Erik Palmer-Brown is a 21 y/o centerback. He is where he should be. McKennie is a mid. Pulisic is an attacker.
Oh man didn’t think i’d see this in here, but then again it is BS. It’s not too early to speculate, but it’s too early to say if Weah or Carleton or any of our top prospects is clearly better than another. A player like Weah may take a little more time to develop than Carleton who’s appeared better in youth games. Not typical but look at how Osorio on Toronto has suddenly upped his game a few levels compared to previous seasons. Bottom line is let’s wait and see how Weah does with the playing time he gets.
Ive replied to you several times. They are not REAL replies, in your eyes, because you dont like the answer.
Its not controversial. I responded to a poster who said that Weah staying at PSG was dumb. It wasnt even ussoccer. Ussoccer took offence to a statement I made about playing time. Please check the post history. I never said Weah was better than Carleton. Or that training at 1 club was better than the other. I said Carleton was getting meaningless minutes. I meant that! In relation to the senior nats team the minutes that Carleton got didnt count for much. On the other hand Weah played very little minutes too. But.......Sarachan felt the need to call him up. Therefore, I draw the conclusion that something that Weah is doing carries more weight and influence in the minds of the USA staff. Ligue 1 being a better league than MLS and PSG being a european powerhouse club, likely played a role. If you can come with another explanation, Im all ears. Im fully aware that each individual situation is different and 1 club may not be a great fit for another player etc. In this case we are talking about 2 specific situations. PSG and ATL and Weah and Carleton. ATL has dragged its feet in playing Carleton even when they have had opportunity. I thnink overhping of players comes with the territory. Its like finding wonderkids on FM. Im more concerned when the staff and coaches overhype a player. Thats when its a problem.
Disagree. We need to reward youth players who seek to be great and challenge themselves at the highest level. Giving rising players at elite programs an early look is a good thing for the program to see if they can contribute. Our pool is already wide enough with above the Ralston line players (MLS deserves credit for this) so we don’t need more quite-good-but-not-great international players that MLS has been able to sporadically produce. We need players who are world-class and competing at the highest levels is the best path for that. Let’s incentivize elite players to follow this path. For all the disappointment wrt Green, he did exactly what we needed when we needed it. On the other hand, Adu was anointed a national team star while at DCU and that likely had a hand in his lack of work ethic IMO.
Respectfully, USS, your support of Agudelo, Hamid, EPB and Carleton presents as cheerleading to me and perhaps others. This is, of course, your right (and perhaps you’re right as you’re obviously a passionate USMNT youth supporter with greater knowledge than most....) but I think you do cheerlead.
In USS’ defense, I think he was merely stating that weah’s PSG minutes were largely throwaway minutes rather than meaningful. This is undoubtedly true and we shouldn’t expect Weah to play truly consequential games for PSG. It is also in controversial that he’s in a much better situation than Carleton.
Professionally, Weah is in a better situation right now. As far as development goes, who knows. Thats a different subject. This isnt the youth forum, though. The evidence is clear. Weah is getting call ups to the national team. Carleton is not. Apparently the situation that Weah is in is working for him. So, why is it controversial to point that out? The national team spotlight provides a different level of exposure. In the past most posters would have agreed with this. His call-up is a direct result of his club play, regardless of how many minutes played. Im not trying to put anyone down but we have to be honest with ourselves here. You get paid to play national team games. The exposure creates leverage. Hes is in a better business situation. Professionally, he is ahead of Carleton in this moment. An agent would want the leverage that Weah has created. However, if Carleton was to start getting more playing time he would likely jump past Weah (in nat team picture). MLS players tend to get call ups fairly quick when they perform, so I expect Carleton to be able to break through soon. If anything I would argue that Carleton has an easier path to the national team. If he were to cement a starting spot on ATL, he would be a part of the national team In my opinion. Weah has far more competition. Its a lot less likely he will play consistently.
