African players playing for European countries

Red the Bear said:

Perhaps immigration? I'm sure the number of Africans moving to Europe far outnumbers the south Americans doing the same.

Also there is this perception that Africans are underperforming while south America already has several world cup winners.

Click to expand...

Africa is closer so you better hope that the there is more contacts between Africa and Europe. The issue here is the idea that african descent somehow don't belong.

roonster09 said:

I don't know, I was just looking for example and as per wiki his father is from Cameroon.

Anyways that's a minor point, looks like we both agree on the point that it made complete sense for Saka and Mbappe to represent the country they did.

Click to expand...

Ah right, I thought I read somewhere his dad was born in France. Anyway, doesn't matter much.

Red the Bear said:

Pele had the luxury of growing up in the football infested atoms of Brazil and taking part in some Futsal tournaments which helped him grow, he also started playing for Santos when he was 15.

How many other peles there are who didn't get the chance to shine?let's not go on a case by case basis and look at the cold hard numbers, Europe has a 700 million population , Africa has 1.2 billion and a much much younger population to draw from(in fact I wouldn't be surprised if the under 20 number of people in Africa is triple of that in Europe and yet their output is much inferior to Europe hell the number of players with African origins in Europe who actually make it seems to be at a much higher ratio compared to their folk back in Africa, doesn't this make the case of how important infrastructure is and how inferior Africans are at it?

Click to expand...

All it does is make the case that something is different in Europe from Africa. What the factor is, we can only make hypotheses about. I don't think its infrastructure but I could be wrong. I just think if it were infrastructure then far fewer Africans would make it to Europe at all.

Infrastructure is clearly not the only possible factor here. In fact, as I've pointed out, there are so many young Africans working as professionals in some field or other, who clearly should be out playing football. I'll tell you from personal experience, I know players who were destined for the top but had to quit football because the pay would leave you destitute.

I'd argue that this narrowing of the talent pool is the critical factor.

I know of players who played in the national youth teams one year, and two years later were working in banking. They had to leave football to make a living. When you have thousands of players vying for say 10 slots to Europe, you'd know that your chances are slim.

If you come from a middle class home, no matter how good you are, you have a very short window of opportunity within which to play football and make it big. You're not going to keep on playing, even at the highest level, for $50 or nothing in some cases. So anyone who has the slightest prospects, or who has mouths to feed and an opportunity to do so, is simply not going to hang around playing football.

Invariably corruption then comes into play. you need to bribe coaches to get into teams regardless of how good you are. Incidentally, that's why David Alaba didn't play for Nigeria. He tried to get in and refused to pay the bribe.

There are so many less visible factors pushing real talent away from opportunities.

You don't have that kind of pressure in Europe. African families who would never let their kids play football in Africa move to Europe and suddenly let them loose because they know there is a safety net and the risk is much lower.

But look, lets also compare output in real terms.

The sheer number of Africans who make it to play football in Europe is staggering, for a continent that supposedly doesn't produce good footballers.

You'd have to realise that an African player only gets selected by a European team if there's not better European player for the position. Naturally, that suggests that there are many more Africans who could play at the same level as most European top flight players but can't get there because being good enough is not enough.

Most European leagues also have foreign player caps.

So in that context, do the number show poor output from Africa, or do they show exceptional output in light of the barriers to entry?

The Original said:

All it does is make the case that something is different in Europe from Africa. What the factor is, we can only make hypotheses about. I don't think its infrastructure but I could be wrong. I just think if it were infrastructure then far fewer Africans would make it to Europe at all.

Infrastructure is clearly not the only possible factor here. In fact, as I've pointed out, there are so many young Africans working as professionals in some field or other, who clearly should be out playing football. I'll tell you from personal experience, I know players who were destined for the top but had to quit football because the pay would leave you destitute.

I'd argue that this narrowing of the talent pool is the critical factor.

I know of players who played in the national youth teams one year, and two years later were working in banking. They had to leave football to make a living. When you have thousands of players vying for say 10 slots to Europe, you'd know that your chances are slim.

If you come from a middle class home, no matter how good you are, you have a very short window of opportunity within which to play football and make it big. You're not going to keep on playing, even at the highest level, for $50 or nothing in some cases. So anyone who has the slightest prospects, or who has mouths to feed and an opportunity to do so, is simply not going to hang around playing football.

