Sure. Over time, you can do tracking. The established method in other industries is to use regional scouts, then employ a set of cross-checkers who are known quantities and evaluated in detail. The lower level folks bubble up everyone interesting, and then you start to get common opinions on common structures. Baseball has industry-wide scales and every team has a database. But to a bigger point, while there are a limited number of camps and spots ... I'm not sure we should be halving that by enforcing overly rigid, consistent rosters at the younger levels. Why? I find it interesting that people seem to be more interested in discovery of new players at the senior level than allowing for it at the youth level, when the chances of undiscovered and mis-evaluated talent is FAR higher the younger you are.
Are we enforcing rigid roster sizes at the earliest levels? For the first 2 U-15 camps of the year, 36 players were called up. That seems pretty good sized to me.
I like how we are now hiring coaches and holding camps almost for each birthyear. If I may be so bold, maybe there should be a special advocate or even camps for kids who were born the last few months of the year or who are slower than their peers in hitting puberty. It almost sounds like science fiction but I would imagine it would make a difference for a handful of kids who have the innate talent to excel at the senior level but would otherwise be discouraged by a selection process that is stacked against them.
I think at the U-20 level the selections aren’t as bad. I don’t have many big gripes at the higher levels. You can’t get away with as much. The son of the coach’s friend may be starting for an MLS academy as a U-15 or U-16 and you can disguise that easily because not many follow. When that kid is then playing for University of Washington or Virginia Tech compared to the kids that are in the same age group playing every week in MLS, you have less leeway with your selections. The U-20 or U-19 coach probably still is coming in without a great knowledge of the pool because this is a new job for them. That leads to the same problems as U-15 or U-16, but it may be a little easier to get up to speed because the pool size is smaller as you move up the different levels. Eventually that shouldn’t be a problem. If I have any complaint for the higher levels, it’s to use some discretion. You don’t need to call in the 23 players with the most high level pro minutes. Those aren’t the 23 best players. Some will be, but then there will be some good players that aren’t part of that 23. I have no problem if we call in some college kids or players who lack exposure elsewhere. If we are talking about GK’s for instance, you don’t have to start Slonina because he’s starting in MLS and Chicago prefers him to Brady. If you think Brady is better (some people do), start Brady. With CB’s, you don’t have to include Jaziel Orozco in a camp because RSL has almost all their CB’s injured for a few weeks, and he gets a few games because he’s one of their only fit players that can play the position.
Stuff like that tends to work. Even if it is an existing coach or scout whose is specially tasked with the responsibility. We do that all the time with things on our leadership teams -- simple advocacy can be effective.
It's definitely just much easier to evaluate players the older they get. A great deal of the U20s are professionals and you can watch them play fairly regularly fairly easily. I think you're also less projecting potential the older the players get. A new U20 coach won't be as familiar with the pool but that'll get figured out quickly. I don't think you should discard the opinions of the clubs, but you need coaches who are discerning about who at different clubs are more straightforward and who may be pushing guys for other reasons. A lot of NFL coaches for instance have particular coaches in college they like to ask about guys because they know they'll get an accurate assessment. And they over time develop a sense of the guys who aren't going to be as accurate. In the case of Slonina vs. Brady, someone like Brady may end up having better long term potential but I think you need to give at least some weight to Chicago picking Slonina as their starter. They are with both guys every day and they decided that Slonina was the one they wanted to make the starter for the first team. Someone like Jaziel Orozco is a bit different because he was playing because of injuries.
I think U-17 team that just had such good results is a sample illustraiting your points. Very nice little U-17 team. Who are future MNTs? Maybe Kruz Medina and Kochen (although for keepers it's a crapshoot) who else? Are there higher potential players that aren't there? Any resemblence of strikers?
