Dempsey was the most recent case study with Fulham surviving by the skin of their teeth last season. After putting his nose to the grindstone, he's re-established himself as a starter in Fulham's mid table squad and is now an integral part of the squad, easily one of the most important players for them. People were very, very skeptical of Dempsey to Fulham from the getgo. It was a struggle, but no one can deny that move was completely worth the effort. Most recently is Bradley, a player we are seeing develop at an unheard of rate at center midfield with BMG. A move BS at large was very.....very critical of. This season's been a nervous wreck of a season obviously but BMG are turning it on at the right time and look like they will be okay by season's end (much less of a gut check than Fulham last season). Its mutually beneficial, young players like bradley get the start here and now and are not made to rot on the bench. Through this development and struggle, Bradley is becoming a hero for BMG before our eyes. They stay up, they establish themselves, they strengthen the squad, and Bradley's a part of that. He seriously could be the future captain of the squad. Im absolutely ecstatic about this as a YA supporter. But this shouldnt be new. Look at Keller and Fulham/Gladbach, look at Friedel and Blackburn, McBride and Fulham. They get the playing time, its a valuable learning process going through the motions of relegation battles. Those who stick around are better for it, stronger players, become highly regarded by club fans. US players except in exceptionally rare cases will not go to top sides. It is these strugglers that will take a chance on US players, and given recent track records with our guys......its payed dividends. I just dont think people should be so hastey to push the panic button when they see a YA go to a relegation battler. We shouldnt panic when we see say, Charlie Davies to Sochaux rumors popping up and shooting them down. If anything....we should be encouraging it. my .02. thoughts?
I have a stepping stone mentality, you start at MLS or a small club in Europe and you move up until you reach the highest level you can play at. I don't think there is one path to success but playing in a CL club should be the goal of every player. I think it is essential, for the USMNT to able to win away, convincingly, against tough teams for most of our players at the best clubs they can be play at. Its not a coincidence that the best NTs in the world have players in the best clubs in the world. Its great to see what Bradley and Dempsey are doing at their clubs but it wouldn't be a wise move to stay at one club for too long, I don't know about Dempsey, but Bradley has already expressed his desired to play in a big club someday. I admire Dempsey too, at the beginning of the season he probably felt like he was an important part of the team only to be cast away, but after the season that he's having now he would be an idiot to stay Fulham for another season. In this game you can't stay in the same spot for too long, you have to be constantly moving on, try a harder league or a bigger clubs, if you fail at first switch to a smaller team/league and try again. Teams aren't gonna want to stay with the same players, they have goals too (avoid relegation, promotion, European soccer, etc) and if you don't fit into those plans you're out, might as well go out on your own terms.
Why would Dempsey be an idiot to stay at Fulham? He is playing every week in the best league in the world.
I agree, they are mid table. They only clubs above them in England are the big 4, Aston Villa, and Everton. Maybe City thanks to the loot. Other than those 7, Fulham are as good as anyone else. And I don't know if he's done enough yet to warrant a move up the ladder. Why not stay and play. If he has a gangbuster type year (10+ goals), then maybe move up. Glad'bach are interesting for Bradley. Great history there. Been a yo-yo lately. If they can stay up and solidify, they could be a power again in Germany. Outside of BM, its not that far to the top in Germany. The likes of Schalke, Dortmund, Stuttgart, Werden Bremen, H. Berlin and company are all good clubs, but not leaps and bounds better than everyone else, like England's top 4. CL spots can be had in Germany, just look at this year. As to the general point, I agree, a relegation battle, if survived, can be a great experience for a player and club. Coming through under pressure can raise confidence and spark improvement. Of course, if it goes badly, it can be tough sledding from there on out (see Derby, Watford, Charlton, Leeds, Reading, etc).
while i love the trend you present, such a trend failed for Feilhaber :-/ obviously without comparing the players and teams and coaches....
I haven't seen his best games for the national team, but he was crap in Hamburg, and didn't show anything for a (then) Bundesliga midtable team. I was surprised he even got a contract at a relegation battler in a top league; he was simply not on Bundesliga level. Maybe you guys overrate his potential for some golden days? He never did anything in European club football; I don't see the reason in relegation battle.
His reputation in the US comes from his performances with the National Team. While in my view his performances were mixed he did show an ability to make the excellent attacking pass. I watched some his games with Derby. He struggled athletically and in his passing.
