Jack Jewsbury

Doesn't this decision depend a great deal on the qualities of the players available? It's entirely possible that the best available $130K guy is inconsistent or injury prone, or simply not much better than an $80K guy. For the sake of argument, let's call the $130K guy, "Zizi."

What's more, once you've allocated that money to him, you find that you don't have enough cash left over to sign the backups who really have potential ... call them Chris, Casey, and Adolfo. So once Zizi gets hurt, you end up giving minutes to guys like David, Rey Angel, and Alberto. Partly as a result, you end up with one of the worst offensive teams in league history, and that, in turn, gets you fired.

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

 

Exactly.

You can argue that MLS has lost some of the creative flair it had in year's past... but in the end, Guevara's flair did jack-sh!t for the metros the last half of the season. (I'll also grant that a lack of creative flair: Preki and Klein... killed KC in the Cup final... but that's neither here nor there.)

Jewsbury had a HUGE impact on the second half of the Wizards season. At times, he was the second best man on the pitch for KC (nobody was bigger than Diego Guttierez this season for KC). His goal against San Jose in the playoffs was goal-of-the-year caliber, especially considering the circumstances.

As somebody pointed out, with KZ most likely across the pond next year, Jack will have a great chance to prove that he belongs.


Frankly, I'll take a kid like Jewsbury who plays all out, balls-to-the-wall and makes a significant contribution to winning games for his team, than a guy like Guevara who's first half was amazing... and then couldn't help his team win when it mattered.

 

I suppose my problem with this argument is that I don't trust either 1. practically anybody's ability to judge subtle changes in any league's 'quality' and 2. anybody's memory of what happened two or three years ago.

Whether MLS is improving or declining in quality, I don't think that it is possible to observe what are necessarily going to be incremental changes. Style of play, vagaries in an individual's favorite team's performance, marquee departures and additions, are going to bias any observer; and, even if somebody were to watch and value every single game equally, it's simply not possible to integrate that much information into a coherent whole. Doing that over multiple seasons, as memories fade, are only going to worsen this problem. Quality is something that I feel much more comfortable judging from a (somewhat) more objective standpoint of looking at what the league has added and what the league has lost, rather than simply referencing my faulty memories.

As for your second point: If the league wants to exhibit a noticeable improvement in quality, does it need to add more Guevaras and fewer Jewsburys? I would firmly say no. Although, sure, adding more exquisitely talented players is one way to improve the league (I'm not against that, of course), another way is to remove the worst players. Maybe it's a personal bias of mine, but I tend to remember the guys who stand out as being inadequate just as much as I remember the guys who stand out for being exceptional. I'd say that replacing Orlando Perez with an adequate left back (be it Denny Clanton or Caballero) is just as important as replacing an average Mike Clark with the exceptional Chad Marshall.

 

I love the way people like to accentuate only the negatives for foreign players but only the positives for domestic players.

 

So hustle is more important than quality?

No wonder the game is played the way it is now in this country.

 

No, Herm Edwards is a sage.

 

Indeed. It seems the argument about a decline in quality hinges on the aging and retirement of about 4 center mids, and the presence of about four "developmental players" (indeed that's a misnomer, as they are the guys that in actuality the league least expects to develop, factoring for age) who some posters think are crap.

Even if both of those things are true (and I might concede the first one), it's not like we've seen a position-by-position comparison of the league now versus three years ago. The reason I tried to make dozens of examples the last time this merry-go-round circled was that I personally would take the overall forward crop in this league today over the one of four years ago in a New York minute. You may not think much of Davy Arnaud. I think he's Raul Diaz Arce except better.

As to point 1. when "it's clearly getting better every year" was a mantra, it was probably true. That would be about the first 5 or 6 years of the league's existence. Since then, improvement has either been very subtle or much, much less. Maybe even, from last season to this, non-existent.

However, it's a leap from here to a clear decline. The league has been les aesthetically pleasing, to be sure, but is collective soccer ability of the 140 or so MLS players who get significant PT collectively lower? You'd have to cite more than 8 of them to convince me.

 

Define the word. To me, hustle is a quality. Not the only one, for sure, but it seems you'd take an especially creative but inconsistent player over one with only a modicum of creativity but who comes to play every day. I'd suggest that clubs at every level win more games if they have at least a few of the latter than if they do not.

I might also suggest that at wing-mid, hustle is often at least as important as creative ability (as opposed to center-mid, where the balance is decidedly different, though even there, the fact that Nowak could still hustle gave him an advantage over Valderrama, which is part of the reason why Valderrama never won anything here, and Nowak did). Wing-mid is often a position from which it is difficult to dominate a match (because much of the terrain being covered is not typically very valuable). The number one and number two things you want to do are to not allow your opponents to run free, and to take advantage on those occasions when they let you do it.

 

Indeed. I recall giving it for half a dozen other leagues to see you strike it down. The fact that MLS's scoring average of 2.61 is higher than the 2.57 that England, Spain, and Italy averaged colelctively from September of 1995 to June 2000 (data I happened to acquire via the following paper: http://www.econ.brown.edu/~iph/pdf/professionals.pdf) doesn't seem particularly relevent to you. You'll forgive me if the tenor of that whole line of argument doesn't strike one as special pleading.

