Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sebasour

The US has Failed to Qualify for the World Cup

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Seriously? Lots. Rooney is from the poorest part of Liverpool. Soccer players are usually from the lower economic strata in the UK. The posh kids play cricket. Beckham always stood out among the England players simply because his Dad was a shopkeeper and he was middle class. And it's even more pronounced in many of the European countries. Look how many of their players are of African or middle eastern descent. Those guys aren't coming from wealthy backgrounds.

Best players in the world...Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Suarez, Alexis Sanchez, Sergio Aguero were all from very poor families. Look at the England national squad...Dele Alli, Harry Kane, Kyle Walker, Raheem Sterling all grew up with a single mother. Good point on the African players...Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Ghana...if people in that county have means, they leave and go to France. Players from that country are poor...soccer is their way out.

Sports are a vehicle for the poor to improve their situations...how many NFL and NBA players are the sons of doctors, lawyers or accountants? How many had both parents around? Poverty makes you hungry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest RoscoesDad
28 minutes ago, TheDoggFather said:

Best players in the world...Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Suarez, Alexis Sanchez, Sergio Aguero were all from very poor families. Look at the England national squad...Dele Alli, Harry Kane, Kyle Walker, Raheem Sterling all grew up with a single mother. Good point on the African players...Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Ghana...if people in that county have means, they leave and go to France. Players from that country are poor...soccer is their way out.

Sports are a vehicle for the poor to improve their situations...how many NFL and NBA players are the sons of doctors, lawyers or accountants? How many had both parents around? Poverty makes you hungry.

Hanging onto the dream of the USA becoming a world power in soccer was nice for 25-years.  However I think it's pretty clear at this point that, no matter what we do to change the operational system of US Soccer, there are still organic forces in place that make it nothing more than an unattainable goal.  Size of country does not matter.  Money does not matter.  What matters are good coaches at the lower levels for development and a culture of kids wanting to be a soccer star.  We have neither.  Lack of quality coaching is the biggest issue IMO. Whatever talented kids we do have, are not getting proper coaching or experience against better talent (the only way one gets better).  I guarantee you I could pull some washed out Sunday Pub League coach in England and they would be better than 95% of our American coaches in youth, HS, etc.

Personally I think we should stop the charade of trying to rule the world in soccer and just concentrate on a system that focuses on the type of talent we do have.  Physical.  Athletic.  Speed.  Tenacity.  Minimal skill.  And adapt our program and style of play around the things we can do well, instead worrying about something we will never, ever be.  The US Soccer system is never going to churn out Messi's and Neymar's and Payet's on any type of consistent level.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TheDoggFather said:

Best players in the world...Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Suarez, Alexis Sanchez, Sergio Aguero were all from very poor families. Look at the England national squad...Dele Alli, Harry Kane, Kyle Walker, Raheem Sterling all grew up with a single mother. Good point on the African players...Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Ghana...if people in that county have means, they leave and go to France. Players from that country are poor...soccer is their way out.

Sports are a vehicle for the poor to improve their situations...how many NFL and NBA players are the sons of doctors, lawyers or accountants? How many had both parents around? Poverty makes you hungry.

Ok so England has 4 players from single parent households. Altidore is the child of immigrants from that uber wealthy country Haiti, Dempsey grew up in a trailer park, and Howard came from a single parent household. England has some African immigrants, and the U.S. has players that are the children of Latin American immigrants, or are Latin American immigrants themselves (spoiler alert, neither group is typically considered “affluent”). 

I’m not disputing that some people can’t afford to play soccer, and that cuts in to our talent pool. But Like Twellman said in his rant on ESPN, effen ICELAND, who has a population of 40 thousand more then HENDERSON qualified for the World Cup out of UEFA. What? Was that because Iceland is just sssooo impoverished, as evidenced by them frequently ranking in the top 10 countries in terms of quality of life? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RoscoesDad said:

Hanging onto the dream of the USA becoming a world power in soccer was nice for 25-years.  However I think it's pretty clear at this point that, no matter what we do to change the operational system of US Soccer, there are still organic forces in place that make it nothing more than an unattainable goal.  Size of country does not matter.  Money does not matter.  What matters are good coaches at the lower levels for development and a culture of kids wanting to be a soccer star.  We have neither.  Lack of quality coaching is the biggest issue IMO. Whatever talented kids we do have, are not getting proper coaching or experience against better talent (the only way one gets better).  I guarantee you I could pull some washed out Sunday Pub League coach in England and they would be better than 95% of our American coaches in youth, HS, etc.

