Okay, I haven't had a take yet, so here goes: I thought the game was great, the team played great... Horan POM. I thought Morgan played really well, I thought the forwards overall gave the lie to recent criticisms that they don't come back to help the defense. If anybody wants to rewatch the game you will, if you pay attention, see that each of them did exactly that any time it was called for. I felt like some of the young ones are playing their way in on schedule-- Smith, Macario, Pugh-- and that Kreuger, for all that she frustrates me several times a game, is hugely improved; each time out seems like a new best game from her to me. Franch-- a little PT can work wonders; she's really taking charge, no longer tentative about telling people where to go and what to do. And I feel that I can see exactly what Andonovski's building towards offensively and it is going to be impressive. Lightning building up from unexpected angles all over the place. Has anybody ever won three cups in a row? We tied a decent and well coached team 0-0. So what. It ain't that other football, it happens. We looked good doing it, and that's what counts to me. Signs of progress all over.
Absolutely. Absolutely. But the promoters of celebration games are entitled to sell the old stars, too... "Thou shalt not bind the mouths of the oxen that grind the grain."
I'm with you. IMO, it was a good match, and the US played well (with some poor finishing but also some excellent SK goalkeeping). I don't think you're a minority of 1; you might not even be a part of a minority at all. There's just a very vocal group that complain about the play and the coach regardless of who we play or what the score was. In addition to Rapinoe and Morgan, like I said earlier, I'd add O'Hara...but I probably am in the minority there. (I'd add that I don't think Morgan in particular needs to be off the roster; she still has a lot to offer. I just don't think she should be the presumed starter in every match.) I haven't seen the actual current CBA (and I don't think anyone here has), but I have seen multiple reports from reputable reporters that the limits on player selection and such no longer exist in the current CBA. A coach can call in whoever s/he wants, contracted or not. Plus, the number of contracted players has dropped each year. The problem, as I have said, is the concern that if a player is contracted, it financially makes sense to continue to call in the player that USSF is already paying rather than paying both that contracted player (who doesn't come into camp) plus another call-in. It seems that no matter how many times though that I point this out, some posters continue to make the same arguments. Yes, there are problems with the CBA (and there will be a new one at the end of this year/beginning of next year), but it is not what it used to be.
Agreed on Horan. She played so well. Smith and Pugh both were great sparks off the bench. Macario though, while showing great potential, didn't play that well in this match, IMO. But, every player has off matches.
I don't know if the full language of the 2017-2021 contract was publicized, but we do have the full language of most (maybe all?) of the pre 2017 contracts. Those contracts explicitly limited how often non-union players could be called up. Immediately before the 2017 agreement, USSOCCER could only call up non-union players for 25 days per year (not just game days, but actual days in camp or otherwise being paid for participating in USWNT activities). I don't think there was a max on how many players USSOCCER could put on the full contract. Theoretically if a player reached the 25-day mark and USSOCCER really wanted them, they could bring that player into the contract and start paying that player the full salary and benefits. Of course USSOCCER has limited money and can't do that for an unlimited number of players. Kelly O'hara actually talked about this on her podcast with Alyssa Naeher. There's no real inside baseball on how the contract works, just an acknowledgement that early in her career Naeher got screwed by the contract (specifically the 25-day rule). *Disclaimer, the O'hara podcast generally sucks, and her talk with Naeher didn't really give any info/opinions on the USWNT's Olympic failure, which is what I was hoping for.
only problem with your scenario is that in his first outing, Vlatko wasn’t a very good ‘major tournament’ coach. He’s actually better coaching friendlies, but that’s because the US has advantage due to playing 20+ games an year, giving them a certain chemistry more reserved for club teams. Our Olympics games were awkwardly paced, hampered by Vlatko’s decision to switch to a more deliberate style than the usual quick, direct attacks that we’re previously used to. But no matter who coached, bronze medal was justified for an program that refusing to bring in newer, younger talent to mix with our veterans. but the $250K per year plus bonus & endorsement deals is an way bigger offer than the ridiculous $50K salary cap from the so called pro league, NWSL. It’s in part why so many veterans keep playing—-as compared to other countries who’s many of their best tend to retire earlier due to not making enough. the only drawback is now some of those vets don’t want to retire even though their way past their prime
I was good with much of your post up until this. This board is rarely even moderated. Even the mods aren't active users anymore.
