I'd like to see Osbourne's form right now. I'm not sure if that should be tested on such an important stage. I guess the coaches will see. I'd normally agree boxx is overall better, but the last 4 or so months I really think Boxx's game has struggled. Even physically she looks to be struggling, like many people on the team. I will say when Osbourne is on the feild she's like a positive energizer bunny.
Osborne might be a bit rusty, but she will certainly be in great cardiovascular shape...she was prepared to run the New York Marathon! I think Boxx still is, on balance, the better player. She has been made to look average (and old) because under the U.S. system, she is forced to be a box-to-box midfielder (no pun intended). At her age, she should be deployed as a strictly defensive midfielder, to limit the ground she has to cover. Absolutely bring her forward for set pieces, she's great in the air. But expecting her to cover the length of the field game after game, all the while mopping up Lloyd's turnovers, is unrealistic. It is another example of Pia's failure to recognize her player's strengths and limitations. Boxx is a fantastic ball winner (tackling and in the air), and a decent distributor of the ball. But she is not an endurance runner at this stage. I agree with Batfink that including Osborne will not improve the USA's erratic offense. Boxx, Osborne, and Averbuch are all good players. But unfortunately, they are all good at the same things. Putting them on the field together won't help make our attack more dynamic and fluid. We need someone who understands how to dictate play, knows when to penetrate and when to hold back, picks the right pass consistently, and possesses a good shot from distance. Right now I'm not sure who this is in the USWNT pool. Chalupny would be good in such a role, but who knows if we'll see her again. Tarpley maybe? There are some good attacking midfielders in the college ranks, but its probably too soon for them. Edit: Just saw in another thread that Tarpley was indeed added to the U.S. roster along with Osborne, per Alex Scott's tweet.
"reading is fundamental"????? what are you talking about, i responded to what YOU wrote, thats a direct quote from you about how she is not good enough.
so you're saying boxx should sit back and if she does that she's still better than osbourne, defensively... I don't know. Come 2011 WC with game after game and boxx playing minute after minute something tells me she won't be able to play at a high level consistantly. She will be 34. I'm tired just thinking about it. Keelin Winters was great 2 years ago at U20. I haven't seen her play since. Has anyone been watching the Pilots lately?
The U.S. 08 U-20 generation has been ridiculously overlooked and wasted in my opinion. Many wont ever see any senior WNT time, or a few will have to pray WPS survives to wait it out like a Lindsey.
Well, generally in youth development if a handful of players from any particular class make the "next step" to the full national team then that can be considered a success. I'm not arguing for or against Pia's player development choices since the 08 Olympics with this post. I'm just pointing out the reality that many more youth players have success as youth than will have success against adults.
The u20 2006 team has had numerous players capp'd: Arod, Cheney, Casey N, O'hara, Tobin, Dimartino, Coxx to name a few. the U20 2008 team: Narin, Morgan.
[interesting tangent] O'Hara & Nogueira (Nogueira is an 89) were among the last players cut from the 08 U20 squad. They're really from that class, imo. Heath is also an '88 but she'd already been pulled up to the full squad by the time the 08 U20 Cup rolled around. I would similarly argue that Narin & Leroux are really part of the 2010 U20 class given their age. You bring up an interesting topic that I'd encourage you to start as a separate thread looking at when (and which) Uxx players take the next step. Looking through the FIFA site for the various U20 cups, (look at the "overview" of the 04 version) is thought provoking. [/interesting tangent]
on a related note to these discussions, bob bradley named his south africa 18 man roster recently. as mentioned before, i also think it's unfair comparing the mens/womens, but if you take a second to look at it, you'll be like...whoa! over half a dozen uncapped, with the most capped having only 35 ("miracle" boy johnny b, which i don't know why still gets called). i haven't really seen a post/article which explains exactly how much pull pia sudhage has on the call ups, but if it's anything like bradley, she should whip out her notebook and take notes...
I am going on who was on each team respectively, regardless of age. It doesn't matter how old Casey is, she wasn't on U20 08 squad. She and Kelly and Noyola weren't on the 2008 squad because they were outplayed or underperformed or didn't fit and the people who were better than them at the time and won a championship with that u20 team haven't been called up.
