Article: "Is this the best US women's national team ever?"

Discussion in 'USA Women: News and Analysis' started by lil_one, Apr 11, 2016.

  1. Smallchief

    Smallchief Member+

    Oct 27, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    #26 Smallchief, Apr 12, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2016
    This may be the best team ever. However comma....

    Given that the US team was arguably outplayed earlier this year by England and Mexico, I'll reserve judgement until after we win the Olympics. I worry that we've been lucky at times -- and the soccer gods will retaliate.

    I'd like to see the US play a UK team that included Little and Fishlock on the roster. Now, that would be a challenge.
     
  2. BrooklynSoccer

    BrooklynSoccer Member+

    Jan 22, 2008
    Aren't they Welsh and Scottish?... they should be able too.
    They aren't Irish, which has it's own Olympic team.

    what's the deal?
     
  3. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006

    Yeah, as long as we are picking random nationals from the former empire, the team should include Sinclair.
     
  4. Kappa74

    Kappa74 Member+

    Feb 2, 2010
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Here's a few other opinions about Michelle Akers.

     
  5. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If your approach is right, I'm not sure I could identify a particular style of play. One thing I find really "good" is a team that appears weaker when comparing player to player but that is able and willing to execute a tactical approach that allows their team to equal or better their opponent. Or, a team that has a small roster but is able to possess the ball in the back line and midfield to conserve energy. Or .... In other words, I like the use of situational tactics to overcome potential obstacles.
     
  6. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I can't tell if you don't know or are asking rhetorically, so...the English, Scottish, and Welsh FIFA federations are separate but the IOC recognizes Great Britain, (well actually the UK, but that's a separate discussion); the federations do not want to enter a combined team into the Olympics because they fear FIFA would then refuse to recognize them separately. Hence, England's WNT (although they qualified) will not be in Rio.
     
  7. BrooklynSoccer

    BrooklynSoccer Member+

    Jan 22, 2008
    #32 BrooklynSoccer, Apr 13, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2016
    No, I actually didn't know why. thank you. I just did some research and i'm not sure where i was last summer, but I missed some interesting stuff and some unfortunate stuff for the Uk WNT
     
  8. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Politics and doubly foolish in my books. It's bad enough that the Welsh and Scottish feds see this as more of a threat than an opportunity but they could placate their fears by simply withholding their players instead of not sending a team at all. As I recall in 2012 Little was the only non English player selected to Team GB. And it's based on the flimsiest of notions...that FIFA would make a decision that impacted men's soccer based on something the woman's teams had done.
     
  9. Smallchief

    Smallchief Member+

    Oct 27, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    Canada is an independent country; Scotland and Wales are integral parts of the United Kingdom, also an independent country.

    Most countries have only one national soccer team. The United Kingdom has three (or maybe four if Northern Ireland has a WNT).
     
  10. Blaze20

    Blaze20 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Seattle Reign FC
    Sep 22, 2009
    Club:
    Philadelphia Independence
    Guys this discussion about the UK situation can get out of control pretty quickly as we have seen before so let's keep this discussion on topic.
     
  11. olelaliga

    olelaliga Member

    Aug 31, 2009
    Ok I am going to say a couple of things that will be decidedly unpopular, but that believe to be true.

    Our FIFA player of the year is holding back this team and Mallory Pugh, while as excellent choice as a pacey technical winger, is not the best choice to be her replacement at the #10.
     
  12. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    I would agree that Pugh might be too young to be ur main play maker at this point in time but I think she will have that role eventually. Not sure Lloyd is holding the team back but I do find the notion that u have to play her but u can only successfully play her in one role a bit to the detriment of the team.
     
  13. BrooklynSoccer

    BrooklynSoccer Member+

    Jan 22, 2008
    I'd love to see this team play with out Lloyd on the pitch. She's the least technical player on the field these days.

    I hear ya, i think Pugh may develop into a great #10. I've said this before, but Pugh, Horan and Lavelle were on the u20 team together. Pugh and Lavelle split the midfield together and Rose was the better 10, but Pugh is faster.
     
