Was pretty good / was so good that a Brazilian had to split his head open. Funny how the best teams never really get punished for really awful stuff.
His actual playing record was mediocre. He was an INCREDIBLY frustrating player who disappeared constantly and didn’t have the athleticism to succeed consistently at the highest level. Yes, he stood out among a generation that lacked touch and control, but that’s it. If you’re hanging a guy’s reputation on one bad foul, you’re grasping at straws.
I mean, the idea that Tab Ramos was going to be the decisive figure in a game featuring Romario is ridiculous. Brazil controlled the match with 10 men! We were never winning that game, with or without Ramos, and Brazil was not worried about him.
It was just a different era of the USMNT, and evaluations were different. Tab Ramos was great compared to what came before him. Particularly his technical ability on the ball. Ramos announced his retirement in 2000. So when he retired, he was way up there on our all-time assists chart. Top 5. Since passed by Donovan and Dempsey and Pulisic and Bradley and blah, blah, blah. Christian Pulisic has won the Champions League and is one of the best players on AC Milan. [Well, he was the first half of the season anyway.] Tab Ramos' foray into Europe was remarkable for the time. Yet, he only ever played for Figueres and Betis in La Liga 2. He was part of the team that earned promotion to La Liga. He never played in La Liga, though, as he was first recovering from the skull fracture suffered at the World Cup. Then he became one of the first players to sign with MLS in Jan. 95. So Tab Ramos never played a single game in a top 5 league. HOpefully, 20 years from now there will be people talking on the forum about how Pulisic is over-rated. They'll be doing so because we'll have some Ballon D'Or contenders starting for Real Madrid or something................... Some old guy will have to come on and say "Yeah. But you see when Pulisic came off the bench in the Champions League final................that wasn't a typical thing to do in that era."
Yes, grading against the curve. I was just starting to watch so I'm no expert on those players at their peaks. I will say not long after that Romario shook Keller's hands after a game because he stoned them. Hard to believe how far our keepers have backslid.
Tab Ramos wouldn’t start for most of our World Cup sides like say 2010 or 2022. Tab and John Harkes were solid wide players in 94 and Tab would have done fine in Spain’s top flight at the time if for no other reason than talent was spread much thinner due to free agent and foreigner rules at the time. We really take for granted that there will be bench players in 26 that would have been top players for the 90s sides. That 94 team really impacted the country though.
I just pray that the people here who truly understand how awful/“injured-and-therefore-useless” Christian Pulisic is can get word to Poch before he decides the WC roster.
Tab Ramos. today could play in La Liga. At the time or in the early 1990's, it was very difficult for most foreign players tp break into a top 5 Euro league as there was a limit. Only 2-3 foreigners per club were allowed on the field. Also, there was a huge bias towards American players back then. John Harkes had some luck at Sheffield Wednesday but he was an exception. It changed with the Bosman ruling in 1995 but by then, Ramos , Harkes , Wynalda and Lalas all decided to come back to play for the inaugural MLS season in 1996.
That hit me with the article about Brendan Aaronson's contract status. Article talked about how helpful he's been in steering them clear of relegation, and that Farke is ambitious to re-sign him, and then adds that "he is expected to have a key role for the USA in the World Cup," and I'm thinking . . . . "is he though?"
The Bosman ruling in 1995 changed everything by eliminating nationality-based quotas for players from European Union (EU) members. This decision categorized players as "workers," granting them the right to freedom of movement within the EU. Before the ruling in UEFA club competitions, clubs could only name three foreign players in their match-day squads. After the ruling, there was an unlimited number of EU players playing. At that point, clubs could field as many players from other EU countries as they wished. Leagues could still impose quotas on non-EU players (e.g., those from South America, Africa, or Asia). The percentage of foreign players in major European leagues rose from under 10% in 1985 to over 35% by the early 2000’s. The ruling now , helped some national teams like France and Spain but it totally screwed Italy as there are only 3-4 Italian players per squad. ' The result now is, "Gli Azzurri" can't even come up with a national team pool of 30 players. Thus, explaining their third consecutive elimination from the World Cup tournament.