Invariably corruption then comes into play. you need to bribe coaches to get into teams regardless of how good you are. Incidentally, that's why David Alaba didn't play for Nigeria. He tried to get in and refused to pay the bribe.

There are so many less visible factors pushing real talent away from opportunities.

You don't have that kind of pressure in Europe. African families who would never let their kids play football in Africa move to Europe and suddenly let them loose because they know there is a safety net and the risk is much lower.

But look, lets also compare output in real terms.

The sheer number of Africans who make it to play football in Europe is staggering, for a continent that supposedly doesn't produce good footballers.

You'd have to realise that an African player only gets selected by a European team if there's not better European player for the position. Naturally, that suggests that there are many more Africans who could play at the same level as most European top flight players but can't get there because being good enough is not enough.

Most European leagues also have foreign player caps.

So in that context, do the number show poor output from Africa, or do they show exceptional output in light of the barriers to entry?

Click to expand...

My perception may deceive me, but it seems to me like African players often have to takeintermediate steps with obscure(ish) clubs/leagues and maybe also need a few years in Europe, before they really deliver.
Mikel had to move to Norway for example, Yaya Toure to KSK Beveren, Naby Keita and Sadio Mane to Ligue 2 clubs, Mahamadou Diarra to OFI Crete and Salah to Basel.

It sounds pretty far fetched to me to assume that all the privileges young players get in Europe and all the money clubs pour into their academies don't give them a head start in their development.

You actually mentioned Okocha as an example: he spent his first two years in Europe in Germany's split third division - not a professional league at the time - according to TM's database his sole club trophy was a domestic Super Cup with with PSG, his biggest Euopean matchup on paper was an UEFA Cup quarterfinal with Frankfurt. He was playing for Fenerbahce during his mid 20s, he was playing for Bolton before he turned 30. Even if we acknowledge that football was less polarized at the time, do you think he had the best (club) career he could have, considering his talent?

My mates been saying this for years, he’s Algerian and they’d have a highly competitive team if players didn’t just choose France.

JPRouve said:

Africa is closer so you better hope that the there is more contacts between Africa and Europe. The issue here is the idea that african descent somehow don't belong.

Click to expand...

Perhaps it's due the notions of nationality and nationalism getting severally strained in the past few decades due to many factors, for examplescan a person of European descent be considered Senegalese or can a person of african ancestry be considered European?

Those definitions are getting more and more stretched as people are moving all over the world but I'm not interested in those discussions when it gets to football.
The current system works fine, I rather not get those contentious issues involved when it's just a game about having fun and entertainment.

The Original said:

All it does is make the case that something is different in Europe from Africa. What the factor is, we can only make hypotheses about. I don't think its infrastructure but I could be wrong. I just think if it were infrastructure then far fewer Africans would make it to Europe at all.

Infrastructure is clearly not the only possible factor here. In fact, as I've pointed out, there are so many young Africans working as professionals in some field or other, who clearly should be out playing football. I'll tell you from personal experience, I know players who were destined for the top but had to quit football because the pay would leave you destitute.

I'd argue that this narrowing of the talent pool is the critical factor.

I know of players who played in the national youth teams one year, and two years later were working in banking. They had to leave football to make a living. When you have thousands of players vying for say 10 slots to Europe, you'd know that your chances are slim.

If you come from a middle class home, no matter how good you are, you have a very short window of opportunity within which to play football and make it big. You're not going to keep on playing, even at the highest level, for $50 or nothing in some cases. So anyone who has the slightest prospects, or who has mouths to feed and an opportunity to do so, is simply not going to hang around playing football.

Invariably corruption then comes into play. you need to bribe coaches to get into teams regardless of how good you are. Incidentally, that's why David Alaba didn't play for Nigeria. He tried to get in and refused to pay the bribe.

There are so many less visible factors pushing real talent away from opportunities.

You don't have that kind of pressure in Europe. African families who would never let their kids play football in Africa move to Europe and suddenly let them loose because they know there is a safety net and the risk is much lower.

But look, lets also compare output in real terms.

The sheer number of Africans who make it to play football in Europe is staggering, for a continent that supposedly doesn't produce good footballers.

