Agreed. Tommy Mac was being called a promising young player at NYCFC when he was 26 because he'd only been a pro for 3 years.
It is a false comparison for two reasons: 1. The English second tier is arguably on par with our first tier. 2. An English player can play in any UEFA country from 16 on. You constantly see MLS compared with the EPL like this. It is apples and oranges. Jadon Sancho is playing in Germany. Almost the entire English squad started in the Championship. MLS should be compared to non-UEFA first divisions whose youth cannot move until 18. Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Japan would all be decent comparisons. EPL is not.
Honest question: Can Brazilian players move to Portugal prior to turning 18? The whole colony thing. A lot of Brazilians go to the Portuguese League first. A big reason being culture/language is easier to assimilate.
You wish it was. I enjoy MLS, I understand it's shortcomings but also recognize its strengths as one of the more competitive leagues on the planet. The fan base is continuously growing and the quality-of-player is getting better daily. But the Championship is much, much better than the MLS. A closer comparison would be League 1.
thank you. you put this very well...better than I did but basically much of what i was trying to say. i would add that teams like brazil, argentina, even portugal have more options playing at a high level than the USMNT does....they have more "clay" to mold than the US does...at least in theory. (which mkes it more curious to me that they would approach their team construction they way they did/do) So when teams like argentina, brazil, etc seem to build everything around a talisman it seems like they are doing it intentionally and by-design. whereas with the us, with a lack of transcendent talents, the options of how to build a team are more limited. my preference is that playing time is as performance-based as possible....and that whoever performs the best actually plays no matter what the name on their jersey says. and that, importantly, to allow that to happen, the coaches don't pigeonhole players with instructions before they get on the field...and instruct them to play in support roles by design. the teams with the highest # of dangerous players are the ones that do well. the USMNT should be trying to come up with a system that allows for the most threats to be on the field at once...even if that means pulisic isnt playing in his optimal position (wherever that is) 100% of the time.
There are obvious loopholes that can be used if your parents get a job in the country. Amon went to a boarding school, for instance. I don't think Australians can move at 16 to England. I believe the FIFA reg is 18, with an exception for kids in the EU. It is not applicable to colonies, afaik.
Officially, players under 18 cannot transfer outside their home country. The only exceptions are (a) your parent legally immigrates to a new country for non-football reasons, (b) the foreign club you're going to is in a bordering country and is within 100 km of your hometown, and (c) you have an EU passport and the new club is an EU nation (technically, the EEA, but let's not split hairs). While nothing here explicitly gives favor to ex-colonies, it does indirectly provide some benefits. European countries and their ex-colonies tend to have close economic, political, and cultural ties, and immigration visas are easier to obtain. Someone from Australia would find it easier to immigrate to Britain (and bring their soccer prodigy son with them) than someone from Cambodia - especially if an English club was pulling some influence with corporate and government contacts. And of course, due to the more recent colonial past and continued inter-migration due to economic ties, someone living in the ex-colony is more likely to have a parent or grandparent from the European country - or some other means by which to claim an EU passport, which greatly opens up the process. Additionally, closer economic and cultural ties also mean clubs from the European country are more likely to have a scouting presence at the local clubs. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe that these rules only govern youth players who already have a contract signed. I don't know how it works if a youth player has never signed a contract with any club.
I've not gone completely into the weeds on this; but there is obviously nobody really checking unless it is a club to club transfer. However, if FIFA determines or finds out that you have broken the rule, they will make all the players leave and ban you from signing more players for two years (at least in the case of Barcelona). If they determine you had a deal before your parent looked/found employment, they will send you home too. It is a small sample size, but the last four WC champions will be EU countries. Brazil and Argentina seem to be falling back quite a bit having been eliminated by EU countries earlier in this tournament than the previous. But, small sample. Hard to gauge just how important the EU movement is.
Well I'm not sure the Championship is a fair comparison because there are no current MNT players and English players rarely move to Europe. Anyway, English players in the Championship are also a minority, though I'm not sure whether Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish players count as domestic or international.
Well I'm not sure the Championship is a fair comparison because there are no current MNT players and English players rarely move to Europe. Anyway, English players in the Championship are also a minority, though I'm not sure whether Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish players count as domestic or international.
I've watched plenty of League One matches but I've never seen a team with 10 internationals like you'll see at Yankee Stadium, or players like Almiron, Vela or Giovinco. And I don't remember a League One team splashing out $15 million on am 18 year-old. Sure there are a lot of League One quality players, mainly in defence, but the best MLS teams could compete in the top half of the Championship I have no doubt. Hell Toronto knocked two Liga MX teams out of the Champions League this season and took a third to a penalty shoot-out and they're struggling to make the playoffs.
