mew2. she just might be boxx's replacement. ts seems to think she has the size, the toughness, and the tools.
● Press is a #9. Shes at her best playing as a lone striker. ● Morgan Brian has potential. ● Dunn will be playing fullback for us. Do you really not see my point in all seriousness?
Dont forget Horan...she was the leading scorer for U20 team before injuring her knee right before they left for Japan. If they go to Japan with a front line of Ohai-Horan-Hayes I think they put up a lot more goals. How impressive is it that they won the U20 WC after losing their top striker?
Well then I'm looking forward to monitoring her development because right now we have two players playing out of position in our double pivot. Both Holiday and Carli have been asked to play as defensive mids and its ridiculous.
Press played AM, FW, winger for USWNT. Dunn has and can played at AM, CM, CB, wingback. She'll be playing AM or winger for her NWSL club team. Yes I know what your argument is, I've heard it the last 10 years that teams around the world will surpass the USWNT easily but I have not seen it yet. I still remember hearing Brazil is going to dominate the US with their technical players 5 years ago and now they fall behind farther and farther. I heard Germany was going to pull away from the US when they won a few consecutive WWC but they are not any better than the US right now. I heard the French are going to be dominant but they haven't done jack squat outside of the U-17 level. I heard Japan is going to Tiki Taka the US to death but so far they only won 1 game against the US. I'll wait until they actually do it to believe it.
Really? Thats what you got out of it? You are lumping me in with the others you have talked with over the years clearly.
The French have made great strides but like all countries their size they have a limited player pool. While their U17s were great last cycle and may win the U20 title this cycle, they r no where to be found in this year's U17 WC. The real test for the the French program is putting a medal quality team in the youth WC every two years.
They were a great team! but then why the heck aren't they starting for our senior team right now? Germany all ready started as much as 5 players off their u20 2012 team at last year's euros. But instead there's not only no place for them on the USWNT but we can't barely fit in either the slightly older kids like Hagen, Brooks & Tymrak. The world game is constantly evolving. but our veteran players ain't! Look at Denmark; they scored more goals against us then they did in the entire euro tournament even though they made it to the semis! The vets are sticking with the NT simply because we pay them too much. Cut off their pay and they'll voluntarily retire!
sounds like the usual. because the senior team is the best in the world? they are just the best u20s? it's not the same level? there are also some u23s ahead of them? they'll all get call ups if they're good enough, and the ones who measure up will stick. experimental friendly. the usual again. cut off their pay and you won't have enough women making it a career. you won't be able to put a good team together when you really need it.
You seem pretty intent on convincing everybody what happened at the AC isn't worth taking seriously. When you have that kind of systemic failure from coaching, strikers, midfielders, defenders, top to bottom you can't simply right the games off as "experimental friendlies". Maybe, just maybe, you can be thankful that it happened at the AC and not the WWC, but that doesn't mean you go about addressing the problems and issues any different. Make no mistake, there are problems. The AC is the last tournament format "test" before the WWCQ's. You don't want to wait until then to find out you have issues in coaching and player performances in group stage situations. The AC to me was a red flag, and it should be treated as such. Please stop making excuses for Tom and everybody else.
The two key words in your post are bolded. Your insistence that something is true does not obligate others to ignore their own judgement. I understand that you believe the sky is falling. I do not believe that obligates me to go helmet shopping, or justifies your making demands that luvdagame behave differently, even if you put "please" in the front.
Red flag is a term denoting various attention and awareness indicators and signals, both explicit and implicit. It can be used in various contexts usually as a warning or when things seem too good to be true. That does not mean the sky is falling, and your analogy of me as some kind of raving lunatic is incorrect, off the wall, and borderline insulting. I am not the extremist in this argument. I am not the poster in this debate who goes from thread to thread and, instead of adding to the debate, dismisses others opinions with "sounds like the usual" and "experimental friendly". That label of extremism belongs to the folks who want to pretend there is nothing wrong and everything is sunshine and roses after the AC, and those other folks who want to sack Sermanni and cut the pay of all the starters. I am asking for diligence, that is all. I am asking that Tom learns from the mistakes concerning how he handles certain players. I am asking why do we have so much competition at some positions, and not at the others? We only have 4 games scheduled before we reach WWCQ's, do you really want to wait until then to start worrying about this team? And I would ask you what needs to happen before you feel the proverbial "sky is falling" for the USWNT? This is taking on the venom of a political debate. An independent disagrees with a Conservative stance and he is immediately labeled a Liberal Extremist and I simply want no part of it any more. Somebody recommended we close the AC thread, and I now second that.
