Couldn't resist, sorry, I saw the title...
Team America at the World Cup
- Thread starter Sir Matt
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
Couldn't resist, sorry, I saw the title...
Yeah I see, that explains a little bit. But then again, Jaap Stam has never played in a youth-academy. Just his local amateur side playing on sunday training two or three times a week. He joined their first team aged 16 finished school played with his brother and mates until the age of 20 getting drunk after matches. Aged 20, he went on trials at a small second division club, joined their second team and built up from there. Same goes for Dirk Kuijt, he also played for his local amateur team up until he was 18. And that's just two players I know off, I'm sure there are plenty of examples. African players for instance, playing on the streets bare footed or at low level village clubs until age 16 or 17.
So perhaps the problem is more in recognizing talent, I don't know how many footballers between age 16-20 there are in America. But on 300 million inhabitants I'm sure there are some, and it doesn't really matter what level or academy they play if you do your scouting right, you must be able to have some true quality players.
Last edited:
Is Durgadurgastan in their group should be a good game!
Jaap Stam would definitely be the exception not the rule right? Since most Dutch players were in academies at young ages.
bingo
Also those travel teams play way too many games a year. Which leads to very little practice time and many overuse injuries.
Well not really, there are plenty of examples like Kuyt and Stam just in Holland over the last 25 years. Van Basten for example played for amateur sides from his hometown until Ajax signed him aged 17 or 18. And we're one of the most developed countries world wide if you look at football academies and stuff, so obviously a lot of our players went through academy, but a lot of players also didn't.
Like I said, look at the African or South American poor underdeveloped countries who still have ridiculous amounts of talents. And even more importantly: general opinion is that players like Van Persie, Robben, Sneijder, Van der Vaart are just natural talents, same goes for Rooney or Gerrard. Yes they went through academies, but if they hadn't, they would have at least been 95% of the players they are today. You can't really teach them a lot, they develop by just playing loads of regular football, break through in first team aged 16 or 17 when they're not even fully grown because they are so naturally skilled already.
Last edited:
In for some embarrassing defeats...
But all the other guys you mentioned were in academies at young ages. And what do you mean by natural talent? You think they got out of bed one day and suddenly they were fantastic Footballers? To become an elite Footballer you need natural talent, but you often also need the right guidance and the right training.
The issue is that many of the most talented athletes don't see football as a career choice in the US. MLS players don't make tons of money and are fairly low exposure throughout large parts of the country, especially the southeast where American football is king. In other countries, football is the universal sport because you can play it anywhere. Here, there are basketball courts or hoops everywhere; American football and baseball can be played anywhere as well. Football is typically middle- or upper-class because of the cost of travel teams, leagues, etc. In European countries, training and development is low cost, free, or players get paid for it. Here, it costs thousands of dollars a year to be a member of a travel team where the best players play.
There are millions of regular Americans who could have been amazing players but focused on other sports that they couldn't feasibly go pro in because of physical limitations. If the people who aren't big enough for the NFL and NBA had changed focus to soccer in their youth, the talent pool here would be enormous. However, how many inner city kids in the US watch football or even play it? Virtually none. It's most prominent in suburbia.
There are millions of regular Americans who could have been amazing players but focused on other sports that they couldn't feasibly go pro in because of physical limitations. If the people who aren't big enough for the NFL and NBA had changed focus to soccer in their youth, the talent pool here would be enormous. However, how many inner city kids in the US watch football or even play it? Virtually none. It's most prominent in suburbia.
that's the thing that needs to change. spread the game from the 'burbs into the inner cities.
Marco Van Basten too, was voted two or three times Best Footballer in the World and he played for local amateur sides until age 17 or 18, no academy. And like I said the list goes on and on. And yes, some other ones were at academies because their talent was so obvious, they got scouted at a young age. But without the academy they still would be brilliant. Young talented players just need a stage where they can develop by playing football as much as possible, preferably against older opponents, but level of the opponents doesn't matter that much, it just has to be challenging for them (like Stam, Kuyt and Van Basten playing at an amateur first team aged 15 or 16 already against fully grown men in their prime). Robben and Rooney for instance they just played a couple of years for various youth squads at their hometown club (everton and groningen), mostly with older players, never with or against players the same age, until they made first team debuts at very young ages, both 16.
