PDA

View Full Version : different eras of the US soccer


sidefootsitter
15 Aug 2005, 01:27 PM
As "Ursula" brought up in the Parkhurst thread, the US soccer has been undergoing gradual transformation over the years. The "big bang", as it were, was the Paul Caliguiri's goal that took the US team to the WC'90 in Italy. With that commenced the new era of the sport in the US of A.

Era I. The Newbies.

The composition of the team prior to and including the World Cup has been of college players, the old A-league or the Pacific Coast League (?). The US teams looked happy just to be in the Cup, bunkered against its opponents and was content not to be embarrassed. It put up a game effort vs. Italy but bowed out overwhelmed.

But one had to start somewhere.

Era II. Riff-raff.

When you start from almost nothing and then get something, you consider it a giant leap and that's what the US team in 1994 was. The roster featured a few European based pros, most of them having solid careers in the 2nd divisions (Wynalda, Ramos, Wegerle, Harkes, Klopas*, Kooiman*), a few players naturalized as adults (Clavijo, Dooley, Stewart**), a few post-college Yanks (Balboa, Lalas, Meola, Jones) and an assortment of back-ups.

The team's grandest achievement was its win against Columbia (Elo had US as #50, Columbia as #16), which propelled the US into the 2nd round.

The style of play under Bora was still "bunker+counter" but it worked well on occasions. Possession was still tough to come by.

Era III. MLS.

This was stated with the creation of MLS and can be considered as lasting until the 1998 Cup.

The qualifying process for the WC'98 wasn't easy, but the player mix in France was basically of the established by then MLS'ers (Pope, Burns, Jones, Maisoneuve, Hejduk, Agoos, Balboa, Lalas, Wynalda, Ramos) with a sprinkling of a few European based players (Regis, Dooley, Stewart, Keller, Reyna). The US "Euros" were basically the lower tier kind, either by their league or their team.

Era IV. Yanks go abroad.

With MLS marking half-decade in business, the US born players have been slowly becoming more attractive to European clubs looking for bargains. Some Yanks go to Europe directly. The qualification for the WC'02 is still tough due to little depth behind the starters but, once the US gets to Japorea, it becomes one of the revelations of the tournament.

Bruce Arena's squad features several US born/Euro based players (Friedel, Hejduk, Sanneh, O'Brien, Stewart*, Keller, Berhalter, Lewis, Moore, Cherundolo) with the rest coming from MLS (Agoos, Beasley, Mastroeni, Pope, Mathis, Wolff). Several have had experience in Europe but are based in MLS (McBride, Donovan). A few are naturalized citizens (Regis, Llamosa, Mastroeni).

Generalizing the US in WC'02, the European based players provided skill, the MLS provided speed. Performance exceeded most folks' expectation as the US reached the quaterfinals with a little luck along the way.

Era V. Breakfast in America.

MLS keeps producing talent but the ratio of the YA/MLS begins to tilt toward the YAs. Bruce's defense of Keller-'Dolo-Gooch-Gibbs-Boca/Convey is all-European and, if it wasn't for Donovan's re-defection and Eddie Johnson's emergence, so would be the rest of the roster.

The qualification for the WC'06 has been a gimme.

Performance in the WC?

Era VI. Bigger is better.

With the recent rumors of Oguchi Onyewu joining Tim Howard at Manchester United, the Yanks are finally beginning to move into the elite clubs.

Landon Donovan could have chosen to stay at Bayer Leverkusen ... alas, that was not meant to be. John O'Brien's injuries (and perhaps management issues) did not allow him to stay at Ajax. Jonathan Spector is on loan at Charlton. Benny Feilhaber is trying to make it up Hamburg's food chain. Da Marcus Beasley is a PSV Eindhoven and Cory Gibbs is at Feyenoord. All those are clubs that are probably half-a-step below the likes of the G-14.

ManCity, Fulham, Leeds, Reading, Hanover, Mainz, Aalesund, Ham-Kam, Fredrikstad, et al., are further down.

Other MLS players like Eddie Johnson or maybe even Quaranta will probably join a fairly big club within a couple of years.

By 2,010, the US should be considered a real contender.

Era VII The Final Step.

The US will have a roster made up of international superstars, looking to get the first US World Cup title. Brazil is within 5. Others are much closer.

studloans
15 Aug 2005, 09:32 PM
Cheers for the history lesson. Nice Job. :D

Liviu
16 Aug 2005, 12:17 AM
Era I. USA 3:2 Portugal

:D

Mountainia
16 Aug 2005, 12:28 AM
I sort of think an 'era' ought to have a few more years. How about:
Era I: 1900 - 1950: The immigrants
Era II: 1951 - 1986: The Dark Years
Era III: 1987 - 1995: Youth Soccer Boom Comes of Age
Era IV: 1996 - present: The Pros

turbostevo
16 Aug 2005, 03:07 AM
I like it. Nicely done.

