I posted something eerily similar somewhere. Speaking of eerie, if I want to go dressed as the System for Halloween, what would I look like? @TOAzer ? I think #2 may have called Wicky and reminded him of his prisoner status after Wicky made a comment that could be interpreted as a swipe at current thinking in senior team ranks. We created a general manager post so this stuff was not supposed to happen. Unfortunately, the GM reports to General Egg's brother Jay. I wonder just how much damage nepotism is doing to us. Where's Cordeiro? Where's the vaunted "free" media?
A Michael Bradley costume? You could hot glue a series of horizontal and backwards arrows onto a soccer pitch costume... You could use the very popular Stay-puff Marshmallow Man costume and label it, Gregg's Midfield.
I feel like it needs to be pinned somewhere in this forum that the 2015 team was very good, but fell apart at the end of the cycle. They got great results for the first year of the cycle, and were a very talented crop, but Richie Williams (probably the absolute worst YNT coach in recent memory) was a disaster of a coach, and ruined a good crop. It wasn't just results, it was also team moral. I heard some crazy things about how that cycle fell apart within the team. Anything before that isn't worth bringing up, IMO. Those players were simply of lower caliber. We see it in the NT. The best players are the players in their early 20's (Pulisic, McKennie, Adams). We are simply producing better players now than we did 5-10 years ago. I think when you compare '02 to the years that surround it, it grades out as the worst year. It doesn't mean that there won't be good players that come from the year, but the age group has perpetually achieved bad results going back to U-15 level and they've perpetually been dominated when they face good teams going back to U-15 level. While results and how well a team plays doesn't always correlate with the quality of the players, I'd say it does with this age group. Players will emerge. I agree about that. If we are going to compare all the age groups though, one of them is going to have to be the weakest. I think if you look around the field, the number of good players is a smaller number and the top-end is not as good. The few positions the age group has some depth (GK, LB) are some of the least important positions on the field. The team lacks at CB, DM, CM, CAM.
There are three more points I want to make, and then I'm going to move onto the next game. 1. The Senegal coach out-coached Wicky in the tactics of this game. We had a lot of meaningless possession that resulted in very few attacking chances. The possession disparity compared to the shots and xG shows this. Senegal let us have the ball, waited for us to throw numbers forward, and then countered when we'd lose the ball, and couldn't get back in time to catch their counter. Either adjust the game-plan to play more direct, throw less numbers forward in possession or use more athletic players. It was a bad game-plan by Wicky, IMO 2. Some people always claim that it's so great how they closed up Bradenton. I don't see why it's so great. Any top-level player at this age thats a professional would be with their club team the majority of time, and will show up to the YNT for important tournaments. This has been the case the last two cycles. Having Bradenton wouldn't have negatively impacted players such as Reyna, Bello, Scally, Pepi, Ocampo-Chavez, Leyva, Busio who are all in professional football or high-level European academies. Bradenton would have no effect on them the last year of the cycle, good or bad. What it would do is provide a place where players such as KHF and Las could've gotten high level training and competition, as well as more games in the European shop window. Having a team that trains together and plays games together regularly also would've improved the on-field cohesiveness, and the on-field tactical understanding of what the coach wants from the team. One of the biggest complaints was how players were given spots early in the cycle, and the coaches were reluctant to remove them when they stagnated. Isn't that exactly what we see in this roster? Wicky specifically said he didn't want to make many changes. He said he wasn't going to bring a lot of players in this year. He wanted to keep the same group of players. How has this gotten better? I'd argue it's gotten worse. This team has more early cycle retreads than the 2015 and 2017 cycle teams had IMO. Bradenton would've also put more of them in the shop window early in the cycle. This team played relatively few U-17 games in the first half of the cycle. 3. I think it lets Wicky off the hook when the complaints we hear are that Pynadath should've been on the roster. From some corners (not all because I know some truly believe this guy is a great talent), it comes off as they don't know the pool, and they are just clamoring for the guy at the biggest club to be on the team instead. I think Wicky actually doesn't know the pool as well as he should, and thats one of the biggest problems with him coaching the team, but one thing I think he got right is Pynadath. I really don't understand the consternation about Pynadath, at all. Never have. I don't know why people don't instead discuss Atencio, Penagos, Dunbar, Wilson, some real big errors on Wicky's part (not to mention the 03's), but thats only my opinion. It also goes without saying that I'm referring more to what you see in other places than this website about Pynadath, but you see it occasionally here, as well.
