USA vs. Canada, 10/15/2019 [R] - Post-Mortem

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by schrutebuck, Oct 15, 2019.

  1. Lloyd Heilbrunn

    Lloyd Heilbrunn Member+

    Feb 11, 2002
    Jupiter, Fl.
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Did those guys go to his high school?
     
    Patrick167 repped this.
  2. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    What kind of flipping idiot gets on a bulletin board to ignore people
     
  3. Ghost

    Ghost Member+

    Sep 5, 2001
    canada have some really good players and have improved a lot. I don't think losing to them on the road calls for 900 posts.
     
  4. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    People making arguments about what 06 meant without getting into
    The draw (Ghana Italy Czech)
    Lewis
    Reyna

    Are basically brain dead

    Is the implication we lost because he came home?

    We lost because we had the champion in our group and a tough draw like 2014
     
  5. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    No, it’s a bs article because the process identified in the piece says get rid of the data you don’t like

    Once you say that a player who tries what is being proposed doesn’t count if he doesn’t survive long enough you have undermined/assumed your own conclusion

    As I pointed out, the vast majority of EPL big club signees aren’t even on their contract team, and the only one who is, subs

    Following this analysis, only Pulisic counts

    But what about the other 6? Most of the players I sent to follow your theory basically bounced back out, but let’s base the argument on the only ones who survive

    You don’t survive “over a length of time” without being good and wanted. It verges on circular.

    And people are just ignoring the part where he bases his idea of elite in part on EPL status where EPL status is based in part on achieving a work permit which is in turn based on already being a high rank team’s regular starting player. Again, circular.
     
  6. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    I watched most of BD’s games last season

    And anyone looking up transfermarkt could get this as well

    CP got in 20 B.1 games last season playing 926’

    Pointing further back then that misses why he is no longer at BD ie Favre and Sancho

    My point is then why replicate that scenario at CFC

    The people lobbing around economists’ theories are ignoring the part where by signing high CP gets a cut of the transfer fee, or that CFC in signing someone American neither coach asked for might have had less than pure motives

    All he has to do is take a little less money and drop a little down the EPL or B.1 table and he plays all day and he probably scores a ton and I don;t have to listen to people suggest Frank Effing Lampard who couldn’t get Derby promoted and wants Mount is magically going to impart to CP what he needs to know to get better

    Or, worse, that he will get it by osmosis in practice
     
  7. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #882 juvechelsea, Oct 23, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2019
    Further hole in your theory. Every EPL team plays the same schedule. Liverpool doesn’t play a harder schedule than Watford, for league. They merely extract better results. Maybe this is why the snobs rant about CL or practice. Ever consider that the simple accumulation of talent is a far more direct explanation for that success than that they drive each other to greater success? And isn’t there a logic problem in saying BOTH the club makes them better AND that they were already better to drive each other on?? The far simpler Occam’s razor is you spend more money and sign objectively better people To excel — and to meet up work permit get the ones who already start on a good NT.

    It’s very simple. If I have ManCity’s money I go sign the best players from Germany England Spain France Brazil etc. If I sign someone from Curaçao or Salvador you need to check my head. You then argue well playing for City correlates to World Cup success. I repeat, if I sign someone from Curaçao......
     
  8. 50/50 Ball

    50/50 Ball Member+

    Sep 6, 2006
    USA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    @Patrick167

    I don't know what game you watched. Landon was great that day. Even in his consensus worst tournament, he looked great against the eventual champions.

    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2006/jun/18/worldcup2006.match2

    FTA: But it was the USA that forged the more meaningful breakthroughs. Substitute DaMarcus Beasley steering the ball into the net to spark scenes of pandemonium before American fans realised the goal was disallowed because McBride had been offside.

