i don’t think he has the potential to be elite. He’s 21 years old - at some point, you’re no longer a prospect with potential. I don’t think he scored after the brace and only played about half the minutes available after your article.
Whether he'll be elite--Pulisic being the only one we have, according to you--was never the question. Why are you trying to move the goalposts from "potential" to "elite player"? Does Toye have potential to be a very good player? Yes, yes he does. And his strong work ethic is a big plus. Will he be elite? Highly doubtful.
This is a straw man. If you mean that many of our best youth players chose to leave MLS to join the world best academies and that many posters don’t believe that the USMNT roster is 2/3rd MLS despite Arena’s and Berhalter’s consistent choices.... It used to be that our MLS contingent were MLS all-stars - now we have posters defending guys who aren’t even close to that and that’s far different from euro pixie dust.
apologies - I thought our discussion was on high ceiling players. I don’t think that Toye potential is near the level that Reyna, Ledesma, Uly, Richards or even Pomykal or Aaronson are.
I'm really looking forward to seeing Pomykal integrated. I've seen him on three different teams (FCD Academy, U20 and full FCD) and once you've seen him for a bit you'll start noticing all the little things he does that most other offensive types don't. He's quick as a cat and because of that hounds players defensively and causes turnovers in bad spots for the other team. He is good with either foot which I think is a very underrated talent but his left foot can be special. I see him as a perfect fit with Adams and McKennie because all three cover tons of ground, have both offense and defense and they would create a real freeflowing yet defensively sound midfield. Pom can also play either wing but at this level that might only be useful for moving him up late in games when you bring in a Morales type in midfield to add more defense all over.
I didn't cherry pick, that's just a year I chose at random. What you're missing is that if the HS kid doesn't do better then what was the point coming out early? You're ignoring my theory that some of these players would have turned out BETTER if given more time. I should only take the risk of skipping college for a SUPERIOR outcome. LeBron James also will be HOF straight from HS. That's not my point -- my point would be that is an anecdotal exception. If I am making a decision what to do with my life, do I decide it like I am a first ballot HOFer? And to get at a repeated flaw in y'all's logic, just like the people signing at CL teams often don't know if they will actually play, none of these kids will know whether they are the future HOF or the guy who is playing in the Turkish league in 5 years. If the odds are against that, that should be the warning advice. You don't know the future when you sign. So perhaps be a little more cautious. This is freaking common sense. I know Pulisic was hurt but with that being true zero Americans played in the EPL last weekend. Some dressed some didn't, and then a list are on loan. This is reality. You can sell "but Pulisic" or "but HOF" all you want but reality is what it is. There is the running discussion of the second division stuff. I think some of that argument is over-stated. But the part the advocates are missing is that if you look at a yanks abroad wrap up for the weekend, almost everyone in the Championship played. Holmes in particular had a big goal. And the Championship is also where several of the EPL signees actually are. Though it is debatable whether they deserve NT calls, in most of their cases their career choice is showcasing them better and then they give GB a decision to make. Isn't that what a club choice ideally does? Here I am, here is what I can do, I am showcased, ball's in your court. As opposed to, "can you please overlook how much PT I get or how I look because I signed with ___________." Which one sounds practical and which one sounds dreamy? And to be fair, that answer might be person specific. The best players can write their ticket. They may be your Elvin Hayes equivalent. 99.99% of hoopsters are not Elvin Hayes and shouldn't run their careers like they are. Or they are deluded. Ditto Pulisic. The problem is dozens of people running their careers like they are Pulisic.
An interesting argument no one seems to be making is that as opposed to "pure merit" there might be "friendly" and "unfriendly" leagues. Holland has been very good to Americans. The Championship and B.2 seem friendly to Americans. Maybe the bottom 2/3 of the B.1. Top of B.1 less so. EPL less so. We rarely have people in Serie A. Ditto La Liga. That also wanders into work permit and international player rules. I think the implication of the merit argument is we aren't in some of these leagues for having inferior players. That's horsesh*t. Are we literally saying we have no one of American extraction who could even be a bench guy in Italy? On even the bad teams? Bull. A lot of who gets picked has to do with scouting habits, cost, bias. Worse, it's like we pretend that many people from these leagues haven't come over to MLS and gotten "found out." Giovinco did great. Many elite Serie A might. But the average stiff? The Dynamo have a CB we signed who bounced from A to B and back in Italy and I think he kind of sucks. But anyhow, my point is despite this reality that we often have at least some merit, a glance around Europe suggests they don't all want us back, at least equally. This is not necessarily hierarchical. Why do we have several people in Germany and one guy in Serie B in Italy? That's backwards of what merit should show. Instead of offering childish theories perhaps consider some destinations are more interested than others, and not for strictly soccer reasons. Or at least objective ones.
