Imagine a hypothetical player pool with players actually playing (for the most part) at the following clubs: - AC MILAN - AC MILAN - JUVENTUS - JUVENTUS - PSV - PSV - PSV - CRYSTAL PALACE (EPL) - FULHAM (EPL) - FULHAM (EPL) - NOTTINGHAM FOREST (EPL) - UNION BERLIN (Bund & UCL) - GLADBACH - GLADBACH - HOFFENHEIM - CELTA VIGO (La Liga) - GENK - CELTIC - WOLFSBURG - PNE, STOKE, COVENTRY, WEST BROM, Norwich - VENEZIA, PALERMO - FRANKFURT, HEIDENHEIM - CLUB AMERICA - FC UTRECHT, AZ ALKMAAR - AS MONACO - ANTWERP, WESTERLO - Le HAVRE - Panathinaikos - etc (plus a ton of MLS players and youth players in many big euro teams, as well) What would you expect of such a player pool in CONCACAF? In WCQ? In the WORLD CUP? For me, I would expect: - Domination of Concacaf = winning Nations League, Gold Cup - Easy 1st Place in WCQ - Advancing comfortably from WC group and if they lose knockout match, it would only be in PK/extra time etc or a very very close match (no blowouts) * sidenote: such a player pool from a non-european team would be much more impressive than if the same player pool was european, imo (because euro players have a domestic advantage in euro clubs)
This is a good game. What would you expect from a national team with players at: 1. Barcelona Kaiserslauten, Augsburg, Hertha Juventus (2), Spezia (3), Empoli, Hellas-Verona, Cagliari, Napoli, Torino, Parma, Roma, Salernitana Arsenal, Aston Villa Monaco, Lens Herenveen Vitesse, Bruges, Southampton, Birmingham City, Huddersfield Salzburg, Copenhagen, Fenerbahçe, Olympiakos, Athens, Celtic, Charlotte ------------------------------------------- 2. Bayern Munich, Mainz, Stuttgart, Dresden PSG Tottenham Hotspur, Wolverhampton Norwich City Celtic x2 Gent Olympiakos, Al-Shabab, Al-Khaleej ---------------------------------- 3. Bayern Munich, Bayer Leverkausen Alavés, Valencia, Real Betis (x2) Frosinone, Udinese, Las Palmas PSG, Reims, Marseille, Saint-Ettiene, Toulouse, Rennes, Le Havre, Nice, Manchester United, West Ham United Stoke City Genk, PSV, Olympiakos, Al-Hilal, Al-Ittihad --------------------------------- That's Poland (26), South Korea (28) and Morocco (14). US is ranked 11.
The only countries that expect to reach the quarterfinals are legit contenders to win the whole thing. All the countries that have reached the quarters the majority of the time in this century are regarded as perennial contenders. And the club pedigrees of our current player pool are fairly typical for the next tier of national teams, the ones that expect to make the Round of 16 most of the time and have a chance at making a deeper run if the stars align.
Transfermkt ranks the US 26th in terms of the combined valuation of its NT players. Norway is 10th, Nigeria 14th and Morocco 16th.
To be fair, these values are for most recent rosters named, and our roster for the upcoming camp is missing two of our six most valuable players due to injury. That said, we're in a whole pack of second-tier national teams. There are quite a few national teams with similar player pools that have a small handful players at superclubs and a decent-sized group at other clubs in major European leagues (or big clubs in smaller leagues), but still have to fill roster spots with players from domestic leagues or second-tier European leagues.
