I don't think 2015 was as good, and you are using hindsight for 2007. I think its important to consider the team at the time. We don't know what will happen with this crop in the future. 2017 vs. 2019 is very close. Goalie: 2019 Defense: 2017 Midfield: 2017 Attack: 2019 I would say that 2017 was slightly better, but its very close. 2019 has a big advantage in goal, but I think 2017 takes two of the other three categories and they are extremely close in the third category. I don't think the defense is that close, and while I think midfield is very close, I would still give 2017 the advantage. 2019 gets the attack advantage. 2017 had decent depth and very good top-end talent, but I think 2019 has very good depth and very good top end-talent. I know people joke that fans say every cycle that its the best cycle, but I don't right now see 2021 as being as strong as 2017 or 2019. It should still be pretty good, but I think its going to be a weaker cycle.
I apologize for not looking up the rules of this very important game before posting! For the record, I agree 100% that it's easier to know what has already happened than what has not yet happened.
I know you like Soto a lot, but no way in hell would Tab start Soto over Sargent, and I don’t think many others on here would either. Put Sargent in place of Soto in those qualifying matches and Josh probably bags a couple goals.
I try not to judge goal scorers by their performance in short tournaments. I think sample size is often a big problem there. Soto goes a few games without scoring against CONCACAF competition, and then resumes his productivity against better competition. Did he just have a few bad games, maybe some bad luck or maybe there’s a Chandler like problem (much less likely)? Ebobisse went a whole qualifying tournament last cycle without scoring and then he adds two off the bench against better competition in the U-20 WC (a continuation of what he showed prior to that tournament. I think it’s much better to judge players on what they show over a prolonged period of international play or their club play. Soto has 9 goals and 5 assists in 12 U-19 Bundesliga games. Would Sargent do worse, better or similar? I don’t know. I’m not saying you are wrong for preferring Sargent. I might prefer him to Soto next week. I think all three are that close in ability. My point here is more about how we are judging strikers with the NT and YNT’s. I feel like some of the same discussions have cropped up relating to Ocampo-Chavez in the recent Nike Friendlies.
What is interesting is that Mendez, Ledezma, Soto, and Richards (not sure about him) kind of came out of nowhere. For instance, Mendez wins the Golden Ball and has no appearances for a USYNT below U17. Arguably, they are four of the best players on the team, especially if you figure Adams, Sargent, and Weah are not U20 players anymore. The first fruits of closing Bradenton? I would expect all our future U20 teams to have similar guys pop out in the DA as 16-18 yr olds that nobody expected.
There is probably something useful and measurable in this question, though I don't have a quick smart thought on what it might be. (Those who know me won't be surprised to hear that I'm neither quick nor smart.) I wonder if we could come up with a useful working definition of "out of nowhere" and apply it to YNT groups to come up with some kind of interesting ratio that tells us something. We'd need a measurable and meaningful starting and ending point. So, for example: "From nowhere" could mean "Was at a non-MLS DA club OR had no YNT callups before a certain point in his development" (I would probably limit this to U.S.-based players, or at least players mainly raised in the U.S.) And we could call a U20 pool callup could represent making it (though the bar could certainly be higher, or there could be several bars) Will think about it more, but open to ideas.
Well, there's my standard template: Out-of-nowhere = a player you have not heard of. Making it = a player I have heard of. For youth teams, an age adjustment my be appropriate, say ... Out-of-nowhere = a player you have not heard of by age 14. 15? 16? Making it = a player I have heard of by 20. 17? 18?
Most of the regular posters here know more of the history than I do. But from what I understand, players were selected when 15-16 to go to Bradenton. Then those players would form the core of our YNT as they aged. Ledezma would have never been on any U17 team, because he was not identified as a top talent at 15 and then would have been on the outside looking in. I think as we go forward, we will see more U17NT players fall off and be replaced at the U20 level by players identified in the DA. I don't know if anyone here could give the Bradenton/Non-Bradenton ratio for the last 3 U17 and U20 teams; including this U20 qualifying squad. Since so much attention is paid to the player pool for the U17WC and U20WC, a player, "out of nowhere" might be one that gets his first call-up in between those tournaments for his age group.
A lot of people are gonna disagree with this but I really don't think that Amon is any better than Justin Rennicks.
I don't think there's been a clear link between the U17s and U20s -- not to say players don't step but, but rather that it's far from assumed -- for some time. The combination of more professionalism, better scouting, (maybe) the DA, the addition of the U19 program and seeming raised profile of the U18 program, have among other things combined to make things far more competitive. It would certainly be possible to quantify this, though I'm not gonna do it.
Its kind of a running joke on these boards that we say "this is the most talented U20 team EVER!" during each cycle. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the 2001 U20 team holds the record for most future USMNT caps. If I remember correctly, fully half of that team went on to gain full USMNT caps. They formed the foundation of the USMNT for the rest of the decade: Donovan, Beasley, Onyewu, Convey, and those guys. [If I remember correctly, Kyle Beckerman broke his leg right before this, and so wasn't involved.] Its one of those things where the 99 U17 squad is probably STILL the most impactful, and when those guys went to the U20 WC two years later...…………..its still probably the most impactful group. It really is difficult to underestimate the importance of those guys. Its very hard to judge the level of a U20 cycle until years later. We typically do know when its a weak cycle, and this isn't a weak cycle.
I'm too lazy to do a quick check on actual future caps, but right now, unless my info is wrong (which is certainly possible) has the 2005 pool (not just Finals team) as having the most capped players. And a couple of guys got capped for other countries, too.
