Why doesn't the U.S. produce star players?

Sure they can, just not in the USA. Because we've had plenty of guys more athletic than most of the last 10 World Player of the Years and Donovan is the only one who has turned out anything above mediocre. Look at Marvell Wynne, just a hair behind Reggie Bush in high school in the 100 meters. Deion Branch? Ochocinco? These guys were nowhere near on a path to become world stars when they quit the sport in High School.

It's the coaching. We don't do it enough of it and what we do coach is of suspect utility. And the coaching problems extend from the time they are 5 until the time they are 35.

 

He really isnt mate. He has poor poor decision making, and if he didnt have his electric pace he would not be playing in any of the top divisions. So many times ive seen this guy make the wrong choice or put in a laughable cross. He is decent, but I would class guys like Adam Johnson Aaron Lennon Ashley Young above him, guys who should be ahead of him for England

He is a decent finisher though, but for me too injury prone and inconsistent

 

This is just what i'm trying to say here. U.S. doesn't produce star players cus all the quick, reflexive, and coordinated athletes turn to other more popular American sports. I'm not saying every football or every basketball player would be a perfect soccer player, and i know a lot of specific football players sucked at soccer in highschool, but what about the millions of others that sided with football that had potential to be soccer players.

 

They all would have developed the same way the players who did stick with soccer in this country developed.

Ask yourself this, watching the US play a country like Spain which areas does it look like the US is lagging further behind in: size and speed or soccer specific skills like passing, shooting and dribbling? If it's the latter, what good will more of the same big and fast guys that currently aren't cutting it do?

U.S. Soccer gets to keep plenty of good athletes, that's the benefit of being a country with 300 million people. It just doesn't do nearly enough with them to make them great players.

 

Bingo! I would think we get to keep more great athletes in Soccer than 90% of the top world Soccer powerhouses just from the nature of growing up in the U.S. with sports and fitness being a huge focus and business here. Granted, we do have the fattest population but we also probably have more people involved in athletics and fitness than any other country.

 

Yep. It is weird because basically if your are dedicated and have talent you can play pretty much any sport in this country, i.e there are good coaches available. Not so much for soccer which is sad. It should not be as hard as it is quite honestly.

 

I agree with the general premise of your post (that lack of good coaching is keeping the U.S. from performing better). I just don't accept that as the only reason the U.S. is not performing better on the world stage. All other things being equal, I would choose a bigger, stronger, faster kid over a smaller, weaker, slower kid.

custar

 

If you're uncoordinated you can't play sports competitively. As for unathletic, here's one: Riquelme. And I don't see the USA producing a talent like this in the next 20 years at least.

 

So you are saying Riquelme is unathletic? i guess you don't really know what unathletic is. He had an insane amount of coordination and reflexes... pretty much the necessities of an athlete.

I'm not saying that all the US needs are tall and fast players. We need quick and highly coordinated players as well. These are the basic components of spain's star players that soccer rarely gets in the country. What don't you get about the fact that soccer doesn't get the athletic talent that other sports get and that is the reason we aren't producing big-named stars.

It's time to stop using the "bad coaching" argument as well because our coaching is improving every year and we are importing many European coaches as well. That is an outdated argument. Besides, many great players from other countries started out playing on their streets with no coaching whatsoever until their later years. In America we have people coaching kids starting at like 6 years old. Granted the coaches aren't great, atleast they are teaching them the roots.

 

And therein lies the reason why so many people say that the problem is too much coaching, whether it be good coaching or bad coaching.

 

Actually, that really is not the problem those kids in other countries are getting the coaching if they are lucky enough and are "playing in the streets". In the states that does not happen enough.

 

Piggybacking on the discussion in the "Black people don't play soccer?" thread... part of the problem is the mentality that people in the US have towards soccer, that it has to be this structured, organized and planned activity. In their minds people instinctively think that soccer has to be a) played in a large space; b) played in a large space covered with grass. In reality that's not the case.

I moved to the US in my teens, but growing up the only "planning" necessary was at least one other friend knocking on my door or calling my name for me to come out. The only space necessary was the street right in front my home, which fortunately ended in a cul-de-sac, and which doubled as our basketball court and cricket 'pitch'. Our goals were two rocks, two cans, shirts... anything. We just paced out four steps between the "posts" and played w/o a goalkeeper... what we in TnT unimaginatively called "smallgoal". At my middle school the tennis court doubled as our football pitch, the nets were taken down and that was that.