The progress of our players taking on more prevelant roles on int'l club teams is very interesting. The future is very bright!

sidefootsitter
16 Aug 2005, 02:07 PM
I sort of think an 'era' ought to have a few more years. How about:
Era I: 1900 - 1950: The immigrants
Era II: 1951 - 1986: The Dark Years
Era III: 1987 - 1995: Youth Soccer Boom Comes of Age
Era IV: 1996 - present: The Pros
In the immigrant era, soccer was fairly big in the US. NASL was obviously big in some quarters in the 70s and early 80s.

But I think the dark years were in between the end of NASL and the WC'90, qualifications for which opened the door for the US Soccer renaissance. Granted, this is an arbitrary starting point but IMO a legitimate one.

FabFiveFigo
16 Aug 2005, 04:04 PM
Nice retrospective.

That's a huge step between Era 6 and Era 7. I think we should be quite satisfied with validating our performance in '02 with a round of 16/quarterfinal result a couple times. That is going to be a lofty enough goal for our crew.

Fleetwood Mac #1
16 Aug 2005, 06:16 PM
Era VII The Final Step.

The US will have a roster made up of international superstars, looking to get the first US World Cup title. Brazil is within 5. Others are much closer.

In my opinion The Final Step will be Era VIII when the US is not only a contender but becomes so dominant that even Brazil becomes our bi*ch.

2-0 Baby
16 Aug 2005, 08:10 PM
The future is very bright!

We should all be wearing shades. Aviator, porno style shades...

sidefootsitter
16 Aug 2005, 08:34 PM
Nice retrospective. That's a huge step between Era 6 and Era 7. Thanks and yes.

Note how the easiest step to make was the jump from "just happy to be here" WC'90 to "let's make some noise" WC'94. Bora did it with a fairly motley crew of players from the 2nd tier European leagues, a few newly minted Yanks and his own traveling circus. It wasn't always pretty but he got the US into the 2nd round.

The final step of becoming a perennial semi-finalist is the most difficult. There are essentially two teams with that pedigree - Brazil (9-10, depending on how you count the group stages) and Germany (9) in the modern era. Italy has made it five times, England twice, France four times, Holland thrice.

The US will try to become the 7th established superpower and it ain't gonna be easy.

Jay510
16 Aug 2005, 08:51 PM
three things.

1. Great post. a preamble to who the players were before that say in the 80's playing every game in St. Louis would be good sometime.

2. you say that there are only 6 superpowers, i would disagree with that. Argentina for one has made a few semi-finals and 2 wins. and Spain, while their world cup performance is left to be desired, they have argubly the best premier league in the world, and maybe the most outright talent in europe

3. the 'jump' from era 1 to 2 is actually harder than most make it seem. Notice how teams like Slovenia, China, Ecuador are finding it hard to get from newbies to riff-raff. The USA had 2 unmistakeable advantages 1) they hosted the cup and didnt have to qualify for 1994, allowing countless games to improve morale and performance. 2) and while this may not be as legit as we would like, that Colombia game was an anomaly...that own goal was from 40 yards, an unreal stroke of luck for the USA. Plus being host garnered the USA, a group that may have been the 2nd weakest i have ever seen (Japan's group was easy in 2002). Taking nothing away from the performance in 1994, it was just easier for the USA than other countries may find it.

Resources in the USA may have helped too.

sidefootsitter
17 Aug 2005, 02:13 AM
you say that there are only 6 superpowers, i would disagree with that. Argentina for one has made a few semi-finals and 2 wins. and Spain, while their world cup performance is left to be desired, they have argubly the best premier league in the world, and maybe the most outright talent in europe Ya, it dawned on me that I blew Argentina with its 3 semis (3 finals too). Sweden had made 2 semis but those were 36 years apart and the country had not come close to the great talent it had in 1958 with Gren, Nordahl and Hamrin.

Spain has excellent individual talent but has been such an underachiever over the years in major tournaments that I would rank it even below Sweden, Czech Republic and Denmark. At least, the Danes won the Euro since the 1960s.

3. the 'jump' from era 1 to 2 is actually harder than most make it seem. Notice how teams like Slovenia, China, Ecuador are finding it hard to get from newbies to riff-raff. Slovenia may never get up off the "happy to be there" level. It's just a very small country.