I am not sure which players belong to which generation in terms of when they first played for which U-20 side. Before the U-17's were in place, USA tended to play younger talents early within the U-20 system. Either way the 08 U-20 U.S. team was a success, the first for a while. A few girls from 08 have gotten very limited looks though, so far only Morgan seems to have stuck. U.S. U-20 teams pre 08 have had great talent step up to the seniors, but again not really stick too. It's the first U-19 champs with O'rielly, Tarpley etc have had the most success up till now, but there seems to be big gaps in the development of players for areas USA now looks weaker than it should. Take a look at how Germany target areas where they need players, and then bring them in from the U-20's. Is U.S. talent that much worse than Germany not to be able to do the same? If you look at other nations squads for the qualifying and friendlies pre WWC, you see a hell of a lot of talents from the last two U-20 tournaments in their squads. Llyod to be frank has not, and will not work. Boxx was great, but needs to play next to better soccer IQ to remain more than a cleaner. Lindsey is hit and miss within a system she seems to have little synergie with players on the field. Averbuch is all talent, but has poor assessments in her ability due to coaches showing little faith. Other talented options exsist outside the current U.S. player pool, but the lack of faith shown in their possible ability is sad. When USA play Haiti and Guatamala with it's coaches strongest 11, you know that talented fringe players and promosing U-20's have little to no chance for years to come. I mean while I think Osborne is great and Tarps has a great underrated football brain, where's DiMartino's call up? Oh wait she has no experience. When you see Buehler at left back, Mitts still at Right back, Lilly managing to remain competitive with Rapinoe, Llyod never having to compete for a start, and every game a new forward alongside Wambach, all you can do is shake your head and wonder what's been going on.
The men are at a completely different stage of their WC cycle than the women are. And have you seen how some people are freaking out over there about that roster? It would be ridiculous for Pia to pull a roster together right now similar in age/caps to the one Bradley is taking to SA. Bradley would never take that roster to a game that meant anything, much less a World Cup place. He also didn't use that sort of roster for the two games in the USA which, it seems, were about ticket sales for the USSF. If we're looking for correlation/comparison then looking at what Arena managed to pull off by adding Donovan & Beasely & Mastro very late in the 2002 cycle. Those guys were pretty darn instrumental in the 2002 success.
Agreed on most terms, specially the 2002 example. All I'm saying is, we get too caught up with conservative callups on the tourneys that don't matter because of reputation/status, that we start having issues on depth and experience on the tourneys that do matter...
you conveniently quoted this part of what i wrote: did you leave out the rest of the (con)text on purpose? yes, reading IS fundamental.
i'm not sure that any of those 2008 u20's except maybe morgan are ready to play for the uswnt. pia's team includes the best u.s. women playing in the best league in the world - the wps. we just have to face the fact that they are just not that good. the u.s. as a whole does not train good footballers. we train good athletes. and as the rest of the world actually starts playing women's football, it's coming back to bite us. and don't say it's pia's job to teach them the skills that they lack. it's not. that's the job of the club and maybe college coaches.
This is what people should be focusing on. The USWNT does not develop young talent. I remember the three game Canada series last year when Pia basically brought the same old, same old roster plus a couple of young ones and when people asked why didn't we play a B roster they got crucified on these boards. Other nations regularly send B rosters to tournaments and in friendlies to develop young talent for the international level. The US is too worried about winning - and keep making comments like, "isn't it great that Pia has only lost 2 games in three years." Well, I don't care about winning any games outside of the WC and the Olympics - I'd much rather see the old players being challenged by the youth in every other game. The fact that Lilly and Boxx, at their ages, are considered locks on this roster says volumes.
I disagree a bit. I think Edwards more than held her own in the starting lineup for FCGP and I think Marshall did well enough to warrant time, too, given her speed & soccer instincts. Those are two positions where we are slow & old and *really* needed the infusion of fresh players. I'd agree except when the USWNT does get beat there rises a chorus of "This Is The End" from the media that hasn't been paying attention until they see the score line. The story would not be "USWNT with new & young players lost the game but gains valuable experience which will be great going forward." For well over 2 decades (starting ~88) winning was pretty much the only way to validate and/or ensure the existence of the team. Now, I completely agree that new players need to be worked into the mix in a way that doesn't result w/ the back 4 we saw in Cancun. But giving the history of this team, wholesale changes of the sort where the USWNT sends a "B" team just isn't possible.