Still find it alarming that we accept that women in their mid 30s are the best players in the world. If they are, it says a lot about our development model and if they are not, then it says a lot about our selection criteria. Both issues are rarely addressed. In essence we are saying that the USA with all its resources should be satisfied with at tie vs South Korea. If you view the game in isolation, maybe, but for al the resources at our disposal, that is a very low bar. We should be playing attractive soccer and beating these teams comfortably. If its a simple as COlin Bell making them hard to beat, then again, the bar is pretty low. The young players you see getting opportunities now have been around for long enough for us to know by now. They have all been part of USSF programming for a very long time. What more do we need to know about Pugh before deciding if she is a starter at this level or not. There are other examples as well. How good/transparent can a player ID system be if we give the greater weight to closed camps than the NWSL. How do you earn a chance to play International soccer for the USA?
Beating Pugh in the NWSL might be a good place to start. There hasn't been so much of that happening as there used to, lately. Players, both genders, all sports, as a general rule get better till around age 32. If you are one of the best in the world at 32, you are still going to be pretty damn good at 35 if you stay healthy. Declines are not normally all that abrupt, although the endurance aspect of soccer affects the situation some, where it doesn't much in baseball or ice hockey. Still it is not obvious to me that Carli Lloyd was not better last year than in 2015. I assume she was not, but there wasn't a lot of visual evidence for that assumption... So, what more do we need to know about Pugh? Whether she has reached her peak-- or even her prime-- would seem to matter a lot?
Barring further injuries, Pugh will be on the team for the next 10 years. If USSoccer was going to pass her by they would have called Rodman or someone else up for the Korea games. Pugh has already been to two major tournaments. She would have been to a third, but injuries allowed Andonovski to call an audible and bring Macario onto the team. For better or worse Pugh will probably get USWNT callups as long as she wants.
So today is Carly Lloyd’s final/ last game, expect a lot of the passes heading her way to get her on the scoreboard one more time They usually threaten posters via e-mail, this USWNT category might have an easy going mod, but the next one(let’s say NWSL) might not. There’s 7 sub categories on women’s soccer, all with different mods, some of them tend to be heavy into political correctness—-extreme, Bernie Bro types. sometimes vets can do better as they start learning every trick in the book as soccer can become very cynical in an pro’s career Rapinoe’s 6 goals in 636 minutes in the NWSL is an better per minutes average than any of the current top ten goal scorers(lead scorer Ashley Hatch, age 26, has 10 goals in 1375 mins.). as much as Rose Lavelle obviously well liked & in her prime(age 26), her stats are shockingly bad in the NWSL; in 835 minutes, she’s got zero assists & just one goal, and that’s from over 30 shots that she’s taken our 2020 u20 squad was quite strong at Concacaf, beating opponents like Mexico & Canada by 3-4 goals, winning the semis 6-0. This squad featured names like Pinto, Garma, Fishel, Rodman. In comparison our 2018 squad didn’t look too good; lost the Concacaf final/couldn’t get out of group play at the u20 WC, and that had current NWSL strong players like Sanchez, Davidson & Sophie Smith(so just saying, an new golden age could be emerging) what I don’t why the USWNT frowns upon using college players? I mean it’s been our bread & butter/thanks to TITLE XI soccer is the 2nd highest female participation sport in college(track & field is #1). There’s now over 420K in high school/over 100k in the elite/select level. Some big name countries; France’s leafing goal scorer is an 22 year old named Katoto/arguably Germany’s best is an 20 year old, Klara Buhl/Holland’s Viv Miedema been their leading scorer since the ripe old age of 17. Canada’s Rivière & Grotto(U of Texas & Michigan) won the PK shootout for Olympic gold/Florida U’s Rose got the PK foul which ended up dooming us. So all though obvious of varying quality, we still got 39K playing college ball. But maybe out of 9K of graduating seniors, less than 1% will even try to even play pro ball & that’s cause of the ridiculous low pay of the NWSL(min pay $20K/max capped at $50K). So I bet a lot of potential gets waisted
Maybe after today's match Vlatko will finally drop all if not most of the over 30s. Some are still performing decently but they have already reached their ultimate ceiling so they will just be waning down from now on. Integrate younger players now and by WWC23, they will be ready to defend the title.
the advance billing was a once in a generation player. She is not that Maybe, but player development will dictate the quality of replacements. This fallacy that College is producing these amazing players is just that. Is the NWSL the place? If it is, it starts pretty late and is hard to do when you play games every week. It ifs NT camps, then let hope they get the selections right.
