The time for that is over. Berhalter has already run a ton of young guys through the team. Its now time to work with a core group to build toward the Hex with. There are several core players who are working their way back to the team (Brooks, Adams, etc). The program is doing a fantastic job vertically integrating the U20s and U23s with the full men’s team. When young players break through with their clubs, they get called in to a mixed camp. This is excellent. It gives young guys a shot to challenge veterans in a closed, competitive environment. It also allows everyone to get familiar with expectations.
Well NietzscheIsDead, if you feel that we are in good hands (Jay, Earnie and Greg), all is well ("The program is doing a fantastic job vertically integrating the U20s and U23s with the full men’s team." -really?) and that we will qualify for WC2022, then I strongly disagree with you. I have higher expectations for the national team and do not believe that we have the leadership - specifically head coach Greg Berhalter - to raise our competitiveness in the world and to reach the next World Cup. There is nothing is his background or his managerial track record to suggest anything but mediocrity. His core group has some guys who just are not going to help us reach the WC and he keeps using them. The Zardes, Lovitz, Roldan, Bradley, Trapp and Ream core group - that he keeps using over and over again and not giving opportunities to younger guys - does not show that he is integrating the young guys very well. They are over the hill or just not good enough and the younger guys should be starting and playing the majority of minutes in these games.
Excellency, I respectfully disagree that Zardes is our best bet for scoring the goals we need for WC qualifying. 12 goals in 5 years, some against very poor competition, doesn't mean that "Zardes scores goals".
Against Guyana and Cuba. He has 5 goals against non-Carribbean minnows. 1 in a competitive game against Ecuador, and nothing else. But sure, he just scored Trinidad, Canada, and Guyana, he's amazing. Oh, in his last 7 before that Canada goal at home, he had nothing against Jamaica, Mexico, Uruguay, Mexico again, Canada away...
I finally got to watch this one after being out of town. Not sure why reaction was so negative. It's great to want us to look like world-beaters every match, but we aren't. We've never been. Away from US soil, we have a long, long history of sucking. So, a 4-0 away from US soil. I will not complain. As for the game, the first 20 minutes or so we looked pretty damn good. Yes, it was only 1-0, but we actually played nice soccer. But the reactions here just seemed pre-scripted. "Lovitz can't handle Cuba." Lovitz - and I never wan't to see him called, ever again - was.... fine. He actually made quite a few nice plays, slipping Morris in, etc. Roldan I was indeed a little disappointed with in that it was another chance that he didn't take it, but was he bad? No, he was fine. I too find myself leaning negative most of the time, but I don't see why we're dwelling on it after that one. I'll leave you with a modified quote from ex-Giant Jeff Kent: “You guys are bagging on the USMNT being out of it after the previous losses. Look yourselves in the mirror. Soccer is fun. It’s played out over a long time frame. That’s what makes it so great. I think the game should be enjoyed more. People are bitching about the game, bitching on Big Soccer. They should enjoy the game.”
I don't think Zardes is our best option either, but the 12 goals in 5 years thing is pretty disingenuous. He didn't play every game, and he played a decent number of games at winger. For Berhalter, he has 6 goals in about 900 minutes. That's not great, but it's not 12 goals in 5 years type of pace. Jozy is clearly still the #1, but he's not healthy. Josh is getting plenty of time, and he hasn't been better than Zardes under Berhalter, so I can understand the back and forth. I don't think Zardes is nearly the zero people make him out to be, and while I hope he's not the striker if we make Qatar, he's also not performing at Lovitz/Roldan levels right now.