Yes, he did, but that doesn't mean very much. Hamburg had a very good season the year before and reached the CL. They struggled in Feilhaber's year in the Bundesliga, and even dropped into relegation battle; they were in last place in the end of january, when Feilhaber made his last Bundesliga game. Feilhaber was sent back into the reserves, and they marched from 18th place after day 19 to 7th place after day 34, with 0 minutes from Feilhaber. Hamburg also lost their first 5 CL games; they were already virtually out after day 3 with 0 points. They focused on the impending relegation battle in the Bundesliga, and Feilhaber played in the meaningless CL games.
I think Feilhaber is the kind of player who is very good when he is playing for an attacking minded team at the top half of the table, but is useless playing in a tough physical relegation battle at the bottom of the league.. If I'm right, then he is going to look great in Denmark... .
I think you hit the nail on the head with Benny. England was not the place for him. HSV, I honestly don't know. Based on what I've seen now of HSV a healthy Benny could play in the style. Previously when he was there it was up in the air if their style fit his skill set. Ceres, I think you will be happy with Benny at AGF. I think he's going to thrive. I hope tomorrow he gets a chance to play. I hope his fitness is there.
I was no problem with Yanks battling relegation or even going to relegation sides. The pressure to survive can build resilience and mental strength. Plus, in one way or another players in relegation sides are in the "shop window". That can be a good thing or a bad thing, honestly. But i don't think there is one correct or one incorrect path for US players to be successful. Their success or lack there of is based on a myriad of situations and circumstances. It's not cut and dry. All I ask of our players is to do their homework on the clubs they sign for. Don't get carried away with the club name or the league. Do what's best of yourself and your career. Just remember nothing in football is a guarantee so try not to put yourself in a "career suicide" situation. I have a success plan for our players in my head. In a perfect world they start out in MLS, make a move to mid-level cub, stay there 2-3 years, and then make a move to a top side, in a top league. Totally hypothetical but ultimately that's how I'd like it to go. Baby steps. Going back for a second, the only problem I have in Yanks going to relegation battlers is when they become the scapegoat; they become the easy target for supporters to blame their team's failures on. I'm a firm believer it takes a whole squad to fail and a whole squad to succeed.
thats a great point, Fulham last year was a great example. Dempsey and EJ were immediate scapegoats for Fulham's troubles last year. They were, of course, Americans who didnt try hard enough that were only championship quality if you were to believe the Fulham messageboard last year (hell even the early part of this year the hardcore zealots still lambasted Dempsey). Then theres McBride, Friedel, Keller, and theyre perceived as the hard working cut their teeth for the club americans. On hence, it really seems to be on overall club situation on who is "pants" and who isnt. Dempsey all a sudden is of enough quality to play for Aston Villa. Personally, i think he is right at home at an ambitious mid table club that is now Fulham. Dempsey took the risk like his predicessors, and he was highly rewarded. Permanent fixture in the squad now. Feilhaber is a good reciprocal case study. Feilhaber has just made some poor, poor decisions for club and country. He swan dived after the Gold Cup in both cases. Hell if you would have told BS during that Gold Cup reign, it would been popular belief Feilhaber was the one with the big future ahead of him and not Bradley. all those who were here in 2007, thats exactly why we shouldnt give up on Feilhaber IMO.
absolutely and especially not a route one long ball team in a relegation fight and with manager changes. he's a guy that wants the ball on the ground, players constantly running off the ball, short, technical play. In england that's largely only the top 6 teams, and that can make it tough. The U.S. is a pretty diverse country, producing varying types of players and i think many of our players that have not had success overseas are in situations that don't play to their strengths. You don't see Manchester United launching high balls to Tevez and Rooney. They play to their strengths. It's a rare player that at a young age is so versatile that they can play in any style and still be halfway decent.
As much as winning a relegation battle helps the mentality of a player I don't think is anywhere as good as fighting for a European spot, maybe I'm wrong (but I doubt it). What is relegation battle? Is it winning the last 3 games? Starting hot then dropping 15 of your last 20 games? I fail to see how that helps a player more than fighting for a top spot. To get into a relegation battle you have to put yourself into it, the league doesn't have a draw to see who starts the season with -30 points, you put yourself on that spot by playing like a relegation bound team. The pressure to win EVERY game as opposed to getting points whenever possible makes the player stronger in the long run and that's what helps NTs win in big games/tournament. I think that Dempsey would be a fool not to take this opportunity to move to an Aston Villa or an Everton, maybe even a CL team in another league. Fulham will never finish in a European spot, they're more likely to end up in the CCC for the next 20 years than to win a Cup or reach the UEFA Cup group stages (or whateve they're calling it next season). Something that I don't understand about people is how they want a YA's club (usually a very small one) to some how survive their current hardships and to improve and become a mid-table club. Wasn't that what Fulham did by benching Dempsey and letting Bocanegra go? So, instead of waiting for a small clubs to magically turn into a bigger club why not just transfer a bigger club? That's just my thought on topic
I think the point is that most YA CAN'T go straight into a "bigger" club. The argument goes Dempsey's relegation battle (and repeated battling back onto the field) was the fire that tempered his steel, therefore making him a possible prospect for the 2nd tier teams in the premiership.
