Right...................but teams do miss the playoffs by a point nowadays. In the past when there were 12 clubs in the league and 8 made the playoffs, it just made a ton of sense for every international player to be released whenever they wanted to be. Margins to the playoffs or the SS can be razor thin in 2019. We can't blame MLS clubs for wanting to have their "best lineup" as often as they can. As I said above, I think we're making a mountain out of a molehill right now about something that hasn't actually happened yet.
I think this is especially true right now with the program at a 25 or so year low. Also a lot of these U20's will matriculate to the U23's so more work together will help that level too.
When you go back and look at the U.S.program in the 1990's, the team was known for it's 110% effort in everything - including friendlies and youth games. The players had a sheer determination that allowed it to punch above its weight. There always seemed to be a chip on their shoulder that made it seem that every time any U.S. team stepped on the field, they were fighting for respect. It was a great identity. That seemed to disappear over the past decade. I guess the approach was to move beyond just a "hard-working" image. It's too bad. Tony Meola said it best on his radio show when he said U.S. Soccer should just focus on being a better version of its former self. Not anything different.
The problem, though, is that this is the mentality that leads to picking the best athletes. This is the mentality that ends up with neglecting the latin players. The program and our approach to the game absolutely needed to be modernized and given a stylistic reboot if we wanted to take steps to becoming a truly respected nation instead of one that others just hated to play against. If we can combine that work ethic and mentality with a modern tactical approach and real technical skills, then we will maximize our potential. There had to be an actual evolution rather than simply saying lets do what we've always done, just better.
My opinion is evolving, however.................... What's more important for the program? The Gold Cup or the U20 World Cup For me, the senior USMNT competition always takes precedence. So if a youngster is legitimately one of our best options for the senior team, then that's where he should be. How about developing a "culture of winning" with the senior USMNT? That's the program that can use it the most! Winning the Gold Cup with the senior team this summer would be a huge morale boost that the USMNT desperately needs. And wouldn't that be a great experience for the young players? I'd also add.........................what do we think the USMNT fan base wants to see at this Gold Cup on home soil. Do the fans want to see the exciting new blood like Tyler Adams, or more of Kellyn Acosta? Do they want to see Sargent, or Gyasi Zardes? It is possible for players to go to both the U20 World Cup and the Gold Cup. Its been done. Michael Bradley, for instance. It just seems like clubs wouldn't go for it.
As we move farther and farther down the path of having our best be pros in their teens we're going to see more and more issues of club vs country at the U-20 level. This is understandable from the clubs but it's a potential issue for the NT in regards to vertical integration. This is the type of stuff that needs to be fixed sooner than later. Right now, neither the U-20 or the Gold Cup are ideal.
I wonder about the usefulness of the Gold Cup overall. I get the importance of winning it. But to have it take place two times in a four year cycle is very taxing - especially since they are trying to have another combined Copa America again with CONCACAF. The Gold Cup runs through July 7. If a Euro-based player is involved through the finals, he probably won't be able to fully rejoin his club until the 10th. With preseasons starting now in the range of June 20-25, going to the Gold Cup means you miss about 3 weeks of the preseaon. So many of the young American players based in Europe are at critical moments of their careers. Pulisic is joining a new team, Adams will have his first Euro preseason, Sargent is still getting his feet wet, Weah is also still trying to break into first team football. What is more important to the USMNT? having these young players play in the Gold Cup and missing a critical preseason, or letting them miss it so they are in better position with their clubs? The U-20 WC has the benefit of winding up before the start of Euro preseason. I happen to think the USMNT can win the Gold Cup with a mix of MLS-based players and European-based players who are better established with their clubs (the Brooks, Yedlin, Wood, types). But again, the culture of winning. I get it. Tough call.
I am not sure how you draw the conclusion that this approach ends up picking the best athletes and neglecting latin players. That is an enormous jump. The 90's era seemed to pick the best players too, there just weren't that many technically gifted players at the time - but the ones who were were were picked. Tab Ramos was the World Cup captain. Hugo Perez had 73 caps. Balboa and Clavijo were mainstays.
Yeah, I agree. If anything, the Latino style has always had more than its share of passion and effort.
If a player can’t break through into the 1st team over the course of a season because he missed the first couple weeks of preseason doing cardio work and scrimmaging local 7th division clubs, then he’s likely not good enough period. And if a club punishes a player for missing the first couple weeks of preseason because of NT duty, then I don’t want them at a club that’s so short sided. Are we going to have these debates if we qualify for the Olympics? Those start at the end of July next year. Euro players might miss the first week or so of the season.
