But Euros weren't available for Jan. camp (otherwise they would have been selected). MLS players are available for this one. That gives the manager flexibility he wasn't previously afforded. (Part of) 2 matches, especially out of season against the sides of the ilk the US played, doesn't provide sufficient info as to what your best 23 is when the group would coalesce. These games would be played against substantially better comp on paper, but not an almost insurmountable challenge like Brasil, and will be in season for all participants. That's ideal conditions for info gathering. With that in mind, I'd bring a mixture of mostly prospects, with some vets sprinkled in, to prepare for upcoming competitions. The whole pool should be open. Theoretically that would produce a "diverse" group geographically. This is who I'd select: FW: Sargent, Altidore, Novakovich, Wood/Morris AM: Pulisic, Weah, Lletget, Amon, Arriola CM: Adams, McKennie, Roldan, Morales FB: Lima, Yedlin, Robinson CB: Brooks, Long, Miazga, Zimmerman GK: Steffen, Horvath, Guzan
It's speculative but I think Berhalter wanted Canouse and Delgado in reserve for defense just in case his "system" doesn't work. He was more interested in offensive performance against CR+Pan B teams and getting thru to the players about his system. I don't see the March window shaping up as a great fit for McKennie flying the Atlantic and playing Ecuador and Chile. The same might be said for Adams but it's a bit early to tell in his case. That's why Canouse and Delgado are in there. Reality check over dream team.
Lol. There is no one who says this or things like this other than defensive MLS fans inventing a straw man against whom to rage.
I’d be interested to see examples of regular News & Analysis posters who even paraphrase this. I think the hyperbole is trending in the other direction as more recently, we’ve seen a respected poster say that ATL is a top 50 in the world club that would crush teams at the bottom of the big 4 and others that state that NUFC is a step down from ATL. Thanks.
I agree with you that there has been, somewhat, a trend in the other direction. Probably because I'm seeing the same as others--the level of MLS is improving quickly, and the young players (particularly those that have come through academies) are increasingly good players. And, fewer of them are leaving for x club in Scandinavia (this is important because that used to be a frequent jumping-off point into the world of European club soccer for Americans--quite a few tracked well and moved up to better and better leagues over the years and provided quality to the USMNT).
Let’s not exaggerate what I said. I said, Atlanta, in my opinion, could beat Wolverhampton. And, that they could be a solid mid table EPL team. I believe the Red Bull’s too could step into the EPL and avoid relegation. And where Newcastle is at today; I wouldn’t bet against Atlanta, although it would make a good game. The championship is not their level. Whereas, teams like FC Dallas and so forth would make pretty good Championship level teams. On the other hand, if Atlanta were to play Guingamp... they should thump them. To say that the best clubs in MLS could only compete in Ligue 2 is absurd. We need to recognize that the US/MLS is not instantly a step down from every single European level. If that’s the case then Denmark, Switzerland, and Sweden are clearly better than MLS. And even Scotland and Norway too should be considered superior. Hell, I wonder if some people even think we are on par with Macedonia. Point is... it’s not lunacy to think that MLS is lower level EPL and Championship... maybe League One (San Jose, etc). And the Atlanta team that’s about to take the field in 2019 is by far the best team yet to ever take the field in MLS. I wouldn’t bet against them. There’s a reason why the South American player of the year wants to play for Atlanta.
First, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. You stated that ATL is a mid-table EPL team, which is ~50th in the world according to 538 and IMO, ATL is nowhere near that level. You also opined that "Most of those teams from 100 to them, Atlanta would maul" and that list includes many EPL, Championship and LigaMX teams. Lastly, you also opined that Nagbe and a handful of others are solid EPL level players and I certainly don't agree with your opinion there on many of the players. As I've stated numerous times, I think MLS is approximately B2/Championship level which is above many other first leagues. That being said, it's not EPL level at all. Just as I asked tomasbernal, I'd be interested to see who these "some people even think [the USMNT] are on par with Macedonia" or "US/MLS is instantly a step down from every single European level" are as I don't see any of this on N&A. The only people who I see saying this are defensive MLS fans who create strawmen against whom to rage.
