why hedjuk, stewart, armas, jones?? Why not let some younger guys who will/can make 2006 roster get the great experience of playing/watching a Mexico match, while having nothing really on the line (not a qualifier). Aren't these exactly the type of matches you want to have guys like Martino, Twellman, and maybe an overseas young guy or 2 etc. participate? (or a Ricardo Clark or Suarez?). Great introduction to real world qualifying.. Don't understand the logic at all of the older dudes who only by miracle will be there in 2006, and will likely only be off-the-bench guys (if that) by 2004...This match doesn't mean anything, but the ones later in the 4 year cycle will... Bruce is a good coach, but this is a weird move IMO
Because we have to qualify first. e.g. Stewart suddenly has not become a poor player but he could still be a factor in qualifying. Making the WC 2006 roster is a different story.
jri, you've been on these boards long enough to know 1 thing. the US hates Mexico (in futbol that is). bruce will never let the USMNT fall to Mexico, so he's going to field a team that knows how to play against their shitty-dirty futbol. and we'll win. plus, hejduk is on 28 -- so he'll still be of good age for the next world cup. think tony sanneh.
We have a serious talent problem if Stewart is playing for the Nats as of 2004....speed guys (who are 35 year olds playing a significant role.....please...he's on the downside of his career now..
And as for Armas, he's like Arena's golden child and was going to get called in as soon as he was fit again from his injury. Bruce wants to get him some time in international games since he also will be playing a role in qualifying (starter or sub).
But what's the point of having Bocanegra, Califf, Convey, Garcia, Klein, Mulrooney, Mastroeni, Beasley, Brown, and Howard (all guys with less than 20 caps) come in and play with a bunch of other guys with even less international experience? The point is to mix the kids into a team of veterans who know how it's done, so they get used to performing on a higher level than at their club, not to throw a whole group of 18 kids to the wolves together. 10 of the 18 guys on this roster have less than 20 caps. Just because two of those guys snuck into the World Cup with little experience doesn't mean they're battle hardened -- Mastro played in zero qualifiers, Beasley played a half in Trinidad after we'd already qualified. So, to me, it makes perfect sense that the 10 relatively fresh faces are mixed in with guys who have been around the block.
Hedjuk, IMO, is a very limited player who uses his speed to make up for his lack of skills in a lot of areas....he has no left foot, he mostly plays every ball with the inside of his right (even balls in which the play doesn't fit). He has 1 or 2 moves, and that's it....I think he can be a good MLS player for next 2-4 years, but on an international level, he worries me...his limitations are costly....Frankie loses even one step, and his "quality" will go down huge, IMO. Sanneh has aged better....first, he is much bigger, and can use his size at an advance age to hold off an opponent (not so reliant on speed)..he can lose a step and still be effective (although now back is obviously big questionmark)..he has skill problems like Hedjuk, but I don't think they are comparable, ergo, Hedjuk will not be as effective as an older player (would not be able to play at Sanneh's BL level at his age) "Just win against Mexico" I wanna just win when it counts...not necessarily now. I think this is opportunity lost for (some guys) who could become very important..
The "need experienced players to teach young'ins" doesn't fly (with me, at least)....You can field a team of Mathis, Donavon, Beasley, Mastro, Pope...all of whom have played in a WC (what greater experience can one really have?). Klein and Convey have played in some good environments for the Nats, and should be ready to take the mental step of being "veterans" for a match like this (again, this is NOT a qualifier)...So, in my mind, you can field 7 players at one time who should be solid in their mental make-up for the game. So, IMO, fielding 3 add'l field players who are relatively newbies (and most the names I've suggested, on roster currently, have had some introduction already)..doesn't seem to be a big stretch to me..in fact, this is a "next step" type of game for a lot of the young guys...they've played (Martino, Twellman) is some smaller, meaningless friendlies, and this is a perfect tweener game for them (higher intensity, more like a qualifier) without the risk....Don't know about you, but I want the young guys to "get used" to playing Mexico in games like this, and not first in a qualifier in Mexico City in which marbles are on the line... But that's just me I suppose (g). Bruce is a deity now because of 2002, so how dare we question such a fundamental thing (as roster makeup). After all, you don't ever see Germany, Brazil or France second-guessing their highly sucessful coaches gg
I see your point, jri, I just don't agree. When 10 out of 18 guys on a roster have less than 20 caps (9 of them with 13 or less), I'd say this is a team with an abundance of youth. And I don't think two WC starts for Beasley and three for Mastroeni makes them grizzled veterans.
