Haha, trust me I've watched Michelle Akers in her heyday many times, but this kid Pugh is special. Just like Mia was.
Interesting, thanks for taking the time to post. (I wasn't the club and country poster.) Something I just was looking at regarding the Soccerplex (I figured that one out) is mass transit access. Driving time doesn't look too bad, but access via transit looks poor, even from Montgomery County much less elsewhere.
I know. That's why by the end I didn't know why I took the tangent I did. The end of the line isn't close and transit to the venue is mostly nonexistent. There are plans for one game at Audi Field this season and options for more potentially and it will be reevaluated in the future.
the key "same" that can't be said about mls (usl is not the top divisiono) teams is that they don't support their local club teams. they do, making it easier to run a national team without obsessing about club revenue. we're not doing that with nwsl teams, thus hampering the growth of the wnt.
i wholeheartedly agree. was saying the same thing to myself after watching her in recent games. 'twas mexico tho. i'm glad the coaches are a little more measured/patient than we are. lloyd?
I don't know how this is an argument at all. A lot of people still reject MLS and the growth of the past 22 years because it's not 5 teams they can name in Europe. Most of the US men's board is people complaining about and not supporting MLS. Likewise, I mentioned USL because I agree it's important to support the local clubs whether MLS, USL or NPSL.
people often differ in their view of prospects. in fact experts often differ. I am most certainly not an expert. but when I first saw pugh as a kid on youth national teams, she seemed a unique prospect even when she was not scoring. i think the coaching staff made a great choice in elevating her, and now it's paying off. a contract given to a young phenom is not the reason professional women are retiring. they are retiring because not enough of us support weekly woso and there's no $$ in it. As a result ussoccer is prudent and astute in investing some of its money in younger skillful stars who will show a roi for many years to come.
eurosnobs do exist. but that certainly does not diminish the argument that ussoccer-mnt does not have to be the financial support for the men. their clubs do that, making it easier to run the $$ part of mnt. no good men's player will quit the game because they can't get a national team contract. the women will, and do all the time, because there's no support for weekly club soccer.
If getting Solo's approval stamp implies losing by 4-1 and 6-2 within a few days, maybe Swedish players were onto something. By the way, I didn't watch the full game, but I finally found at least all of the goal on USWNT website, here.
The main thing I noticed was that Mexico was much more physical in the second game. The coach must have given them a talking to. The unfortunate thing is, they may have caused some US player injuries. It seemed to me the ref let players get a way with a lot.
Don't disagree with your last statement, but those youngsters must clearly show they are out performing their peers to warent such an investment. Wondering in which event you saw her excel? I have followed the YNT (male and female) closely for about 8 years. her u17 team failed to qualify for the WC at all in 2014. She was elevated to the u20s that year despite not being the highest goal or point accumulator on the u17s (I know that's not everything, but the team was objectively not successful) She played the first u20 game against France as an ACM behind Horan's 9 and in front of Lavelle's 8. She was woeful. Even Michelle French saw it and moved Horan back to the 10 and Pugh out wide where she had zero impact the rest of the tournament (out I think in first knock out against KDPR if I remember correctly) The second u20 cycle she was arguably the third best forward behind Watt and Sanchez as most agreed. If relying on youth performances is a good basis for WNT call ups (and I do think it should be a factor) then Ohai, scoring the winner against Germany in the 2012 U20 World cup WIN should have gotten more of a look. And Dunn who was clearly WOM (assist and created that goal in addition to some game saving defensive plays at right back) shouldn't be a fringe player. Certainly we can agree to disagree on a player's subjective abilities. If you are a fan who enjoys a driving to endline cross kind of game, then I think I see why you are high on Pugh. I enjoy a more sophisticated build up, because I believe it more effective (and yes I concede more aesthetically pleasing) against all levels of teams not just the tomato cans, so there is where we may diverge. That said I have seen Pugh commonly finish poorly, dribble over the endline, and send crosses in to no one many times as others I am sure would agree. Again I think she has been an excellent prospect. But is not where others have been and they too should have been offered more chances to excel. Pugh has received so much support in her advancement that I wonder which other wunderkinds might have emerged if offered the same? The cynic in me also wonders how much her "marketability" played in her elevation. As I said, they retire because they don't earn a living wage. But they knew the salary level going in right? At least some of them went into the league thinking they had a shot at the golden ring of a WNT contract and that potential was worth the years toiling at poverty level. When it became clear to them that wasn't going to happen they defaulted out of soccer back into the "real world". No one goes into professional women's soccer with a long term goal of earning 23k/year. I think if the NWSL is not seen as a real potential path to the WNT because the golden ones are preselected as teenagers at least in part due to their marketability, fewer will take the time out of their real careers to give it a shot. That very well may weaken the league. The league needs to exist so the allocated players have someone to play against. That is the reason FIFA nixed (at least temporarily) the idea of an international "league'. Some ( including me ) felt that FIFA would actually weaken women's soccer by putting more emphasis on international play rather than club level play. I would also favor subsidizing an intercontinental "champions league" over an international one. I think raising the standard of level and compensation at the club level (NWSL included) will do more to advance women's soccer than advancing the international competitions. That's my position on this; I respect yours.
