of their control that either you're oblivious to, or want to completely ignore. I on the other hand, try to recognize all of the factors at play and identify the root causes of a problem instead of taking the easy, low-hanging fruit of blaming everything on the manager and back office.

Its not their fault that all of our players have been perpetually hurt over the last 18 months or so, is it? Of course not... and you'd be stupid to blame that on them.

Is it their fault that up until the last 12 months, we have a severe lack of overseas interest in plucking out youth players and placing them in academy systems in Europe? Of course not, there are economic factors at play which have determined that... and actually, USSF has helped this. How might you ask? Well, as much as I disagree with the fact that MLS academies and youth clubs don't get compensated if a young kid is signed to a youth academy in Europe (as happens with clubs in Europe), that lack of payment... something held steadfast by USSF... actually lowers the cost of acquisition and development for academy players in Europe. That is why we have so many kids going to Germany and other countries recently. Its cheaper for those teams to pluck American kids and put them on their teams because they are basically free. Bet you didn't know that one. Thank you, USSF.

You can complain about the coaching search all you want, to some extent I agree, but at the end of the day we are stuck with GGG and I'd rather give him an opportunity to prove his worth than spend all of my time bitching and moaning about god knows what and blaming everything on him unnecessarily. At this point, it would be more detrimental to fire him and bring in someone new, so we're stuck with what we've got. As fans, which you claim to be one, we should try to show support for the guy and the team instead of always complain, because whether we like it or not, he is the man taking us to 2022.

I don't see hoe any of that is the result of some inferiority complex or some dated way of thinking, or the status quo. Its actually a wildly logical and rational viewpoint... one which most in the US soccer community has outside of the Yanks Abroad site if you go out and explore what other people are saying outside of this message board.

But hey, you do you bud. But inevitably my post will be called fanboyism, or USSF defending, or status quo, or whatever label you can slap on it.

Know Nothing
Post #54
Thursday October 15, 2020 4:06pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 1,827
Original post from Lilshmike

@BGC6
@Know Nothing
@Stoked-3

Bringing this back to the high school recruit example with Arkansas...

Again... context is required. Context.

In my example, the reality would be that college isn't a 4-year term, but rather a 10 to 12 year term with a conference championship taking place every 4 years. Our high school recruits who have yet to see the field don't know the X's and O's, and although have the potential to be good, in their first freshman year there is a team full of guys who have years and years of experience ahead of them.

Why does all of this matter, and why does it make sense? Because we are talking about the job of the coach. The job of the coach, at a macro level, is win.

Sure, these recruits may have way higher ceilings to the guys in front of them, but the older guys, the guys who have been at Arkansas for 6,7,8 years... they have developed to where their floor is defined, they know the X's and O's, the coach knows what they're going to get out of them, and they've gotten years of experience playing against their opponents and know what they're up against.

So, as a coach who wants to win, that coach wouldn't throw out all those recruits out day one. They would integrate them in slowly, letting them learn, gain experience, and earn their place. EXACTLY as has been happening with the national team.

Why wouldn't shouldn't we throw out all those recruit and say screw the people who are in front of them on the depth chart on day 1? Well again, context. These recruits are in the first year of their 10-12 year college career, entering their first championship cycle... playing against other teams who have both superior recruits and superior experienced veteran players who have been through championships before.

If the coach said on day 1 that all of these high school recruits, with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 veteran players, were now the starters without any games or experience, and then we went into a conference championship with the likes of Alabama and LSU and Georgia... Arkansas would get absolutely smoked.

So, bringing this full circle, and back to my point about this whole situation and WC cycle being a double edged sword for GGG...

Hes damned if he does, damned if he doesn't for most on this site. The job of the coach is to ultimately win games....

If he plays a bunch of veterans or older experienced players and we win some games, everyone is up in arms because some random kid on a youth team in Europe or who has a couple sub appearances to his name wasn't called in, everyone will be up in arms crying about how dumb Berhalter is and how he should be fired for not selecting that kid.

If he plays a mix of experienced guys and young recruits, and we lose lose some games, everyone will be up in arms claiming that its the fault of the experienced players and that Berhalter was dumb for not selecting more young recruits.

