Why Young Yanks shouldn't go to the premiership part 2

[Maczebus]

Originally posted by HartwickFan



Well, I admit, I haven't seen any of your clubs excellent youth development. I do know that a US youth squad (composed mostly of our youth national side's reserves and/or rejects) just bitch-slapped Bolton's U-21's 4-1, and outshot them something like 15-3.


If the US meet Bolton in a future WC, they can be virtually guaranteed the 3 points then. :)

[jumhed]

Are we talking development within the system or development within a club? The last two finalists of the Euro U21 Competition was between France and the Czech Republic, with the Czechs winning on penalties courtesy of their cheating keeper. I wouldn't say that gives the Czechs the best league or development system.

Germany reached the WC final through having the easier route (barring the US game), so they DEFINITELY don't have the best development policy. In fact, they suck.

Also, it's down to which club one joins. Reyna is a fantastic player, but as I pointed out at the time on these boards, Sunderland is just the wrong team. They play the long-ball up to Quinn, who heads it down to Phillips, who-GOAL!

The best youth development (in my opinion) is the French, followed by Italy, Spain and England. Spain seems to be better at developing overseas talent, or at least capitalising on it, England buys older, more proven foreigners and developes its own (ManUre, West Ham and Spurs are doing particularly well (and Liverpool, sorry 'Pool fans)). Italy buys South American and developes its own to devestating effect. Germany, at the moment aren't quite there, but lets face it they hardly (if ever) make big investments in overseas players (except Bayern), so they'll always look to bring their own through (like Hargreaves).

But lets face it, any of these leagues are better than the MLS (which is getting better all the time). But no Yank player is going to get better if he's only warming the bench (hello Max-Moore).

I don't know of any EPL based bids for MLS players after the WC, but I wouldn't be surprised if when the play-off's finish, we see a few concrete offers appear.

In conclusion, an MLS player should take whichever european top-league offer he can (if the MLS lets him). He'll only get better facing the likes of Linke, Stam, Ferdinand etc. week in, week out.

What thinks you?

[Mc_Midas]

Originally posted by benine



well, one goal (Albania?) in 13 games isnt the best numbers and didnt he miss like an 8 yarder against Finland? You have to REALLY 'strike' to be a good international striker, he seems to be more of a plod and preassure forward and less a prolific scorer. Cole would play the slot well if england went to a 4-4-1-1, but Sven and a 1-1 will probably never be a match.

sven was looking at him just saying 8o

[Mc_Midas]

Originally posted by jumhed
Are we talking development within the system or development within a club? The last two finalists of the Euro U21 Competition was between France and the Czech Republic, with the Czechs winning on penalties courtesy of their cheating keeper. I wouldn't say that gives the Czechs the best league or development system.

Germany reached the WC final through having the easier route (barring the US game), so they DEFINITELY don't have the best development policy. In fact, they suck.

Also, it's down to which club one joins. Reyna is a fantastic player, but as I pointed out at the time on these boards, Sunderland is just the wrong team. They play the long-ball up to Quinn, who heads it down to Phillips, who-GOAL!

The best youth development (in my opinion) is the French, followed by Italy, Spain and England. Spain seems to be better at developing overseas talent, or at least capitalising on it, England buys older, more proven foreigners and developes its own (ManUre, West Ham and Spurs are doing particularly well (and Liverpool, sorry 'Pool fans)). Italy buys South American and developes its own to devestating effect. Germany, at the moment aren't quite there, but lets face it they hardly (if ever) make big investments in overseas players (except Bayern), so they'll always look to bring their own through (like Hargreaves).

But lets face it, any of these leagues are better than the MLS (which is getting better all the time). But no Yank player is going to get better if he's only warming the bench (hello Max-Moore).

I don't know of any EPL based bids for MLS players after the WC, but I wouldn't be surprised if when the play-off's finish, we see a few concrete offers appear.

In conclusion, an MLS player should take whichever european top-league offer he can (if the MLS lets him). He'll only get better facing the likes of Linke, Stam, Ferdinand etc. week in, week out.

What thinks you?

brazil have good youth development. france used to not anymore.

mls player should go to a club in europe that he can get in the team - no offense i doubt any american player could play for a english(bar keller and brad)/italian/spanish club :o if they did get signed they would be in revserves.

[Prenn]

Originally posted by HartwickFan
Well, I admit, I haven't seen any of your clubs excellent youth development. I do know that a US youth squad (composed mostly of our youth national side's reserves and/or rejects) just bitch-slapped Bolton's U-21's 4-1, and outshot them something like 15-3.

http://www.ussoccer.com/news/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=19842&itype=

Uh? Bolton don't have an U-21 team...

