Its not even about "hacking" it as a forward or winger. If the staff thinks Reynolds' developing skill set better matches that of a defender, then that's where they should move him. When Man United moved Jonathan Spector from a forward to a defender/defensive midfielder in their academy, were people shouting that ManU didn't know what they were doing? No! I remember reading a story in 4-4-2 about how late in the development cycle Dutch clubs nail down a position for a player. They develop the skills of the players and then pretty late in the process assign a position. Here in the US we have little folders in our heads sorted by defenders, midfielders, forwards, etc at young ages. And even sub folders. Is a midfielder a #6 or a #8 or a #10. Its like we have a sorting hat. And heaven forbid that a coaching staff thinks a player is a #8 that the Big Soccer Intelligentsia has determined is a #10. Oh hell, no. Those are grounds for dismissal.
I don't understand why many here have decided that Reynolds should switch from being an attacker. I'm curious to know why, if anyone can explain it. To me, this looks like Dallas has a player that they don't know how to develop (or care how to develop). We can go back to Pareja's infamous quotes about needing practice players at RB. There's no guarantee Reynolds would develop well at any position, but from what I've seen, CF is the best position for his game. Defense highlights a lot of the areas he struggles in (soccer IQ, errors, quick decisions in all four directions).
This is a strawman argument. I don't have a strong opinion about Reynolds' best position, which I think is also the case for Clint Eastwood, and DMN expressly wrote that he does not have one. I'm not one who particularly likes blind appeals to authority, so I'm not going to argue that Pareja's decision to try him in defense inherently makes it the right decision. But I'm also not going to dismiss it as automatically wrong. Who knows, maybe Reynolds was initially used as as a throwaway RB in practice, but it turned out he showed promise there.
I think Clint made a good point on this. It comes down to whether you trust what Pareja is doing with regards to development of these young players. I personally do not, and am not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt as of now. If we were talking about NYRB, RSL, SKC, Philly Union, I think I would give them the benefit of the doubt. Not FCD with what they are doing of late. They'd fit into the category along with Atlanta, LAG, and some of the real non-existent academies (Houston, Colorado, New England) who don't even seem to recognize they have an academy.
At some point the whole Ajax team (except for keepers of course) were former attacking players. Including JOB who ended up at LB.
The changing positions happens all the time as kids get older, needs change on teams etc. That doesn't bother me and if Bryan excels at center back or right back that's great. The problem with FCD is I don't trust Parejea or their staff to have the players interests first (there is an argument to be made their first interest is not the player but the win/loss record) so who knowns if this will be a good move for Bryan. Did they put him there simply for practice numbers and he will be placed on the USL team and then never heard from again, or will he get a chance with the first team? Time will tell what happens with Jesus, Pax, Bryan and now Thomas and hopefully the kids behind them are watching when deciding if they want to entertain HG offers if FCD makes them. If these kids (Pax, Jesus, Bryan, Thomas, et al start to destroy USL and still get no time on the first team yet FCD keeps bringing in 30 year old south American players, a young player ( particularly offensive) in the academy would be unwise to take that HG offer. Wait until your 18 then try Europe. If it doesn't work out, then try the USL or MLS again later. Similar to LAG, what happens if Efrain is the leading scorer of the League for LA2 next year and still doesn't get time on the first team? Is he stuck in USL as he is LA property, but they won't play him on the first team and he can't get to Europe because they won't sell him? He is wasting his time in USL, showing he needs to play on first team yet still not getting minutes. That would be a major problem for young American Players.
Some people are starting to sound like the entitled parent on the sideline demanding that their kid play more. Kids are generally not going to just step into the first team lineup, and -- as long as their is a clear plan that everybody is on board with -- there is nothing wrong with that. Would AC playing be a hell of a lot of fun to watch? Damn straight. I'd be playing him every game if I were the manager! But fortunately someone with much more information is making those calls. Either way, the fact that Andrew Carleton is not a starter yet is not something that is going to ruin his career or even affect his optimal potential. He's still at the very beginning of this process, and it's not necessarily a bad thing for him to be working his way in as a professional at this point. Keep in mind that playing regularly in USL at the beginning of the season, and being on the bench for just about every game recently are really big strides for him.
ehhh, wrong board in terms of the focus on Andrew Carleton, but I do think the overall concern for not playing 17-18 is a tad bit overblown. It's best to be sure they are ready to carry the load before throwing them out there.
