I’m of the opinion that any player giving the ball away in his own end is a problem, but I agree that it’s more important for a CM because he’s going to be in those positions more often. As I went back and watched, that was a big problem for Green against France. I don’t really agree that Carleton has made this big jump recently. I am of the opinion that he looks more like the player I know him to be now than he did before. But I still think the issue was he and his team didn’t have any chemistry and didn’t look like they knew how to play the system they were in. I still think his team around him is generally pretty poor, but they at least seem to know what they are supposed to be doing now and look to have some chemistry. The improvements I’ve seen from Carleton have been as the season progressed on things like his defensive work rate and his willingness to constantly be in motion, something I think is very important for a central midfielder. I think that has been happening more because of pressure from the coaches to improve than a necessity in the games he has played. Plus, I think it’s a work in progress and he still has a pretty long way to go.
So you believe it was solely the time at Porto B that prepared him? Tha beginning of the 16-17 season at Porto B where he played a total of 482 minutes in 20 matches. (i.e. he played 5 complete matches and appeared for 32 minutes in a 6th.)
I believe you were the one who tried to give all the credit to SKC for getting him to being a minor league starter and purchased on a free by one of the best clubs in the world. I am simply pointing out that Porto may have had a critical role in developing EPB. I don’t believe that his playing time was materially different when with SKC. This is not a Miazga situation where he was a critical component of NYRB.
I believe his time with Porto (and remember this was with Porto B) likely helped, especially to adjusting to the continent. I have spent more time living overseas as a professional adult than I have in the United States. I have seen people struggle with that adjustment and his time in Porto definitely had to help there. it also likely exposed him to some new tactics, etc. That said, I find it disingenuous that so many posters will go out of their way to assert that the 7-8 years EPB (or any other player for that matter) spent at SKC did not contribute to his professional development, but his limited exposure on a loan to Porto B was a larger factor.
Of course it was also SKC's decision to send him on loan to Porto B to aid his development.................................
Please. I guess when the statement that SKC was neither shit nor outstanding wrt EPB is viewed as some form of self loathing, it shouldn’t surprise me that MLS backers will get out with their pious sanctimony act. Gimme a break.
Larger? No. But crucial? Probably. And so the question is, could SKC not have used the first team to provide that "crucial" professional development? The answer is "possibly". They didn't, and he left on a free after not much playing time.
I'm not even a huge MLS backer. Typically I'm pretty even-keeled about this. All I'm saying is that in these instances of young kids going abroad, our domestic programs never seem to get the slightest bit of credit. Christian Pulisic played for PA Classics for 7 years, interrupted only by stints at Bradenoton with the US U17s. He moves to Europe, and is playing first team Bundesliga soccer within a calendar year. But do people EVER give our programs credit? Weston McKennie trains at Dallas for 7 years from 2009 from 2016. Not even interrupted by Bradenton. He goes to Schalke and is playing first team football within a calendar year. Where's the credit for FCD? The same thing is about to happen with Josh Sargent. He'll make his first team debut at Bremen within a calendar year of joining them. He was at Scott Gallagher since the age of 8. These European clubs are right now applying polish to what our domestic programs are already producing. And these youngsters are in HIGH demand. When I'm at tournaments like the Dallas Cup the scouts are circling everywhere. We have news of other kids going over all the time. Taylor Booth just left for Bayern Munich. Rumor is that Gio Reyna is about to leave for Dortmund. The list goes on. Its a wave. It is in fact a true statement that EPB joined SKC at 12 as raw material and they developed him to the point that Man City signed him. That's nothing to sneeze at. In hindsight could they have done things differently to maximize their profit? Yes, they could found more playing time for him and sold him sooner. Lessons learned that they can apply to the next case. We aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllllllll know MLS has a lot to work on with regards to youth and player development. We just never seem to give ourselves any credit for the strides we HAVE made, though. Because our development programs are night and day from where they were only 15 years ago. Not even in the same ballpark.