You'd have to realise that an African player only gets selected by a European team if there's not better European player for the position. Naturally, that suggests that there are many more Africans who could play at the same level as most European top flight players but can't get there because being good enough is not enough.

Most European leagues also have foreign player caps.

So in that context, do the number show poor output from Africa, or do they show exceptional output in light of the barriers to entry?

Click to expand...

You make fair points and certainly a lot of those apply like cost of living, life prospects, corruption (although that could perhaps still be considered part of the infrastructure) and sure all do play a part but I still find infrastructure to be the most impactful part like some eastern European countries managed to pump out so many talents despite their poor talent pool or how some Spanish clubs maximize the talent output through their academies those things are not easily imported, that would be the case in most areas of expertise whether it be academia, art etc etc.

Also wouldn't it be the case for some extremely poor folk to bank everything on making a career in football? Same with how so many make it in slums of Rio or Paris and London while most of the Middle class folk would rather give up and follow a more sustainable career path and numbers do seem to back that up with most footballers coming from disadvantaged backgrounds.

In the end i imagine those African countries to improve drastically when they develop and manage to provide better safety nets as you said it yourself and better footballing education and opportunities.

The Original said:

Well, not lots but that's more to do with a dearth of talent at source rather than the system killing off good talent. Pulisic and Davies are proof that being born and bred in North America is no limitation if you have the right drive. Neither of them is half as talented as Rooney was so I can easily see a Rooney-level talent thriving there.

On the second part, the whole point of the comment by Mourinho is redefining the concept of qualifying for a national team. Under his proposal, you would have to play for your country of descent, which means, I would guess, those who are first and second-generation Europeans would be repatriated to their national team of origin.

That would include those African Europeans currently playing for African teams as well as those who qualify but choose not to.

Click to expand...

That’s a problematic idea. For example, my parents are English but I was born in Canada. I feel Canadian, not English.

dannyrhinos89 said:

My mates been saying this for years, he’s Algerian and they’d have a highly competitive team if players didn’t just choose France.

Click to expand...

But what Algerian-born players are choosing France?

jem said:

But what Algerian-born players are choosing France?

Click to expand...

None, which isn't true for french born players choosing Algeria.

jem said:

That’s a problematic idea. For example, my parents are English but I was born in Canada. I feel Canadian, not English.

Click to expand...

It’s a nonsense idea all ends up. People are citing players like Alaba, Musiala, Alli and Olise that in Mourinho’s view should be playing for Nigeria. All have mixed heritage. To take Mourinho’s point to the logical end then these players should play for the worst teams in their indigenous heritage. That means that Alaba should be playing for the Philippines not Nigeria. Olise by these considerations should be playing for Algeria going by the FIFA rankings. Dele Alli is mixed race English and Nigerian but doesn’t speak to his Nigerian family and has only ever wanted to play for England. Should he be forced to play for Nigeria because his dad is Nigerian? It seems absurd. Musiala played for England and Germany. His mum is German, why should he have to play for Nigeria?

jem said:

That’s a problematic idea. For example, my parents are English but I was born in Canada. I feel Canadian, not English.

Click to expand...

I agree it's problematic but not so much. I don't agree with this whole idea but for the sake of argument, if it were to be enforced, you could simply stipulate that a player choose from one of the two sides that could be considered his country of descent.

Where it gets tricky is where countries have complicated citizenship laws that might actually preclude you from claiming one of the countries. In many African countries, for example, citizenship through a mother can be complex to impossible when the father is from another country.

The Original said:

You're making my point, really. If you're arguing that Ivorian players benefitted from a French education while in Ivory Coast, then clearly, football knowledge can be exported.

I don't know much about the setup in Asec Mimos but if there are French coaches running things there, why would you think they wouldn't replicate that elsewhere? Obviously, football education, just like all education, spreads. There are obvious degrees of quality that might remain but I'm sure you wouldn't refuse to be treated by any of the thousands of Africa-trained doctors that now work in Europe? Why would you then think that it's so different for football?

And over the years, tremendous effort has been put into the education of coaches, partner programs, and so on. If you're thinking that African academies don't have access to top-level training knowledge, you'd be wrong. So much is going on.

In fact, the investment at that level dwarfs the investment that goes into professional clubs in most sub saharan countries becasue it's a business. African academies are developing players to move them on to Europe, sometimes without them ever going through the professional league system, and this is becasue the commissions gotten off a single such transaction can often foot the bills of an entire club for a year.

