Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN FC)   Ex-USMNT coach Jurgen Klinsmann, well-known for his bashing of MLS for trying to keep top American players instead of letting them learn their craft in Europe, did not have his input appreciated by MLS, who wrote him off as a complaining bozo   ( espnfc.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, national team, Klinsmann, World Cup, Herzog, Jurgen Klinsmann, coach Andi Herzog, FIFA World Cup, MLS leadership  
•       •       •

628 clicks; posted to Sports » on 17 Apr 2017 at 8:50 PM (26 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-04-17 05:03:53 PM  
MLS sucks. It's bad at player development. Maybe if they listened to criticism we wouldn't still be complaining about player development for the 35th consecutive year.
 
2017-04-17 08:19:40 PM  
Considering what a lousy coach Klinsy was, I think it was a good idea to ignore him.
 
2017-04-17 09:00:13 PM  
So England should be one of the 4 best teams in the world b/c of their league development, right?
 
2017-04-17 09:24:02 PM  

Pentaxian: Considering what a lousy coach Klinsy was, I think it was a good idea to ignore him.


Don't confuse the coach with the technical director.

/Coach wasn't that bad
//Led us out of what was by ELO ranking the 2nd toughest group in WC history.
 
2017-04-17 09:24:19 PM  

Pentaxian: Considering what a lousy coach Klinsy was, I think it was a good idea to ignore him.


Counterpoint:

Pulisic @Dortmund> Donovan leaving Leverkusen for San Jose Earthquakes
 
2017-04-17 09:27:57 PM  

Trocadero: So England should be one of the 4 best teams in the world b/c of their league development, right?


League dev is not equal to youth dev. They've farked up their youth development with Home Grown Nation qoutas that have led to the big clubs buying English players, registering them on the 25 man rosters and benching them. It has worked reasonably well in other countries, (the HGN) but thanks to the TV contracts the EPL has the clubs have too much money for the economics of such a system to work. You get hyperinflation on any English player that could conceivably be useful one day and they ride the pine.

MLS wanting to keep Americans here makes no sense either. The league exists to serve the NT's purposes in this country. The South American leagues are more than happy to let their players head to Europe, they know they are not and will never be Barca and accept that they can help the country be developing talent.
 
2017-04-17 09:31:30 PM  

cheezesub: Trocadero: So England should be one of the 4 best teams in the world b/c of their league development, right?

League dev is not equal to youth dev. They've farked up their youth development with Home Grown Nation qoutas that have led to the big clubs buying English players, registering them on the 25 man rosters and benching them. It has worked reasonably well in other countries, (the HGN) but thanks to the TV contracts the EPL has the clubs have too much money for the economics of such a system to work. You get hyperinflation on any English player that could conceivably be useful one day and they ride the pine.

MLS wanting to keep Americans here makes no sense either. The league exists to serve the NT's purposes in this country. The South American leagues are more than happy to let their players head to Europe, they know they are not and will never be Barca and accept that they can help the country be developing talent.


Don't forget that a lot of barra brava, actually organized criminal gangs, make a lot of money skimming off big Euro buyouts.
 
2017-04-17 09:43:28 PM  

cheezesub: MLS sucks. It's bad at player development. Maybe if they listened to criticism we wouldn't still be complaining about player development for the 35th consecutive year.


If the MLS is bad at player development where are all the well developed American born stars playing in other leagues/countries?

When even tiny countries produce more top class talent than the US, all the player development in the world isn't going to help the MLS. Can't really develop what's not there, and our best soccer players are playing basketball or football.
 
2017-04-17 09:45:51 PM  
MLS should clearly be USMNT's source for the vast majority of its talent pool, the academies are beginning to get built up and the skill level is clearly improving. It's just a given that most players are not going to be jumping ship to other leagues, skill level or no not everyone thrives in exotic foreign locales, even if it's Engerland.

HOWEVER

It is also beyond clear that the cream of the US' crop, our elite-level stars, our goal-scoring clean-sheeting badasses need to be playing at the goal-scoring clean-sheeting badass levels. This means not MLS. Even if it's mid-table Bundesliga or whatever. The world's best play in Europe. Our best should make every effort to join them.
 
2017-04-17 10:02:48 PM  

Cheeseface: MLS should clearly be USMNT's source for the vast majority of its talent pool, the academies are beginning to get built up and the skill level is clearly improving. It's just a given that most players are not going to be jumping ship to other leagues, skill level or no not everyone thrives in exotic foreign locales, even if it's Engerland.

