Unpopular USMNT or US Soccer Opinions

You can still have pro/rel with a salary cap, limiting what you're referring to.

I btw have said numerous times, the reason for pro/rel here is because we're not Europe. Has nothing to do with Europe. If we were the size of France or Germany, a closed system makes a helluva lot more sense.

 

- MLS is the only chance of soccer someday escaping niche status in the U.S. No MLS growth into a truly big deal in our sports landscape, no legit national team. Ever.

- Pulisic will set an American transfer record, but it won't be anywhere near the type of Real Madrid mega deal many fans are already dreaming about.

- It's laughable how much blame Bradley gets for the overall team's woes.

 

1. Wondo's miss wasn't that bad. Courtois had come off his line and cut off most of his angle anyway so even if Wondo had gotten it on frame it most likely would have hit Courtois' body
2. Donovan's goal vs Algeria wasn't improbable and was mostly due to decisions made by Algeria because of game flow. Algeria could still go through with a 2-0 win and thus pushed their entire team forward exposing them for an easy counter and LD's tap in
3. The US would qualify for 1 of 3 World Cups or less from CONMEBOL or UEFA

 

He had plenty of other problems, and it was the right time to fire him but I think the argument that Jurgen had an anti American soccer bias is bullsh**, and it's always bugged me how it's just been thrown around as an accepted fact on here.

The pet stat that get's thrown around by a lot of people who pedal this, is that he only gave 3 MLS players their first cap in non camp cupcake games. That's an utterly meaningless fact though, because he still allowed numerous players to break through that and resurrected the careers of many MLS players who's careers were seemingly dead. However for some weird reason the former doesn't count because who care's if Besler and Gonzalez started a qualifier in Azteca just a couple months after their debut? They got their first cap in Camp Cupcake so it's invalid. As for the latter, who cares if Kyle Beckerman became a regular immediately after Jurgen got hired? Because he picked up some caps under Bob when we sent C teams to the 07 Copa America and 09 Gold Cup.

Camp Cupcake is an MLS only camp, that gives a lot more room to experiment with MLS players who haven't had caps yet. It makes sense players would get their first caps there. We don't really have a European equivalent, though most Euro based players that got their first cap under Jurgen did so in friendlies. It's not like he threw Euro based players into the fire right away and forced the MLS guys to wait.

We ignore guys like Wondolowski, Davis, Yedlin, Evans, Beckerman, Shea, Zardes, Morris, Ibarra, Zusi, Besler, Gonzalez, Birnbaum, Gordon, Nagbe, Kitchen, etc. because Jurgen wouldn't regularly call in guys like Feilhaber and Hedges, despite non US based Big Soccer Pet Players like Lichaj, Ream, and Villafana also not getting regular caps.

I don't even agree with many of his MLS callups, so everything I mentioned above isn't even a good thing but Jurgen not calling Big Soccer's MLS flavor of the week, meant Jurgen must have hated MLS.

 

I cringe whenever I see people on here suggesting that Chandler should not even be called up.

A more general opinon: The level of the average American soccer pro has to rise before the cap can increase to the levels some want in the MLS for the sake of the development of the sport in this country.

 

He also had only just gotten on the field. It was the one chance he had the entire tournament, and he got the job done. Can't ask for more.

The rest of our forwards had the whole game to try to score..............................

The biggest criticism of Klinsmann on that team should have been that we didn't bring a backup to Jozy Altidore. [Johannsson also had a minor injury mid-tournament that hampered his play.] So when Jozy went down we had to completely change strategy to something the USMNT had rarely done. Play Clint Dempsey as a lone forward. God bless Clint Dempsey, who did an admirable job playing a role he's not suited to.

[One can make the argument, if they wish, that we didn't have a competent backup to Jozy Altidore.]

 

Repped for putting this out here. I think you're DFW (wrong is the last initial) on most of these but I do agree with:

15, 17, 19 and 20.

 

Pretty much agree except for #10.

Pro/rel is not in our future. No way these guys are shelling out that kind od dosh and getting relegated. The rest of your point in #10 may or may not be true (frankly I think the single entity issue is more of a problem than pro-eel), but we are not getting pro/rel. That is not how American sports work.

Most likely we will see something similar to the NFL with different "conferences"/leagues with some inter- league play followed by a Super Soccer Bwol when the league is finally built out than anything resembling pro/rel. We may even get divisions to spark "rivalries".

We are far more likely to adapt soccer to American sports realties than to the Euro model.

Otherwise solid list.

 

This is the best post I've ever read on BS, even above the much-loved "haterade" ones.

 

This rivals Stormtroopers above.

