Club play is where players are supposed to demonstrate that they are better and/or ready to step into international play. That is exactly how Shannon Boxx made the USWNT who was named to the 2003 WWC squad without a single cap (her first caps were in the pre-cup send off games). Becky Edwards has outplayed pretty much every other holding mid in WPS. She's demonstrated by her play that she's as ready as Boxx was in 2003.
Boxx got her standing position not because she got on the team with no CAPs. ALL players get on the team with no CAPs. Players get to keep their positions by showing superior play. Shannon showed that by taking over the holding mid spot when she showed she could score off set pieces and from following runs in those pre-cup games. She was by far the best player out of college in those days. ( I know, I watched her beat UP teams in the finals) and she spent several years in the WUSA showing she was a star. By the time she got there, the talk i remember was how overdue the appointment was. She had a game in the air no one else had with the absence of some then recently retired players. And she showed her superiority by winning the slot in camps. She had the best air game since Akers. This current team theoretically has Abby to win the air now, so balls don't go anywhere else. But neither Lindsey or anybody else has won that spot from Boxx. I say theoretically because Abby has yet to step up since her injury. When Becky Edwards or someone else comes into camp and takes the job we will have a new starting holding mid. But it will be somebody who does more than just hold the position. It will have to be because she can offer something beyond just expected play. Boxx can do that and has the competition experience. It will take a spark that adds to the team and gets people's attention. Edwards did fine at the u20 level. She recently did OK at the u23 level, but she hasn't set the world on fire like Boxx did. Both of those teams had her paired with Winters, a player who is a better scorer and she will have to compete against. I saw Becky Edwards play for the Flash ( late night replay of the 2-2 tie with Sky Blue game) what I got from that game was how fortunate she was to have the two best players in the world playing around her and how they made everyone else's job easy. Last night it wasnt so easy and Edwards didnt look like a superstar. I didn't come away with a revelation that she is the glue to the NY Flash. just as she wasn't when she played for the Gold Pride. The Flash will win with Sinclair, Marta, and nine muppets. Sometimes the muppets let in goals and the game goes to tie. offensively, her job is to get the ball to whatever half of the field the other two are in and sprint to the corner for the celebration. She will play against those players on the international scene, not with them. If she wants to make her mark she should ask for a transfer so she can try and stop those two. Nobody else does, but she doesn't have to. Right now you could say they haven't beaten her like they beat everyone else, but the claim doesn't mean much.
if you have a great player - boxx is or is close to the best in the world at that position - good coaches don't always replace them when they have a bad patch. when rooney had his dry spell, (and i'm sure there are other cases as well) both club and country kept playing him. they believe that the player won't get back into form sitting on the bench. that's one approach. other coaches might sit him. pia is doing the former. but that's a difference of opinion among good coaches. we can heartily disagree with her approach if we prefer the other way. but that in no way makes her a bad coach or a coach who does not know what she is doing. that's what lori lindsey's there for. that's why averbuch was on the team for a while - as backup and in case of injury. i complained about her seeming to tire in club games last year. so i agree somewhat. but she had been used for two years (the first with the sol) as a two way middie who had to cover a lot of ground. she was doing a lot of attacking while she still had quite a lot of grunt work on the defensive end to do. so her tiring was understandable. but that's not the same as saying that she was surpassed by the other dmids. i haven't seen that. and i suspect that's the way pia sees it too. in addition, see what i said above about great players. your argument about age does not hold in every case. the netherlands stuck with an older squad. if you look at the average age listing from youngest to oldest, germany is indeed third - very young. but the netherlands is 24th - even older than france, and they got to the finals - farther than france and farther than germany. indeed, especially in the u.s., the coaches have a superfluity of year after year of fitness data on these players and are in a much better position to make the call on their tiring, breaking down bodies than we are.