Not only that there's no mention of this alleged friendly anywhere other than at the link you gave.

And to top it all off our first team, reserve team and top academy players are busy playing pre-season friendlies elsewhere.

[Boro_lad]

Also mIddlesbrough has one of the best Training facilities in europe along with some of the best coaches...so how can this be bad for young players???

[OBartleby]

Originally posted by Prenn
Uh? Bolton don't have an U-21 team...

Not only that there's no mention of this alleged friendly anywhere other than at the link you gave.

And to top it all off our first team, reserve team and top academy players are busy playing pre-season friendlies elsewhere.
Must've been the Democratic Republic of Bolton the article was refering to. ;)

[prk166]

team's aren't exactly lining up to buy your players.


Apparently you haven't realized that NO ONE is buying players this summer. It's not quite literally. Compared to the last few years, it has been no one. Pointing out that no one has bought any Americans after the World Cup is a bit like pointing out that no one has bought any French players and concluding it means they suck. Seriously, who on the roster for France has been bought in a transfer deal? Spain? Italy? Germany (note that Ballack + others were bought by Bayern before the cup)? Which English players have moved beside Rio? THere just isn't much movement out there right now. It's not the nationality; the market is just darn slow right now.

[Boro_lad]

Originally posted by prk166


Apparently you haven't realized that NO ONE is buying players this summer. It's not quite literally. Compared to the last few years, it has been no one. Pointing out that no one has bought any Americans after the World Cup is a bit like pointing out that no one has bought any French players and concluding it means they suck. Seriously, who on the roster for France has been bought in a transfer deal? Spain? Italy? Germany (note that Ballack + others were bought by Bayern before the cup)? Which English players have moved beside Rio? THere just isn't much movement out there right now. It's not the nationality; the market is just darn slow right now.

Boro have bough players

Juninho(TLF)
Massimo Maccarone
Gerimi (loan)
Boeteng
Frank Queadrue


Also boro and liverpool have been spending mony

Bolton bought j j ochotcha (lol sp)

im sure there are more but i cant be arsed to list em all

[benine]

Originally posted by Prenn


Uh? Bolton don't have an U-21 team...

Not only that there's no mention of this alleged friendly anywhere other than at the link you gave.

And to top it all off our first team, reserve team and top academy players are busy playing pre-season friendlies elsewhere.


no, it's for real. USSF wouldnt just make something like this up. I think it's all academy players, not even reserves, who are playing the matches. And it's just players who are under 21, not neccesarly a squad.

[M]

Originally posted by Boro_lad

im sure there are more but i cant be arsed to list em all

The list I saw indicated that the total value of transfer deals involving English teams was about a third of last season. And a big chunk of this comes from Man Utd (Ferdinand) and Man City. Of course, there's still a couple of weeks to go, but I'd still be surprised if even half of last summer's total is reached.

Okocha is a loan deal, iirc. Bolton are one of a number of teams that haven't spent any money at all.

[Newman]

Boy, these arguements get tiresome.

1. MLS has set higher than market prices for it's WC players simply because they are worth it TO MLS. They are recognizable in a way new to MLS and a real asset in marketing and drawing fans to the park. These are not things that would be a factor to any Euro club, obviously. Thus, no bids that meet MLS price. Is it the right strategy-maybe. Is it naive-no. McBride is more valuable to MLS(in MLS's view) in Columbus than he is in terms of transfer fees right now.

2. Why is it American soccer fans must act so desperate for attention and respect from the English? We meet in no club competitions and have not met in an important National Team competition since 1950. Yes, some of the English posters come off as a bit pompous-but some of the Americans come off as desperate (who the hell is going to be impressed with a win over a Bolton youth side?). Have a little confidence in the American player and in MLS. You can see it on the field that USA soccer is improving, why do we need some Brit to bestow blessings on us? We have defeated Mexico in 5 of the last 6 including at the WC, LA is the current club champ in Concacaf, and USA won the Gold Cup-and yet you'd be hard pressed to find many Mexicans who would call the US superior. Why do you feel that we're going to get all this respect from the English, based on far fewer hard results. We know we're slowly getting better-just enjoy the ride.

3. The true respect for the American player will not be in how many 25 year-olds we can send across the pond. It's that we're starting to see more 16 year-olds have a chance to try the JOB route in clubs around Europe (and england-at least 2-3 with Arsenal). Couple that with MLS forming real reserve sides, US could have some real player development on a large scale for maybe the first time ever.