This is all negative hyperbole. No, he didn't set Hamburg alight, but you pile on unnecessarily and slant everything. As for "Bundesliga level", I think you would find most #10's would have some struggles when played as a defensive midfielder in the Champions League. Ya kinda glossed over that whole DM deal there. Hmmm. And yet... here Kicker has only Rafi VDV rated better against Porto... and here he made a rather fine second half sub appearance against Arsenal. I also remember him having good, solid showings against 'Gladbach and Leverkusen just off the top of my head. He had all of 12 HSV games before Doll was fired and Stevens went with all the veterans. Then he went to Derby, who were oddly content to throw the same players out week after week whether they were getting the job done or not (about 9 of 11 weren't).
Yeah, I'm not a member of the Church of Benny Feilhaber by any means, but he wasn't nearly as awful for Hamburg as that guy's post made him out to be.
It's a different kind of pressure, and much harder in a relegation battle. Fighting for a European spot is positive pressure, combined with a feeling of success. You win on saturday, think "yeah, we're gonna win next week, too" and have a nice week. Relegation battle is a question of life and death. The coaching staff could be sacked every day, you don't know where you can play next year (2. tier? Or who is going to hire a player who was not good enough for the league last year?), everyone is afraid of losing his economic existence, the greenkeeper, the secretarys, the guards at the parking lot... that creeps into your brain, you have to bear the responsibility, you will have problems to find your sleep, you have to stand this downward spiral. Very different from "do we win 3/5 or 4/5?" Typical phenomenon when better teams have a bad season and get into relegation battle: They think "we are too good to get relegated, just go on, we will win one day anyway", don' take on the battle, and can't stand the pressure they are not used to when they awake too late. I don't get the logic. When a club with the claim to become a midtable club puts you on the bench or pushes you to leave to reach this goal - then because they think you are not good enough. Why should a bigger club be interested in you? Because the guys who work with the players every day cannot judge their potential, but Manchester United comes around and gives you a contract? Sounds not very convincing in my ears.
Very true, it's usually so that real top players are not well suited for a relegation battle, because they are not used to this kind of pressure or the more physical style of play, so when one of the better teams in the Danish league get in relegation trouble, you often see that they use the winter break to sign some physical strong players who are used to this kind of 'life and death' battle.. .
So coaching/playing at Fulham or some club you never heard of is harder than at Real Madrid where winning the league title or the CL is a must every season? I'll try to explain it one more time. When you're Fulham, Stoke City, etc, you only need enough points to achieve your season goals, so when Dempsey misses a sitter at Wigan, no big deal cause there is an acceptable amount of failure tolarated, people might complain but its not the end of the world. When you're at Arsenal and you miss a sitter that would've given you the victory vs any team, the press, fans, coaches are all over you. If you're Dempsey and you want to play for a good team, why would you wait til a Fulham becomes an Aston Villa when you can just transfer to one? How often does a club go from being a yo-yo club to a long-term threat? Not enough to keep a player in his prime at that club, what is more likely to happend is for a new coach to come in and change tactics/formation and bench you in favor of someone new (someone the coach knows) regardless of your talent. That's why you do what Saha, Van Der Saar, and countless other players at these type of clubs do at end of a good season.
You didn't say Real Madrid; you said "fighting for a European spot". I don't think anyone in Madrid describes the level of Real as "fighting for a European spot". Sorry, you and I live in different realities. Maybe you have no experience with relegation battles? An acceptable amount of failure for a relegation battler is tolerated, while the same amount of failure for e.g. a team on 6th place is the end of the world? I think this view is very... unusual. So you think a player should change his club more often than the clubs change their managers? That's not very easy with an average manager sack frequency around 0.75 per club and season, and I really doubt that this is a good strategy to establish yourself and develop your potential.
It's no harder for a title-chasing team to achieve its goals than it is for a team in the relegation mix to achieve them. Both require players to perform at the same level of their potential. The players at the top just have more potential. As for why players sign for clubs near the bottom than better ones... It's simple. It's nothing to do with it being seen as a better career move. It's simply that those lower ones were the only ones that made them an offer.