You forgot Flores and Wright... He has a strong bias towards athletic and "skillfull" players. Nothing wrong with that as I am desperately rooting for super technical smart player (Hyndman, Zelalem, etc), but the inability change views after the initial one is crazy. I worry a bit when our opinions on players are similar. I'm high on EPB, but a little more cautious. I think Carleton is wildcard. I could see him being very good or never really putting it all together, and think it will be mostly likely at one of those extremes.
Typo on my part - meant to say non-controversial that Weah is in a better situation than Carelton. I do think that he's only going to get non-meaningful minutes with PSG. Also, I don't think that Carelton should jump past Weah if given MLS minutes. Perhaps bring him into the pool but not ahead of Weah.
I know you love those technically skilled players and are willing to forgive some grit while I think the gritty athletes with bad ass attitudes (e.g., JJ) are our intermediate future and the type of team I like supporting.
At the end of the day you need both, and ideally you can find a full team if guys who have all of those attributes (athletic ability, grit, technical skill, and soccer IQ) but most national teams can't which means you need to put a mix of guys in the field who are stronger at some things than others.
I like a balance. For now, I'd like to see Adam's as a disciplined at stay at home dmid, Mckennie in a free role and a player like hyndman/zelalem/Parks. To play two of those guys, both of them would have to improve their "bite". My ideal, if they ever got good enough, would be mckennie, hyneman, and pulisic assuming we had players who could play on the wing. I just want of those guys to break through because I see it as such a deficiency of our team and we may need those skills help break down lesser opponents. If after they break through, we are better with 3 JJ clones so be it.... I just want that option.
Players who have been mentioned in the last page of Weah’s thread: -Jermaine Jones -Pulisic -Hyndman -Tyler Adams -McKennie -Parks -Zelalem -Carleton -Flores -EPB -Haji Wright -Osorio -Julian Green -Adu -Agudelo -Hamid
these past two days ITT, are more action than Tim's is going to get until the next loan window opens up
It also makes us look like a minnow. This is the type of thing Panama does, and then their players end up at Deportivo Fabril a year or two later. We've done this before. They end up being bad players for Greuther Furth or Necaxa. Thats not to say I think any specific player will be that without evaluating their individual situation, but no one should have that authority to call in pet projects on a wide scale level. It is way too unreliable compared to calling in what is pretty straight forward process that players play well for their club team and earn a chance with the NT. There might be minor disagreements on certain players there, but most can agree which players earn a chance with the NT. Besides, this Ralston line stuff is complete nonsense. This term should stop being used. It completely blurs the lines of differences between the caliber of players. Its lazy to use this type of rhetoric. There are players in our player pool all around the world who deserve a chance to prove themselves because they've proven themselves at club level. Not all of them will contribute in big roles. We might only add a couple of valuable back ups or maybe a low-level starter, but thats important to a team. We saw last cycle that when you get rid of any type of merit-based system for call ups and call in pet projects, you end up with a severe lack of depth when the games matter. You seem to have the problem of not understanding the difference between having different opinions and cheerleading. A lot of our fanbase have become cheerleaders. Pulisic is bigger than the team according to them. He should show up to the NT when he wants. What matters is not his impact for or against NT results, but personal feelings towards Pulisic. The cheerleaders attacked me for pointing out that Weah was not going to leapfrog established very good footballers at PSG. When they were wrong, instead of admitting it, they've began to spun what happen into a good thing and added huge distortions to try to paint Weah in a positive light at the expense of other players. I don't care about my opinion conforming on this website. I was probably the first person here calling for Klinsmann to be fired, and I was right, unfortunately. They were wrong. The coach they backed ended up being probably the worst coach we've had in 20 or more years. I immediately disliked the Arena appointment. I was saying even before it that it was a bad idea. Some of my opinions are right, others are wrong. What I will not do is latch onto a consensus and intentionally cheerlead for it, even when it makes no sense.
