2023 FIFA U-20 World Cup - USA vs Uruguay - 6/4 5:00 PM EST (Pre-match/PBP/Post-game)

I meant on games that count. Friendlies is easier to get a called.

 

Che = Richards
Paredes = Weah
Wiley = Dest
Wynder = McKenzie
Slonina >

The rest >> the rest. From the quantity of viable prospects, comes a few more more regulars, when they level up w/ development.

Players in the pool outside the squad >> . Pepi, Neal, Gutierrez, Aaronson, Buck, Cremaschi, Leone, Brady, Clark, etc. weren't there for a variety of reasons that didn't much exist last cycle.

So this 17-20 age range is going to produce more relevant players than the prior one, and yes, several of them will be starters for the a-team at some point in their careers.

 

Who do you think, if any, will start when 2026 rolls around?

 

They don't have to. They're competing w/ a solid starting group, who's young, but not as young as them. So they're starting out w/ a built-in disadvantage.

This doesn't preclude them from, in their own right, being good to outstanding, and starting themselves down the line. Maybe when they're in their mid 20's some bump later 20's incumbents.

I don't know there's an individual favorite here. But:

Pepi, if we're counting him, is a threat to Balogun, or whoever. W/out the Balogun acquisition from outside the system, Pepi would be the favorite.

Both Wiley and Paredes are a threat to ARob. Maybe together they have as good or higher odds. Paredes is also a threat to Weah. So he's got a realistic chance at 2 positions, increasing his odds. He has the 2nd best chance, imo.

Slonina is a threat to Turner, and I think he'll straight up be better in his prime. But he's a long ways from that.

I think Neal & Che are threats to break into the starting CB grouping where Richards & post-achilles MRob are the faves. Though it's unlikely.

Then, I wouldn't be shocked if Gutierrez or Buck break into one of the 3 CM/CAM spots. Though that's even more unlikely.

I suppose my over-under would be 1 as early as 2026, combining all the possibles. In 2030 I'd expect a few to come from this u20 cycle.

 

Got off a long shift. Very disappointed.

Is it worth watching or will I be crushed?

 

im taking weah, dest, mckenzie waay before any of this crop, fwiw

 

not wrth it.

if they went out and played the right way but just lost it woulda been though

they crumpled...nerves and naivete

 

Weah was the only one who arguably did more at this point. And that's debatable. Weah was a semi-productive semi-regular for Celtic at this point. That's true of Paredes at Wolfsburg, in a much better league. Though Weah had somewhat of a senior MNT career at that point. I don't think it's Paredes' fault he doesn't. It's coaching malpractice & circumstance he didn't have a 2-year period where we had nothing going on.

Dest was a reserve for Ajax at this point. Wiley's a good player for Atlanta. Dest also sucked the first 2-3 games of that u-20 tourney, before coming on later. Wiley does the less sexy things. Dest has defense and size which could and has been exploited.

As for McKenzie, this is pretty big revisionist history. He didn't play much in that tourney due to carrying a knock coming in, and when he played he sucked. So he could have generated more skepticism at the time. I used Wynder as a placeholder for McKenzie's style. And Wynder's extremely young. I wasn't super high on either. I could bring up Neal or Che. Che was on a much better trajectory than Richards w/ Bayern and FCD. Neal's better than McKenzie in MLS at the same age.

So there's plenty of revisionist history here, and looking at some players with hindsight. People will do the same about this class in comparison to the next.

 

I don't think Che is as good as Richards was. Mckenzie was older than Wynder right? But that, as you said, isn't the comparison worth making.

Paredes just wasn't at the tourney enough but Cowell is likely Weah caliber at this level IMO anyways.

my only disagreement point is I think Richards played much better than Che and was better.

 

People are being hard on the players.

It's clear that as a team and program, we need more than "win it backs fast as you can."

Let's learn our lessons and win a medal next year.

 

It is what it is. Seems like the ceiling for the USMNT - at all levels - is R16/QF. And, looks like it would be down to luck that the US gets out of the R16/QF rather than moving on because they were superior to their opposition on the field. Maybe a brilliant tactical manager would change this but the US doesn't have one of those just laying around waiting to be called, so... it is what it is.

 

I'm not just evaluating based on this tourney. There's too many data points to do that. It's not even the best one for most players.

My evaluation on Che vs. Richards is Che was 16-17 starting in 3. Liga for Bayern. Richards was 20 when he was doing that. Then Che was starting most games for FCD (albeit at RB) at a younger age that Richards didn't play for them at all on loan. The Hoffenheim 18-month loan was a dumb detour. But even if it's pointed out Richards ultimately started for them, he was 21, a couple years older than Che.