As much as i enjoy watching the NWSL I am unsure if it is really a good development environment. The play in most matches seems slow and VERY conservative. It often seems like teams in the NWSL believe that possession is the key to winning so they give up opportunities to attack to retain possession. I have not seen so many useless back passes since I watched a training session where the only goal was possession. (They were simply playing keep-away.) A lot of the NWSL matches look a lot like that session. In the limited watching I have done of other women's leagues I do not see so much meaningless possession although the quality of the individual players does seem higher in the NWSL overall. It was, in the past, that the pro league(s) in the US were better for development than any place overseas but, now, it appears, that other leagues, in spite of their issues, are better or at least as good. Here in the US we still suffer from poor development in both high school and college. The different stupid rules that college insists on hamper development and the extremely short college schedule means that real development is lost unless the players play elsewhere as well and there are regulations that make that hard for college players. A good time ago Tony DiCicco said that there was a dearth of soccer development between U14 (Players starting HS) and U23 or so due to players stagnating in college. In the past we were the best because we were close to the only country that provided any development at all for women and girls. That is no longer the case and unless we keep players from being ruined or at least not developed by the high school and college experience we will lose our exalted status. If we have not already lost it and the world is just waiting for the superior development to have the expected effect.
College players I am not familiar at all except I heard about this Kelsey Turnbow that apparently plays like Miedema... Just being compared to the latter is already enough impetus to be given a chance honestly. I mean USWNT does not have a legit striker right now so. As far as the NWSL is concerned there are countless younger players that should or can be given a chance or two. If USWNT wishes to stay on top then they need to start finding a Morgan, Rapinoe, O'hara, Heath (to name a few) replacement now particularly if they want to defend their WC title.
What system produced the players who you think need replacing? Logic would assume the system still exists, but that the players coming out of it are not good enough or have other employment options that make soccer less attractive.
Unfortunately the "system" that "produced" top US players did not really "produce" them. They developed their skills in spite of not because of the "system." College and High School do not cause players to improve but those that do improve do so because they found ways to get better without any real help from their environment. But many people think that our HS/College system is actually producing players while what is happening is that some players develop without help from the system. Look at what is happening with the MLS. Play in the MLS and the USMNT is getting better because the MLS finally realized that they needed a system that avoided college and developed it so that players are in a place that encourages development. The MLS is mostly getting it right while the NWSL is getting it wrong by depending on college to do what they are not good at. We, here in the US, are locked in a system where people believe college is for everyone so even those that will never do anything with any knowledge learned in college are encouraged to go to college so what actually happens is that people are delayed four years or more from entering the work force. That also means that most good soccer player stagnate for four years. Unless we find a way to keep development going for the lost HS and college years we will slowly slip in international play until we become ordinary. We will, probably, never slip out of the top ten or so but we will no longer be the dominate team that those of us that have followed the USWNT from pretty much the start have become used to. Yes other teams are improving and we are not but the reasons for the US not getting better needs to be addressed just to allow the USWNT to hold their position at or near the top.
3 of Rapinoe's 6 goals (50%) were on PKs. Kinda important, no? So in the run of play, Rapinoe has 3 goals in 636 minutes, or one in 212 minutes. Hatch (I'm assuming none of her goals were from PKs) is scoring, from the run of play, one in 137.5 minutes * The problem with Rapinoe isn't even the production per minute (or per 90 minutes); it's her inability to put in the minutes. When she's out there, Rapinoe can still be very dangerous on the attack; the problem is you just can't count on her being out there for very long and you have to wonder how much you're sacrificing on the defense in order to get those minutes. * Both of Rapinoe's goals on 8/21 came from the spot. Her goal on 10/13 against Portland came on a PK after Angela Salem was called for a handball.
Emily Sonnet being on this team or any USA full team will always baffle me. There are 6 or more usa women better than her that cannot even sniff the roster.
BTW, is anybody else bemused by the opinion pendulum here? When we beat somebody 8-0, well, we shouldn't be playing such bad teams-- but when a decent team holds us to a scoreless tie, well, something's wrong, we should be good enough to beat most anybody 8-0 every time...