U-17 wnt

[Unregistered]

Whoever brought up a residency type program during the summer is on to something.

However, it’s my understanding that LESS camps are coming, not more.

There is currently no u14 gnt coach or u16 gnt coach under contract. I guess since they have such a successful GDA program, that’s all they need...

That was me. I'm, not sure more frequent short camps are a solution. There's not enough time to build momentum and consistency. It's also tough on players and school commitments. That's why I think a summer program plus the regular year get togethers would go a long way to improvement. They also could invite more prospects and make a bigger program, at least for a portion of the time.

The lack of a committed coach....no brainer there.

[Unregistered]

That was me. I'm, not sure more frequent short camps are a solution. There's not enough time to build momentum and consistency. It's also tough on players and school commitments. That's why I think a summer program plus the regular year get togethers would go a long way to improvement. They also could invite more prospects and make a bigger program, at least for a portion of the time.

The lack of a committed coach....no brainer there.

(1) A residency camp at U14-U18 won't undo the damage to player development done from U6-U14. There is a reason the golden generation from La Masia started younger than that.

(2) I've heard it said that one of our problems is limiting the player pool too early (a kid enters the program at U14, and the program sticks with them even though they should be replaced). A residency camp might make that problem worse. The most successful men's international teams (to the best of my knowledge) add/drop players all the time from a wide player pool.

(3) The incentives of the player and the organization have to be aligned. A residency camp won't do that. Maybe if the players came with a sponsor/coach, and if the player washed out, the coach was sent home, too?

(4) "Send more money" (i.e., fund my residency camp) is almost always the wrong approach to any problem that involves a bureaucracy.

(5) To the best of my knowledge, the only systematic approaches which have worked (Iceland, Germany's success of a few years ago) all involved expanding scouting and improving youth coaching.

- a coach

[Unregistered]

What bothered me most was style if play. Are they being coached to play so direct? If theory is we are more athletic and we will jam it down their throats we better think again. NPK possession with less athletism just schooled us.

We weren’t more athletic across the board.

There were a couple players that looked faster, more athletic, but not everyone. We looked gassed also. Chasing their possession around I guess.

[Unregistered]

We weren’t more athletic across the board.

There were a couple players that looked faster, more athletic, but not everyone. We looked gassed also. Chasing their possession around I guess.

Diasagee. I was actually shocked how many times NPk players got chased down from behind after a good through ball. If they were more athletic it pains me to think how much worse it could have been

[Unregistered]

I would start by getting rid of the center of the field. They were terrible. Maybe it was a bad day, but they couldn’t keep the ball or advance it. I have to admit/hate to admit that the Stars girls looked good.

Which one looked good....the one who was subbed off first or the one in the back? Let’s be honest this was a failure of the system. From the selection to coaching no one is without blame. Watching the backs pass the ball back and forth and then back to the GK which then gets launched up the field to an invisible midfield is maddening. How anyone can root for that style of soccer is beyond me. Number 4 should never see the field again for the US she was that bad. I’m not sure I’ve seen a player who’s job it is to cover the post shy away from a ball like that ever.

[Unregistered]

Which one looked good....the one who was subbed off first or the one in the back? Let’s be honest this was a failure of the system. From the selection to coaching no one is without blame. Watching the backs pass the ball back and forth and then back to the GK which then gets launched up the field to an invisible midfield is maddening. How anyone can root for that style of soccer is beyond me. Number 4 should never see the field again for the US she was that bad. I’m not sure I’ve seen a player who’s job it is to cover the post shy away from a ball like that ever.

I thought they both looked good. I agree that the midfield was invisible.

[Unregistered]

Which one looked good....the one who was subbed off first or the one in the back? Let’s be honest this was a failure of the system. From the selection to coaching no one is without blame. Watching the backs pass the ball back and forth and then back to the GK which then gets launched up the field to an invisible midfield is maddening. How anyone can root for that style of soccer is beyond me. Number 4 should never see the field again for the US she was that bad. I’m not sure I’ve seen a player who’s job it is to cover the post shy away from a ball like that ever.

When I watch high-level games through (what I flatter myself to be) coach's eyes, I usually spot some single CORRECTABLE aspect, or small number of CORRECTABLE aspects, of each team's game. For Cameroon, I might've said "keeping their tempers," or "consistency." For Korea, I might've said finishing (like I said earlier, #10 made the wrong decision when through on goal at least twice, missing two likely goals). During the game (if you're in the technical area), you try to correct the problems on the fly. After the game, you plan training sessions to correct the problem(s).

But for the US, in both games, every aspect needed total overhaul. There was no "fix this aspect and we'll get back on track." Only a total and complete failure of the system can explain the selection and training of this team and its coach.

- a coach

[Unregistered]

I thought they both looked good. I agree that the midfield was invisible.

This is where the discussion gets kind of stupid. its not about absolving the locals. The whole team was poor - the end.

[Unregistered]

When I watch high-level games through (what I flatter myself to be) coach's eyes, I usually spot some single CORRECTABLE aspect, or small number of CORRECTABLE aspects, of each team's game. For Cameroon, I might've said "keeping their tempers," or "consistency." For Korea, I might've said finishing (like I said earlier, #10 made the wrong decision when through on goal at least twice, missing two likely goals). During the game (if you're in the technical area), you try to correct the problems on the fly. After the game, you plan training sessions to correct the problem(s).

But for the US, in both games, every aspect needed total overhaul. There was no "fix this aspect and we'll get back on track." Only a total and complete failure of the system can explain the selection and training of this team and its coach.

- a coach

Yes. I have tried to raise this over the years and it goes nowhere. You get accused of having an agenda. My only agenda is getting better.

[Unregistered]

Time for some accountability because this is not our best.

[Unregistered]

This is where the discussion gets kind of stupid. its not about absolving the locals. The whole team was poor - the end.

You are right. It is about picking on the locals. The end to you, buddy.

[Unregistered]

You are right. It is about picking on the locals. The end to you, buddy.

Thanks dad, you are always there for me!

[Unregistered]

Thanks dad, you are always there for me!

Not dad. I would bet a million dollars if I had it that no NT dad is on this site. It's for us wannabes.

[Unregistered]

Not dad. I would bet a million dollars if I had it that no NT dad is on this site. It's for us wannabes.

I know for a fact that N T parents are on here. How else is the world going to know about their experiences?

[Unregistered]

It is only NT parents and a few others. Who else really?