If Berhalter plays a bunch of freshman and high school recruits (which has not happened yet), a bunch of guys that are youth players on teams in Europe, or to this point have been reserve players at their clubs with little to no first team playing experience... well the reality is that we would likely lose most games and have absolutely no shot at winning a conference championship against teams filled with equally if not higher talented recruits and a squads full of far superior veterans. At which point, everyone will be up in arms about how it wasn't the fault of the kids, it was Berhalters fault because he is a bad coach and doesn't know what he is doing...

There is no scenario where you guys won't get mad and cry about the result and blame Berhalter. None. The reality is that while everyone has been crying about some of these MLS guys... at the time, in context, they were the best we had (and in some situations, still have).

The reality is that when you stack our pool up against other nations in the world... we are still a far ways off. Right now we are a good CONCACAF team. We can't even say that we are the best team in our region. We are realistically still behind Mexico. And thats before we get compared against South America and European teams. We have a lot of promise coming up and should be able to have a good team in 2026 so long as all of our young guys continue developing, but in the near term we still are far behind our rivals.

And to bring this full circle once more... the job of the coach is to win. So Berhalter needs to try and win games where he can (in competitive competition). For 2022, he has no way to win with anyone on this site. Its a double edged sword and hes doomed for failure because he either way we will likely be outmatched by our opponents, or it will require playing some guys who are potentially unfavorable to the fanbase but help get the job done (think Beckerman with Klinsmann).

If y'all don't comprehend what I have laid out, or can't understand why some of these young kids have not (and should not) been called in... there is no rationalizing with you.

I keep saying the same thing. The same things continue to happen.

Lilshmike: Player X is in a youth team in country Y. There is no way he will get called in and doesn't deserve to be called in. Player A should be getting called in because he is outperforming player X, as well as players B, C, and D, relative to their positions and leagues.
YA posters: You're stupid, a fanboy, don't understand, and want to pump MLS.
*roster comes out*
*Player A is selected, Player X is excluded*
YA Site: Blasphemy!!! Out with Berhalter!!! Hes an idiot!!!
Lilshmike: Guys, I told you. This isn't rocket science.
YA Site: The smartest guys int he room schtick is getting old, and you just want to defend the coach and pump up MLS...

I mean, it gets fairly comical when you step back and take a look at it...


Context please...I do not think any of us believe we are world beaters.

Comical indeed when you compare the youth setups for professional teams in elite leagues to mere high schools. These players are not mere high school players, they have been training at elite trade schools that develop soccer players. It's more like a scenario where you have a young violinist trained by Juliard playing against a seasoned veteran of the Omaha Symphony Orchestra who studied music in a random college.

So in reading your diatribe, you state the coaches job is to win and using players whose ceilings have been defined makes the most sense since they understand the system. In this scenario, the Arkansas veterans will do well against the Div 1A schools but will never beat Alabama because Alabama's talent has a much higher ceiling. So, if it a coaches job to win, why shouldn't he use his freshman talent that may have the ability to turn the tables against the Alabama's of the world? Losing is losing.

Lilshmike
Post #55
Thursday October 15, 2020 5:28pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,509
Original post from Know Nothing

Context please...I do not think any of us believe we are world beaters.

Comical indeed when you compare the youth setups for professional teams in elite leagues to mere high schools. These players are not mere high school players, they have been training at elite trade schools that develop soccer players. It's more like a scenario where you have a young violinist trained by Juliard playing against a seasoned veteran of the Omaha Symphony Orchestra who studied music in a random college.

So in reading your diatribe, you state the coaches job is to win and using players whose ceilings have been defined makes the most sense since they understand the system. In this scenario, the Arkansas veterans will do well against the Div 1A schools but will never beat Alabama because Alabama's talent has a much higher ceiling. So, if it a coaches job to win, why shouldn't he use his freshman talent that may have the ability to turn the tables against the Alabama's of the world? Losing is losing.
The only thing I'm going to address here is what is in bold.

I'm not talking about playing playing guys strictly based on their defined ceiling. The point I'm making is the ability of that person to get the job done when called upon. If you cannot comprehend the notion of "higher ceiling, lower floor" vs "higher floor, lower ceiling"... then I can't help you.

Its pretty straight forward.

For a one off game, a friendly or something like that, I can understand and could be supportive given the player and circumstances. Or maybe a single player in the WC where it is do or die... like Deandre Yedlin or Julian Green. A guy where you toss them in during a pinch and say, "show me what you got".