Knowledge is not the issue.

I would argue, as I have in a previous post, to another poster above, that the problem is that the talent pool is much smaller than it should be due to economic pressure. Talented players who have other opportunities in Africa are more likely to pursue those opportunities, so what you have left are those who have worse opportunities, or are so exceptional that they turn pro before they finish school.

Similarly, America and Canada have a much smaller talent pool due to pressure from other sports. But Mexico is much better. Would you argue that Mexico has better access to football education and facilities than the US? I'd say the answer is clearly not.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's that simple. England do not produce many top players, especially compared to many other countries.

Money and Infrastructure != Good football education.

Red the Bear said:

Perhaps it's due the notions of nationality and nationalism getting severally strained in the past few decades due to many factors, for examplescan a person of European descent be considered Senegalese or can a person of african ancestry be considered European?

Those definitions are getting more and more stretched as people are moving all over the world but I'm not interested in those discussions when it gets to football.
The current system works fine, I rather not get those contentious issues involved when it's just a game about having fun and entertainment.

You make fair points and certainly a lot of those apply like cost of living, life prospects, corruption (although that could perhaps still be considered part of the infrastructure) and sure all do play a part but I still find infrastructure to be the most impactful part like some eastern European countries managed to pump out so many talents despite their poor talent pool or how some Spanish clubs maximize the talent output through their academies those things are not easily imported, that would be the case in most areas of expertise whether it be academia, art etc etc.

Also wouldn't it be the case for some extremely poor folk to bank everything on making a career in football? Same with how so many make it in slums of Rio or Paris and London while most of the Middle class folk would rather give up and follow a more sustainable career path and numbers do seem to back that up with most footballers coming from disadvantaged backgrounds.

In the end i imagine those African countries to improve drastically when they develop and manage to provide better safety nets as you said it yourself and better footballing education and opportunities.

Click to expand...

Sure they would, but that makes it even more interesting, because almost invariably, people from the lowest classes end up being the only ones who make it in African football, in sub saharan Africa at least.

This has implications. This group is often the least well educated, like everywhere else, meaning that the best and brightest of society almost never end up in football unless they leave the continent very young. So you'd observe, perhaps, that players like Osimhen and Iheanacho who left Nigeria before the age of 18, have a comparable level to European raised players like Lookman and Eze. Osimhen and Iheanacho were recruited out of high school but if they hadn't made it when they did, their chances would have been very slim.

Now this may be really well off the mark but it's a hypothesis.

I also think of societies like South Africa where they have the best facilities on the continent. South Africa should be much better than most other African countries at football but they are worse than most.

But I can of course see the benefits that infrastructure has. I'm willing to concede that it might play a bigger role than I've considered.

Hammondo said:

I don't think it's that simple. England do not produce many top players, especially compared to many other countries.

Money and Infrastructure != Good football education.

Click to expand...

They actually produce more top players than most countries in the world. If by top players we're talking about something sensible like very good/elite international class players that were elite or near to it for their position in their time. Argentina and Brazil are really the only countries that have produced more than one player everyone would agree is in the GOAT debate.

Demyanenko_square_jaw said:

They actually produce more top players than most countries in the world. If by top players we're talking about something sensible like very good/elite international class players that were elite or near to it for their position in their time. Argentina and Brazil are really the only countries that have produced more than one player everyone would agree is in the GOAT debate.

Click to expand...

As in world class players, we produce very few, and we probably spend the most money.

do.ob said:

My perception may deceive me, but it seems to me like African players often have to takeintermediate steps with obscure(ish) clubs/leagues and maybe also need a few years in Europe, before they really deliver.
Mikel had to move to Norway for example, Yaya Toure to KSK Beveren, Naby Keita and Sadio Mane to Ligue 2 clubs, Mahamadou Diarra to OFI Crete and Salah to Basel.

It sounds pretty far fetched to me to assume that all the privileges young players get in Europe and all the money clubs pour into their academies don't give them a head start in their development.

You actually mentioned Okocha as an example: he spent his first two years in Europe in Germany's split third division - not a professional league at the time - according to TM's database his sole club trophy was a domestic Super Cup with with PSG, his biggest Euopean matchup on paper was an UEFA Cup quarterfinal with Frankfurt. He was playing for Fenerbahce during his mid 20s, he was playing for Bolton before he turned 30. Even if we acknowledge that football was less polarized at the time, do you think he had the best (club) career he could have, considering his talent?