I’d like to come back to this - do you really think that Mexico wants to give up corner kicks vs. the US to offer opportunities on counters?
I assume it is the big contract that should be able to set his family up for life. It is a high risk, high reward choice. It also eliminates the risk of getting injured in college and never getting paid. It isnt a anecdotal exception. There are quite a few NBA players that came straight out of HS and successful careers. Daryl Dawkins Kevin Garnett Kobe Bryant Jermaine Oneail Tracy McGady Rashard Lewis Tyson Chandler Amar'e Stoudemire Lebron James Dwight's Howard Andrew Bynum That is 11 out of 45, or roughly 25%. There are 13 who werent first round draft picks, including one from that last. So that makes 10nfirst round draft picks out of 32, or roughly 33%. Those look like pretty good percentages.
Our players don't transition well into the more technical leagues (Spain, Italy, Portugal, up to a point France). On the other hand, the soccer culture in those countries has always been very dismissive of Yanks. The English put us down hard, but in part jokingly. The Mediterranean countries completely dismiss us.
Who hasnt transitioned well to those countries? It has been a bigger issue that there havent been many opportunities. Off the top of my head these players had some success in those countries... Ramos, Lalas, Keller, Bocanegra, Rossi, Bradley, Davies
I agree at the leagues you have identified and their general reaction. I also agree with the post that follows where it's like but x but y but z. When they have tried us many have done fine there. It feels similar to how the rest of Europe used to be c. 1990s. Be happy you get a job anywhere. Except if you look at Holland and Germany they have several Americans. Ditto the Championship. So are we putzes or not? At least some of this is in their heads, not ours. I also feel like the Champions League obsession fuels a myopia. A breed of American looks at it like "you should be playing for a Champions League team in ____[country x]_____." But what it takes to get there varies country to country. But more pointedly, in some of the bigger countries, they seem so obsessed with Champions League they neglect those countries have, say, 18-20 or more teams in the league. And in many of these countries it's not just no CL guys, on checkbook teams, it's no guys on down to #20. The framing is artificial. The idea that no one could help any team even on the bench on down to #20 is just not objective. So the theory is there is no guy here who could help Espanyol, SPAL, Tolouse, etc., way down at the bottom. That's bull. It is interesting that Weah as a child of a famous PSG player could break into France, but many others couldn't. I would also be curious to what extent the argument is circular, ie, "I don't see them elsewhere in the league so why should we sign them here." Which begs the question, and is kind of bias perpetuating itself. Conversely, I do wonder if some of this is name brand stuff. That American kids brought up on EPL recall the glories of Villa and Newcastle when in reality they now are yoyo teams with losing records and negative goal differences. And for some reason they are attractive but the equivalent in other leagues is not. I get the argument that they think they are super technical but the 3 Spanish players the Dynamo brought in a few years back were unathletic (slow as molasses) and couldn't hack the speed of play or physicality of MLS. One could take that self servingly as our league is knuckle dragging in a way their pure soccer skill clashes with. Or one could take it as if you brought in a few athletic, physical Americans who also had skill you would probably raise hell in La Liga. Like our guys are not that unskilled and then could run right past theirs, win tackles. When I played in a local hispanic league, where the focus was on one on one dribbling, and less on athleticism and organization, being fast and able to do help defense made me a god. To me Spain might have it precisely backwards. I'm imagining Jordan Morris running at most Spanish defenses other than the top few. And then FWIW these fast and athletic MLSers would probably be perfect for Serie A on the smaller clubs. It's already been tried before with Bradley. I think we're perfect for there. But it takes two believing that...... Like I said, their bias, their lack of imagination.
Well, a handful of successes per decade proves nothing. And frankly the soccer philosophies in the two spheres of the world (Mediterranean/Latin vs. Northern European/English) are so dissimilar, it's almost as if they were playing two different sports, at times.