If you looked at any of the U17 games you will noticed they all are playing from the back. I guess is the new fad.
It was peculiar how many Senegal goals involved long ball or rebounds: goal 1- long ball from GK, flick, bounce off US defender, shot-goal goal 2- long ball from GK, shot, rebound off GK, shot-goal goal 3- cross, rebound off GK, shot-goal goal 4- long ball from Senegal defender, illegal tackle, free kick, goal You are right about them creating a vacuum and countering quickly. Very witty of them. Like in basketball where the center gets the rebound and throws it full court to a sprinting guard. Also, Senegal exploited rebounds well. Its about numbers - take many shots, a certain % will be rebounds; have 1-2 players following to finish. Re possession ball, it's easy to exploit at younger levels since they are not as good at controlling ball; like the first Senegal goal, go long, defender unlikely to trap the fast incoming ball well, wait for the bounce, exploit (that head flick was wicked tho)
I think what people are critical of isn't the individual players as much as the system/the program/the paradigm. The US has massive resources, great facilities, big talent pool, experienced coaches, etc. Why are they losing to a country that is poor with a small population? To me, it's clear that part of the reason is cultural. The kids in Africa and South America grow up poor yet play everyday, at a local small court, a futsal court, in the street, on a dirt plot, wherever. With shoes, with sandals, barefoot. (Actually, barefoot is good because you develop great feel for the ball.) While in the USA it is a suburb sport where it takes a soccer mom 45 mins to shuffle her kid to the coolest club he can get into (and of course it costs $$). Wasted time, wasted resources. I grew up poor in the midwest and played more soccer than my now-kid plays in an upper-middle class environment. Why is that - probably because when you're poor you're more likely to live in denser neighborhoods around more kids. So you'll be outside playing more (not just soccer but various sports) and more kids close by to play with.
Be patient. The 2000's didn't have a good CM, CB or CAM. All of those emerged after the cycle. This group has 2 players who are sure fire starters in Europe for a long time and a couple more guys who have Bundesliga potential as well. This group just needs their 3-5 players for us to be fine. The 03's and 04's looks to be stacked to make up for the lack of quality in the 02's. When looking at the USMNT end game the high end talent on this team looks like they'll be fine for this group so let's be happy about them and that our lord and savior Sergino Dest is playing for USA.
The youth teams have been playing out of the back in a 433 for several years now. The Senegal game was not too dissimilar to the opening game of CONCACAF qualifying where we narrowly defeated Canada after going down 2-0 in the first half. Our possession in that game was rather stale and methodical. We were able to improve over the tournament and played some sparkling football in the final and definitely deserved to beat Mexico. We will see how the next two games go. They are much tougher games than CONCACAF presented, but I don't think much rides on whether or not these kids advance in this tournament. There are a handful of very good prospects, and the style that they are playing with in the US jersey is one that they can build off of going forward. I'd much rather see them playing in ineffective possession game than be banging the ball up the field to some monster forward to constantly chase or hold up.
We had a lovely first half against Mexico and then were run off the field in the second. One of the big problems of Wicky's coaching style is how gassed the players are in the 2nd half. Mexico, in the Brazil warmup,and now against Senegal. He's got to adapt to the fact that the players can't play this style for 90 minutes. A successful possession game means you can wear the other team down as they chase you. A poor one, like the USA is playing, means you're constantly transition defending as a group while the other team gets to send only 2 or 3 attackers. It takes a toll.