Yedlin going into that tournament had a very low floor, and the whole purpose he was brought in was because of speed and athleticism. He spent time during camp training by himself working on man marking and 1 v 1 situations because he was going to be used for a very specific purpose. Using his speed to exploit opponents.

For the record, I would have been fine with Green getting called into the squad... so long as he was taking the place of a guy like Brad Davis... not a guy like Landon Donovan. But to call it for what it was, Green didn't deserve to be called in, was only called in because Klinsmann promised him a spot on the roster if he switched from Germany, Donovan was left off because of a personal vendetta that Klinsmann had against him stemming from his time at Bayern, JK used stats and camp scrimmage results as the "reason" to axe Landon, and Davis was brought on because of his left footed crossing and free kick abilities. I know this because I have spoken to people who were close to the situation through one avenue or another. Those are the facts.

Getting back on topic... when you're looking to grind out results in competitive games, like qualifying or certain tournaments, it makes sense for a coach to go with "higher floor, lower ceiling" guys who he knows can get the job done instead of taking a risk on a "lower floor, higher ceiling" guy who may not be up to it yet.

Over time, yes, a lot of our "lower floor, higher ceiling" guys will have a floor that equals or surpasses the older "higher floor, lower ceiling" players we have in the pool... but that will take time.

So yeah, my analogy makes sense. Its legitimately what happens across almost all teams across almost all sports. This is a very basic, common occurrence.

Lilshmike
Post #56
Thursday October 15, 2020 5:41pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,509
Original post from Lilshmike

The only thing I'm going to address here is what is in bold.

I'm not talking about playing playing guys strictly based on their defined ceiling. The point I'm making is the ability of that person to get the job done when called upon. If you cannot comprehend the notion of "higher ceiling, lower floor" vs "higher floor, lower ceiling"... then I can't help you.

Its pretty straight forward.

For a one off game, a friendly or something like that, I can understand and could be supportive given the player and circumstances. Or maybe a single player in the WC where it is do or die... like Deandre Yedlin or Julian Green. A guy where you toss them in during a pinch and say, "show me what you got".

Yedlin going into that tournament had a very low floor, and the whole purpose he was brought in was because of speed and athleticism. He spent time during camp training by himself working on man marking and 1 v 1 situations because he was going to be used for a very specific purpose. Using his speed to exploit opponents.

For the record, I would have been fine with Green getting called into the squad... so long as he was taking the place of a guy like Brad Davis... not a guy like Landon Donovan. But to call it for what it was, Green didn't deserve to be called in, was only called in because Klinsmann promised him a spot on the roster if he switched from Germany, Donovan was left off because of a personal vendetta that Klinsmann had against him stemming from his time at Bayern, JK used stats and camp scrimmage results as the "reason" to axe Landon, and Davis was brought on because of his left footed crossing and free kick abilities. I know this because I have spoken to people who were close to the situation through one avenue or another. Those are the facts.

Getting back on topic... when you're looking to grind out results in competitive games, like qualifying or certain tournaments, it makes sense for a coach to go with "higher floor, lower ceiling" guys who he knows can get the job done instead of taking a risk on a "lower floor, higher ceiling" guy who may not be up to it yet.

Over time, yes, a lot of our "lower floor, higher ceiling" guys will have a floor that equals or surpasses the older "higher floor, lower ceiling" players we have in the pool... but that will take time.

So yeah, my analogy makes sense. Its legitimately what happens across almost all teams across almost all sports. This is a very basic, common occurrence.
And to build off my point about the last world cup... think about it...

JK consistently relied upon Brad Evans at RB throughout qualifying. Hell, Brad Evans even won us a game during qualifying. Then what happened when the final WC roster came out?

... he got cut in favor of Yedlin. Why? Look at my previous post.

Same thing with Clarence Goodson. Goodson was called in consistently and relied upon during qualifying, and when the final roster came out he got cut. Why? To bring in John Anthony Brooks.

Yedlin, Green, Brooks... at the time, these kids were not the ones playing and grinding out results for the US. They still had to develop and weren't there yet. But they got called in during a select circumstance for a select purpose.

This is the situation I am talking about. Its necessary at times to stick with established veterans with higher floors and lower ceilings in order to grind out and get the results required. Once you're at the show, totally on board and can endorse selecting certain inexperienced lower floor, higher ceiling kids... but you have to get to that point first. And sticking with the lower floor, higher ceiling guys before their floors have reached the level of the older veterans... it could end up being detrimental.

hamsamwich
Post #57
Thursday October 15, 2020 6:05pm

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 3,446
Didn't hurts win a title as a true freshman qb at Alabama?