HOWEVER

It is also beyond clear that the cream of the US' crop, our elite-level stars, our goal-scoring clean-sheeting badasses need to be playing at the goal-scoring clean-sheeting badass levels. This means not MLS. Even if it's mid-table Bundesliga or whatever. The world's best play in Europe. Our best should make every effort to join them.


I agree with your second statement but not your first. If a player has the talent to make real money in England, Spain, France, Germany, or Italy they damn well should go.
 
2017-04-17 10:08:35 PM  

cheezesub: MLS sucks. It's bad at player development. Maybe if they listened to criticism we wouldn't still be complaining about player development for the 35th consecutive year.


MLS isn't very good, but it is steadily improving.  It is quite a bit better than what it was even 10 years ago, and you can't even compare it to where it was 20 years ago.

And it's still probably the best bet for developing American players.  One or two elite guys like Pulisic aside, guys going overseas and rotting on a bench at a young age haven't exactly done wonders for their career.  Playing in MLS and then trying to make the jump is a better idea.

I mean yeah, if guys can get onto the fast track in the Barca academy or something, they should do that.  But for guys who aren't Messi, MLS is as good as we have for Americans, for all its flaws.
 
2017-04-17 10:15:04 PM  
As MLS goes, the future of American soccer will go. The more competitive the league is, the more numbers of American players will get a chance to play in a serious, competitive league, and the better our national team will become.

The more popular the league becomes here (and my god, could you have imagined the attendance numbers teams are pulling now 15 years ago?), the more kids will grow up watching it, and the more kids will want to play the sport.

We're not Belgium where players can travel an hour or two and play for leagues in England and France. Playing in Europe means moving halfway around the world, and we're never going to be able to do that in mass numbers. We need this league to be strong, and it gets stronger every year. More Giovincos will help.

If you've grown up watching EPL or Serie A, I know it isn't the prettiest soccer in the world, but if you live near a team, go to a game - it's affordable, and it sure is a hell of a lot of fun.
 
2017-04-17 10:17:36 PM  

cheezesub: Trocadero: So England should be one of the 4 best teams in the world b/c of their league development, right?

League dev is not equal to youth dev. They've farked up their youth development with Home Grown Nation qoutas that have led to the big clubs buying English players, registering them on the 25 man rosters and benching them. It has worked reasonably well in other countries, (the HGN) but thanks to the TV contracts the EPL has the clubs have too much money for the economics of such a system to work. You get hyperinflation on any English player that could conceivably be useful one day and they ride the pine.

MLS wanting to keep Americans here makes no sense either. The league exists to serve the NT's purposes in this country. The South American leagues are more than happy to let their players head to Europe, they know they are not and will never be Barca and accept that they can help the country be developing talent.


There are a lot of people that will argue that Brazil hasn't had the dominance it had during "The Beautiful Game" era because, as opposed to then when most of their players played domestically, most play overseas now. They've lost their own flair and style.

I'm not saying it's 100% right, but it's an interesting argument.
 
2017-04-17 10:23:50 PM  
Rich white kids playing soccer in the US is not going to bring home a World Cup.
 
2017-04-17 10:35:52 PM  
Every time I see USMNT, I think it's referring to ninja turtles.
 
2017-04-17 10:44:05 PM  

The Googles Do Nothing: Rich white kids playing soccer in the US is not going to bring home a World Cup.


No, but poor black and Mexican kids learning the game might.

A 6'4" power forward isn't going to get a D1 college scholarship, even if he's the best option his high school has at the 4. Put him in the goalie box, though? The skill sets translate very well.
 
2017-04-17 11:08:58 PM  

The Googles Do Nothing: Rich white kids playing soccer in the US is not going to bring home a World Cup.


Yeah, the U-20 MNT looks like Trump's cabinet
img.fark.net
 
2017-04-18 12:01:06 AM  
images2.nick.com
 
2017-04-18 12:21:35 AM  

js34603: Can't really develop what's not there, and our best soccer players are playing basketball or football


Horse hockey. We've got tons of kids playing soccer, thing is most of them are never seen by anyone who can spot talent. The only kids who have much chance are the ones whose parents can pony up the money for various teams. Don't get on one of those teams? You could be the next Messi and no one would know. And among all the kids who play soccer in the US, finding the next Messi wouldn't be shocking. Part of developing players is that the system we have doesn't even give a lot of kids a chance. The US needs to hire up a bunch of European scouts, give them each their own car and tell them to get busy checking out ever soccer game they can anywhere they can find it. Oh sure that'll upset the big bucks crowd, but that crowd should've never been there in the first place.
 