I agree with all of this and hope that the trend will continue assuming Garber and MLS no longer think of MLS as a final destination league but rather a developmental one. But we're not near the major leagues/big 5 level at this point nor should we expect to be given how young our league is. My point to you remains: no one in N&A states what you and others accuse them of stating: that all or even most of Euro is better than MLS by simply being in Europe.
If I were to rank my top 50... 1. Manchester City 2. Paris SG 3. FC Barcelona 4. Real Madrid 5. Liverpool 6. Bayern Munich 7. Borussia Dortmund 8. Juventus 9. Atletico Madrid 10. Tottenham 11. Manchester United 12. Arsenal 13. Chelsea 14. Sevilla 15. Borussia Moenchengladbach 16. Red Bull Leipzig 17. Inter Milan 18. Porto 19. Roma 20. Red Bull Salzburg 21. AC Milan 22. Zenit St Petersburg 22. Lyon 23. Ajax 24. Bayer Leverkusen 25. Benfica 26. Getafe 27. Valencia 28. Lille 29. Eintracht Frankfurt 30. Schalke 31. Atalanta 32. Shakhtar Donetsk 33. PSV 34. Real Sociedad 35. Galatasaray 36. Real Betis 37. Everton 38. Dynamo Kiev 39. Lyon 40. Genk 41. Hoffenheim 42. Red Star Belgrade 43. Dinamo Zagreb 44. Club Brugge 45. Lazio 46. Montpellier 47. Bordeaux 49. Alaves 50. Wolfsburg And there’s still Krasnodar, St. Etienne, Braga, Hertha, FC Copenhagen, etc. that I’d rate above Atlanta, (not to mention River Plate, Boca Juniors, Etc) but do I think they’re at least a top 100 club... yes I do. For what it’s worth, between Celtic or Atlanta... I’m taking Atlanta all day on that one. And if Celtic are good enough to take 68...then it’s approrpriate that Atlanta is in that range. But hell, according to some... Atlanta would be destroyed by mighty Guangzhou!
In all honesty, this question is interesting because MLS is unlike all these other leagues. At the DP level, many MLS players are better than players in the SPL, Denmark, B2, and EC. But that is 2-3 guys spread around the whole league while in these European leagues the talent is concentrated at the top. At the TAM level, MLS players are probably not Top 4 quality or would be fringe players. Celtic in terms of MLS probably has 2-4 DP players, 10 TAM players. But Hearts is probably 1 TAM player, and guys who would be MLS squad players. Everton would probably have, what, 5-7 DP players and 10 TAM players? I do think parity is no longer enforceable in MLS and the league has to decide whether to keep trying. Is it better to keep a lid on Atlanta and have them lose every year to Tigres in the CCL, or let them go all out and possibly become the best club in the Western Hemisphere? If they wait, I think the fan base might be more temporary than people think.
I don’t think the ATL defense would hold up against EPL teams. For example, I have always liked Parkhurst, but (imo) he would struggle against Prem teams at this point in his career. . The ATL attack would also not be able to run as rampant as they do in MLS. I’m sure they could get games here and there.
The problem is that you are making a ton of assumptions that I don't think hold water. I will point out just one ... that Wolverhampton is actually a top 50 team. Because 538s system has them ranked there, you believe that? I don't ... not for one second. Just because they are punching a bit above their weight at the moment, do you really think they merit that ranking? I frankly think it to be absurd. So when someone says they think a team could beat Wolves, they aren't necessarily saying that a team is top 50.
I don't look to 538 for exacting ranking but think that a top 50 team is better than a 200th ranked team. Therefore, I'm less concerned about is Wolverhampton at #50 but rather ElevenBravo's opinion that ATL is a mid-table EPL team (I do think that mid-table EPL is about 50 and that no team in MLS is even close to that). In other words, it's not about whether Wolves are over-ranked but does MLS belong near the top 50 (as I believe 11B opined) rather than a bit under 200 (which feels right to me when the bulk of MLS is in the high 200s and 300s and the fact that MLS values parity).
