We have gone way far off track in this thread. Overall we just need to produce better players. Players who have the technical ability to easily fit into the elite club sides in Europe. We are not there yet.
Whenever I've traveled I've not noticed any larger percentage of people in other countries that don't like Americans than I come across Americans who don't like "foreigners" here. I've met plenty of people in other countries who like Americans just fine and a few who didn't. Big deal. Also, hating America is different than hating Americans, even in those cases where people are pissed about geopolitical issues. Regardless, when a player earns it on the field, respect will be given. Dempsey climbed up until he reached a level he was solid but no longer a standout and that was that. Bradley got moved up from Chievo to Roma when he starred at one level but when he was a rotation player for Roma he went no further. Can anyone honestly name a single American who deserved though his play on the field that he deserved a chance at a top tier club? Howard got a shot but didn't have the consistency required. American players don't have a great reputation but I don't understand why they would. How are players supposed to have this great reputation without performances to back it up?
He was one of their best players and then was sold for a crazy amount of money after a contract squabble.
And Bradley was a key player for Roma until his ankle injury and then was released per his request for a crazy amount of money that was offered to him by Toronto. Point is that there are plenty of examples of where a player is considered expendable... Hell, go back to Diego Forlan as perhaps the greatest example of a player that was considered a nobody at one club and became a star at another club.
Not sure what that has to do with Bradley but in summary Ozil had 3 spectacular years at Madrid and was sold to Arsenal for > $70MM. So again if "Bradley who could challenge anybody not named Ozil, Khedira, Cesc, Iniesta, and only a handful few of other players." what happened at Roma?
Bradley can't complain he clearly got his chances to show his quality at Roma. His first season he played 30 matches with 24 starts, most of his matches as the box-to-box mid in Roma's attacking 4-3-3. Unfortunately he produced almost no offensive output with 1 G and 2 As in those 30 matches. Roma then recruited over him first bringing in a young CM, Strootman from Eindhoven in the Dutch league. Strootman won the starting job and regulated MB to the bench. Roma again recruited another young CM player Nainggolan and the writing was on the wall that Roma considered MB a squad player. Look, MB is (arguably) our best field player but the idea that he would have moved to another UCL level team post Roma is not supported by facts.
Wow for some reason I had it in my mind it was Bradley's first season in Roma. My previous post is now deleted.
Happens all the time. 1 player goes from a big club and fails or is hindered and can usually move to another CL club. MOst of it is "IMAGE" and Bradley doesn't have a big enough name or the right nationality but he is quality. Not enough to start at Arsenal but to play a role ala Kallstrom, he def could have contributed as equal to that. But of course it is right that he'd just be "depth" at another CL club but at the very least it's Arsenal, so that's quite a GRAND situation.
Got it. Bradley got a 1 year, 30 matches, 24 starts to show what he had at Roma. As I said while we can say Americans in general do not get a shot at big clubs, we can't say that about MB90.
Coming in late so will just put in my take which is similar to others I saw. 1) Check the source. Of course his dad is going to say he is Arsenal quality, but that should be taken with a grain of salt. 2) He may have been a better move than Kalstrom but no transfer would have been a better move than Kalstrom. 3) He couldn't have come in expecting to be a starter. Arsenal has a stronger squad at the moment than Roma, so if he wasn't seeing much of the field at Roma he could only expect to see the same or less for Arsenal. A) Now maybe he could have played his way in, and with the injuries Arsenal suffered he probably would have gotten some playing time, but this is all hindsight. At the time he was moving to get playing time leading into the World Cup and Arsenal couldn't guarantee that. 4) As for bias against Americans I think there probably is some when players first make the move. But once a players establishes themselves in a European league that for the most part goes out the window. It's all about what have you done at a level we know.
C'mon, between: Panic, Lil'jac, Strootman, Bradley, DDR, and Nainnngggolag. Which one do you pick. It is a tough choice. Strootman has an attacking sophistication along with defensive chops, so he may be considered a better all around player than Bradley. DDR might be a specifically italian phenomenon so you might bypass entirely. Nainngolag is more a DM, as far as I could tell. Panic is a creative force and Lil'jac never much impressed me. Bradley is in the conversation but several pegs behind several for a specific job.
I've long said that that there is a peculiar bias against American players amongst Euro clubs. I've tried to lay off that opinion some, because it's hard to prove; and a lot of posters give me eight degrees of crap for it.
Yeah, for a lot of time. I, for the record, don't exactly agree with the quote but it does say "can challenge" which is not the same as "better than" or even "as good as." It just means come close in quality and desire and ability. I would make that "untouchable" quite a bit longer, but there are a lot of very good teams that, were Bradley in the right place at the right time, he would be a fine regular starter and contribute well. But he's never going to be the 1st guy picked in the world class pick up game.
Look. Generally speaking, nobody gives a flying fig where a particular player is from. Most big clubs read like the United Nations. Why would Arsenal rebel against an American with an American running their scouting department? Why would anyone in Germany care, what with a number of dual nationals plying their trade in the country? Heck, Bayern is opening a New York office with Kaiser Franz just to widen its appeal in the largest single commercial market, which is the Unites States + Canada (+Mexico, to some extent). Roma, with its American owners, are doing likewise. In fact, one can easily make the opposite argument, "Big clubs will sign players from the economically wealthy nations just to capitalize on the star hungry populace". Did Roma receive more attention in the US after signing Michael? You bet your ass they did. The same principle applied to a number of Chinese, Korean and Japanese players in the major Euro leagues. In other words, Bob is more wrong than he right. Being American was what gotten Mikey a Roma gig to begin with. As a player, he was as generic as one can get, a relatively bereft of skills plugger with a lot of energy. That's a mid-table quality and far short of the CL, where Roma is now headed. As to why, you're off your rocker, check out WhoScored. Mikey is the 24th ranked player on the squad. Now, who in his right mind - and I will never accuse Bob of being that - would argue that a 24th ranked player deserved to jump ahead of Pjanic (2nd, can play the same role), De Rossi (3rd), Strootman (4th) and Nainggolan (7th). http://www.whoscored.com/Teams/84
My understanding was Bayer Leverkusen were interested in MB, but the money from Toronto was just to much to turn down? Ives was reporting that.
There is no American bias by European clubs. The only bias is by posters on this board. If Bradley went to Arsenal he wouldn't have even gotten more then a few sub appearances. Michael Bradley is a good player and does the job for the US, however he lacks the top quality technical skill, athleticism, and passing ability to succeed at a top club. He is a very good all around midfielder, but he doesn't excel at anything in particular. He doesn't have near the technical skill of Wilshere, doesn't have the stamina tackling ability or goal scoring record Ramsey has, doesn't have the experience or passing ability of Arteta, doesn't have the steel that Flamini has. Ozil and Bradley don't even belong in the same sentence. Kallstrom was a classic Wenger buy, to fill a gap on the cheap. He only had a few appearances but I didn't think he looked out of place out Arsenal. Bradley is a good player, but Americans just overrate their own players, myself included. There is no bias, the only thing is top clubs don't want Americans because in general they are not good enough. Dempsey got a raw deal at Spurs, but don't come in here and start saying Bradley is better then Aaron Ramsey thats just absurd. Wenger has gone on record and said the most important quality a player needs to play at the top level is technical ability, and if a player doesn't have the needed technical ability by a certain age he won't be able to obtain it. The lack of technical ability is what hold most American players from making it at the top level, Bradley included