Jane Campbell ending up in the back (against the netting!) of her own goal as a corner bounced in is a symptom of a real problem with USWNT development. Players are identified at 14-15, but then that is it. These same players pretty much move along to U17 then U20 then U23 (anyone noticed that these teams aren't doing great in non-friendly competitions?). They are then moved to the USWNT to see if they can play there. Meanwhile, kids not selected early never really get looks. Yes, of course, there are exceptions. But Campbell is the perfect example of the coaches at USSF being enamoured of her "look" and basically moving her right along and into the USWNT. Other GKs, playing well in NWSL or NCAA never get the same opportunity. What has Campbell ever done professionally? Ellis couldn't wait to bring her in. Even when she was 2nd string in a league with 6-8 American starting keepers, she was called in. I've watched a lot of soccer, and have never seen a GK end up against their back netting with no contact. She just ran back there. The NWSL exists, and is kept afloat by USSF, to develop players for the USWNT. How about we let players excel there before getting called in? Obviously, Davidson is doing well and there will be exceptions; but a player like Hanson doesn't need to be looked at. She was good with the ball at her feet but was sloppy in possession, and it was Mexico. Is she going to the WC? No. Let her get pro minutes and then look around the league for midfielders; there are good ones that never get called. If the CBA allows Jill to call NCAA players but not more NWSL players, I apologize to Jill. But we don't know what is in the CBA, and I don't know why that is.
Rapinoe, Morgan, and Pugh were too much for Mexico in the second game. Rapinoe moved the ball faster and didn't make all the bad decisions she was making at SheBelieves. But, even with her 4 assists and a goal, if I told you to watch the game and count up her turnovers you would be appalled. She is this wild card that will have 10 bad turnovers but create 10 chances. Both are incredible numbers. I still think Horan plays incredibly soft. She had 20 pounds and 4 inches on almost every Mexican player but is repeatedly bodied off the ball. I can only imagine that this was WCQ tune up and that is why the Best 11 played so much in two friendlies against a second tier opponent. It can't be that JE feels she has to win these games. Should add in Best 11 without O'Hara, Ertz, Mewis, Short because they are injured. Now add Brian and Horan? to the list. Brunn just got back from injury. Anyone seeing a pattern here? These women are playing far too much and the injuries are mounting.
I think the Morgan statement was interesting. IMO US coaches have been way to interested in what Morgan could already do (i.e. get behind) and finding ways to help her do it. When she joined Lyon they were interested in what she could do to help their team. She earned a spot on the flank and learned to defended it. They wanted her to expand her game because they weren't going to change their system to help her get behind. Instead of pouting about it she took it as a challenge and has rounded out into a much more complete forward. I honestly never thought she would work in a 1 front... that her game was suited to be the left side player in a 2 front... but my mind has been changed completely. Other than not being a significant heading presence she has become as good a #9 as anyone in the woman's game.
Regarding the USA being offsides on goal # 1 and goal # 4 I went back and took screen shots. I, personally, don't think that the USA was offsides for either goal, but it was close. See for yourself. Ball is marked by a red arrow. Pugh goal (# 1) - it looks like Mexico player # 23 is keeping Pugh onsides with her right foot. Morgan goal (# 4) - I took a screen shot as the ball is coming at Becky S. and another screen shot after it leaves her head. One Mexico player is keeping Pinoe onsides. Sonnet's (??) foot never touches the ball. Ball is marked by a red arrow.
I actually think Pugh's head has leaned past #23 G.Espinoza's trailing right foot Morgan's head, torso (abdominals ), and left foot are way offside. That's why Pugh didn't pass to Morgan.
Close on the Pugh play; hard to fault the AR for not getting it inch perfect. Mexico are a shambles, the offside line is wrecked by #23(?) and Pinoe is all alone with lots of space between the midfield and defense. Horrendous. A close call would have bailed them out unjustly; they were asking to be scored on.