You expose yourself when this is what you say. I asked you a very simple question how what you said could make sense. You have yet to respond to what I asked. Instead, you try to impugn my motives in your response and turn this into an debate of different players. I frankly don't care about your opinion of that. I didn't ask about that. You are talking rubbish, but that matters less than your inability to answer a straightforward question. I asked you how a statement you made makes sense, and you refused to answer it. I've asked it multiple times. I'll do this one last time, and then I think everyone can see that you don't have any real answer because there was no intention for it to actually conform to making sense. Hopefully you try to give a good faith reply though. I have no need for you to not answer. I merely asked a simple question initially, and you've chosen this direction for the discussion.
This, this, this. So perfectly encapsulates things, although I would add one caveat. I'm not remotely indifferent to what's going on with Carelton. I'm, well, enraged is the wrong word, maybe sporting enraged, over it. Carleton is probably our best playmaking prospect to come up through the system in probably a half decade to a decade other than Pulisic (who could play a greater variety of positions). Carleton has a legit chance to develop into an old school #10. But because he doesn't have a euro passport (I think he doesn't) and because he foolishly signed a long term HG contract with MLS, his development has been stunted dramatically by said choice, and the chances that he lives up to his potential, that he maximizes it have been artificially inflated.The chances that he becomes an MLS lifer, yet another solid but not special central midfielder to pile up with previous might have been's grows every day he's stuck glued to that Atlanta bench. It's infuriating. He is an asset to the USMNT in addition to an asset to his club and considering the close ties of MLS, SUM, and the USMNT, the fact that one of the two or three faces of the U-17 team, one of the brightest prospects on the U-17 team of at least the past five cycles is having his career deliberately stunted in Atlanta is just beyond frustrating. w/regards to the 97531 and somebody disagreement: We'll see what happens. Maybe I'm missing something, but I agree with the idea that Weah's situation is significantly better, even in terms of minutes. We've just seen the '18 MLS season largely come and go and be a total waste for Carleton, we are only just starting Weah's season and he's already gotten plenty of run with PSG during the summer and even in serious matches to start the year. I think he made the wrong choice in sticking around at PSG, at this point I can't remember sticking around and not going out on loan working for any of our prospects other than Pulisic. Maybe it will work for him, but to me, minutes matter. Considering his coaches track record, and PSG completely owning Ligue 1 in recent years, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he got some spot starts here and there throughout the season due to such a heavy schdule glut of games, and the Teuchel wanting to dip him into games periodically and then add in the possibility that PSG takes the title by late March, or early April, then there could be another 3 or 4 or 6 or whatever games he can also get in the spring. Weah's almost certainly going to get plenty of play in '18-'19 just as Pulisic did in '16-'17. I don't mean plenty as starters minutes, but plenty in the sense that 97531 and really everyone else would've wanted for Carleton this year. I don't think it's comparable, I think it's pretty clear Teuchel knows how to handle young players, and will give them plenty of opportunities in terms of minutes and even a handful to a half dozen or more starts. Carleton's just been hosed. Whether they rate him, and sincerely just want him to develop the body, refinement, and maturity to handles the rigors of a really physically brutal league like MLS (in the sense of the summer heat, the physicality and iffy quality of reffing, and the horrific travel issues w/how massive the country is compared to European domestic leagues), or they are just b.s.ing and just consider him a young prospect that isn't near the top of the pecking order and not relevant now as anything other than exceptionally cheap roster depth, it doesn't really matter. Screwed is screwed. He has no potential for loan outs, he isn't being used in any meaningful, well thought out approach, he's an afterthought. That's not close to Weah's situation in any meaningful way. If Weah gets no more minutes in '18-'19 and something suddenly changes with Carleton, we can talk about how similar it is, but right now Carleton's in an s show of a situation, and Weah's got a beautiful one (although, again, I'm extremely frustrated he didn't take the loan out. Just don't see that work out well other than Pulisic, although you can also end up like Haji and have the loan out blow up in your face, but again, how is that much worse than what already has happened to Carleton?).