2017-04-18 01:24:22 AM  
I agree that there is a lot of hidden soccer talent in the United States. Unfortunately, the financial incentives are not there to find and develop that talent. MLS teams do have academies, but our population density / soccer player density is very low.  European clubs are businesses which have hundreds of other teams nearby which generate profit and can thereby offset the cost of player development.  American youth clubs are non-profit which get revenue from fee-paying parents who have a vested interest in their children, but not necessarily in the local club.  Well-to-do families can become mercenaries who travel far and wide for the best soccer opportunities, but the vast majority cannot afford that.  Sure, you might be lucky to get noticed and then play on the U17 national team, but getting noticed is the hard part.  Until we have multiple tiers of professional soccer and therefore more profit-generating clubs, there will be little incentive to pay someone to scout for budding talent.
 
2017-04-18 01:25:08 AM  

js34603: cheezesub: MLS sucks. It's bad at player development. Maybe if they listened to criticism we wouldn't still be complaining about player development for the 35th consecutive year.

If the MLS is bad at player development where are all the well developed American born stars playing in other leagues/countries?

When even tiny countries produce more top class talent than the US, all the player development in the world isn't going to help the MLS. Can't really develop what's not there, and our best soccer players are playing basketball or football.


Urugay is better than us. There are about 3 million Uruguayans. On top of that, players from other nations have mentioned how great our athletes are on the pitch. How many players are stronger than Brooks? Faster than Yedlin or Fabian Johnson? Not many. FJ was one of the fastest at the WC on the ball (if not the fastest IIRC) and everyone in England is astounded at how fast Yedlin is.

Stop with the shiatty excuses. It's coaching. It's mentality. USA swimming dominates with a tiny number of registered youths. The Netherlands manages to dominate field hockey and speed skating while tending to be great at soccer. MLS tends to play a negative brand of soccer. This shows in the players it attempts to develop. The Ajax youth squad develops more talent than the entire league over here on less money.
 
2017-04-18 01:28:43 AM  

Krazikarl: cheezesub: MLS sucks. It's bad at player development. Maybe if they listened to criticism we wouldn't still be complaining about player development for the 35th consecutive year.

MLS isn't very good, but it is steadily improving.  It is quite a bit better than what it was even 10 years ago, and you can't even compare it to where it was 20 years ago.

And it's still probably the best bet for developing American players.  One or two elite guys like Pulisic aside, guys going overseas and rotting on a bench at a young age haven't exactly done wonders for their career.  Playing in MLS and then trying to make the jump is a better idea.

I mean yeah, if guys can get onto the fast track in the Barca academy or something, they should do that.  But for guys who aren't Messi, MLS is as good as we have for Americans, for all its flaws.


It has improved, 10 years ago was a farking horror show. But it's still not good enough. Outside of FC Dallas the academies are farking awful.

You are generally correct, but the washout rate for youth prospects of any country is pretty high. A lot of kids fail to break into the big Euro sides. That doesn't mean they would've been better off playing below Championship level over here.
 
2017-04-18 01:33:45 AM  

organizmx: cheezesub: Trocadero: So England should be one of the 4 best teams in the world b/c of their league development, right?

League dev is not equal to youth dev. They've farked up their youth development with Home Grown Nation qoutas that have led to the big clubs buying English players, registering them on the 25 man rosters and benching them. It has worked reasonably well in other countries, (the HGN) but thanks to the TV contracts the EPL has the clubs have too much money for the economics of such a system to work. You get hyperinflation on any English player that could conceivably be useful one day and they ride the pine.

MLS wanting to keep Americans here makes no sense either. The league exists to serve the NT's purposes in this country. The South American leagues are more than happy to let their players head to Europe, they know they are not and will never be Barca and accept that they can help the country be developing talent.

There are a lot of people that will argue that Brazil hasn't had the dominance it had during "The Beautiful Game" era because, as opposed to then when most of their players played domestically, most play overseas now. They've lost their own flair and style.

I'm not saying it's 100% right, but it's an interesting argument.


It has more to do with their refusal to hire a foreign manager. They have more than enough talent.

