USMNT vs Curacao

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess the firing will have to wait until after the final against Mexico.

Yep, beating a team, which is outside the top 50 in the world, is enough to retain the job. The bar has been set pretty low.

Better than the disgrace we saw last WC cycle

All the USMNT has to do is be the 3rd best team in CONCACAF and they can qualify for the World Cup forever. And then all they have to do is get out of the group stage and people will say, "we're getting better."

That's what USSF is betting on with their mediocre coach and their mediocre player development system. As long as it keeps filling seats for their mediocre league (MLS) so the owners can keep making money.

It's programmed mediocrity. And for those of us who think it's possible to shoot for excellence, it's frustrating.

So stop the whining, and offer solutions. What would you do?

Open up the system and create competition to MLS through promotion/relegation. Then the place in the top division would have to be earned on the field and people would start investing more in soccer. The top talent will rise and mediocrity would be relegated to lower divisions where it belongs.

Something realistic. Pro/rel isn't going to happen.

It is the only solution. We have a monopoly, the rest of the world has free market.

This makes no sense. We don't want out best players going to MLS anyway, we want them going overseas.
Anything that would make our players want to stay in the US is a bad thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess the firing will have to wait until after the final against Mexico.

Yep, beating a team, which is outside the top 50 in the world, is enough to retain the job. The bar has been set pretty low.

Better than the disgrace we saw last WC cycle

All the USMNT has to do is be the 3rd best team in CONCACAF and they can qualify for the World Cup forever. And then all they have to do is get out of the group stage and people will say, "we're getting better."

That's what USSF is betting on with their mediocre coach and their mediocre player development system. As long as it keeps filling seats for their mediocre league (MLS) so the owners can keep making money.

It's programmed mediocrity. And for those of us who think it's possible to shoot for excellence, it's frustrating.

So stop the whining, and offer solutions. What would you do?

Open up the system and create competition to MLS through promotion/relegation. Then the place in the top division would have to be earned on the field and people would start investing more in soccer. The top talent will rise and mediocrity would be relegated to lower divisions where it belongs.

Something realistic. Pro/rel isn't going to happen.

It is the only solution. We have a monopoly, the rest of the world has free market.

This makes no sense. We don't want out best players going to MLS anyway, we want them going overseas.
Anything that would make our players want to stay in the US is a bad thing.

It the same system that Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Belgium, the Netherlands and many other countries have. It does not stop their best players from going to big leagues in Europe. Clubs compete against each other and have to invest seriously in youth development. Once they develop players, they integrate them to their first teams and then sell to bigger clubs in bigger leagues at a profit. If MLS improves, it is a good thing, but it won't improve significantly with its current structure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess the firing will have to wait until after the final against Mexico.

Yep, beating a team, which is outside the top 50 in the world, is enough to retain the job. The bar has been set pretty low.

Better than the disgrace we saw last WC cycle

All the USMNT has to do is be the 3rd best team in CONCACAF and they can qualify for the World Cup forever. And then all they have to do is get out of the group stage and people will say, "we're getting better."

That's what USSF is betting on with their mediocre coach and their mediocre player development system. As long as it keeps filling seats for their mediocre league (MLS) so the owners can keep making money.

It's programmed mediocrity. And for those of us who think it's possible to shoot for excellence, it's frustrating.

So stop the whining, and offer solutions. What would you do?

Open up the system and create competition to MLS through promotion/relegation. Then the place in the top division would have to be earned on the field and people would start investing more in soccer. The top talent will rise and mediocrity would be relegated to lower divisions where it belongs.

Something realistic. Pro/rel isn't going to happen.

It is the only solution. We have a monopoly, the rest of the world has free market.

This makes no sense. We don't want out best players going to MLS anyway, we want them going overseas.
Anything that would make our players want to stay in the US is a bad thing.

