What could hurt CP in terms of individual international records is that he'll hopefully spend the vast majority of his career in Europe (after the 2030 WC, when he'll be 31, seems like a good time to target an MLS move). Donovan spent virtually his entire career in MLS and Dempsey roughly half of his, so that meant those guys were available for every friendly, off-year Gold Cup, etc. Pulisic will not only likely end up with fewer caps per year than those guys all else being equal, but the average caliber of opposition when he does play will likely be higher.
I'm sure one of the stats gurus here could create a weighted BS coefficient to appropriately measure CP's contribution.
The 2006 goal against Ghana will always hold a special place in my heart, despite the outcome of the match. He hammered Beasley's pass in so confidently.
Club. Country. For me it's a combo of the moment and the skill in both. We've had other great goals like Landon vs Algeria but that wasn't flashes of individual skill like the above. And for a trip down memory lane. Deuce breaking into Fulham and his ride the next few years was the most exciting period for a YA. Here's his first Fulham goal. The lone goal in a win vs Liverpool and saved Fulham from relegation. McBride and Boca both started in this game.
Um, yes it is a debate. That's why there's a debate. For the record, I definitely think Donovan was a more complete player. The assist track record underlines that. But you fail to note something in analyzing the two players and that's roles. Donovan played as a forward and a bit as a winger early before being used as a #10 for much of his career, so should it be shocking, like, at all, that he'd have infinitely more assists? Donovan's game was in running onto passes, and delivering passes. They were distinctly different players with different skill sets, different assets and liabilities in their games. As a result, their statistics are revealing: Dempsey scored far more goals from the run of play, while Donovan produced what, 3x as many final passes for goals? That reflects how the players were used within their coaches game plans. So how to evaluate their impact after that? For me, the main selling point with Donovan, as you have mentioned, is that Donovan was the engine that made the team go from 2002-2011. If anything positive happened in those years, typically it was happening because of a Donovan run, or a Donovan pass, that is, until Dempsey arrived. After Dempsey arrived things changed, we finally won a gold cup with a confederation-cup attached for the first time in five years, we finished runner up in a major tournament, and made it to the knockouts (w/Clint a full time starter for the first time since '02 at that '10 Cup. So at that point how do you decide? For me, you can choose Donovan, and that's a reasonable choice, because I mentioned earlier, he was involved in almost everything good that happened from 2002-2011, and you're right, he made everyone better, which, not coincidentally is why he was so often used as the #10, it allowed him to work as both a distributor and as an attacking player receiving final passes on his runs. But you can also choose Dempsey, because it's Dempsey's arrival that augered in a rebirth of the USMNT after a down period that included a failed '03 Gold Cup, and '06 World Cup where he had only a small role (and still managed to score a critical goal), '07 Gold Cup, '09 Confed Cup, '10 World Cup. Produced in every major tournament, as others mentioned earlier the guy scored in essentially half of his elite tournament games (World Cup, Confed Cup, and Copa Centenario) and that doesn't include A PK he earned that Donovan scored on, and a goal incorrectly waived off against Algeria that gave Donovan yet another goal. At the end of the day you can take Donovan, and you'll get the greatness, but you'll also get the millennial mentality, that one that could see him disappear from critical games repeatedly, or retire from the team to travel the world, and then get pissed when the idiot coach held that against him and said vacation likely proved decisive in the harebrained decision to leave him off the final 23 in '14 (I always thought that was an imprimatur move, to nail down control of the team, and punish someone for not buying into his passion and mentality for the game edict-going as far back as Klinsy's idiotic comments about Donovan's failure to score on Kahn in '02). Or you could take Dempsey who definitely did not consistently impact the game in any playmaking sense, hell sometimes he even could have the feel of that "Melo" chucker, where the ball went to die, when you should always be looking for the best option instead (if you're using the NBA analogy). But Dempsey also had a fighters mentality, he played with a rage within him, but not the stupid rage of a Bradley, that could burn out of control, but a clever rage that rarely burst out of control and instead was used to produce scoring chances and goals, and intimidate opponents. He was fearless in front of the goal, and fearless in playing the game, genuinely risking his life to wear the shirt in '17 after a heart ailment nearly ended his career in the fall/winter of '16-'17. That mentality is something Donovan lacked, and it's something Klinsy's right about, at least to a degree. Donovan knew there was more to life than just soccer, and like many of us, battled demons that could impact his life and play on the field. Dempsey seemed to take the demons he had, and use them for fuel in his game. When it comes to these guys, ones verdict will always depend upon what you value more, and what you view as most critical. In the final analysis, while I think Donovan was the better player, as others mentioned on page 1, I think Dempsey made far more out of his tools, then Donovan did, and had the better career as a result, w/o any tournament blemishes to his record, and w/a track record most international forwards and attacking players would envy. I give the lean to Dempsey because of that track record, and mentality. He produced consistently tournament to tournament, and in qualifying and concacaf based performances. While