If you don't understand why Zardes is getting flak, then I think there must also be some misunderstanding surrounding why Lovitz/Roldan are getting so much flak as well. Roldan and Lovitz are clearly not good enough against WC level opposition and against better CONCACAF sides. Meanwhile, their caps have continued (or, in Lovitz's case, started) under Gregg Berhalter. And what's worse, we have players who are clearly better at those positions who aren't getting opportunities. We don't even have to guess who could do better than those two, there are easily 5-6 better options that either have the potential to be WC-level, or are simply superior options with a lower ceiling. Zardes is also not good against good competition, despite the fact that he has some production. 55 caps, 12 goals. 2 were against teams ranked in the top 15 in the world. His Netherlands goal in the 2015 Friendly under JK. His tap-in against Ecuador in the Copa America, also under JK. The rest of his goals (10) have been against countries that were ranked between 59 (the massively-deflected goal against Ecuador that looped over the GK) and 177 (his goal against Guyana). The majority of those 10 goals came against teams ranked in the triple-digits. Meanwhile, his caps have continued to increase over the last several years since Cuova. He's a player that everyone recognizes does not cut it at the WC-quality-levels of the International game (top 40-ranked countries are the ones that are going to make the WC). And yet, instead of playing other younger players who may have a chance of being/becoming good enough to score against such opposition, we play Zardes more and more. And every time he scores, inevitably against teams that are weaker than anything we'd face at a WC, and weaker than the tougher CONCACAF teams that we're going to need to beat/score on to qualify for the WC, people come on here asking why he isn't liked very much. And MLS.com writes a long article saying that the Zardes-haters have finally been silenced. It used to be that Jordan Morris got a ton of hate. He was some random college player from Stanford with one good foot whom we tried out against Mexico in a Friendly. Eventually, he proved that he belonged in MLS. Then he proved that he could use his weak foot effectively. Then he proved that he could be very effective on this team. Now he's a likely starter, and clearly an automatic-roster spot, despite missing an entire year with an ACL tear. Unless Zardes scores against someone good, or unless Roldan/Lovitz somehow massively raises their level to where we need it to be, they will continue get flak on this board every time they are playing and not performing.
Nowhere in my post did I say that I don't understand why Zardes (or Lovitz or Roldan) are getting flak. So I'm not understanding why this the is opening to your post. I said the 12 goals in 5 years stat is pretty disingenuous and that Zardes has performed better than people seem to be saying recently. In Zardes' case, he's both improved and many of his prior caps were at winger, not CF. Ummm, okay? I agree with this (except maybe I'm not sure I can name 6 better options, but that's quibbling). Furthermore, there's literally nothing in my post that even implies I don't. That stat is pretty disingenuous. But no, I don't think Zardes will be good against World-Cup caliber competition. In other words, aside from Mexico, probably the ability level of most of the teams we are facing in the hex. I don't even want Zardes starting in WCQ, but I don't think he's a disaster against 4 of the other 5 teams we will see there. Do we? Since the Gold Cup, Sargent has start four of six games. Zardes has started two, and only gone 90 in one of those. (And yes, Josh should have been at the GC, but since then...) It seems to me that Sargent is getting the developmental time he needs. And that Zardes got the Canada start after Sargent was poor at Canada because we needed to win. Sargent really hasn't outplayed Zardes yet. He will, and he's getting most of the time since (360 minutes versus 190 minutes), but I don't think it's some disaster that he's having to outplay Zardes to win the job. Or do we want to hand starting postions out? Zardes is not playing poorly, and while he's not World Cup caliber, we also need to qualify. And where he is playing right now, he can help us there. Josh Sargent is getting his chance to seize those minutes. I'd like to see someone like Mason Toye in January camp, but the striker position isn't exactly humming for the US right now in terms of challenging Zardes, either. I just think he's in a different place than Roldan and Lovitz, who aren't even at the level right now of being able to help us against El Salvador or Jamaica. That's relevant to me, how? I simply pointed out that he's been better than the stats people are throwing out. There's a mile of difference between "Zardes won't be an asset at World Cup levels" and "12 goals in five years" he sucks kind of conversation. Zardes HAS played much better than Lovitz. There's a big difference to me between someone who isn't an asset against Cuba (Roldan, Lovitz) and someone who can put two goals in and have a strong performance against a bottom half of the hex team (Canada). We need to Sargent, or Jozy, or someone to develop to have this position be a plus in Qatar, if we make it. But simply playing Sargent or Soto or Novakovich isn't going to suddenly make that player World Cup-capable. Sargent is getting the majority of the minutes since the Gold Cup, excepting the first game against Mexico and the "must-win" versus Canada at home. Frankly, if Sargent had performed well at Canada, I bet he gets that start, too. I know people don't trust Berhalter, and that's fine, but it's pretty clear Sargent is in the group and is going to get every chance to prove he's better than Zardes. He's got to do it now.
