Rob Stone: US Manager shortlist is Ramos, Tata Martino, Marsch, Berhalter, Friedel, Osorio & Vermes.

Worst kept secret in sports. It is finally over. Can we fire Earnie Stewart now? What purpose did he serve?

 

First, thank you for reading. It's not an Edcrocker-sized treatise, but I appreciate that you took the time to read each of my counter-arguments.

Now back to your post...

The education system is not 1-to-1 analogous to the development of soccer players. Entering professional soccer before your early 20's is the normal developmental pathway of the rest of the soccer world. Many players may not get a lot of minutes prior to 21-22, but the best ones do. MLS being bad at identifying talent and relying on colleges to develop its players because they didn't even try to develop players until 10 years ago seems to conflict with a lot of your points. If the US players were "garbage", then MLS scouting/development is hardly a good test, because they aren't even trying.

And laying the proof at the foot of less European involvement is frankly absurd. Scouting Joe the Plumber from the University of Iowa is far easier to do today with the advent of digital video, the internet, and increased globalization in general. In 1994, the cost-benefit ratio required to scout American players would've been astronomical compared to today. The fact that European clubs (who were far smaller back then than they are today, and mostly remain far smaller than many American professional teams) couldn't afford to venture into the wilderness of American youth soccer does not mean that there was/is no talent here.

I mean, my whole point here was that MLS was not good at that job, and they really still aren't, which you seem to agree with. You're just willing to dismiss it as a casualty of a young league, whereas I am not.

I think he's more of a CM/CDM, but whatever, six to one half-dozen to the other.

I mean, yeah, I understand the unique challenges facing MLS teams vs. European ones. It doesn't change the fact that they miss huge parts of our player pool basically by default. And if we're going off of your point above, they never even tried to develop a system until a decade ago, so MLS was never going to be a good gauge of youth development, nor would they have developed our players well. It's not what their goal was. Their goal for the first decade was probably just survival.

Which is fine, but then we're left with the fact that the proceeding decade-plus, when it is their job, and they do have the resources, has been incredibly underwhelming.

In fact, it also coincided with a huge drop-off in American talent. You may pass that off as MLS getting its feet wet in the player development game, which would be valid, but my concern is also rooted in the fact that the league is gearing up for being even worse for young American players, as DP rules relax, free agency remains restricted, and MLS academies lose prospects to European clubs who can now easily scout the entire country. It's hard enough for MLS to get a good prospect to stay and manage his development, without the additional barriers to his professional development.

Yes. Same with, for example, Soto, Ledezma, etc. It's well-documented and understood that MLS academy and traveling teams are being poached by European clubs. Pulisic came from PA Classics, for example. It speaks to the fact that we have talent in this country, and I don't think that's ever been the issue, really.

So, we're coming to some of the murkiness of the issue here. Is the number of Americans who succeed in Europe small because there are very few talented Americans? Or have very few Americans succeeded in Europe because MLS doesn't do a good job of developing players?

I think it's the latter, not the former. We've had players in Europe since the 90's, before all the infrastructure was in place to scout them. Now, with all the infrastructure, we're getting youth players poached at an ever-increasing rate. If there was no talent available, European teams wouldn't have set up permanent teams and scouts here.

Once again, the costs associated with scouting the American market are waaaaay down. You know, I can actually draw a parallel to basketball. American colleges scour the globe for the best basketball talent. Rankings sites constantly adjust and promote players. Almost every year, my college team has at least one guy from Eastern Europe or Austrailia. Why is that? Is it because basketball in Eastern Europe is suddenly amazing, and people grew an extra foot there? No, it's because basketball players from those places suddenly became visible and available. Lauri Markkanen, from Finland, was recruited because an assistant coach saw his highlights on Youtube. Where the heck was that in 1985?

As to Reyna, MLS's academies get credit, he played for NYCFC for the last 3 years. But a lot of the talent leaving for Europe does so because of the senior team, not because they aren't learning anything here at the youth levels.

You're welcome to dismiss the failure of MLS scouting and development as simply lag time. I will not. We have millions of kids playing in environments that mirror MLS academies. They play in structured, competitive leagues that are perfectly capable of producing great players. See Sargent and Pulisic for the latest examples. These teams have been operating for MLS's entire existence, and in fact, MLS teams often take players from them, analogous to European teams taking Academy players (Carleton was developed by Georgia United, for example, and many MLS teams take players from the best local team they can find, Ballistic United for San Jose). They've had the time and money to do more than what they have accomplished so far, because so far they've failed to develop top-end talent, for export or otherwise. Hopefully that changes.