I don't think that is a style issue. I would put that more on depth than anything else. If anything, the possession style should minimize how fatigued players get over 90 minutes. Unfortunately, the depth of players is a little bit lacking, so the marginal players in the starting 11 get exposed over the 90 minutes, and we don't have game changers coming in off the bench.
It's about time someone got around to the indefatigable Suburban Soccer Mom theory of US Soccer inadequacy. I was beginning to lose faith in our younger generation. All kidding aside, the time warp occasioned by this premise is positively Meta. Dada, I would highly recommend you stop by in another 25 years for a similar head rush.
It's patently obvious and has been patently obvious for many a moon that no US coach at any US level knows how to connect and build up from the defense to the mids to the attack (except Marsch and Vermes). The spacing is wrong. The movement is wrong. The awareness is wrong. The options are wrong. The passing is wrong, mostly to the man instead of to the space, although no one's moving to create the space in the first place so in reality, it's a circle jerk of incompetence. But it's a sexy 4-3-3 they say. No, our 4-3-3 is basically 10 guys standing still watching one guy with the ball trying to figure out why 10 guys are standing still and staring at him. Stockton and Malone ran the Pick & Roll. So do Bo and Ned at my local YMCA. There's a reason the former are in the HOF and the latter are accountants Mon-Fri. Frankly most of our coaches would be better off as bookkeepers.
I think I get your point. But if it's so obvious then why isn't anyone doing anything about it? Just install a futsal court in every community park and I'll be that would improve US soccer quite a lot.
I don't think you are wrong, and you can add in the fact that the soccer is not the top sport in the US, which mitigates much of the population advantage. But what's the point? We all know there's really big cultural reasons why the US doesn't reach a potential purely based on population and GDP. Do people really need to rant at teenagers over something that was true last year, 10 years, 20 years ago. At what point do people realize that their anger is basically based on entitlement -- I mean, I saw someone say that they were mad they will never see the US win a World Cup. Americans are used to winning everything. That's a big part of the anger here. But there's no real reason we should be winning a World Cup. And so to somehow get angry at teenagers because of outsized expectations is kind of silly. Also, there's little correlation between U17 tourney success and senior team success. Few of these players will ever get a cap. It's a curiousity, and fun, and we might see a future star. But losing in the group here really means nothing other than losing in a group.
Is it outsized expectations or a failure to demonstrate an expected competence? Perhaps a failure to be held to a certain standard during their development is why our Men's National Team has been soft as paper recently?
My reference to outsized expectations is in regards to the belief that we should win a World Cup any time soon. We're so far from that I don't see the point in using that as a standard.
To Bo and Ned! I just wanted to add to this post. First touch? You can't control the ball, you can't control the space, you can't control the pass, you can't control yourself. How can you control a match?
It depends on how comfortable you are on the ball and how well you see the field. Keep on putting square pegs in round holes and get the same results over and over again.
I don't think it's silly at all. Messi scored his first goal for Barcelona at 17. These "kids" are not far off from being adults. There may be little correlation, but after the men losing to mighty Trinidad and Tobego, this loss feels like a greater symptom to a systemic problem. I don't know enough about this stuff to argue the details, but generally you wouldn't be happy with poor results after spending big money right? Would you be ok if a plumber did supbar work and you paid him a lot? I don't think so. It's only right to hold people accountable. We might as well copy Senegal's paradigm; start at age 5, play every day on dirt. Join a club in the teens with lackluster facilities. Perhaps we'd get better results with a lot less cost.
Are you suggesting that Senegal's youth setup is better than ours? We have arguably made bigger strides than any other country in the world over the last few years in terms of player production. Just looking at the senior team doesn't tell you much about what has been going on (look at the U23 pool at the very least), and making conclusions based on this one U17 game is not going to lead to an accurate assessment of where we are or what we need to do going forward.