No, you imply it all the time. In fact, you go further than just that. You are probably the worst offender of this type of opinion on the whole website.
I dont really get where you're going with this. Ive never implied that Europe is better than MLS. Ligue 1 is better than MLS. PSG is one of the top clubs in the world. Are these not FACTS?Ligue 1 and PSG are relevant to this discussion because Weah plays there. I addressed what i meant about meaningful minutes. I dont understand why you're bent out of shape.
I'm not bent out of shape, but I don't have respect for the approach you used here. I responded to a part of what you said, and instead of coming back with a reply to what I questioned, you attempt to question my credibility for something very loosely related. Back to what the discussion was initially about. I think Carleton has gotten garbage minutes. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The issue here is that you tried to draw a distinction, but it makes little sense because Weah's situation is very similar in the minutes he's gotten and the competitions he's gotten them in. Weah started in a Cup competition when a number of the regulars were in the squad, as did Carleton. He started one league match, as did Carleton. I don't see how you are concluding that the minutes Weah has gotten are meaningful while Carleton's aren't (given the similarity in minutes), unless any minutes for PSG is meaningful and a similar situation in Atlanta is not meaningful. I get the main point of what you were trying to say. In a way, I agree. I'd like all our players to try their hand at Europe instead of MLS clubs that don't want to use them, but somehow Weah is being held up as this shining example of getting a lot of playing time. In reality, he isn't getting a lot of playing time. He's on the fringe of the first team. His situation is very different from when Pulisic broke in at Dortmund or McKennie at Schalke. I don't know why most don't understand this.
Ok. I really dont get how you came to these conclusions. Im not campaigning for Europe. If you feel your credibility was attacked..... well,that sounds like a personal problem. I addressed playing time and minutes in every post i replied to you in. Even though you were not the poster i originally was responding to. Just because you dont like my answer doesnt mean im avoiding your question. You simply dont like my point of view. I never tried to make a point that going to Europe is better. Im simply saying, Weah getting small amounts of minutes outweighs Carleton getting small amounts of minutes, currently. Its not just me who feels this way. Sarachan, apparently, feels the same way. It has nothing to do with Weah being a shining light for anything. Obviously those in US soccer came to a similar conclusion as me. They must have felt the limited time Weah was getting at PSG, outweighed the limited minutes Carleton was getting. This is evident by the fact that Weah got called up after very few minutes at PSG.
I will Weah in on this ... 1) We (the USMNT) are absolutely desperate for Weah to come good, but relatively indifferent to Carleton's progress. This is unfortunate, but true - certainly for this WC cycle. 2) If both players are still learning the game - and much of the game is learned by developing players in practice - then Weah is attending a much stronger school then Carleton. 3) MLS does not suck, but for structural reasons it cannot be trusted. In Europe, it is very likely that Weah will reach the level of success that he deserves - rising (and falling) according to the level his ambition, effort and abilities. In MLS, this cannot be fairly said, and Carleton is much more likely to find himself trapped and never reach his full potential. 4) I realize things are rarely this clear-cut, never this simple, but I see a stark contrast in their situations, and as a young, emerging soccer player I would much rather be in Weah's situation than Carleton's.