Well, cause I was looking at @dlokteff's post. but had quoted just yours instead of both of you. He started his post with "I don't understand why reaction was so negative". I was hoping to basically mash together the ideas from your post and his, so that I could more easily talk about the broad strokes of the Gyasi Zardes, Lovitz, and Roldan debate. His lone good competitive goal was as a winger. He has not improved enough to be having this large of a role in our team. He is marginally better at holdup play, and a much better poacher, but still nowhere near good enough. His most positive attribute is that he stretches the backline. Course, he can't actually control the ball if it ever gets there, but whatever. Yep, that'd be @dlokteff 's part there. It's not "disingenuous". It's what "some production" looks like for Zardes. Aside from Mexico and Costa Rica. And aside from any away game, sure he's fine. We're going to give all the starts and minutes to a guy who will only be "...probably [at] the ability level of most..." for 4 home games in WCQ. Sounds crazy to me. If you're going to claim that 4 out of the last 6 games is a big deal, you cannot also hand-wave away Zardes playing at the Gold Cup instead of Sargent, which was a 7-game tournament that could've provided ample evidence of how much work Sargent needs to be good enough. We missed a huge opportunity to play Sargent in competitive games, and instead gave those minutes to Zardes. Sargent could be better. Therefore, any minutes with Zardes on the field and Josh on the bench are minutes that could be used to develop him, and are instead wasted on Zardes. I actually don't mind playing Zardes against Canada at home in what is essentially a one-off game that gets us competitive opportunities against Honduras and Mexico/Costa Rica, but once again, it just doesn't matter very much that he scored when he's at-best a bench option. And it's not "giving away a spot". It's building your team around the pieces that will get you to the WC and through the WC. Zardes cannot. Josh may be able to. Won't find out unless you give him as many minutes as possible. The US pool isn't teeming with strikers who are scoring 25 goals/season, true. But we knew what Zardes was since we first saw him in 2015, and we've seen his level as a striker in the 2017 Gold Cup. You needed someone to lead the line that was of higher quality. Instead, Gregg has chosen Zardes. Under Sarachan, Zardes played in 3/12 games. But since Egg took over, Zardes has played in 15/18. We should've been force-feeding Josh Sargent those minutes. Or Ebobisse, or Sapong, or whomever you think might have the best chance of leading the line in Qatar. We have been mostly terrible as a team with Zardes anyway, so there's just about no downside to playing Sargent instead. I don't think there's a mile of difference, except in the fact that we have much better options at LB/CM than Lovitz/Roldan, which makes those two useless players who only take minutes from players who could matter in Qatar. It's very similar to Zardes, who simply does not play indefensibly-badly all the time. When there is no "Cuba", and no "Canada" at the World Cup, the point is moot. You may bring the "good enough to score on Canada" guy to a WC due to injuries, or perhaps that's the best you have, but you don't start them and give them lots of minutes when you have guys who could be better. "Simply playing" is how to determine who can hack it at the International level, particularly between close players. If we'd "simply played" a few more guys before Cuova, we likely could've saved ourselves from missing the World Cup. Sargent has 5 goals in 12 appearances, including a goal against #21 Peru. So he's already well on his way to outscoring Zardes both in total goals, and goals against WC-level opposition. Can't give minutes to both at the same time, so you may as well give it to the one with more potential and talent.
Sargent should have been at the Gold Cup, IMO. However, you’re kind of ignoring that Sargent hasn’t even established himself as an automatic start @ the club level and he’s 19 years old. Calling him away from Bremen for every camp/game and adding another dozen games against teams that are gonna hack the shit out of him and enormous travel every month or two may not be the best idea and I seriously doubt WB want that stress on him. You are going to have to split the minutes and right now Zardes is our second best option. You hope that isn’t the case when qualifying gets underway. Hopefully Altidore gets healthy. Hopefully Weah gets healthy and establishes himself with Lille. Maybe Toye and/or Ebobisse take another step forward. Maybe Novakovich or Wright start scoring. Maybe Soto or Vasquez or someone catches fire. However, if you’re throwing out Sapong, you’re basically saying you just aren’t looking at things rationally and want change for the sake of change and not for any improvement on the pitch.