Lilshmike
Post #58
Thursday October 15, 2020 6:16pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,509
Original post from hamsamwich

Didn't hurts win a title as a true freshman qb at Alabama?
He led them to a national championship game, but they didn't win. A more accurate comparison would have been...

Could Hurts have beat out a starting or backup QB in the NFL as a freshman? Again, the reality of how this analogy works is that College is a 12 year cycle, not 4. So the equivalent comparison would have been...

Would Jalen Hurts, in his freshman year, have beaten out AJ McCarron or Greg McElroy... assuming those guys were at Alabama for 8-10 years? Probably not.

Did Jalen Hurts have greater potential than those guys? Maybe. But in all reality he would have been sitting the bench day 1 with a list of guys in front of him... and he would have had to work his way up.

Nice try, but the analogy still stands.

Know Nothing
Post #59
Thursday October 15, 2020 6:18pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 1,827
Yes, I fully understand the concept of higher ceiling low floor and so on and so forth. Yes, I understand the concept of experience matters.

However you have always dismissed my notion as calling in these younger players for an audition. Call them into camp so the coach can assess where this players floor may be from time to time. Your argument to that is why disrupt their training...well how much difference will 2 weeks make in a players floor?

When it comes to playing time, compare the quality of the MLS guys compared to their teammates and then compare the qualities of the players in the youth setups to the players they have to usurp in elite leagues. The established players in elite leagues have much higher floors than their MLS counterparts, so the bar is set higher for the youth players. I believe it to be unfair to judge the floor of these young players solely on the club level since they have much higher to climb than their MLS counterparts and the only way to truly know what that players floor is is to call him in occasionally to see where it is (again, I am not saying play them, merely evaluate them and if they are ready, then give them a jersey).

Lilshmike
Post #60
Thursday October 15, 2020 6:28pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 1,509
Original post from Know Nothing

Yes, I fully understand the concept of higher ceiling low floor and so on and so forth. Yes, I understand the concept of experience matters.

However you have always dismissed my notion as calling in these younger players for an audition. Call them into camp so the coach can assess where this players floor may be from time to time. Your argument to that is why disrupt their training...well how much difference will 2 weeks make in a players floor?

When it comes to playing time, compare the quality of the MLS guys compared to their teammates and then compare the qualities of the players in the youth setups to the players they have to usurp in elite leagues. The established players in elite leagues have much higher floors than their MLS counterparts, so the bar is set higher for the youth players. I believe it to be unfair to judge the floor of these young players solely on the club level since they have much higher to climb than their MLS counterparts and the only way to truly know what that players floor is is to call him in occasionally to see where it is (again, I am not saying play them, merely evaluate them and if they are ready, then give them a jersey).
I'm not dismissing that. I am fine with calling in a random kid for training and an audition, so long as the circumstances allow for it.

But again, sometimes there are injuries... sometimes the kid gets called into first team training and given a shot to show something... lots of clubs have friendlies during FIFA windows and play reserve and youth team kids to give them a chance to impress... sometimes, if the kid is going to cross an ocean for a 1 week training session, without any chance of playing, it wouldn't make sense to go through such great lengths and potentially put the kid at risk of injury just to have a training session... sometimes the clubs say no and don't release players - this happened during the Gold Cup...

Again, context is required. Am I in favor? Yes... so long as its during a friendly window, we aren't stacking the roster with kids like that, and it makes sense to bring the kid in given the kid's circumstance at club and where/who/type of game the national team is playing.

The difference between you and I (and others) is that when that kid is not called into training, people grab their pitch forks and torches creating a mob shouting "Berhalter out!"... getting emotional and up in arms about the exclusion of some random kid who had little to no shot of playing and was called in to "take a look"... without considering the circumstance surrounding that player and that potential decision.

Whereas I look at it and say, this isn't moving the needle for us and this isn't a big deal.

Page 4 of 5
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5  Next »

Pellegrino Matarazzo and VfB Stuttgart got their Bundesliga campaign off the ground on Saturday with a win over Mainz.
RECENT POSTS
Marsch Wins Coaching Honor
American Trio Wins 3. Liga Title
Konrad Commits To Barcelona
Matarazzo, Stuttgart Eye Promotion