I agree with this but the important part remains... ...they have to have the actual ability to fill that explicit role.
BUT I thought those were the "trainers"? Along with the "former Pros" And the former "national team players" If I had a Dollar for each of the latter two I've played against in modest level Mens' leagues.....
The best was during my two years working for the MetroStars. At every city, guys would flood the hotel with their CVs, indicating that they had played "professional" in their country. Guys in full Brazil national team kits coming up to Parreira and saying, "Profi! Do you remember me?" Comical. There have been hundreds of open tryouts in the 17-year history of MLS. Guys come out of the woodwork and usually go home saying to themselves, "Those guys are a lot better than I thought."
In 25 years going back to NASL days til the the late 90s, I probably played with/against 20 legit pros. And 1000 who claimed to be pros.
That is true.... but look at Llamosa! And I think the TRUE players are going to come from KIDS coming here to grow up. Not some 20 something guatemala league reject working as a banquet waiter or dish washer.
A few have made it. Carlos Llamosa, Petter Villegas, are two I recall. Obviously Fernando Clavijo back in the day. There have been some incredible success stories.
Yep. The toughest talker in the room is the guy who has never taken a hard punch in the jaw. Same with player development. I have often said there are two ways to identify people who have never done the job: 1. They similarly believe they would "never" have missed Player X under their watch. Those who have been in the fields all have big misses against their name. 2. They think saying, "Player Y will not amount to much" or "Player Y is limited" makes them sound smart. In a group of seasoned youth coaches and scouts, you would get a reaction of "No shit" with such bold declarations. There is a reason coaches show some restraint in criticizing other coaches. Part of it is the coaching fraternity. Part of it is that coaches tend to understand the nuances of what the other coach may be navigating as they make their decisions. Yet again in this thread you hear bold condemnation of what Klinsmann was trying to do early on. But I bet if they would take one minute to think about things from Klinsmann's point of view, they could at least list out a couple reasons why Klinsmann made the choices he made. Does not mean they would agree. Two coaches seldom do. But the conversation would be better. The same was absolutely true of fan criticism of Bob Bradley.
As I read the last 2 pages of this thread I can almost imagine I am hearing similar laughing conversations in the 60's about where are those talented "negro" players good enough to play pro football and pro basketball, there aren't any. You will never ever see more that 1 or 2 average players in the pro leagues. It is not about busboys or waiters who could be on the MNT today. It is about getting more of the kids who are 7 or 8 today wherever they live, whatever they look like able to help in 2022 or 2026.
A gree with you until the last sentence. How can I ever forgive BB for subbing in Borstein at the Gold Cup finals against Mexico when we all knew he wasn't getting playing time in Mexico.
Thanks Jeff. That is a more thorough list than I tried to compile and proves Bob called up more than his fair share of Latino players, dispelling the myth of his reticence to call them up.
Which is fine. But, JK also was pretty clear about wanting to make the team more Latin, so there in lies the rub. I didn't have a problem trying out new players, just the myth that somehow we would be soooo much better with certain average Mexican league players. Whether or not that was what JK really wanted to do is almost besides the point, because at least there are many who assumed and wanted him to do it.
Yeah, but under most of Bradley's tenure, Gomez was a fairly average MLS player. Gomez was contemplating retirement when he got the chance to go to Mexico and then led the league in scoring. Once he did, he became a person of interest. Torres was a young kid just emerging as a player during most of Bob's time. Yet, Bob still called him up a lot, and gave hims early games. He also took him to the Confederations Cup, and started him in the WC. Torres was 22 or 23. JK inherited two players with much more pedigree and experience.
At this point I am not following you any more. I thought I was agreeing with you. But, now I am not even sure where you are going with this post. Please clarify.
And of course kids fall through the cracks... look at Demerit, who fell through a number of cracks. The exception proves the rule... and we still have not had the Messi level player fall through the cracks. Sure, we lost out on Najar, but we can live without him. Castillo almost did, and we certainly would be fine without him.
Remember: my chart is all about clubs and "net club strength" (basically, how strong they are against an ideal rival with "neutral" style). It's not about players. Just a chart to keep in perspective the strength of the leagues and the teams within. Some people seem to think that ANY Euro league is miles better than ANY non-Euro league. Because they watch the games between top teams in the Big 5. They never bother to watch a Dinamo Bucarest vs. Turnu Severin, and compare that to a Cerro Porteño vs. Libertad or a Newcastle Jets vs. Adelaide United. Individual players, on average, sort themselves in the teams where they should be. Also, remember: there are two factor at play here. A great player can turn a good team into a Cream of the Crop. Example: Falcao in Atletico. The second is that a player far above or below a certain club tends to not stay there. He's sold up or down, depending. In general, if you have a player who remains for years in a team, you can make the case that his strength is matched to the club's. Case in point: Jermaine Jones. He fits like a glove in Schalke, a team usually in the #4-#7 range in the Bundesliga. So that's basically his level (for now, nothing is permanent). The Brazilian league is going through a Golden Age. Many big companies are investing in the teams, so in a way is like the Russian league: plenty of money is coming in. The BRIC countries are still making tons of money, and it shows in their sports. So now Brazilian teams can afford to keep their stars for longer, and they have been dominating both Libertadores and Sudamericana for a while now.
