Mexico was clearly a good team. More surprising to me though, was how bad Canada was in comparison to US and Mexico. They looked cohesive as a team with their tactics, but their technique was just off which caused countless turnovers.
The interesting thing I've noticed with Mexico, both at the NT and youth levels, is that the backline has tended to be 100% Mexican-American. I'm not sure what that means, but at this tournament, they almost always used the US-raised players in the back 4.
I think Costa Rica was possibly the 3rd best team in CONCACAF U17, but the people who did the seeding placed the 1 and 2 seeds into the same bracket which eliminated the other teams in the bracket. Watching Mexico easily dispose of Hati and the US' destruction of Canada only confirmed my suspicions that group A was by far the easier of the two groups.
Costa Rica clearly had items to work on, but they showed a lot of grit. Costa Rica vs. Haiti or Costa Rica vs. Canada would both have been good matches! Like you say, Canada may have been helped out by the draw.
I too have noticed that the US teams in general including the full WNT and full MNT do not play with a creative ACM, classic #10. Is this because we don't have such a player, we haven't found them, or we don't choose them? I know on the men's side of course all eyes are on Christian Pulisic as perhaps America's first true #10. His father and mother were both accomplished players and he was supported in a manner that allowed him to maximally develop and be recognized. The US will clearly be better for it. What's happening with the girls? I admit that I didn't see every minute of every game. For sure Sanchez is an outstanding player. However she is so in a very direct to goal, try and stop me if you can, kind of way. In how many fun to watch creative midfield and forward combinations were either she or Brianna Pinto (playing an 8) involved? I saw little Jordan Caniff trying a few times. Her attempts were largely unsuccessful, but she seemed to be trying. Spaanstra was mostly a non factor in this tournament, but at least played a couple of well weighted and insightful through balls. Smith was a similar to Sanchez, go at you and cross (albeit not mindless crosses but with purpose in general). Kuhlman was a more than adequate target. I honestly didn't really notice Howell. But maybe that's the best thing that you can say about a #6 who quietly takes care of business. I am going back and watching the final again to see what everyone is raving about in her performance. In general, I saw a lot of attacking players trying to do it themselves or at least fly down the flank for a cross. Some of the kids seemed to put intention behind their crosses so I don't absolutely hate that, but it would be nice to see some more sophisticated combinations and flair out of this group. Again is there a classic #10 out there that we just don't choose or are we failing to develop a sophisticated, fun to watch player with flair, who is looking to set up a cheeky goal for others? Ovalle, to me, was the best player on the pitch in the final.
Costa Rica played Haiti in an exhibition match a few days before the qualifiers. I believe Haiti won that match, 1-0.
Olelaliga, while I don't disagree with any particular point of yours per se, you strongly imply that a team needs a true #10. I don't think a true #10 is absolutely necessary. It depends on what formation and strategies you are using. US Soccer seems to believe they can excel without one. And thanks for the info about the exhibition match!
That's a great point. Thanks. I agree the US WNT proves that a team does not need to play a style including a classic #10 to win games. However, I guess I personally, and believe there may be a larger like audience in the US, enjoy the entertainment that a creative #10 can provide. I think the audience for women's soccer in general would improve if there was more entertainment value in an attractive sophisticated style of soccer. Now at least the male audience is largely us dads of daughters and girl's/women's coaches and those that enjoy both soccer and some pretty faces on the field. With the u17s, their initial lineup implied that the formation would support a #10 and she would be Ashley Sanchez. The line up was originally presented as a 4-2-3-1 (same as the USWNT slotting Lloyd in as the #10). My observation of the game suggested that the 2 were really a #6 (Howell) and a #8 (Pinto). As such the lineup suggests that the US were trying to support more of a creative attacking style focused around a playmaking #10. However their #10, Sanchez, did not really interact much with the other players as much as head to goal more as a forward rather than an attacking, playmaking, midfielder. In fact there was very little playmaking, save some thoughtful crosses and a couple well weighted through balls on display in my estimation on first viewing. I will, however, watch again and pay more attention to Howell and Pinto's interactions with the attacking players.
I've been told health issues apparently. They didn't specify the injury. She was on the roster at the NTC in February but was unable to play.
Ekic was ACC freshemn of the year (shared) and i heard may have torn her ACL in one of the last games of the season. I cannot verify that though. I also really love that kid's style and flair!