Ah, well, now that you've given me the facts. . .

 

Wonderful they have a higher average. Which one is more entertaining?

It seems to me that in this country La Liga Serie A EPL and a host of other leagues from South America have people who pay money to get these games on their networks. MLS seems to be the only football product in this country that doesn't. I wonder why.

But I am sure there is a good explanation/excuse for that.

 

Indeed! This is of course the crux of the point that goals scored is a measure only of how good the offense is relative to the defense. It is a truly horrible indicator of how good a league is overall.

 

Agreed, Amado faded big time towards the end. He played alright in the playoffs, but was nearly invisible for the the home stretch. But you are not saying more players of his skill level wouldn't improve this leagues quality of play, are you?

 

I think he is saying he would rather watch more jack jewsbury's play than more Amdo Guevarra's.

He would rather see and low skilled player who hustles all the time and does a lot of "unecessary running" (thank you Earnie Stewart) than a very skilled player who might occasionally go through a dip in form.

 

Dude. Honestly, what the hell is wrong with you? Do you even try to make an attempt at understanding somebody's post before you go and make comments on it that are just plain wrong?

I really doubt it.


That's not what he said at all, and the fact that this thread has gone on this long is pretty freaking rediculous. To me, the conclusion would seem fairly obvious.

The reason MLS doesn't produce as many "skill" players as the EPL or whatever is the indisputable fact that (get this) we are NOT the EPL or whatever. It seems like its been repeated ad nauseum on these boards, but it amazes me that some people still don't get this concept: AS THE LEAGUE GETS MORE ESTABLISHED, THE PLAYERS WILL GET BETTER. Period. End of story.

Truth be told, for a league that is only 9 years old, MLS has done a DAMN good job of increasing the quality of the talent pool.

Does that mean that we should be producing world-beaters any day now? No.

Does that mean that we should be catching up the the EPL or whoever in terms of quality of play? No.

As of right now, MLS has basically only gotten to the point where it has figured out what kind of players have the most long-lasting success within their system. Since Americans, in general, are not the most naturally skillful of players, That kind of player just happens to be "Jack Jewsbury"s of the world. Which, despite the cries of apocalyptic doom from people like yourself, is perfectly fine.

 

You really don't have any reading comprehension skills do you?

"Wanting on your team" does not mean "prefer to watch"

And frankly, I watch way too much EPL - mainly because it's soccer and it's on my TV - and I can name countless EPL starters who are no more skillful, nor as exciting to watch than Jack Jewsbury. - And because you'll misread that statement I'll throw in this disclaimer: I am not suggesting in the least that Jewsbury is EPL calibre.

 

First off, I am Jewish and all of the talk in this thread about Jack's last name and is he Jewish and what not is making me very uncomfortable. Soccer ability has NOTHING to do with religion, race, or skin color. OK enough with my ranting! I think Jack had a great season. I was very impressed with his play all season. He plays with lots of energy and purpose. Last year as a rookie Jack played in one or two games, and this season he was basically a started. I am very proud of the way he improved and I think things will only continue to get better. I am looking forward to watching Jack play next season. Oh yeah and he is good looking (sorry just had to say it)!!

 

"Naturally skillful" ?

Americans can be as skillful as anyone.

It is mainly down to the approach to the game why Brazilians end up how they are and Englishmen end up how they are.

 

hats off to Jack. Gotta give him credit for sticking in their and achieving what he achieved. On the other hand, as others have pointed out, this is not the final product/player our system should be striving for. Need more crafty, less predictable, game-breakers. That'll only happen after we start teaching our kids at an earlier age the fundamentals, so by twelve or so, they got that down and are ready to move on to tactics.

 

1. I was trying to be glib.

2. I find this fixation we have with workmanlike players in this country especially grating. Amado Guevarra will win you many more games than a Jewsbury or no matter what dip in form he has.

3. I don't really care what bum players Norwich city trots out. If they don't play for Man U in the EPL I am not that interested. I do however get tired of this "Well he is no worse than this guy!" argument. Its weak and if that is the one of the major positives a player has then there is something wrong with that player.

I didn't mention any EPL players in this thread or even compare MLS players to them. You did that. I spoke only of players in this league because that is what interests me.

 

Yep.

 

You perfer the more 'workman-like' player, while others perfer more razzle-dazzle creative types. Fair enough, thats just personal preference. That said (a term I am quickly tiring of), it is hard to argue that the quality of play is getting better every year. For 3 years the level of play has, as seen through my eyes, stagnated. There has been no real obvious step up nor down. The odds on bringing in a few more 'skillful' types to improve the run of play are definately better than fielding a roster of mostly 'hustler' types. Obviously, there is plenty of room in MLS for both the Jewsbury's of the world and the Guevarra's. Personally though, I would like to see us start leaning more towards the latter than the prior.