It seems as simple as Chelsea is reassessing their budget. CL qualification on the men's side is no given; they spent a lot of money on players who have failed to deliver on potential. Girma not starting is a non story imo. The Chelsea team is deep, talented and full of Internationals, as are the other teams you mentioned. Very few guaranteed starters on them. Look at Jenna Nighswonger. Went over there as a US International and has rarely played. It is a tough, competitive environment. Many of the best players in the game play on the teams listed. Imo Buchanan IS an old school cb. Girma much more of a finesse, passing, modern type. Kerr was a great player. In my opinion, she has way less leverage in the NWSL than she thinks she does. She is not American and does not have the resume Marta does. Too many demands will make teams just pass. Maybe I am missing something, but I dont think Corporate America is going gangbusters on Women's Soccer.
Sure, but she's also not known for her attacking side. She a DM/destroyer or defender. Yeah, she's been pushed up recently with Washington, but that's not where she traditionally plays.
Depends on what you mean by "gangbusters." On one hand, there is a lot of investment going in to women's soccer in the US in various ways. And it is clear there is currently a lot of financial grown in WoSo in the US - just look at the valuations of the NWSL teams. And there wouldn't be cities that want to have NWSL teams if there wasn't interest in investing. I'm also noting how Denver is building their own, women's specific stadium, and Boston is renovating a stadium for the Legacy. Stuff like that doesn't get done if there isn't interest. Now, is this the same as elsewhere? Not sure, and I think the best comparison would be to the WNBA, who is having some organic investment, but also needed to have some forced investment via the recent CBA. But there does seem to be increasing investment by those monied in WoSo in the US.
These 26 + Swanson, Cat, Biyendolo, Bugg, Rudd, Wiesner, McGlynn, and Jackson is probably extent of the real contenders atm. That's 34. Not that someone else could not enter the chat. Or Shrader, who should be there already on merit.
While I understand coaches want to argue calls or non-calls, at some point it becomes a distraction to your own team. I don't blame the ref there. Plus that call happened so fast, I'm not sure you can blame the ref for not seeing it. It seemed quick in slo-mo.
Absolutely. But, she does arrive late, and get open shots at the top of the box. And, when she does, she puts them over the bar. Same as Coffey, but Coffey puts them on frame.
The valuations appear rather artificial to me. Has the WNBA ever made money? I am yet to see what the "play" is for an exit at ever greater valuations? Feels like you need to find a specific type of "investor" who gets a payback from many others associations that Women's Sports can bring as opposed to just money. Liverpool ladies are FSG owned and I see no inkling of inestment from a company who is all about money. I beleive that has a lot to do with the way NWSL vs WSL teams are franchised and where they are. Time will tell I guess.
*Milbrett US Soccer actually recently did a feature on her highlighting how she was a scorer who came through in big moments (they did a weekly feature on lesser-known WNT stories in March for Women's History Month): https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/20...ry-month-1996-atlanta-olympics-fifa-world-cup
She played really well yesterday, took about half dozen shots with a lot of confidence behind them. Lily displayed excellent ball handling as she scooped up the ball quite frequently while it was still in the air. The assuming Heaps made up the third with fourth American born mid, Egurrola coming to sub later on. The dynamics of the game helped where a seriously undermanned Wolfsburg just bunkered its way throughout(they had the one goal lead coming into the game). And of course what helped out the Yanks was that double, triple espresso(or sixtripled) that Lyons got in its front line Arsenal vs Lyon in the semis should be interesting as while I think Lyon got the overall talent, Arsenal plays in the way morr competitive league
(Matsukubo & Tanikawa are insanely underrated; last season Matsukubo was 2nd in NWSL’s in combined goal/assist tally. An Lionel Messi type, Tanikawa can slice n dice her way through several defenders. Yet both got surprisingly small playing time at the recent Asian Cup. Meantime Hamano seemed to be their main focus of attack, yet she’s hasn’t been able to have a distinguished career at Chelsea & has been loaned out since. Their false #9, Ueki, only got one goal so far in the WSL, with West Ham club looking like they’ll be relegated. And oddly enough their leading scorer in the WSL(where thirteen of their NT’s play) Seike, got zero playing time in the AC final so their definitely a hard figure out, but that’s probably the way they want it! Expect the unexpected from them.