Click to expand...

It's more a case where the players you mentioned are moving at really young ages. Okocha, Toure, Mikel, were all teenagers when they moved and European clubs are naturally less keen on taking the risk on unproven players.

But Okocha was an outlier. You could compare him with Kanu for example, who broke through around the same time and really flew almost immediately.

Let's also talk about the money European clubs put into infrastructure. It seems as though the bulk of the money goes into comfort for the players rather than any really significant developmental concerns. I mean, what much more can you provide for a players onfield development than nice pitches, a fancy gym, and bright cones?

i'd imagine the rest goes into fancy food, digs, welfare, and so on. But are the players better than they were 20 years ago? Do they have the same strength of character?

i don't see it.

The Original said:

Sure they would, but that makes it even more interesting, because almost invariably, people from the lowest classes end up being the only ones who make it in African football, in sub saharan Africa at least.

This has implications. This group is often the least well educated, like everywhere else, meaning that the best and brightest of society almost never end up in football unless they leave the continent very young. So you'd observe, perhaps, that players like Osimhen and Iheanacho who left Nigeria before the age of 18, have a comparable level to European raised players like Lookman and Eze. Osimhen and Iheanacho were recruited out of high school but if they hadn't made it when they did, their chances would have been very slim.

Now this may be really well off the mark but it's a hypothesis.

I also think of societies like South Africa where they have the best facilities on the continent. South Africa should be much better than most other African countries at football but they are worse than most.

But I can of course see the benefits that infrastructure has. I'm willing to concede that it might play a bigger role than I've considered.

Click to expand...

A lot of it has to be cultural, I may be wrong but for example isn't south Africans interested in other sports?

Also the level of interest in sporting activities differs from country to country for example Britain has always far outpunched countries with similar populations in Olympics due to how much they emphasize sports over there i imagine.

In the end it probably is a compilation of all the things we alluded to with some of it being inseparable (for example the more a country develops the more likely it grows a well established infrastructure etc etc)

Red the Bear said:

A lot of it has to be cultural, I may be wrong but for example isn't south Africans interested in other sports?

Also the level of interest in sporting activities differs from country to country for example Britain has always far outpunched countries with similar populations in Olympics due to how much they emphasize sports over there i imagine.

In the end it probably is a compilation of all the things we alluded to with some of it being inseparable (for example the more a country develops the more likely it grows a well established infrastructure etc etc)

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

Vidyoyo said:

Well France is the obvious one and looking at their recent call ups only Steve Mandanda (born in Zaire) qualifies. Everybody else was born in France.

Other examples:

Nani and Rolando born in Cape Verde
Benteke born in DR Congo
Kevin Prince-Boateng and Gerald Asamoah in Ghana
Evra in Senegal

I'm not convinced they'd make enough difference to win a world cup, past or present.

Edit - Misread slightly but 'that of their origin' is very loose. You shouldn't expect players born in Europe to play for African teams just because that's where their parents were born.

Edit edit - If Mourinho is making a statement that more economically prosperous countries benefit above African countries because people move to Europe then he's generally right.

Click to expand...

Kevin-Prince Boateng was born in Berlin-Wedding, he's as German as you can get. And he actually opted to play for Ghana after the German senior NT didn't give him a chance.

Hansi Fick said:

Kevin-Prince Boateng was born in Berlin-Wedding. And he actually opted to play for Ghana.

Click to expand...

Oh my bad. Thanks for correcting

JPRouve said:

None, which isn't true for french born players choosing Algeria.

Click to expand...

As an Algerian born and brought up in Manchester I agree with you. I'm not too bothered about Benzema or Zidane choosing France as they went through their upbringing and football education in Europe. It's only right that Europe benefit from their talent on an international level. With Mahrez/Brahimi etc. we've actually benefitted from the French born Algerians. I do seem to find it a bit ironic that the French media and majority of French people I've met aren't too happy with them never singing the national anthem however, but that's a completely different topic.

We in Africa need to do better in producing our own talent, it's got nothing to do with Europe, If Zidane or Benzema were born in Algeria the likelihood of them even becoming professional footballers are miniscule despite their talent.

