But you can't win an argument that youth development mirrors NT success and (correctly) point out that N'lands is good at youth development. I'm just saying the link is not as absolute as you claim. I also think that leagues are over-hyped for development and specific club importance can be overlooked (not directing this at you, btw, as you have a pretty nuanced view, but many don't.) Lille is not the same as Monaco for youth development. But US/MLS have unique issues that EU passport holding countries don't, and it affects development.
What's truly important is the number of youth players with elite potential playing the sport, and the amount and quality of resources supporting their development. Given soccer's pecking order in the US, it should be obvious that we are highly disadvantaged in both areas. Not sure why you would quote female participation rates as it has little to nothing to do with success in the men's game (other than potentially some future, second-order effects) The US would obviously fare better per capita if there weren't caps on the number of athletes we could send. For example, we are typically limited to 3 athletes per event in track events, even though we probably have 20+ athletes in multiple disciplines that can meet the A standard for qualification. And there are numerous other reasons why it's fundamentally hard for a large nation to do well in per capita rankings. Citing your link, the US is second to only Japan for the 13 nations with a population over 100 million. It's number one for nations over 150 million. Again, what percentage of the US has access to winter sports AND cares about it to the degree Norway does. And how does Norway do in the summer Olympics, or in soccer for that matter, where their climate and focus isn't an advantage? And that doesn't even get into an analysis of whether Norway is loading up on medals that aren't as globally contested (e.g. the exact point you try to make when belittling US accomplishments in sports like football and baseball). Point is, what your nation focuses on, has the climate to support and is predisposed to be good at greatly matters in these sorts of things. I don't think anyone cares how the rest of the world views it, and if the US media is overly positive about America (which it is) then the global media is overly negative (which it is for macro reasons I won't get into on a soccer board). The US is a large, rich and diverse country and the best of the best are generally empowered here to a greater extent than elsewhere. That's the true strength of the US and you see it borne out in leadership positions in virtually every field or pursuit the country takes seriously. I have no doubt soccer will be the same, if and when, this country ever makes it a priority. You're a good poster and I greatly value your contributions and perspectives on soccer in general. But that wasn't a very good post as it was heavy on patronizing superiority and light on relevant facts and analysis.
As I have also written before, it makes no sense when people argue about one league being slightly better or worse than the next, because it says absolutely nothing about the youth development in general or the youth development at a specific club ... you can easilly see that the Germans are better at developing NT talent than the English, though obviously you can find the exception that confirms the rule when looking at clubs in England, but the average age in a league and % of foreign players and number young talents being sold and moving abroad and then also doing well, is a sure sign of how good or bad the top clubs are at developing talent which also will reflect in how good an NT is going to be ... I like to mention Turkey, which is a fairly big country with arguably the most dedicated soccer fans and has a league ranked in top 10 in Europe, but that fail miserably when you look at the average age of players in the league (which is around 28) and % of foreign players (which is more than half), a failry small export of talent and NT results that quite clearly reflect all this ... You can always argue that Randers are terrible at developing young talents at the moment while Midtjylland and Nordsjælland are the very best, but only around a 3rd of the players in the Superliga are foreign players and the Danish FA are working to bring down this number even further, just as they are working on how they can push Superliga clubs to develop even more talent for export and for the Danish youth NT's ... all this is quite noticable when you look at the Danish NT squad and how many of these players are regular starters in the EPL, Bundesliga, Spanish and French league.
The point I was trying to make by bringing up Norway and the Winter Olympics is, that American sports like football and baseball are as popular outside the US as Norwegian winter sports at the Olympics are in the USA ... so just as Norway are not considered a world beater in sports just because they have their own sports that has little to no interest elsewhere in the World, then the USA is not considered a world beater in sports just because they are the giants in sports like American football and baseball ... I'm not belittling US accomplishments by saying that these are tiny sports outside the US and so should not really be mentioned by Americans who want to be taken seriously in a debate about how good they are at sports in general, just as Asians would not be taken seriously if they bring up badminton and table tennis, or Norwegians if they bring up cross-country skiing and the winter Olympics to prove how great they are in at sports in compare with the rest of the world. The by far biggest sport in the World is soccer ... all other sports including the entire Summer Olympics are dwarfed by soccer and so, like it or not, it will also be the absolute measuring stick when people outside the US look at how great the US are doing in sports ..just as it is when they look at how great Norway is at sports ... or China for that matter ... they are not going to care one tiny bit about accomplishments in baseball, badminton or the winter Olympics ...