Transfermkt combined player valuations 1 England €1.24bn 2 France €1.18bn 3 Portugal €979.00m 4 Brazil €932.00m 5 Argentina €877.20m 6 Germany €817.50m 7 Italy €774.00m 8 Spain €697.00m 9 Netherlands €659.50m 10 Norway €423.60m 11 Belgium €415.00m 12 Denmark €392.20m 13 Serbia €369.20m 14 Nigeria €339.90m 15 Croatia €332.60m 16 Morocco €315.15m 17 Ukraine €312.50m 18 Austria €298.70m 19 Scotland €281.40m 20 Colombia €274.75m 21 Sweden €267.60m 22 Ivory Coast €261.38m 23 Poland €255.70m 24 Switzerland €252.80m 25 Turkey €250.80m 26 United States €239.00m 27 Japan €236.15m 28 Senegal €236.00m 29 Russia €182.40m 30 Wales €173.13m 31 Ecuador €171.90m 32 Mexico €165.80m 33 Cameroon €165.05m 34 Ghana €164.93m 35 Mali €164.65m 36 Slovakia €151.48m 37 Algeria €149.00m 38 Republic of Ireland €147.90m 39 Georgia €144.15m 40 Greece €132.80m 41 Hungary €130.43m 42 Uruguay €129.80m 43 Slovenia €126.60m 44 Czech Republic €126.55m 45 South Korea €120.00m 46 Paraguay €118.80m 47 Egypt €107.65m 48 Bosnia-Herzegovina €106.90m 49 Democratic Republic of the Congo €103.95m 50 Chile €102.68m
The only measure by which the US is underperforming is overall population. But when you consider that football, basketball and to an extent baseball dwarf soccer in terms of participation and glamor, it's not that surprising.
Top 20 FIFA ranked teams by squad valuations, noting that key players missing, like De Bruyne, affect overall team valuations. 5 Argentina €877.20m 2 France €1.18bn 4 Brazil €932.00m 1 England €1.24bn 11 Belgium €415.00m 15 Croatia €332.60m 9 Netherlands €659.50m 7 Italy €774.00m 3 Portugal €979.00m 8 Spain €697.00m 26 United States €239.00m 32 Mexico €165.80m 24 Switzerland €252.80m 16 Morocco €315.15m 6 Germany €817.50m 42 Uruguay €129.80m 20 Colombia €274.75m 28 Senegal €236.00m 12 Denmark €392.20m 27 Japan €236.15m
Euro players have a huge advantage in terms of getting into the better/best Euro clubs....I mean, wouldn't the US generally be expected to be able to beat Poland? and, yet, somehow, the Polish players are generally at as good or better clubs....it's evidence right there (in case you think it is a level playing field)....Polish players dot have to fight for 1 of only 3 roster spots on a Serie A team, like Americans do....if they did, they wouldnt have any Poles in Serie A, most likely Americans in Serie A basically have to be "DP level" in Italy to even get signed by a Serie A team, whereas a Polish player can just be squad depth. Italian teams simply are unable to sign Americans (without euro passports - which is gotta be like 90+% of them) as squad depth...the rules prohibit it. If people wanna overlook this simple reality and try to equate such teams as Poland and the USMNT, based on playe pools being roughly at the same cumulative levels of clubs, then so be it, but it is "head in the sand-ish", imo Again, do you think these values are somehow objectively derived????!? of course English are going to be "the most valuable"....their domestic league is by far the richest in the world. I'd love to see a ranking of countries whereby their players do not qualify as domestic... in that case, Brazil and Argentina will be 1-2.....and the US will look a lot better. Player valuations are never going to accurately reflect "true value" or be objective in this current geopolitcal climate. so, ultimately....IN MY OPINION....if a team like the USMNT and a team like Poland have roughly the same number of players at top clubs/euro clubs....clear advantage to the US and they would likely be heavy favorites (even though on the surface it may seem like they are equals - they aren't)
So based on this logic, that would mean you would consider Morocco to be heavy favorites against the US? On the surface their players are at better clubs, and they are non-European, right? I feel like that directly contradicts you stating the US had superior talent to Morocco a few weeks ago, doesn’t it?
Most of the teams ranked 10-30 have player pools with similar club pedigrees. Are there levels within that pack of teams? Sure. We're at the upper end of that pack, ranked 11th. Poland is 26th. That looks fair to me.
Poland are perennial underpeformers. They should easily outperform countries with much much smaller populations like Serbia, Croatia and Belgium. Maybe they need a civil war or internal regional rivalry to stir their passion. The Transfermkt values come from the databases that clubs, agents and the media use to determine transfer values. Transfermkt valued Pulisic at $25 million just before his $22 million transfer. The rest of your post isn't really worth responding to. Maybe if you used facts to support your argument than conjecture and lore it would help you argument.
@adam tash Why not try this thread again in a few weeks with number of UCL group stage starters? That way we have a level playing pitch.
