I have decided to make the issue of 'playing' much broader than a case-by-case basis and the reason is the complex nature of USMNT and MLS. By forcing players to 'play' (I would say 50% of matches. How is this judged? Use the country music standard: if it sounds country, it is.) It makes them almost maniacal in their pursuit of playing time abroad, something along the Dempsey lines, where every minute on the pitch was used to stay on the pitch. If they cannot reach this ultra-competitive level, but are still talented players, then this would force them to MLS, thereby increasing the competitiveness of the league and benefiting the USMNT by having all our players either benefiting the long term goal of a better league for better US players or increasing the perception abroad that US players will do anything for playing time.
Huh? It takes in the only variable that is not he-said/she-said based: Playing time. Market forces will take care of the rest.
No, actual talent is not "he said/she said" ... Just because Donovan goes to Bayern and doesn't get action doesn't mean he's not actually one of the 3 best players we had at the time. Getting playing time at Aalborg doesn't mean you're better than someone only playing one of every three or four at Fulham.
Correct. Talent is he said/she said? Where exactly? Maybe on these boards, that's about the only place.
There's some point beyond which talent and ability don't matter. If Donovan doesn't get playing time for an extended period, I suspect that his starting spot could be put in jeopardy. JK indicated that players should always be fighting for their position, every camp, every game, and that he wants us at least 2 deep at every position. That's not for nothing. I see JK being rational and practical in his approach, but I also see him destroying the notion that there are any sacred cow players. Landon is clearly our best field player, but I don't think that that means that JK wouldn't make adjustments if LD stopped seeing the field for a long period of time. If he took exception for LD, it would undermine everything he's saying about his approach, causes it all to fail.
Robbie Keane is pretty much the perfect example of what I'm talking about. What's his actual match time been at the club level the last 2yrs ? Aaaaaannnnddd what's his National team form been over the same period ? Stating in a black/white manner that if you aren't playing for your club, then you shouldn't be playing for the national team is pretty much being ignorant on purpose.
It's not being ignorant on purpose as it is instilling a certain value structure. If you want your players to constantly be giving their best efforts and fighting for their position by doing so, it doesn't work if you make exceptions. You seem to disagree with the approach, and that's not unreasonable, but it is unreasonable for you to say that this approach cannot work or that it cannot work without granting exceptions, because it hasn't been tested, so you don't know whether it will work. The fact that this is happening in Ireland doesn't really inform our discussion, unless you're saying that (1) they employ the same rationale as JK and (2) we should aim to emulate their program and results (and stay home from the World Cup).
Noooooooo, it has to do with the variable that you seem to be ignoring also. Actual talent. It isn't as simple as "he's not playing, he's not trying, therefore he's not playing for the USMNT" .... that is a way too simplified stance to take. What, Donovan wasn't trying at Munich ? Let's be real here. The implications of simplifying it to this level are far reaching. While I firmly believe that someone's National Team is more important than the club team, I don't think there is any right to hinder a player's potential growth and opportunity by essentially restricting their choices on where too play. Being this simplistic in the approach does just that. Hey Maurice Edu, don't sign with Rangers because you may not earn full 1st team action right away and well that drops you from USMNT contention simply on principle. .... that negates the fact he was already better than the vast majority of midfielders and ushers in players not as good as him simply because they play for Chivas USA. Do you honestly not see the problem there ? I'm not saying the concept isn't sound if done correctly. I'm saying that making it overly simple like this isn't the right way to implement it.
Talent can only be verified through playing time for club. Does that make it clear enough? Not enough club time, talent is irrelevant. THis player or that player are great, wonderful talents, they have no team, they never start, they train great. That is not the standard we are aiming for, in my opinion. As soon as you start being 'practical,' you just open the door for more and more ambiguity and in the long run, systematic approaches to success hate ambiguity. There have to be some fundamental requirements that define you, your system, your team, or organization.