I think that’s because there’s no track record of success yet. I think we are in a transition phase and we don’t realoy know yet what the Booths or Reynas of the world will turn out to be. So at this point, no one really has that “I developed these players...” type of success to hang their hat on. Maybe FC Dallas, but even then, it’s not like McKennie or Parks is a superstar yet (or even a “very good” pro compared to the rest of the world). I’m with you, we have definitely gotten better, and I think we do deserve some credit for that. You can see that just by our Booths and Reynas getting picked up by big clubs every year. But we still don’t know what will happen to all of them. We still don’t know for sure if that means they will turn into better players. I think the same of EPB. This argument is happening about where he developed and we don’t even know how good he is yet. Hopefully, in 5 years, NYCFC’s academy director or youth coaches will be able to talk about Reyna, Scally, and all the other prospects they’ve groomed and it will be something impressive on the world stage. Same for LA, Seattle, etc.
Track record of success takes time. Half the league has been founded since 2007. There are early adopters like NYRB, FCD, etc. that we can point to right now as the leading edge. But even they have only been in it for 10 years. Are people expecting Minnesota United to produce USMNTers from their academy? How? We all know what has to happen. Investment and investment and investment and growth and growth and growth year after year after year after year. Its not going to be meteoric. Its going to be a slow and steady grind. And patience has to be required. We're not going to be Germany or Spain tomorrow. They've had generations worth of a head start on us. Modern US soccer history really only began in 1988 when we were awarded the 94 World Cup. And for those of us that were around following the sport in the 80's prior to that..................it was dark, dark times. 1988 was only 30 years ago. Pan out and its amazing where we are right now. 30 years from now where are we going to be!!!!!! Its going to be exciting.
Sorry, this is not to your point but this is a widespread misconception. Parks never trained with the FC Dallas academy. Heck, I don't think he ever played for a DA team. Mostly, his development happened playing for Armando Peláez, following him around Dallas/Fort Worth for about 8 years.
I agree with this statement. NYRB has done the best with Miazga and Adams who have gone fully through the system and other systems have developed very strong youths who are in high demand. That being said, it’s a far cry from saying that anyone who believes that SKC didn’t cover themselves in glory here (but not in crap either) suffers from an inferiority complex. It’s not FCD or NYRB success....
Those can't be the only rules. Doesn't every intra-league loan have to include a sell-on clause? Because that's a kinda important piece.
Perhaps we should develop players who could compete head to head with our '02 player pool before suggesting discussion of why we can't....is an inferiority complex. BS is the only place I've ever witnessed criticism brushed off as those offering it having an inferiority complex. It's what business is built on. Critiquing and constantly asking what are our weaknesses and how we can improve. The real inferiority complex is the bubble MLS/SUM/USSF and many fans/writers live in, constantly overhyping our players, constantly telling everyone how great we are, constantly labeling any criticism as simply being a byproduct of being a europhile or plastic fan, constantly suggesting numerous other leagues aren't that good, half the Prem sucks, etc, essentially going to war with anyone and everyone who doesn't toot their horn and then, they want to tell others they have the inferiority complex? The above attitude is a major reason as to why we aren't in Russia. Complacency from believing the lie that we're better than we are and the outright refusal to look honestly at what we are. As an aside, using examples of players needing to escape our system at 18 and travel an ocean away to pursue a legit career goes against the idea we're doing it right. More youth bypass our domestic league than any other country and that number is quickly increasing. The problem isn't that we're a young league. The problem is that with our resources here and now, our corrupt leaders have chosen by intent and with purpose to handicap us and make the development of the American player an uphill battle at best. In the name of chasing control and profit for a few.
I’m just going to say that I still believe we don’t know how well we are doing. We won’t know until 5-7 years have passed and we can look back at which prospects developed and how they compare with the rest of the world. It’s pretty clear that we did a shit job with the players from 5-7 years ago, but there have been a lot of changes and expansion in that time. I’m sure we are overvaluing some players, but I also think some have a chance to be pretty good. The reality is whatever we do now, or even have done in the last few years, it’s going to take time before we can consistently produce top quality players. And yes, there’s no guarantee what we are doing will be the correct way to do that. But we won’t know until after the fact.