    Man of the match

    Landon Donovan - A touch of class in a chaotic match. The American golden boy was the most technically accomplished performer on the pitch, displaying the skill and vision to make Italy's defence look ordinary.

    https://www.espn.com/soccer/club/name/660/blog/post/2079126/headline

    7. U.S. vs. Italy, 2006 World Cup

    Germany 2006 is regarded as the low point of Donovan's U.S. career, but his non-stop running and intelligent play against the Azzurri was a major reason a nine-man U.S. squad was able to steal a point against the eventual World Cup champs. The Americans were the only foes Italy failed to beat in 2006, and the result -- often overlooked, but among the most impressive in U.S. history -- kept them alive heading into their final group-stage game.
     
  9. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    I think the Arena quote was after the Czech game. I vaguely recall a rumor where Arena called LD some choice names on the bus after the game. As bad as LD was against the Czechs, he was much worse against Ghana. He shanked shots, shied away from the ball, and deferred to much lesser players. In between those two very aweful performances, LD had a good game against italy just like the whole team.

    This tournament epitomized his career. I'd suggest that his ability to drift shutting on and off in MLS contributed to his uneven play. His first stint at Leverkusen taught him a little bit about how to be a professional. His failures the second time and at Bayern helped him realize the issues with his approach to the game. He was then able to finally put it together for short stints at Everton. LD was like a box of chocolates.
     
    Patrick167 repped this.
  10. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    Watford obviously plays a tougher schedule.

    Have you ever watched Liverpool or Man City train?

    Why is it that you think your americanized NCAA, HS, and club soccer views are better than what everyone in the rest of world does? Where are these top players in lesser leagues? Why have the MLS lifers been downright average with the exception of a few outliers? Your views are naive beyond belief.
     
    Patrick167 and yurch10 repped this.
  11. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #886 juvechelsea, Oct 23, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2019
    Ok, here is the comprehensive dismissal of the article. There are, I believe, 8 Americans signed to EPL sides right now. Scott and Yedlin at Newcastle, CP and Miazga at CFC, CCV at Spurs, Mixx, Steffen, and ??? at City. As I am sure you are already jumping in, wait, x, y, and z aren't actually at those clubs. Which would be my point. I believe it nets out as 1 starter and 1 sub from 8 people. The starter is on a team in the relegation zone, and he helped allow a key goal in a recent competitive international. A sane human being would question their objective odds. This is provable on its face. The players are where they are. The outcomes are what they are. Everything else is spin.

    Enter the evergreen contrarian economics piece, trying to argue against that dark nighttime background that the sun is out. Except it has no predictive value for those 8 players. When will I know whether the study works for me? Not before the fact. The study treats the 8 coming in the same whether they are to be hailed as genius or condemned as failures and sold away. By its own terms, if I am successful, it bandwagons me and uses me to claim I contribute to international success. But if I am one of the 6 who end up loaned out or gone, If not, it sweeps my data under the rug or calls me a negative outcome.

    Is that any value to a player coming in, making his choice? No. It's an after the fact paean to the successful. Without acknowledging that under UK work permit rules, you aren't there unless you can either present the right passport, or already start for a national team of high rank.

    An additional fallacy is the notion that proximity to success rubs off. All 8 of these players signed up for good teams. They should all have proximity. But in reality some stick and some don't. The study then comes in at the end and says success breeds success, except it clearly can't, because at the best teams players get flushed every year, and in terms of our 8 man cohort, some succeed, some don't. So the mechanism you claim rubs off, doesn't actually work. Per the numbers for every CP there are Scott, CCV, and Miazga. 1 in 4. And they will all start each summer rubbing the same prestige shoulders before being mostly loaned out.

    No, what you're doing here is blaming the players. Well, see, he wasn't very good, so it didn't rub off, so he got dismissed. Except at that point you're basically saying that it wasn't the rubbing, it was the talent coming in. That at a big club the good players who stay around correlate to world cup success teams. Duh. You don't say. Except what you were trying to argue is this should rub off on everyone who tries, when that is demonstrably false in many cases. In a better NT time period, it might be "truer," but for your theory to work as beforehand prediction it needs to tell me which strategy works before I start. This instead bandwagons my outcome after it's all done. Predicts nothing, proves nothing. Simply says that success tends to follow the elite player around, to both club and country. DUH.