It the same system that Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Belgium, the Netherlands and many other countries have. It does not stop their best players from going to big leagues in Europe. Clubs compete against each other and have to invest seriously in youth development. Once they develop players, they integrate them to their first teams and then sell to bigger clubs in bigger leagues at a profit. If MLS improves, it is a good thing, but it won't improve significantly with its current structure.

There's really only one solution, and that's it: To use the proven route to success other countries have taken with open systems. If you say that's not realistic, you're saying that the current power structure in USSoccer/MLS is too strong to break and we are doomed to mediocrity forever.

If that's the case, I would advise any good American players to break free as soon as they can. Go to Europe, Mexico or South America to develop. If you're a dual citizen, declare for the other NT. Let the rotten USSF/MLS structure rot until it falls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL maybe the problem is very simple: Americans suck at soccer.

I hate Chelsea, but this comment makes me wish Pulisic becomes the new Hazard and leads them to a Premier League win next year...

Dream on. He did not even make it to the bench for Chelsea CL's game this week.
Will he still be selected in the USMNT if he only play in the FA and League cup games?

[Anonymous]

I wish he were at a less prestigious team that still competes at a high level. A Leicester under Brendan Rogers, Crystal Palace etc would be a better fit. Dempsey seemed to do just fine with his career at Fulham.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish he were at a less prestigious team that still competes at a high level. A Leicester under Brendan Rogers, Crystal Palace etc would be a better fit. Dempsey seemed to do just fine with his career at Fulham.

Agreed. But I am not sure he is the player that Dempsey was. He was absolutely second rate in all of his Chelsea appearances, constantly out of position. That attack improved significantly when he was benched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish he were at a less prestigious team that still competes at a high level. A Leicester under Brendan Rogers, Crystal Palace etc would be a better fit. Dempsey seemed to do just fine with his career at Fulham.

Agreed. But I am not sure he is the player that Dempsey was. He was absolutely second rate in all of his Chelsea appearances, constantly out of position. That attack improved significantly when he was benched.

It was a mistake to pick Chelsea. Chelsea has a long history of benching good players: De Bruyne, Sheva, Torres, Higuain, Morata, Pato, Falcao, Deco, Cuadrado, etc. And Lampard is a mediocre manager, whose team is currently in the seventh place in the EPL. There's no way that Leicester and West Ham should be higher than Chelsea in the table based on the talent level of the squad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish he were at a less prestigious team that still competes at a high level. A Leicester under Brendan Rogers, Crystal Palace etc would be a better fit. Dempsey seemed to do just fine with his career at Fulham.

Agreed. But I am not sure he is the player that Dempsey was. He was absolutely second rate in all of his Chelsea appearances, constantly out of position. That attack improved significantly when he was benched.

It was a mistake to pick Chelsea. Chelsea has a long history of benching good players: De Bruyne, Sheva, Torres, Higuain, Morata, Pato, Falcao, Deco, Cuadrado, etc. And Lampard is a mediocre manager, whose team is currently in the seventh place in the EPL. There's no way that Leicester and West Ham should be higher than Chelsea in the table based on the talent level of the squad.

All true but I am not sure he had much choice in the matter.

[Anonymous]

It seems he might have been signed for Sarri, or his price was inflated by the incoming transfer ban.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish he were at a less prestigious team that still competes at a high level. A Leicester under Brendan Rogers, Crystal Palace etc would be a better fit. Dempsey seemed to do just fine with his career at Fulham.

Agreed. But I am not sure he is the player that Dempsey was. He was absolutely second rate in all of his Chelsea appearances, constantly out of position. That attack improved significantly when he was benched.

Pulisic just turned 21 a few weeks ago. At that age, all Dempsey had really done was play in college. He might have had a 2-3 MLS games under his belt by then, but that's it. He didn't go to the EPL until he was almost 24, and when he did he went to Fulham, not Chelsea. In his prime, Dempsey was a very good player for a mid-table, occasionally Europa League level club. He was never good enough to be a consistent starter for a Champions League level club.