 

1. MLS is expanding too rapidly. We just don't have the quality player pool to staff it under the current rules. Garber seems to want to get to the max number of teams (and collect all those rapidly growing fees) quickly, while neglecting the product on the field.

2. MLS will not be seen as a quality league until it can start beating the other club teams in this hemisphere on a consistent basis. Heck even the ones in Mexico and central America would give it a boost, let alone SA.

3. MLS worries too much about "what happened" to the old NASL, and it has hamstrung the leagues growth as a quality league on a world scale. It made sense to have some controls early on, possibly, but not so much now. Time to take off the training wheels and let the Clubs go at it.

4. MLS clubs need better coaches. Tactics in the league are woeful overall.

These 4 points are not unrelated.

 

Your mother was a hampster and your father smelt of elderberries.

 

There's only one person who uses the non-Cupcake argument but he does mention it quite frequently...

 

The fact that Landon Donovan, arguably our best field player of all time and World Cup elite performer, was never captain of a world cup team speaks volumes about him as a leader and teammate.

 

I wasn't asking for more of Green. I was asking for more of the poster who said his goal sent the game into extra time.

 

My turn.

Brad Davis put in a solid shift verse Germany in the WC.

MB is still our best CM, and should still start as the 6.

Zardes was underrated in the Copa.

Zusi was underrated as a RB in these 2 friendlies.

 

Good post... but I think what is more important is the development of coaches. When we have more soccer players that understand the game and grew up playing and then become coaches is more important then the current young talent.

For example, when I was a kid not 1 single parent (or coach) that coached me as a young youth never played the game themselves (My first real soccer coach was in high school in the late 80s). Now we have a generation of parents who grew up playing as kids, but most of the current generation probably were coached poorly in their youth by non-soccer playing coaches, like me. This next generation of players/coaches. The players that are currently 10 to 20, probably have parents (and coaches) that were also coached by people that actually played the game.

I think this same curve could be applied to coaches... and where are we on this curve in regards to coaching?

 

As a leader definitely yes. Not necessarily as a teammate. Leadership is extremely important because it is one of those hidden "skills" that enhance a player's greatness. If Donovan was a stronger leader there would be fewer LD haters.

 

Very good point about coaching/parent knowledge. I think they go hand in hand and can't really be separated. It takes 1 yr or so for a kid to be introduced to the game and he/she will help introduce younger kids as he/she grows older but the real growth happens when he grows and becomes a knowledgeable parent or coach and that takes another 20 years or so. Even then that kid (now a parent or coach) is just part of the first generation of coaches. The only real difference between the two is the time it takes to develop top level coaching. I think you see the "first generation" of American MLS coaches now as former players are taking prominent roles in coaching (and administration). I wish I could remember where I saw it (Maybe Adu thread?) but in a post the other day there was a list of USL/NASL coaches that included a very large number of former MLS names. Some of those will remain at that level, some will move up or quit and be replaced by next generation of MLS retirees as they come into coaching.

It's hard to say where on the curve we are with coaching. I think that coaching may be slightly behind the players and knowledgeable parents are one or two notches behind the coaching. I would say that a typical quality youth coach would need to be at least 25-35 yrs old ( approx 15-20 years playing and 5-10 years coaching experience). The parental timeline is similar but a smaller number of coaches is needed than parents. Soccer is growing and will continue to grow in this country and the parents will catch up. Initially, when I was young many of the kids that "played" didn't really play the game enough to really know the game. They were familiar with it an not much else. When they became parents they were only marginally better as coaches and mentors for their children but now there are more qualified people (other kids and coaches) to fill in the gaps.

I grew up in a similar situation as yourself. Most of the coaches and parents that I knew had absolutely no background at all. There were a few immigrants that knew about soccer, so they were the "experts" but they didn't necessarily know much either. If they were English or Mexican, than they were qualified to coach.

 

I've outlined this in depth in the pro/rel thread, and I don't really want to turn this thread into a pro/rel thread but essentially, a closed system makes more sense in a country the size of Spain/Italy/Germany/etc given the smaller landscape and population. Far easier to scout/identify and provide opportunities with everything so close, so local.

My argument for eventual pro/rel here is that our landscape is more akin to the size of the entire Euro continent, never mind 315M+ people. So the idea 30 or so MLS clubs can cover this vast landscape while maximizing our landscape is not something I'll ever agree with. There are hundreds of clubs in Europe covering a similar land mass. If we were the size of Texas, quite different. Then we get into that the NBA/NFL rely heavily on the HS/NCAA system to scout/identify/develop in communities across the nation. MLS is going away from the HS/NCAA system. So who picks up all the development responsibility the HS/NCAA system shoulders for the other sports?