/Also, starting Marcelo only works in setups where the rest of the back line can make up for his piss poor positioning. Drop him already.
 
2017-04-18 02:01:27 AM  
Y'all keep in mind that Klinsman didn't want to play Pulisic, but eventually caved.
 
2017-04-18 03:21:17 AM  

cheezesub: The Netherlands manages to dominate field hockey and speed skating while tending to be great at soccer.


Not so much right now, but the point still stands.
 
2017-04-18 05:47:08 AM  

Pentaxian: The Googles Do Nothing: Rich white kids playing soccer in the US is not going to bring home a World Cup.

Yeah, the U-20 MNT looks like Trump's cabinet
[img.fark.net image 850x425]


Crackers!
 
2017-04-18 08:01:52 AM  

cheezesub: Urugay is better than us. There are about 3 million Uruguayans. On top of that, players from other nations have mentioned how great our athletes are on the pitch. How many players are stronger than Brooks? Faster than Yedlin or Fabian Johnson? Not many. FJ was one of the fastest at the WC on the ball (if not the fastest IIRC) and everyone in England is astounded at how fast Yedlin is.

Stop with the shiatty excuses. It's coaching. It's mentality. USA swimming dominates with a tiny number of registered youths. The Netherlands manages to dominate field hockey and speed skating while tending to be great at soccer. MLS tends to play a negative brand of soccer. This shows in the players it attempts to develop. The Ajax youth squad develops more talent than the entire league over here on less money.


US coaches / scouts need to figure out that soccer is not a game dominated by athletes, like basketball, where being an athletic freak can bring you to the NBA. Similar to football.

It's a more of a defined skill game, like baseball where it's good to be an athlete, but to be in the top levels you have to have some super-fine skills.

US players are great runners and jumpers, but are awful passers, awful with their first touch, and awful finishers (respective to the top level players).

Klinsmann was right.. it is beyond pathetic and lazy that Landon would rather play in LA than try to compete in england.  Same with Dempsey... he stayed for a while, but he wanted to be comfortable rather than great.
 
2017-04-18 08:09:11 AM  

WhyteRaven74: but that crowd should've never been there in the first place.


Chuck effin' Blazer, man.
 
2017-04-18 08:11:08 AM  
Following up on myself, a big part of the 'problem' is kids don't play soccer in the US. They don't throw down their coats as goals and just play in the park. So they don't experiment with little flicks and have fun with the game.

Go to any park in Argentina and that's what the kids are doing. Almost every grown man could 'juggle' a soccer ball for a few kicks.

It's not about athleticism, it's about having a skill ingrained in your body.

Give them a baseball and they'll all throw 'like girls' just like if you give your average american a soccer ball, they'll be lucky to do 2 kick ups.
 
2017-04-18 08:19:06 AM  
Klinnsman was a good big picture guy but at details. His vision for where US Soccer should be going if we want to compete internationally was essentially correct, but subverted once it became apparent that the USMNT overachieved at the World Cup in 2014 before eventually settling back into their usual sort of mediocre excellence.

MugzyBrown: Klinsmann was right.. it is beyond pathetic and lazy that Landon would rather play in LA than try to compete in england.  Same with Dempsey... he stayed for a while, but he wanted to be comfortable rather than great.


Landon Donovan dominating MLS is the perfect metaphor the USMNT. We're (usually) the best team in CONCACAF (not so much lately), but it's because we're a big fish in a small pond. The US should qualify for every WC when playing Trinidad and Tobago at home means kicking a teenagers' pick-up game off the one good pitch in the country.

And USSF was so butthurt by Klinnsman they went and hired old tried n' true Bruce Arena, King of Mediocrity. That hire alone is completely indicative of the American attitude towards soccer - do enough to qualify, but don't change too much because you'll take power and dollars away from the old guys at the top.

Burn it all down.
 
2017-04-18 08:25:27 AM  

cheezesub: Pentaxian: Considering what a lousy coach Klinsy was, I think it was a good idea to ignore him.

Don't confuse the coach with the technical director.

/Coach wasn't that bad
//Led us out of what was by ELO ranking the 2nd toughest group in WC history.


The coach was that bad. He compounded it by picking awful players or players who he had to shoehorn into whatever system du jour he was playing that day. He had grandiose visions of where he wanted to take the USMNT but he lacked the wherewithal and support to a large extent to do it. Gulati gave him a really long leash but his abrasive personality and approach alienated a large chunk of players and MLS club directors.
 