I don't mean to call Justin out here, but his tweet is kind of the reason I started this thread. Is this a common perception, that the USSF doesn't have many (enough?) people capable of high-level talent evaluation? Bello and Tolkin aren't the problem, the problem is that we don't have people at USSF who can evaluate talent at a high level.— Justin Moran (@kickswish) May 27, 2022
In my opinion, it's not that we don't have people who are capable of evaluating talent. It's more that we don't have a system where the people are evaluating talent enough. I think a big problem is that everything is done too by the book. The reasons a lot of people state that Gomez shouldn't be called up to the USMNT are that he hasn't played above USL/La Liga 2. Do I think Berhalter, Stewart, McBride are thinking the same thing? Yes, I think thats probably exactly their thinking. These guys are paid to make subjective decisions. They should be making judgment calls, should be deciding which exceptions to make, should be making hard choices. It should not be completely by the book. You don't want them going rogue and calling in all their favorite pet projects, but they need to be willing to make the hard decisions, and then have an assessment of their job be based on how they did with the hard decisions they make. Take Gomez out of the equation here. Do I agree with John Brooks being off the USMNT? No, but I don't know the reasoning. Berhalter made a bold call there that I can respect. If there's some good reasoning behind it, I can applaud the thought process. We need more of that. I want to see the NT get to the point where Berhalter assesses a player a lot of people think is good, and decide that he doesn't rate that player. It shouldn't all be by the book. I think this is also a problem with the YNT's. Too much input from outside sources on who to call up. The clubs should have very little influence on YNT selections. Playing time is important for selecting a team like the U-20's or U-23's, but you need to have people willing to make judgement calls. We need a coach that we trust to be making the hard decisions. They shouldn't be paid to go to transfermarkt, and call up the players with the highest market value from that website.
This leads me to another question. Take Gomez for example. How much is our scouting network (I'm assuming we have at least 1 scout in Spain, probably more?) ACTUALLY watching someone like Gomez play? Are they watching him in person? Film? Just talking to the Sociedad B coaching staff? These are the kinds of nuts and bolts questions that fascinate me.
I'm certain that someone on Berhalter's staff is watching Gomez. They spend a lot of their time just watching film of the players in our pool. It's unlikely anyone has gone to see him in person. And Gomez has been in a USMNT camp in the last six months, so it's not as if Berhalter isn't familiar with the player.
You're assuming US Soccer has "AT LEAST" 1 scout "in Spain"? A country where we have very few national team or youth national team players? How many scouts do you think the US has in Europe overall, if there's one just for Spain, a dozen with like three in Germany alone? I have no idea what the actual answer is but I'm assuming there are zero USSF scouts stationed in Spain... guessing maybe 1-2 3 max for all of Europe in terms of actually being over there (would love to be wrong on this).
I feel like alot of our Spanish relationships with clubs was handled through Nico Estevez, which makes sense given his connections. He was instrumental for instance in recruiting Musah. I imagine hat has not been replaced since he's left. I imagine Berhalter probably has alot more contacts in say Germany, where he played and has former teammates serving as sporting directors and what not. I'd be surprised if we had a ton of scouts in Europe but according to this we have 160 part time youth scouts domestically and internationally https://www.ussoccer.com/talent-identification.
Not saying it's outlandish, I just don't trust US Soccer to be spending their money on a bunch of scouts (makes too much sense) when they could be covering Crew stadium with "dos a cero" signage to jinx our team instead... That's good to know but I would imagine the vast vast majority are domestic (as it should be) and also I'm wondering how far the definition of "part time scout" may be getting stretched here... Beyond just general skepticism and cynicism, it would be nice to see another addition here: Talent ID Manager – Europe (eurosnob@ussoccer.org) Maybe not reasonable but even another one for Mexico or all of Latin America would also be nice... TALENT ID ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE TECHNICAL MYNT BOYS: Tony Lepore, Director of Talent ID (tlepore@ussoccer.org) Garrett Biller, Talent ID Manager – North (gbiller@ussoccer.org) Rob Irvine, Talent ID Manager – East (rirvine@ussoccer.org) Chris Kranjc, Talent ID Manager – South (ckranjc@ussoccer.org) Alex Zotinca, Talent ID Manager – West (azotinca@ussoccer.org) === Edit: YNT SCOUTING NETWORK: 160 Part-Time Scouts (domestic and international based) Assigned to scout local games, training sessions and events (in-person or video) Supervised by TID Managers based on scouting region So there's no "TID Manager to supervise based on scouting region" for whatever part-time scouts are based in Europe? Wonder how that works then, compared to the four US regions...
I'll call out Justin Moran. I don't think I've seen anything from him that makes me think he's at all qualified to make any judgements. Like, half the shit he posts makes me wonder if he knows anything about the sport. Also, the idea that Gomez is picking Mexico because someone was picked over him for a U17 team seems to be a pretty massive assumption here to begin with, even before we get onto any assumptions about people's relative ability to evaluate talent.
