There is a MASSIVE difference between walking in to Man U and starting and being seen as a "developmental project" by Man U. A project implies a player that has some of the tools needed to be good but is extremely raw and lacking in many respects. You hope he unlocks his potential and if he does you look brilliant. If he doesn't you discard him to the trash heap of lower tier soccer. Bradley does not fall into this category. Maybe it's semantics and what you view a "project".
C. Ronaldo was a development project at Man U. It took a couple years for him to play well enough and develop his tools to fit within Man U's system in order to start consistently. There are players like John O'Shea who took years to become trusted for a regular role. If these players had not progressed in the eyes of the manager, they sure as sh*t would have been sent elsewhere. Arsenal has several players that have taken years to break into the side. Wenger increases their playing time every year, and it is not always a steady progression either. I really don't get your point. I don't think you understand how things work in the rarified air of the biggest clubs. There are some superbly talented players- more skillful than Bradley, quite frankly- who have needed a good amount of time and development to crack into elite clubs starting lineup consistently. The players they purchase for immediate starting roles are already stars at the club level somewhere. Bradley is hardly a star in the Bundesliga, let alone Borussia Moenchengladbach. He is an up-n-coming talent on a mediocre side who had an average season and a strong world cup. In all candor, I believe the point is moot since I don't see clubs the caliber of Man U or Arsenal buying Bradley at this time. They will want and need a more complete player, and a player that can dominate at club level too. Maybe if Bradley puts in a dominating performance at Bayern Moenchgladbach this year, they will purchase. If you want an analogy, Hernandez looked very good for Mexico at this World Cup and was purchased by SAF. He is 21 years old. You think SAF is going to start him week-in, week-out in the Prem this year? Yeah, right.. No, they will develop him in the 'Man U' way
They are going to talk about his vacation schedule. He will get three weeks off, and miss both camps.
I don't he would, but on the other hand his play against the top top German clubs and against England in the WC indicates that he would not be that far from making and playing for a big 4 club in England. The one thing about Mikey is he has a way of winning coaches over.
Ronaldo was 17 years old when he went to manyoo. He was half the size he is today when he first arrived. He had to mature for sure, both physically and mentally. Rooney wasn't exactly a 90 minute player when he first got to Everton. Bradley is 22. A better comparison might be someone like Michael Carrick who started with West Ham at 17, went to Spurs and Manyoo at age 25 (he is now 28).
I believe Bradley should stay with Gladbach another year and work on becoming a more consistent and tactically astute CM - something that would be mutually beneficial to him and the club. Bradley had a good WC but I don't think he really showed anything that clubs didn't already know about him. He played hard and showed great endurance and strength, has acceptable skill and thrives in the pressured environment that comes with high profile matches. Of course, if some club wants to offer Gladbach a lot of money for Bradley, they should take it. But, I think he is the kind of player that will be far more valuable to a mid-level kind of club than a top 4 club where he is likely to be more of a squad player. And yes, Gladbach is a very big club where he can play in front of 40,000 fans every week in a league that places high tactical demands on his play.
you are comparing Carrick- who was a proven DM and rated as one of the best in the Prem when Man U purchased him and is ENGLISH- to Bradley, who hasn't even established himself as one of the best midfielders in the Bundesliga and is AMERICAN? That is a huge leap, I'm afraid.
This is where I think Americans lose the plot. They want to equate their quality with lesser clubs directly to their prospective effectiveness with better clubs. When you move to a Champions League team, your quality instantly increases based on the talent around you. You're really telling me that Cambiasso, Song, Mascherano, Carrick, or Lucas Leiva bosses a Bundesliga midfield surrounded by the players Bradley has around him? Fredinand, Vidic, Michael Dawson, Thiago Silva, Vermaelen, or Ivanovic never gets exposed at Standard Liege when playing Champions League opponents? Pedro, Pato, Bentnder, or Babel lights up EPL scoreboards with the service Altidore got this year? Fletcher, Maxwell, Kranjcar, Benayoun, or Muntari is part of Best XI lists at Fulham? Once you're in that club, you're in that "club". You have to screw up massively to fall out of that Champions League club. Howard did it so we know how it goes. The best in the world are always the best in the world. Ronaldo, Rooney, and Messi could go just about anwhere and still be the best in the world. The US doesn't have anyone challenging to be "best in the world." But its BS BS thinking that role players for those top clubs are miraculously immensely better than other players simply because they play for top teams. Does Bradley's play directly encourage domination at a club like Arsenal? Of course not. BUT, how good would Bradley's energy look when the players around him aren't getting caught out of position? How good does his bite look when his team isn't always on its back foot? How good/effective are Bradley's forays into the box when his teammates have the vision to find him? Those are the questions Arsene Wenger is asking, not "how much work would we have to put into this kid to get him ready?"
Can Bradley even pass the ball other then inside of his right foot? That trait alone disqualifies him from a side like Arsenal, in which every single player (save maybe Walcott) can do anything they want with a ball.
Which lets every single one of us know that you did not watch him at all with Gladbach, nor did you see what he did during this World Cup. You don't complete 80% of your passes as a CM if you're a bad passer.
An unbelievably poor post which makes me think you have an axe to grind or don't watch much soccer. A much better argument would be Mike would have a hard time displacing Alex Song and Abou Diaby.
I think that's where Bradley's intensity would fit in. He's stronger, tougher, more athletic, and better defensively than either of them, and while not as good technically, still a good passer, and a better threat to score. Those two are probably somewhat better passers, and better dribblers.
I agree completely, but for Arsenal to pay money for Mike he should fill a need that I don't think Arsenal even have right now. Unless of course Wenger is projecting Mike to be a player to good to pass up.
I have absolutely no axe to grind. If Bradley could pass like Dempsey or Feilhaber, I couldn't make that claim. Why, when we get excited by our players, are so many posters blinded to their weaknesses or needs improvement? There is no way Bradley has the quality ball skills that one thinks about when you imagine Arsenal prospects. That takes nothing away from Bradley drive, determination, workrate, leadership skills, strong tackling on occasion- all of which would interest stronger clubs.
I don't think most of us are studying which part of which foot a specific player out of 22 are using.
There is a difference between tempering ebullient praise & and asking if he can make a pass with a surface other than the inside of his right foot. One takes an unpopular path and/or ventures toward being Negative Nelly. The other removes all vestiges of credibility.
Actually, Arsenal lack a fighter in the middle of the pitch. They've never been able to replace Viera. Until they do, I can't see then passing either Utd or Chelsea, though they've got the better technical players. Then I guess Arsene Wenger lied to the world about how good Bradley was on French TV while broadcasting the world cup.
Maybe if we gang up on him he'll run off like he did after his last grand statement: "Bruce Arena is the worst coach in MLS."
Arsenel doesn't need a pure enforcer, and that's not what Vieira was either. Diaby and Song are good, but they don't have the energy or "bite" (something that has become a popular description of Mikey right now) that Bradley does. If Arsenal wants/gets Bradley, then they're looking at him for the same role he had at Gladbach and the US: shared/limited responsibilities on both ends. He's a box-to-box guy and that is his lure. He goes all-out for 90 minutes every game.