Not sure why there is this American obsession with English soccer. I guess the English language has a lot to do with it. Anyway, getting back to the thread, instead of looking for free agents in England and hoping and praying for the second coming of Simon Dawkins, juding by Borussia & Bayern's performances in the CL, maybe the Quakes should sign some Germans?
Spanish soccer it is usually just a contest between Real and Barcelona. Italian soccer has had too many scandals for me to take it seriously. "English" soccer is not really "English". A majority of the players are not from the British Isles. It's more like the United Nations. I can see great players from dozens of countries there, and also see different styles of play, it's not all the same. And of course, the announcers are better.
English teams traditionally play zone with a lot of crosses and Italian teams play man to man an counterattacks. Its evident that England tried to emulate Italian soccer over the last 15 years or so. I.E. hiring Fabio Capello as a national team manger as well as bringing in many Serie A playersand coaches into the EPL. Italian soccer declined to a point in recent years but their players, especially their national team, are s still pretty strong in my opinion. England has never won anything other than a WC at home 47 years ago and that was with a goal that wasn't even over the line. That isn't that great a record considering they invented the game. Overrated indeed.
I much prefer watching league play, than international play, the latter which tends to be more cautious, defensive, and boring. The English national team is crap, but, I enjoy watching the EPL. Two totally different creatures.
This is unbelievably wrong. You can't just lump all English teams together like that. English teams play every style and tactic on the planet. You like tiki taka, 4-3-3, and possession? Go watch Swansea, Arsenal, and Liverpool. You like 4-4-2 longball? Go watch Stoke and West Ham. 3-5-2/5-3-2? Aston Villa. 4-2-3-1? Chelsea and Man United. 4-4-1-1? Man City. In fact many of those teams will often switch their tactics depending on the situation. Man United have also played 4-4-2 five times this year and 4-4-1-1 three times. You like teams that try all of these different systems and suck no matter which one they use? Watch Newcastle. International soccer is completely overrated. The club level is where the highest level soccer is being played at in the world. International teams are just all-star teams slapped together a couple of weeks before a tiny sample size tournament. Not surprisingly, the all-star teams made up of the most players who play for the same club teams do the best. Because then they aren't just a bunch of individuals, but guys who are used to being each others teammates.
To get this thread back on the right direction I think a great trade target would by LA's Michael Stephens. He is only 24 and has been getting less and less playing time every year since his stellar rookie campaign. Only 1 start and 138 minutes so far this season. He is probably also close to the end of his contract so he probably wants to go somewhere where he can get more playing time and earn himself a better contract.
Not sure why its such taboo to go against the norm and to each his own but as I posted, I don't watch EPL so I don't know anything about their players and/or teams other than what I see occasionally in European play and some league games on FOX. If you wan to talk tactics, we can go on all day but I just do not care to watch their brand of soccer. Anyway, none of this has anything to do with this thread so moving on.....
neither are realistic options beasley you have allocation order to deal with b/c returning former nat'l team player KC owns herc's rights
Robbie Rogers is coming back to either the Gals or Seattle. Controversial as it is, it would be good to have a player of his skills on the Quakes..
I do like the idea of Beasley, he has done quite well with his club in mexico. That said Im sure Chicago are also thinking they need a player of his skillset and they have his rights, and i reckon if he came back to MLS he would wanna go there.
I know you can't judge a national team performance but he seemed out of place on defense in his last international game for the USA. Maybe he was playing out of position?
well of course he was, that goes back to Klinsmann being an inept judge of talent and where to play a player. Beasley at left back ahead of Morrow tells me all i need to there. Beasley is a great left mid option.
He played DaMarcus Beasley instead of Morrow against Mexico because he probably felt that he had more experience than Morrow and knows the Mexican players as he has been playing in Mexico.
Question: Does Klinsmann deserve to be called the inverse of what I wrote here the other day; in other words, "a great player doesn't necessarily make a great coach." It often happens.
Uh no...what a circus it would be for all the wrong reasons. I'm also pretty sure MLS doesn't want the first gay player in American sports to play in a small market. Also Morrow has been playing like pretty poorly when it comes to contributing in the attack.
Not to get into what constitutes a market debate, but, if Rogers did come to the Quakes the news of it would not be confined to the San Jose area, it would be bay area wide, (and beyond) and that market is much bigger than Seattle's.
San Jose and the Bay Area are considered small? Really? An area of 6,984 sq mi and 7.15 million people? We are bigger than some small countries and we are considered a small market?
It's pretty small especially when he would play in front of 10k every other week. MLS will want to milk this. Also why in the world are people now saying we are not a small market team? First people say we don't get a DP because we are not NY or LA or Seattle. But when it comes to Rogers we are now a big market? Great consistency.