is Twellman not on the roster for the Mexico game? I can't stand the guy when he plays for NE, but I swear he's going to be better than Donovan (and I don't mean that as a knock against Landon, more as a thought about how well Twellman has played as of late).
Maybe we could get Hristo Stoitchkov to transfer over and play for the USMNT. He's only 39 and I'm thinking this is the year that he really produces.
Maybe you didn't see how much better we played in Seattle AFTER Stewart came on the field. There is a lot of problematic thinking in this thread. First off we aren't looking at doing well at Germany 06. We ARE looking at doing well at the confed cup and in qualifying that will start in what 8 months? Bruce has said that he will *not* field an inexperienced team at the confed cup because they would get blown away. You know what is going to make the young players better? When they have to push themselves to beat out the established national team players. Its fine to say Hejduk is limited or Armas is going to be old, but its a completely different matter to say that we have someone better than them at what they do currently. Armas *is* a better defensive mid than Mastroeni and BA is going to use Armas to push Mastro into becoming better in those reguards (especially positionally and in recklessness). Again who can come onto the field and provide more leadership than Earnie can? Etc. Now is the time to figure out the Confed Cup roster. That is what this game is about. And let's not forget that this roster still has to be combined with Cherundolo, Eddie Lewis, JOB, Berhalter, Keller, Friedel and possibly Reyna to get a confed roster. And that is assuming that BA won't try to call in players like Conor Casey, Gibbs, Vanney, or Kirovski for a camp between now and then. It *is* about now. It *is* about earning your place. It is *not* about throwing out young and inexperienced players in mass and trying to see who floats and who sinks.
Personally, I'd rather see Jones get his ten gazillionth cap in a totally meaningless friendly against Mexico that's being staged as a test match of the Houston market than in a qualifier two years hence. The thing that's being ignored by certain posters is that each of these players is a role player who knows his role. Look at Stewart and Jones by the end of the World Cup--they weren't starters, they were guys who were brought in to affect the game in a certain way. They are team players who are willing to sacrifice. That's just as important as an example to the younger guys as anything else they bring to the table. I'm well-known for advancing the theory that Jones in particular should be fired out of the nearest cannon, but the man knows his role. And he fulfilled it admirably last year. If you've got a resource like that, you use it. Earnie Stewart is cut from the same cloth, and better still, knows how to raise his game at the critical moment. Plus he's here and available readily for the first time to give camp experience to the youngsters. I don't give a hoot if we're playing the Faroe Island All-Star Sheep-Shaggers XI, he should be a fixture in every Nats camp from here on out until the day they bury him.
Give me a break...what do you possibly learn by playing Jones, Stewart, etc. here and now....we all know what they do, and what they are capable of....how can playing them against Mexico help (for Confed Cup team?)....surely by now, Earnie/Cobi are plug n play players after all this time..you don't NEED to work them into a lineup.. "We will get blown away with..." Your statement (and Bruce, if he made it) runs somewhat counter to our WC experience, in which the newbies (Donavon, Beasley, Mastro, and even Mathis, etc.) had fine tourneys.. As far as Mastro/Armas....I saw Mastro totally own some pretty famous German attackers at the WC...he is a different type of player than Armas, but I have a difficult time seeing Armas going forward as a much better option..
Agreed. Armas may be a good defensive mid, but havent we progressed past the bunker in system where we needed a mid who basically played as a 5th back. Its time we had a good d-mid with attacking skills (something Armas lacks). I say try the new d-mid for the Metros (his name escapes me).