 

This attackers debate is interesting as I was thinking about it when looking at the first choice strikers for the playoff teams almost all imports

 

You lied !......

 

there were a few that got time. How many were developed from a young age where they were not ready to play in MLS to being ready? there are a few others that you didn't mention but not too many. MLS did give opportunities to young Americans...or any American that was ready but they didn't develop them. My point is that we weren't set up for development in the past. I stand by that. MLS is now entering the development game and has been at it long enough now so that there are some young players that have been in an MLS academy for several years. Those are the players upon whom we can begin to judge MLS...the results and or trends should be more clear in a few years. This past year was a major step up from recent history but that is a very low bar. What is needed is continued improvement year over year.

there are enough young attackers now that if they are on the right track, some will emerge in the next few years. Pomykal, Carlton, Busio, Mihailovic, are a few off the top of my head. If we don't get anything soon than it's a fail.

 

Scouting lag time is probably less. It takes time to set up a good scouting system but once in place, the benefits should be obvious immediately...though not necessarily at the senior team if they are scouting 14, 15 and 16 year olds. It should be obvious at the youth level.

Development: (by the way, I believe development IS education...we can agree to disagree). Development definitely has an inherent lag time. I don't see how you can ignore that. Assume we take Professional team A with no development system this year and next year they implement a development system that is complete and all the kinks are already worked out. A 18 yr old will either go immediately to the first team or remain somewhere below. If he goes to the first team does the team get credit? I don't think so and you have said that wouldn't indicate development. To get to the point where a team would get credit, you would have to wait at least three years and by then any 18 year old is too old. Of course a 17 year old would still count but that is still a lag time of 3 years and that is assuming the academy hits the ground running on all cylinders.

I'm not trying to excuse MLS. I'm just saying that it is what it is. Who in MLS or who that passed through MLS, in your opinion, should have been a top attacker? Who was missed? Other than the fact that we now have a few examples of top prospects, what makes you think that the top prospects would not have risen to the top and been visible to somebody? USYNT? Europe? (remember, there are and have been international club tournaments for a long time and European clubs probably scouted some of them), College? If the talent was that great, someone should have emerged. Pulisic and Sargent were both identified by USYNT and were undoubtedly on the radar of many teams. Donovan was signed by Bayer Leverkusen... If there were comparable numbers of talented prospects in the last 10 or so years, at least 25% (to pick a number out of my backside) should have been discovered somewhere and the European teams would have come calling...even if MLS missed them. Instead, we have literally zero attacking players that emerged. But if one or two had been developed in Europe I would more easily be swayed.

I still don't think MLS has been a developer of talent. I do believe they are on the right track. I don't think it is fair to judge their current status based upon their past when they weren't trying to develop. It is ok to criticize them for past decisions but they are not necessarily indicative of where MLS is at the present time. We will have a clearer picture of where we are NOW in 2-3 years (even by the end of next season). There are several MLS products going to Europe (not all are attacking players and not all were actually on contract to MLS teams). We will also see within the league, how many of the young players this year increase their minutes and their importance to the team and we will see if the sales this year are an aberration or possibly the beginning of a trend.

 

Bah, Edcrocker had to break his posts up into parts because he was running into the character limit on his posts.

I was faaaaar from that character limit!



Admittedly, long, but it's a complicated problem that deserves a longer answer. Particularly because most of it is just straight opinionated reasoning.

 

He served the purpose of hiring Berhalter with the “thorough search” making it seem like someone with soccer knowledge selected him instead of non-soccer people like the board. The worst part about this is that Berhalter might be a good coach but the way they went about it makes everybody question everything.

 

You've harped on the age restriction a lot. I don't think it ultimately matters, particularly if you start conceding a lag-time of 3-5 years. Let's say MLS starts a team, like Atlanta a couple years ago. They started multiple age groups right away. They already have multiple top US prospects who are teenagers, and they got a bunch of kids from the various DAs in Atlanta and around Georgia. Are they developing any of their kids well? How many years do they need to figure out if Carleton and Bello are any good? Hey, how about we give them a full decade. That's the original premise, and the answer is, MLS is god-awful at nurturing talent.