I sort of agree that it's hard to remove Boxx from her role right now. I think she's earned the benefit of the doubt, though her minutes should be watched if some early round games get out of hand. But she has slowed significantly since the last world cup (when she was one of the best players on the team) and is at the tail end of her career with WNT. I do think there is a pipeline of replacements coming in the next quad-- FaucetFan did a nice job identifying specific names, though I think Amber Brooks might be better off at outside back. I did not like the choice of Lindsey as her backup, which was probably done because Pia thought she would be a reasonable backup for both Boxx and Lloyd. I wanted Averbuch for that role, thinking that Rapinoe or Heath could fill in for Lloyd in a pinch. Where I disagree with you is your assessment of Becky Edwards. She is a tremendous young d-mid. I have seen her in HS, college and pros and she might not be the flashiest player in the world but she gets the job done. Edwards is hands down a better player than Winters-- not even close. If you are looking for a d-mid, scoring ability is not near the top of the list of required attributes. But don't discount her offensive ability, as she has that skill (when needed in college with 20 assists and 10 goals) but is just asked to fill a more defensive role with her club. As for your analysis of her role with the Flash, I found it over the top, but it doesn't surprise me since you told me a few days ago that most young American players in WPS just pass the ball to the international players and get out of the way. Reality is that Marta and Sinclair are just as lucky to have her (as well as Bock, Averbuch and Seger) in the MF to keep possession and allow them to be adventurous offensively as she is to have them on her side. And there are other really good offensive players in WPS aside from Marta -- Smith, Wambach etc...where you can judge how she might handle herself against top flight competition and she has acquitted herself nicely. You might not think she looked like a superstar but she does the big and little things that win games and would be a fine addition to the WNT in the coming years.
Rooney is about to turn 26. Boxx is about to turn 33. Big difference in how coaches rotate and try to save their legs vs letting them play through a slump. I don't agree completely with the view BrooklynSoccer is taking. But I do think relying upon 33 year old legs for a short tournament is flirting with disaster.
i am not against taking her out early to save her legs, or not playing her at all occasionally. but that has been done. in the four nations boxx played the first half in the first game, and averbuch played the second half. boxx didn't even dress for the second game, and then played again in the third game - but only the first half. averbuch played the second half again. what i disagree with is some who seem to think that someone else should be playing in that spot because boxxy had some bad games. you and i were the only ones early on harping on her age. so i share some of the same concern. i also share your concern about mitts. but i don't worry too much about it, because coaches and team physios and doctors are normally consumed by supreme self interest, and would have looked at mitts with an eagle eye during some very tough training last week, would simply not take a player who they think will be a problem, and would certainly not leave behind a player who (in their eyes, not ours) is better able to help the team win. it seems to me that at their current level, krieger is the #1 rb, mitts is #2 and sauerbrunn (who has been played there by pia) is #3 on the depth chart. if, in the next few weeks mitts comes back strong, she can actually switch places with krieger on that chart. i'm comfortable with that setup. mitts experience puts her ahead of engen for me.
Well, to start with it wasn't the same Mexican team. They had a 16 year old in goal who they had hardly played with before. They were also missing a first choice central defender. Watching the game, it was clear that Mexico's main problem was a lack of composure on the ball, especially in the back. Too many ball were hastily and aimlessly cleared upfield, so they were unable to build possession from the back in their usual style. I think it is pretty obvious that there was a safety first mindset that comes from not having familiarity with and confidence in their goalkeeper. Once they had played together a while, they did improve, and they looked better than the USA for several stretches in the second half. It's also worth keeping in mind that Mexico have been training hard, and they were the ones who had a long flight to get to the game on top of that. So they were going to be even more fatigued than the USA. Finally, the Mexican coach, Leo Cuellar, had stated before the game that a main goal was to avoid injuries against the USA, which I think limited how aggressively they challenged for the ball on many occasions. The takeaway is that, like most teams, Mexico uses it's friendlies to try out new personnel and make selection decisions without showing everything they have or putting everything on the line.
i remember occasional attacks. but i don't remember several stretches. i guess...but the u.s. was surely trying to avoid injuries too. no?
Ok, maybe it was a little over the top. We could get into a pissing match about who Edwards is better than. I said she did fine at the u20 level and ok at the u23 level. I think she is a good player. But she is going to be better than just a good player to take the job from Boxx, just as Shannon had to win the job. When Boxx got her CAPs, she scored a goal in the first three. That is something neither Hamm, Milbrett, Akers, nor anyone else managed to do when they won their spots on the team, and she did it from the holding mid spot while controlling the center of the field. Earlier somebody insinuated that she somehow got a pass onto the team. That's just not the case. She FORCED her way on to the squad, she didn't get the spot because somebody forgot to cut her. That's as it should be. When Edwards gets her chance and if she does that, I'll be her biggest fan, but she'll have to earn it. So far, that hasn't happened. - not at the international level, and I don't think at the club level either.