1. I don't care much what WB wants when they don't start him regularly. There should be no problem with him scoring goals and getting gametime with the NT, particularly when he's not getting it much at his club. It'd be really nice if he could bang in goals against the likes of Jamaica, and maybe that translates back at his club. 2. Zardes is our 2nd best goalscorer... out of the 3 forwards that we have ever given minutes to. So he's currently 2nd-best out of 3, and like Altidore has very little/no potential to get better. You cannot rely on Zardes against good competition. So, therefore, you MUST do something in order to get better/more consistent production at the forward spot. You can't rely on Altidore because he's often injured, though when healthy he's still #1 right now. That means you must get more out of your young forwards (Toye, Ebobisse, Sabbi, Gall, Nova, Pepi, Vasquez, Soto, Weah, etc), or you bring someone else in (e.g Sapong) that is a veteran striker whom you don't know if he's better or worse than Zardes. The production has to come from somewhere if it isn't going to come from Zardes.
I'm just not all that into the childish "hate everything about something when it doesn't align with my desires" nonsense. It's boring and childish. If I'm a person who likes to have an open path for up-and-coming players to both compete with veterans for roster spots or minutes on the field, then the current programmatic focus on providing that path with some regularity and success is a notable development. Personally, I view this as a time where that kind of vertical integration is not just a formality, but a necessity. I don't know whose plan that was (that's where having an inquisitive soccer media would be useful). I don't have to know whose plan it was to know whether or not it is something I view as a positive. My views as to what or what isn't a positive is not dependent on who makes the decision. What is good is good. If one's view of whether or not something is good is dependent on who one views to be the political beneficiary of such developments, then that's a pretty good indicator that it's time for them to take an introspective look and that they may be the one who has the wrong take on the issue.
If we're talking about the Gold Cup, I agree with you. But my point was simply that post-Gold Cup, we've actually seen Sargent get the majority of minutes. Your original post said something to the effect of Zardes getting more and more minutes -- and while that's true in the Berhalter v prior coaches sense, it's not true in terms of trend over the past year. Altidore and Sargent are my top options for Qatar at the moment, and I don't see anyone else even making a mild claim right now at striker. It's a problem and a weakness. So Sargent is getting those minutes now. And I don't mind that he still has some pressure from Zardes. He has things to improve. A little pressure will help him. And we still have to qualify for Qatar and while I am fairly certain Sargent will be the better option in 2022, he might not be in October of 2020. Either way, I think there is a gap between the Lovitz' and the Zardes' on this team. The former can't help us even in qualifying, the latter actually can.
Just because you must doesn't mean you will. I see this thinking a lot with folks that just want to try everything, and there's this belief that something will work. Sometimes, you are already on the best options. I think we know enough about CJ Sapong to know he's also not the answer. We've seen him with club and country, and he's CJ Sapong. There's no way he's capable against good teams. I will go back to my point about some of the stats being disingenous. Under Berhalter, Zardes is scoring once about every 150 minutes. Not great, but not terrible. Not great competition, but Canada is hex worthy and he had two there. Yes, he has a terrible first touch and he's not a good finisher. But he has positive attributes and still scores. Bringing in CJ Sapong or a bunch of guys who aren't even scoring or even playing for their club team seems like a waste of time. Give most of the time to Sargent. Give some to Altidore. Zardes stays #3 until someone like Weah gets healthy or one of the young guys makes a step forward. That's what seems to be happening now. Hopefully, someone will really impress in the U23 camps and make this all moot. But when even Sargent can't really beat out Zardes ... with WCQ looming, I'd like Sargent to be my developmental focus. My general rule of thumb is this: it's time to bring in someone new when you are interesting more in the someone new than getting rid of the someone old.
Sometimes the addition by subtraction is so necessary, that the upside of someone new is required to be determined.
