same, u20s convinced me. i know hes had a strong season with fcd but seeing him at a different level (not better/worse just different) is important to me. (responding in general now) but my "endorsement" only goes as far as i want him in camp, i want to see him on the field, i want him to get more than a 12 minute cameo in one of the two (presumable) friendlies. i think writing him in with adams/mckennie is crazy premature- but i want him to get a real shot to prove me wrong (or at least that im going to be wrong in the not distant future). that said- talk of adapting pulisics game around him is straight nuts. thats some next level getting too far ahead of yourself eta:i agree the olympics are a good next step for him, especially considering how shit we are at integrating new/young players.
It's not adapting Pulisic's game around Pomykal. It's playing Pulisic at the position he has played over 90% of his club career.
Olympics are the priority for Pomykal. The U.S. doesn't need another failure like 2012 and 2016, and we shouldn't expect European clubs to release any valuable U.S. players for the competition. As long as he's sitting in club limbo, however, then Weah should have gotten the Michael Bradley style U-20 + Gold Cup callup. Especially since Olympic qualifiers are unlikely.
oh, pulisic should absolutely play on the wing- thats always been the case. hes played, at this point, probably evenly on the left and (the last couple of years primarily on the) right. im not trying to cause a ruckus, you just worded it in a way (paraphrasing) "have pulisic and boyd inverted to play off etc etc"- i hoped the emoji would show how non-confrontationally i meant that. this thread is obviously going to be hyperbolic to make its point, im just saying even IF youre (the general "you") saying pomykal/adams/mckennie today and for the next decade! then at least lets recognize his role is first and foremost handing mr adams and mr mckennie their water bottles correctly and we can go from there, much less basing any roles around him
That paraphrase doesn't begin to actually paraphrase anything I said, since I was talking about him needing to beat out Roldan and Mihailovic just to make a roster, not writing him in as a starter. Also, one gets better results with laughing emojis after actually saying something funny. Insert laughing emoji.
Puli can't lift the entire team unless Pax multiplies Puli's force (as well as changing his direction). Does anyone need a diagram?
Man, can any thread avoid becoming a Bradley thread? I've watched a ton of Pomykal this year, and he is one of the better players in MLS. It's evident watching and it's really evident to just compare Dallas with Paxton and Dallas without. It's a stunning difference. He may have played farther forward as a youth player, but right now, both at FC Dallas and at the U20s, he's tailor made for the position McKennie is playing right now. He could easily challenge Roldan for that backup slot, and I think he'd win. Roldan would likely be better the further back you play the role -- Pomykal is a bear on defense and a great tackler for MLS, but he's not a big guy and that will play a role at some point. But he's miles ahead of Roldan in terms of offensive skill. He should get a look, but I expect him to lead the Olympic Qualifying team ... unless he gets sold in July, which is looking kinda likely. He's had less than a full season of MLS at this level, so it's understandable that he's not on the senior roster yet.
What do the Olympics matter? The only tourney that matters is the WC, and if we're rolling out the same retreads (as we are currently), we very well might miss the WC again. I also don't get everyone saying we need to "put the breaks on". Who says he's the next Claudio Reyna? Who says he's a star? If a player, whatever his age, is the highest rated player in MLS (by any independent-ish metric), he needs to be on the team and challenging for a starting role. Especially when the current coach has shown a proclivity to favor MLS players. If he runs into a bit of negative form, or gets injured, or whatever, he can then be dropped. This isn't Freddy Adu, this isn't even Sargent, this is a guy playing better than other Americans, in the same league as most of these Americans, who are currently starting on the senior team. I don't get why this is so complicated. Did we delay Jozy's arrival on the senior team? Or Bradley's? Or Pulisic's? When is it "ok" to call a young player up? Pulisic played 9 games for Dortmund and was with the senior team. With two goals as well. Just because it was 9 games in Germany means more? What happens when we're struggling with our retreads in pre-Hex qualifying. Then it will be "too late" to call him in, as we need to "go with experience", like we just did in, wait for it, missing the WC.
I get you, but there's a difference in style there. Gil was supposed to be a bit of a dribbling fantasista, and Pomykal's more of a circulator, which makes his lack of goal stats more normal. Shoot, he might even wind up being the 6 of the future for us. I think that's me you're referring to, and I suppose one could read it that way, but the motivation was the other way around--finding a good enough CAM to allow Pulisic to play on the wing where he really should be playing. Maybe I should rack my brain for others, but I can think of one American in recent years who was as good as Pomykal in MLS at age 19, and you just posted his name above. Going back a few years, you'd get to Altidore, Donovan, Beasley, but that was a long time ago and those guys all became regular NT starters.