Equador has some physical talent and makes for a difficult opponent, especially at home. They beat Brazil and Argentina at home and currently ranked 26th by ELo, roughly where the US was before WC'02

China is growing fast. Its U-20 team was pretty good and it's a competitive side on the Asian circuit. ELo has it at 48, so we'll see where the Chinese soccer goes. Its federation is very corrupt however and it may slow the sport's growth if this continues unabated.

Jay510
17 Aug 2005, 10:44 AM
Ya, it dawned on me that I blew Argentina with its 3 semis (3 finals too). Sweden had made 2 semis but those were 36 years apart and the country had not come close to the great talent it had in 1958 with Gren, Nordahl and Hamrin.

Spain has excellent individual talent but has been such an underachiever over the years in major tournaments that I would rank it even below Sweden, Czech Republic and Denmark. At least, the Danes won the Euro since the 1960s.

Slovenia may never get up off the "happy to be there" level. It's just a very small country.

Equador has some physical talent and makes for a difficult opponent, especially at home. They beat Brazil and Argentina at home and currently ranked 26th by ELo, roughly where the US was before WC'02

China is growing fast. Its U-20 team was pretty good and it's a competitive side on the Asian circuit. ELo has it at 48, so we'll see where the Chinese soccer goes. Its federation is very corrupt however and it may slow the sport's growth if this continues unabated.

well i was just giving some of the new qualifying teams as an example. Ecuador has the best shot at making the move due to its soccer resources and extreme home field advantage. China has vast resources, but as you mentioned, the federation is corrupt.

but none (maybe ecuador) will be in the 2006 world cup. Size never mattered to holland, i just cant see a team making the jump as the USA did. in 15 years the USA has come about as far as a country can move. from nothing to a regional superpower and to a 2nd tier world power. pretty good

csc7
17 Aug 2005, 11:16 AM
As "Ursula" brought up in the Parkhurst thread, the US soccer has been undergoing gradual transformation over the years. The "big bang", as it were, was the Paul Caliguiri's goal that took the US team to the WC'90 in Italy. With that commenced the new era of the sport in the US of A.

Era II. Riff-raff.

When you start from almost nothing and then get something, you consider it a giant leap and that's what the US team in 1994 was. The roster featured a few European based pros, most of them having solid careers in the 2nd divisions (Wynalda, Ramos, Wegerle, Harkes, Klopas*, Kooiman*), a few players naturalized as adults (Clavijo, Dooley, Stewart**), a few post-college Yanks (Balboa, Lalas, Meola, Jones) and an assortment of back-ups.

The team's grandest achievement was its win against Columbia (Elo had US as #50, Columbia as #16), which propelled the US into the 2nd round.

The style of play under Bora was still "bunker+counter" but it worked well on occasions. Possession was still tough to come by.


This group's biggest accomplishment was finishing 3rd in '95 Copa America, not the win against Colombia. And I'm assuming you meant to mention something about it since you put an asterisk, but Stewart wasn't a naturalized American.

Overall, I think we need to careful about thinking that just because we've moved this quickly up the ladder that we'll be winning World Cups left and right. Look at England and Holand's history. It ain't a forgone conclusion.

FabFiveFigo
17 Aug 2005, 02:00 PM
Overall, I think we need to careful about thinking that just because we've moved this quickly up the ladder that we'll be winning World Cups left and right. Look at England and Holand's history. It ain't a forgone conclusion.
I'm not sure any rational follower of the nats is thinking this. But I do think that many believe that making it out of the group stage is now what we should expect, at the least. I still think that with the talent exploding all over the globe like it is, we may still have to get a result that is a little over our head, like we did in '02.

sidefootsitter
17 Aug 2005, 02:09 PM
This group's biggest accomplishment was finishing 3rd in '95 Copa America, not the win against Colombia. And I'm assuming you meant to mention something about it since you put an asterisk, but Stewart wasn't a naturalized American.

Overall, I think we need to careful about thinking that just because we've moved this quickly up the ladder that we'll be winning World Cups left and right. Look at England and Holand's history. It ain't a forgone conclusion. Yes and yes and thanks for noticing.

And Argentina too. It has had great talent for a long time but it won in 1986, when IMO, their talent was more of "Maradona + 10 other guys", rather than in 1994 when they had Batistuta, Balbo, Caniggia, Redondo, Simeone and Fat Maradona, whose drug suspension killed the team spirits as they went down to Romania.

Brazil went 24 years (5 Cups betwen 1970 and 1994) before getting another win.