    What you are neglecting is that the likely differentiator would be before the fact development work, the level of the player we send out. As with Lewandowski, Hazard, etc., if you turn out well domestically, Europe will come calling. Some moron will then cite this study to claim Europe made a pre-existing national player of the year into what they are, as opposed to Europe waved around a checkbook to aggregate most of the world's talent.

    I mean, I believe we are sending more players to England now than in the golden years and yet this is a NT down period. You can say, well, then we had Friedel, and now we have Yedlin, but that kind of says talent will win out. But you were really saying the more players we put in the machine the better our team should come out, and that's not really true, is it?

    Thanks for playing. I am bored of discussing this shoddy pro market study, which if you'd read closely spent the whole first chunk discussing anything but soccer, a hint of ideology. The outcomes are in practice right now the opposite of what the study encourages, and we will not know before the fact which set of expeditionary players will get the olive crowns, even in an upturn. This is for meritocracy fanboys and provides no predictability to an actual player about to make a choice.
     
  12. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    Staying in MLS almost guarantees that our better players will only be transferred to deep pocketed teams where they are unlikely to play for their own team and more likely to be loaned out.

    Why? Because those are the only teams willing to pay the required high prices for unproven players. The mid-level teams that we all prefer our rising players to go to are generally looking for low-priced younger talents that they can further develop and then sell at a higher price.
     
    Patrick167 repped this.
  13. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #888 juvechelsea, Oct 23, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2019
    Re WC 06, we had a crap defense and a past it 10 who would get stripped. The game that looked good was Italy because unlike the other aggressive teams, Italy is content to sit back in their defensive shell and then counter. That relative passivity matched up well with us, giving us some room to move the ball forward and meaning when they won the ball it was deeper in their end. The teams that went after us destroyed us. Italy bogged down into a mutually shorthanded brawl and we did enough.

    Current comparison: Mexico and Uruguay. The team that stood on our neck on our end kicked our butt. The team that conceded space let us tie them. The coach then held up Uruguay as progress when we can now clearly see it's about how you press our team.

    Landon was widely known as Landycakes for years. Arena may have yelled at him this time for being soft, but it was an enduring trait, and his initial pro developer was BL. I decline to set this at the feet of SJ or LA. It was what he was. And kind of like Yedlin with defense, he only ever slightly improved this. You wanted him for offense. The price of admission was what I call "Ole" defense where the matador gets out of the way of the attacker.

    Last, trying to give big clubs credit for him at 2010 is silly. Ever considered we just had a softer draw? Slovenia Algeria England? And we had to go down to the last minute on Algeria to advance? And then lost to the same Ghana team as 2006? Isn't this the whole reason that the pro JK bunch were like, dude, we've plateaued, we need someone to shake things up to get different results? Isn't that why BB despite advancing was subject to JK rumors right until his disaster GC 2011, at which point they officially pulled the plug?

    I say this in part because the whole snob mentality now ascendant is born of that time period and argument. We always had Euro soccer fans who snubbed MLS. But they had no control of the team. After this point they began to get some. To then act like it was a high water mark led by Landon making a loan stint is laughable.
     
  14. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    I think Bobby Wood is an over-achieving success, not a failure. He would be far less wealthy if he had stayed in MLS. IMO, his issue is injury - maybe he should have listened to Timmy Chandler but part of the reason I like Bobby so much is that he always leaves it out on the pitch.

    I also think that this applies to Bradley at TFC: you think they wanted to keep him and not Giovinco this year? Where will Mike play next year and for how much?

    I have no problem with this - if you far overshoot your level and push for a club that's way over your head, that's a bad call. The prospect and his family/advisors need to be make a sensible decision - are you are high ceiling prospect or not? if it's the latter, stay at home or quite frankly, go to college......Jordan Morris isn't and will never be the highest paid classmate of his Stanford class.....

    Given that many of our elite prospects have traditionally been more athletic than technical, it's a sink-or-swim mentality as they'll quickly see that being Marvell Wynne fast doesn't amount to much at real programs.

    Question: do you think that Pulisic and/or Weston would be better, worse or the same quality of player if they had stayed at Philly, FCD instead of heading abroad?
     
