U23 national team

A Parks-Mihailovic-Pomykal midfield is going to get run over. I’m putting Servania back there. The other two fit with him.

 

Yup. I would not consider Keaton Parks as a "holding mid." He's a #8.

Servania is an interesting case.
He was on the CONCACAF U20 Championships Best XI squad after a really nice tournament.

However, with FC Dallas he seems to have fallen behind another youngster on the depth chart. @Eleven Bravo should probably have this player on his chart at this point. He's been in the 18 for FCD in both games so far, and made his MLS debut last week. That's homegrown Edwin Cerrillo.. His stock has been rising really quickly. Both Servania and Cerrillo can play either the #8 or #6 position in FCD's 4-3-3.

Also, at fullback, I would have USYNTer John Nelson ahead of some of those selections. He played LB, RB, CB, and CM in the preseason for FCD, but his natural position is left back. He'll be in the 18 for FCD this week (as Cannon is out injured).

Also, I think that when the games start to matter...……..both Sargent and Weah will be with the USMNT. They're just not automatic right now like Adams/Pulisic/McKennie. They will be shortly. It just could be that for this window the USSF chose to play those two with the U23s in Europe. They have some strong competition to play against. No big deal.

 

I think we need to wait a few more weeks to see if Cerrillo has passed Servania at FCD. Servania was injured and may be just getting back to health.

 

A full time program? Olympic Qualifying is tentatively set to begin in October for CONCACAF. The Summer Olympics are next Summer..............

That's all this is for. Once the Olympics/Qualifying has concluded the U23 team will go on hiatus for 3 years until Qualifying for the 2024 Olympics starts.

 

If the u23 is going to play the same as 3G wants the senior side to play then Parks would def fit that 6 role.

 

Well, I haven't really followed this idea, so maybe I'm missing something...

by full time this means that the players would be signed here instead of the clubs? That seems like a terrible idea for more reasons than I care to go into.

If the idea is just a U23 team on an ongoing basis, instead of just picking up that option for the Olympics ever 4 years, well at least that is more reasonable. Not sure there are enough competitions and enough interest to really keep that going and be viable, but maybe. Depends on execution.

 

The US used to have a B team which played games against other B teams. That stopped about 10-15 years ago but the U23's would be perfect for this.

 

The Olympics are pretty worthless and most countries don't take them seriously (England doesn't even field a team of course). A U23 team could play in them every four years but they are hardly worth building an entire program over. However, most nations, in UEFA at least, have U21 and U23 teams. These act as reserve/development teams for their senior teams. They play Friendlies on most FIFA dates.

I think Weah and Sargent (and others) being sent to a U23 camp is more about the timing of Berhalter's hire than any new commitment to the Olympics. But we are approaching a time where our NT will actually be quite young and good. Behind them and coming fast is the current U20 pool, which might be the greatest birth years of talent yet. So much so that Mexico is trying to pick off multiple players. They will need somewhere to go to play the NT style where they can be evaluated for promotion.

Pulisic is playing for the USMNT this break, but Brunn-Larsen (Denmark), Diallo (France), Dahoud (Germany) and Zagadou (France) are all playing on U21 or U20 teams.

Having a team after the U20s where players can be evaluated will also help with the conundrum that is almost unique to the USA. That our player pool at this age is split between continents. Having a team where MLS U22 players can be observed side by side with European reserve or fringe first team players will be very useful. I think Camp Cupcake skews our coach's perception of the player pool and it takes too long to get certain types of European players integrated. If Cupcakers could be in camps and in games with those foreign based players for the other 11 months, should even things out and really allow for the cream to rise.

 

What is the point in having an U23 category in the first place? Looks like a limbo place-holding stop for a bunch of good but not great players. At some point potential just ain't all it's cracked up to be.

 

Yeah, but we have a whole bunch of those levels. What is the purpose of the US U18s and U19s? A holding pen for players that are too old for the the U17s and not in the U20s yet.

I don't think we need a "full time" U23 program. I do think we need a U23 program to start 2 years before olympic qualifying starts.

We don't take olympic qualifying seriously at all. We're within a calendar year of qualifying...............we don't have a coach and haven't played a game yet. Then we all act shocked and horrified when we fail to quality.

 

Because nobody takes the Olympics seriously. Our players won't be released. We then usually field younger players who get pushed around by older CA players. The Olympics are not important. Having a team to play in Europe against other U23 teams during FIFA breaks would be useful.

 

The U21 and U23 in UEFA are essentially same thing.

Currently to be eligible for the Under 21's they have to be born after January 1 1996.


There is a finals tournament played every 2 years. It is in Italy this summer. Next one is Hungary and Slovenia in 2021. There is a full qualification tournament which count as competitive games.

The finals every 4 years are used as Olympic qualifying . The top 4 qualify.
I think the DOB for eligibility is usually a year later than the qualifiers.

 

The Germans and Brazilians took them pretty seriously in 2016. The UK also did when they received the exemption and fielded a combined team in 2012. Uruguay used Suarez and Cavani in 2012. Spain's team was also solid in 2012. The Olympic are not the World Cup or Euros or Copa America but they are being taken more seriously. Plus, it is during the summer, so it doesn't interfere with club plans other than training. Of course, as you point out qualifying is another issue, as clubs have no obligation to release players.

That said, We have enough good U-23 players who are fringe rotation members at clubs that I think having them play U23 Olympics matches would be a net positive. I do think our success in 2000 at the Olympics helped cultivate what happened in 2002. A Young Landon, and JOB, Wolff plus overage inclusion like Friedel and Hejduk were all part of that team that received a lot of kudos, significant attention in the U.S., and developed some self-belief. (and DMB was a stand-by player)

 

What is the difference in life experience, in maturity and in career advancement between 18 & 23? Career soccer players shouldn't be an exception. Call it an Olympic Qualifying program. At 23, these young men should be over being called "unders".