Donovan sometimes played like our soccer equivalent of a Gretzky, he didn't have Gretzky's consistency, Dempsey in this analogy was more like a Lemieux, and he did have Lemieux's consistency (in as much as one can in soccer). You can call it ridiculous, but I think such an argument is absurd. There's a reason there's a million poll's on different media sites, and it's because there is a debate over the players. For the record, if I was starting a team, I'd still start with Donovan. Having watched him since the 2000 Olympics, and actually heard on KNBR 680 the live news that Donovan was coming to San Jose from Leverkeusen, I've followed Donovan's career since 2000 (I deeply regret having missed that classic run in the '99 U-'17 World Cup) and seen virtually every game he ever played in the US shirt and a few with San Jose as well. He is the building block player, the guy you build the team around. But was he the best to ever put the shirt on? I give that to Dempsey, because of what he actually did when it mattered most, and in the smaller games alike. Came up with big moments that could turn the tide in every single World Cup he played in, the confederations cup he played in, and the centenario. I don't think that heart angle can be minimized either. People just forget that sorta thing. Having watched guys like Hank Gathers, and Reggie Lewis die on the court, having seen the same happen to guys like Marc Vivien-Foe, and Christian Benitez, it's no simple thing to go back on the field after having had to leave it due to a heart ailment. I don't point to that as a sign of why he might be better than Donovan, but rather as a sign of how fanatical he was in his passion for the game, and in going out on his terms, rather than that of a medical condition. All the more poignant considering the tragic death of his older sister when he was a child. To me, that fanatical passion for the game, that mentality, is what made him go from the relative obscurity of Furman in '03, to the top of the leader board on the USMNT scoring list alongside Donovan fifteen years later.
It's like Ed Crocker is possessing posters. The team did fine without Donovan: WC KO Round and Copa Semis. On the other hand, with Dempsey(and Jones) aging out, things went pair-shaped. Others prioritize friendlies and Concacaf matches Major tournament performance is my criteria. And Dempsey has the better record in major tournaments.
Club: the second of his two goals, in a Europa knockout round match, against Basel. The chip against Juventus was great because of the moment. But the craftsmanship on the Basel goal was insane. And with his off foot!!! Country: his goal against Spain in the Confederations. Classic Duece: out-thinking and out-hustling the opposition. And against the greatest national team of his era.
Zoltán Gera on being teammates with Clint Dempsey at Fulham: "Never in my life I've encountered such a strong character in football. When I was signed, I took his place in the starting lineup. He was so aggressive that at trainings I felt he would rip my head off." (1/2)— Gergely Marosi (@emgergo) February 21, 2018 "Once he wanted to have a go at it in the parking lot. He terrorised me with his belligerent attitude so much that I became afraid and he claimed his place back in the lineup. I admire that level of will and desire to win." 2/2— Gergely Marosi (@emgergo) February 21, 2018
Hard to argue against the Juventus goal, or even the Ghana (both!) and Liverpool goals, as favorites but it’s worth showing love for his volley against Stoke for Fulham. I remember watching this in bed early one morning, terrifying my neighbors when I screamed in awe as the ball hit the net. Pure class. Such a legend. Gonna miss you out there, Clint.
Donovan was more complete which means he is better lol Did Dempsey come up big more when it mattered most more than Donovan? That answer is no. If you think otherwise, thats simply just not true. It’s not. It not statistically true. It’s not eye test true. It’s just not true. Agree to disagree
Both Clint and Landon were bulwarks of the USMNT, but when we start making comparisons, it is foolish to leave out Claudio Reyna, who was the most talented USMNT player ever, in a career marred by injuries. Remember Claudio was named to the Best Eleven in 2002, voted on by the players; Landon only made honorable mention. And to speak of best forwards without mentioning Brian McBride isn't right, he probably had the best English career of any Yank.
A great competitor, and always good to see him on the pitch. However, that being said, his passing is pretty much the end of the Klinsmann era, and that's a good thing. I wait with eager anticipation to see the form of the new era now dawning.
Claudio Reyna was rubbish. He made that 2002 team because in 2002, the world press had no idea who any of the other players on the team were so he was our rep by default.
Reyna, kinda like Tab, is a great "might have been,". So many injuries, and he just hit '94 too young, '98 imploded around him, '06 he hit the post in a crucial moment and then provided the giveaway that cost us the Ghana game. In the World Cup, unfortunately, the worst of all possible realities repeatedly played out for him in all but the '02 tournament. It's a shame because he was an exceptionally special player, though he could frustrate at times (hence the gloss "Sponge Bob Square Pass," which is still a personal favorite, can't remember who coined that) and seemed to not always mesh perfectly with Donovan. McBride was another great might have been like Tab, in the sense of man, if he was born in 1981-1983, just a part of that generation how good might we have been in '09/'10 (especially post Davies car accident). As it was, after Dempsey, and Donovan, he's the greatest attacking player we've ever produced and yep, chronically underrated including by me. I never appreciated him enough until in '06-'10. Not a better career then Dempsey though. Dempsey had a spectacular career over there. McBride was good, but Dempsey was pretty prolific.
ouch, lol. Agreed, more or less, on the latter part, not so much on the former (though he was frustrating as hell at times).