Coming off not qualifying for the World Cup, I'm not sure how that isn't justified right now. USSF is an unmitigated disaster and everything they touch has failed miserably, with the only exception being winning the hosting rights for World Cup 2026.
If we aren’t questioning what went wrong and what needs to change to improve then we’re doing it wrong.
Exactly. What was the refrain all last cycle? "We're not that bad, it's just a bad generation. At least we'll qualify for the WC after JK's failures." Now, the refrain is: "We just lost to Trinidad on a fluke. Everything's not so bad, MLS is just young, and the USSF/SUM/MLS partnership is perfect for all sides involved". The worst possible outcome became a reality, and in the dead zone of the WC without a permanent manager, there's hand-wringing that we might be "overdoing" it with the discussion of what went wrong/what can be improved? What else can/should we talk about?
Here's my problem with that line of thinking. Top players develop their package, their raw skill/ability on their own. It comes from hours upon hours alone with the ball as a kid, stemming from household culture and a true love for the game. In basketball it's the kids shooting/dribbling alone for hours, day after day. Kobe developed Kobe. Jordan developed Jordan. Lebron developed Lebron. Larry Bird would shoot till the sun went down on his hoop on his family farm. Same with soccer. For Pulisic it was practicing alone for hours. Neymar, the same, dribbling around family members in his apartment. Berbatov, practicing against a wall in a Bulgarian town. You can't say hey, let's go develop the next Pulisic. Instead you say hey, let's ensure the next Pulisic enters a system designed to maximize him as a pro. By 16/17 that raw package is either there or it isn't. It's then the system which takes that raw talent and turns it into high level pros by 20-22. It's teaching, it's coaching, it's the tactical education. And it's most basic it's taking the raw skill and teaching it how to succeed in a team setting, followed by preparing it for success at higher levels. And our system is set up against that. Hence our raw talent goes abroad. We're not making changes which address that issue. In fact, the increasing money directed at foreigners is a result of not addressing the above. We're essentially playing the game of luck. We have to hope someone like Adams lives in the NY area and can play for one of the few who seems to get it. As an aside, think about how utterly insane it is that in a country of 315M on a continent similar in size to Europe, we're pointing to NYRB and RSL. Maybe FCD but they're overhyped. But three good situations covering that population and landmass. And what is the USSF's response? With SUM by its side to go out and crush the NASL, consolidate profit around MLS and offer little to no support for everyone else. Know that financial windfall we'll see from the 2026 WC? Well when one looks at how SUM is set up, SUM's shareholders, i.e. MLS owners, will receive far more paid to them in dividends from that windfall than will anyone or anything outside of MLS. That goes back to our structure. We're actively crushing our potential. The USSF's priority given our population and landmass should be to get as many clubs as possible into the game of scouting/playing/selling upward. Instead it has chosen to go to war with everything not MLS.
The question that should be asked is "why as fans do we continue to accept USSF's excuses for not trying to address the program's long-standing structural issues?" No fans of any other sport in this country would tolerate these excuses and would be demanding action. They would also be demanding the resignation of the board. We're Americans. We do not like losing.
I don't necessarily mind NASL failing. They were poorly set up, and their death will not be a big deal. I like the MLS/USL partnership. I'm worried about the day when the top-performing USL clubs grow enough that they deserve a status that is better than playing against reserve MLS teams and small clubs. We already see with FC Cincy and Nashville that they can get big enough. So, if for example, Sacramento gets big enough to be a good market, or San Antonio, or Austin, do we have to wait for MLS to make them pay 300 million for entrance into the club, and expand to like 30 teams? What about the ones that are sort of tweeners? DCU draws 8.7K/game. What if I'm Detroit City FC or Louisville, and drawing 12K? It's not a big market, and not enough to pony up hundreds of millions for MLS entrance fees and a 25K stadium...
BS is a magnet for critical types and their opinions. It's really a matter of saturation - criticism makes up the bulk of posts, so naturally BS is a place where you would see push back against perceived "misplaced criticism". One avenue for this is the "inferiority complex" argument with respect to USMNT fans, and I think that it holds some weight in this microcosm.