I jsut don't even find this much of a question that we may (and may well) be at least a darkhorse contender for the 2010 title. GK: a recovered Howard (ManU or somewhere else) D Simek Onyewu Marshall/Boca Spector A lot depends on how good Onyewu becomes, and if he can cover for the other center back, whom I expects to be big 4 good, but not necessarily WC champion good. Although potentially, Spector could end up in the center if Karbassiyoon ends up being really good. MF: Szetela Gaven DMB LD If it reaches its potential, that's a strong midfield, no matter how you cut it. By this point DMB might be the dirty work player. FW: EJ Adu A lot of ootential there. Would that team, if it reaches its more or less potential, beat our quarterfinal team? I think so. I think they would beat the German team that went to the final (minus Kahn anyway).Frankly, that front six looks pretty darn scary to me. So, I don't see why this is so difficult to imagine.
yeah but.... the USA still is pretty much an underdog, and Europe loves underdogs. i mean, if the US is in a group with two Euro teams, we'll be the underdog both times. AND Dubya HATES soccer. so follow this logic: p1: Dubya hates soccer. p2: Europe hates Dubya. conc: Europe supports US soccer to spite Dubya.
Projecting from today: 1. Howard, Cronin U-20 all star, Westberg pro in France 2. Spector, Karby, Simek, Fro, Sarkodie, Dolo? 3. Gooch, Boca, Gibbs, Marshall, Whitbread, Cochrane 4. Landon, DMB, Szetela, Dempsey, Gaven 5. Freddy, GAM, Buddle?, Zimmerman, Rogers GK: Looks very doable Wide backs: Starters at the EPL level seem almost sure now Centerbacks: Top 10 overall for a centerback seems hard two top 25 maybe Midfield: Szetela has a chance to be a top 5 DM, Landon and DMB could very easily be top 25 at LM and AM, RM is a bit tougher but top 50 has a lot of room. Up top: Freddy, who knows how good he can be. GAM pretty much the same way. After that it's a crap shoot. Possible but there will be some holes.
yeah, I agree 100%...obviously "potential" is a dirty word, but hey we're all in the business of hypotheticals anyway. the point is -- and i've been a part of BigSoccer for a long, long, long time now -- one rule that has ALWAYS held true on bigsoccer is: if you have the audacity to post something even slightly forward-looking or optimistic about the USMNT, the BigSoccer sophisticates will without hesitation reply skeptically to show you how naive you are, and to remind themselves how smart they are. and this rule applies to everything, no matter what the subject. so, while i agree with your post entirely...i am not surprised by the skepticism expressed on the thread.
Another factor, look at hte 11 I posted and figure their ages. Howard 31 Simek 26 Onyewu 28 Boca 31/Marshall 25/6 Spector 24 Szetela 23/4 Gaven 23 DMB 28 LD 28 Adu 21 EJ 26 potential bench players: Karbassiyoon 26 Whitbread 25/26 Gibbs 31 Cherundolo 31 Dempsey 27 Convey 26 Mapp 25 Martino 29/Capano 25/26 Buddle 28 Cooper 26 Casey 28 Esky 27/8 Rogers 23? They will be pretty darn uniformly 24-30 year olds. Prime years across the board.. That's young. Remarkable. I think a european team would have difficulty keeping up with a frontline that included Adu, Johnson, Donovan, and DMB, with say, Buddle coming off the bench, in the heat of a south african summer. And no one has even dare mention the possibility of Rossi, 24, or Niardello, ??.If Rossi changed allegiance and EJ otr Adu was the first guy off the bench, running at tired defenses ............
I wouldn't say he's the best 15 year old in the world. I'm sure Brazil has a ton of "Adus" running around.
Maybe the first time, but the second time depends on where we are in the group after one or two games, as was true against Poland. Not to mention we get screwed most times when we're the favorite...as was true against Poland.
The issue is not whether we win the World Cup by 2010 but are we making progress toward that goal. All signs are pointing favorably to the US becoming a quality soccer side. Some say we are now. I am still under the belief much work needs to be done. We still are not producing enough midfielders who can distribute the ball under duress.
Although if we win by 2006, may we all freely assume that all bets are off, or will the skepticism still abound?