Personally, I wish they would just go ahead and let the cat out of the bag. -Make all domestic players and signings of u20 international players cap exempt. If Colorado, San Jose, etc cannot keep up; there’s always the USL. And, I don’t think Atlanta would be the only team to take advantage either. Red Bulls, Timbers, Sounders, Galaxy, LAFC, and Toronto are all willing to spend big. NYCFC could be a powerhouse if the bottom line would make it worth their while. Which, in this case, if the restrictions were loosened, I have a feeling the market and the demand would push them into the top bracket. Dallas, RSL, Sporting, DC, and Philly might not be the biggest spending clubs out there but they invest heavily in youth development and they aren’t slumps either so I think that would take their game up a notch. Houston, Montreal, Minnesota, Orlando, and Vancouver could take their game up a notch. As although their player development has been poor; they still have good fan bases. I’ve got high hopes for Cincinnati and Columbus with their new management. Personally, I think Miami could be a hit too once their ducks are in a row. Only clubs that are stuck in first gear is San Jose, Chicago, Colorado, and New England. Which, I don’t think it’s worth it to keep the league hostage over 4 teams who are stuck in MLS 1.5. Plus, we all should believe by now that if the product is strong; there’s no reason MLS cannot make it in every major metro in the US. Take it from me that, although I thought Atlanta was a vastly underrated market as I know how popular soccer is here; I never thought we could easily put 70k fans in the seats on a regular basis. Arthur Blank has proven that if you care to put out a top notch product, fans will show up. And if people thinking those fans are going to go away, you’re not paying attention. Hell, I run into more Atl United fans than Falcons fans any day of the week. A dip in fan support isn’t going to see them ever come close to dropping below 40k for matches unless Blank sells the team to some idiot who just ruins the product for everyone...which, that’s not happening either.
Atlanta or Guangzhou.... Okay, the case is closed that if those rankings are even somewhat credible that Atlanta should be in the top 75; which is probably where Atlanta would be. Give or take. Maybe, Atlanta might struggle one year in the EPL, but other years, they could overperform just in the way Wolverhampton has done this year. And, to say that Wolves are so much better than Atlanta United is faulty thinking. Take it this way; in England alone: Clearly better than Atlanta: Manchester City Manchester United Chelsea Arsenal Tottenham Liverpool Everton (although they’re not doing too hot this year) I’d give an edge to the English team: Wolverhampton (this year alone because of how they’ve overperformed but I think Atlanta could still beat them) West Ham Leicester City Debatable: Newcastle (typically Atlanta would be under, but they’ve been terrible for awhile) Watford Bournemouth Crystal Palace Southampton I’d give Atlanta the edge: Brighton Burnley Fulham Huddersfield Cardiff City
Respectfully, you're comparing teams that play at a very high level vs. the Man Citys of the world to ATL which plays against MLS teams. The competition level is apples and oranges and the eye test simply doesn't work. Just because a team looks bad vs. elite teams doesn't mean that they're not better than Championship teams (as relegation and promotion often shows). To me, it's similar to saying that the Knicks are worse than Duke's team. ATL has shown no ability to play at a high level and few, if any, of its players has shown that. You think that Nagbe is a mid-level EPL player and I don't see that at all. Quite frankly, it remains to be seen if Almiron is at that level and he was one of ATL's best players. I now realize that you're an Atlanta resident and fan. Congrats on the MLS championship! Let's see how ATL does in the CCL before putting them well above every team in the Championship and B2....
While I think the Top 10 are clearly European teams, and possibly so up to the Top 16, after that there's a healthy sprinkle of South American teams, and even some African teams, in the Top 100. Anyway, ranking leagues is very hard. You can choose to rank them based on top teams (then the Botola league from Morocco could be ranked higher than MLS, because the Casablanca teams, Raja and Wydad, are likely stronger than any MLS team), you could rank them based on weakest link (then I'd place MLS above the EFL Championship, because the bottom of the Championship is utter trash), or rank them based on some form of average (which is pure guesswork to calculate, since the weaker teams in most leagues don't even play that many friendlies). Some things should be common sense, though: - from two equivalent players, give the chance to the younger one; - take the decent guy who gives 100% over the excellent guy who only gives 70%, if the on-field results are similar --a guy half-assing it poisons the well; - starting XI depends on rival; - guys from top-tier divisions usually are better psychologically prepared for the international game than guys from lower divisions; - when possible, pick complementary pairs that know each other (two CBs from same club, or at least same league, for example); - for the NT, when you need a result, pick form over potential; - for NT duty, adaptability is as important as technique, since they don't have the time to know each other --pick smart players who can adapt quick.