More clubs with skin in the game would be my answer. That doesn't mean MLS will participate in pro/rel. But just look at the numbers. 12 teams vying for 4 expansion slots, all willing to throw away 150M+ in expansion fees. That's over a billion in investment which will be locked out of the league. That will only increase. So where does all that money and potential owners go? I just eventually see that money/ambition being put into the more global system, a pro/rel system down the road. Others have laughed at that and proposed owners will just give up and sit on the money once locked out of MLS. I don't see that but furthermore, for the good of the game at large I hope that doesn't happen. But I'm not suggesting we need pro/rel to have success, I'm suggesting eventually this market won't be maximized without it as given the sheer numbers/geography, 30 pro teams will never adequately cover this land mass. To shoulder the responsibility the HS/NCAA model carries in other sports, we need dozens upon dozens of clubs nation-wide who are in the business of scouting/developing and then selling upwards.

 

I'd suggest MLS is turning out more pro level players than we've ever had, providing a deeper pool than ever before but is generally failing at the top end of our pool which has only gotten worse.

A question is, is star player development more luck, comes in waves or is it a byproduct of intent? Can be either/or or both. We both know Bulgaria fairly well. They lucked into Stoichkov and Berbatov. Germany however systematically produces consecutive waves of talent. Running in opposition to that, there's numerous leagues who've been around for decades and produce very little. Academies themselves, just having them doesn't produce talent. England has more revenue than any league globally and development has gotten worse. Our best generation ever was produced without much infrastructure, so was it luck? If it's luck and we just wait for the next wave, heavy investment in academies might be wasteful. However if heavy investment in academies comes with the expectation of a ROI, then MLS is failing as it's not turning out any real ROI. Haven't sold a successful top league American attacker since Dempsey a decade ago. Last six transfer windows we've only sold two Americans abroad, both defenders, Yedlin and Miazga. The best young attacker in MLS over the last 3-5 years, Fabian Castillo, went for ~3M and has flopped in Turkey, yet he's a higher quality player than a Zardes or Morris or any younger American attacker in MLS IMO. I do think Morris might get a move to a top league and find some success but he exemplifies many of our issues with one of the worst left feet we've ever seen in our NT pool. It suggests some real poor coaching/development along the way.

I think in general, academies are a good thing and will improve, are important as 95% of our player pool will come thru MLS but I also suggest there's strong evidence that after 2-3 years in MLS, like clockwork players stall and hit a development wall, where they benefit from the initial jump in play then hit a ceiling, and that's due to poor coaching, the incredible choppiness in roster structures due to the DP model and due to single entity, many players being forced into non-ideal situations. Essentially, MLS seems to be able to take non-pros and turn them into MLS level players but generally fail at taking MLS level players and turning them into top 5-6 league level players, the latter being what our NT needs. And for me, that's the essence of development, taking an asset and improving it to compete at the next level. I don't see anything like Bobby Wood's leap in development happening here. He's taking an enormous step while most his age in MLS stall. I don't even see a Paul Arriola type jump in MLS for the most part. Would he have taken this step if he stayed at LAG instead of going to Xolos? Doubtful. Nagbe would be a prime example who hasn't improved much from 22/23 on. Or Trapp. Or Shipp. Or Rowe. Or JacMac. Or Powers. Etc. MLS Flavors of the Week thread is chalk full of players fans have gotten excited about and never amounted to much.

Still, not only do I not see any Clint/Landon American level attackers in MLS, I don't see any Mathis or Wynalda or DMB level attackers either. And we're many years beyond when they hit the scene and investment had multiplied many times over. So where's the results? If it's "just time" then why were our top end attackers superior in the 90's and early 00's? Then we can even get into that the top two young strikers in MLS, Morris and Larin are NCAA products. Why isn't there a single American striker who went thru the MLS system who's near their level? Shouldn't it be the opposite, that MLS is producing better strikers/attackers than the NCAA, or that a Pulisic type doesn't come from a non-MLS DA? MLS invests 40M/Y in development, then our arguable top two American attackers, Wood and Pulisic come from well outside MLS. Carleton has loads of potential but he too was developed outside MLS and if he had a Euro passport would be overseas. We'll have to see how ATL handles him and I'm quite high on ATL, so we'll see.

Then again, maybe it is more about luck, which supports pro/rel as if it's more about identifying random elite talent in various corners of our landscape, the priority would then be having as many clubs as possible doing that identifying and turning a profit off it. IMO at least. Then again, according to Parchman, the majority of MLS teams don't even have an official scout on their payroll. All results of systematic issues.

 

Excellent post, for a troll.

 

I just remembered another one:

God bless them, but the American Outlaws have got to come up with better chants. If I hear "everywhere we go.." one more time, I'm going to go Eighteen Alpha all over somebodys' asses.