  14. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Thee way Ellis uses her DMs I would think Lavelle would be more of a #6 or #8
     
  15. BrooklynSoccer

    BrooklynSoccer Member+

    Jan 22, 2008
    hard to say, Ellis has never had a true 10 to play them like a 10.
     
  16. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Ellis had Lavelle in at least four camps yet Id be surprised to hear someone tell me Lavelle played #10 for the second team during scrimmages. Similarly I was surprised when Pinoe got hurt that neither Lavelle nor Colaprico rated a token look at left mid during a match
     
  17. thegamesthatrate

    Jan 9, 2007
    I think that the trio of Michelle Akers, Kristine Lilly and Mia Hamm might have had something to say about that.

    And, if you have to substitute a goalkeeper for either Lilly or Hamm, putting Scurry there still leaves you with a formidably talented trio.

    Akers is the greatest player of all time, and either Lilly or Hamm has a track record plus talent that leaves them ahead of Pugh for now, so much more so than the difference between Solo and Scurry in her prime.

    And, by the way, if talent is your gauge, Morgan Brian might have more of it than Carli Lloyd, but the Akers - (Lilly or Hamm) - Scurry trio would still be formidable.
     
  18. olelaliga

    olelaliga Member

    Aug 31, 2009
    We are still looking for an exciting creative uber quick and entertaining -#10. Lloyd is so far from a 10 it's ridiculous. Brian is an 8. Characterized by great vision and ability to pass incisively. Not sure Lavelle has the super elite quickness and enough strength at this time to evade the physical defenders and really become Americas first female 10. But she does come up with some unique solutions. Pugh is mostly a straight ahead player. Excellent on the flank. Technical and speedy enough to slow down the game for herself and pick out a final pass. That final pass is usually the obvious one though. Heath has shown some flashes of magic, but I don't think she's quick enough and sometimes I wonder over some of her decisions. Is she consistent enough? Is she a player who delights and surprises the fans as she breaks down a back four with her magic often finding a pass that no one else sees? This after a dribbling exhibition drawing 3 defenders and breaking their ankles? ...Not yet and maybe not ever.

    Yes we can clearly win games without a 10. But the game is so much more entertaining and the fan base would therefore grow if we could find one. Do they exist? Yes. I see them at 12 years old. Do we pick them to rise up in the national programs? Yes and after a short time we try and turn them into robots, limiting their touches and instructing them to "play simple" thus surgically extracting exactly what makes them special. Then we choose the straight ahead player trying to do it all herself. We need more players combining creatively and we need to encourage more variability in the attack instead of continuing only to value straight ahead qualities and mentality.

    Encouragingly, I do see Klingenberg showing signs that she would love to find someone inside with whom she could create magic. Let's work with our current players like Brian and maybe Heath, Lavelle and Press to create more combinations in advancing the ball. I do think mixing in Pugh and maybe Dunn's pace adds spice and variability to the attsck. Wouldn't the US be unbeatable if we had our orchestra playing a piece melding both styles pleasingly?

    I am hopeful now that Ellis has started making some changes at the top. Time will tell if her willingness to think differently about how we play the game will trickle down to the early NTC level. In a decade will the US be playing attractive entertaining soccer at the highest levels? I sure hope that we are cheering more magical players as they dance and flow down the field and entertain us.
     
  19. thegamesthatrate

    Jan 9, 2007
    I suspect you may not be old enough to have seen Michelle Akers play during the first part of her career. She wore number 10, she scored ten goals in the first Women's World Cup and she played a genuine "10" position.

    And, to a certain degree, Alex Morgan plays the role of a "10" and for much of her career Abby Wambach was a "10" whose best-known goals were in the air but could unleash a cannon of a shot and get herself open to do so.

    But I see your concern about the current players. And, scoring goals has occasionally been a problem for this team against good competition. In the knockout rounds before the final of last year's WWC, the USA scored two goals from the run of play.
     

Share This Page