But yes, they are a shadow of what they used to be. I see multiple issues:
- several key players spending too much of their energy on building their personal brands, rather than remaining focused on their game
- poor fundamentals in execution (bad passes, poor first touches, bad tackling, weak shots...)
- very poor tactics by the coach with a game model that seems out of sorts
Unless something changes really quick, I don't see them getting to the medal round.
It happens to the best. Look at what happened to Germany and Italy a few years ago on the men's side. Life cycles and the USWNT one might be coming to an abrupt end.
But yes, they are a shadow of what they used to be. I see multiple issues:
- several key players spending too much of their energy on building their personal brands, rather than remaining focused on their game
- poor fundamentals in execution (bad passes, poor first touches, bad tackling, weak shots...)
- very poor tactics by the coach with a game model that seems out of sorts
Unless something changes really quick, I don't see them getting to the medal round.
It happens to the best. Look at what happened to Germany and Italy a few years ago on the men's side. Life cycles and the USWNT one might be coming to an abrupt end.
Also several players selected precisely because they're brands, marketing/sponsorship opportunities. Even so some of the younger players aren't impressive either. This is what has been warned about for several years now - other nations catching up while the US rested on its laurels.
But yes, they are a shadow of what they used to be. I see multiple issues:
- several key players spending too much of their energy on building their personal brands, rather than remaining focused on their game
- poor fundamentals in execution (bad passes, poor first touches, bad tackling, weak shots...)
- very poor tactics by the coach with a game model that seems out of sorts
Unless something changes really quick, I don't see them getting to the medal round.
It happens to the best. Look at what happened to Germany and Italy a few years ago on the men's side. Life cycles and the USWNT one might be coming to an abrupt end.
Everything you say is true except the nonsense about "brand building". Other athletes do come under that kind of scrutiny when they are in Gatorade or Subway commercials.
There is a lot of free time for pro athletes. They are not grinding 8 hours a day.
Everything you say is true except the nonsense about "brand building". Other athletes do come under that kind of scrutiny when they are in Gatorade or Subway commercials.
There is a lot of free time for pro athletes. They are not grinding 8 hours a day.
As we know they're not exactly the highest paid athletes so I don't blame them for trying to make more $ if opportunities are presented to them. Even much higher paid athletes do the same. However I agree with above that some of the players were selected because they were seen as marketing opportunities for USWNT, not because they were the best players for the team. Those players also happen to be older....time for a big re-set before the WC. Figure out who really belongs on the NT and take steps to get them better prepared. Playing easy warmup matches against poor teams clearly wasn't the way to go.
But yes, they are a shadow of what they used to be. I see multiple issues:
- several key players spending too much of their energy on building their personal brands, rather than remaining focused on their game
- poor fundamentals in execution (bad passes, poor first touches, bad tackling, weak shots...)
- very poor tactics by the coach with a game model that seems out of sorts
Unless something changes really quick, I don't see them getting to the medal round.
It happens to the best. Look at what happened to Germany and Italy a few years ago on the men's side. Life cycles and the USWNT one might be coming to an abrupt end.
yes and Germany and Italy had soccer leadership that knew how to turn it around and got national buy-in on their plans. USSF is not a leader and is incapable of doing that.
As we know they're not exactly the highest paid athletes so I don't blame them for trying to make more $ if opportunities are presented to them. Even much higher paid athletes do the same. However I agree with above that some of the players were selected because they were seen as marketing opportunities for USWNT, not because they were the best players for the team. Those players also happen to be older....time for a big re-set before the WC. Figure out who really belongs on the NT and take steps to get them better prepared. Playing easy warmup matches against poor teams clearly wasn't the way to go.
Why they were selected is one thing but the point implied that their ability to market themselves is the reason for their poor play.
Doing commercials is not detracting from their play, their age is.
Building their brand is detracting from their preparation
Inane and uninformed.
What is starting to hurt the US is their reliance on players from the NWSL.
It is a subpar league compared to European counterparts and the lack of quality week in and week out is taking its toll. Their competitors are playing in Europe regularly.
Our players hold their own while competing in those leagues, but those are different squads in total.
What is starting to hurt the US is their reliance on players from the NWSL.
It is a subpar league compared to European counterparts and the lack of quality week in and week out is taking its toll. Their competitors are playing in Europe regularly.
Our players hold their own while competing in those leagues, but those are different squads in total.
Agreed, and the days of relying on D1 players may soon be waning as well. That used to give us an advantage because women internationally had fewer outlets to play and train. Now it's changing, quickly. Our better players are going abroad to play - some not always with great success - while others languish in the NWSL or UWS for the summer, then it's back to college ball (as described high school on steroids).
But yes, they are a shadow of what they used to be. I see multiple issues:
- several key players spending too much of their energy on building their personal brands, rather than remaining focused on their game
- poor fundamentals in execution (bad passes, poor first touches, bad tackling, weak shots...)
- very poor tactics by the coach with a game model that seems out of sorts
Unless something changes really quick, I don't see them getting to the medal round.
It happens to the best. Look at what happened to Germany and Italy a few years ago on the men's side. Life cycles and the USWNT one might be coming to an abrupt end.
In general, I agree with this, but I think we should put the emphasis on the coach.
Where was the midfield today? Since when did the uswnt play constant direct style with long ball after long ball from the back to the wings/striker completely bypassing the center mids, and insisting on this even though it resulted in loss of possession 90% of the time? Where was the desire to keep possession and establish some sort of rhythm before attacking? So either the system chosen by the coach is wrong for these players OR the players aren't executing properly.
Either way, it was one of the most disjointed performances I've ever seen from the team.
In general, I agree with this, but I think we should put the emphasis on the coach.
Where was the midfield today? Since when did the uswnt play constant direct style with long ball after long ball from the back to the wings/striker completely bypassing the center mids, and insisting on this even though it resulted in loss of possession 90% of the time? Where was the desire to keep possession and establish some sort of rhythm before attacking? So either the system chosen by the coach is wrong for these players OR the players aren't executing properly.
Either way, it was one of the most disjointed performances I've ever seen from the team.
NCFC would fare better as a squad than this bunch.
Comment