Look, we are just expressing opinions and impressions here-- and you are asking others to quit "pretending" nothing is wrong. I'm not the only one who sees no great wrong to confront, and there is nothing riding on our consensus. What we say here isn't particularly important, and I wouldn't have challenged your posts, had you not decided to set out to tell someone else what you required their opinion to be. I do think you have engaged in a process of posting the same general thing over and over, and then in effect declared that it must be consensus because it has been posted so often; this is a common modus operandi here, and is kind of insulting, but hey, I can mostly live with it. But then declaring that someone else is out of line because they believe their own eyes instead of you, well that is a whole extra level of rudeness. And now you consider yourself the victim of an insult, because I found it objectionable... We had a bad Algarve cup. We were missing four potential starters due to injury, had another so recently off an injury that her minutes were limited, and we tried some other people out (which last is precisely what posters here have been itching for for years.) That really is a hiccup, not a catastrophe. As for what I think needs to happen for the sky to be falling-- well I haven't seen it yet. The Mexico loss last WCQ was not it. An Algarve loss certainly is not; the same general thing happened to Germany at Algarve not that long ago, and they do not appear to be buried under a pile of cloud-rubble. I suppose if we actually failed to qualify it might be an issue-- but even there the resource base is so huge that I doubt the failure would continue into a trend. We aren't ever likely to be where, say, Iceland seems to be-- trying to get something done while the 4-8 year window of a golden generation is open.
Can you clarify this? I wasn't part of the debate, it was how he was responding to others. If that isn't objective, I don't know what is. He does this in other threads as well. It is always the same "the usual", or "experimental game" Comparing someone to a raving lunatic who is shouting "the sky is falling" on the streets, especially since that was my first comment in that particular debate, is borderline insulting. I'm in general agreement with you here, except I would say the WCQ loss to Mexico, forcing the #1 in the world to a play in game, utterly unacceptable and as close as it gets.
I was referring to this: which is IMO you doing to luvdagame precisely what you complain of my doing to you. "The sky is falling" is not from a story about a raving lunatic, but rather the children's story of Chicken Little; a story designed to teach children not to overreact to things when they grow up. I never know what this phrase means when used like this? Do you mean the stress is going to make you ill and you may suicide? Do you mean you are going to start a revolution and overturn the Fed? Do you mean you actually own the team and are going to fire everybody? Of course it is "acceptable"-- what are you going to do about it but make a little noise and accept it? I mean, I suppose you could give up being a fan and watch bowling or something, but other than that, aren't you pretty much in no position to do anything else? To quote "Stripes," "lighten up Francis!"
I'm still not clear what your complaining about here. You are upset I believe he is making excuses for the so called "best team in the world" after they failed to win 3 out of 4 games?
I'm not even the target, and it offended-- not upset, offended-- me... If you can post the same things over and over again, and treat them as facts not opinions, why should luvdagame be accused of making excuses (for people who, after all, do not actually need excuses) instead of merely expressing opinions?
What have I posted over and over again in this debate that I treat as facts? This comment that you seem so upset by was the first comment I made in this debate. I was otherwise just reading what others had to say. Then the moment I say something you feel offended about something that wasn't directed to you?
Oh, were using the thread as a whole now? I thought we were just talking about what other teams in the world are doing to get better. How they are catching up to the US because we insist on using certain players because of what they have done for us in the past. I saw luv making an excuses for what happened at the AC against the argument for us not to try the U20's. That is what I was commenting on. I fail to see how my previous comments on a coaching error by Tom has anything to do with that.