Some US fans really sour the discussion surrounding Weah. I've always said he had big potential. I've been saying that for longer than probably anyone on this website, but I don't think there's been an example in recent times of a US player being anointed while proving so little. Green might be the last example of this, and we are talking about around five years since that. Weah has played in the same team as Carleton for years, and he has never been the better player. He's actually been worse than a number of his teammates like Durkin, Sargent, Garces, Gloster, Lindsey, etc. Weah's best game in a US shirt, he was still worse in that game than Carleton. Weah had an anonymous U-17 WC, outside of one game. No less than 5-6 of his teammates were better than him. He was a back up in his age group 12 months ago. People who learned the kid's name 2-3 months ago are now anointing him. It just makes you look dumb. Pulisic proved himself all along the way. McKennie proved himself to a lesser extent, but way more than Weah (and actually got regular playing time). Look no further than a very similar situation being a shining light in one situation, and the other being the epitome of negativity. There is such extreme distortion used in discussion surrounding Weah. Slag off all others (without regarding the merit of the point), and anoint Weah. Thats the mode of operation from some. Its not all the fans. Sarachan does the situation no favors by calling in a player on the fringe of his first team to the USMNT (reminiscent of Green's call ups under Klinsmann), and a lot of it has to do with his pedigree (look no further than discussion surrounding Jon Klinsmann). I'd just suggest people really evaluate how they are discussing Weah. There is always the potential here for a Green situation or any number of situations where a player was anointed prematurely, and didn't amount to anything. I think Weah will amount to a very good player(and I've always said that), but its really an unfair situation where Weah is anointed before he's proven himself, and then if he ends up not proving himself, those who anointed him prematurely will start blaming him instead of their own crazy rhetoric.
No one is anointing Weah. If Weah stops playing soon (like now) he will likely be dropped out of the national team picture for a while. Its exciting to see young talent in general. Especially in our current circumstances It seems the comparison between Weah and Carleton triggered you in some form or fashion.The intent was never to bash Carleton. You seem to be going through great lengths to put Weah down. Weah wasnt worse than the players you mentioned. The coaches played the guys they wanted and Weah played behind guys who he could have probably started over. I guess you have faith in our coaches to make the right decision all the time. Or not pick the insider favorites. Of all people talking about crazy rhetoric...............
Green has done quite well for the National Team. Weah has gotten more minutes with PSG than Carleton has with Atlanta. The U-whatevers are irrelevant to a discussion of the players' respective senior level careers.
Green has 4 goals in 10 games. Using him as an example is alarming. He has been a sub a few times too. If Carleton and Weah roles were reversed id be saying the same things about Carleton.
weah works hard:according to reports, Dave likes what he brings and he can play on the wing. Id like someone playing more, but its not like he is awful or getting no time.
Would you like me to say you are making things up? That could replace the characterization of crazy because thats exactly what you are doing. You are inventing a situation that didn't occur, and denying any plausible alternative to what you said. I asked nicely for clarification, and then I explained nicely what didn't make sense about what you said, but you reacted harshly because you knew what you said was exposed. Weah has played less than Carleton. 180 vs. 143. Thats basic counting. What I will not do is sit back and let you make disingenuous argument after disingenuous argument that is completely unfair to both players you compared without saying something. Lets just be truthful about what you did. You were trying to paint one situation unbelievably positive and the other unbelievably negative. You were comparing them for a reason. You know it. I know it. We all know it. I'm merely saying (and I'll state it nicely again), what you are trying to say doesn't apply, unless you give such a lenient definition towards Weah. Of course, its a ridiculous argument, anyway. I got hounded by the mob here for claiming that Weah wouldn't play when the starters returned, and he didn't. I received no apologies for the verbal abuse thrown my way by those who couldn't control their emotions. What else should I consider it? Weah has played 264 first team minutes over the course of 15 matches since his debut. Please don't try to tell me thats some shining example of a great situation. It's not. The lengths some will go to here are incredible. Once they latch on, thats it. You can't reason with them about a player. Pulisic has missed 7 of the last 8 NT games. There are posters here who say he's bigger than the whole team. This is a player who is coming off a terribly unproductive season, but the rhetoric in his favor has been strengthened. No questioning his actions (or his play from last season). In a sense, Pulisic proved himself, so I can understand it to an extent. Weah? The kid has 264 first team minutes after a pretty average youth career and now you are slagging off others to compliment him. It is beyond premature, and is frankly embarrassing. Besides, you chose to say what you did. Don't try to place any blame on anyone other than yourself for the start of this discussion. You have no power to trigger me, but if that floats your boat, go ahead and believe that.