Vidyoyo said:

Oh my bad. Thanks for correcting

Click to expand...

No worries, I happen to live where he's from.

Let them play in both.

Let everyone who is dual nationality play for both countries.

the_cliff said:

As an Algerian born and brought up in Manchester I agree with you. I'm not too bothered about Benzema or Zidane choosing France as they went through their upbringing and football education in Europe. It's only right that Europe benefit from their talent on an international level. With Mahrez/Brahimi etc. we've actually benefitted from the French born Algerians. I do seem to find it a bit ironic that the French media and majority of French people I've met aren't too happy with them never singing the national anthem however, but that's a completely different topic.

We in Africa need to do better in producing our own talent, it's got nothing to do with Europe, If Zidane or Benzema were born in Algeria the likelihood of them even becoming professional footballers are miniscule despite their talent.

Click to expand...

The majority of media and people don't give a damn about players singing the national anthem. Sometimes a weirdo mentions it and is criticized for being a weirdo.

I think it’s just a compliment as to how many great players the continent of Africa produces. But people born in whatever country are nationals of that country, regardless of where their parents came from, so it’s up to them. It would be pretty crappy to tell someone he is French, British or Spanish etc but then say “but you can’t play for the national team”

JPRouve said:

None, which isn't true for french born players choosing Algeria.

Click to expand...

That’s what I thought.

The Original said:

I agree it's problematic but not so much. I don't agree with this whole idea but for the sake of argument, if it were to be enforced, you could simply stipulate that a player choose from one of the two sides that could be considered his country of descent.

Where it gets tricky is where countries have complicated citizenship laws that might actually preclude you from claiming one of the countries. In many African countries, for example, citizenship through a mother can be complex to impossible when the father is from another country.

Click to expand...

but would that preclude his country of birth?

System is fine as it is leaving players to declare for one nation. Whether that is because they feel a stronger bond, or a greater chance of playing international football or a better chance of trophies, each is best left to make up their own mind and live with their own choice. Any third-party dreaming up a way of making international football better, fairer, more competitive or whatever is just talking shit.

As far as making African NTs strong is concerned, my -probably rather easy to substantiate and prove- gut feel is European born and raised players of African descent strengthen African teams far more than European NTs tap into African born and raised ones. In fact, I'm pretty sure if you made it so that you absolutely HAVE to represent your country of birth the better African NTs would get weakened quite significantly.

I was born in Scotland but live in New Zealand, have done for most of my life. If I had the choice I would want to represent NZ. This idea that you should play for where you were born completely misses the fact that people have an affinity towards where their home is. Jose's idea is poorly thought through.

The Original said:

The USA today probably could produce 17-year-old Rooney. Lots of good players coming out from the States, and even Canada without having the level of talent Rooney had. Whether he would progress into mid-20s Rooney is a different question entirely.

That said, I don't really follow the point you're making with the Rooney example in connection with the question of whether European born players would improve African teams.

The point was that African players in Europe as they are now, being forced to play for their national teams would benefit those national teams because they would have a greater pool of quality players to choose from.

Click to expand...

The United States wouldn't be able to produce a 16-year old soccer prodigy like Wazza, no way. Rooney was a product of the football scene in England and specifically Merseyside.

At 16, no male soccer player would have the access and support like Wazza did in Everton and Merseyside. Wayne Rooney is a freak of nature, a legit once in a generation player of his upbringing.

The closest sporting figure I can actually think that could have made an impact at the highest level at the ages of 16/17/18 in the US...LeBron James. Again, a once in a lifetime/generation thing.

The Original said:

Well, not lots but that's more to do with a dearth of talent at source rather than the system killing off good talent. Pulisic and Davies are proof that being born and bred in North America is no limitation if you have the right drive. Neither of them is half as talented as Rooney was so I can easily see a Rooney-level talent thriving there.

On the second part, the whole point of the comment by Mourinho is redefining the concept of qualifying for a national team. Under his proposal, you would have to play for your country of descent, which means, I would guess, those who are first and second-generation Europeans would be repatriated to their national team of origin.

That would include those African Europeans currently playing for African teams as well as those who qualify but choose not to.

Click to expand...