  15. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    After the effing Canada game, on the effing Canada thread, am I really still seeing people talking up the idea that being fast doesn't amount to much?? Are you serious??? This is one hubris of the snobs wrapped in a little bow, that speed is overrated. You just got your head handed you by a team with basically nothing but effort and speed. Please.

    This is we have bought into an idea that the old model of player that had some success is now passe. The new version is worse.

    Does Pulisic strike you as slow? McKennie? Adams? Morris?

    To me the objective anchors dragging behind the team are the aged and slow Bradley, the unathletic Trapp, slow Brooks, slow Ream, players like that.

    Soccer is a running game, please do not preach foolishness.
     
  16. gogorath

    gogorath Member+

    None
    United States
    May 12, 2019
    I agree with you here. Speed kills. It's true in almost every sport, and soccer is no exception.

    Somewhere along the line the idea that we were losing because our players were more athletic than skilled became so much gospel that ... instead of training fast people so they have more skills, people decided speed (or other athletic tools) weren't valuable.
     
  17. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    who’s saying that speed isn’t important?
     
  18. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    fwiw I am not a troll, I tell my truth. People like what I say on other topics. I just am ruffling feathers on this topic because one undercurrent of US soccer is fans moaning about the coach but meanwhile buying into his underlying theories, without seeing the contradictions.

    JK loved this big club thing. The players who bucked his theory were the ones who found renewed country and club success in what otherwise turned into a down period.

    fwiw2 i am amused that the pro euro snobs are also often opposed to my experimental ideas, which quite often fish in the pond right behind their euro cottage. this is where one can see that it's kind of an ubermensch club = merit thing, where they will advance the same discredited big club players over and over eg Yedlin, as opposed to presenting a more balanced argument that europe and other places might offer treasures under less obvious rocks. ironically this would dovetail with their anti MLS theories, but it wouldn't support as well their fanboying of the elite few leagues. if there were interesting players in the championship, B.2, age group teams, denmark, etc. etc.

    thing being scouting and performance wise the big leagues are the well trod path where we know all that we can know. ironically in many ways you have won, we start several people who don't earn it, and kind of settle to do so knowing the negatives, arguing like you do that these uber-mensch at the top rungs are simply the meritocracy winners. give up, you've won, and it doesn't look pretty.
     
    TOAzer repped this.
  19. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #894 juvechelsea, Oct 23, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2019
    don't twist my words and then argue you didn't say how you misquote me. quote me. i basically tracked the verbiage you used. you said, "Given that many of our elite prospects have traditionally been more athletic than technical, it's a sink-or-swim mentality as they'll quickly see that being Marvell Wynne fast doesn't amount to much at real programs."

    this is the international soccer thread. it sometimes confuses with the big club thread, but it's the other. we just got beat by a pure speed team that was actually offensively inefficient and not that technical. so, what, are we going to talk big clubs instead, which would arguably lead us down the path that just screwed us? being unable to stay with, what, 2 particular Canadians?

    fwiw most big clubs aren't glacially slow. they would definitely favor the fast and technical over the merely fast. but they would also probably favor them over the merely technical. more often than not if jozy loses out, it's not to some slowpoke, it's to defoe who is as fast or faster. don't sell bs.

    i don't think we have m/any oduro or eddie johnson types "running" around. going back to average skill being up, if we have a speed guy it's usually more like morris or weah now. yedlin and dest are two of the few fast and dumb guys we have.

    my dynamo have had guys come over from La Liga 2 who couldn't handle MLS' speed of play. couldn't separate on offense. couldn't stay with on defense. i am sure they were fairly technical guys.

    i think one of the key lessons of the moment, when people had thought that on average we were a more skilled team than before, is of how much skill is required to be a skill player or a skill team. we have backed off on pure speed while not being all that skilled. we embrace skill and passivity as an end while not being that good at them. this is the danger of your theory.
     
  20. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    lol. I had no idea you meant me!

