Deep thoughts from Arena. I don't see him as having any basis to comment on CP's career. His comments remind me of a couple posters on here. Has Dembele's move been bad for him? I'd be more than happy if CP went to a big side and only played 1,000 minutes next year. I have no idea why people keep asking him questions. http://www.espn.com/soccer/borussia...-great-place-at-borussia-dortmund-bruce-arena "In his couple years there with the first team, he's done very well. Hopefully, he can continue to do that, be consistent at the club level, and if he does that, he's going to be a real plus for the national team program. "Any move Christian makes in the future, it's important he goes to a club where he plays on a regular basis. There's no point in him leaving Dortmund and going to a club where he doesn't get the kind of minutes he needs to continue to develop."
What experience does Arena have with players climbing the global ladder? Which of his players ever climbed the global ladder and took on challenges?
Sound advice. Dortmund is a Champions League regular, CP is well paid there, and he's established himself without standing out as a star. Still plenty to prove there, and he's in a position to do it.
what he hell about that would make you so happy?!? i dont get that at ALL. hes playing in a top 5 league, in champions league against the best players in the world. theres NO rationale for going to liverpool (for example) and sitting behind salah and mane. the only step(s) up for him is a better team in which he is a player as regular as he is at dortmund. wanting him to go to a club where he will be a supersub is insane. what makes him different than anyone else we say HAS to be playing? other than being better than them, in large part, BECAUSE HE HAS BEEN PLAYING?
I guess I disagree with whoever "we" is. I have no problem with a young player not being a starter for a year or two as long as they are training at a higher level. CP getting the minutes he has over the last 2.5 seasons has helped him improve, but he is just better than his US competition. I often fall on this side of the simplistic playing/not playing debate. While I dont think Hyndman's situation has been ideal, but dont think it has been near as damaging as many have made it out to be. I would have easily called him in while at Rangers in 2017 and for these last set of friendlies. I think we would have seen that he is still a better player than a guy like Delgado (who has made a lot of progress in the last couple of years). I'd be happy as it would reinforce many views I have on CP that I have based on limited information. CP as always struck me as being quietly confident with a strong desire to compete. He also comes across as very grounded and mentally tough. A move to Liverpool would reinforce the first part and the second would help him succeed there. His time there would also be verification or not whether all those views are accurate. I want players that will help us compete at the level of this tournament that is going on now and includes players playing at the level of Liverpool and higher. CP striving to get to that level would indeed make me happy. There are a number of reasons to think that liverpool could be a good spot for him to continue to grow. After having multiple coaches (6 in total) for both club and country over the last two seasons, it might be good to have a coach he knows, rates him, and a style that fits him. This last season has appeared to be draining on him and a new setting might be a positive. I cant think of a team with a better pair of wingers to be behind and train on a regular basis. Besides behind supper talented players who are early in their primes, they are leaders of their respected national teams. There are still plenty of minutes that CP could get. Liverpool played just over 5,000 minutes this year and there were over 2,000 where they werent on the field. In addition to being asked to contribute but not leaned on initially, there may be a chance that he be asked to step up if either are eventually sold. It would be very reasonable that a bigger club makes a ridiculous offer if these guys had another big year. I also think staying at Dortmund is a good path for him for another year or two. Hopefully, Favre pans out and gets Dortmund back to where they were under Klopp and Tuechel. A move to a bigger club will always be risky. I'd generally prefer he do it early in a cycle than mid way through, but understand that a couple years more of progression will also help.
I took this as a literal question as players who transferred to notable European leagues and stiffer competition. Hmm, that I can think of from UVA: Claudio Reyna and John Harkes, DC United: Ben Olsen (also UVA), and Tony Sanneh. Players who went abroad from his NATs days: Frankie Hejduk, Gregg Berhalter, Eddie Lewis, Clint Mathis, Tim Howard, DMB, Brain McBride, Tim Howard, Carlos Bocanegra, Bobby Convey. NYRB days: Jozy Altidore; LA Galaxy days: Zero. I think that is noteworthy as he seemed to like taking retreads to mix with his DPs during that era of the Galaxy.
There are plenty of obvious examples from that list of players who went through periods of not getting regular minutes and didnt seem to hamper their careers. The three that stand out to me are Reyna, Howrad and Altidore. In all of their cases they went abroad early in their careers. Reyna's case is most similar to CP. He was good enough for the level, but needed time to acclimate. It was too big of a jump for the other two. It is too bad that old man chooses to ignore these cases and spews this over simplified nonsense and some people take it as gospel.
Preseason but he was a factor in all three goals, scoring two in a 3-1 win over Liverpool just in one half of play.