Personally I think we should stop the charade of trying to rule the world in soccer and just concentrate on a system that focuses on the type of talent we do have.  Physical.  Athletic.  Speed.  Tenacity.  Minimal skill.  And adapt our program and style of play around the things we can do well, instead worrying about something we will never, ever be.  The US Soccer system is never going to churn out Messi's and Neymar's and Payet's on any type of consistent level.  

As gridiron football continues to lose youth participants (on ongoing issue), the growth of soccer, lacrosse, and other sports will continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Ok so England has 4 players from single parent households. Altidore is the child of immigrants from that uber wealthy country Haiti, Dempsey grew up in a trailer park, and Howard came from a single parent household. England has some African immigrants, and the U.S. has players that are the children of Latin American immigrants, or are Latin American immigrants themselves (spoiler alert, neither group is typically considered “affluent”). 

I’m not disputing that some people can’t afford to play soccer, and that cuts in to our talent pool. But Like Twellman said in his rant on ESPN, effen ICELAND, who has a population of 40 thousand more then HENDERSON qualified for the World Cup out of UEFA. What? Was that because Iceland is just sssooo impoverished, as evidenced by them frequently ranking in the top 10 countries in terms of quality of life? 

There are many more in England, I just named a few. You picked a couple of guys on the US squad who came from poor backgrounds...what about players like Landon Donovan, Pulisic and Bradley who all came from upper middle-class to wealthy households?

The point is, if it is free to play soccer, you get more participants, and thereby increase your development pool. Iceland is an outlier...it happens...just like a soccer power like Netherlands and Chile get left home. 

I've never expected the US to be a world power in soccer...but a trip to the WC every 4 years is a low bar considering they play in CONCACAF. Oh yeah, and they've missed out on the last 2 Olympics as well, which is more proof the development system is garbage.

http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/how-many-howards-or-dempseys-are-the-us-losing-due-to-pay-to/4c10dtk0u17c16q7nsa1g3x4y

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheDoggFather said:

There are many more in England, I just named a few. You picked a couple of guys on the US squad who came from poor backgrounds...what about players like Landon Donovan, Pulisic and Bradley who all came from upper middle-class to wealthy households?

The point is, if it is free to play soccer, you get more participants, and thereby increase your development pool. Iceland is an outlier...it happens...just like a soccer power like Netherlands and Chile get left home. 

I've never expected the US to be a world power in soccer...but a trip to the WC every 4 years is a low bar considering they play in CONCACAF. Oh yeah, and they've missed out on the last 2 Olympics as well, which is more proof the development system is garbage.

http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/how-many-howards-or-dempseys-are-the-us-losing-due-to-pay-to/4c10dtk0u17c16q7nsa1g3x4y

Yea, the development system is garbage, that has been my primary point. Which is why I don’t understand why you think just having soccer be more accessible to poor kids will magically make the system better. We are not losing because of a huge deficit in athleticism or “hunger”, we are losing because of a huge deficit in skill. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, RoscoesDad said:

Hanging onto the dream of the USA becoming a world power in soccer was nice for 25-years.  However I think it's pretty clear at this point that, no matter what we do to change the operational system of US Soccer, there are still organic forces in place that make it nothing more than an unattainable goal.  Size of country does not matter.  Money does not matter.  What matters are good coaches at the lower levels for development and a culture of kids wanting to be a soccer star.  We have neither.  Lack of quality coaching is the biggest issue IMO. Whatever talented kids we do have, are not getting proper coaching or experience against better talent (the only way one gets better).  I guarantee you I could pull some washed out Sunday Pub League coach in England and they would be better than 95% of our American coaches in youth, HS, etc.