Only caught the highlights of both matches, but Lyonnes really seemed to change in the second match and play like a high speed train rather than a steam train they were in the first match. It seemed there was some combination of luck and underproming that prevented Lyonnes from putting in 5 or 6 v. Wolfsberg in the second leg. Regardless of the league, Lyonnes have probably the deepest, or second deepest attack in club WoSo, only beat by Barca. At peak, they are also probably behind Man City, and when fully healthy, Chelsea should be up there, and Washington should also be in that conversation. But, geez, Lyonnes has such an incredible strength in attack.
So, @blissett is this pretty much the entire A-team lineup? Anyone injured or missing? Also, what is the consensus opinion among fans regarding the coach not being re-hired (fired)?
No relevant missing name, apart maybe from Jun Endo (back from a long injury and still lacking playing time in her club) and Hina Sugita, who recently had a season-ending injury, but anyway hadn't been called for the Asian Cup. Many were thinking Nils Nielsen wasn't giving much to the team by a strategical point of view, but the timing of that change left us anyway quite puzzled. It's obvious that, if they weren't trusting him to have a good result at the World Cup, this was the last possible moment to change him, but we hope JFA know what they are doing and have a clear project for these months ahead leading to the next World Cup. Nils Nielsen's style of football was maybe unispiring, but anyway, if the goal was qualifying for the World Cup and winnng the continental championship, he basically had the job done. We are wondering if there weren't other reasons why JFA was unsatisfied (for instance not developing domestic players enough). We're going to see: these three games vs USA will be a big test (although they will be most probably played under an interim coach).
I'm wondering how much the standard that Hayes has set regarding developing young players within the national team set up is going to be the standard going forward. From what you have said, Japan should have a good youth squad, but are they not developing them at national team level (all age groups)?
I don't believe in significant development within a national team environment. Hayes has certainly given young players opportunities at the Full NT level, but I don't see those two things as the same. NT camps are usually very competitive, hierarchical and not places you go to learn things other than game plans and your role. Hard to develop young players without allowing them to try things and fail. The College game in the USA has been a great developer of talent. We will see the impact of players moving pro early and the coaches who love to "teach and develop" becoming rare, relative to those who are all about winning today.
Ugh, that is not what I said. I said "within the national team set up." Players need to be able to get to the national team (at all age groups), but Hayes has been very deliberate about aligning all age groups so that a player can move from the U17 to the U19 to the U23 to the senior team, or skipping one level or another, and not have to relearn things like tactics or process. But once on the national team, at any level, both Hayes and many players have said that she works with individuals on how they can improve "within the national team set up." That goes from moving up levels, getting to the senior team, getting a starting role, or becoming a star player. I did not say "developing players to get to the national team."
I want a couple of those on my team. Though I get she probably hurts the group dynamic. Still won the Olympics with her there. Assisted on the winning goal. Just saying that in terms of ON field considerations, she merits inclusion. But that is not, and should not be the only criterion. Therefore, I never rule her out completely. If she ever matures/gets her head out of her @$$, she could be back in consideration. Started for Lyon in CL with Heaps & Yohannes midweek.
I found the earlier Milbrett takes weird. 206 caps. 100 goals (7th). 64 assists (T5th). More goals? Akers 107, Morgan 123 , Lilly 130, Lloyd 134, Hamm 158, Wanbach 184. More assists? Wambach & Rapinoe 73, Lilly 106, Hamm 147. Goal contributions. 164. More? Morgan 176, Lloyd 198, Lilly 236, Wambach 257, Hamm 305. Everyone with more goal contributions also has more caps. Milbrett is easily an all-timer. HOF. Starter in '99 WC, and OLYM in '96 (scored in final), on OLYM '00 (2 goals in final loss), and was the starter at the '95 WC after Akers got hurt. Reserve on the 2003 WC team. Led team in goals at 1995 WC (tied), 1999 WC, 2000 OLY.
Yes. I thought that was who the bully comment was about. But I'd want that person bullying the OTHER team.