PLEASE don't consider me a part of this polemical debate, but here's the deal: NOBODY is arguing that PSG isn't one of the top clubs in the world, or that Ligue 1 isn't better than MLS. What most of us who argue tend to argue is that it's dubious that being on PSG's roster and training with PSG is in itself any better than actually playing elsewhere. Players in their late teens and early 20s need to PLAY, not simply train. I'm a backer of Weah (and the guy that you're arguing with is not, frankly), but I don't consider the tag "PSG" to be any kind of a substantial achievement until he's trusted with regular playing time there, and in fact I'd much rather he loan out elsewhere until such time as his coaching staff has such confidence in him. And there is another form of silliness that makes its way into this in here, the way that people tend to overly rate players (most particularly young players perceived to be somewhere on the cusp of playing time, but not actually getting it) by the prestige of the club and the club's league that they belong to. That's silly.
Speaking of disingenuous. How many people would've predicted Green would be an unproductive second division player (he's on his second season of this)? It wouldn't have been many. I already discussed this with you the other week, but a very SSS with the NT doesn't override what is a pretty mediocre club career so far. His career isn't over, but Green was crowned way too early. I don't know if you are taking cues from the guy above, but he was not truthful. Carleton has played more in his career and more in their current seasons than Weah. Lets start with getting some facts right before we go to any analysis.
You probably learned his name a couple of months ago. Its actually comical how some of you don't know anything about these players, and are bigger experts than anyone within a matter of months. I've been a fan of his play for years. Take a look at my posting history. Its very apparent. You should just stop now before you dig yourself too big of a hole. An out of control Sargent fan tried to do this not long ago either, and called me a hater of Sargent. The proof was there that I was the FIRST person on this website that was a fan of his game. What I am not is a cheerleader. I'm not going to paint the situation positively when he's not making the roster. If it means some (who don't have a clue what they are saying) say I'm not a backer, so be it.
I'm aware. His situation is terrible, and its probably already set his career back. It doesn't mean Weah (who has played less first team football) is a good example to the contrary. Why is that so hard to understand?
Weah has more Ligue 1 minutes that Carleton has of MLS. A poster was confused on the matter. You similarly whinged about EPB's lack of time. Now, he is under contract with Man City. Poor baby.
I thought I was in the Carleton thread for second. Hopefully, this all dies down soon enough... or escalates for all i care. I dont like the ignore feature (pretty sure I'm this guys list) as it can be hard to follow discussions. I usually skim past this guy posts but glad I caught this bit. I found it very amusing...
He's out on loan at NAC Breda, and hasn't seen the field yet this season. He wasn't able to take part in preseason at Breda because of registration issues (for all the Man City loanees). If this is the career path you have to take (the endless loan system where you are valued as a future transfer fee instead of a player), you are at a disadvantage. The difference between players like Palmer-Brown and Pulisic or McKennie is career-path. He got it wrong, they didn't. McKennie would be a back up right now if he started out at FC Dallas. Palmer-Brown's probably more talented than both of them. What he doesn't have is a decent club resume yet because he had less than 1500 first team pro minutes when he left for Europe at age 20.
I've read about two pages of this argument and I genuinely don't understand what your point is. Setting aside all these "how many minutes is someone getting" stuff - in sum, what is your general position? I know the internet makes it hard to tell, but I'm being quite genuine here. I'm curious, but I don't understand.
What @FeedhimtothepigsArold said here is silly. The discussion has went off into other things, but this was what I responded to, and I've yet to receive a real reply about. Weah is like the 20th or 21st player on the PSG depth chart. He has missed the 18 the last couple of games with their regulars available, like I unfortunately said he would. It is disingenuous to make the comparison that he tried to make. He's not wrong about Carleton, but to try to compare them, and characterize Weah's situation as "actually playing meaningful minutes, early in the season" is a reach, at best. If you are going to make that reach though, it doesn't really fit with the comparison, unless the reach only applies for players at PSG and not for players in MLS. Somehow I've yet to get an answer on that one, and I've asked a couple of times. It's an all around flawed comparison, regardless of how he meant it. I had no intention to go beyond just this point, but when you are going to impugn my motives and try to discredit me for asking a question, sometimes discussions go off-topic when thats the way they tried.