View Full Version : So who is actually going to be on the field?
BelhavenKeeper
11 Jan 2005, 08:58 AM
Does anyone have a clue what our lineup might potentially be? Is Bruce going to have an A League camp? Is anyone going to pay to go to the home games?
Would it be better for the scrubs to lose so USSF would reallize its mistake, or would it be better for them to win so we increase the chances of qualifying?
This fnck!ng sucks.
Minnman
11 Jan 2005, 09:29 AM
Does anyone have a clue what our lineup might potentially be? Is Bruce going to have an A League camp? Is anyone going to pay to go to the home games?
Would it be better for the scrubs to lose so USSF would reallize its mistake, or would it be better for them to win so we increase the chances of qualifying?
This fnck!ng sucks.
The USSF's stated deadline re: a replacement team is February 1. Hopefully, this'll be settled before then.
BelhavenKeeper
11 Jan 2005, 10:22 AM
Does anyone know of any quality A-League players that might be on the team if all of this doesn't get worked out?
SgtSchultz
11 Jan 2005, 10:30 AM
I don't know, but we could see a team comprising of Arena's favorites.
Richie "I am not that short" Williams
Tony "Atkins Diet" Meola
Mike "I scare the fans" Booourns
Kenny "My dad is the coach" Arena
David "St." Regis
Jeff "as fast as a goose" Agoos
puddleduck
11 Jan 2005, 10:57 AM
I don't know, but we could see a team comprising of Arena's favorites.
No we couldn't. No players with prior caps will be allowed on the field by USSF. I believe that also applies to caps at the youth level, but I'm not sure. Anyone know for certain?
blech
11 Jan 2005, 11:40 AM
No we couldn't. No players with prior caps will be allowed on the field by USSF. I believe that also applies to caps at the youth level, but I'm not sure. Anyone know for certain?
is this correct? i had heard that there was talk at one point of using the u20 team, less any of the players like Spector and Gaven who have been to recent men's caps/games. so, i don't believe it involves youth caps.
also, i thought it was the players association who had claimed that anyone who had a men's cap or had even been to a camp was part of their group. the assumption has been that no one would break ranks, but has the ussf said that it won't take such individuals if they agree to the terms? i didn't think so. of course, the "catch" is that they have to agree to terms before the ussf will allow them on the field, so maybe it then comes full circle....
BelhavenKeeper
11 Jan 2005, 12:02 PM
Anyone think that we even have a chance of winning with an A-League team?
spot
11 Jan 2005, 12:44 PM
Most of what we know is through the PA. They say they're locked out, which means the SF would have to use non-PA players since they've locked out the PA. Right? At least that's what we're getting from the PA.
The SF position is that the players are on strike. They were called and refused using a strict reading of protocol as an out. Never-the-less, in the minds of the SF they're on strike. With this in mind the SF may try to use willing PA players, who will cross the lines. Have we seen anything from the the Fed, not the PA, that contradicts this?
NBlue
11 Jan 2005, 03:11 PM
I think it borders on farcical that the SF position remains that the players are on strike. The players are willing to play under the former agreement and the SF is not willing to let them play. That is pretty much the definition of a lockout.
Adam Zebrowski
11 Jan 2005, 03:13 PM
Dusty Hudock; Melchior Arnold, Scott Schweitzer, Alan Woods, Ian Joy; Mac Cozier, Grover Gibson, Justin Evans, Jeremiah White; Jacob Thomas, Ryan Coiner...
that's one opinion of the scabs!!
I suspect Arena will sit and defend, look to counter, and hope for 0-0...
Sandon Mibut
12 Jan 2005, 11:08 AM
Anyone think that we even have a chance of winning with an A-League team?A chance? This is soccer, everyone has a chance.
Do we have a good chance? I doubt it. See: Cup, FA and check out the part on Exeter vs. ManU, among others.
T&T has talent. Some MLS level talent, some Premier League talent and a bunch of English First Division (or whatever they're calling it these days) talent.
They'll also be playing at home, have international experience and the advantage of playing together.
They would be prohibitive favorites over a team of US scabs.
They would also have a lot of pressure on them, and that might force them to play tight. By contrast, the US would have ZERO pressure as no one expects anything from these guys.
So, a team of A-Leaguers, indoor players and lower tier Euros could steal a result if they get a couple of breaks and play the sequel to The Game of Their Lives II (Electric Boogaloo).
BTW, I think Adam's proposed starting lineup will be pretty close to what we'll see down there if there's no labor resolution.