Wes Brown and John O'Shea on the other hand, both brought up in the famous Man United academy. Joined first team aged 18, trained and played with the best players in the world for over ten years. Ten years, almost everyday, with the right guidance and training and they hardly developed as players. That's how important having natural born football talent is. And yes you're just born with that, you have to develop it by playing a lot.
Last edited:
Basically poor kids can't afford to play it. I had a lot of immigrant kids in my team mostly Mexicans and others from central and south america. We had to find ways of subsidizing their fees and it was a pain every year.
So more of a practical case, like transportation to a football club, equipment, monthly fee for the football club and all? I can see that, although I would normally say football is the cheapest sport in the world, all you need is a ball. But in America it's pretty expensive?
I was born and raised in American and player football from the age of 5 locally and then from 7-18 I was on a travel team and played for my high school as well from 14-18. Most of the problem is as somebody mentioned earlier that playing games is prioritized over training and perfecting skills. Additionally practice is often not more than just playing 7 v 7 or some iteration of that with little tactical input from the coach or manager. This is basically the case for nearly all levels of the game at youth level. As a result when you're playing so many games, winning becomes the priority over actually developing talent.
I was the best player on my team tactically and in terms of keeping possession, but because A) I'm Indian and B) I'm not particularly tall, strong or very athletic I basically was just shunted out to play as our left back. The logic was simply that since I wasn't particularly physically gifted I should play defense and that I had the best left foot on the team except for the one guy on the team that was actually a lefty and played in front of me on the left wing. I don't really care to go in depth about my struggles, but my point is simply that the prioritization of certain skills is a direct reflection of what is valued at youth level.
This has been very evident in the USMNT under every coach prior to Klinsmann as the only real qualities that we possessed were great fitness levels and athleticism. Other than that the team was atrocious technically and in terms of build up in attack and defensive organization. Dempsey and Donovan were solid players, but neither is particularly brilliant that they should ever be the best players on the team around whom the team should be built around. Obviously even under Klinsmann we aren't great technically or tactically, but there is definitely a shift in what is being prioritized on the field.
Ultimately another major problem is that there are 4 other major sports in this country which offer better coaching and easier paths to professional level in basketball, American football, baseball and hockey. There's definitely been a large increase in the level of interest in football in the USA over the last decade and it is part of the national consciousness to a level it wasn't before. Comparing the USA's lack of success to smaller countries like the Netherlands or Uruguay is stupid because the best athletes in America will always move to other sports and the best soccer players in the USA will not receive proper instruction to develop.
Also to dismiss the USMNT because the population at large doesn't care for the sport or because fans don't truly understand the game is ridiculous. I probably have a far greater understanding of the nuances of basketball or American football than the majority of fans of these sports in the UK or abroad elsehwhere, but that doesn't somehow make me more worthy of caring about the results of the game. The USA isn't the only country with stupid uneducated fans that fail to grasp the finer points of football.
I was the best player on my team tactically and in terms of keeping possession, but because A) I'm Indian and B) I'm not particularly tall, strong or very athletic I basically was just shunted out to play as our left back. The logic was simply that since I wasn't particularly physically gifted I should play defense and that I had the best left foot on the team except for the one guy on the team that was actually a lefty and played in front of me on the left wing. I don't really care to go in depth about my struggles, but my point is simply that the prioritization of certain skills is a direct reflection of what is valued at youth level.
This has been very evident in the USMNT under every coach prior to Klinsmann as the only real qualities that we possessed were great fitness levels and athleticism. Other than that the team was atrocious technically and in terms of build up in attack and defensive organization. Dempsey and Donovan were solid players, but neither is particularly brilliant that they should ever be the best players on the team around whom the team should be built around. Obviously even under Klinsmann we aren't great technically or tactically, but there is definitely a shift in what is being prioritized on the field.
Ultimately another major problem is that there are 4 other major sports in this country which offer better coaching and easier paths to professional level in basketball, American football, baseball and hockey. There's definitely been a large increase in the level of interest in football in the USA over the last decade and it is part of the national consciousness to a level it wasn't before. Comparing the USA's lack of success to smaller countries like the Netherlands or Uruguay is stupid because the best athletes in America will always move to other sports and the best soccer players in the USA will not receive proper instruction to develop.
