cherundolo is no way better than mcbride and i think dempsey and bessly could be on their way for an impact too
But there are several years when Friedel was the best or 2nd best player in a club that qualified for Europe. McBride has been the best player on his team maybe 1 season, and in that season, his team narrowly avoided relegation. There's no comparison. Unless you think Tevez had more impact last season than Drogba, since Chelsea didn't win and still would have qualified for Europe with a normal season from Drogba, while West Ham would have been relegated without Tevez. But that's a pretty idiosyncratic definition of "impact," and one that really cuts against the grain. It vaults the guy who scored the game winner in Wigan's last match above every other player in the Prem except for maybe CRonaldo. And nobody thinks that a Wigan player had the 2nd most impact in the Prem.
McBride is only not a journeyman because he went to Europe so late. Steve C. at least is a good (not great) player for an average team; McBride is that with a bad team. Reyna may have been overrated, but he still has played in Europe and been the captain with several sides better than Fulham. No, not really. That's really his weakness. He's got 30 league goals for Fulham. His best season is 10 league goals. Let's not get hysterical here.
You LOOOOOVE to ponitificate on others 'throwing shite against the wall' and not doing their research, yet, there is absolutely nothing to support your claim here that Hanover has been an 'average' team vs. Fulham 'poor'. - not placement in standings last 4 years - not overall record - not points from relegation ** you basically are making this up, and now have claimed this twice. Fulham and Hanover have been remarkably similar in their mediocrity. There is little or no difference between them (in fact, Fulham may even have an ever-so-slight edge during the 'McBride' years, only if one wants to be argumentative...)
Relative to every other American striker who's ever lived and played abroad....he's scored bags of goals. And there is no one on the near-term horizon who is going to displace him either (I guess until and unless Altidore gets his 'chance'...and even then he'll need 3 years + of strong performance)
What does it mean? It means I get the impression that Clint Dempsey, like many males of his generation, self-identifies with a certain strain of youth culture, and has made it a big part of who he is. And that it may even be reflected in his play. Marcus Hahnemann is a 35-year-old man. He may be a rock fan, a hip-hop fan, a Bavarian dance fan, or any number of other things, but he does not happen to self-identify by any of those choices. Clint Dempsey is a 24-year-old kid who happens to have made his culture of choice a big part of who he is. The way certain young people do. The way, say, Bill Walton did with rock culture in the early 1970s. Try telling basketball fans it's "asinine" to say that was part of Walton and his game.
Article about Dempsey by Nick Webster on Fox Soccer. http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/story/7184858 A bit over the top on the praise with: "Well, in my humble opinion, he played the finest game an American outfield player has ever produced in the Premier League as he literally carried the Cottagers on his shoulders to a surprising and dramatic late draw." but at least it's about the game mentioned in the thread title.
I doubt it was the greatest game ever, but he did play great. http://www.toffeeweb.com/players/past/MooreJM.asp I found this on JMM- who was our only field player in the Prem not too long ago. He probably ties Wynalda (BL, back in the day) for the greatest start to a season in a top league EVER by a YA- JMM was on fire from January 2000- April 2000. Over a period of 3 months (and before he hurt his knee), JMM scored 8 goals..many of them game winners. I'll still argue that that knee injury robbed JMM of that lil' extra he needed to shine, and he never was the same. Regardless, he gained respect at Everton and left with it as well. At a time when the English didn't think a whole lot about American players in general... BTW- In his first year in England, JMM had a better goals to minutes strike ratio than Michael Owen and a whole host of 'star' English strikers.
Ah, another stat from the "jri book of useless statistics". Whilst it's true that JMM had an amazing initial run (5 goals in 5 games) his strike rate had already started to diminish rapidly prior to his injury. In many ways his performances matched those of Mathis, who did extremely well initially, before things fell apart. This is why it's foolish to make judgments on players based on a small initial sample of games:- many players simply fail to sustain that initial success.
But he had one of the best songs ever devoted to a YA: "Joe ... Max ... MOOOORE!! How d'you like him? How d'you like him?"
I thought it was something like 7 in 8 games. Although I also remember that his goal scoring had dried up well before the injury. Regardless, JMM was a limited player who put together a great run. Stevie C. better than McBride? That's lunacy. Starting right back for a crappy Bundesliga team is a whole lot less impressive than maintaining a starting job at forward for even a crappy PL team, IMO of course.
Ah, just waiting for slight crack of opportunity Well, yes- JMM or any player is not going to score every game- so 5 goals in 5 games...he's not going to equal that over the course of a season. But the fact remains he had a terrific 1/2 season for the squad. And yes, he sustained a serious knee injury that kept him out for many months. Like Mathis, who sustained his knee injury long before he went to Germany, I'll continue to maintain that both of these players could have gone onto to greater things had they not been hurt so severely. DK- Calling JMM 'limited' is a bit harsh. During the mid-late 90s, he was prolly as good a striker as existed in the US. He was good enough to get a recommendation from Richard Gough (who had played the entire US) as the 'one' player for Everton to pick up. He did well before he got hurt at Everton, and he is remembered with respect there. If that's limited, we could have use a whole bunch of limited in that period. He was good as we had, basically. (the entire US, that is) over a 6 year period.