The US coaching staff made avoiding injury a specific point of emphasis before the match? You have evidence for this? A link would be nice. Otherwise it just looks like unwarranted speculation.
Over on the WPS forum, there's a thread titled "No matter what happens, it's evidence Women's Soccer will never be successful." After reading the commentary about the Mexico game, I'm thinking someone should start a new thread on this forum titled "No matter what happens, it's evidence the US Women's National Team -- and their coach in particular -- will never be successful."
I think they could very well be successful. What is unfortunate is Pia didn't bring together the best team possible and as a head coach that means on some level she has failed. I wouldn't put anything past these girls. I think they are capable of a WC championship, but if the coach was better this likelihood would be much much higher. I want to see USA play at it's best. And this shouldn't be dependent on Pia's personal vendettas get get certain players to their first World Cup while sacrificing the teams overall strengths.
So if they win the World Cup and Mitts scrores a goal in every game, that WILL be evidence that Pia sucks, then? Good to know...
Absolutely not, because when that happens Elvis will sing at their welcome home parade through the streets of NYC! I'll be there.
Thing is, you worry me that you will bring a package of Mannlicher Carcano "curtain rods" with you if it happens...
was just asking. i didn't say that the u.s. coaching staff made avoiding injury a specific point of emphasis. was just surmising that avoiding injury always seems to be a point in all of these pre wc games.
Note that I was not arguing Edwards should have Boxx's job now. I personally would have considered her (along with Averbuch) for a backup role because I think Lori Lindsey should not be on this team. They already have cover for Lloyd at attacking mid with Heath and Rapinoe and there are others who are better d-mids. Why take a 31-year-old who has little past and little future with WNT when you could have taken younger and better defensive players in Averbuch or Edwards. Pia likes Lindsey, though. Called her in and player her after other coaches had all but ignored her. My choice ultimately would have probably been Averbuch but Edwards is an up and comer and I hope she makes the Olympic team next year. And remember, it's hard to force your way onto the team when you don't get called up. I think she's shown enough in WPS (disagree with you there) to get that call but Pia doesn't. As I said up thread, I think Boxx has earned the benefit of the doubt but keep in mind that she is not the same player she was when she achieved all of those things you mentioned. Four or five years ago she was one of the best players on the team (and one of the best if not the best d-mid in the world) but she is now 34 and has slowed some. I think she is at the tail end of her career. My guess is she might play next year and try and make the Olympic team but beyond that is a reach. It might be time as early as next year for some of these younger d-mids to get a chance in her place.
Well, it is true that this is probably the last go-round for Boxx. It's probably true for Rampone, Mitts, and a bunch of others as well. Maybe Abby. If they get the Cup, I'd say it's guaranteed. Maybe even if they don't. As to Edwards or any defender not getting her caps now, Shannon didn't get hers for at least a full cycle. She was a star in the WUSA for a while before she got a CAP and though she graduated in 1998, she didn't get her first CAP until 2003. I think that's just a fact of life for defenders. National team coaches have always looked for some offense from the defense. They often are enamored by trying to convert offensive players before taking a defender out of college. Averbush wasnt a defender. Heck, they are tinkering with Ohara as a defender, and she NEVER played that in college. Even Shannon was more of an offensive player in college- more of an attacking mid. Some of the current defenders were offensive players. Coaches seem to love the idea, though in real life results are mixed. And maturity plays a role. Defenders just don't have the freedom to make mistakes that attacking players do. Positioning and strength are often more important than pure speed and youth.
Not if Pia's still around after the WC, she'll probably try to drag it out until the next Olympic...and then the next WC.
Haha It is true for the USA that the Olympics has turned a four year cycle into a two year cycle. For other countries it is still a four year cycle. I wonder if we won this cup if USSoccer would take the full four years to build a team? If we don't, I think we stay where we are.
The point is, there is a world of practical difference between an explicit point of emphasis and a vague, unarticulated hope.
maybe. but when it comes to avoiding injury an explicit point of emphasis does you no more good than a vague, unarticulated hope.