    I am a huge believer in speed and athleticism as defining factors for the USMNT. I can’t stand that we’re trying to move to a more technical style at the expense of athleticism, particularly by relying on minor league players who aren’t technically outstanding at the international level.

    the point I was making wrt Wynn is not that speed isn’t important but that the reason to go to great programs (that don’t exist here) is that you can’t just get by with speed/athleticism alone like you can at a lower level. You will have to develop that other side and when elite USMNT eligible athletes develop good enough technical skills as compared to major league players, that’s when we’ll be truly competitive as a national team.
     
  21. jmplautz

    jmplautz Member

    Jul 28, 2007
    Madison
    The Italians also remarked at how good Donovan was in that game. There were Italian defenders proclaiming him the most influential player in the game. He's the reason the Italians removed Totti and inserted Gattuso.
     
    50/50 Ball repped this.
  22. 50/50 Ball

    50/50 Ball Member+

    Sep 6, 2006
    USA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Landon was more than good against Italy. I hoped it was the start of a run of form but it was not to be. I don't memory hole the great game

    A lot of the criticism was over the top.Landon didn't have the tournament that people expected. People thought that the young player of the 2002 edition was going to boss the 2006 edition. Memories are very result dependent. Had the US beat a very beatable Ghana and advanced to the KOs it would be more like the 2009 Confed Cup in memory. The US got boat raced in South Africa by Italy ala Czech Republic but made the KOs and the final so nobody talks about Italy and Rossi anymore.
     
  23. 50/50 Ball

    50/50 Ball Member+

    Sep 6, 2006
    USA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The Landycakes thing was Eurosnob nonsense from the beginning The guy was an ironman who played a role in basically every notable USMNT success for a decade plus. People were mad that he didn't follow their FIFA career mode dreams.
     
    Grumpy in LA repped this.
  24. ChicagoVT

    ChicagoVT Member

    United States
    Jun 26, 2019
    I think this a culmination of frustration about the USMNT team and USSF. This game just proves that we have made no improvement from 2 yrs ago. If anything we have regressed. Sure, Canada has a pretty good team right now but, there is no excuse to look as poor as we did.
     
    Patrick167 repped this.
  25. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #900 juvechelsea, Oct 23, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2019
    i think it's a scheduling quirk that lessens the blow. tnt had finality because it was the final game of that round. this is the second of 4. we live to fight another day. its full impact will not be felt until after the 3rd game, when we play canada again and set much of our path, or until the 4th game, when any tiebreaker will kick in. in that sense it's like guatemala where the red warning lights are flashing but if we can escape certain people will make excuses. and then next round will likely expose the same issues with a vengeance.

    as it stands, we can only advance on a tiebreaker with 2 wins from the remaining 2, and i don't know if people realize that. they max out at running the table, 9 if they lose. we max out at 9 if we win everything. if we tie or lose to canada at home they advance and we don't. if we win out we still have to exceed them on the goal difference tiebreaker because their current points = our max points.

    i also think that some of the blase attitude is the notion that FIFA rank makes us invincible given how qualifying has been structured. but that too is laden with this sort of "we will escape" arrogance. thing being this game should be heeded because without changes when this shifts from canada to mexico CR Honduras etc. it will only get worse. let's say we advance to NL and qualify to the hex wounded like this. and then what?

    i also think fans tend to forget tnt had tied us away in the semi round last time. that had me scared before we even showed up, much less how the game went. if they won their games and we played to prior form we were going to squeak in on a tiebreaker. and then we didn't do that. but as someone has pointed out, we haven't won a game that counts, away, in years. and people may be as with tnt already pocketing the cuba away game where we may in fact need several goals for differential.

    also, i think if canada wins both that will be a double tap where tnt was a one-off.

    also, i think people saying canada is no big whoop are basically ignoring the recent lldwl form, and the way the games went end of last year. this is just one game only works if you hold it in isolation on purpose. if not it's a run of form that would have probably gotten prior coaches fired. like i pointed out, from games this year, berhalter would be 1-4-0 against Mexico Jamaica Canada in the top 7 that may be in the hex.
     

Share This Page