"International Quality"

That's why I don't use the term. Any player who's appeared in a CONCACAF NT competition has competed on an international level. That's not saying much.

 

I get the sense that people who say "international quality" really mean "World Cup quality"... ignoring the fact that every national team outside CONMEBOL plays mostly opponents that aren't World Cup quality.

 

Semantics. If you don't like the term because Euro teams play minnows, fine, use "World Cup Quality." But what we are really talking are aspirations. If we want to compete with the best in the world, the term still has meaning.

 

It’s similar to using Europe as if that’s an indicator of quality. There are lots of low level european leagues and teams.

I prefer major and minor league teams (which refers to teams rather than just leagues as the top teams in certain Lesser leagues are better than mid table EPL teams).

to truly compete at a World Cup, you need a lot of UCL knockout Level players.

 

So...in any given UCL campaign there are 288 players in the knockout stage (16 teams x 18 players). To compete for World Cups you need very talented & motivated players, among the best in the world. There just simply aren't enough UCL knockout level players to go around, let alone enough for the 32 World Cup teams (soon to be 48...) to all have multiple numbers of them.

Germany has a lot of UCL knockout stage players....a large number of their players also happen to play for Bayern Munich. Spain has a large number.....a large portion of their players play for Real Madrid and Barcelona. Italy has a large number...a good amount of their players play for Juventus....

Yes, I get it. People will point to Argentina and Brazil having lots of UCL level players. The thing is, for those players, football is likely their only avenue out of poverty for themselves and their family. In the US that's just not the case, as a disproportionate number of players come from a more affluent background. I am fully aware that there are exceptions (Dempsey, Yedlin). With the pay to play model largely what most players have available to them, it's going to be a long time before this changes. Not to mention that there are other more popular sports in America that can lead to a more lucrative career (Baseball, Basketball, American Football) or at least a better college education (Basketball and Football have the majority of full scholarships).

 

what’s ur point? That we’ll never be good enough? Or that we need MLS to get better?

not all 32 teams contend and there are plenty of countries outside of the big four who contend with players outside their league - look at France, which you conveniently didn’t mentioned.

the Netherlands, Belgium, Argentina, Brazil and Croatia are the countries who have a chance at winning even with only a few domestic players. That’s what we should aspire to rather than hoping that a couple MLS teams become truly elite.

 

The point is, the US cannot rely on the hope of having 2-3 "UCL Knockout Level Players" in order to field a competitive team. It's not realistic, nor is it sustainable. I did mention Brazil. As for France, most if not all of their players got their start in the French League. I mentioned Brazil, and most Brazilian players get their start in Brazil's State and National leagues. They move on to Europe to make more money, and also for the safety of their families. Same can be said for Argentina as well. A good portion of Dutch players currently play or have played for Ajax, PSV, & Feyenoord at some point in their career. They leave to make more money.

It's great that players have aspirations. They should. Raising the level of quality of the US player needs to be a collective effort. It's not a Domestic league player versus a Europe/foreign based player thing. There has to be a wholistic approach, a pathway for players. In order to strengthen the US player pool there needs to be a foundation for players to improve. That foundation is strong US Domestic professional leagues. Then you add in the handful of elite level professional players who move on to "major league clubs" to be the difference makers.

Pulisic and Reyna are generational players. They are not the norm. It's no different for the giants of the international game either. Spain's dominance in the 2010's? That generational talent. France's recent teams? Generational talent. Portugal without CR7? The 2008-2010 Netherlands side? Generational talent. England is seeing this now with some of their players. What most of these nations do infinitely better than the US? They have a foundation & sporting culture that develops international level players that allows them to compete every cycle. Then when they do have those generational talents to mix in, they compete for and win major honors.

