Yup, the rules of FIFA apply all over the world. The only thing that can stop it is a court, as in Europe a Spanish court did for I think a Colombian kid. I mentioned that ruling in one of the threads of the US forum, perhaps even this one.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...0-of-the-best-young-talents-in-world-football A few Yanks in the list! Weah and Carleton
Saw that. Also Alphonso Davies. No idea why Weah over Sargent but I don't take these lists 100% seriously.
Having foreign prospects participate in the DA is something that I see as a good thing. American baseball (as an example) doesn't seem to suffer at all from having owners willing and able to buy the services of any hot prospect from Korea, Japan, or the Caribbean. Yes, if you made a list of the top 50 players in MLB there would be a good number of foreign players, but you also would a large contingent of standout American players. Premier League domestic disparity has largely come down to British youth development and coaching being trash for awhile now.
Or Justin Garces. I think people don't realize how good he is. 6'3 keepers with reflexes and good feet are few and far between.
Yes, they might have missed him, but still their prior choices were EPB, CP and Taitague. Strange that they couldn't wait for a few weeks with the list.
Think it doesnot matter in their observations, as that's boys vs boys and the rating of the 60 kids is based on matches in adult competitions.
In what adult competition they've seen Carleton and Wea? And a half of the list? What do they know about let say Sargent or Garces?
Eh, technically, Carleton has played adult competitions, and done really well. These lists are not about who's the best, more who's the most hyped up. Sometimes the two are the same thing, but not always. They add Weah because of who his father is, not because he's one of the few best American players. And he's a good player himself, but he deservedly does not start (or at best you could say is maybe he deserves to be one of the last names on the team sheet) for the U-17's. Its great that he's benefiting from playing at PSG, but he has not proven to be on the level of Carleton, Sargent or Garces, IMO. Still a good player, but I think there are a few players I'd add to the list before him. I'm surprised they didn't include Lederman, but then they'd have to think of things to write about him.
I'm pretty sure they didn't see Carleson's two preseason games or 10 mins in MLS. So this list isn't based on adult play, and hype is definitely a major component. Still they obviously know soccer and watch international youth games, otherwise they wouldn't pick Taitague.
Carleton played in the Cup, 90 minutes. Does that not count? I think the lists come from Guardian journalists in all those areas, so its not like they have some 10 person panel who are big youth experts. If you consume the soccer culture in a country like those journalists do, you should have some idea who the best players or big names in an age group are.
Forgot it. May be they just stay tuned. Still watching adult games obviously not required and they do reasonably good job. Especially if you compare it to some crap like 24 U 24 where our experts supposedly see everyone.
.@OptaJack and U.S. Soccer signed a deal that will lead to data collection and stats from Development Academy and youth national team games.— Jonathan Tannenwald (@thegoalkeeper) October 5, 2017
I don't think it is a bad idea for even the "A" U17 and U19 clubs to gets some experience against men's league teams. It has to be the right team and shouldn't be a regular scheduled event. The big concern with a lot of the top clubs is that the competition level is not high enough on a game by game basis. You have teams like Atlanta (or Red Bulls, FC Dallas) that might have 6ish U17 players in its squad going up against team it can beat 5 or 6 to 0 without breaking much of a sweat. Teams also are spending time and money traveling in some cases hundreds of miles to do it. Playing the right local team (or entering a high level tournament) might be better use of their time. A lot of those team have a lot of former college players in them, so technically some of these teams could hang while also exposing players to more physical developed players. Week to week pub league is probably not the right fit though.
Sorry.................but Lederman right now is the definition of hype without proven results. Isn't he technically on the same team right now as Konrad de la Fuente, who we consistently see in highlights from their Juvenil B games? When it comes to these types of lists we see the same players on all of them. These journalists aren't doing any research of their own for hidden gems. Particularly outside of the European powers.
Yeah, that was my whole point about Lederman, I still see people (not people in this forum) mention him because they don't know what they are saying. There's a lot you can criticize this coaching staff for, giving Lederman a chance is not one of those. I wish the kid well, but I'm afraid its not terribly impressive to be in the lower of the two age groups for your birth year, and be a back up, regardless of the club. I think we underestimate our own players, I think probably every kid picked for this team could be that, I don't think Lederman is any big snub or anything. He seems like he simply isn't good enough. Good luck to him though, hopefully he makes something of his career.
A huge problem in England when I was there. Just something for us to keep an eye on moving forward................... ‘Football’s biggest issue’: the struggle facing boys rejected by academies https://t.co/ixFfbA2lK5— Dallas Cup ⚽️ (@dallascup) October 6, 2017
This is probably less of a problem in the USA than any other country out there, which is good from that standpoint, although it probably leads to less top players being produced by us. @feyenoordsoccerfan, how would you say the problem is in the Netherlands? Does every kid want to be a footballer? Do any talented players opt for further schooling and potentially another career over football?