El Instante de Miguel "El Piojo" Herrera

or Gio...

 

See my thing, putting the bullshit rivalries aside......Pulldo is a sick ass player, but everyone else does what he does better at the moment.

The types of goals he scores is chicharos domain, oribe offers more than all of them period, and Raul plays the center forward role better because he knows how to throw his size around better.

Pulido is like a Gio light....it makes no sense that he would leave Gio at all. If anything like someone said if he's gonna go, it will probably be brizuela that gets dropped.

 

would take fabian over brizuela.

 

No you wouldnt

 

Brazilian wimmenz......

 

If Gio doesn't go that will be ridiculous. That excuse of not knowing the system and not having trained with Piojo better not come up.

 

Why not take Cheech, Oribe, Raul, Gio and Pulido? Pulido is one of our most consistent guys right now. He's been a goal machine.

 

I think they're all going. They are pretty unique. Oribe, finishes so well, gio is creative, Cheech is your poacher, pulido can make some nice runs in the box and is good with the ball, Raul is a big guy who is pretty good with the ball as well. I could see them all playing.

 

THIS!

there's no excuse NOT to take all 5 of them

and Gio doesn't necessarily have to play as a striker anyway

 

Got to disagree. Gio is a dribbler and skill player, while I would describe Pulido's style as smooth and collected, almost effortless looking.

 

Seeing Fabian play in that striker role and then looking way better when he was moved to the wing made me second guess having Gio play forward. The midfield may have had something to do with it but they were isolated for long stretches of the 1st half vs. the US

 

I think Fabian would've looked better if we stopped playing long ball after long ball. He wasn't going to win any against those tall defenders. Tactics were off in the first half as was effort.

 

We havent overperformed in every competition. We have done so in 1 (maybe 2) Confed Cups, 2 Copa Americas and 1 Olympics. I would also say that we have done so in 2 out of the last 5 World Cups. So even though these are a significant number of tournaments, they are still the minority since in the same period there have been 5 WCS, 5 Olympics, 7 Confed Cups and 5 Copa Americas. So we are talking about less than a third of the total international tournaments.

I would say that as of right now, we have the raw materials to be in the top 16, maybe in the 14 or 13 range. From 2000 to 2006 we were probably at 15 or 16. In the 1990s, I would put us in the 17-20 range.

So while I think that the Round of 16 reflects our true current level, I dont think this has consistently been the case in the past 20 years.

 

This is riduculous.

Your point is based on the mistaken premise that we should have made the quarterfinals in every single World Cup, which is absolutely ridiculous since we have never been a top 8 team in the world. Were there round of 16 games that we should have won? Absolutely, but the opposite also applies, there have been groups stage games that we should have lost. Overall, you have to look at a teams true level and the true level of the team is not within the top 8 in the world.

You have to take a hollistic approach, which you are clearly not doing.

 

I dont see why Gio doesnt run back as a play maker and bring the ball up the field with his speed and dribbling, atleast to pass 1 defender then make a pass off, atleast to start some attacking action.

of course in open field is when he can shine, but he shouldnt be playing up top too much.

 

We also need to develop better coaches....send them to Europe/S.America to learn new things.

I think we came really close in 94...But the coach decided not to make any subs.

Aguirre taking out Ramon Morales for an old Luis Hernandez etc.

 

Right, but the results that we have had recently (and by that, I mean 2013) were a result of Chepo severly underperforming. Unless you are trying to convince me that there is a team in Concacaf with more talent than we have, then you must agree.

By raw material I mean the talent available which is the variable with the biggest correlation to results. It is hard to quantify talent, but if you base it on salary or transfer value, the team we have today has more talent than any team in the last 20 years. There are other factors at play, like the lack of scouting of the Mexican League in the 90s compared to today, but I think the point still stands even if you consider this. Right now, our top 5 players in Europe have a value of around 57 million Euros (if you include Vela, it goes up to about 80 million). This number is way above any objective valuation of talent (taken inflation into account) in the last 20 years. To put this into perspective, Bolton paid 1.4 million euros for Boghetti 9 years ago.

And when you see the performance of these players on the field, it is hard to argue with the results. Before 2010, Luis Garcia was the second mexican player with the most goals in Europe. In the last 3 years, Chicharo, Giovani (and Vela) have passed him and none of these guys are older than 25. I dont think this is a very controversial idea.

 

This is not an idea that I am pulling out of the air. The idea that talent (most closely reflected by a player's wage) is the biggest determining factor of results is a conclusion drawn from over 40 years of studying data in just about every league and international competition. This really isnt a controversial idea since in general talent (quanitified by a player's salary) explains about 70-90 % of results. Here is one of these studies analyzing the English footie specifically: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/f340caae-47cd-11e1-b646-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2ylxR9Gxf

Your conclusion is reversed. It it talent that determines the biggest part of results and not results that determine the biggest part of talent.