The problem with this is we can turn around and say. Well lets look at Tata and Teuchel. Carleton's been invisible and anonymous for Tata, actually worse than that as he virtually never even sees the field as a sub. Weah's gotten minutes for a top 8 team in the world with visions of being the best team in the world. Weah's scored goals for them in the run of play, played for them in the preseason as a starter and s sub, played in all manner of games and been steadily brought up through the system until this summer he starred at times for them in their tour, and actually started a game in one of the biggest leagues in the world as well as gotten sub minutes this year, and last. Carleton can't get off the bench in a vastly inferior league on a team w/o 1/50th the talent of PSG in the starting lineup or reserves. What matters more? That Hackworth and friends couldn't figure out where to play Weah or how to harness his talent? or that Teuchel and PSG have figured both out, and to great effect with Weah consistently generating chances, assists, shots on goal and goals. What matters more? That Hackworth could give Carleton a role where he shined at times, and played solid ball otherwise, better than Weah most of the time perhaps? While Tata either thinks he sucks? Thinks he's nowhere near good enough for MLS sub minutes, or just thinks he's not close, physically or perhaps mentally (I can't remember if he said the latter so correct me if it wasn't implied or said) for the rigors of professional football yet? And btw, it takes A TON of chutzpah to just brush aside a freaking hat trick in the knockout rounds of a youth world cup game, and focus entirely on when he didn't score? You've done the same with Sargent repeatedly as well despite the fact that he scored a ton of goals at the overrage U-20 cup which is about 10x as important as scoring at the U-17 WC when you will be the focal point of your opponents attention after your performances five months earlier. It's silly. This is soccer. Carleton and Weah do totally different things. Weah is not going to be having a clearly obvious impact on the game unless he's scoring goals, or forcing saves, something that happens far more rarely in soccer games than quality touches in the midfield from a #10 tasked with directing an attack. Far easier to look good (and to be fair, to look bad) when you direct the attack, then when you depend upon others to see your runs and movement and reward you with well timed through balls, crosses and the like(see Pulisic's frustrations at Dortmund when he was repeatedly ignored by teammates in '16-'17). Lastly, sometimes it just takes longer to development, and sometimes players just hit a wall or plateau. I'm not sure if Weah is just WAY better now than he was in 2017, or if he's always been good and with the US, he just played within a system and with a coach that was incompetent (check and checkmate there). I don't know the answer because the windows into viewing Weah were sparse and of small sample size. I didn't see it early on, then he helped destroy Paraguay and you started to see it: the technique, the speed, the quality of the runs, the intelligence. Hopefully Carleton hasn't hit a plateau. We have no way of knowing because of how Tata has handled, or rather not handled him. I still think he has special talent. You don't see passes, lanes, and runs the way he does without having talent. But one of Tata's concerns was echoed by posters in his tougher games with the youth team in that he was vastly more effective in open games, then in tough, physical games where space was really limited. That's my one concern, and it's another reason why it's infuriating that he's stuck with Atlanta. If he were in a good situation like Pulisic was, or guys like Sargent, McKennie and Taitague have been, he'd have an intelligently run outfit working with him on these liabilities, and refining and augmenting his strengths. Instead we get a bunch of b.s. coachspeak, and splinters in his rear end with no end in sight, to the degree that if he fails, we'll never really know much much was a lack of skill/talent/what's between the ears and how much was the total mismanagement of his mid-teen years in Atlanta.
I don't really think so. I would agree with the sentiment that being attached to a big club doesn't mean you aren't the same quality of a prospect attached to a lesser club (see Sargent being pursued by both smaller clubs like WB, and bigger clubs like Dortmund and Bayern Munich), at the same time, when you are a young prospect, and you attract the attention of teams playing at the top level of a sport that's better than not attracting their interest at all. They don't sign players just to fill the #'s. They're into analytics too, and it always makes sense to have as many quality youngsters as possible. If an elite team is interested. It's good. It's not the final say, but it's still very good, and much better than generating no interest from them at all. That being said, I fully understand that it doesn't mean you actually will be a star or a very good player, it's just a blinking sign that right now, at your age, you're of interest to a club that is at the top of the heap. Maybe you turn into Jovan Kirovski, or Jonathan Spector, or maybe you turn into Pulisic. One doesn't learn the final answer until the fullness of time plays out.