Most Mexican Americans have chosen to play for the US. One of the few I can remember losing that mattered was Miguel Ponce.
I wonder what people see as our all star team aggregated from the latest youth tourney's, i.e. last two u17/20 and forgetting about maturity just for fun. for me, going with 5 subs (to make an 18 with 3 gk's) , I'd go with ---------------------sargent--pulisic ----adams---Carleton-Durkin--Delgado--lennon --------------glad-----epb----miazga ---------------------gk: Klinsmann subs: Weah, Booth, CCV, Lindsay, Hyndman* *that 5th sub was hard. Polster and Trapp are better mids than Hyndman but I needed a scoring forward and couldn't think of one. This exercise for me led to this conclusion: We continue looking vulnerable at GK. We have sturdy cb squad but it doesn't run deep. We have a large pool of mids but I worry most about our coaching staff picking the right ones We have one good cf and one top class forward. We may want to concentrate on developing a scoring midfield, like putting 5 mids in there with guys like Adams and Lennon who can score on the wb's. Also it makes Williams more valuable because he can score from yard. We also have to think about developing guys like Ramirez who will be over 30 in 2022 but still mite be serviceable.
Most haven't been good enough for Mexico. Edwin Lara and Efrain Alvarez have been. We'll lose some, but we'll get the Euromericans as well.
Look at the top 4 Champions League clubs in each of the top 4 leagues (Germany, Spain, Italy, England). There isn’t a single Mexican on any of those clubs. Yet there are 1 or 2 Argentines on almost every one. Why is that given Argentina’s population is 1/3 of Mexico? Something to think about
Which sorta makes sense considering they grow up here, not there. Yeah, more likely to like soccer than most groups of people in the US, but that doesn't mean that they won't just gravitate towards baseball, football, and basketball like most kids in the US.
Bringing this quote in from the QF PBP thread because I think it hints at the themes from this one. I wanted to add this: In qualification the US U-17's performed like this: Group Stage: USA 5 Jamaica 0 USA 4 Mexico 3 (and one of Mexico's goals was an own goal in the 92nd minute) USA 1 El Salvador 0 Based on the starting XI, the El Salvador game involved us rolling out our bench. Classification Stage: USA 3 Honduras 0 USA 6 Cuba 2 Final: USA 1 Mexico 1 (again, the US allowed a goal late, this time a crusher in the 92nd minute). Mexico won on PK's. In terms of game performance with counting stats: USA 5 Wins 0 losses 1 tie (lost on PK's in the final) Goals For: 20 Goals Against: 6 (one being an own goal) Goal Difference: +14 Mexico did beat us in the final thanks to a 92nd minute injury time goal sending them to a PK win, but otoh, in head to head, the US Scored 5 goals against Mexico, and Mexico scored 2 in the full 90 minutes, an additional own goal, and goal were scored in injury time minutes after the full 90 were passed. In terms of performance at the U-17 World Cup: USA: 3-0 over India 1-0 over GHana 1-3 loss to Colombia 5-0 over Paraguay 1-4 loss to England 3 wins 2 losses 0 draws: 11 goals for 7 against: +4 GD Mexico: 1-1 draw with Iraq 2-3 loss to England 0-0 draw with Chile 1-2 loss to Iran 0 wins 2 losses 2 draws: 4 goals for 6 against: -2 GD Honduras: 1-6 loss to Japan 5-0 over New Caledonia 1-5 loss to France (it pays to have a New Caldeonia in your group to get a third place ticket off GD) 0-3 loss to Brazil So for people having issues, melting down, thinking WC '22 is at risk (and who knows it might be), you won't find evidence that it is based upon our U-20 Results (Concacaf Champ, Quarterfinalists at World Cup losing to eventual runner up in Extra Time), or our U-17 Results (should have been Concacaf Champs (outplaying Mexico head to head in qualification) but gagged in injury time so scoreboard for Mexico there), outplayed the region overall at the U-17 World Cup with a quarterfinal trip, 3 victories, two over strong teams in group winner Paraguay and fellow quarterfinalist Ghana, and a +4 GD, as compared to Mexico's winless performance in an easier group, a -2 GD, and Honduras being blasted out of the tournament after getting a gift ticket to the knockouts (only matches against teams that had any business at the tournament they lost 6-1, 5-1 and 3-0 for a GD overall of -7 (and -13 if you drop the win over New Caledonia). So just looking at regional performance, both our U-20's and our U-17's were the best in concacaf in 2017. Suggesting to me that our kids born between 1997 and about 2001 appear to be better than the rest of the regions kids in those years. If they can stay healthy, it bodes pretty well for Qatar '22, and hopefully if we win it North America+Mexico '26. I think we've got a pretty good chance of seeing somewhere between a high of 8-10 guys from these two classes, to a low of 5 being contributors on the USMNT going forward. Pretty good after the dire stretch 2008-2013. We just need our 2015 U-20's to get healthy and pick it up.