Pulisic isn't a product of the American soccer/football system. His father and mother were collegiate soccer players, so genetics played a huge role in his natural progression. His dad was also a coach and they naturally played/trained together. Pulisic also played on a youth team in England when he was young, as his family was located in England. His dad also knew how to make in-roads in England and Europe well before he reached academy age, but his dad already knew he had to prepare his son for life away from the US and make sure his formative years were spent in Europe.

Davies and Jonathan David, fellow Canadian teammate, are probably the best development stories for outfield players in recent times for U.S./Canada. Gio Reyna is still young and lots to improve, but he again has his dad to thank for many of his natural talents (Claudio Reyna) and the fact that he was born in a professional setting in Sunderland.

I’ve always found the constant social media urge to call France NT ”The African National Team” slightly racist. Obviously players can be encouraged to represent their origin country, but many players certainly would prefer the country where they grew up in. So let them be European if they feel European.

The whole phenomenom obviously stems from colonialism, but then again the development of these players can also benefit from the strong football systems and resources of the European countries. It’s not for anyone else to decide where they feel at home.

You guys are being a bit clownish if you think a black kid, born to two African parents in lets say England loses his "Africanness". NEVER in a million years. These immigrants usually leave behind Grandparents, their parents, their other children, the players siblings in most cases. Cousins etc, So this notion that they happily choose their nation of birth, or they lose connection with their parents homeland, is so far from the truth its not even funny. Especially Africans. We never lose that connection. Culturally and spiritually. Its way more than football.

Mourinho is neither right or wrong though. But most Africans feel the same way as he does. And I agree with the "players should choose for themselves" bunch. Deep down in me, I feel like these kids do get "persuaded" somehow at Youth level to represent a certain country. Even if I dont have any proof whatsoever.

Bennz McCarthey17 said:

You guys are being a bit clownish if you think a black kid, born to two African parents in lets say England loses his "Africanness". NEVER in a million years. These immigrants usually leave behind Grandparents, their parents, their other children, the players siblings in most cases. Cousins etc, So this notion that they happily choose their nation of birth, or they lose connection with their parents homeland, is so far from the truth its not even funny. Especially Africans. We never lose that connection. Culturally and spiritually. Its way more than football.

Mourinho is neither right or wrong though. But most Africans feel the same way as he does. And I agree with the "players should choose for themselves" bunch. Deep down in me, I feel like these kids do get "persuaded" somehow at Youth level to represent a certain country. Even if I dont have any proof whatsoever.

Click to expand...

Are you in that situation?

The Original said:

It's more a case where the players you mentioned are moving at really young ages. Okocha, Toure, Mikel, were all teenagers when they moved and European clubs are naturally less keen on taking the risk on unproven players.

But Okocha was an outlier. You could compare him with Kanu for example, who broke through around the same time and really flew almost immediately.

Let's also talk about the money European clubs put into infrastructure. It seems as though the bulk of the money goes into comfort for the players rather than any really significant developmental concerns. I mean, what much more can you provide for a players onfield development than nice pitches, a fancy gym, and bright cones?

i'd imagine the rest goes into fancy food, digs, welfare, and so on. But are the players better than they were 20 years ago? Do they have the same strength of character?

i don't see it.

Click to expand...

You're basically arguing that having the privileges of being rich don't really matter for your development. It starts with the staff, probably more coaches per team, who are probably better educated and more financially secure themselves. Video analysts, doctors, (school) tutors, psychologists, guidance counselors. A whole machine that swallows up these kids and tries to manage/support almost every aspect of their lives in order to mold them into the best footballer they can be.

And then you also have the competition aspect, having these min/maxed academy teams constantly play each other in domestic leagues, cups or the UEFA YL. The brightest kids may also get to play in the second teams or train with the first team on an elite level.

It would be a small miracle if all that investment didn't yield results. And footballers are definitely better than 20 years ago. Everyone is much more complete, attackers can defend, GKs can sweep and distribute the ball, CBs dribble into midfield, kids get media training, clubs try to shape their personalities.
So it's no surprise that it has become a somewhat regular occurrence that teenagers are ready to compete (and sometimes dominate) in their teenage years: Fati, Pedri, Wirtz, Mbappe, Götze, Sancho, Bellingham, I could probably find dozens more. Who are the teenagers out of the African system that have had a similar start to their careers?

JPRouve said:

Are you in that situation?