Again... who didnt transition well in those countries? Altidore, but he wasnt ready for that level in any country. Adu, but he was already ruined mentally. I dont recall a bunch of talented players going to those countries. It seems to be more about lack of interest because not being a good fit stylistically.
I never talked about "transitioning" in those countries. My point is that, for the most part, there's no interest whatsoever.
You did ? You need to sharpen up your IQ. Eat more blueberries. You think Mexico lined up accidentally without intention on that corner they scored on at Azteca to deny us 3 points in the Hex we later failed to qualify from? You'd be wrong.
did they take the ball and intentionally dribble/ kick it backwards toward their end-line to give us dozens of corners? I definitely need to eat more blueberries cuz I don’t recall that at all
By transition I mean moving from here to there. But yeah, I should have explained it differently. I think I was conflating both: the ones we've had in those leagues didn't do particularly well, with very few exceptions; and very few go there. Frankly I think our guys have a much better chance in Germany, England, Scandinavia or Benelux.
I would make a distinction between the "belief" that their soccer is soooooo different, and reality. I've had both English and Med coaches and sorry but soccer is soccer. There are different expectations but heck one could see the past several years as also showing that one can have different demands within Northern European soccer itself. More German/English derived versus the current Dutch fetish. Some of this argument is also against an amnesiac background. Strictly speaking Moore and Nova are already in Spain, and Weah in France, so we never left. de la Fuente is in age group Spain. My point is that is tepid relative to Germany, England, or even Holland. Historically we have had Boca, Adu, Bedoya, Davies, Regis, Vanney, and Westberg (France), Ramos, Keller, Jozy, and Gooch (Spain), Lalas, Bradley, and I think Szetela (Italy). But that was a decade or so ago so we can now pretend it didn't happen and we don't fit. Even though -- for example -- I think athletic, organized, and able to play defense would be perfect in Italy. As would technical guys who play high upfield. And I think in Spain they overrate smaller club technique and probably underrate what I think athleticism would do to less athletic opponents. Also worth pointing out Rossi started here then played in Italy. He did slide over at an academy age, but it's a subtlety they likely miss. He's "Italian." My point is with a history of players in these leagues going back 20-30 years, and our players only getting better, and our players breaking heavily into Germany, why doesn't our southern European contingent match? Why don't they seem very interested? And don't tell me it's because we suck, because we have some boom U20 classes coming out and they aren't snapping them up either. Similar lines, it's also odd if what age group players we have/had are at PSG and Barca but not anyplace else. That's a mixed message on the value of our talent. Seriously, I'd be curious how much of this is language driven, or bias at smaller clubs, or what.
Let's be real, we have a better shot in Scandinavia because that's latter or perhaps even a step down from MLS. Just using Sweden, AJ is at Hammarby and his career is in rehab mode. Gall revived his career from Columbus struggles, at a series of Swedish clubs including Malmo. Ostersunds has a guy named Perry from the US I have never heard of. Along similar lines, my Dynamo signed a crappy LB from Elfsborg (Lundkvist) and when we failed to sign a Honduran RB he signed instead at Norrköping (Alvarez). That to me sounds more like why we can get into B.2 and the Championship, which is that for the sort of player in demand out of the country there is no "jump" at all. People tend to make self serving "league" or "team" comparisons but the question in transfers is whether the "player" can cope, and for solid MLS pros much less stars, it's of course. The bench players who might not be European quality are also not the primary transfer targets. That being said, I know MLS bench players who have gotten signed in Scandinavia, particularly back when reserve salaries were low and one could practice arbitrage in Scandinavia or the USL, where a starter there made more than a back end MLS reserve. The numbers changed and the dynamic followed.
Germany has no restrictions on foreign players. That is why there are so many Americans there. Everywhere else has restrictions. Germany also has a limitation on ownership spending that incentivizes finding young, unproven, talent. La Liga has significant restrictions on non-EU players, only 3 can play in any 11. Only 5 in an 18. Do you think a Spanish team is going to use one of those spots on Reggie Cannon? Maybe, but if they find a player that they like they have to compete with MLS, Germany, and if they are that good, England. Serie A has a quota of one on the number of non-EU players that can be signed. It is very fortunate that Germany is liberal in their policies and we would be in a poor place if they restricted players like the other countries.
Nova is in Italy. He's not exactly flourishing there. Moore is a rotational starter with a team barely above the red line.