Personally I think we should stop the charade of trying to rule the world in soccer and just concentrate on a system that focuses on the type of talent we do have.  Physical.  Athletic.  Speed.  Tenacity.  Minimal skill.  And adapt our program and style of play around the things we can do well, instead worrying about something we will never, ever be.  The US Soccer system is never going to churn out Messi's and Neymar's and Payet's on any type of consistent level.  

It could, those guys that could be like that at soccer are just playing other sports.  I would do that too if I was an elite athlete.  No way am I going to play soccer when I could play baseball or football.

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Brew_Poke said:

As gridiron football continues to lose youth participants (on ongoing issue), the growth of soccer, lacrosse, and other sports will continue.

I'm not sure this is all that true. For one, I don't see a lot of 6'6 230 lb (without football weight) guys charging around the soccer pitch. Rugby, sure, but not soccer. For two, I don't see a lot of guys who are world, or at least national class, sprinters or hurdlers in soccer. It isn't so fast twitch dominant. I see basketball, rugby, and baseball growing with a dip in football. For three, we don't really seem to have a talent disparity, we have a skills or coaching disparity. The US vs TTB was LSU vs Troy and we're LSU. What happens when we go play Alabama? For four, I don't see Americans really embracing soccer as a path to financial success until the best paying leagues are domestic. That's at least 50 years off if it ever happens. 

Basically, I see soccer losing its world dominant position before it becomes dominant here. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, happycamper said:

I'm not sure this is all that true. For one, I don't see a lot of 6'6 230 lb (without football weight) guys charging around the soccer pitch. Rugby, sure, but not soccer. For two, I don't see a lot of guys who are world, or at least national class, sprinters or hurdlers in soccer. It isn't so fast twitch dominant. I see basketball, rugby, and baseball growing with a dip in football. For three, we don't really seem to have a talent disparity, we have a skills or coaching disparity. The US vs TTB was LSU vs Troy and we're LSU. What happens when we go play Alabama? For four, I don't see Americans really embracing soccer as a path to financial success until the best paying leagues are domestic. That's at least 50 years off if it ever happens. 

Basically, I see soccer losing its world dominant position before it becomes dominant here. 

All good points.

But, to your last, what in the hell could ever replace soccer as a world dominant sport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jdgaucho said:

That a mediocre coach like that was the best this country could produce is a microcosm of the steaming pile that is the U.S. soccer federation.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest RoscoesDad
14 hours ago, Brew_Poke said:

As gridiron football continues to lose youth participants (on ongoing issue), the growth of soccer, lacrosse, and other sports will continue.

I agree, could happen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Brew_Poke said:

All good points.

But, to your last, what in the hell could ever replace soccer as a world dominant sport?

I have no idea. MMA? Cricket? Basketball? League of Legends? Tennis?

150 years ago there wasn't soccer so I don't really expect it to exist as popular as it is in 100 years. It might be something completely new. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest RoscoesDad
1 hour ago, Jack Bauer said:

It could, those guys that could be like that at soccer are just playing other sports.  I would do that too if I was an elite athlete.  No way am I going to play soccer when I could play baseball or football.

 

14 hours ago, Brew_Poke said:

As gridiron football continues to lose youth participants (on ongoing issue), the growth of soccer, lacrosse, and other sports will continue.

It could happen over a long period of time.  It will take a huge culture shift before it does.  And I don't think it will happen until we produce at least a few Pulisic's before kids start buying into that dream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, happycamper said:

I'm not sure this is all that true. For one, I don't see a lot of 6'6 230 lb (without football weight) guys charging around the soccer pitch. Rugby, sure, but not soccer. For two, I don't see a lot of guys who are world, or at least national class, sprinters or hurdlers in soccer. It isn't so fast twitch dominant. I see basketball, rugby, and baseball growing with a dip in football. For three, we don't really seem to have a talent disparity, we have a skills or coaching disparity. The US vs TTB was LSU vs Troy and we're LSU. What happens when we go play Alabama? For four, I don't see Americans really embracing soccer as a path to financial success until the best paying leagues are domestic. That's at least 50 years off if it ever happens. 

Basically, I see soccer losing its world dominant position before it becomes dominant here. 