On the second paragraph, your premise is frankly absurd. We know there were good players here because we exported players to Europe years before MLS existed, and we did so in the ~12 years before Development Academies. Guys like Reyna, Caliguri, Kirovski, and Wynalda all played in Europe prior to MLS, (specifically, the Bundesliga, because it has a Wiki list of every foreign player ever to play there), and guys like Mathis, Hedjuk, Gibbs, and Pearce bypassed MLS to play in Europe after 1994. The latter group all went to college, nobody in MLS signed them, and they went to Europe.

You keep saying how MLS is bad at scouting and development, then throwing up your hands saying "if we had any talent why didn't Europeans come and get them?" Well, the Europeans did get some, but if the national league can't be bothered to find talented players, how the hell do you think the Europeans will??? Magically large amounts of money so they can scour the 800 NCAA college teams for American players? MLS can't be bothered and 1990's Real Madrid isn't knocking, they must just all be trash, that's the only conclusion you can draw?

Not to mention, these European teams are setting up permanent shop here. Why, because everyone plays for MLS youth teams? Because suddenly despite no evidence of any structural change to the way we teach soccer, we're waaaay better at soccer than we were 10 years ago? No, kids play for the same clubs they've always played for, mainly outside of MLS youth teams. They're simply being watched by European scouts because it's now easy to do.

 

If it's just a case of the national league can't be bothered, I don't see how that would be a deterrent to anyone else...if there is indeed all the talent that you indicate. One league's stupidity...if that is the case, would be another's opportunity. The very fact that players did go over underlines Europe's ability to sign Americans. The fact that almost no attacking players of real quality were developed in Europe indicates that Europe didn't develop any American talent either. (Wynalda was good but not great so you could count him if you want). Also there was Dempsey who was excellent. Not sure who else.

Of course there were players that went to Europe. Of those that you mentioned only Wynalda, Kirosvki and Mathis were attacking players. Mathis began in MLS and was going to transfer to Bayern from MLS but the deal fell through when he injured his knee...if I remember correctly. KIrosvky went over young, Wynalda went over after playing with the college and the USMNT. Most of the early players that went to Europe went after USMNT exposure. Kirosvski was once considered a top prospect and he had a long professional career but he could hardly be considered a top player...he had his moments but never really broke through. Of the group, he would be the one that Europe developed.

You seem t have missed my main point and misunderstand some of what I am trying to say. Perhaps if I was better with the written word... You also seem to be getting frustrated with me. I am sorry for that but I don't believe our conversation is going anywhere...just taking up space on the internet so I'll say goodbye.

 

Kljestan was drafted at 20. Sold to Belgium.
Alex Zendejas, an FCD HGP, sold to Chivas at a young age. Good enough to play for Mexico's U21 team last year.
Fabian Castillo, bought by FCD at 19.

 

When the USMNT coached by Berhalter crashes out of the Gold Cup in the summer of 2019 because we wasted a whole f***ing year with Dave f***ing Sarachan, Earnie Stewart has to fire him, and then hire his replacement... in 2021.

 

Wait a minute the excuses are already in place.
1). He hasn't had enough time to implement his style of play.
2). There was only one true FIFA window to get the players in and work as a team.
3). Some of the players were injured.

 

Uninspiring and unimpressive! The press conference was a waste of time. Not ONE media member asked a hard question. One softball after another! Geeesh!

 

The media asked questions that were fine. There were just so few that were actually answered or answered fully. Oftentimes, someone would ask more than one question, and only one question would be answered, and even then only partially.

For example, an early question asked where the team went wrong last year, and what the strengths of the team were specifically, in attack, midfield, defense, and goalie. 3G said he wouldn't talk about last year, then some quick general boilerplate that the squad was young and talented. The opposite of "specific".

 

I think some are making way too much out of the press conference. Really what did you expect him to say?

1. Well we didn't qualify because the mainstay players were too old and not any good anymore.
2. Well we didn't qualify because the previous coaches were idiots and didn't put the team in a position to win.
3. Well we didn't qualify because the keeper in the last game was way too slow to react to a 40 yard shot and the dumb ass defender shinned in an own goal.