Given the lack of parity in most leagues, it's far better to rank teams than leagues. The challenge is comparing teams across continents as they don't play a lot. I believe 538 uses wages and transfer fees as a benchmark as well and that's a reasonable, albeit imperfect, proxy for talent level in a squad.
If we are going to continue with the tucked in RB I'd love to see how Lynden Gooch would perform in that role. Tough, great motor, can defend and is relentless going forward.
Not when it comes to England. The English market VASTLY overpays relative to even other top leagues, for its own domestic talent. And they can do that because the league is awash with cash due to marketing ... again, relative to even other top leagues. So using wages in England as a proxy for talent is a highly problematic endeavor. We are all engaging in opinion here though, which is my point. And 538 is as subjective as your or my eyeball test.
We can agree to disagree. I think the concept that 538's ranking are subjective as eyeball tests is wrong as you are effectively saying that choosing wages/transfers as an objective metric is inherently as subjective as eyeballs. Is it perfectly objective? Nah but money is a pretty good indicator of value and it's 2 parties coming to an agreement on value when there's a global market at work. For example, Wolves' salary is about $35-40M and ATL was $11m last year. Is Wolves 3x better? Probably not but to say that the meritocratic system doesn't work in the most global sport of all doesn't fly for me. YMMV.
Like you said, we may just agree to disagree. And I think that’s fair. I don’t think anything less of you, and hope you don’t think anything less than me. I think ultimately it is hard to compare how one team would do in a different league, as it’s hard to say how when a player can transfer to an equally talented club in the same league and be a star at one club and on the bench for the other. On Nagbe; Nabge is an even hotter/colder type than Landon Donovan. Meaning, he’s wildly inconsistent... which is why his game probably is suited better for MLS than abroad where it’s more forgiving to be hot/cold. And, I know...when Nagbe is off. He sucks. The whole team suffers. When he’s on though. He’s one of the best players in the league. If Nagbe performed at his potential, he would easily be playing for a club of the caliber of Borussia Moenchengladbach. Nobody can convince me that his talent level is lower than Fabian Johnson. In fact, that’s probably a good benchmark for his talent when his game is switched on. But the problem with Nagbe has never been his talent or who he’s playing against. It’s his drive to perform day in and day out. On Villalba; for instance. Right now Villalba would walk into the USMNT and outside of Pulisic, be one of our best players. Weah is roughly equivalent to Villalba at this point in his career, just Weah is younger and has more upside so his value is greater. Villalba struggles to even get into the Atlanta line up. On Gressel; Gressel is the type of player every team needs but would never be the star attraction. Therefore, no one would say Gressel is the second coming of Toni Kroos. But if he had a coach that saw what he could contribute, he could easily again be playing for a club as high as Schalke. On Parkhurst; everyone sees his age and the fact that he’s never been a USMNT regular and thinks Atlanta’s defense sucks for some reason, although Atlanta was 4th in the league in defense. Point is; Parkhurst has actually become better in Atlanta’s system where the defense has been built around him. It rarely happens but it does happen that some players actually peak into their 30s. Think of Cannavaro for example; who Parkhurst is of a similar style player (although do not quote me saying they’re of the same talent.) All across the board, Atlanta has very good talent and they have played historically very well with each other. To think they could not be competitive against the bottom end of the Premier League just seems like faulty thinking to me. The US isn’t France, Spain, or Brazil by any means; but we are not so inferior that we’re on the level of Scotland, Northern Ireland, or Norway either. The US is probably a top 20-30 team right now, two years ago they were probably 40-50, and I would project by 2022, we’ll actually have one of the best teams we’ve ever had; which is probably a top 10-20 team. And, compared to yesteryear; MLS has actually outgrown the level of the USMNT. Hence, why 2018 was a disaster was because our best players were not good enough to play for the best clubs in MLS. So, it doesn’t make sense to me to say that if we rank somewhere in the top 20 or 30 teams in the world right now to say that our best ever club, that is arguably more talented than our national team, could not even compete in a league where we have guys like Danny Williams (when healthy) and Tim Ream playing every minute. Comparatively, if that were the case, Fredo Morales would be a star player for us.