Whether Pulisic will be able to reach and maintain that level remains to be seen. But again, he just turned 21.

[Anonymous]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/oct/03/chelsea-christian-pulisic-callum-hudson-odoi

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish he were at a less prestigious team that still competes at a high level. A Leicester under Brendan Rogers, Crystal Palace etc would be a better fit. Dempsey seemed to do just fine with his career at Fulham.

Agreed. But I am not sure he is the player that Dempsey was. He was absolutely second rate in all of his Chelsea appearances, constantly out of position. That attack improved significantly when he was benched.

Pulisic just turned 21 a few weeks ago. At that age, all Dempsey had really done was play in college. He might have had a 2-3 MLS games under his belt by then, but that's it. He didn't go to the EPL until he was almost 24, and when he did he went to Fulham, not Chelsea. In his prime, Dempsey was a very good player for a mid-table, occasionally Europa League level club. He was never good enough to be a consistent starter for a Champions League level club.

Whether Pulisic will be able to reach and maintain that level remains to be seen. But again, he just turned 21.

David Owen was 18 when he scored for England in the WC and he’s one of many examples of world class players taking center stage before 20. Pulisic has been playing pro ball in big time leagues on a big time team (Dortmund) for a while and hasn’t really improved in a few years. I think he’s very good but may have already neared his peak. He also holds the ball too long like many US players. Superstar syndrome and mentality vs. team mentality. I am really interested in Weah but the US doesn’t seem ready to leverage those two together. Regardless they are only two, and soccer is truly an 11 player sport. We will qualify this time (behind Mexico), but likely exit in group rounds. We will never have top 5 to 10 sustained success in international play. Too many competing, lucrative pro sports in the US and not enough national team glamour or pride to attract and hone the best young talent hungry to win as a team vs. simply out dribble others.

[Anonymous]

Who the hell is David Owen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who the hell is David Owen?

This is why US players will not go beyond Dempsey and Pulisic. Please tell me you are kidding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish he were at a less prestigious team that still competes at a high level. A Leicester under Brendan Rogers, Crystal Palace etc would be a better fit. Dempsey seemed to do just fine with his career at Fulham.

Agreed. But I am not sure he is the player that Dempsey was. He was absolutely second rate in all of his Chelsea appearances, constantly out of position. That attack improved significantly when he was benched.

Pulisic just turned 21 a few weeks ago. At that age, all Dempsey had really done was play in college. He might have had a 2-3 MLS games under his belt by then, but that's it. He didn't go to the EPL until he was almost 24, and when he did he went to Fulham, not Chelsea. In his prime, Dempsey was a very good player for a mid-table, occasionally Europa League level club. He was never good enough to be a consistent starter for a Champions League level club.

Whether Pulisic will be able to reach and maintain that level remains to be seen. But again, he just turned 21.

David Owen was 18 when he scored for England in the WC and he’s one of many examples of world class players taking center stage before 20. Pulisic has been playing pro ball in big time leagues on a big time team (Dortmund) for a while and hasn’t really improved in a few years. I think he’s very good but may have already neared his peak. He also holds the ball too long like many US players. Superstar syndrome and mentality vs. team mentality. I am really interested in Weah but the US doesn’t seem ready to leverage those two together. Regardless they are only two, and soccer is truly an 11 player sport. We will qualify this time (behind Mexico), but likely exit in group rounds. We will never have top 5 to 10 sustained success in international play. Too many competing, lucrative pro sports in the US and not enough national team glamour or pride to attract and hone the best young talent hungry to win as a team vs. simply out dribble others.

I'm sure you mean Michael Owen, but regardless, you missed the point.

Someone said Pulisic wasn't as good as Dempsey. I was simply pointing out that Pulisic has accomplished a hell of a lot more than Dempsey had by a similar age, and it's still too early to tell how good he'll be in comparison.