I did the work for you based on 2022/23 and it seems to substantiate the idea that the US sits in the 11-20 range. Non-European players 2022/23 UCL Group Stage+ (FIFA rkg) 46 Brazil (1) 28 Argentina (3) 11 Senegal (18) 10 United States (11), Uruguay (16) 9 Colombia (17) 7 Morocco (14)
Odegaard is def a valuable piece but he had 1 very good year after underperforming. He needs at least another year at last years level to justify his quoted price. I do think he will. However, Haaland is worth significantly more than what he’s quoted for in there. He’s generational.
I agree. But $90 million is a lot of money. The only thing the US has lacked over the last 30 years is a generational talent. If there was a Maradonna, or Pele, or Messi, or even a Kane I would expect a lot more from this team. Without a generational talent last 8 is pretty much all we can hope for in 2026, no matter who the coach is or how the federation is organized.
Puli went for 63 which isn’t exactly a small sum and is almost double what Odegaard has went for. Odegaard may or may not fetch 90 on the market after 1 very good year. A player of his caliber would be great but but let’s be real, Norways value is all Haaland.
And that's all the U.S. lacks, a generational talent. No amount of huffing and puffing by this squad to get the U.S. to the World Cup final no matter who is in charge. Modric got a nation of 4 million to the World Cup final 2018. Very few teams have got that far without a generational talent. If there's no single outstanding talent at a World Cup then Germany or the host usually wins The US has had generational talent. They just chose other sports to use it in. So if we can find an American Modric, or De Bruyne, or Messi, or Zidane, or Ronaldo, or Cruyff, or Beckenbauer, or Pele, or Bobby Charlton, or Puskas in the next 2.9 years we have a chance. Without one, we'll probably reach the last 16.
I know what your saying but factually, Norway is at 10th in today's Transfermkt valuations because they have Haaland at $180 million, Odegaard $90 million and a few others at $20 million. I'm using their current valuation, not past or future valuation. I don't think Norway is the tenth best soccer team in the world. I'm just trying to use objective criteria rather than what I saw in the toilet bowl after my dump this morning like the OP.
In CONCACAF? Champions. We won the 2021 Gold Cup and 2021 Nations League. And won the 2023 Nations League. We won't win 'em all, and lost the 2023 Gold Cup. We're the only nation in CONCACAF that qualified for the U17WC, U20WC, and Olympics. We are the cream of the crop across the board at the moment. World Cup? That roster doesn't differentiate us from the top 10 nations in the world. So round of 16 sounds about right. We'll see what our pool looks like in 2026. Maybe I'll refine those expectations. In order to win a World Cup, you need that difference-making truly transcendent player. The USMNT has good players, but not those types of players. You need Messi. You need Mbappe. You need Iniesta/Xavi midfield. You need Ronaldo (the Brazilian one). The list goes on. There's a lot of luck at the World Cup. Morocco is back to being who they are. In their last 3 matches they've failed to beat Peru, Cape Verde Islands, and South Africa. In every World Cup there's just a magical ride for some nation. Margins are really fine at the World Cup. Argentina could easily have lost to Holland. France could easily have lost to England. Croatia could easily have lost to just about anybody other than Canada. Particularly Brazil, who basically dominated that game from start to finish. Lots of luck involved at that level.
Yes but it's Garber/MLS/SUMs/USSoccer /Gulati/Bruce's fault that we haven't created a US based breeding farm, where the most talented Germans are mated to produce the next global superstar, the fetus's being dispatched to join Bundesliga academies like Jürgen suggested. Jürgen already ran a pilot program that produced L.A. Galaxy's reserve goalkeeper. Yes, as a coach I mentioned one said, it's the successes that are the freak moments, not the failures. The USA's 2002 run for instance being a "freak", like for Costa Rica in 2014 and Croatia in 2018, a lot of things just clicked. Croatian managers and administrators are going to be held to the 2018 standard throughout the next 2 or 3 generations by little Antun Tashivic's.
Croatia to me is a little different. Their first cycle as an independent nation was 1998. And they've finished 3rd place or better at the World Cup.................three times!!! [And Yugoslavia was pretty darn good before that.] We have to come to the realization that Croatia IS a power. If you take out the years when they first became an independent nation.............their average FIFA ranking must be top 10. In 1992 they were ranked #116. By 1998 they were #4.