I agree...but to get more out of someone like Ebobisse (who I like a lot), they need to PLAY with the team. All of those players you mention could possibly do better than Jozy and Zardes, but we will never know if they are not played. We are almost at the point of no return, in that Gregg is going to be able to use the excuse that he does not have enough games left to experiment with new guys...hence, an oft-injured JA and a guy who is not internationally competent, Zardes. Guys like Morris and Sargent have been given more time lately, and I think Morris is the real deal. Hopefully, Sargent grows into the real deal. But, again, they need to be used in whatever few games we have left. The same with Bradley...he needs to go now so that all the youngsters coming up can vie for midfield positions. None of this, of course, is going to happen anytime soon. Goodbye Qatar.
The problem is that you are cherrypivking 6 games, then saying it's a "trend", when I could just as easily argue that Zardes has started the important games, and Sargent has played the 2nd-team/less-important games. Even just considering the 6 games that you've decided to extrapolate from. But if you look since Cuova, we've given Sargent lots of minutes, and other strikers some time under Sarachan. Berhalter comes in, and Zardes plays 15/18 since the start of the year. So, on slightly longer time frame than *1 month*, Zardes is the backup to Altidore, and starter when Altidore's unavailable. Go back 6 months, and it's Zardes that backs up Altidore in the Gold Cup, and Sargent gets dropped entirely. The question becomes, is the last 6 games an indication of a change in direction, or merely a bump in a larger trend? With Berhalter, the safe bet is on the latter.
1. I don't actually mind playing the player who is playing better in the important games. For example, we needed to beat Canada just to get two good games in the summer; the player who has won the spot gets that. 2. I don't know why you think that it's a safe bet that this is a bump in whatever larger trend you are seeing, aside from just general pessimism. While we have evidence that Berhalter has been slow to integrate younger players, we don't really have evidence of a player brought in, played extensively, and then losing a lot of time to older players, do we? Berhalter has talked about Sargent since Day 1. Even as he was leaving him off the Gold Cup roster, Berhalter said: “We have to remember that he’s 19 years old and he has a bright future in front of him,” Berhalter said of Sargent. “When I talked to him and gave him the news, one thing I mentioned was that he’s going to be the striker for the national team in the future. We’re sure of that.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...says-omitting-josh-sargent-was-toughest-call/ In other words, he's part of The Group. When other players have gotten this much time, and outplayed opposition, they have moved up the depth chart. Yeuill has outplayed Trapp and is clearly ahead of him. Cannon was actually not in The Group, and played his way past Lima while Yedlin was hurt. Boyd, for as much as he's not taken a starting spot, clearly took Corey Baird's spot, with Baird being called in once when Arriola was hurt. I get that these players are sometimes still making rosters, but Baird hasn't played since March, Trapp didn't play a minute of Nations League, and Lima has 31 minutes since the Gold Cup. Before you go onto Roldan and Lovitz ... I think they are different than the Sargent-Zardes issue. Berhalter has someone he has identified as a challenger to Zardes in Sargent, someone he obviously likes. Sargent just needs to beat him out like Yeuill did. While it seems insane, we haven't seen a left back challenger brought in for Lovitz (aside from Dest). We have had limited time for Morales for Roldan (which is where Berhalter clearly sees him), so maybe that's a bit more comparable. But Morales hasn't gotten the time Sargent has. When players have been added, they've largely gotten a chance: Yeuill, Boyd, Cannon, Sargent, Dest. Holmes, Lletget and Morales might be the counter to that; we'll see. Miles Robinson got hurt before we could see more. That's why I'm more optimistic that Sargent will be given a fair shake. He just needs to take it. I'm far more concerned that he doesn't progress quickly enough than I am that Berhalter won't recognize it.
Are the results we've gotten, and the goals our forwards are scoring "the best" we can do? Good teams identify their weaknesses and work to fix them. Forward is a weakness. Fix it. Zardes does not fix it. He MIGHT be the best we have outside of Sargent and Altidore, but I doubt it. When you wait for a top talent to make itself known to you, and refuse to take initiative to solve problems, you are refusing to actually coach/evaluate talent. Instead of making decisions and making a choice, you're just waiting for it to be made for you, and that rarely works out when you're on the edge. It didn't work out last cycle, and it won't work this cycle. Not with this coach, who needs as big of a talent disparity as he can get.