Click to expand...

No not me personally, but someone very close to me was in this situation.

Bennz McCarthey17 said:

No not me personally, but someone very close to me was in this situation.

Click to expand...

I'm in that situation, I know dozens of people in the same situation and no one shares the view that you shared. For everyone that I know it's extremely simple, people feel that they are from the place they are born and/or grew up, the heritage that you get from your parents is a bonus, it adds to your identity it's not what primarily defines you, you don't have to lose anything.

do.ob said:

You're basically arguing that having the privileges of being rich don't really matter for your development. It starts with the staff, probably more coaches per team, who are probably better educated and more financially secure themselves. Video analysts, doctors, (school) tutors, psychologists, guidance counselors. A whole machine that swallows up these kids and tries to manage/support almost every aspect of their lives in order to mold them into the best footballer they can be.

And then you also have the competition aspect, having these min/maxed academy teams constantly play each other in domestic leagues, cups or the UEFA YL. The brightest kids may also get to play in the second teams or train with the first team on an elite level.

It would be a small miracle if all that investment didn't yield results. And footballers are definitely better than 20 years ago. Everyone is much more complete, attackers can defend, GKs can sweep and distribute the ball, CBs dribble into midfield, kids get media training, clubs try to shape their personalities.
So it's no surprise that it has become a somewhat regular occurrence that teenagers are ready to compete (and sometimes dominate) in their teenage years: Fati, Pedri, Wirtz, Mbappe, Götze, Sancho, Bellingham, I could probably find dozens more. Who are the teenagers out of the African system that have had a similar start to their careers?

Click to expand...

Yes privilege like most economic inputs has a point of optimal marginal utility and now, I'm arguing it might actually be yielding diminishing returns. You say players are better but let's focus on England, and who are these players who can measure up to Gerrard, Scholes, Beckham, Owen, the Coles, and co?? Sure they might be more balanced in their basic skills but the real talent isn't visible anymore. These are mechanical footballers today.

Your second question is moot because we agree that African players may not be the best per se, what we disagree on is why. But even at that, such a question is a little strange as there are lots of African players who've come out from the youth system and taken Europe by storm.

Victor Osimhen - 10 goals and record u17 world cup top scorer straight from high school. he wasn't even in a formal national coaching program, and was recruited to the national u17 team from open trials.

Kelechi Iheanacho - granted he petered off a bit, but went Straight to Man city for big money from a nigerian academy

John Mikel Obi, went straight from a Nigerian Acadmey to being rated second best player behind Messi at the youth world cup in 2005 (or so), and you know the battle for his signature that followed.

These are just the Nigerian ones.

Well as I am Irish, wow as we be fecked and would never (maybe) not have been seen at the Euros or World cups that we did (as still remember the tee shirt, well piss take ones, on the front ya had "who put the ball in the England's net" with a question mark underneath (euro88 1-0) and on the back it stated, "the Englishman did" Ray Houghton) if Fifa took that stance of play for the country you were born in or don't play at all, as that is what I've taken from that tweet, as how many top Africans are playing for other countries that would do a Maradona.

And given how we have a fair few Irish lads born to African parents, does he want to tell them not to play for us.

And England were the same with some of their better players down the years, Owen H as someone pointed out, Cyrille one of the Three Degrees Regies, Le Saux, Terry (Mr Blood) Butcher born in Singapore, Lutther blissett, Sterling, John Barnes were all born in Jamaica man.

Tommy79 said:

Well as I am Irish, wow as we be fecked and would never (maybe) not have seen us at the Euros or World cups that we did (as still remember the tee shirt, well piss take ones, on the front ya had "who put the ball in the England's net" with a question mark underneath (euro88 1-0) and on the back it stated, "the Englishman did" Ray Houghton) if Fifa took that stance of play for the country you were born in or don't play at all, as that is what I've taken from that tweet, as how many top Africans are playing for other countries that would do a Maradona.And given how we have a fair few Irish lads born to African parents, does he want to tell them not to play for us

And England were the same with some of their better players down the years, Owen H as someone pointed out, Cyrille one of the Three Degrees Regies, Le Saux, Terry (Mr Blood) Butcher, Lutther blissett, Sterling, John Barnes were all born in Jamaica man.

Click to expand...

Please remove as don't know what happen, sorry.