[superdave]

Originally posted by maczebus
It's pointless arguing that DMB(for example) is 'worth' $Xmillion, when teams are offering less than that. 'Worth' is something for the buyer to decide on, not the seller.
You're half right. If Boro offers $800K for DeMarcus Beasley, and MLS says, no he's worth the $1.2M that Ajax offered us for him before Sikora fell into their laps, what is DMB's value?

To Boro, it's $800K. To MLS, they think his value is $1.2M.

Let's take the case of Brian McBride. Pursued by Everton. The thing is, he is the icon in Columbus, not just for soccer or MLS, but for professional sports. He's bigger there than any of their NHL players. So maybe Everton says, hmmm, decent skills, 30 years old, injury prone...he may help us, let's take a flyer and offer $750K for him (just a hypothetical.)

But the Crew may say, look, we've been building our marketing campaign around this guy for 7 years. He's worth more than that in terms of tickets sales and wins. I mean, player prices (except for the rare merchandising icon like Nakata or Becks, etc.) are derived by the wins and draws a player gets for his team, because fans spend more money supporting winners, and teams are rewarded for winning.

I guess what I'm saying is, because of soccer's tenuous place in the US sports culture, PLUS (and this is a big, big deal) the fact that the MLS season is hitting the homestretch when European teams want to buy, artificially deflates the value of Americans in Europe, compared to their worth in the US. I mean, it would be bad enough for the Crew to sell their icon, in terms of getting fans to the games. But to, on top of that, sell probably their best player in the middle of their fight for the postseason, would be a public relations nightmare. One not worth the money Everton is offering.

So both sides are satisfied. McBride is worth X to Everton, and 1 1/2 X to the Crew.

[Alex_1]

Originally posted by jumhed

In conclusion, an MLS player should take whichever european top-league offer he can (if the MLS lets him). He'll only get better facing the likes of Linke, Stam, Ferdinand etc. week in, week out.

What thinks you?

I think it should be the player's decision really, and I know if I were in that position to chose I'd look at what would be best for my career. IT is always an honor to play for your country but realistically, the best play for their country and the better you are, the better your chances will be. It's not just about playing in the Premiership or in Spain or Germany or Italy or Argentina (anyone notice how many American fans "snub" South America? ;) ) It's about what will best fit what you're trying to do with your career, and where your skills can best serve the system that's aim is to achieve a set result without being sitracted by the BS on the side. Simple as that.

Yes, it would be great for a fan to boast: "Our top player plays for Real Madrid". But if you're the player, and you're not up to par with your teammates, and you don't fit into the system + will never be utilized, what good does that do your development? Great, so I can be Zidane's whipping boy in practice.

Be realistic... you'd want more than that. And that's the reality. Just be realistic in their skills, the system they're looking at, and what's best for them as an individual player in their career. THe National Side isn't payin' all that much in comparison these days. :D

[Prenn]

Originally posted by benine



no, it's for real. USSF wouldnt just make something like this up. I think it's all academy players, not even reserves, who are playing the matches. And it's just players who are under 21, not neccesarly a squad.

Even then you'd be looking at 16 year olds. Most of the academy lads are with the first and reserve team.

[Prenn]

Originally posted by M



Okocha is a loan deal, iirc. Bolton are one of a number of teams that haven't spent any money at all.

Nope, Okocha is a bosman.

[sinner78]

Originally posted by HartwickFan


I will cheerfully concede that no Yank currently has a choice between serie A, premiership, germany, and la liga. I honestly don't see how that is at all relevant to a debate about which leagues are better at developing talent. Maybe you can explain to me how the number of choices that American players currently have is related in any way to the argument over which leagues are better at developing talent.




I tell you what...
How about you produce your own players and develop your own talent..
Does that sound like a good idea???

We've got players like Rio ferdinand ,micheal owen ,etc... rolling off the production line so we obviously dont know how to produce players.
You're all clearly experts on our ways of youth development.
You yanks wouldnt wanna degrade yourselves and come to england...
Theres no need for this debate to continue because you yanks too high and mighty for us .
You reach one quarter final and now you're clearly the best thing since sliced bread.
bye bye, its been fun.

[Achilles]

What's the matter, Sinner, no witty response to HartwickFan?

Thought not.

[Boro_lad]

Originally posted by Achilles
What's the matter, Sinner, no witty response to HartwickFan?

Thought not.

All i got to say is....

Shut up you muppet!

[OBartleby]

Originally posted by Prenn
Nope, Okocha is a bosman.
Meaning Bolton didn't pay a transfer fee for him, correct?