I know that. Why is it lame for me to say "if you incetivize more you improve the quality of U.S. players." If we incentivized less it would decrease the quality wouldn't it. Well I don't have a problem with your point on that. We know that changes to the system (any system really) aren't greeted well. Do you have any suggestions as how to incentivize MLS clubs more or is that completely impossible?
Fair enough. You didn't acknowledge those changes in your initial post. As to whether more can be done, sure. I think the biggest change outstanding would be to give clubs autonomy on the decision to keep or sell HG's, so if the club wants to sell, that's completely their call. Another change they could implement is that an HG contract - even after 3 years - only counts a set number against the cap. They become similar to DP's. That makes it easier for MLS clubs to keep their developed stars. I wouldn't be surprised if both ideas become reality. MLS clearly wants clubs to develop their own talent, and the trend in recent rules is to implement pro-development policies so clubs feel free to invest more in their systems.
Thanks, Stan. Alright fair enough. So it's a gamble because the possibility exists that DA system will not pay off. But won't it? And even if it does not pay off (immediately), is it because the DA system is a gamble or because it might need some (more) improvements? I'd be surprised if the DA system won't pay off. In fact I don't think it's a gamble. It's a wise and well thought out decision. In terms of finances it's impossible for me to judge the risk of the DA setup. Besides, if it was a gamble I could add a sixth argument as to why there's little financial incentive to develop players. But that be kinda like intentionally scoring an own goal against my opponent. What are the political risks, if I may ask, Nutmeg?
Zzz... And here we go. Spartacus semantics. If Deuteronomy knew what a straw man was, he'd be mad at you for using one. Nobody said US Soccer woke up one morning and decided to roll a pair of dice on the DA. A good bet - a well considered bet - is still a bet. Not even sure what this means. If you aren't conceding that you were wrong and there are a number (not one) of in-place economic incentives for MLS teams to develop players, then bring it. Why are MLS clubs already investing in player development? Are they not as smart as you are? Should they stop now with the news there is little economic incentive to continue. No.
The whole discussion is nonsensical. If an MLS club is good at developing homegrown players thru the development academy...........it should help them win games, win trophies, and make money. That's the bottom line in this business, and that's all the incentive anybody needs.
Poor Shea. Just the most overhyped player since Adu. I'm starting to thing that chasing coeds is better for soccer IQ development than Bradenton+MLS.
So basically anything anyone ever does is a gamble/bet? You used the words: "DA gamble". I've asked you time and time again why it's a "gamble". You simply refuse to explain your statement. We're actually discussing your semantics.
I've refused because, like I said, the question bores me. You have a history of taking a term, applying your narrow definition of it, and embroiling others in some tedious debate over whether the term applies. Spartacus semantics, zzz...
I agree. The argument that MLS teams have little incentive - financial or otherwise - to develop players is one that passed away 5 years ago.
Haha. Why do you keep pointing at me? Who said "gamble"? You. Your word. Your narrow definition. I've asked you what you meant by it. Why? Because I found the statement 'USSF has taken a gamble with the DA system' interesting... Same with the 'overhaul of coaches'. I was even interested in your 'incentive' argument. Too bad most of your replies are simply insulting.
I am late to this party, so sorry if it has already been asked: Do you have a link for the quote that you attribute to Reyna?
Here is what our National team coach offered as reasonable goals before the Olympics: http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/1679/...-olympic-squad 1. Not expecting a medal in London. 2. Similar goals to Mexico 3. Make a statement. 4. Make a statement to Mexico. A regrettable epic fail due to overconfidence from top to bottom and completely bought into here on Big Soccer. Per Brian Sciaretta's article linked above by NamDynamo: the failure to get out of the initial group is very alarming. Are there any radical changes that have to be made? Not at this time. The radical changes were made last August when Klinsmann was hired to run the national team and have significant power over all levels of US teams. The significant changes at MLS were also recently put into place so it's way too early to determine if they have been successful or not. But that is perhaps what is of most concern. There have already been drastic steps taken within US Soccer. It is way too early to say that they have been failures but now it is clear what failure could look like, and it is not pretty. Canada's professional league is MLS. They beat us 2-0 in Nashville with a rag tag bunch, many of which don't even have a professional team. Does anyone there suspect that MLS not investing heavily enough in player development is the reason they missed the Olympics after advancing to the semifinals? How about the years the USA qualified to play in the Olympics before there was MLS? Our player pool was superior to three of the four teams in the Concacaf semi-finals. We were outcoached. http://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/news?slug=ro-rogers_jurgen_klinsmann_concacaf_olympics_loss_032712 “We all feel really sorry for the guys,” Klinsmann said. I guess the argument is that at least we indoctrinated these kids in how to play a 4-3-3. I am sure that made a statement to Mexico. Another bright side is that at least nobody has to be confronted with medal expectations. this is a hoot . . do you know what a red herring is?