Looking back I notice the original point made by VBCity72 was less how good the U.S. is in sports compared to the world, and more how MLS is still a lot newer (and a lot less cultural important) compared to the four major sports leagues here. Not sure this need to prove the U.S. is only mediocre at popular world sports was necessary in the first place, unless it's just stoking someone's ego.
It's not a question of the US being mediocre at sports ... I actually never said that, I wrote that the US are good at sports .... but perhaps just not quite the natural "World beater" in sports the media would like Americans to think they are ... the idea that you just need MLS up and running just like the leagues in the big American sports, and the US then suddenly will dominate the world of soccer, if there is just enough media interest and money behind it, is silly at best ...there are several reasons why MLS will lack behind the top 4 leagues of Europe and it has nothing to do with money, but all to do with structure ... playing soccer at college is never going to help the US develop world class players, no matter how popular the sport is going to be, because it will be too little and too late for young players in that age group ... just as an environment without pro/rel (also at youth level) will make this highly difficult for club academies and youth teams, because pro/rel makes both clubs and young players fight that bit harder to reach the next step or stage of their career.
I don't think I ever see anyone claiming a better MLS that's more ingrained in our sports culture will lead to the U.S. "dominating" world soccer.
Although, realistically much of it is money. Germany, after a "disaterous" (for them) Euro showing made a targeted, big money effort to revamp their national soccer development structure. For large, high-population countries like US, Germany, Russia, France, Spain, Mexico etc. money is a big part of the equation. US soccer reportedly has revenue of ~$100 million annually and spends ~$33 mill on National Team expenses (tbh I don't know what that entails.) Germany puts more than hat a year just into academies. And they started from a much higher point on the mountain. The college argument, while it does affect MLS does not affect the USMNT. Few, if any true elite players any longer bother with college. The poblems with US soccer are: $$ - despite the "massive" amount of money they supposedly spend, it is a pittance compared to many top programs. Culture - the US does not have a mature soccer culture yet. That can't be invented. It is happening, but most other top countries have a head start. EU work rules - this is just a simple fact. More EU players have access to better training due to EU work rules. Crappy academies because of lack of financial reward - Due to MLS structure and other issues, clubs in the US can't get rich as easily off the kids they develop. One reason the dutch became so good at developing kids - or at least stayed good at it - is it provides decent revenue for the clubs. But really, the US has no reasonable academy system. Even more debilitating than college soccer is the recreational history of soccer in the US. Youth clubs have, for years, been fly-by-night with owners/coaches either doing it for the money or having absurd delusions of being Barca before they're even Preston. When you look at how the top academies do it. Baraca spending 10 mill + , Ajax 6 mill, etc. you quickly see what the problem is. Stumbled across this glossly little study. It'll make any parent of a kid in an academy side cry just a bit... http://www.ecaeurope.com/Research/ECA Report on Youth Academies/ECA Report on Youth Academies.pdf
Soccer is a strange sport in the way that it "reward" NT's from countries that have an excellet youth development structure much more than big countries with loads of money to buy players and build strong leagues .. the English NT is solid proof of that, because they have won nothing since 1966 and that was at home in England (which is also proof that young players moving abroad in fairly large numbers is also a huge part of NT success in soccer). Americans should take note of this ... Croatia and the Croatian league would be absolutely crap if success in soccer was all about money ... and there is no chance Iceland (population: 335,000) would ever have qualified for a Euro (even betaing England to reach the Semi-finals) or a WC if they had not put all their focus on youth development and export of talent.... and I have already mentioned Turkey ... a big country with highly dedicated fans and lots of money to buy foreign players to "better" their league. The Danish league being the best in Scandinavia has very little to do with money, but mainly to do about Denmark also being better at attracting young foreign youth NT talent because of how it develop young Danish talent for export and the NT ...I mean when a German U-21 NT player like Hany Mukhtar pick Denmark it has little to do with money but all to do with youth development and culture. I won't argue with you on that ... but then US soccer would also crash and burn if it was to rely on college educated players and the usual youth development path we see in American top sports ... so it just add to my point about American sport culture and closed non pro/rel leagues is not going to work in competition with Europe and all of rest of the World when we talk about soccer, which is by far the most competitive sport in the World .. and I do not really think much more highly of the English way of doing it, which also lack in all departments regarding development of own youth inspite of all the money they throw at the English PL ... If MLS and the FA is mainly going to do it the "English" way and focus on revenues and annually spendings more than thinking of youth development, much like the English FA, American soccer has already lost the battle in advance, because at least the English have their soccer culture and participate in the Champions League...