 

The foundation is better training and better exposure for our pre- and young teens. MLS appears to be helping with that but we’ll see how it pans out - we’ve already got respected posters calling Weston type players leeches for not signing a 3+2 contract and encouraging them to not train them even if they make money doing it. If our best players are forced to make a choice between signing a 3+2 contract domestically and controlled until almost their mid-20s by a league that only sells at inflated numbers or not get to train at an elite level, that’s terrible for the USMNT - absolutely terrible.

Unlike MLS, other domestic leagues don’t even try to keep their best players from moving up the ladder (unless they have a couple of major league teams that compete at UCL). No other minor leagues says that they want the best players in the world, particularly American ones (ironically, they are actually more focused on Mexican players).

Furthermore, none of the other countries mentioned appear to favor minor leaguers over major leaguers and clearly favor players in certain leagues over players in equivalent ones. All of those guys field almost all of their players playing above MLS. Let’s flip it around: how many players in MLS play for a top 10 international side other than Mexico? Very very few - once they come to MLS, their international career is pretty much finished.

It’s not realistic to hope to have 2/3 UCL players in the squad? WTF are you taking about? we already have that and are moving past it.

Right now, we are close to having a full squad of players playing above the Championship/ MLS/ B2, which every single team that has a real shot at winning the word cup does.

our first step is to get to where very few of our players are minor leaguers and those that are are absolutely killing and are being recruited by better teams (e.g., ARobinson).

 

this sums up all the issues with the way people look at the pool

the us needs more talent everywhere

they need more players in better leagues and playing more and better on those teams/leagues and it goes on and on

there is no magic number like 'we need 2/3 guys playing in the champions league and now that we have that the goal is to have 4/5 guys playing in the champions league. All of it is nonsense there is no magic number and you can't say the team that won the world cup had x amount of champions league players so thats what the us needs it just doesn't work that way.

People overthink all of this too much its like every assist or goal in europe the entire usmnt future shifts and that isn't how hit works.

the usmnt first and last step is always the same...get more talent.

 

this is fine but the pathway must go all the way to the top of the game (UCL knockouts). The path cannot be designed so that many stop at MLS as it’s a minor league that is uncompetitive with the best. if the pathway doesn’t allow for “players to improve” beyond MLS-level, that’s a huge problem.

the concept that our team can be a legitimate contender at a World Cup with MLS level players plus a couple elite talents is silly.

 

It's an old term from 20 years ago and needs retiring.

 

I don't recall mentioning MLS in my post..........

I simply stated that there needs to be a better pathway for players to become professional, and improve. We need to start seeing more kids playing pickup games in their free time.

Our country needs better coaches who aren't solely focused on winning games, and ultimately take the creativity out of players.

 

I agree with the need for better training as I stated above. But more is needed - the pathway need to funnel up to the best soccer in the world and not be biased towards staying in a minor league.

here’s what you said:

Are you not talking about MLS as the foundation and adding a “handful of elite level professional players who move on to “major league clubs””?

at the end of the day in order to be a dark horse candidate, we need to be moving dozens of players to major league clubs from MLS in any given 4 year cycle. Just like the best nations do that don’t have a big 4/5 league.

 

Everybody realizes this. Everyone wants MLS to be like Ligue1 or Brazil's Serie A.

 

respectfully, I think a large (and vocal) component of BS USMNT forum posters don't agree because they are MLS focused.

Please look at the poster I was responding to....

 

I think having 30:1 odds (roughly equal to 32 teams) means you're a legit contender so that would be 11 teams.

 

I did not mention MLS in my post. YOU brought MLS up. I specifically did not mention MLS in order to keep the discussion moving forward.

Your bias against the league always comes through, and influences how you view and digest the posts of other contributors on BS. It blinds you to what actually is being posted.

Everyone knows that the USSF has largely been a mess since day one. MLS certainly struggled mightily for it's first 10-12 years of existence. The sport itself has struggled for legitimacy in this country for over a century. Hell our country's own fans have a massive inferiority complex.

The above has been slowly changing since about 2010. There's still a hell of a long way to go. Coaching education needs to be greatly improved, to put it very lightly. Youth coaching / development needs to be greatly improved (goes hand in hand with coaching).

