While I agree with the sentiment in general, I do think too that Pulisic is a bit of an anomaly in general in most countries. The Kid went from high school soccer to 1st team squad of a Champions League team in less than a year. (with a combined 15 matches during that period with the BvB U-17s and U-19s). BvB definitely got him prepared for the first team, but to be able to rise that quickly and that far, well I think he defies the normal expectations.
I'm amazed Shaq Moore might get some apps in La Liga this season. His touch was horrendous with the youth teams. They must have worked with him big time. Spain is certainly not a bad place to work on that weakness.
Oh...................there's no doubt that from a talent perspective Pulisic is a big-time outlier. Even if Pulisic was a born-and-bred German, his path to the Dortmund first team was remarkable. Expecting other prospects to take that path is unrealistic. Most of our youngsters that sign in Europe are going to take a slow and steady rise up the ladder, and not the BOOM BREAKOUT with a Champions League squad that Pulisic did. We can look at Donovan's struggles to get playing time with Leverkusen as an example of that. We can actually think about Weston McKennie in this way. How long was Weston McKennie at Schalke before he made his first team debut? He signed his contract in August of 2016 and made his pro debut in the Bundesliga in May of 2017. So he was there less than a year, and he was actually injured for part of that time. And yet folks continuously bash domestic development programs and assume our youngsters are just sprinkled with magical European pixie dust when they get over there. The Bundesliga clubs really seem to want the youngsters that we're producing, while some on this board continue to bash the talent we're producing. [They don't seem particularly enthused about signing MLS adult professionals, but they sure do want our 16-18 year olds.]
Most observers are unaware of the work and visa restrictions that prevent US players from signing abroad. The only real way to improve the quality of the player pool is by improving the domestic league (mls). I think that Bruce is making a statement with Kellyn Acosta. I think he's saying to mls players and management that the usmnt wants homegrown talent. He's saying that this is where US soccer is going.
If he is saying it I think more and more players are not listening. Acosta was recently quoted he as saying he wants to go to Europe sooner rather than later. Sargent becomes a pro the day he turns 18 in Europe. More and more of our young players are trailing in Europe, all one needs to see is the huge yanks abroad thread to know that this is true.
I have said this before, so apologies if it sounds like I am harping. But a reminder every once in a while might be helpful. Youth development is a numbers game. Take a pool of 1,000 elite 14 year olds. It will typically take 10 prospects to develop one solid pro. 100 to develop a consistent starter. 200 to develop a star. The numbers may not be perfect, but they usually are not far off. Great coaching can cut that down somewhere between 25-50% by knowing what to look for and how to develop it. The rest is on the players and almost an unquantifiable amount of other variables. That the biggest change in recent years is a bigger player pool getting developed is a really important thing. The other huge change is that smart European teams are shopping for kids right at the MLS drop off point - around 17 years old. Clubs like Schalke know they can take those kids with a good attitude and technical base, refine their techniques and teach them the tactical side of the game. Get them for free, sell them for profit, rinse and repeat.
Yup. More DA academies. More USL minutes. More foreign coaches finding spots for young players abroad. More scouting. More youth tournaments. More total kids playing in a competitive environment and more European/Mexican teams willing to sign them. As our total pool grows the number of eventual above average players should also rise.
I agree with this and I do agree that we are seeing some improvement... But, we are not yet seeing a radical shift either; which will take time anyways. Personally, I believe the opposite of those who say expansion dilutes the pool. I argue that we've been operating at maybe 30% capacity considering what we need is to expand the sport in every corner we can. So, in that regard, we are moving in a positive direction with expansion. Ideally, we need to be able to look at the map of the US and say every place is covered. I would like to see the quality of coaching improve. Talking about how we could invest into our program and that needs to be the first step. We need advance coaching licensing for youth coaches. Next, MLS/USSF still needs to take steps to help grow development in that 18-22 age. One rule I would argue for is that all HGP are forever cap exempt and a team's roster must at least be a certain percentage of HGP. Moreover, a rule where teams cannot hold youths hostage; a la Eric Palmer-Brown at SKC. There needs to be a rule that either Vermes plays EPB or has to loan him out to play X amount of minutes a season. We're moving in the right direction, but I'm not ready to celebrate yet.
I believe the implication is that these clubs lock up the players around 17 and bring them over for training stints, signing them when they turn 18. We've seen a number of these players pop up in Germany for extended spells, some dropping out of club soccer and others continuing on. At least for now, there's no FIFA rule against this.
I don't see how you can really operate a league under those criteria especially the last point. How do you determine if a coach is holding a player hostage? What if the player is Coy Craft and not Eric Palmer-Brown? What if the player is Bryan Reynolds? I don't see how you can force such an arbitrary rule on teams. Also allowing a HGP to be salary exempt forever limits the players ability to move overseas. Really good HGP like Acosta would be worth exponential amounts of money to the club. Way more than they could get with a transfer. They player could leave once their contract ran out, but you are creating an incentive to pay way over value wages to keep players. I do think you should get an exempt period like it is now and that is should probably prorate out to full salary by the time the player turns 24 or 25. Requiring a certain percentage of HPG likely encourages signing HPG players before they are ready more than anything and hurt clubs in small markets. Do think lowering the International Slots would be a good idea because it is so easy for guys to get Green Cards. I could see a quota of U23 American per team perhaps, but rules like this likely end up flooding the bottom of their roster with these type of players and they rarely play anyway, so you don't make a big impact.