http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/1679...-qualification-failure-jurgen-klinsmann-still This is going to sound odd in a way...............but I do like the fact that Klinsmann and the USSF see the development of coaches as a serious need. So at least there's a positive spin I can put on his comments. Why they felt that Olympic qualification was the place to help a young coach develop is beyond me. That was bad. I mean, here's what Klinsmann is saying about Porter's continued involvement in the program: "That could be being part of our camps with the senior team. That could be being part of our workshops that we have on a regular basis with all the coaches involved in all age levels. That could be being part of the different youth teams or their coaching staffs. It could be sending him to Europe to learn at European clubs, their models, their way of doing it, talking to coaches overseas.” ................... “We hope that we find ways now going forward even if it's not with the Olympic team, that we find roles for him to improve, to grow, to mature in his coaching career,” Klinsmann said about Porter. All that is fine. I like it. We can do all that with our young coaches. I think Klinsmann naively thought he could roll out a young, inexperienced coach with the U23s and qualify. He vastly underestimated the talent gap between the US squad (without some of their top players) and the squads of Canada & the Central American nations. In a way, we should have the same concern about our U20's. We all presumably like Tab Ramos.................but he has even less coaching experience than Porter.
Tragedy . . . http://www.ussoccerplayers.com/ussoccerplayers/2012/03/klinsmann-talks-olympic-qualifying.html " There are many, many things – the travel aspect, behavior roles, was it all organized perfectly, did you eat the right way, did you sleep the right way … there’s so much stuff that comes into a bigger event."
http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2012/04/04/klinsmann-stands-hiring-college-coach-olympics "I think he did a very good job," said Klinsmann, who appointed Porter back in October. "I think it was absolutely the right decision to make him the Olympic team coach. Now based on the result and the outcome of it, now you can argue . .. " "There were many mistakes being done and not all of them were done by Caleb Porter." But responsibility for the Olympic elimination also has to be shouldered by the American players, according to Klinsmann. "I think some players didn't live up to their expectations and they need to get that message across," he told the media.
I see it as being more a recognition of how special these players are. The goals and assist records per 90 of the two at the major global tourneys are pretty rarified stuff. Imo it's not realistic to expect players of that caliber to roll around more than every 10-15. I'd argue that the importance of amatuerism in the development of US players vitiates the usefulness of comparing the US-23s to their Mexican counterparts. Most of the US produced pool aren't products of professional team academies. Players like Ream and Dempsey and Bocanegra didn't even enter a pro setup until after age 20. That's why I'd stress comparing senior pools. Here the US is as deep as Mexico and with the Diaspora Americans included not insignificantly deeper. Findley was not of international quality. Shea was an over-promoted youth player. The more Edus and Bradleys one has the less need for the former two. The US like most mid-level teams has possessed special players but lacked surrounding talent.
Interesting to follow the immediate short term fortunes of our U-23s. Bunbury is now a bench player. Shocking Opara is on the bench. Kitchen out of position at centerback now back at defensive mid. Stephens got minutes today, unlike in the U23s.
Houston haven't had a game since March 23rd. Okugo did not play in Philadelphia's game against Vancouver. Jorge Villafana was on the bench for Chivas today. I don't know if teams are resting these guys or what, but consider that so far the entire backline except for Zarek Valentin has been benched or moved out of position (Perry Kitchen). Johnson seems to have lost his job (for now). Hamid is hurt. In retrospect, this extremely talented U-23 cycle was pretty top heavy towards one end of the field.
Opara was on the bench before too. He hasn't played a minute for the Quakes, and I see no reason to put him in when their defense is playing so well. If anything, I think that Quakes CB Justin Morrow should be getting some looks from the national team, he is every bit as fast as Opara, and it looks like he has better touch. He played LB in years past, but is looking very good next to Bernardez in CB