Not to belabo(u)r the point, but good, well-financed, competitive academies that have some sort of reward for producing top notch payers is the only thing that will move the needle in the US faster than natural evolution (which is happening, of course, but natural evolution can be slow and messy - not fast and Messi! seewhatididthere...) When US fans and US Soccer admins gets their shorts in a twist over paying a Nat Team coach a few million, when many in the US can't imagine a Pekermann or Mourinho coaching the US team. When we think being a national team coaches single-capped kid is a good coaching resume... we aren't doing much for our soccer culture anyway. That said, it is inevitable, since the popularity of soccer and the finances of the game are past the tipping point, that more money will be put into development. But until academies can figure out how to make a good bit of money on players or until US Soccer decides it will sink real money in either a few regional Chatelaines with competition and success metrics or subsidies MLS academies and implement competition and serious success metrics, US soccer evolution won't move faster than nature, work permits and economic forces, let it.
That's completely different. Show me a team that has been consistently strong in soccer without a good league.
There have also been folks who think we are real close to being competitive. I’m not sure I’ve seen it it said, but wouldn’t surprise me that there are people who think MLS is close to being a top league and that we would have a decent USMNT shortly after that. People are still posting how if we hadn’t had a missed penalty in 2002 we would have been in the final. Similarly, there were many people who believed our world ranking in 2006 and expected a semifinal run. There are a lot of folks who think it is easier than it will be.
Quality of a countries league is not directly correlated to quality of national team. There are many teams in South America, Europe, Africa, and actually North America that well exceed what their league would “imply”. I do like how this argument is selectively invoked. Show me a team that has been consistently strong in soccer without a league with pro/rel. The single most important thing for us to become competitive and hopefully dominant is to focus on developing good players and getting them in environments that help them grow as players.
Well, again, being "decent" is a different rung of achievement than "dominating." I don't disagree with your observations, but I stand by my statement that I don't usually see the type of extreme optimism that claims MLS will be the path to the NT dominating world soccer.
Hamid was warming the bench when FCM took yet another win in their quest to become Danish Champions ... this time they won 2-1 away against Hobro ..
Bill on the bench again as Midtjylland travel to Silkeborg in Denmark Superliga Currently Midtjylland lead 0 - 2 at the half
Too many tangents in this thread. If you don't have anything to say about Hamid you don't have to post. Transfermarkt says Hamid has played in two reserve games. I looked around a bit but couldn't find any highlights. Someone else might know where to look though https://www.transfermarkt.com/bill-...7714/saison/2017/wettbewerb/DKRE/verein/62685 I know there is some worry about Hamid not starting. Personally I am okay with it atm. As someone who watched him play a lot last year, he never looked 100%. Seemed to always be carrying a knock. His movement in the box was rarely smooth and his distribution was erratic. (There was an Atlanta game where he was in a collision(?) iirc and couldn't even take his own goal kicks by the end of the game.) He looked okay in the friendlies. Had some really poor turnovers but he seemed more mobile, although his play style has always been very intense so "mobile" is hard to really define for him. He's had knee issues in the past so optimistically I look at this as a time for him to heal up a bit. It's crazy to think he hasn't played a competitive club game since September. And honestly I wouldn't be surprised if Hamid doesn't get 15 starts by the end of 2018. I don't see him picking up too many by the end of the spring and who knows what the fall will bring. But if time off helps him get back to 100%, I'm completely okay with that.
Currently on the bench as his team takes on SØNDERJYSKE They're 2nd on goal difference due to Brondby's rise.