2017-04-18 08:34:44 AM  
Oh, also:

Get rid of single-entity status if you want your garbage league to be more than a collection of 22 rec league teams that over-the-hill European stars retire to for the paycheck.
 
2017-04-18 08:37:43 AM  
Soccer will never be a big thing in the USA, they need to give up that dream, and just let it be what it is.

In Europe and the rest of the world - they do not have the other options for entertainment. Plus, it is a cultural thing. BUT most importantly - the rest of the world is poor compared to the USA - to play soccer all you need is a ball. This is why every kid grows up playing from Mexico to Africa to Spain to England, and this is why it is the worlds number one sport.
 
2017-04-18 08:46:49 AM  

Reanlous: Soccer will never be a big thing in the USA, they need to give up that dream, and just let it be what it is.


Soccer already is a pretty big thing. Of the team sports, it's probably 4th. Viewership is about equal with hockey and participation for youth it's huge.

There's just no good nation league to watch because of  

bainsguy: Oh, also:

Get rid of single-entity status if you want your garbage league to be more than a collection of 22 rec league teams that over-the-hill European stars retire to for the paycheck.


The MLS is like some mediocre cartel designed to make people money with shiat soccer.  They need to let teams really open the purse strings and get some real talent.

You're not going to get prime Ronaldo, but you'll get the next level down, which would be great.  Or maybe you could poach the 19 year old star who wants to get exposure rather than sit on the Barca B team.
 
2017-04-18 09:16:52 AM  

organizmx: The more popular the league becomes here (and my god, could you have imagined the attendance numbers teams are pulling now 15 years ago?), the more kids will grow up watching it, and the more kids will want to play the sport.


We've been hearing this since Pele came to the Cosmos. Tons of American kids play soccer, and then by middle school, they stop. Tons of Americans watch soccer--the Premier League, which gets more rights money than MLS does from US networks.
 
2017-04-18 09:21:07 AM  

ElwoodCuse: We've been hearing this since Pele came to the Cosmos. Tons of American kids play soccer, and then by middle school, they stop. Tons of Americans watch soccer--the Premier League, which gets more rights money than MLS does from US networks.


This is because the path to professional soccer in the US doesn't work because the way the NFL/NBA profits off of the idiotic NCAA system doesn't fit the European soccer model. Your career is supposed to be near its apex by time you're 22, not just starting.
 
2017-04-18 09:49:50 AM  

ElwoodCuse: organizmx: The more popular the league becomes here (and my god, could you have imagined the attendance numbers teams are pulling now 15 years ago?), the more kids will grow up watching it, and the more kids will want to play the sport.

We've been hearing this since Pele came to the Cosmos. Tons of American kids play soccer, and then by middle school, they stop. Tons of Americans watch soccer--the Premier League, which gets more rights money than MLS does from US networks.


Sigh. You have been hearing that since NASL was the only league. Now there is a professional soccer league -- admittedly with poor caliber soccer I don't prefer to watch -- with a regular viewing audience, spectators always in the stand, and a cautious growth plan feeding soccer players into a national team that's made every world cup since 1990 (something we hadn't done in ~40 years since the early 50s). The growth of Americans playing soccer past a young age has also grown exponentially to.

You'll get no argument from me that the best athletes are generally not playing soccer -- instead basketball, football, and often baseball -- but if you think its the same now as it was in the 1970s and 1980s, you're either a complete moron or have been hiding your head under a rock since the 1980s. I don't know if MLS will ever expand to a point where it competes with MLB, NBA, or NFL, but it doesn't need to. Countries with 1/20th our population and 1/100th the money manage to put together competitive teams. Whether they play in MLS or in Europe, we just need the players to play competitively.
 
2017-04-18 09:53:38 AM  

MugzyBrown: ElwoodCuse: We've been hearing this since Pele came to the Cosmos. Tons of American kids play soccer, and then by middle school, they stop. Tons of Americans watch soccer--the Premier League, which gets more rights money than MLS does from US networks.

This is because the path to professional soccer in the US doesn't work because the way the NFL/NBA profits off of the idiotic NCAA system doesn't fit the European soccer model. Your career is supposed to be near its apex by time you're 22, not just starting.


Which, in a political sense, is pretty damn amusing.  The NCAA system is essentially communism or extreme socialism - all the workers are paid the same, regardless of their value.  So Lamar Jackson and Leonard Fournette subsidize the backup punter and offensive tackle, even though the latter two are easily replaceable and don't add much value.  But the punter and tackle receive the same benefit as Jackson and Fournette.  Meanwhile, the only people actually getting rich are the government administrators - the AD, President, and the coach.