Pulisic was looking tired at the end of the season. Klinsmann and Arena were very smart to agree to grant Pulisic a summer of rest. He'll need to be fired up and ready to go for the all-important Gold Cup in 11 months.
Yeah, he’s one of the best players in the world who didn’t play in the World Cup. Nobody will argue against that. Four years from now, my hope is that some other kid shines in a (edit) midseason game while Pulisic is still on leave.
"I didn't see anything new, just that he's a bit older and has new tattoos!" Klopp said of the 19-year-old postmatch on Sunday. "He's a fantastic skilled boy, and it's not a surprise to see. "He's a smart player, and unfortunately the USA needs more of these players. He alone cannot do it all. "Don't put too much pressure on the boy, hopefully you can have a few more of them and then play very successful soccer in the future. If Belgium and Iceland can go to a World Cup then so can the USA. I think he'll be fine." http://www.espn.com/soccer/internat...-us-not-to-pile-pressure-on-christian-pulisic
This is exactly why having guys like Pulisic, who drives to succeed at the highest levels, is HUGELY important to the future success of the USMNT and soccer in the US. They inspires generations of young kids that want to grow up and "be like Christian" Imagined boys at 10, 11, 12, years old, etc. idolizing Pulisic and dream of one day playing for Dortmund, 'Pool, ManU, etc. in the Champions Leagues. How great is that USMNT team 10-15 years from now? Christian Pulisic, whilst taking part in a post-match interview, notices a kid being dragged away by security after running on the pitch to try and speak to his idol.Pulisic walks over to the kid and takes a photo with him. ✊ pic.twitter.com/OGKvwjc9pL— Squawka Live (@Squawka_Live) July 22, 2018
Which brings up the other elephant in the room. USA soccer is getting better athletes than before but we are only getting them in the 5-7 to 5-10 size range, we are still missing the 6-1 to 6-4 range of athletes, those still end up with the other major sports. Once we are consistently getting some of those athletes then we will have 10 Pulisics to put out in the field to compete with the top teams in the world.
I don’t think height has to much to do with this.... the winning World Cup team has an average height of 5 feet 9 inches. Take out the 3 GKs and I bet the average is even shorter. The tallest teams finished as so... Serbia - group - average of almost 6’ 1” Sweden - quarters Iceland - group Denmark - r16 Croatia - 2nd Russia - quarters Tunisia - group Germany - group Belgium - semis Senegal - group - average of 6’ Some tall teams did well, some did not.
This game is changing and changing fast. When I started playing the storyline was one of the great things about soccer was that it didn't take a certain physical specimen to be great. It was about talent and working hard. That is not where the game is headed. The game is headed toward youth, talent, and size. Years ago most guys that were over 6' weren't as shifty or coordinated as some shorter guys. Not the case anymore. There are tons of athletes out there that are tall, fast, and very coordinated. And in general they are physically stronger. I watched ESPNFC yesterday and they were talking about the goal that Weah scored on Saturday and how he did a nice job with using his body to shield the defender. Which he did. But the general consensus of the guys on the show was that he still needs to beef up as he wouldn't be able to do that against a quality CB with size (which most have these days). Bottom line. Would you rather have a guy who is 5'9" with talent, speed, and soccer smarts or a guy who is 6'1" with talent, speed, and soccer smarts?????
I chose both, Example... Giroud 6’ 3” Varane 6’ 2 (1 goal) Loris 6’ 1” Pavard 6’ 1” (1 goal) Pogba 6’ 1” (1 goal) Umtiti 6’ (1 goal) Hernandez 6’ Matuidi 5’ 9” Mbappé 5’ 8” (4 goals) Griezmann 5’ 7” (4 goals) Kante 5’ 5” 6 players are 6’ or shorter, and Mbappé (5’ 8”) and Griezmann (5’ 7”) account for 8 of Frances goals scored. Only 4 outfield players are 6’1 or taller.
This is a constantly shifting target, it's pointless to try and get a certain athlete of a certain size. Mascherano is 5-9 and won the treble playing at CB, pretty recently. England, in some ways, has put the emphasis on "athletes" and how has that worked out for them over the last 20 years. If someone can play, if they have vision and awareness and technique, then they can play.
The thing is at youth level, if you are a coach for say Dallas FC, and you have a bunch of 12 year olds that are big, fast, talented. and you also have a bunch of 12 year olds that are small, fast and talented, do you ignore/discard the small players and put all your development efforts on the big kids? (this also assumes that you can predict what kids will continue to grow to a big size and which ones will not grow to a big size at that age). But change it to other ages, at what age do you make the choice to go for size, 15? 17? 19?