I saw a funny meme (can't find it now). After 2010, hey the USSF should be more like Spain, then they go out in the group in 2014. After 2014, hey the USSF should copy the German development playbook, then they go out in the group in 2018. After 2018 Oh man what if England wins?
was a huge waste of money and made pay for play even worse then it is now. Was one of ussf's few good decisions. People need to learn there are no single magic fix that can be applied to ussf. People that think guys like Byer or Gary Kleiban or tinfoil pro/rel people have magic fixes don't see the problems.
They play prettier, we bunker better. BTW Howard had 16 saves vs Belgium, how many did their goal keeper have?
Given that Japan's youngest player against Belgium was 25 and the average age, maybe the question should be was Japan ahead of us 10-15 years ago? Starting X1 vs Belgium Kawashima 35 Yoshida 29 Shoji 25 H Sakai 28 Nagatomo 31 Hasebe 34 Shibaski 26 Haraguchi 27 Kagawa 29 Inui 30 Osako 28 Subs Used Honda 32 Yamaguchi 27 U20 WC Rankings 2017 - USA 6, JPN 14 2015 - USA 7, JPN DNQ 2013 - USA 22, JPN DNQ 2011 - USA DNQ, JPN DNQ 2009 - USA 18, JPN DNQ 2007 - USA 7, JPN 9 2005 - USA 11, JPN 16 U17 WC Rankings 2017 - USA 7, JPN 12 2015 - USA 21, JPN DNQ 2013 - USA DNQ, JPN 9 2011 - USA 12, JPN 5 2009 - USA 12, JPN 21 2007 - USA 16, JPN 17 2005 - USA 5, JPN DNQ (Incidentally the average age of the US team that tied in France was 22.8).
Japan's ahead of us in the respect that they have an older and more ingrained footballing culture, where soccer is the 2nd most popular sport, behind baseball. We think of them as upstarts because the J-league started at a similar time as MLS, but they had a viable D1 league and exported players to top leagues abroad, like Brazil and Germany before that. Prior to the Club World Cup, the club champions from South America and Europe contested an Intercontinental Cup that was held in Japan for the last 20 years of its existence, starting in the early 80s. The hugely popular manga series "Captain Tsubasa", about a Japanese boy who travels abroad to follow his dream of playing for the top clubs in the world, started in the 80s and is still running (it also featured real clubs like Flamengo, Inter and Barcelona). So soccer has had a strong foothold in Japan for sometime, but may have gotten even more popular in the 80s/90s. Despite that, the US has achieved more internationally in a relatively short time. What Japan has over us today is a clear identity and style of play, that allows their players to play with confidence.
This is absolutely true. It is difficult to compare quality of sides based on whether or not they qualified simply because the qualification processes of different confederations are wildly different. However, I think that "DNQ due to a playoff loss to Sweden" is not quite the same as "DNQ due to accumulating fewer points than Honduras and Panama over extended round-robin play, capped by a definitive loss to an under-strength Trinidad & Tobago". Compared to our "had worse overall record than Honduras & Panama and got flat-out beat by Trinidad's reserves", Japan's "advanced through the World Cup finals group stage and took a tournament favorite in Belgium to the wire" seems to suggest that they have reached a significantly higher water mark than us in this most recent cycle. And I am personally willing to be bold enough to say that the gap in accomplishments so vast as to suggest that our MNT, presently, is not as good as theirs, presently. And my explanation for that is four years of mismanagement, locker room turmoil, and poor talent development which has seen us drop considerably from where we were when we faced Belgium in 2014.
I would really disagree with that. First off, until the J-league was established in the mid-90s, Japan has only amateur and semi-pro leagues - I don't see how that be considered to be a viable D1 by any metric. They did export some players as prospects, but out of necessity - any talent in the country had no professional outlets except overseas. They did have an organized university system that was responsible for much of their development, but that was equally true in the USA. The Japanese made their first ever World Cup in 1998 - if we ignore the early Cups (prior to US soccer's death and resurrection) the USA was still a participant nearly a full decade earlier. And most would point to 2002, when they hosted, as the true watershed for Japanese soccer. There may be merit to your point, in that Japan arguably has had a soccer culture longer than we have, especially in embracing the larger global culture of the game. USA soccer culture had that long dark age, and the revival was largely separate and independent of the world game. But there was little in the way of infrastructure to develop Japanese soccer until maybe the late 80s at earliest. In those terms, the USA and Japan infrastructures are roughly equivalent in terms of their age - the USA maybe a little older. You could say Japan had more of a grassroots to tap into when they did really start putting in the infrastructure, while the USA has been more of a top-down development.
Pre-1994, the USA had no soccer infrastructure because American society was extraordinarily hostile to the sport itself. You had mainstream politicians, media and overall American society referring to soccer by every pejorative and insult you could name, from Communist to Homosexual to unpatriotic. Your very existence and loyalty to America was questioned. Japan never had to deal with such a ridiculous attitude towards a single sport that soccer had to experience in the US. It was certainly a very strange way of expressing Xenophobia: by taking it out on a sport. And of course, most everyone here is familiar with the Simpson's own cheap shots at soccer.
According to this the English invented it: https://historiek.net/engelsen-vonden-honkbal-uit/2254/ It's rugby, modified for wimps.
Yes, modified. Both sports, modified. So much so, that they are different sports. Weird how that works, huh? The Native Americans played a variety of stickball games. Doesn't mean that Lacrosse isn't now it's own, unique sport.
They definitely outperformed us this cycle, and can certainly go home proud. But no, I don't really think they are, not really.
Talking currently? Yes... They made it to the world cup and even got out of their group, they're. A lot of their team is on the older side so next WC cycle I'd probably say US can be better. We just can't F*ck up this time
This thread sucks because half the people think the question is about the two TEAMS, and half the people think it’s about the two PROGRAMS. So everyone is talking past one another.
so wait you are saying native americans didn't literally play lacrosse? when did lacrosse become a new and unique sport?
"In the traditional aboriginal Canadian version, each team consisted of about 100 to 1,000 men on a field that stretched from about 500 m (1,600 ft) to 3 km (1.9 mi) long." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lacrosse Sure, this inspired the Anglican and French Canadian colonists, but let's not pretend it's any more alike than rugby and gridiron football.
lol so less players...smaller field...new sport I am watching this amazing sport right now its brand new. It has two goals...11 players per side but it has this thing called var which is basically instant replay and they allow a fourth sub if the match goes to extra time. Its amazing...watch out soccer...this is the new worlds game. there is a team from england that won earlier today which is amazing because in that country they play an entirely different sport.
The Sheffield Rules resembled Aussie Rules and Gaelic Football, with players allowed to use their hand as long as they bounced the ball, fair catches (or mark) and no crossbar.