I don't see it that way. I see it as how did they play, how did they perform, how did the kids look overall. We dominated qualifying, owning Mexico in the group stage (a 4-3 win, but Mexico got an own goal gifted to them in the 92nd minute, that was the most comprehensive performance I've ever seen our youth teams put together against a Mexican youth side), we did lose on PK's in the final after giving up a gut punch equalizer in the 92nd so that's a negative. But to me the big positive is that we essentially saw our kids do something they've struggled to do in regional qualifying for the olympics and in youth world cups repeatedly since 2009 and that's dominate. We stomped Jamaica 5-0 Outscored Mexico 4-2 while giving them an own goal in the 92nd to make it look closer than it was. Beat El Salvador 1-0 with our reserves. Beat Honduras 3-0 Beat Cuba 6-2 Then lost in the final 1-1 on penalties. That was an outstanding performance. In the Cup we also produced 3 wins and 2 losses, and 2 of our 3 wins were against excellent teams (Ghana and Paraguay). The loss to England was disappointing, but many were worried about what might transpire after the injuries and cards and some head scratching coaching decisions put a lineup out their that was lacking 3 or 4 key starters. So to me, we were a top team in the tournament, the only teams that definitely looked better from what I could see were England, France, Brazil, and Spain. Mali lost to Paraguay so not sure what that means with regards to quarterfinalist Mali, we did get whipped by Colombia, but we also came in not desperate for a result which played a role in that. For me, the kids themselves were excellent in a regional sense, and to my mind, were right there with the '99's and the '15's as our best ever. I recognize that the '15's crashed out ugly, but they were in the group of death and ended up losing to the eventual champions Nigeria, and to the hosts Chile, no sin in that. What matters for me is this group looks like it has 5-7 kids who have a legit chance of being contributors or eventual starters if everything turns out okay. With the passage of time, injuries, and player issues, some of those 5-7 guys just won't make it, and maybe it gets winnowed down to 2-3 or 3-4 total, but compare that to the 2009, 2011, and 2013 classes and it's a huge difference. It's an exciting group that has shown well enough to get overseas interest very soon, if not already (in the case of Weah, and Sargent).
The chuckleheads at the ringer did, but other than that, probably nobody. I just wanted a quarterfinal run with a legit chance at the semi's and we had that. Agree on the latter point, the fact that we had, was it zero Californian's on the roster is patently absurd. I'm not arguing for quota's, just emphasizing that if ew had no Californian's on the roster, it doesn't mean that there weren't Californians that were good enough, it means our scouting in California is dog manure, and we also clearly left some guys we shouldn't have that we did scout. California is a massive hot bed of soccer talent, absolutely massive, nobody is going to tell me 2000-2001 was a down 18 months or so for soccer players in Cali. That's nonsense, so for the first time in a while, I agree w/a post of yours. Can't speak to Texas as I don't know the region at all.
I think you're underselling a lot of guys, though reasonably so in the sense that all of these players have holes here or there, then again that isn't all that unusual with 16 and 17 year olds, they've got time to refine their game, grow if we're lucky or flesh out with diet and training regimes. I'm very excited about a bunch of them beyond Sargent: really like Carleton, Durkin, Dest, liked what I saw of Goslin (I think it was Goslin, mixing up names), and Acosta and a few others who are slipping my mind. Throughout the tournament I felt like there were around 6 or 7 guys who look like they could make it if they work on their games, can stay healthy and get quality coaching. The average is 2-3 historically so maybe that happens again, but I think like 2015, this generation has a chance to be one of the best we've ever had when all is said and done. It's a long argument in the end and we won't really have a good reading on this till around 2022-2024 so it's going to be an interesting 4-6 years.
Great post. I would just add that Hackworth could not have made worse decisions in that PK loss to Mexico.
It's good to see the zoom out function used once in while, too Looking at how Mexico did vs. US kinda confirmed to me what I suspected about our team in '17. Mexico's games were closer, suggesting they were more flexible and able to adjust mid game. We had some big wins then big losses. While Colombia and England shared the property of athleticism and size, they took different routes in beating USA. Colombia went after our spread-out wingers, fullbacks 1 v 1 to get us to cough the ball up whereas England sat in the kind of formation Costa Rica used, waiting for the juicy morsel to fall centrally and spring a counter against outnumbered cb's with fullbacks out of the play, right up the middle. US Soccer has to sit down and ask themselves what sense it makes to designate the 4 man back line as the default formation after recent results. Guys like Curly Doyle at MLS soccer site talks about the "modern formation" pushing the fullbacks up. I think we have to get away from this. It's a liablility on the balance sheet. It was weird seeing Gloster motioning 3 of our guys into the box for a long throw in towards the end of the England game, where they stood around looking at 9 Englishmen all taller than them. In went the throw and nobody even jumped.