The European system is almost pure capitalism.  People are paid what they're worth and can choose a variety of different paths.  It's interesting.
 
2017-04-18 10:03:19 AM  

redmid17: Countries with 1/20th our population and 1/100th the money manage to put together competitive teams.


And this is why I'm tired of hearing "no really we're just a couple years away from being a world soccer power"
 
2017-04-18 10:21:09 AM  

ElwoodCuse: redmid17: Countries with 1/20th our population and 1/100th the money manage to put together competitive teams.

And this is why I'm tired of hearing "no really we're just a couple years away from being a world soccer power"


We've been an up-and-coming world soccer power since we hosted the World Cup in '94. Next time around, we promise! We'll do it, guys! We'll make it past the first elimination round! We'll make the semis!

Nope. No. Nuh-uh.  Not if our domestic league looks like it does and our USMNT members continue to play in it.
 
2017-04-18 10:23:54 AM  

ElwoodCuse: redmid17: Countries with 1/20th our population and 1/100th the money manage to put together competitive teams.

And this is why I'm tired of hearing "no really we're just a couple years away from being a world soccer power"


Yeah and those countries don't play any other sports, whereas we have 3 1/2 sports more popular than soccer (hockey is played by fewer people but is more popular to watch). People saying "US is only a few years away.." don't know what they are talking about, but at least they have seen a lot of progress to it.

I don't know if the US will ever be a continuous heavyweight, much like MLS being an awesome league, but much of your problems with soccer seem to stem from your complete ignorance of anything after Pele retired. Unless you're one of maybe 5-6 teams (Brazil, Argentina, Spain, Germany, Italy) you're not a world soccer power, imo. England won once at home 50 years ago and France won 18 years ago with probably the best generation of soccer players in their history. Cindarella stories don't really happen much with them winning. Closest I can think of was Greece winning Euro 2004, which definitely isn't the World Cup. Some teams have peaked at #3 in their initial WC appearance or a rare one, like South Korea and Croatia, but that's about the best that's happened.

I also have to admit I'm amazed you're even in the thread. You clearly don't like soccer and don't keep up with it. Just a thread shiatting then?
 
2017-04-18 10:24:51 AM  

redmid17: Whether they play in MLS or in Europe, we just need the players to play competitively.


The point is that MLS isn't the competitive soccer you're saying we need our players to play. It's structured poorly and will never challenge the good players to get better. Klinsmann was wrong about a lot of things (tactics, positioning, playing Altidore), but he 100% correct that if we want to compete with the rest of the world, we can't field MLS players and expect to do more than barely get out of the group stage of World Cup. MLS execs are whining because he's calling the validity of their cash cow into question.
 
2017-04-18 10:29:38 AM  

redmid17: ElwoodCuse: redmid17: Countries with 1/20th our population and 1/100th the money manage to put together competitive teams.

And this is why I'm tired of hearing "no really we're just a couple years away from being a world soccer power"

Yeah and those countries don't play any other sports, whereas we have 3 1/2 sports more popular than soccer (hockey is played by fewer people but is more popular to watch). People saying "US is only a few years away.." don't know what they are talking about, but at least they have seen a lot of progress to it.

I don't know if the US will ever be a continuous heavyweight, much like MLS being an awesome league, but much of your problems with soccer seem to stem from your complete ignorance of anything after Pele retired. Unless you're one of maybe 5-6 teams (Brazil, Argentina, Spain, Germany, Italy) you're not a world soccer power, imo. England won once at home 50 years ago and France won 18 years ago with probably the best generation of soccer players in their history. Cindarella stories don't really happen much with them winning. Closest I can think of was Greece winning Euro 2004, which definitely isn't the World Cup. Some teams have peaked at #3 in their initial WC appearance or a rare one, like South Korea and Croatia, but that's about the best that's happened.

I also have to admit I'm amazed you're even in the thread. You clearly don't like soccer and don't keep up with it. Just a thread shiatting then?


So your argument is "We won't/can't be an international soccer power because we're not a South American or European heavyweight, so why try?" F*ck that. We have the talent and resources, but we're using both of them to fill the pockets of US Soccer executives (See: Chuck Blazer) and forcing our sh*tty domestic league to be thoroughly average across the board rather than getting rid of single-entity status and instituting relegation because, again, the people in charge don't particularly care about the quality of the product their putting out, they care that people are paying for that product.
 