Why? Scouts aren't recruiters. And because we are limited to players of a certain nationality, it's not like the discovery aspect of a scout's job has any ROI in Europe -- someone may "find" an American here or there we don't know about but honestly, it's going to be easier to use FM or the internet to find them, and then send a contractor (i.e. part time scout) to watch them, plus wyscout plus tape from their club team, etc. And then one of the central staff or cross-checkers if the player looks good enough. I'm not even sure why this would even relate to Gomez, a kid who has been in US Camps and seen a ton of times. I don't even know if people can call this a failure, but it seems a giant leap to try and tie it to scouting. Before we even get into the idea that all these twitter heads definitively know who the better players are.
I think there are some serious questions to be asked now, I wasn't on board when this thread was made but after our u-20 game against Canada the flaws in roster selection have been made obvious, the back line is suspect, how did we only take 3 full backs forcing Cuevas to play out of position? No true number 9? We're on our way to missing the Olympics again with no sign that the federation is learning of it previous mistakes in roster selection ( and coaching) of the last Olympic team. And yes releases where an issue but if that was the case, why didn't the few u-20 camps we had focus on identifying players who would be available, Atlanta was never going to release anyone for this tournament. Failure of the USSF to plan ahead to something that was easily predictable.
When it comes to fullbacks that’s just a symptom of the roster limits. As for the lack of 9s, this age group is seriously lacking at the position other than Pepi.
I wouldn't go overboard yet, but the roster construction didn't make sense. Too many small dribble-y #10's. Why do we need Aaronson, Clark, Luna, and Tsakiris? For that matter, are we sure Tsakiris place on the team is 100% based on merit and not that his dad is an assistant? I'm not saying either isn't good (the son or coach), but I don't believe that it wasn't a factor. The lack of a 9 is an issue. Won't disagree with anyone about that. I find the lack of a 6 worse. Asking Pukstas and Alvarado to play as 6's is a waste of what they do well. Edelman cannot be your starting 6. He's not a true #6. As I said, I wouldn't go overboard yet. I expect we'll qualify, but I am not impressed by Varas.
Here is my take on the state of identification for the youth national teams. Bias is always going to be a part of any system so though we want to limit it to complain that it is there is folly. The ID camps are really good for finding the few players that aren't currently on an MLS academy team that just rise above and hopefully will soon be on an MLS Academy team. I would say their main purpose isn't actually identification but keeping very strong kids playing soccer and feel they are being noticed for all of their hard work. Especially, at the younger ages, these kids are seeing their friends and childhoods pass them by giving up a lot for soccer and their craft. Not everyone will be playing on the national team who has the ability to play pro or college. I am also a firm believer that you really cannot judge a 13-16yo as to what they will be doing at 18-22. The ID camps give these bubble players love and recognition. The sift from the DA to the MLS Academies. This very much tilted the power from the USYNT to the MLS. Too early to say if it is going to be good for the USYNT. It appears to be very good for the MLS. I think this shift has caused some issues with the way kids are promoted and pushed to the YNTs. Playing in Europe and being dual citizenship. I feel like this has become more important recently for who is called up at the youth levels and who the MLS is promoting. As with the top comment and MLS taking over the DA. The MLS is wanting to promote players that will make them money. If a player has the ability to dual citizenship they are more likely to be an easier sale for the MLS to foreign clubs. So, the players being promoted by the MLS teams to play in international competitions often have dual citizenship capabilities. Lastly, I would say overall we have very strong u18 and below teams. Where we have often failed is when they move to U20 and above. Another place we have really failed for decades is the selection of defenders. Might be one reason we have stronger goalies. But, for some reason, we have done a poor job promoting defenders. As for regional scouts. I am not sure it would be viable but would like to see scouts assess talent not in their regions. Send someone from the NE to the SE to see players. We do not have a pool of coaches even at the college level who aren't also closely tied into the youth club levels as well. That does lead to bias that can be easily removed.
I think people do need to remember that fact. Actually, this level does have potential impact players like Pepi, Paredes, Che, Slonina, and others. Not to mention Jonathan Gomez, should he commit. So when people say "We don't have a #9 at this level." Actually, we have a #9 at this level that recently transferred to the Bundesliga on a huge deal. Other than that, its a simple analysis. A U20 roster is one coach's selection from an increasingly large player pool. The proof will be in the pudding at the end of the day. Folks can go back and read the lamentations about roster selection in 2015, 2017, and 2019. We ended up holding the trophy at every one of those events. So what was all that consternation and whining about? How about we wait until AFTER the event to analyze our roster selection "failures?"