I'll have to trust you on that,because I'm too lazy to do the math...……. That 2005 team had a lot of capped players (Feilhaber, Nguyen, Kljestan, Spector, and company.] But Donovan, Beasley,and Onyewu alone from 2001 have 352 Maybe the 2005 cycle nickels and dimes its way up there.
Right. Of course it's easy to be a prisoner of the moment, and my "by a mile" comment was certainly a bit hyperbolous. The top end of that '99 group was arguably the best we've ever had, but that team was mostly college players. That's not their fault, but it's just a sign of how much things have changed and how much better our development landscape is now. To me, it's almost unfair to compare a pool of players from that era to now because there's no way a group from two decades ago can match what we have been seeing withing the last couple of cycles simply because of the vast advantages that the current generation has. That said, I think the argument has to consider depth as a major factor. I'm not sure 99's top 5 of Donovan, Onyewu, Beckerman, Beasley, Convey is better than 19's top 5 of Adams, Sargent, Richards, Carleton and Dest, but, even if they were better, you'd have a hell of a time arguing that the next 5 of Casey, Martino, Eskandarian, Buddle, and Davis are anywhere near the likes of Durkin, Weah, Soto, Mendez, and Ledezma. The current class still has Pomykal, McKenzie, Sands, Amon, Gloster, etc. in its back pocket, and that's where this debate would get comical. Comparing the '17 class to the '19 is the only debate in my opinion, and I'd still give preference to the '19s any day of the week. Hell, we've already seen that Adams and Sargent are potentially the best players on a class of '17 team that is without Pulisic and McKennie. Outside of those players, who I think have their equals in Carleton (for Pulisic) and Adams (for McKennie), I think the '19 U20 class blows the '17 class out of the water. The only place the '17s would be comparable is at center back, where they would have the edge in depth if not top end quality.
I'd say this U20 had the best qualifying campaign ever and that is without some of it's top players (in comparison to the Donovan era). Still need to see how the play at WC before making any judgements.
You wonder if there are three stages of U20 squads. 1st: You generally can get all your best players because they are not playing professionally. 2nd: You are missing several important players because they are playing professionally 3rd: You have all your best players because your senior team is so stacked U23s don't break in there. I think England and Germany are in the 3rd category, England just reaching it. We have just entered the 2nd. You can get results at any stage really in the WC as even a stage 1 team with a good generation can go far that year. Since most CONCACAF teams are in the first stage, the fact we dominated with our depth is probably a good sign we have moved on. I don't think the 2017 team wins the tournament without their best 4-5 players (they were missing two and did win). Sargent, Weah, Adams are already on the first team; so we obviously are not at Stage 3. I don't think Mendez, Richards, and some others are that far down the depth chart either. The 23-28 year olds are just not that good. When Pulisic, Adams, Ledezma, etc are in their prime, we might get the point, if we still keep churning out players like these last two cycles, where guys will have to play with the U20s and we will have to have a full time U23 team.
Not sure 3 ever happens because pro teams don't have to release players and can be jerks (ala Novakovich a few years ago).
Which in itself is something that's fairly unique to the US because we have a lot of players that move to Europe before 20. It seems like English teams will generally release English players for any youth level and the same goes for most European teams, but they'll hold on to the player if they're American.
We all understand that every time we analyze a current U20 cycle versus previous ones...………..we're analyzing potential versus achieved reality. Don't get me wrong. I'm with ya. This group has a lot of talent in it. But other than a few of the kids (Tyler Adams, etc.)………………..they're mostly still prospects. Prospect is a latin word meaning "hasn't done squat yet." We've had plenty of high profile prospects in recent cycles completely disappear. What on Earth is Junior Flores doing at Dortmund? What is Matt Olosunde doing at Man United? Injuries happen. Marc Pelosi was never the same after his leg break at Liverpool. Gedion Zelalem has seemingly stalled at Arsenal due to his injury. We can go on forever. Conor Casey started his club career at Dortmund. He had a successful 5-6 year career in Germany before injuries got the best of him. [Then he played another ten years in MLS at a high level.] He played for the first team of the very club that Sebastian Soto is currently playing U19 games at (Hannover). This idea that Soto has a higher ceiling than a player like Conor Casey may be accurate. I don't know. A lot can happen. But we have to see it first. For those of us around in the early 2000s, we talked about Conor Casey like people now talk about Sebastian Soto. What's the difference? I couldn't tell ya.
Casey is a great example of where our player pool was developing 18 years ago. Who knows what would have become of Casey if he hadn't been injured. His career in Germany was ok, would hardly call it successful. What success he had he had in the 2.BL on loan. I think the difference with all the kids now is this: 1. They are coming from a professionalized DA environment; Casey played high school then two years of college 2. They are coming at 16 or 18, not 20 or older (Casey signed with BVB at 20). I think playing in the DA until 18, then in the U19 Bundesliga is a better preparatory path than South High School in Denver, then two years at University of Portland. So, yes Soto and his age cohort are prospects, but I think they are better prepared to make it. That injuries are a wild card but it is also possible they have been trained better in that regard than a high school player. I think the, "hit rate" will be much higher, but some large number will not make it obviously.
Hundley might be the most underrated prospect in the pool. He had a great season at UCLA, he ripped up the DA for years in a bad Rapids team and he did well with the U-17's. I think he was one of the last players left off the U-17 WC team. Why wasn't he part of the qualifying team with the U-20's? He had a very good season in college soccer. He was much better than his college teammate Amaya. I really like his skill-set also. A very skilled and creative player with a lot of end product. Excellent technique. Not the best athlete, but not a bad athlete either. I'd like to see Colorado sign him to a homegrown contract, and I think he should get a chance with the U-20's before the U-20 WC, although I don't think he's good enough for that team with all the attacking talent it has.