As for their comparative performances at this tourney, both were good defensively and on the ball. I'd say Che actually showed much better passing range. Those diagonals he was pumping were beautiful. He has better ability off the dribble. Passed decently in the short to mid ranges. As for defense, Richards was cleaner. But ultimately Che had to cover for Craig, whereas Richards it was Keita. Keita sucked on the ball but was a superior defender. On the first goal, Che is checking to try and deal with a ball to an attacker Craig didn't get touch tight w/, but the combo move was too rapid. Then Che gambles out of desperation, trying to cover 2 guys and be the hero. Finally it's punished maximally due to Craig's lack of recovery speed too. In context, I think Che was outstanding in this tournament. His ability popped off the screen.

 

Watch the first 10 minutes and then turn it off and you'll be pleased.

 

Richards was 19/20 when playing for Bayern II. But ultimately they wanted to keep him, not Che. Hoffenheim wanted to keep him, and not Che.

this sounds like I am trying to denigrate Che but I dont intend to. I think Richards was the better player.

I agree Che had some good long switches and diagonals. Showed some solid athleticism and did have to play with a slow Craig. On the otherhand of that is having Craig and a wingback covered for times where Che seemed to me to be positionally all over the place.

 

I don't see any of this U20 class breaking into the starting 11 lineup for 2026. I can see 3 of them breaking into the 23-man roster.

I think the first player to break into the start 11 from this U20 class is going to be in the back 4. I believe we will be playing with double pivot going forward and the top 3 are McKennie, Musah, and Adams. None of the U20 class has a chance to bump any of those 3. For the ACM/10 We have Reyna and then probably Booth, Tillman, among others. Is Paxton good enough to beat out Reyna? Chances are none, unless Reyna is hurt, and then Aaronson has to show more than the other two subs. In the front 3, there is no U20 players that is anywhere close to Pulisic, Weah, or Balongun.

 

It’s an interesting convo. I never saw any top top guys here. I see a lot of very professionals pros.

I see guys playing in a very continental manner. I see a lot of guys with good IQ’s and technical ability. Just keep filling in the ranks. A lot can happen in two years.

 

Are we counting Pepi or not? If we aren't, I agree, don't think any of these guys will be first 11 or even 15 guys, but you never know. I could see a timeline where Slonina gets a good loan and ultimately becomes our 1.
As for the roster, I can probably see a realistic path for about 8 guys on this team, and then you add in Pepi and Paxton, and it is not a terrible age group. My guess would be 2 on a 23 man roster or 3 on a 26 (McGlynn would be perfect for a final 3 spot because he is so unique in the pool and with a watered down field they might have to break down some bunkers in the group stage)

I think about 10-12 of these guys will at least be national team pool relevant, (top 70-80) players at least for some point of thier career (including the ones not released). See a lot of really solid pros here

 

This sounds about right. It’s tough, because so many of us crave that next level, that next rung, but so do many other countries. We might be a few generations off from making that next jump, if we do at all (ducks for cover).

 

center backs and goalie are what this cohort will contribute to the senior team

and Wiley will probably surpass Antonee Robinson within the next five years

 

He is already a known quantity, and he wasn't part of the U20 team. I agree with the rest of your comments.

 

that can be out-sourced.

its clear that the failing of US soccer is cultural

 

Overall team was well organized and setup but had an incredibly easy run to the quarters and didn’t have the same punching power as the 2019 squad.

Those are some “hot takes” even just comparing to the same age.

In no way was Che as good as Richards. The team Richards eventually became a starter for, that plays the 3 ATB system that best fits Che, did not think he was worth €2m. Che is not as good of a pure defender, is not as press resistant or ambipedal, and not as good a natural fit at CB.

Paredes is not as good as Weah. He’s a late wide channel sub who is physically slight. He doesn’t have the same in the box or off the ball instincts. He’s not as decisive.

Wiley and Dest are different types so this is closer. Maybe Wiley is more well rounded with Dest having a higher ceiling, but a lower floor. Wiley has a good sense for when to make runs but his touch and cross timing/selection and pure ball striking let him down. Defensively he had the benefit of playing with 3 ATB (similar dynamic with his club) and I saw some looseness he needs to work on.

Wynder projection is really relying on an age curve. Mark was injured for the actual U20s and then played out of position so using those specific matches would be poor analysis. But in general he was much smoother on the ball and could pick out line breaking passes. I think Josh can get better but I don’t think he will be as smooth in 2 years.

Of the other guys listed Pepi is like Adams, graduated to the full team. Neal is Mark McKenzie like. Paxten looks more promising but is not super versatile and is going to be a sub this cycle without major injury issues. Guti has a lot of work to do to reach Djordje level, let alone becoming a full team starter. Leone is probably going with Mexico. Clark is way in the wilderness and could go the Uly route if he doesn’t find a good loan. Buck and Cremaschi are promising but belong to the next cycle. So these are a lot of 2nd or 3rd tier prospects who need to hit big. Counting on a Wes or Adams like progression from all or even most of them is not wise. If a total of 5 of these guys hits that’s a win.