This is still done in small pockets here in the states... in Brooklyn you can go to Medgar Evers College on any given Sunday around 9 am, go around back to the basketball courts on Lincoln Place and get in on a pick up game with the local rastas and other free spirits, and while you won't see too many freestyle tricks, you're guaranteed to get a laugh or two out of the older heads trying to revisit their youth.

 

Yes, Riquelme is unathletic but he has an exquisite first touch and can kick the ball, dead or spinning, like few others can. A player like him would school any American superstars in soccer, no matter how elite an athlete. LeBron, Howard or any other ghetto brother wouldn't know what hit them.

 

Meh. In European and South American countries, the best players are put into formal soccer as soon at their talent is spotted. It's just a romanticized myth of poor kids playing pickup on the streets and doing better than their coached counterparts.


For example, the first time Messi played soccer was in an organized game...check out the interview with his coach on youtube.

 

I agree, it's a myth. I try and dissect everything with possible reasons.
Are players who played a lot of street Soccer great because they played in the street and in those types of games or is it because they grew up in a country that loves their Soccer, their athletic heroes are Soccer players, their dads and uncles play and teach them Soccer from birth, their entertainment is Soccer, their society makes a big deal about playing Soccer, dancing, art with flair, etc.?
Did the street Soccer simply suffice as an alternative to a possible better training situation like organized scientific training?
The street stuff always makes for a better story, like when Rocky went to train in Russia and had nothing but some logs, axes and rope while Drago was being pumped with steroids and using all sorts of bad "state of the art" (meh) equipment. Guess who won?

 

"Street soccer" is a a metaphor for culture.

The best American soccer players..well played soccer a lot growing up in and out of structured environments. That is what I am saying.

 

Most people would picture an unlined patch of dirt or area of grass or concrete area with cans used as goals as "street soccer" with a wide age and skill level variety playing with very few, if any, rules.
Street soccer is fun stuff, my boys play a form all the time. What I'm saying, is IT may not be the reason a player turned out to be a great player. Maybe he enjoyed playing street soccer because he was destined to be a great player given all the other right ingredients that surrounded him.

 

If there was a bigger, faster, stronger kid with all the same skills available, I would pick . . . well, I will save my choice for just a bit. It is only fair to ask which you would pick.

I don't know that you understand the point. Other than Riquelme who has been discussed above, which one of those you listed is slow? Or is easily pushed off the ball? Or doesn't have the stamina to play a full 90 on a regular basis? For that matter, which of those you listed would not be better if he had more speed, more strength, was quicker, or was taller? Athleticism and soccer ability are not mutually exclusive. If you start with a better athlete who has skills that can be used in soccer and then develop him/her into a soccer player, you will have a better soccer player. Athleticism complements soccer ability and vice versa.

Now for my choice. If a Messi, Maradona, Sneijder, or Scholes, etc. was available and a kid with all the same skills but who was bigger, stronger, and faster was also available, I would pick both.

custar

 

This is the answer, and on top of that, they grew up in a culture that has serious respect for players of flair and technique. Also these players are the type of kids that will spend hours every day practicing and honing their technique since they were very little the same way a talented musician would.

 

Yeah, a 22 men team on the pitch, would sure knock everyone else with ease....


When you have to choose between one or the other it is because you can`t have them both, otherwise it wouldn`t be a "choice".

Manuel Francisco dos Santos (Brazil, 1933-1983), otherwise known as Garrincha.

The man had one leg 2.5 inches shorter than the other one, both feet turned to the inside, and suffered from a twisted back bone as a result from polio at younger age, which made him look so strange and ugly, reasons why he got his nickname by one of his brothers who named him like that (Garrincha = an ugly bird from the Matto Grosso jungle), but that was no problem for him to become the world class soccer player he afterwards became, being decisive for Brazil, in their first two WC championships.

 

Correct, and almost all great players have begun in unstructured environments. It is only after a certain age (15+) where organization and tactical coaching yields benefits.

Street soccer is actually the reason a player turns out to be great, it is where the ones who love the game play it unfettered and learn its essence. The fitness and tactical aspect only are relevant after a certain age, years after the player has learned the game by simply playing it.

 

This guy played over 50 years ago. I meant modern day players, not someone who wouldn't even make it in today's sport.

 

You're right. I shouldn't have said too much coaching. What I should have said is not enough opportunities for unstructured play in which they're learning how to think and act for themselves instead of just doing what adults tell them to. Not enough becoming familiar and comfortable with the ball in casual situations (like two 10-year-old baseball players playing catch in the back yard).