Could you imagine how the Europeans would feel if the US won the World Cup on European soil? Would Bush go to the World Cup final in Germany if the US made if that far?
The two major ones were Bradenton and then the Project 40 relationship with MLS so that we could get players into MLS without having to wait for them to finish four years of college. Combined the two have contributed DaMarcus Beasley, Bobby Convey, Eddie Johnson and Eddie Gaven to the National Team. The two will also likely contribute Chad Marshall and Justin Mapp in the relatively near future. Project 40 has also contributed guys like Clint Dempsey and many others. Outside of that, the real important thing was that instead of respecting everyone's "turf" and letting things progress as they had as if everything was well, people sat down and thought about and then addressed real problems. College soccer could have seen Project 40 as an attack, but it needed to happen for the good of the National Team so college soccer had no choice but to get over it. Project 2010 was a series of goals the program set. I'd say that we are a bit behind the goals that were set, though obviously growth has been made. What needs to happen is to have these kinds of discussions all the time, constantly analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of what we do. Instead I think we've fallen into the trap of waiting until something really bad happens before we're motivated enough to change things (in 1998 that was our poor results in France).
I think I agree with you. Why this isn't happening every four years is beyond me. Maybe it does happen but not in such a dramatic or public way. I'm sure that MLS and USSF could argue that next year the league's reserve teams are another step in this diretion. I believe that they are but not a hugely signifigant one. I would agree that our growth has been at least static since 2002. That's two years where more things could've been implemented. Another Brandenton for example. You might figure that an additional set up like that might take a year or two to get off the ground, okay. So if you figured they were starting another once this year those 17 year olds would be 23 in 2010. Perfect right? That's ot to say taht the same kind of growth and progress isn't going to be made over the next six years, but clearly the programs in place have worked. It's a damn shame that the USSF hasn't taken that fact and chosen to try to mutiply and accellerate that growth even more. Any of this make any sense. I'm kind of rambling.
I assume the 2010 WC would still be in June/July. Here's the average temps for Johannesburg that time of year according to weather.com: 60 high 42 low Imagine having a tournament in California in December/January (southern hemisphere: seasons are flipped). Could be warm, but no one is going to get heat stroke.
In some defense of USSF, Bradenton has expanded from 20 players in '99 to 40 players today. This growth was achieved quietly, but the effect is just as great as if USSF had opened a second U17 training center. I'd settle for a 100% increase in top-quality youth training every 5 years
Right but the things is there's a difference between expanding what you were already doing and changing something you were doing wrong from before. IOW, going from 0 to 20 is far more significant than going from 20 to 40. What now needs to be looked at: a) Is the way we come up with those 40 the best way or just the most convenient way. You know my answer with regards to the ODP system. b) Do we need to have multiple independent sources each addressing youth development in their own ways. c) Are there aspects of the training that occurs at Bradenton that could be improved such as tactical training, ball control, off the ball movement, etc. Bradenton was a quantum leap forward, but more needs to be done.
At a certain level, only time will tell if this was a reasonable goal. I have certainly been thrilled with our player development in the time since MLS was founded. Whether the same upward curve in quality can continue (since we basically started at zero) also remains to be seen. That said, I would suggest that player/technical development is not the sole focus or beneficiary of Project 2010. Players and coaches will or will not develop: what P-2010 did (and is doing) was unify the USSF toward a common goal, at all levels. Organizational growth around a common goal is what makes organizations -- businesses, armies, religious institutions, political movements, whatever -- successful. When you set one common goal, those who embrace it will fill in the steps that lead to it. The progress will not always be obvious or appear in expected ways (not making 2004 mens Olympics, for example), but comes in an organic, or non-linnear fashion. JF Kennedy, whatever else his faults, understood this when he made a public vow in 1960 that we would put a man on the moon before the end of the decade. He did not say "We want to be leaders in the space race"; he put out a specific goal, with a specific time. The scientists and test pilots and everyone else filled in the middle. Sometimes, this model has to be flipped on its head. Here in New England, we can't say enough great things about the NFL Patriot's Bill Bellichek and his "we're only focused on the next game" attitude. Here, he inverted the formula, using one-game-at-a-time to get to the Super Bowl...twice, and aiming for a third. But he had a specific goal that everyone buys into, from ownership to the scouts to the payroll negotiators to the third string kick holder. My point is that organic, across-the-board focus throughout the US soccer community is the real power behind Project 2010. There are a lot of national team programs with deep player pools that never seem to do much outside the group stage. Here is where the Greece/Euro 2004 result I think is most relevant: they had always had quality talent, what made the difference was the strength of the program's organization (due largely to Otto, or so the media has us believe -- like Hiddink in S.Korea). Another fair example of the opposite effect would be the US Olympic basketball team 2004. Or our Olympic hockey team in last winter Olympics -- what good did the depth of NHL talent do us there? So I say that if you're a US supporter, you HAVE TO believe in the validity of Project 2010. Believing in it is its only reason to exist. The results are out of our hands, based on our competition, refereee decisions, injuries, etc. etc. But a specific goal HAS TO be there for us to progress, because otherwise our "potential" will pull us in too many other directions.