No, that's not true at all. Landon at Munich shows us that. Robbie Keane shows us that. There are plenty of other players that show us that. Landon Donovan doesn't have to play every match, or significantly more minutes than every other American midfielder to validate his talent as one of our two best midfielders. I'm not saying playing time doesn't play any part ... it does. It isn't as simple as Bedoya has played 9 of 10 matches for Orebro this season and Donovan has only played 5 of 10 for LA, so Bedoya gets the call. Those four matches haven't made Bedoya significantly better just as those same matches haven't made Donovan significantly worse. I can still be better than you even without playing as many club matches as you. Sure, you might play every match for Scunthorpe but I play one of every three for Everton and train with vastly better players on a day in day out basis. I also keep up my fitness. Simply because you get more minutes doesn't make you better. Now, if we're talking about guys like Davies/Gooch and the like ... sure there's substance to the playing time debate, and I agree with it. However that's not what you're saying here.
Getting dogmatic about this (or about playing players "out of position" and a whole myriad of other things) just doesn't make any sense. Everything really needs to be case-to-case, using a coach's best judgment. Any overly dogmatic approach is merely a handicap.
Proven commodity is a better term. Jozy, Adu, and couple others have actual talent, they aren't polish or proven.
Jurgen to Landon: "Landon, Keane has been playing better than you at club level so we're going to bench you and start Kljestan in your place. He is now more valuable to the USMNT than you are. Sorry, buddy, 'no play. no play.'" lol this is an example of someone getting too involved and devoted to their own argument to even realize what they're typing.
If klejestan is in invredible form and donovan isnt seeing the field the i would stand by klinnsy for starting him. Look, its all about earning the shirt. Id be pretty insulted if ive scoref 10 goals for my club half way through the season and klinnsy gave the start to someone who has only seen a hanful of mins over the last 5-6 games. This is all hypothetical and im pretty sure this particular example will never happen but if it did id be able to justify it. When you male exceptions you lose credibility. "Sure, i scored 15 goals for fc dallas. But, beasely trained with the rangers. Regardless that he hasnt seen the pitch since the bush administration and his own club team has no faith in him. Im sure he can give more than me" wrongggggggg. Dont care who u are. If you make bad decisions on where u go play there should be consequences on a national team level. By not doing so is a direct insult to the other hard working players in that position. Could we lose by not starting donovan over klejestan? Absolutely. But it sets a benchmark at the same time. Its all about preparing this team for the big picture. There is no player bigger than the USMNT shirt. Period.
My take on the matter is that Club PT should equal a call-up. It's up to Klinsmann at camp to determine who's sharper then who. In the gold cup, despite lack of PT at AV, i would have still called up MB b/c of his play with the nats has been quality (IMO). However, with up coming friendlies, i would leave him off the list simply for a couple reasons: 1) they are meaningless 2) he has to fix his club situation This goes for others. I would expect the players called up to at least be off the bench options with their clubs. Once called in, Klinsmann has the right to start them if he feels they are the better option, not b/c Player X receives more PT in MLS then Player Y in EPL.
If we don't want to consider how talented the player is, do we want to consider who the club is? (to continue the analogy do we want to tell LD that he's putting his NT career in jeopardy by hypothetically going to Real Madrid, but that he's in like flint for the NT if he chooses to play 4th division Jamaican league*? *ie somewhere so bad that he'll be a standout.
Did you just compare a jamaican pub team to MLS? WOW... If you arent playing football with your club you dont deserve to wear the shirt period. If that means sacrificing a salary for consistant playing time then so be it. Really though? Compare MLS to a jamaican pub team?
You keep going back to this salary thing. One day you'll realize the real world is about making money and supporting your family. Playing for your country is an honor, but it doesn't feed your kids.
my point is playing time should be essential, but not completely essential. LD to RM and making the 18 is fine with me as he's an option off the bench. LD to RM and not making the game day 18 is a completely different story. In other words, Club performance gets you the call-up. Klinsmann's decision will come down to who's sharpest in camp (just my take) Half a season is one thing, however, the more and more you dont play the duller and duller you get. It's not a surprising thing to say. The problem with going to (as you said) the Jamaican 4th division is that there is obviously someone in a tougher league starting and doing well.
Preposterous. There are so many other variables (more important ones too) that must be taken into account.