Right, but those were our very best newbies. The 8 guys on this roster with less caps than Beasley and Mastroeni are our next best newbies (plus a few of others... say Twellman, Martino, Buddle, etc.). How deep into our pool do you think we can go and still have newbies pull out "fine tourneys" against teams like Turkey, Brazil, and Cameroon?
JRI could be right about the mix of veterans and rookies. On the other hand, Bruce Arena could be right in that he thinks it will help the development of Beasley and Mastro to play with Stewart instaed of Kyle Martino against this particular opponent. P.S. Hejduk, despite his obvious flaws, is the best US right back at this time. Hejduk is easily the best right back in MLS at this time. At his age, he could still contribute in 3 years at the World Cup, much less when qualifiying starts in less than a year.
Oh yeah I forgot how Beasley, Donovan, Mastro, and Mathis didn't have much USMNT time before the World Cup. And the point isn't that no players go into games inexperienced its that you keep a good mix. Something you can't seem to grasp. Arena said that the system would be a "joke" if he didn't include Mastroeni on the WC team after how well he played for the NATS in the first half of 2002. Maybe you missed the Gold Cup. Maybe you didn't see Donovan play against Italy, Germany, Holland, or maybe a certain WCQ where we clinched our WC birth. Beasley only scored the game winning goal against Korea in the Gold Cup and had played in a WCQ away. Mathis? Are you questioning the experience of Clint who was argueably our best player in the first 3 games of the hex before getting injured? Are you questioning the experience of the player who put 2 past Germany or are you questioning the Clint Mathis who first played for the nats in 1998 a full 4 years before the World Cup? Why don't you just go make another post about Gibbs being the best thing since sliced bread WITHOUT ever having seen him play before? And BTW you can expect to see some new faces come confed cup time you just will see us bring our best team or close to it not our U23 team with Eddie Pope, Brad Friedel, and Brian McBride... Look what BA did in 99. He played players like Harkes, Dooley, Fraser, Wynalda, and Balboa. The team played well and built in confidense. It worked before why should he change the pattern now? And that was a team that needed to be completely rebuilt after the disaster of 98. The current team will have a core of at least 8 players off a WCQ team to build on. But there are also another 13 players from the team that are going to fight to keep their spot on the team until someone can prove they can do the job better.
Armas is going to look slow (and likely get beat in important situations) vs. Brazil, Turkey, etc. I am not near as confident as some here about Stewart against higher quality competition...even a 1/2 step loss (and he is at that age) means big problems... We need to upgrade our skill over the guys who have just got it done in past...the young guys need to get put in positions that are more qualifier realistic or they will not grow at potential Nats permanents... I don't think Hedjuk is a better option than Cherundolo at the moment....I think he is on a downward slope (in career) too..although he will likely plateau at a good MLS level for a while...(still remembering Euro-trained tricks)...I hope to goodness he's NOT our best option in 2-3 years...that would scary, IMO (Garcia/Suarez should be better by then). Something SERIOUSLY wrong if Cherundolo is not..
Eliezar....it a FRIENDLY....a FRIENDLY...that means it is a relatively MEANINGLESS game... I thought the overriding priorities in US soccer was to (1) do well in 2006 Cup/qualifying and (2) everything else a far-away 2nd... Bruce HAD to go with the guys you mentioned in 1999...there were truly little/no alternatives (upgrade in skill, etc.....Beasley, Donavon, Mastro were just not there yet). If I recall, though, Bruce did bring in a few MLS guys for the Mexico tourney- kindof one shot deals. However, mostly, it is different this time around....Martino is already (IMO) as skilled as Earnie, he just hasn't had the experience...that's what friendlies are all about... the Confed Cup is one of those nice little tourneys that won't mean anything years from now....kindof like Canada winning Gold Cup a few years back....who cares, was irrelevant... The Gibbs thing is really tired and old, doncha think? Stay on theme..