"[1] Those who I find agreeable are a mature force for good. Those others? They are deplorable children. [2] I am for the good, because it is good. It is good, because I am for the good. The good is good, which is good that I am for the good. [3] "Vertical Integration" is good. What is vertical integration, and why does it seem to require the same old inept cohort as ballast to weigh down the ship match after match? Those are not good questions. Don't ask them. Vertical Integration is a known unknown, which is good. That you know it is unknown is good. So you should keep it that way, for it is good to keep the good. It is so very good that it is necessary to keep this good, not just as a formal good but a necessary good, so that we may continue the good of not knowing what this good is." Alles klar? Dein guter Freund, Nietzsche Ist Tot
Soccer isn't played out over a long time frame. Matches only last 90 minutes. Cricket is played out over 5 days. [/facetiousness] (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/facetious) Anyway, US Soccer deserves all the criticism it gets. It's incompetently run from top to bottom. Personally speaking, beating minnows and failed states in Concacaf isn't something to be proud of.
Currently, Josh Sargent is getting most of the time. You can call the last six games an arbitrary endpoint all you want, but he's better getting most of the time. In addition, changing personnel is not the only way to improve. Continued coaching and cohesion between players is a way to improve overall results. That's not just for Zardes, it's for Sargent and Altidore; much more so for the latter two. We are going to have a January camp. I assume that we will see MLS-based alternatives to Zardes there, although my favorites will be likely slated for Olympic qualifying in the Spring (Toye, Ebobisse). We will then have March friendlies and maybe another set of friendlies before the Nations League break? I don't get the scattershot approach. I really do think that we can see that CJ Sapong is not going to be at the standard you are requiring. We've have Novakovich in a US Camp before when he was playing better, and he wasn't at that level then. People used to call for Andrew Wooten, but now he's not getting minutes in MLS. I just completely reject the idea that US performance and Club performance are uncorrelated to the level that we need to see everyone regardless of club performance. Bring in whomever you like in January camp; it's a big camp. But bringing in Novakovich is a waste of time in March. The camp is short; I'd rather spend time on adding a tactical wrinkle for Altidore, Sargent and even Zardes to learn than test out someone that has given absolutely no sign that they can be that "World Cup" level player. Spend all that camp drilling the counterpress. Have Pulisic, Sargent and <insert CAM here> get down cohesion. If someone starts to break through -- Soto is getting time at Hannover and scoring; Toye or Ebobisse impress in U23 camp; Bobby Wood comes over to MLS and starts killing it; that's different, let's do that. But throwing shit at a wall is a bad plan. It assumes something is going to stick. But it's far more likely right now that we don't have a World Cup-caliber striker at all. I'll spend time developing the one guy who seems like he's ready to both contribute and develop (Sargent), but I'd rather focus on Qualifying than test out guys that have given absolutely no indication that they can be that player. Furthermore, what kind of audition do you even get? Two, three days of camp and then getting thrown into a roster? Are you going to get a good evaluation? How many games do you need to evaluate a player? I'd much rather focus on giving Lletget or Holmes more time, giving Morales more time, finding someone to replace Lovitz, hopefully integrating Weah, than tossing out a larger B team at positions I don't have someone I think is ready at. I find Zardes SUPER frustrating. But he has been better than the Lovitz' and Roldan's of the world.
This might be redundant, but for clarity's sake: Playing players in game isn't the only way to search for and evaluate talent. Players like Toye and Ebobisse and Sabbi are being evaluated in the U23 camp. It's clear Berhalter spends a lot of time looking at game tape. He's also gone out and gotten Boyd, Dest, etc. He's brought in players to camp and evaluated there. There's no doubt that his net is smaller than many here, but there's this weird thing with fans that if THEY can't see them in games, they assume there's no data out there. I've seen CJ Sapong play. He's a worse player than Zardes, much less Altidore or where I expect Sargent to be in six months. I'm 50% sure Sargent is the solution; why would I waste resources on players who are likely <5% the solution when I have limited time and other holes to fill?