I get a great feeling of pride when I see SKC included in the lists of teams doing development well. I don’t have anything to do with it, I’m just a dumb fan, but I sure hope it continues.
I think it's way too soon to be proclaiming a certain team or coach is excelling or failing with young players. In a year or two there will be a much better knowledge of this but right now with different teams and coaches have different pools to choose from, different teams to put those in and different levels that the first teams are at right now doesn't make for using a one or two year snap shot as a final rating. Last year ussoccer97531 was eviscerating KC because EPB wasn't getting time and yet this year they are one of his exemplary clubs. Don't be the day trader that buys and sells every couple of hours. Instead be the savvy trader who studiously picks the companies and stocks that they can ride for years.
Best possible U-18 team. GK: Shakes, Ochoa, Travasos DF: Hoffmann, Hilton, Araujo, Akanyirige, Toledo, Malone, MacDonald, Martinez MF: Booth, Tessman, Otasowie, Bassett, Duke, Palomino, Roberts, de la Fuente, Llanez FW: Stojanovic, Kelman, Diaz Shakes Hoffmann-Araujo-Akanyirige-Hilton Booth Duke-Tessman de la Fuente-Stojanovic-Llanez This team has weak full-back depth. I think the starting CM's and the starting CB's are very good, along with there being a lot of depth at those positions. The starting wingers from this group are very good, but there's not much depth behind them. Weak in goal.
This team kind of leads in the category, "players in Europe that we don't get to see on tape much". I think Araujo, Hoffman, Booth, De La Fuente, and Llanez all have very high ceilings. I think we will consider this team loaded in 2 years. Plus, there are probaby 2-3 players we don't really see or know about at the moment that will emerge. Great posts!
I haven't heard anything. I last saw him play in June of 2017. He was good, but not great. If we had better full-backs, I might not think he's best 23 in this age group. Duke is either not still with SKC or injured. If he's not injured, I presume he's waiting until he turns 18 to sign in Europe.
Possibly a January camp. Tab said on the Scuffed podcast that instead of the full youth campapalooza, they'll have the U20s, U19/18s, and the U17s do a joint camp.
I think all three GK's quoted above are strong in goal. Ochoa just signed on with RSL as home grown and I believe Shakes and Travasos signed their NLI. Ochoa saw action in the U20 WC Qualifiers and did played well.
In "ridiculous made-up words world" everyone knows it's not a REAL "summit" -- er, campapalooza -- without the U16s apparently... I feel like they could still call it a summit. But I'm chill like that. https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/20...it-brings-153-players-together-in-single-camp
Last year's U18 January camp had 33 players called in including eight players based in Europe, so hopefully we see a wide variety of guys brought in. Hoping to see Joao Lucas, Charlie Kelman, and Jordan Adebayo-Smith. Also, Cameron Harper seems to be on the rise with Celtic but he hasn't been called in since last January.
1090721165507772419 is not a valid tweet id Haro was a Mexico YNT regular callup throughout 2016, 2017, and the early months of 2018. I believe this is also the first callup for Bassett and Bryant, two of the more notable domestically-based '01s.
I do a cursory rundown of U18 callups. Here's an updated version: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lEyhcweounRgP6uYI44U0WoQDpwsQVkCFRebIRh3xOE/edit?usp=sharing These guys all have 3 or more (out of 6 camps) callups. Call it an early maybe peek at your 2021 U20 cycle: Sepulveda Leonardo Araujo Julian Mendoza David Morris Aidan Ochoa David Benalcazar Nico Duke Cameron Hategan Nicholas Roberto Llanez Jr. Ulysses Otasowie Owen Palomino Marcelo Roberts Thomas Booth Taylor George Hunter Haak Justin Hinojosa Jr. Julian Martinez Nelson Ritchie Stuart Segal Gabriel Shakes Kristopher "Kris" Stojanovic Stefan Also, in case you missed it, Tab is coaching the latest group.
Surprised to see no Thomas Roberts, Bryan Reynolds, Ulysses Llanez or Marcelo Palomino in this group. Wonder if this is like the January camp for the first team with trying out newer fringe guys and more regulars not called in. Perhaps its plausible their coaches did not release them but would expect them to be called.
I think this is more taking a look at some other guys. Llanez can’t even be blocked by Wolfsburg because he hasn’t officially signed with them yet. Bassett is probably the headliner of this roster.