2017-04-18 10:35:02 AM  

bainsguy: Klinnsman was a good big picture guy but at details. His vision for where US Soccer should be going if we want to compete internationally was essentially correct, but subverted once it became apparent that the USMNT overachieved at the World Cup in 2014 before eventually settling back into their usual sort of mediocre excellence.

MugzyBrown: Klinsmann was right.. it is beyond pathetic and lazy that Landon would rather play in LA than try to compete in england.  Same with Dempsey... he stayed for a while, but he wanted to be comfortable rather than great.

Landon Donovan dominating MLS is the perfect metaphor the USMNT. We're (usually) the best team in CONCACAF (not so much lately), but it's because we're a big fish in a small pond. The US should qualify for every WC when playing Trinidad and Tobago at home means kicking a teenagers' pick-up game off the one good pitch in the country.

And USSF was so butthurt by Klinnsman they went and hired old tried n' true Bruce Arena, King of Mediocrity. That hire alone is completely indicative of the American attitude towards soccer - do enough to qualify, but don't change too much because you'll take power and dollars away from the old guys at the top.

Burn it all down.


So much this. The structure of American soccer will never allow for a World Cup-winning national team or a great domestic league. I agree, Klinsmann saw the big picture, but didn't have the details nailed down on how to get there - and that ambiguity is what let the system resist him. Everyone wants their little fiefdoms rather than building something great, and I don't think Klinsmann was prepared for that.
 
2017-04-18 10:43:17 AM  

Truman Burbank: bainsguy: Klinnsman was a good big picture guy but at details. His vision for where US Soccer should be going if we want to compete internationally was essentially correct, but subverted once it became apparent that the USMNT overachieved at the World Cup in 2014 before eventually settling back into their usual sort of mediocre excellence.

MugzyBrown: Klinsmann was right.. it is beyond pathetic and lazy that Landon would rather play in LA than try to compete in england.  Same with Dempsey... he stayed for a while, but he wanted to be comfortable rather than great.

Landon Donovan dominating MLS is the perfect metaphor the USMNT. We're (usually) the best team in CONCACAF (not so much lately), but it's because we're a big fish in a small pond. The US should qualify for every WC when playing Trinidad and Tobago at home means kicking a teenagers' pick-up game off the one good pitch in the country.

And USSF was so butthurt by Klinnsman they went and hired old tried n' true Bruce Arena, King of Mediocrity. That hire alone is completely indicative of the American attitude towards soccer - do enough to qualify, but don't change too much because you'll take power and dollars away from the old guys at the top.

Burn it all down.

So much this. The structure of American soccer will never allow for a World Cup-winning national team or a great domestic league. I agree, Klinsmann saw the big picture, but didn't have the details nailed down on how to get there - and that ambiguity is what let the system resist him. Everyone wants their little fiefdoms rather than building something great, and I don't think Klinsmann was prepared for that.


There are not enough professional clubs in the US to institute relegation and not enough local interest in professional soccer to keep people interested in teams in lower leagues. Any relegated team would probably struggle to get an average of 10k people through the doors again, so teams wouldn't even have the sort of financial resources they have now. Relegation would pretty much doom the MLS to the level of competition it had 10-20 years ago.

Single entity probably needs to go, but I understand why the MLS is cautious.
 
2017-04-18 10:49:40 AM  

llortcM_yllort: I understand why the MLS is cautious.


Cautious was fine 20 years ago, but MLS is no longer a burgeoning league that needs careful nurturing to stay afloat. It's time to grow up. MLS consistently sh*ts on USL when it would be easy enough to set up a relegation system with them if MLS weren't so up their own assholes about being the dominant soccer league in this country.
 
2017-04-18 10:57:00 AM  
Forget "international power" can we at least win a World Cup knockout stage game?

redmid17: I also have to admit I'm amazed you're even in the thread. You clearly don't like soccer and don't keep up with it. Just a thread shiatting then?


You clearly don't know anything about me so shut your hole
 
2017-04-18 11:08:02 AM  

Pentaxian: The Googles Do Nothing: Rich white kids playing soccer in the US is not going to bring home a World Cup.

Yeah, the U-20 MNT looks like Trump's cabinet
[img.fark.net image 850x425]


Under-20, you say?