I mean - this is nonsense. What you mean is that top English players rarely move to Europe - which has to do with the huge salaries offered by the EPL that makes it the ultimate destination for most of the world's players. That's especially true for English stars, who are in extreme demand among EPL clubs and can double or triple their salary in endorsements if they stay in the UK. This influence has consequences all the way down the league pyramid. As for English players in the Championship being a "minority" - well, they're not. They still make up about 49% of the players in the Championship.
Getting back to the thread topic. The biggest thing to me is don't burn Pulisic out, the way Donovan was. USSF is going to be strongly tempted to bring him to matches where he's not needed, to sell tickets. Please please please don't abuse him.
http://kwese.espn.com/football/unit...lisic-cant-be-responsible-for-us-soccer-alone Jurgen Klopp: Christian Pulisic can't be 'responsible' for U.S. soccer alone "But you don't do him a favor if we talk too much about him. This country is too big and there are too many players here [for him to do it alone]. "If you do these things, like Egypt is doing with Mo Salah and Pulisic is for them [the U.S.] -- come on, let the boys play football." "But don't make him responsible for U.S. football because nobody can do that job." "But if Christian Pulisic stays the only one with that quality then there's no chance. So it's easy as that and we don't have to talk too much." Klopp would be a great USMNT coach....I wish the USMNT would play similar to how liverpool plays under klopp
All Klopp is saying is that "best player" means nothing because it is the best "team" that wins. It doesn't matter how many times I say that or a mega star like Klopp says it, the result is that there is no change in people's attitude and they will be making up lists of "current best xi" without the least thought about how it all works as a team. I don't have Pulisic in my "best xi" at the moment because I think Weah fits better and I want to play with a target forward like Jozy/Sargent and 5 mids and 3 cb's. In a 433 I'd start Pulisic. Would our manager force us to play a 433 because he could play Pulisic and he didn't want to face the blowback from SUM/MLS/public? Of course he would. He isn't hired to win the World Cup; he is hired to take the easy way out.
Don't worry. You'll get a coach who says we can win it all. It will not be Klopp. Of course I have Delgado in my "best xi team" - for now. Find someone who understands and executes the connection between attack and defense as good as Delgado and I'll take him.
We're no where near ready to win it all and no everything shouldn't be focused on a single player. But, pretending Pulisic shouldn't be on the field regardless of formation is absurd. I love Weah as a player and from what little I've sen Seargent has some real potential too, but we need to see how much they actual see the field this year before we stat benching someone like Pulisic in their favor. Fingers crossed that as the year goes on, this possibility looks more rational, but I think you would struggle to find a single professional coach anywhere in the world who wouldn't start Pulisic for the US.
the point of playing only young players right now is to help them grow and help them establish themselves.... if creating a platform for these players was a fruitless endeavor...and nothing can be done to enhance who/what they will become....then just play the best 11 at all times. what i take from KLlopp's quote is: the USMNT should do all it can to help DEVELOP players and move players along in their careers. I know a lot of people are against that and say that national team isnt about development but the only way a lot of the us players can get to the next level is through usmnt involvement. plain and simple. people who discount what klopp says and say well yeah of course we would want 6 pulisics but we only have 1 and we cant do anything about it....just dont get it. it's about how the team is CONSTRUCTED and how TALENT is nurtured (or not). the USMNT - expecially right now - should be an incubator...not a reward show, imo. with the end-goal being a team with as many threats on the field as possible...not a team with 1 superstar and his underlings.
Pulisic is going to need some creativity down the middle. I see him more as a Dempsey type than a Donovan one: he can create his own chances, but he's not the type of player to elevate those around him. So, without a creative midfield, all the rivals have to do is put two guys on him and we'll be in trouble. That's why I feel it's essential that Weston McKennie and Keaton Parks pan out. Those two, if they achieve their potential, can be the right CM pair to feed a guy like Pulisic and others (Weah, Sargent, etc.). Also, I was counting on Saief to be on the other side, but he may be a bust at this point. Let's hope Green can prove good enough to make the jump this season.
I agree that Pulisic isn't a guy who is most concerned with the making the whole team click and getting others involved and that sort of tactical scheming. He's more of a direct attacker. We need a team to get him the ball in dangerous situations and let him attack the goal. If we expect Pulisic to play deep and control the game from midfield, we're losing his best characteristics as an attacker and forcing him into doing things he's not as good at. We need other player to do their jobs to get the most out of him. There's certainly an argument that his game will grow into a different type of player, but I rather doubt it. He can have a great career in Europe playing for teams who will get him the ball where he needs it and won't rely on him to both dictate play and score goals. Plenty of great players are more specifically attacking players.