Also to dismiss the USMNT because the population at large doesn't care for the sport or because fans don't truly understand the game is ridiculous. I probably have a far greater understanding of the nuances of basketball or American football than the majority of fans of these sports in the UK or abroad elsehwhere, but that doesn't somehow make me more worthy of caring about the results of the game. The USA isn't the only country with stupid uneducated fans that fail to grasp the finer points of football.
Not in America mate, everything is money in America. Theres uniform fees, coaches fees, tournament fees, hotel and travel costs etc etc. The Mexicans for example most of their parents just worked all the time and had little time or money to invest in a sport that for all intents and purposes their kids play for free with each other in the park everyday. It was a battle to deal with this situation and then combine these kids in with rich white kids. But I made it happen most years and had some brilliant teams.
But, you are assuming that players who played in amateur sides were not getting proper coaching. A lot of the amateur sides you mentioned were probably the equivalents of a League 2 side in England or a Serie C side in Italy.
@Henrik Larsson You're right in that all you need is a ball and cleats. The expense comes in for paying to support the infrastructure required for providing quality coaching. Some travel teams in my area (DC suburbs) often go 4-500 miles for tournaments to play other elite junior teams. This is expensive. Moreover, elite travel teams employ coaches-which are also expensive.
I laughed anywayI'm from India. We are still qualifying for Asian Cup. Lolzy
Nope not even the equivalent of a Serie C side or something, Holland is a small country. What I mean is that you don't actually need that much of an academy to produce have great players.
Ad I find it so difficult to understand why there haven't been any in the USA at all basically, while there have been a lot of people who play football there.
That's because you keep ignoring the people who explain it to you.
Even Canada has over 30 million people and we can't provide the proper infrastructure for kids to go on and do something with football. Imagine 300 million and the best talent you can produce is Clint Dempsey and Landon fecking Donovan.
Yeah but, and I mean no disrespect, India (as China) is a very, very poor and underdeveloped country if you compare it to the United States of America, so that's a different situation. China for instance has the biggest population, but how many Chinese are struggling to feed themself, living in rural areas and such? I don't know, but I'd guess 30 or 50% or something? I image they have other priorities than playing football.
Not at all, plus I answered everyone. Or do you mean I'm not right about the fact that you don't need quality academies to get quality players?
I hope something goes awry and the USA accidentally beat Germany. The Kroos and Reus fanboys here would be butthurt for weeks!
You can hardly call Uruguay developed, but you included them because it suited your opinion.
It's not a priority for young athletes. Simple answer. Soccer, as you condescendingly bring up repeatedly, is not the best option for the top young players.
Whats wrong with wanting Kroos and Reus to join? I mean they are no Danny Welbeck or Tom Cleverley but still good players man
To be fair, it also requires a radically different skill set to the one most decent athletes in the US will aspire to, surely? Your top athletes are going to be pushed down the "be a beast" route subconsciously I reckon so by the time they realise football is a thing they might be good at I'd imagine they're already well on the way to being a NFL/NBA "athlete" rather than a footballer.
Not at all man, what is your problem? My question is exactly the same for India, China and the United States, why have they not produced any special talent? But since India and China have very different cultures, political histories and are less developed than the USA, I can see a lot of reasons.
Whereas the USA, who share a lot of similarities with Europe, I am very curious about the reasons why, because I can't see any real obvious ones like in China or India.
I used Uruguay to show that even very small countries inhabitant wise can still have great teams. For instance Uruguay 3.5 million people, 50% female = 1.75 million men. Let's say 1/3 has the right age and plays football that's 600.000 footballers. Surely there are 600.000 footballers in America in the same age category, how come Uruguay has way more talent? Uruguay don't have better sport academies that USA, if they're underdeveloped like you say, that's for sure. Football is a lot more popular/only way out there, that's a reason why there could be a better level, but it still leaves questions.
Lots of good hockey, baseball and football players that aren't psychical beasts.
Maybe your attitude is the reason you aren't getting the responses you want.
I meant no harm
I do not know what else we need to tell you. The posters on here have hit almost all of the major points.
Does Mewtwo play hockey? Haha. Because you put psychical.
Nobody wants the yanks to become a force in international footy. That'd be fecking awful. They've already got far too much influence as it is.
for ffs sake
They won't until most of the kids play it on the streets. Like Eboobé's been saying, their best sportsmen will gravitate to other sports.
Not sure that nobody wants them to though. I'd imagine a fair few US folk probably want them to become a force, for a start.
Do you think Klinsmann will start with Altidore?