Here is the problem with this thinking, our players who are seasoned in MLS at the position he plays (or those that keep getting called anyway) are equal to or less than what he currently is. So why waste time giving them minutes now in all the games, when you could be building to the future, even if he flames out you at least know what he is. And if he does develop you are giving him the platform and minutes on the national team that can only help as his career goes on. Im not saying bring in every young player, or call them all them time, but if the skills they have displayed are equal to or close to a vet, its better to go younger at this point in our current state in a majority of the friendlies and the GC filler spots. Its not like we are talking about replacing superstars.
@Casper my apologies, i did get my wires crossed between your reply and a post from @Stan Collins. sorry stan as well, and i appreciate your clarification. i WOULD say i see adams/mckennie/pomykal as a 6/8/8 setup and that thats not a problem with me- i think being able to advance the ball through midfield to our attacking 3 (with my hopeful future frontline of weah/sarge/pulisic being the example) being both more than enough and more than weve had in years. but ffs, people just WANT to get pissy and argue. but at least now i know emojis are for knock-knock jokes and working on stand-up sets, not trying to convey friendly conversation.
thats an interesting thought. kellyn acosta is close- considering performance AND hype (we have no shortage of "next big things if they only got a shot"). i think miazga fits the bill. but off the top of my head i cant think of any others that werent a lot more hype than substance shown (at the time). shea maybe? he was probably 21, 22. agudelos hype came more from the national team, he was never really top 5 at his position in mls, though. yeah, acosta and miazga are all i can come up with.
It's not an either/or. The Olympics is (are? grammar, what is it?) a FIFA tournament; we should try to win it if we can.
Yes, we try to win it. But if there is any non-zero % that a certain selection (Pax in this case), will inhibit the future success of the senior team, that selection should not be made. Similar to why Sargent wasn't picked for the U20s (don't ask me why he's not on the senior team, but that's beside the point). When we're in a dire situation, as the senior side is now, there is no luxury to keep our best performing players, regardless of age, from the team. By all accounts Pomykal is one of our best performing players.
Is their anyone over 23 on the team right now you'd cry over if they weren't there anymore? If not then the Olympics is the perfect place to let most or a lot of the future starters to play together and gel and then move up together after it's over. Qualifying might be tricky of course and not sure how many who are involved in qualifying would be in the Olympics itself. Also, the actual Olympics are Summer 2020 so after qualifying some of those from qualifying could get some minutes with the full team and still play in the Olympics later that year.
If we move to 433, Adams-Pomykal-McK would be a great second line. That was where he played in the U20's and IMHO, was outstanding. His defense caught my eye on more than one occasion. Boyd-?-CP is formidable in front and having service and surprises from the second line is gonna be annoying to play against. That question mark has many possibilities.
I hear you. And who knows WTF is up with the Sargent situation. You won't hear me apologizing for our sorry ass fed when it comes to that. But... Between qualifying and the Olympics, Pomykal will miss one senior team match that matters. And it's against Cuba. He can play in the other Nations League group stage game against Canada, and he can play in the semis and finals in March if we make it that far. (God help us if we don't.) The Olympics are in the middle of a summer with no Gold Cup, and we weren't invited to Copa America. The Hex dates haven't been announced but last time it started in November. And because WC2022 is starting late, that's still two years away from Qatar. There is tons of time to integrate him into the senior team, if he stays on this trajectory.
Appreciate the dates. So Hex starts in November 2020? But what about the pre-Hex qualifying (where Jozy dominated)? I certainly wouldn't want MLS' top American to miss 6 pre-Hex qualifiers just to play in the Olympics. Is the Nations League the new pre-Hex?
That question mark does a lot of work on most clubs at most levels of soccer - "If only we find a striker who finishes more often..."
It really gets weird when players aren't called up and we get these arguments about it being so they can play in the Olympics. The full national team is where ALL the best players should be playing. It is the top of the mountain and the top of the mountain is for the best players, regardless of age. If you're 18 and one of our best or if you're 35 and one of our best, I want you on the full national team. The Olympic team gets the U23s that aren't quite good enough but may get there in the future. If someone from the full team is able to fit the Olympics in too, great. But, the priority should be to get the best players on the national team. That's where the games matter most and that's where players face the best competition.