Those two statements are pretty far from mutually exclusive. That's like saying Mike Burns wasn't limited because he started in a World Cup - or that Frankie is a great left back.
It took me a little while to figure out what song this was sung to the tune of, but now I got it. Very cool.
Burns is easy to dismiss, surprising you'd pick him as an argument. (what success did he ever acheive in MLS or abroad). I don't think he was our best defender, or even close, even in one season. Frankie- admittedly- is a difficult one to handle. In fact, Frankie's just a plain odd bird as a soccer player. Plenty of workrate, at times terrific play, but then some real average things in a lot of ways. But regardless, he's been in the mix at right back for a decade, and that deserves some kudos. Look at Joe-Max Moore's production before and up-to the knee injury in 2000. The guy was very productive for not only the US National Team, but also in BL2, the Premiership (albeit for 1/2 a season), and was a terrific scorer, assist guy on some piss poor NE teams. I think its much more likely the case that the knee injury robbed him of that extra quickness and mobility he needs to succeed at top levels...than that he got 'found out' in the Prem. For, when he came back to MLS from the Prem- he simply couldn't go anymore. His knee was done- it wasn't a question of peaking as a player (otherwise, he would have stayed in MLS, and been somewhat productive still). As it were, he literally couldn't play anymore. He was your classic off-striker, and was very good at it when healthy wherever he went and over many years. I don't see that as 'limited' in any sense. Calling JMM limited is more like calling McBride limited- if we speaking in 2004- than anything else (in my opinion).
Compare the games the two have played in top flight football at this point. And I think it's safe to say that Steve C. is going to add a hell of a lot more from here on out than McBride.
SD, I almost always tend to agree with you, but you've really lost me on this one. Dolo is one of my favorite players for the USMNT and it seems clear he has developed a good following from the fans of Hannover as well. However, I'm not sure I can point to any game Dolo has had that were as successful as some of McBride's for Fulham in the past two seasons. He scored 10 goals for Fulham in 05-06 and lead the team with 12 last year in route to securing Fulham player of the year honors. He was also handed the captaincy of the club this year before his knee injury. Look, I think Dolo is a very nice player and has a number of good seasons in Germany, but you cannot compare the two.
The thread took a weird turn. Which our player had the biggest impact? What about the sad news that none of them with the possible exception of the keepers were/are impactful players? None of them was paid as an impactful player, none of them was purchased for impactful player's money, none of them (except for Reyna) was expected to make impact and none of them did. What is the biggest single moment? Cherundolo being solid defender on a mediocre team? Convey with a good season in the second league? McBride with a few good months here a there on a mediocre team? Reyna who has always been just a few steps away from a breakthrow? JOB's hopes? Beasley almost a starter on above average teams? I don't mean that they all aren't good players. They are good. But so far nobody is impactful and if something happens to them (Beasley, Convey, Reyna, JOB) a replacemet is easy to find, and pretty often the replacement is an improvement. Sorry, it feels like we are looking for the tallest midget.
Don't know if you're talking past each other, but Superdave said "And I think it's safe to say that Steve C. is going to add a hell of a lot more from here on out than McBride." Superdave seems to be talking prospectively, and you're talking historically. Is it so wrong to say that Cherundolo has more in his tank and will contribute more, especially now that McBride's career is in jeopardy with his knee injury?
Whatever team you're on is pretty irrelevant if you're a consistent goalscorer in what many consider the toughest league of football in the world. McBride is not scoring against Fulham defenders, he's banging in the goals against the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, ManU, etc. To the extent that the lack of quality at Fulham has any relevance, it only further elevates McBride's talent in the sense that it's that much harder to score.
Way over the top and so very, very British of Mr. Webster. The guy has a great game and enter in the dramatics of him being the next Maradona. The English are masters at killing good prospects with ridiculous expectations. Dempsey does have great potential and he's doing well. I personally think he can surpass McBride. But, let's just all relax and let the guy develop naturally in the 'prem.
Are we just debating longevity? Maybe I just don't understand the terms of this debate. Just because Cherundolo may have more of a career ahead of him doesn't mean he's going to improve significantly. I personally think the rest of his career will look mostly like his career to-date, i.e., decent, but mediocre player on a lower level Bundesliga team. The fact that McBride is doing it late in his career only makes his accomplishment more impressive to me.
My mentioning of Burns and Hejduk was only to point out to you that saying JMM was at the head of the class of U.S. strikers in the late 90s isn't a very compelling argument for why he is class. Maybe "limited" is a little harsh, but IMO, he found his level in the PL regardless of the injury. He probably wasn't good enough to be a regular starter the way McBride has been.