So, teenagers?

Perhaps a Teenage Men's National Team - TMNT?
 
2017-04-18 11:33:14 AM  

llortcM_yllort: There are not enough professional clubs in the US to institute relegation and not enough local interest in professional soccer to keep people interested in teams in lower leagues. Any relegated team would probably struggle to get an average of 10k people through the doors again, so teams wouldn't even have the sort of financial ...


I'm not as concerned about pro/rel as some, but there are more than enough clubs to institute it and I think it's becoming necessary. The problem is that MLS doesn't want it because it wants to protect its investors rather than grow the game. It also would have the lower leagues act like Minor League Baseball does, rather than develop independent teams in various cities that rise or fall on their own accord. The lower leagues want to be independent entities and are at war with each other for positioning, and the politics of soccer are even worse at the Division II and III level than they are at the MLS level because of that.

Organizationally, the US needs to have all its leagues be one league, controlled by either the USSF or a new entity that is the league. At worst, it needs to be the English setup, where the Premier League runs its own affairs but is closely tied with the primary league. It needs to develop teams in more cities under that common league, rather than letting a second-division league act as a training league. It needs pro/rel because teams need to be able to grow organically, rather than trying to fight with each other to buy a spot in MLS.

US Soccer has a whole host of problems off the field, and they all stem from trying to force American-style sports structures onto a game that developed its own.
 
2017-04-18 11:56:58 AM  
bainsguy  redmid17: ElwoodCuse: redmid17: Countries with 1/20th our population and 1/100th the money manage to put together competitive teams.

And this is why I'm tired of hearing "no really we're just a couple years away from being a world soccer power"

Yeah and those countries don't play any other sports, whereas we have 3 1/2 sports more popular than soccer (hockey is played by fewer people but is more popular to watch). People saying "US is only a few years away.." don't know what they are talking about, but at least they have seen a lot of progress to it.

I don't know if the US will ever be a continuous heavyweight, much like MLS being an awesome league, but much of your problems with soccer seem to stem from your complete ignorance of anything after Pele retired. Unless you're one of maybe 5-6 teams (Brazil, Argentina, Spain, Germany, Italy) you're not a world soccer power, imo. England won once at home 50 years ago and France won 18 years ago with probably the best generation of soccer players in their history. Cindarella stories don't really happen much with them winning. Closest I can think of was Greece winning Euro 2004, which definitely isn't the World Cup. Some teams have peaked at #3 in their initial WC appearance or a rare one, like South Korea and Croatia, but that's about the best that's happened.

I also have to admit I'm amazed you're even in the thread. You clearly don't like soccer and don't keep up with it. Just a thread shiatting then?

So your argument is "We won't/can't be an international soccer power because we're not a South American or European heavyweight, so why try?" F*ck that. We have the talent and resources, but we're using both of them to fill the pockets of US Soccer executives (See: Chuck Blazer) and forcing our sh*tty domestic league to be thoroughly average across the board rather than getting rid of single-entity status and instituting relegation because, again, the people in charge don't particularly care about the quality of the product their putting out, they care that people are paying for that product.


No that's not my argument. That'd be a f*cking stupid argument. You can tell by my use of present tense instead of future tense (or just generally reading the sentences, one after the other, so they make sense). There are currently 5-6 soccer powers, and then you have the continuousish heavyweights like Netherlands, France, Portugal, that always make the WC but rarely if ever win it. . I don't think the US will ever be a soccer power, but that's because we have too much invested, from a player and money standpoint, in at least 3 other sports. Being a team that routinely makes it to the final 8 or so in the world cup is well within reach of the US, just not the immediate future.

As far as relegation goes, we're looking at at least 20 years before it's feasible at every level, Soccer in the US grew from the top down, not the bottom up, so the US just realistically doesn't have club infrastructure and fan base to handle it. Fan support dries up, teams go bankrupt, and no owners want to keep the teams because they lose money which translates to no one is willing to start a new team. People can kick and whine and moan all they want about the cautious approach, but the league lost 2 franchises within the first decade of founding because of aggressive expansion. Single entity needs to go at some point but I don't see it disappearing until USSF fixes the 2nd division free-for-all mess they let fester and we get a set of genuine feeder clubs from lower divisions.

People who ignore the practical barriers to implementing euro style soccer leagues in the US are just as bad as the ones who biatch and moan about soccer "being the next big thing", just a different pot of ignorance.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report