I'm not saying he'll even be our top choice, but I think Nate Jaqua will be in the mix of our offense pretty regularly if he continues to develop comparably to how he has over the past two years.
We seem to be talking at cross purposes here. I'm not talking about everyone else or anyone else. I'm talking about the US. My question is, "Who do we have?" I don't who we have who is special, except Adu, and look how many people won't even recognize that. I don't know Nguyen, but his name keeps coming up, so he must be pretty decent. At least he's moving forward with the process. Maybe I should state a couple of premises: (1) MLS will not produce the players we need to move into elite status; (2) Bradenton, whatever its merits, is insufficient to get the job done (by itself). Therefore: (1) We need to send every good young player we can to Europe (or South America); and (2) We need another Bradenton or two. We really need to step things up on the youth development side of things. We need greater depth and breadth. If only one of a hundred promising young strikers eventually pans out (into gold), then I really need two hundred names. So let's start digging! ------------ Where is Feilhaber playing, by the way?
Barring injuries or some kind of off-field meltdown, and assuming that his birth certificate is accurate, it's hard for me to imagine how Adu wouldn't pan out. He looks to be well ahead of where any other American player has been at a similar age. I don't necessarily think he'll end up being the next Ronaldinho, but I'm pretty confident he'll be the best the US has ever had.
Sorry, you're confusing me. You made your original 'Nguyen 500' remark in Post 140; I picked up on it (and mentioned you by name) in Post 146; you quoted me directly in Post 150; and I quoted you back in Post 152. I thought that sort of exchange constituted an open dialogue, about which other posters are welcome to jump in with their two cents at any point. Further, if Posters A and B are debating an issue, and I feel I want to weigh in on one side or another, I do. I thought that was the very essence of BS. Everyone here has their own posting style. Many are not to my taste - I object to name-calling and profane language, for example - but who am I to judge? There are moderators to police things up if they get out of hand. But I'm missing something here, obviously. Maybe you or someone else can clue me in. Back to Post 140. DGNB had mentioned (positively) four players that most BS posters view quite highly: Bradley, Adu, Nguyen and Feilhaber. Now, go back and read your comments. I would like to stay positive. Who do you like?
Where do current U-17 standouts Anthony Wallace, Ellis McLoughlin and Sheanon Williams fit in. Can we reasonably expect them to earn a look during the next cycle. For that matter, can we with Josmir? There are _ players who will "probably" be eliminated from the player pool after this cup due to birthday accumulations, McBride, Reyna, Berhalter, Keller, Hannemann, Lewis and Pope (all will be 35+ by 2010). One might also assume this is Pablo last go round - granted many of us didn't think we'd still be looking at McBride, Pope and even Reyna as viable options for '06 four years ago (and certainly not VITAL ones!!--but that's another thread, been there, done that). Which means, best case scenario, we need to replace two GKs, 3 Defs, our best MF and best F. Most of us would assume these roles would go to players such as (GKs) Guzan and Reis (Def) Pearce, Marshall or Spector, (MF) Adu and (F) ??. However the speculators among us would at least hope that while all these guys get a good look (and hopefully take these spots and/or force other less productive players off the roster), that up and comers like the aforementioned three, plus Feilhaber, Wynne, Nguyen, etc also are able to force their way on the roster. Is it reasonable, that given our deepest player pool in hostory, that extremely young players such as Altidore, McLoughlin and Williams (and you could include Adu, though I'd say he's a given) might be able to break through by 2010?
Now we're back on track! I think at least one very young player has to break through for us, especially up front, 'reasonable' or not. We just don't which one. I'm trying not to get too far ahead of the curve, here, but whoever coaches the USMNT in 2010 is going to have to look at some pretty young players over the next four years and 'project' them forward to 2010. That's not easy. I'll ease off on BA, for once, except to say he had a clear preference for some 'old favorites' in this past cycle. Keep those names coming, please. I'll be compiling as long a list as possible.
Well, let's set the ground rules first. I'll throw out a name at each field position, say Josh Wolff, Ben Olsen and Jimmy Conrad, all 29, and open the floor for others to nominate younger 'replacements.' Let's give everyone a little while to rack their brains and suggest a name or two or three. You get to jump in whenever you want and say, 'Wrong, he's not better." And at the end of the thread you get to declare yourself the 'winner.' Fair enough?