I just looked it up in Wiki and apparently he was with Real Betis and when they got promoted to the first division but never played because of the skull fracture suffered in the WC. He then went to Tigres and then MetroStars.
But what does that have to do with "overseas" players i.e. non-EU? How did it help Americans? Also I don't see how it harmed Italy. It enabled their best players to move to play freely in other countries. Minutes by nationality in top 5 leagues: Spain (504 players) 414,153 France (388) 316,615 Germany (274) 241,699 Italy (283) 216,415 England (254) 195,853
Before the ruling, all teams could only field 2-3 foreign players total. Regardless if they were American or not or where they were from. After the ruling, an EU (or at the time, an EC) worker , was considered a citizen and thus was allowed to play. Before, they were blocked. I'm not sure if the ruling did help Americans initially. Actually, Americans were not sought out as they were not considered good enough because of their nationality. I remember an English commentator saying how John Harkes starting the FA Cup Final for Wednesday was the equivalent to a Rugby player starting the Super Bowl. That was totally ignorant. Harkes , at that point, played the game his entire life growing up in Kearny, New Jersey. He was a player who played in a World Cup , was starting for Sheffield Wednesday and this guy is talking about two different sports. Later though, I believe the ruling helped because many American players received their EU passports through ancestry. This helped them land contracts. Weston McKennie who played 5 years at Schalke, helped him gain his EU player status. Then he signed with Juventus and is now a mainstay with them. He will have never been tought of in the 90's or even 2000's. Now because of his EU status, and of course strong play, Juventus easily gives hi a contract. Christian Pulisic became eligible because his grandfather was Croatian. This was why he got a European passport and play starting at age 16 rather than 18. During when Tab Ramos was playing, a team like Juve will have never even looked at Weston. For that matter, Milan will have never signed Pulisic.
The post you were responding to was about Americans playing in Europe so I don't know what Bosman has to do with that. Americans came on the European radar because of the 1994 World Cup. Wegerle and Harkes had paved the way in England and proven that Yanks could play football. There was no anti-American sentiment in England at the time, more of a patronizing affection. As for Italy of the players are good enough they'll play. No-one is being stifled because of freedom of movement. It's the same argument that a certain poster makes about MLS. He thinks that promoting MLS Next Pro players would win the USMNT the World Cup, when in fact it would turn MLS into Next Pro.
Yes indirectly , it did have to do with it. Before teams were allowed only 2-3 foreigners on the field at all times. How will an American ever find a spot and why weren't more playing at that time? England may have been different but when in lived in Italy in the early 2000's, and worked at Fiorentina as a scout, I recall a great deal antiI -American sentiment. I tried to get some players in (who I won't name) so the club would sign them but they laughed at me and wouldn't even consider them. Many clubs demeaned American players. This was after the Bosman ruling. Italy has no players and every club team has maybe 3-4 Italians per roster. Most of them are backup GK's and defenders. It reminds me of the original NASL. Traditionally, the Italian national team doesn't choose outside Italy so how is Italy going to form a national team without any players? There is literally no depth, no forwards or midfielders. Just look at the Serie A's goal scoring leaders without one Italian in the top 10-11. That was unheard of 10-15 years ago. Como, who are in 5th place, have no Italian players starting. You won't come up with much of a national team if your top teams have no players.
So you're suggesting the 3 foreign spots that went to EU citizens now went to non EU citizens. Ok. In terms of Italy though it enabled their top players to play in other top leagues.
Well I mostly meant total foreign players per club and how players were prevented from being signed. There were only so many foreign player spots avaialble and that clubs could sign. Anyway, as for Italian players, there are few good ones domestically or abroad. Clubs have sacrificed young player development and signed foreigners to form the nucleus of their teams. The national team program is now in complete disarray. If you go over to the Italian boards, you will see the problem. Again, the Serie A today, reminds me of the old NASL.