 

Right, but the challenge of getting players released should be a reason to identify a coach and have them start "casting a wide net."

Our CONCACAF competition seems to have figured this out and has been preparing for quite a while with games and competitions. Both Mexico and Canada played in the 2018 Toulon tournament with this group, for example. The upcoming PanAm games are another example. Mexico will be participating. Will we? We never participate....................

All I'm saying is that this can be a little more of an effort than the 6/7 month group that we currently have. We don't even have a coach. It can be a 2 year program for players not yet in the USMNT and too old for the U20s. If they graduate from this U23 group to the USMNT, then great. No problem Keep casting the net.

 

We are basically agreeing. I just see the reason for a U23 team to identify talent and not particularly for the Olympics. That would be a full time program and play the kinds of games that the the team is playing this break.

Of course, you need a coach. I wonder who is greeting the players as they arrive today?

 

Hook, line, and sinker. Go look on USSF's schedule page. There are no U23 games currently scheduled. There is talk about who will coach -- just half a year before they try to qualify -- which is basically way late. Go look on the U20 list of callups. There is like one guy, Amon, who has gotten a senior look.

GB deliberately left off 2 key contributors to last year's A team, spouted some gibberish about the U23s, and basically got away with it. No one said, woah, these guys scored last year, and that MLS guy you called is a pimple on his tush. No one said, when is a U23 camp? When is a U23 game? How are you going to get them in the fall? Why not the U20s instead? They have games. They have played there. They play worlds this summer when there is no club-country fight.

He sold y'all a bill of goods and by going whole hog on "well, who should coach," or "well, who should be on the list," he got you.

FWIW, if we are going to do lists, people need to acknowledge the guiding reality of U23 and U20 tournaments with a mature system where players sign pro as teens. You will not get your favorite brand names who play at big clubs. You will not get your best 23. You will get the players MLS allows, and then the players who are on youth program teams abroad. If they are on a first team in the fall you will not get them, not the good ones, not the loaned ones, not even the iffy ones playing in a second division but on the first team. You will get the U21s or U19s and then those whom MLS will release. The sooner we acknowledge that reality and call up and prepare a team accordingly, the better our chances of optimizing a second choice team.

 

Bad idea. You have a team which basically gathers for a few months every 4 years. That lacks the systematics or long term approach to be a big-pool evaluation experience. No, that should be the opposite. Identify a team, train it up, and try to win for a change.

Since it's so far apart you have players who get caught in between on the age thing, 20 in the 23 year, 24 next time.

You have people who are lauded who won't be released. You have people who sit on MLS benches or U21 teams who will be.

It would be nice if someone surprised but usually the best U23s are exactly who you would expect, it's a mature age group, they are starting to flourish as pros or not. The only ones who "surprise" are usually the Julian Green types who showed something already as a senior level player, but faded into some poor professional situation. Put them back on an age group team and magically good again.

U20 and below is where to cast a wide net and see what you fish up. The U23s it gets to be more about scouting and creativity and identifying professionals people forgot or didn't know about who could use a platform.

 

It's not a bad idea but let's be real, the Weah/Sargent/Lletget/Acosta kerfuffles of late make one question whether GB would have the right people allocated A, B, or off. MOTM his second game was a bench player both nights. The two guys he wants to ship off to U23Land in theory, were productive last year. He instead gives you Zardes, etc. He makes noise about U23s but the implication of "they wouldn't play much so this gets them some minutes" is he actually believes that re the ones in camp versus the rest.

 

The interesting use of this process would be to attempt to cap-tie. I realize it might not be legally permanent but it has a moral utility as labeling you one of us. But we seem to have swung the other, disinterested direction on the dual national pendulum. We aren't fighting over anyone.

But by 20-23 years old players are either turning out or not and the primary ways you would prosper are by identifying either dual nationals we have not previously used, or bringing in players who are in a bad club situation but who would flourish if given playing time.

 

But, going back to the original point, the fringe U23 players that could be used in qualifying are not Sargent, Weah, Robinson, CCV, etc. Which is why this camp has nothing to do with the Olympics. it is just to remove all variables to test out the Adams at RB experiment.

 

Its not really about cap-tying per se (as none of the games we'd be using to prepare for the U23 Olympic qualifying would even be provisionally cap-tying). Its about keeping talented 21-22 year olds in the US fold while they work on breaking into the USMNT.

A player like..................Jonathan Amon. A dual-national (his father is Nigerian) that hasn't yet broken out into being a full USMNT callup. But a kid we do want to keep in the fold after the end of the U20 World Cup as he does have talent. Those types of players.

The second that the 2019 U20 World Cup ends (which is this June), the members of that team should either have the U23s or the full USMNT to progress to.

 

I guess I wasn't clear with "moral utility" which is the same thing. Not legally binding but I commit to you and vice versa, and if you give them a fair shake it probably sticks at age 23.

My point on U20 is that while we're playing pretend on the players effectively "sent back down to the minors," if we were being real about it, they would be with the U20s who play this month and then play for real at worlds in summer months when their services can be asked for without tripping over club-country. "It would be nice" to have them in Oly qualifying for which they would also be suitable, but that isn't in the same zip code as reality, which is a Euro first team is not releasing dress players for regional U23 in October. They might let you have their age group kids who aren't even first team. Between that and MLS' stretch run you have to adjust the expected roster to reality. Weah and Sargent are not U23 reality unless we make Tokyo. But I don't think that's the paper thin excuse GB was trying to offer. He wasn't even saying they might be tired or rusty. He literally tried to say they stink right now and should be with the basically nonexistent U23 side. I completely disbelieve that even a rusty Weah or Sargent would be worse than the MLS forwards he brought in.