It's been 40 minutes without a response, so ... Just to make life easy, I went back to the first two pages of this thread. Listing the players in the order named: Michael Bradley, Lee Nguyen, Jonathan Spector, Freddy Adu, Jay Demerit, Heath Pearce, Wynne, Benny Feilhaber, Sturgis, Danny Szetela, Ricardo Clark, Justin Mapp, Eddie Gaven, Eskandarian, Altidore, Arvizu, Ochoa, Kirk, Zimmerman, Casey, Kenny Cooper, Davies, Smith, Burciaga, Todd Dunnivant, Marshall. Dunnivant's on the 'alternates, list, so maybe we should add Kerry Zavagnin, Conor Casey and Chris Rolfe. Maybe someone can tidy up the full names, ages and club affiliations of these players. I'll accept nominations for a while longer, ok? My point: I would take any one of these players instead of one of the roster players named above. Your point: You would not take a single one of these players instead of Wolff, Olsen or Conrad. You're happy to stand pat with BA's 23. No nitpicking, now, don't tell me someone's injured, etc. I'm pulling off the three guys I named and adding three younger guys, perhaps much younger. Let's see what others think ...
I would not have taken one of those players ahead of Wolff or olsen. I might have taken spector ahead of conrad.
It's probably because Spector's shoulder was falling out of the socket around the time that BA made his selections. Taking a risk on a young player is one thing, but taking a risk on a young injured player would be nonsense.
Agreed. That's worse than taking a risk on an old injured player. I'm sure someone else told me about Spector's injury at some point. Someone said Mapp was hurt too, and there are probably others. But the premise is that these guys are healthy.* So are we taking a healthy Spector, Mapp and/or anyone else? Or is the current roster really the best we can do? *If the only players we want were injured at the critical time of selection, I'll concede. But I doubt that all the players I named were injured.
To make the national team you start by being one of the best players on your club team. How many guys on that list can even claim that? They may be talented, but future potential doesn't matter here, only how well they play today. Further, you're freely mixing position - the real world doesn't work like that. If you want to bring Adu (for instance) where does he play on the field? I presume a central or possibly left AM (he's not really a run up the side and send in crosses type of guy). So which guy on the team do you drop for that?
Gosh Timmy. Nice try. You lose. What's most pathetic here is that you are just writing names down that you read about without having the slightest idea if they were playing well in MLS or abroad.
Olsen, maybe? I can picture using Adu, as a reserve, in certain specific situations. Since I'm not playing Ben Olsen, under any circumstances, I'm not carrying him on the roster. That wasn't so painful, was it? Now, you're right, you have to picture where a guy fits into the big team picture. On my team, Adu fits and Olsen doesn't. Pretty simple call, I'd say. And I'm not freely mixing positions. I just listed the guys who someone else had named in the first two pages of this thread, in the order they were named. I did that as a public service. I encourage you to take the next logical step, and divide the players by position, and add their age and club affiliation. *Not necessarily, for a variety of reasons. Look at Tim Howard. Look at DMB, for that matter - I'm not sure how your label fits him. Look at Ben Olsen himself, for that matter.
Well, I guess making fun is better than arguing your point. Perhaps I have more faith in fellow BS posters than you have. Anyway, you don't don't what I know or who I know. Half-humorous cheap-shots are your stock-in-trade, and at that you are an expert. Try reading and understanding, then responding, for a change. Here's my point. I'm not playing Olsen. I'm not playing Wolff. [I might play Conrad if I have to, so I guess he can stay.] If I won't play a guy, he's deadwood on my team, however much I like him. So I'm giving his spot to a promising young prospect, who can sit on the bench just as well and soak it all in. And if I have a young player who might actually help me, somehow, someway get the ball into the opponent's net, well let's call that a bonus. I'm taking Adu and Eskandarian; I'll take Rolfe; someone can help me out with another name or two. Just make it someone who might legitimately help us in 2010. You're right I don't know the young guys very well - but I have a working principle - no deadwood. And BA should know them and he should have taken a chance on one or two of them, anyway. Laugh all you want to. I realize mine is a minority position, but I'm far from a minority of one. Open your eyes. The WC is here and everyone is rallying round and circling the wagons. But their eyes are open, and they wish we had a little more ammunition. We do, but we left it at home.
