Christian Pulisic helped Chelsea to win the Champions League. Setting aside that he should have scored yesterday, is he the real deal that proves US soccer players have improved to be world-class or is he a one-off wonder?
-
-
There are now a number of US players at good to great European teams. If a few more of them rise to the top that would be something.
Of course the real indictment of US soccer is that these boys have to leave the US in order to become players who can compete in Europe. *That* is pathetic, actually. But, it all adds up slowly. If we get a few more players who know how to play st a top level, the men's team might have a hope of doing better, etc. -
Yes unfortunately many of the success stories left and/or had the benefit of dual citizenship that gave them training opportunities elsewhere. The other pathetic thing is half the MLS draft is international players and internationals account for a large percentage of US college spots. College coaches think those so called "rejects" from international clubs are better than our US trained players. When those trends start to reverse + US teams not only qualifying for big international events and actually doing decently in them? Then I'll agree we're moving in the right direction. Right now we are not.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
Pulisic is a squad player on a top team. How is that evidence of US soccer "on the rise" ? It sounds like he and a few other individuals are, not the collective.Comment
-
Pulisic is bench player.
He can’t even start regularly let alone be a superstar.
Until the US gets someone with REAL star potential or actually does something in the World Cup, US Soccer will continually be a gong show.Comment
-
You are ridiculous. A bench player on the best team in Europe, so, the best team in the world just about? Give Pulisic some credit. He is an excellent player.
That does not mean US soccer is doing well.Comment
-
Agreed. "A few" more going pro abroad is good but it's hardly representative. None are international stars, many were blessed with two passports. Then there's our inability to qualify for the Olympics and WC when it wasn't that long ago we used to. As another mentioned MLS and college rosters have loads of internationals.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
So no, overall we are not making progress. Even if we were, we're doing it fast enough to keep pace with the rest of the world.Comment
-
-
They are not the best team. They were the best team on the day. He is a very good player, no one disputes that. he is not a regular starter. FACT. If you want to change the OP to, is CP a good player, then fine. Attaching US soccer's progress to individuals is not the way to measure it. The collective needs work as opposed to trying to link it to how certain individuals with mitigating circumstances have performed.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
CP has had a fine season.Comment
-
Agreed with both statements. In a championship final with a 1 goal difference, they put Pulisic in and they wouldn’t take that chance if they didn’t feel he was the best man to contribute. But would I say he’s emblematic of American players - no way. He’s been fortunate to have a father who understands the game and has given him opportunities to play in Europe since his teens. That isn’t the average American’s experience. Has US soccer gotten better, yes off a very low base; but outside of a dozen or so players they aren’t world class.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
Biggest problem to me is that MLS has not been a true pro pathway for homegrown talent and a breeding ground for a decent American style of play. They are too reliant on foreign players and it is terrible soccer. I watched 5 minutes of the LA vs SJ game and turned it off. Soooo much space and time with players dribbling the entire length of the field and then booting the ball away. Total garbage. The college game continues to be a distraction when players are in their prime development years when they should be going pro.Comment
-
Agree with the above, and would add that a huge problem is the proliferation of leagues. It's impossible for there to be a straightforward path from bottom to top. I have a kid graduating high school and about to play in college, and *I* can't keep the leagues straight! A million clubs have "Academy " in their name (back when the DA existed), and as a newbie parent it was truly difficult to figure out! One clear path would go a long way towards IDing talented players.
Improving coaching in the younger years a la Iceland would also pay big dividends.
I am encouraged by the Americans playing in Europe, but I do think US soccer is a disaster and a disgrace.Comment
-
Problem is there'sOriginally posted by Unregistered View Post
1) no effective leadership. USSF is a joke. Germany, Iceland and other nations that have improved their performance had effective leadership and common buy-in from multiple groups. We have too many g-dam leagues and clubs who make more money with a fragmented landscape. Pay to play is obviously another big issue here that doesn't happen (to the same extent) elsewhere.
2) Americans are too impatient and too obsessed with winning/fast results. Change is hard and it takes time. Iceland didn't get there overnight. Building a supply of quality ulittle coaches takes time and money. Many ulittle programs can't afford paid coaches, yet relying on poorly training volunteer coaches isn't working eitherComment
-
Well, Europe does have a lot of leagues too to be fair and it’s not always a straight line for those players either. For example, England has 3 or 4 leagues below EPL. But you are hitting the nail on the head with coaching and ID. No consistency here.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
DA was a very good thing, but expecting a national body like US Soccer to run a development league forever was naive. There needed to be a handoff to MLS for a pro pathway, but the level of commitment to their academies is spotty. And you don’t need to look beyond the fact that MLS allows so many pathways for foreign talent to see why. Each team gets 8 international slots that they can trade so some have had as many as 11 slots. Then there are loopholes that allow special status (refugee, etc.) and non-citizen “homegrown” players to come up thru the MLS academies. So basically you have MLS teams with 10 or more internationals on a max roster size of 30. Those often end up as your starters. Obviously, European teams have tons of internationals too, but their domestic pro leagues had generations to develop homegrown players to compete where MLS didn’t. If MLS had been required to reduce their international slots in favor of US-born homegrowns when DA started, the US pro landscape would be much better.Comment
-
the "problem" if there is one, is the incentives are not consistent with producing a smaller number of world class players. They are aligned with making MONEY from Youth sports. Its a volume game here.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
Pulisic is WAY overrated. Be honest, Roman spent that money on him to boost value for the US tv contract / sell more kits. There are countless european talents who are better but he gets press because he is american.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
He has speed but not world class 1v1 skills. Imagine being a #10 and coming off the bench. Disgraceful.
Plus he is injured constantly.Comment
Comment