I agree that 1) winning doesn't matter outside of the World Cup and Olympics (with the possible exception of Algarve, where everyone says their A-team and counts for a lot in FIFA rankings) but 2) image of the USWNT takes a hit inordinate to its significance when there is a bad result. The solution may be to send "experimental" teams to play abroad (i.e. in matches not televised on ESPN2) and play largely to win at home. I understand that this is the Internet age, but I think there's no doubt that without ESPN2 coverage, USWNT friendlies tend to be under-the-radar except for the committed soccer nuts (i.e. us).
disagree with most of this. Leroux was Godlen ball and Golden boot winner at the U20 2008 cup. Last year she outplayed and outscored Cheney at UCLA for most of the season and this year she was the Bronze ball winner at the u20 2010 cup, despite going out in the quarters. During the two U20 tournaments she competed against starters from numerous top senior women's teams, such as Germany, Korea and France and outperformed them. I'd like to point out that it's the U20 WC. It's NOT the u17. They are actualy not girls, they are women. They aren't little minions with out experience or training. We would never know if they are ready for the big stage, however, if they never have an opportunity. Pia hasn't given them that opportunity. About coaches teaching their players skill they lack... wha??? Because she's a national team coach every player who comes in should be fully technically /skill wise developed? that's silly. espeically in the women's game and especially in america where for most years we never had/have a pro league for these athletes to work on development.
please don't even start with the wps best shpeel. If wnt grabbed the best (as in consistent best performance terms) some of these players wouldn't even have been in these tourneys. And yes, after seeing a lot a previous games, I don't see pia teaching them soccer skills. Some of them do a lot of what they display in the wps, which wasn't much to begin with. To clarify once more...IMO, it would be beneficial if we called up and played more people during the non vital matches so we can see their innate talent and possibilities.
ok. for those of you who disagree with me. tell me who you think should have played instead of.......let's say pia's typical starting 11 for these wcqs. i know the players that i like. for example, i've been saying for a while that wilson is probably the best right back we have, and that ellertson is probably the best center back we have. but pia looks with a sophisticated eye, knows more soccer that i do, and sees these players a whole lot more than i do. she and hege rise very likely see problems in chemistry and/or positioning and/or reading the game and/or mentality that i don't see. i doubt that a coach would see a player that is clearly going to make the team better and not bring them in. and those pia brings in still have to win their position in camp. that's the first place that they have to beat out boxx, rampone, lloyd, mitts et al. if they can't do it there in front of the coach's direct gaze, they're not going to make the field. so some of our pet projects may not be as good as we think they are. anyway, who do you think pia should have played instead of: abby? __________ arod? __________ rapinoe? __________ o'reilly? __________ boxx? __________ lloyd? __________ mitts? __________ rampone? __________ lepeilbet? __________ buehler (as a left back)? __________ barnhardt? __________ like i said. it's not her area. the people who are supposed to be doing that are doing a lousy job of it. i know that this is an oft discussed point here. but, as far as i see, the uswnt has no non vital matches. they have friendlies which they need to win just so that they can keep the barely noticeable crowds coming to their games, and they have fifa competitions. both are necessities in order to keep the uswnt going.
U17, U20 and U23 teams are means and not ends in themselves. In other words, developing young players and giving them international experience is more important than winning tournaments. These teams should be feeder programs for national senior team. The 2010 U20 team did not win the U20WC, but it greatly contributed to the development of high quality players. In FIFA's technical analysis: • Disciplined, well-organised defense • Patient build-up play from the back through the midfield • Attacks using the width • Width of the pitch well used – wingers attack the goal, are able to cut in, good in one-on-on • Excellent off-the-ball movement Note, all areas where the senior national team is lacking. Here is what FIFA said about the outstanding players from that team: • 1 HENNINGER Bianca: good positional and covering play at the back, good shot-stopping and handling skills • 2 PRESSLEY Toni: organises the defense well, quick to cover at the back, good delivery with long forward passes • 4 DUNN Crystal: excellent one-on-one defending with good tackles, good header and provides cover at the back • 19 LEROUX Sydney: fast and direct striker, creates chances with good off the- ball runs, good finishing ability I would also note that although they are not named individually, Bywaters and Hayes provided the outstanding attacking play from the wings which the report praised. These and other young players should get get playing time with the national team.
Pressley's long ball accuracy was beter than any i've seen on the WNT including Whitehill. It was very impressive. I think Dunn has a lot of great qualities too. Leroux is an Arod type player right now, with better finishing skills, probably better runs too, imo.
I really liked Pressley at the U-20s. She might be what the back line needs right now, but CB is a real pressure position and she should play alongside an experienced vet. Henninger is the next U.S. No. 1 in my view but Barnhart was probably the strongest keeper in WPS this year so I can't criticize the pick. I think A-Rod's accuracy is lacking so it may be time to use Leroux in that small forward role. I agree that all of the players you mentioned should play for the WNT if there is a run-up to Germany. If there is no WWC, then these are the players who should be formed into the core of the team going into the Olympics.