 

In this game:

Uruguay made some changes to come out in a 433. On some level this is the textbook numerical matchup when facing a back 3/5. If they had stuck with a 41212 that puts them 2v3 against our CBs, advantage US. In possession they still went 31 or 32 from pressured goalkicks with the 6 dropping but instead of keeping him there when trying to progress they went to a 2323.

This meant they were outnumbering us on the line behind our first line of pressure and it put pressure on our WBs to step up into midfield. When they got into attack against our block they didn’t really do much, and overall created 1.28 xG with most coming from the goal. They looked much more dangerous exploiting us when we were stretched.

Varas stuck with the same system but, as I suggested, there was an emphasis on looking for the switch. This is kind of a similar matchup dynamic to what happened when the full team played Uruguay with the roles reversed. Our WBs and wide attackers could find space on the weakside when Uruguay wasn’t in its 451 low block. Uruguay is quite good at making it difficult to progress through the ball side with their defensive overloads which deny ball access to our attackers on that side. So playing a switch/long diagonal is going to do a better job of getting it into the final third than progressing through a compact defense, especially considering the right side’s talent mix, the left did a better job, as it has all tournament.

Once they went ahead Uruguay became more selective in their pressing. Still doing a very high 212 against some goal kicks but then dropping their frontline behind our 2 man CM. That meant we had 5(!) guys behind their line of confrontation, and nobody in like the middle 60% of the field from the edge of the center circle to our one attacker on their backline. We needed Jack and Obed to get a bit more staggered or even just both step higher and play more ahead of the ball. We created 1.38 xG.

On an individual level we did not out duel them, they were pretty comfortable against our pressure (not just shape/numbers wise but individually) and when we doubled we played the lanes and they just waited us out too often. Wiley should have squared first touch to Wolff on his big opening. Cade should have squared instead of going low near post (although Uruguay did a good job of rotating cover). Pukstas should have ducked. Wiley OG was pretty poor. It was excusable for Che to miss the pass into the corner but his slide was not good. Wiley took the wrong angle based on the only run and Craig had position but go beat. That and the loss of composure after the goal costs us in a tight match.

 

I wasn't able to watch the game live so had to watch a replay after knowing the final score. That's often the best way to objectively assess how the US played as a team and the quality of our individual players. So watch the whole game (not just the first 12 minutes...) and ignore the hyperbolic, "sky is falling" comments earlier in the thread (more recent post game comments are somewhat more measured) that are typical BigSoccer reactions of those who post while watching a game live, are emotionally invested in a team, and as a result every poor touch or bad pass gets magnified out of proportion (admittedly we all get frustrated, myself included, when the game and score are not going as hoped).

My overall take on this US under 20 team is probably they are the best passing US team (compared to their age level competition) that I can remember watching. What I particularly liked is our defenders' willingness and ability to make and complete passes to our midfielders when those midfielders only have a yard or two of space and our midfielders' ability to retain possession when under pressure (our defenders' ability to make accurate 30- to 50-yard passes to our forward line when needed in order to bypass midfield pressure was also impressive). That's often the hallmark that distinguishes a good, technically adept team from weaker competition. Unfortunately, it's something that even our senior team struggles with at times (I find it particularly frustrating when our senior team defenders are unwilling to risk those midfield passes and instead resort to low percentage long balls, especially now that we have experienced midfielders who are talented enough to retain possession under pressure). So as the members of this group of U-20 players advance to the senior team, I'm hopeful that we'll see improvement in that area.

However, the weakness of this US team that was evident in all of our games in the tournament was our lack (other than Cade Cowell) of goal scoring threats and our imprecision in front of goal. I don't know if great strikers or born or made but if the latter we need to heavily invest training resources and time in that area.

Finally, here are some stats from the Fifa website for the Uruguay game (I know stats don't tell the whole story but I think they bear out my comments above).

Possession: US 50%, Uruguay 34%, 16% in contest.
Attempts at Goal: US 10, Uruguay 11
On Target: US 3, Uruguay 2
Final third entries: US 70, Uruguay 52
Line Breaks Attempted: US 175, Uruguay 175
Completed Line Breaks: US 138, Uruguay 98
Passes: US 587, Uruguay 299
Passes Completed: US 512, Uruguay 222

 

Thanks. I have stated often how I have never seen a US team this technically sound. It was a joy to watch. From back to front a very heartwarming experience.

PBP here and the actual match never conform as yo pointed out. I was just afraid that the passing and movement were a mirage. I have time Friday and will give it a good long look.

I am sure it won’t be as bad as some posted here, never is, and I don’t doubt the attack was an issue. Has been all tourney why wold it change now?

As long as we adhered to what were doing beforehand I will feel much better. We are works in progress of course. Thanks for the rundown. Much appreciated.