There are better players who could have been chosen for the squad, however Arena has stressed that he is not taking an all-star team . Whilst even within that context I have quibbles with some of the selections, for the most part it's a sound roster.
Someone linked to an old thread from 2002 the subject of which was 'picks for the 2006' team. There were some really wild picks like youth kids who aren't even in soccer anymore(Jordan Stone, Devin Barclay). The most precient list was Wahl's list. What I noticed there was that there wasn't too much turnover and most of the guys were all ready accomplished pros. In other words if you're thinking about the next 2-4 years, you should avoid throwing out more than a handful of youth names and instead stick with accomplished young players. Ellis McCloughlin. Who the hell is this? A conservative lineup for 2010 would look like: -----------------Altidore------------------ ------------------------------------------ -----Beasley------Adu------Donovan------ -------------Bradley---------------------- ---------------------Clark---------------- ----------------------------------------- --Convey---Gibbs----Gooch----Wynne-- ----------------Howard------------------ The only player in this group currently not playing 1st Div ball is Altidore.
This is the sort of 'criticism' that I don't find very helpful. I am not arguing about what Bruce Arena thinks Bruce Arena should do. He did it. He made his picks. He's got the 23 he wanted (less two injuries). I'm arguing about what I think Bruce Arena should do - now, of course, what he should have done. I am not throwing out our entire roster for some mythical 'all-star' team. I'm letting go two or three 'older' players, clearly reserves and (clearly to me) of limited utility, in favor of a like number of promising young players. The core of the team, the guys expected to actually play, remains unchanged. I don't see this as radical at all. I'll continue, below, as I review your 2010 roster ...
Freddy Adu won't be in soccer in 4 years? Now that's an early retirement! [Just kidding, I know that's not what you said.] But, actually, any player we can think of might have a career-ending injury, so you're right, there are no guarantees. No guarantees, but you still play the percentages and make educated guesses. Let's take a look at your lineup - pretty encouraging, actually. Here's what I see. Wait a minute, I see Altidore up front all by himself! I thought I said no 4-5-1 in 2010. I want two guys in front. And you've given up the search already? Given up on EJ even before we see how he does in Germany this month? How are we going to win it all if EJ isn't scoring at will? But that's not my point. My point is I'm relieving Wolff of his duties and appointing Adu. You say no, Adu's an 'all star' whose immaturity would disrupt team 'chemistry.' OK, so let me bring Altidore instead. He promises to keep his eyes and ears open and his mouth closed. Now, maybe Altidore will be out of soccer in 2010, chuckling to himself as he reads his name in your old lineup posts. But you are projecting Altidore as the one go-to guy up front you can name right now for 2010, so I'm swapping him in for Wolff right now. Midfield is that much clearer. Olsen - out. Bradley in. Or Clark in. Adu - still out, you made your point already. I bet we could find half a dozen other names. Tougher in the back, but you like Wynne so much, I'm swapping him in for Conrad. Today! Makes you nervous? Well, I won't plug him in until we're officially eliminated, ok? And somehow I forgot about GK. If KK is #1, and Howard's #2 (and your nominee for 2010), and MH is (virtually) 34 already - see where I'm going? - then I'm thanking MH for his services and bringing in a young GK as #3. Same simple principle - improve your chances for tomorrow if you can do so without diminishing your chances for today. Is this concept so hard to understand? You have a core group of 20 players you plan to play and three extra slots. BA is filling those slots with Wolff, Olsen and Conrad. I'm filling them with young players, and I'm letting you choose the players. What's the problem? Are my young guys all-stars? Are they going to mess up team chemistry? By sitting and watching and doing as they're told? Please don't tell me again that BA sees it differently. We know that. He made his choices. I want to know what you and others think about those marginal, end-of-the-roster choices. And I don't mean Twellman or any of the ususal suspects. I mean young players of the sort we're discussing here. *Ellis McCloughlin is today's homework assignment. You can retrace this thread for starters. I gather he's in Bradenton, and that he's fast and can shoot with both feet. That's what he says, anyway. Full report, please!