And not to mention A LOT of physicality. Latin American soccer can be very rough at times. Not just CONCACAF teams in Central America but also in places like Colombia, Brazil, and Argentina.
The latin style can be plenty gritty, for sure. My issue is that the "chip on our shoulder" mentality is always based on being the less talented team. It's basically the story of the underdog. I don't think that we should be content or strive to always be the underdog. Let's be dominant and take the game to every team that we play with style and skill -- and, yeah, toughness and non-stop agression. But nicking goals on set pieces and defending like banshees does not have to be our destiny.
Question: What did winning the U17WC (2x) and the Olympics actually do for the senior Mexican team? Did that instill a "culture of winning" that carried over to greater senior national team success as the years went on? I'm not entirely convinced that success at the U20 level translates in the way some are implying. Ramos talks about that Portuguese "golden generation." They won two U20 World Cups in 89 and 91. What did they win as a senior national team? Nothing. Not a World Cup. Not a European Championships. What exactly? Heck, they had to endure the shame of losing to the USMNT at the 2002 World Cup. They lost in the Euros AT HOME to Greece, which should have been their moment. Portugal also didn't need to rush those young starlets to their senior team, because they already had a senior team of a high standard. The USMNT is in desperate need of an infusion of young talent. We're not talking about ten U20 players here. Heck, Weah has to prove something to me at Celtic to show he's a USMNT player. I think Adams and Sargent should be with the senior team. Just those two. I would have those two, Pulisic, and McKennie. And I would have all Gold Cup advertising and promotions focus on "the next generation." The marketing campaign writes itself and really would help the fanbase turn the page from the most disapointing USMNT era in modern history. Anyway, I think I've officially beaten this to death
Two issues: 1. Psychologically, the "underdog mentality" is very difficult to sustain when a team is not actually inferior to their opponent. The more players we have in top leagues, the harder it gets to convince them that they are inferior to the players on the other side of the field from them. 2. The "underdog mentality" relies on effort and athleticism in lieu of skill (technique) and intelligence (tactics). I believe that all of these are important, but the underdog often abandons the latter because they feel like they cannot compete in those regards in order to go hyper on the former.
Winning U17, U20 or U23 WC would be big for the Men and for their publicity. It would also put the onus on each team afterward to do the same to measure up. Honestly there's no wrong answer here as I can see the value in each. I would add that winning a WC at any age is against teams from all over while a GC is just the usual CONCACAF suspects and they've done it before. Mexico and Portugal don't have the assets or population the US has and one WC win at any age might be a huge boost like Lemond winning the Tour de France or the Olympic women winning that first gymnastics title.
I'd like to see one GC become a Confed Cup qualifier and the other GC be a U23 tournament for Olympic qualifying. Then we play in the combined Copa in between, if FIFA allows it. This particular Gold Cup though is going to be a replication of the intense camp Berhalter is having now with the full top choice player pool. If you listen to the intense work they are putting in with game plans, there is no way he can get all the Euro players on board with emailed videos and a few days in March. The Gold Cup is the perfect opportunity to really get everyone on board and in the system as he wants to play it. Even has a friendly and three lesser games to work things out then some stiffer competition to really see how things are working. Pulisic had the entire offseason this year and he actually has fallen out of the first 11. Not sure how much he will play the second half, he can use the GC and the games to get game sharp and show up to Chelsea ready to go.
CONCACAF youth tournaments generally draw pretty badly. Heck, even some Gold Cup matches. This might be terrible business, though I get where you're coming from.
Tab's interview with @bshredder seems to raise the possibility, if perhaps remote, that neither Mendez (hypothetically MNT) nor Carleton (hypothetically not in form if not playing regularly) would end up on the Finals roster. They're not interchangeable, but without a playmaker type the look of the squad might have to change dramatically.
I've never seen Ledezma play, so no particular thoughts there. Pomykal can certainly break down defenses but I see him doing so in a different fashion than Mendez or Carleton -- Pomykal comparatively more with the ball at his feet, AM/AC comparatively more via pass or shot from almost anywhere in the middle third. I think that's partly why the combination of PP and AM worked in qualifying.
A healthy Taitague is our starting #10 at the WC. Tab has always rated him highly, and well, it's not crazy to say he's our most talented player at the position,