Justin Cedar
12 Jan 2005, 11:26 AM
[QUOTE=BTW, I think Adam's proposed starting lineup will be pretty close to what we'll see down there if there's no labor resolution.[/QUOTE]
:confused: I think I missed somthing.
Can we not use uncapped MLS players?
Wouldn't that be better than USMNT Youth players?
Sandon Mibut
12 Jan 2005, 11:36 AM
:confused: I think I missed somthing.
Can we not use uncapped MLS players?
Wouldn't that be better than USMNT Youth players?The scuttlebutt we're hearing is that Bruce (and/or the USSF) doesn't want to use youth national team players because he doesn't want there to use be lingering friction and disruption to chemistry between the core players and the replacements when there finally is a settlement.
Same goes with MLS players. There is also talk that the MLS Players Union would honor the lockout and not allow themselves to be used as scabs. (And since this really isn't their fight, I don't blame them.) And, Arena also has similar concerns about scab tension for the MLS players who could be part of his team in the future.
It could turn out to be bunk and that the US will use the 20s or a bunch of uncapped MLS players, but I suspect not.
I think, as I said before, we're looking at A-Leaguers, indoor players and guys in lower tiers in Europe.
dxp969
12 Jan 2005, 12:37 PM
Ryan Coiner Jemal Johnson
Robbie Rogers Charles Kazlauskas Jeremiah White Peter Philipakos
Karbassiyoon Zack Whitbread Jay Demerit Frankie Simek
David Yelldell
Subs:
Brian Mascarenhas
Knox Cameron
Kenny Cooper
Johan Smith (I think that's his name)
Daniel Hernandez
Jay Denny
BelhavenKeeper
12 Jan 2005, 12:44 PM
All of this better get worked out by the time we head to the Azteca. Scrubs may take 6 or 7 there. I really felt like we had a good chance of beating them there this time as well.
If they don't get this crap worked out I'm refusing to coach my brother's U-16 Rec team. That ought to teach USSF a lesson
Centennial
12 Jan 2005, 12:46 PM
If the USSF really wanted to show they mean business they would have fielded a team in January for preparation just in case the regulars didn't show up. I would have loved to see a team of A-Leagers against Sweden. But now it is too late.
Sandon Mibut
12 Jan 2005, 12:55 PM
If the USSF really wanted to show they mean business they would have fielded a team in January for preparation just in case the regulars didn't show up. I would have loved to see a team of A-Leagers against Sweden. But now it is too late.Yeah, but if said team got its ass handed to it by Sweden, it would only have strengthened the players' case.
Granted, if they got a result, it would have hurt the players' case, but the USSF didn't want to risk that and I don't blame them as odds are Sweden would have won easily.
The Lieutenant
12 Jan 2005, 12:59 PM
Anyone know anything on Reyna's situation?
I haven't seen anything on the Yanks Abroad forum.
soccerfan
12 Jan 2005, 01:30 PM
If the USSF really wanted to show they mean business they would have fielded a team in January for preparation just in case the regulars didn't show up. I would have loved to see a team of A-Leagers against Sweden. But now it is too late.
why A league players ? we should put forth the best team we can, that is not part of the players pool involved in the contract dispute
I am surprised they do not have a team ready training,
I belive we have enough players world wide to put on a good team and get a draw against T&T. I would definetly like to see players from Europe who did not have a chance represent their country.
Should the first team support the replacements ?
Of course they should. The better result they get against T&T the easier their job will be in the Qual. We all know sooner or later the contract dispute will be resolved.
Alex_1
12 Jan 2005, 01:39 PM
why A league players ? we should put forth the best team we can, that is not part of the players pool involved in the contract dispute
I am surprised they do not have a team ready training,
I belive we have enough players world wide to put on a good team and get a draw against T&T. I would definetly like to see players from Europe who did not have a chance represent their country.
I thought of this - the training part. The USSF, if they are serious and honest about what is going on, and what could happen, should have called in the players by now to at least give them a fighting shot at getting to know eachother.
But on the other hand, if you are one of those players, it puts you in a bit of a tight spot. What happens if it really does get worked out? Then what do you tell those players that said they'd be willing to play? Pack it in and go home? That would be a very horrible thing to do and give the federation even less clout, and respect from players since they turned their backs on the 'underdogs' that were willing to play for their country. Also... who knows, this sort of issue may come up again and when and if it does, it would be a rather big black-eye to get over.