Re: Bruce Murray----Most underrated player in US history Hugo Perez was a midfield creator, not a striker.
Anyone who understands the game and watched Hugo play in the 80's and early 90's realizes that he was a special player. His fued with the Fed and his injury hurt his Nats career and years of playing indoor took a toll on his body. It's obvious to anyone who actually watched him play that he was one of the best to ever play for the Nats. He deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. One other thing of note that seems to be ignored here is that Perez went to play in El Salvador 2 years before MLS started. He retired from professional soccer at 32 at the end of the 95/96 season. It was never a choice of ES over MLS. If he was offered contract by MLS teams then it's not a stretch to guess that he was still good enough to play, but only someone who saw Hugo play in El Salvador could make that call.
I always wondered why he didn't want to sign with the MLS as soon as he stopped playing in El Salvador. I don't think they approached him becuase I think he didn't show any interest. I remember asking why he wasn't in the league in 1996 but his name was never even mentioned among the list of players even though he had started against Brazil on July 4th, 1994 at Stanford. You would think if guys like Waldo, Vermes & Sorber got signed on as marquee players, Hugo should have also.
I seem to remember that MLS did approach him about playing but he declined. I don't know if it was his health or an issue over money or what, but remember at that point he had played professional soccer for 14 years. He was probably ready to call it quits.
A friend of mine from El Salvador who played for the national team and on the Rochester Lancers knew Hugo pretty well. He told me in 97 that Hugo became a Born Again Christian and some sort of Pasture in a non denominational church in San Francisco. He also told me he still plays with his fellow El Salvadorans in Men's Over 35 Sunday leagues in SF.
Re: Bruce Murray----Most underrated player in US history Hugo Perez was the A-mid that everyone round here wanted Reyna to be. He'd be a big deal today if he was the same 18 year old player coming into MLS that he was back in 82.
I agree with every point you made Allos. I do not know what these coaches or writers look for in a player. Hugo had it all and more than 70 Caps. 1st ballot in my opinion. It's sad for our sport that he was not voted in as a player.
In full disclosure, Hugo was very skillful and painfully slow. Reyna was/is a much better player overall. No disrespect to Hugo as he was the best we had in that era, but no, he was not as good as Ramos, not as good as Reyna as an overall player. If you compare the club career's of Reyna and Perez, it is pretty apparent what others though of those two.
Thank You Bruce. I didnt, know you felt that way about HUgo. You have only posted this same thing like 50 times.
Yes, he has a better chance at the HoF with the veterans' committe. Most of the voters for the HoF seem to lack a keen history of the game in the US, thus players like Perez and Thomas Dooley and Bruce Murray don't get voted in despite being more than worthy of inclusion. Apparently, if you didn't have the bulk of your success at the club level after the 94 World Cup, you aren't getting voted into the HoF by the mainstream voters. Also, the veterans' commitee is made up of a lot of Perez' contemporaries and is more likely to vote in one of their own. I mean, they voted in frikkin' Clavijo who earned most of his success as an indoor player. And they let in Al Trost, who was a solid but by no means spectacular NASL player but who had very little success, as did most players of his era, with the national team.
perez was slow, like valderama was slow.... perez was a pure playmaker, the guy on the ball who ran the usa attack... in the qualifying for 1990, when usa went to central america, a great deal of the burden was placed on perez.... NO perez, NO 1990 bid... i don't think you can say that about ramos nor reyna... all 3, really are stylistically different... but NO 1990 bid for the usa, and who knows what the future would have been... i don't quite recollect when the 1994 bid was given to the usa, was it AFTER usa beat trinidad or before??
This is so true. Everone remember's Caligiuri's goal against T&T, and for good reason. But just as important was Perez' goal in the US 1-0 away win against El Salvador. Without that goal, the US doesn't qualify. Period!
The US was awarded the 1994 World Cup on July 4, 1988. They defeated Trinidad on November 19, 1989. Wikipedia is great!
What some of us are saying is that sans Perez, the US doesn't qualify for the World Cup in Italy... in 1990.
Yeah, I was answering Adam Zebrowski's question. I hope that he and Bruce Murray can get into the Hall of Fame.
Growing up in San Diego I got to see Hugo from the beginning including the Olympics, there were 3 or 4 Sockers on that team. He wasn't that slow when he was young but years of playing indoor took it's toll on his body. Unfortunately he came up right as outdoor soccer was dying, his story would have been different if MLS was around in the 80's.
Hugo was a good player. No doubt about that. But I also would not make him Valderrama, or even Reyna or Ramos. To me, Ramos was perhaps the best midfielder the USA has ever had, though a lot of bad luck and REALLY bad injuries hurt his career.
The only comparison anyone is making between Perez and Valderrama is their speed. Are you even reading the posts you are responding to? Seriously man, you've been posting nonsense. Making crap up that's factually incorrect is nonsense. Sandon called you on it and you were wrong. Most of what you've posted in this thread is just flat out stupid. Look at your previous post Lousy player? Arturo Alverez? That's just dumb. Your misguided opinion isn't worth listening to when it's based on incorrect information. You've already proven that you don't know what you are talking about. I doubt you ever even saw Hugo play before his game against Brazil in 94.
Perez trumps Reyna hands down. Perez just oozed talent, who could unleash a precise pass cutting a defense in two. Reyna was (is) too static for my liking, rarely making that killer pass, relying more on the safe lateral pass. Reyna beats Perez in the sense that he was born later, when soccer was gaining more traction among the public. If you could fault Perez for anything, I guess it was his reliance on his left foot, but what a left foot.
Hugo was so much fun to watch, the passes the control, the way he commanded to have a touch on every posession is what a 10 should do. Reyna was great do not get me wrong, but how many time would he go sideways or back. Hugo would take chances and look for the killer pass. He'd take on defenders and put beautiful balls. The passes he put were mesmorizing. Hugo was a 10! different then Ramos. Reyna was a 10! but never took chances. Greatest 10 we ever had was HUgo. Since he didnt play MLS the writers do not know who he is. I find it amazing and yet frustrating. Bruce, everything you write on the Hugo thread is just plain stupid, just like the hall of fame voters.
No, not at all. Ive seen them all play. I know a good player when I see one. There are plenty of people here that share similar views. Hugo did get between 50 -70% of the votes along with dooley. That a majority in my opinion. Of course you need 80 to get a 3rd player, which is just an absurd rule. Point is your posts dont make much sense, because they are all out of left field as some countrymen would say
And immediately following the win v. Trinidad came a large wind, later identified as a collective sigh of relief from the FIFA powers-that-be/were. IIRC, FIFA had been criticized for giving the WC to a country that had not qualified for so long, and FIFA officials really hoped the US would earn a bid in 1990 before getting the automatic host bid in 1994. FWIW, I had the good fortune to see Hugo Perez play a couple of times for the USMNT. He may be the most creative and most accurate passer I've seen play for the USMNT--and often his targets whiffed or mishit what should have been easy goals. I would suggest that his statistics, esp. assists but even goals, would have been stronger if he had been surrounded by better players.