What does the pro game look like in our country going forward? How do professional team youth academies fit into this picture along with pay to play clubs (which aren't going away)? International clubs are establishing academies in the US, how do they fit in? Which BTW they charge as much if not more than a college education in many instances per year to be a part of. The college season/structure needs to be figured out, so that it can still be a pathway for players who fall through the cracks. There are risks to changing the format though, as a longer season would mean increased costs. Those increased costs could lead to schools dropping the sport.

How is the development of the women's game being handled going forward? How does the USSF navigate and ultimately resolve the mess they have brought on themselves in regards to the women's game?

Now the game has to navigate these uncertain times as well. The transfer market very well could be dramatically different going forward. There's a chance players might not move as frequently, simply because clubs may not have the money to spend on players for the foreseeable future. This pandemic might shutter local youth clubs, or high school programs in our country. It might force pro teams to temporarily shutter, or even close their academies.

All of this is going to play a part and affects our country's ability to produce international quality players. There is no clear path currently to getting there. Aspiring to have dozens of players a year moving abroad to other leagues is great. How does the US get there though? How is this dream made a reality? In the early 2000's American players moved abroad a lot. They went to Sweden, and Denmark to play. So they could make more money, most didn't move on to bigger leagues.

 

gimme a break @jaykoz3. you clearly referenced MLS in a thread referencing player quality.

here’s what you said:

It's not a Domestic league player versus a Europe/foreign based player thing. There has to be a wholistic approach, a pathway for players. In order to strengthen the US player pool there needs to be a foundation for players to improve. That foundation is strong US Domestic professional leagues. Then you add in the handful of elite level professional players who move on to "major league clubs" to be the difference makers.

Are you not talking about MLS as the foundation and adding a “handful of elite level professional players who move on to “major league clubs””?

at the end of the day in order to be a dark horse candidate, we need to be moving dozens of players to major league clubs from MLS in any given 4 year cycle. Just like the best nations do that don’t have a big 4/5 league.

 

Again, if saying that the level of play in MLS is around the Championship and B2 is biased, I stand guilty.

If pushing back upon Arena's, Garber and Berhalter's obvious preference towards MLS over those leagues and better ones is "bias against the league", I'll cop to that too.

Perhaps you ought to look in the mirror and see why it is that when people point out that our past couple of coaches have been clearly biased in MLS' favor, you go crazy.

 

Gimme a break @DHC1 I know you can read and comprehend. I am NOT talking about MLS clubs as a foundation. Again you are making assumptions based on your personal bias.

In order to produce better players, the US needs strong professional leagues at all levels. By raising the quality of the leagues, kids will be more inclined to take interest in the sport. They will be more likely to play the sport in their spare time with friends. Think Basketball. Players develop more when they play and practice their sport of choice on their own. Allen Iverson didn't develop his crossover during high school practice, he developed that on the playgrounds.

 

what does that have to do with international quality? Your entry point in this thread was to say that we can’t expect to have more than 2-3 UCL players on our squad and now you’ve meandered to something entirely different.

what does the Answer playing pickup ball have to do with domestic professional leagues?

if kids want to watch soccer nowadays, they don’t need local teams to watch. They’re streaming the best teams in the world which is why the numbers for morning major league games are better than those for MLS prime time ones.

that’s not to say that I disagree that much better training is necessary but that not the same as having better professional leagues. Our leagues are fine at this level - are they much different from Croatia’s domestic leagues?

Im still waiting on why saying MLS is roughly comparable to the championship and B2 makes one biased.

 

I couldn't never quite relate to following a non-local team. Not saying it's wrong fan behavior, just wasn't for me. I imagine plenty of kids might feel similar today despite NBC's Premier League Mornings. I mean it's cool the big six in England can pull such ratings in the U.S. but at the same time the Bundesliga and Serie A ratings kind of speak to a notion that "major league" quality isn't the sole driver of demand.