Our senior team could have used Delgado and Roldan - probably Jonathan Gonzalez, too, the way things turned out. . Guys like that aren't going to jump out at you but they play as a team and grind opponents into dust over 90' and and unfortunately for guys like Nagbe, Bradley and Acosta, 90' is how long a match lasts.
I appreciate your thoughtful analysis and the breadth of your knowledge but I disagree that Sands had a bad tournament. Despite being played out of position he made a lot of key plays throughout and, even with his mistakes in the last game, he prevented another goal when Garces was beat.
Hudson odoi burned Watts and Sands stepped in front. It was the England game so Durkin was suspended.
Goslin was suspended, Durkin started. I know its hard to keep up with which Chris is which, I think there are three on the team lol. I now remember the play, the one at the beginning of the game. He said Garces was beat, which is why I thought it was the sequence in the second half where he was actually beat, and Durkin cleared it right before it was going in. The one that Sands blocked was in front of goal, no clue if Garces had it covered or not IMO, I don't think we got a good enough angle to tell that.
Yeah, I could well be confusing the two plays as well. I just thought had a pretty good tournament all in all.
It is the bar. And, the US should continue playing soccer. The youth national team programs should stop measuring themselves by how many NCAA offers their participants receive, how many become professionals, or even senior international team players. All of those things are swell. None of them meet the bar. You can do all those things and not create a pipeline of talent that makes your national team competitive against the very best teams in the world. In fact, we have watched the US youth teams do just that since Landon Donovan's class of 1999 (the only time, not coincidentally, the US was competitive on both talent and results). This class was supposedly the most talented class of US players since 1999. And a lot of people here and in US Soccer were/remain pretty excited about it. And this class just got beat by better soccer players. So why keep playing? Because it is important to measure yourself against the bar. It is just as important to be honest about where you stand in relation to it. The US just learned that even with this hyped up class, it still has a ways to go.
Just out of curiosity, what do you think the main difference is between a quarterfinal loss and a quarterfinal win? Coaching, development, or something else? What set Donovan's class apart to the extent that you believe we have regressed?
People were excited about the class because it is always measured in relation to what has been our standard. I suppose some people were delusional that it could rival the elite talent factories of France, Germany or Spain but they were just crazy if so.
The team was much better than Paraguay on one day and not as good as England on another. The 5-0 over Paraguay was a great result and our best players in this age group played their best. At this level, Paraguay was one of the best South American teams and had been rolling in the tournament. The England match just showed that EPL academies have turned their 17 year olds into almost finished products while MLS kids are all over the map in their development. The top 10 players on the pitch might have been 5-5 or 4-6 USA/England. But their next 15 were probably better than Gloster or more experienced and polished than Booth. Soccer is a weak link game and our FBs were a massive weak link. Akinola and Ferri also were not good enough in possession. If the idea of the U17 WC is to show yourself and get a jump on your professional career, then I think the USA did the job. Sargent (but he had already done it), Weah, Carleton, Sands, and Durkin all showed very well. There is no way we are getting 5 NT starters from one U17 team, but if 3-4 come good, that is a great birth year. Many of the above already have contracts in MLS. MLS has not sold a young American to another league since Miazga. it just doesn't happen. Players and agents have figured out you have to literally let your contract expire to get out. That is how EPB and Hamid got out. Sargent and Weah bypassed MLS. I wonder if Carleton wishes he hadn't signed. Does anyone know what his deal is? He has to have interest. He by far has had his stock climb the most with the Paraguay and even England game. He showed the toughness and skill to be in the middle of the park. He must have caught some eyes; but can he extract himself from MLS? Will he get an PT or will it be an EPB situation where he plays for Charleston and loses 2 years of prime development? This is the only question coming out of this tournament. I don't know why people here discount Weah. He seems to have added inches and muscle since Qualifying. He was playing out of position and was not great defensively. I doubt he will be asked to play much defense by club and national teams going forward. I think he might be playing on the best club out of all these players in three years (sold or on loan from PSG).
I don't like the way that Hackworth or Ramos tries to play. If that is the vision for the future, we will continue to leave behind the technical players for the athletic only types. Leave behind Llanez and Yueill but bring Williamson and Akinola. I thought Hackworth was ok, what worked against Paraguay didn't against England. But his roster was terrible. I'm glad Bradenton has closed, it is time. These coaches get too wedded to these players and never drop them. There has to be some CBs some where? Did we really need all those extra forwards when the same four played almost every minute and injuries, illness, and form decimated the defense? But I'm glad he didn't try to bunker against Paraguay or England like Richie Williams. Put the kids out, let them play. We just were short on good players at all positions. You could see it in the first minutes against England when Watts just blind clears it with no pressure (Matt Besler special) and just gives the ball back to England.