Great points. Soccer requires a much different skill set (and body type) then basketball and football. If there was some alternate universe where American football never existed and soccer became the most popular in the U.S. from day one, most people would probably think the team would include guys like OBJ, russel Westbrook, Lebron, etc. But in reality it would probably be made up mostly of guys that are marginal WR/DB/RBs, undersized basketball guards, and baseball players that are utility guys. 

Now I am not saying a guy like OBJ wouldn’t be a good soccer player, just saying that explosive athleticism just isn’t as important in soccer as it is in other sports; so it’s no guarantee that he would be a good soccer player if raised in a soccer-first country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RoscoesDad said:

 

It could happen over a long period of time.  It will take a huge culture shift before it does.  And I don't think it will happen until we produce at least a few Pulisic's before kids start buying into that dream.

I just don't think people care about it enough for it to happen.  I have three kids.  Outside of some peewee type stuff, they all think soccer is lame.  If they wanted to play, I'd support them in it, but my son likes bball and water polo, strangely.  My daughters both played for a bit and lost interest.

In my entire group of nieces and nephews on both sides of my family, there are only a few who are in to soccer.  On my wife's side, there is one teenage girl who plays on some club teams.  On my side, one sister has three kids who play, and another sister has 1 kid who plays.  This is out of 14 kids on my wife's side, and 19 on the other (insert Mormon joke here).  Some of them are still kids, so they might play more going forward, but most of the kids on both sides are more interested in football, basketball, and lacrosse. 

I feel like this is how it is nationwide, so until that changes, we'll never see elite level soccer players in the US  

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Great points. Soccer requires a much different skill set (and body type) then basketball and football. If there was some alternate universe where American football never existed and soccer became the most popular in the U.S. from day one, most people would probably think the team would include guys like OBJ, russel Westbrook, Lebron, etc. But in reality it would probably be made up mostly of guys that are marginal WR/DB/RBs, undersized basketball guards, and baseball players that are utility guys. 

Now I am not saying a guy like OBJ wouldn’t be a good soccer player, just saying that explosive athleticism just isn’t as important in soccer as it is in other sports; so it’s no guarantee that he would be a good soccer player if raised in a soccer-first country. 

Or that we'd play the same soccer as everyone else.

I mean, football only has unlimited substitutions fairly recently. If we still played real football, yeah, those guys might be better able to play soccer - but those old timey players who went 2 ways couldn't hack it any more. Players are more specialized, which means faster and stronger because they aren't in the game for 160 snaps. What if the same thing happened to our soccer? For that matter, a huge part of what makes the guys mentioned so good at their sport is the fact that they have much larger hands than the average person. Unless we plan on having 9 goalies that doesn't really matter. Or, heck, if we did include those guys above, american soccer would be a hugely different style. More of a wait-wait-wait-BLITZ with superior speed and size when the opportunity arises. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Brew_Poke said:

Such a salient point; good post.  The model that works is already employed here, albeit in baseball.  If we treated soccer like baseball for a decade, we'd be competitive.

Some of this is occurring as MLS teams add a European academy model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Yea, the development system is garbage, that has been my primary point. Which is why I don’t understand why you think just having soccer be more accessible to poor kids will magically make the system better. We are not losing because of a huge deficit in athleticism or “hunger”, we are losing because of a huge deficit in skill. 

 

Using your argument, if we had better coaching, the talent/athleticism wouldn't matter?

In the history of soccer in the USA, we've had one player ascend to being a regular, consistent starter (non-GK) in one of the major 5 (EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A, Ligue 1)...Pulisic. In the last 50 years, you mean to tell me if it was just coaching, there wouldn't have been at least a couple more outliers? Pulisic was coached by his former pro dad, like thousands of others, but the difference is his balance, speed, and spatial awareness are rare.

I will agree the development system is garbage...and if it were improved you would get better-developed players...but part of that improvement is to seriously reduce the cost. Until there are people willing to not charge $2500 a year to coach a kid, it's going to continue as it is. It's time for MLS, US Soccer, Nike, Reebok, Adidas, Coke and all the major sponsors to put their money where their mouths are and start real academies where you don't charge parents an arm and a leg. You do that, maybe in 15-20 years, you will see it pay off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...