There is zero value to hashing the real hard issues of the past. Its pointless. Think of it this way. If a coach throws previous players under the bus how excited are you to play for him now!!!!

Its over. The decision has been made. Lets see how he really approaches the team and how they gel. I could care less about the past....unless he starts to repeat it. But I am willing to give him my 100% support to start.

 

This seems like a more than reasonable take.

I guess that I would have preferred him to not have the attacking platitudes and stated that we are going to be extremely well organized defensively and rival the best defenses of USMNT history, which will allow us to effectively take better shots at scoring on the other end.

What will be interested over time is to see where GB comes out on what's more important:

a) playing time at club

or

b) pushing oneself the the game's highest levels.

This will be become apparently pretty soon.

 

If you don't learn from the past you are doomed to repeat it.

Berhalter and Stewart better have a very good understanding of what went wrong. That he doesn't want to throw ex-coaches and ex and current players under the bus is reasonable. That he didn't say, "2 inches to the left" is a good thing!

 

Given this interview by SI (https://www.si.com/soccer/video/2018/12/04/planet-futbol-usmnt-head-coach-gregg-berhalter-mls), it seems that he's really quoting MLS talking points (better to stay in the minor vs. pushing to the highest levels) andseemingly implying that the only level above MLS is Champions League.

I guess it's to be expected but it's things like this that make the insular nature of the USSF incredibly disappointing (although i'm sure certain poster will call that a conspiracy theory.

FWIW, MLS is not a development league and doesn't have a good track record of developing players. Hopefully, that will change in the future.

 

When did Berhalter say that? He gave a very reasonable answer, which was always the right answer and never controversial until a previous coach took a radical, hard--line stance on it: you pick the best players period; some are going to be from MLS, some are going to be from Europe. He even said it was time for Adams to make the jump.

I hate to bring his name into this, but the whole "pushing yourself" thing, that language specifically, is a Jurgenism. IMO, he had an outsized focus on players making the jump abroad, which was kind of a non-issue; the majority of young Americans pros try to go abroad if they have the opportunity. I look forward to this not being a tent-pole issue during this cycle.

 

It is only an issue because Garber had such a hissy fit. It is the kind of thing our media can understand and controversy gets clicks. I agree, it is not controversial. Bradley said it, and nobody cared.

Jurgen also harshly commented on MLS offseason length and again it was met with a hissy fit. But MLS has since lengthened its schedule.

Lots of people in US Soccer never liked Jurgen or the idea of Jurgen. Some people liked him more than they should because of who hated him. What a fascinating figure.

I can't think of any other American team I follow as a fan where the current manager/coach is constantly compared to previous coaches. It is not like any previous coaches won a non-regional championship either. Super strange.

 

First, I appreciate the attempt to leave JK out of it as I know it’s a topic upon which you have strong convictions (please respond to patrick167 in the other thread!)

I personally think that it’s vital to have our players pushing themselves and the USMNT coach should be actively facilitating our players to play in the major leagues rather than B2/Championship equivalent leagues.

I think it should be said privately rather than publicly but I wouldn’t sing the minor league homilies as it’s not good for our program even though it makes Don Garber happy.

 

Interesting from 2006 ...

Q. What has to change?

A. The league has to get better. The players will get better if they play in a better league. They will have better opportunities overseas, and that’s the way our national team will get better. The best players in Brazil and Argentina play in Europe and their domestic leagues are pretty good. Mexico has a pretty good domestic league, but its national team has struggled because they didn’t have many players in Europe. And we’re better than Mexico.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/sports/soccer/13arena.html

 

Trying to make it in Europe is fine. Trying to make it over there at all costs it's foolish.

Get there on a free transfer (or a very cheap one) to a big club and chances are you'll never amount to anything.

Let the youngsters choose their path. If they know themselves enough, they are the best judges of where they can flourish.

Exerting pressure to to to Europe at all costs ends with a lot of disappointment. Go there if you honestly believe you're good enough, and go somewhere they'll appreciate you.

 

A youngster sitting on the bench at a big club makes more in one month than he'll make at an MLS club for an entire season.

The purpose of soccer is to put food on the table for your family and to provide them with a comfortable life. Getting paid a minimum salary in MLS isn't going to go far in life.

For example, Jack Harrison went from making $165k in MLS to $3.4M. Ask him if he minds those paychecks.