#1. U23 will play XXX amount of minutes (say 1000 minutes for hypothetical argument). If a team cannot meet those minutes, they must acquire a loan where the player can play those amount of minutes, including in loan to another MLS team, NASL, USL, .. Potential penalties could include team pays a fine or the player can terminate the contract with his current club and resign with another club of his choosing. #2. How? Ultimately, a player is going to decide if they want to go abroad or not. If FC Dallas say sell Kellyn Acosta, then they should be able to keep that transfer money. That seems like good enough incentive. Moreover, teams should be incentived to have the best academies because they're not endanger of losing their investment. #3. Teams can play their HGP on their reserve teams if needed in USL.
IT's been a disappointing summer on the prospect front. A lot of guys will advance by taking the loan a division down, but for the majority, that will be their level for the near future, and maybe their whole career. A year ago, I was really hopeful for Wright, Perez and CCV. Now I wonder if all of those guys are headed for Jonathan Spector-y careers. If we get just one of those guys back to a productive career at the parent club, that would be more than we should expect. While I still think we have an unusual batch of good talent (for the USMNT) in the youth ranks, a lot more than the current prime-age pool, I'm thinking more and more that we might have to maximize our dual national front to be competitive at the WC, much more so than I was hoping. If we could snatch Tillman and Shashoua, have McKennie develop to starting level at Schalke, have Carleton and Sargent reach potential, and add them to Pulisic that looks like a potentially formidable front 6. Palmer-Brown, Brooks and two-ish wide backs, maybe Yedlin as one, Acosta as the other. We'll see what the deal is at keeper, but we know that's a crapshoot in terms of going from youth to quality starter. And even if we get that team in place and it reaches something close to its potential, what are we going to do for a bench?
Just my opinion, but I'd suggest forming your own opinion on these players, and not letting what a team does with their playing time dictate how good or bad they are.
I firmly believe at the end of the season we will all say Shaq Moore is the breakout youngster this year.
Russia might be the last time we hear about Chandler. And then Yedlin and a bunch of unknowns (hopefully no Zusi, Lichaj). Not a disaster area like LB but still.
Why would it be? Is he going to quit like Johnson? Yedlin and Chandler is really solid. Those are two of our 10 best players on club form from the past season. Then you got Cameron, Johnson who both fill in well at that position. RB is not a position I really worry about that much for the next few years. LB, OTOH, yes, very worried. Jorge Villafana doesn't even start in LigaMX, yet starts for our NT. I do think you have a point. Long term, I worry a lot more about RB than LB, but I thought this discussion wasn't really for that far into the future.
Yes, for now we are OK. But after Russia: Johnson is gone; Chandler isn't playing in Central America, 32 by Katar, gone; Cameron will be too old to play FB, not his best position anyway. And Yedlin although not fragile, but not super resilient either. Moore, Fossey, whoever else might have a chance.
We've got Yedlin... which he's a huge plus. IMO, would have an underrated case as being our biggest game changer (for the record, I'm not saying definitively he's our best player but he's got a case). Then, there's Chandler... which he should be a huge upgrade, but there's something bizarre going on there with translating that to national team performance. Plus, he's injury prone. Next up, Graham Zusi, who, IMO, is a upgraded version of Brad Evans from last cycle. Someone who can serve, in case of an emergency but is not going to set the world on fire. Eric Lichaj should be a strong contender, although he did seem to make some rookie mistakes in the Gold Cup. That said, those mistakes look like they're something he can learn from not from a lack of ability. Also, he may need slide over to LB... which I hope he gets some time at. After these four, who? It's extemely bleak.
You got some candidates for the next few years though. Yedlin, Chandler, Cameron, FJ, Lichaj. We don't have great depth at many positions, so you could really say one guy gets injured and we are in trouble at any position (maybe besides CB). Thats how it is with a very average NT. But compared to what we have at other positions, I think our RB depth right now is pretty good.
C'mon, Chandler isn't anything until he carries over his club performances to the national team. He's the same or worse than, I don't know, Nick Lima. Lima is at least showing promise and then not having a chance to prove he's fool's gold. How many chances does Chandler need to get before he's deemed unreliable? Short-term I'm more worried because we're throwing out the name Timothy Chandler, who we should dare not speak right now when it comes to trying to win games. Long-term we should be fine at rb with plenty of prospects circulating, i.e.: Moore, Lima, Fossey, Olosunde, Adams, Polster, (Rosenberry), (Hollingshead), etc. There should be a couple hits in there, adding to Yedlin already in the fold. As far as LB, you've determined Villafana isn't starting in LigaMX already after two games at the beginning of the season, huh. That's not overreacting. Some players who played with the U.S. in GC and joined their teams late aren't starting yet because they needed to rebuild chemistry with their teammates and trust with the manager. It's boiler plate. Could at least wait until several games in to make that determination he's not a starter in LigaMX. And unlike Chandler, he hasn't been a putz for the national team. He's come up big in the bigger games he's played in. That means he should add to the comfort at the lb position in the interim, while Chandler detracts from it at rb. Jorge will be 32-33, so I don't know if he does that for Qatar however. Frankly I'm satisfied with the fb position. Maybe that's because of the 2010 perspective where Jonathan Bornstein and Carlos Bocanegra were our starters. Also, we have versatile players and don't automatically need two true fb's at each position. LB could become a problem again in Qatar with Johnson and maybe Villafana out.