No one is disagreeing with you. In fact I was agreeing with you that we should cast a wider net at the youth level in the LAtino communities, because the previous system tended to overlook them. We are just pointing out the fact that this has very little to do with the National Team, since there are already a ton of Latino's playing for them and doing well. All well before JK even showed up. And the myth that once the Latino's take over we shall be an amazing smooth passing tika taka team is absurd. Being Latino doesn't automatically make you a smooth as silk passer and dribbler. Neither does being poor, or working class, or rich or middle class. These are gross oversimplifications and only serve to create divisions, and further preconceived notions of condescending paternalism, which is how you are making JK sound. Those prejudices only divide our nation. If we have 23 awesome players and they are all Latino, that is awesome. If they are all black, that is awesome as well. If they are all African-American-Germans, I will take that too. But, what most likely will happen is that the national team program will be utterly diverse and full of the best players form a vast variety of backgrounds and origin, just like the nation itself. So let's stop trying to say that if we just get poor Latino's to fill the ranks, because that is the best way forward. Saying something like that is just as absurd as saying, if only we just had inner city blacks, or wealthy private school educated blue blood New Englanders, or poor southern whites from divorced families. Do we need more white, latino, or black players? Who cares, we just need the best professional players that are available, who cares where they came from, what color their skin is, or what their last name is.... a good player is a good player.
Exactly! Although, I don't think JK has given Latino players more of a shot (that may change) than Bradley. He just gave Torres more of a shot, and maybe Castillo. Lets develop more youth talent and lets build better trust in the Latino communities, but it isn't a pancea, and it has nothing to do with the USMNT.
Yes, I offered it, It was discussed, others agreed, some did not. Here was your response and as you suggest this makes you the conscience here. That was discussed too. The discussion had moved on from there, too. So, anyway, what does it have to do with this strawman? So who is it projecting? Again, if you don't appreciate straw man arguments or projecting, consider taking the high ground yourself. If you don't like asinine,
I am convinced that so many people who have opinions don't really watch the games, or know much about soccer. Michael has been such an obvious talent for so long, plus a hard worker, yet people have been trying to dump on him forever, stirring up the idiocy of the nepotism idea, when clearly Mike has been our best CM since he started playing for the USMNT. As another poster said, you should be very proud of your nephew, I am certain he will go down as one of the best US soccer players ever. I am glad he is still fairly young, we probably have yet to see his best.
The style itself of the NT doesn't fit the Latino style. The USA plays more English-style soccer: direct, long balls, based on athleticism, lethal in counters, unconcerned with possession except against the weaker rivals. There is nothing wrong with that type of football: it can be a refreshing break from the more possession-short passing oriented styles (the Latino and the Mediterranean styles). But for Hispanic players used to the feints, the balls through, the combinations, the "paredes" 1-2-1, etc., playing the more Anglo style can be demanding. In that style, feints waste time, owning the ball stops the rapid counter, short passes seem ineffective, combinations to break the midfield are often failures because half of the team just does not "get" the idea, and possession is more often than not toothless: the team needs the spaces afforded in a sudden counterattack.
Honest question here. Do you think the Mexican national team plays this way now, or has their style evolved to be more European as well?
Nope. Mexico is Latin in style through-and-through. Sometimes they try to be more Euro, with bad results. I'm partly of South American background (Argentina), so I'm not THAT familiar with Mexican futbol, but from what I see, their best games are when they stay true to themselves: short-passing combos, feints, tiki-taka (something South American teams were doing 20 years before Ajax or Barcelona tried it).
One of the GREATEST tacklers in MLS's history. Not to mention how pretty cool it was that he went from working as a janitor in the WTC to one day play for the USMNT. Again, this I think is misunderstanding on it. When he meant 'latin' he was talking about what style of play you see more in Latin America. Possession based, high techique based style of play. I think you're just mad at the posters that were dumb enough to believe that. Truth is, he just wanted a base of players to start his 'expiriment' and then work from there. Like when you build a race car, often times you take a decent 'stock' model car, and chip away at it, until you get what you want. Out of the box, it isn't the best thing... but it's a good base which will give you a good foundation to build off of. Yea... because Messi was spotted in one of the GREATEST soccer spotting countries.... argentina (have the most amount of soccer stadiums in a country... what does that say). If we had the net that Argentina has with their country... we'd probably have one by now. See, I think you feel like we're arguing for what you're saying above. I don't disagree with you. The problem lies in the kids that never get discovered. I am not worried with JK at the helm. He knows how to value players that have good technique, smart soccer brain, good touch, etc. But with that said, he also likes players paired wtih that... and CRAZY WORK RATE. That will thin the herd of players who are 'lazy' but full of technique, like Feilhaber. Yes. They are good in tight spaces, good control, good vision from forward to defender. This is how they out brasil'd brasil in the Olympics. Brasil actually looked more of the 'euro hacks' than did Mexico.