Wouldn't hurt. We're getting that to a certain extent. Super Y has its own identification system. The MLS clubs are putting out feelers for doing their thing. Soccer America just ran a big piece on some SoCal Premier League, which is an enhanced competition system for the top SoCal teenage teams. This is bottom up stuff, not top down from USSF. But it's in the right direction. Probably. Look, I agree with you, '98 motivated change, '02 motivated happy pats on the back. Pretty much always how things work. If I had to guess, I'd say that we'll get knocked out in first round '06, and that a bunch of overly optimistic and pissed-off soccer people (and fans) will lead the next charge after '06.
Not to question their supremacy further, but they were also gifted a goal pulled back in their elimination game against Belgium. Marc Wilmots was not offsides, the score is 1-0 Belgium, and the midfield domination that saw Brasil unable to string 3 passes together (if you doubt me, roll the tape: until Ronaldo's individual effort, they had nothing) would have closed them out.
Better than going to the WC final would be if he would put a junior soccer field on a White House lawn. Getting back to the issue of WC 2010. We have to use our depth to address the different types of opponents we face. There is so much variety. Warm weather, cold weather, windy, sunny, altitude, tropic heat, big opponents, small opponents, defenses that swarm all over you, defenses that let you play, 3/4/5/6-man midfields, opponents that have speed and stamina, etc. Only Brazil can play "their" game against every other opponent, they just have a problem with altitude. It's a game by game situation and we would need the right personnel and the right strategy for each game.
2010 isn't so far away that the answer is obvious. Can this team win the world cup? 21 year old Freddy Adu 25 year old Eddie Johnson 28 year old Landon Donovan 28 year old DeMarcus Beasley 23 year old Eddie Gaven 22 year old Danny Szetela 31 year old Carlos Bocanegra 25 (26?) year old Jonathan Spector 27 year old Ogoochi Onewyu and a wingback...for now lets say 31 year old Cory Gibbs, moving Boca over to left wing and Spector to right 31 year old Tim Howard I think the answer is obvious....if Eddie Johnson's progress continues and/or Adu turns out to be half the goalscorer he's on track to be, if DMB and Donovan's play remain simply constant, if Gaven improves and Szetela is competent to take over the Armas role, this team (which will have a more than competent defense) has no holes, other than depth. Whether depth will be a problem will be something we'll see in 2010, but we've got quite a large soccer population to find role players, and we'll be playing in neutral territory in 2010, rather than the hostility of Europe or South America. Mission clearly, clearly accomplished.
15 year old prospect, might be the next Denilson I love EJ and I see no reason for him to fail, but better men than Eddie have torn up bigger leagues than MLS at age 20 without realizing their potential. Should be good. Ditto. Had a good season as a 17 year old, we'll see. Everton prospect just getting his feet wet professionally. We'll see. Should be good. A pretty good bet. Where's he playing, Belgian league? From your lips to God's ears. But I don't think God will grant all these prayers.
If he moves to Brazil. At any rate, you get the point on Denilson. A young superstar in '98, a forgotten man in '04. Stuff happens.
If the mission is to field a competent, professional men's side in 2010, then yes, if some of those younger players pan out, mission accomplished. But if you mean they will have as much quality as the top four national sides in the world, then you're living in La La land. I can quite assure you, there are 10 to 20 Eddie Gavens and Danny Szetalas fighting for spots in Argentina and Brazil as we speak.