|
Post by Soccerhouse on Aug 13, 2018 7:51:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Aug 13, 2018 9:50:06 GMT -5
tied 2-2, they are going home unfortunately. summary I read was there only tactic was forcing through balls to Smith -- granted I didn't watch
first goal for spain -- one of the worst clears you will ever see -
2nd goal for spain - looks like the keeper should have had it
1st goal for USA when down 2-0
2nd goal for USA at 2-1, deflection
|
|
|
Post by zizou on Aug 13, 2018 15:18:23 GMT -5
Fortunately the U-15s closed the deal. After a kind of embarrassing early loss to Portugal. Doesn't SoCal itself have more players than Portugal?
I have yet to watch this U-20 match. I did watch the first two. The only one that mattered was against Japan. In that match, the US U-20s were overwhelmed in midfield and looked like they had one idea: get it to the fast girl up top and hope she can do something. They looked like they were trying to play out of the back without the midfielders looking like they knew how to get in pockets to make themselves available. It was shockingly naive play. Who is this coach of this team? From what I saw there were players out here that simply cannot be the best U-20 players at their positions in the USA. It is not possible. Some of them have big names and have been in the system for a long time.
On another note, this is not a new problem. here is what has happened with the U-17 WNT in the World Cup: 2008-Runner up 2010-Did not qualify 2012-Group stage exit 2014-Did not quality 2016-Group stage exit
Obviously USSF has not been doing a good job with this age group for some time. And this 2016 group just contributed to the current U-20s.
The U-20s have taken a bit of a different path. These are now mostly players who have been in the college system for at least a year: 2008-Champion 2010-Quarters 2012-Champion 2014-Quarters 2016-4th 2018- Group state exit
That is not terrible, pretty decent actually, except for 2018. Nowadays the U-20s are also playing against teams who are composed of professionals and get much more time together than do our players. Note that ECNL started in 2009, so the beginning of the U-17 decline is hardly on them. There is one event, however, that coincides with the decline of the WYNT program. April Heinrichs took over as Technical Director of Women's soccer for the Federation in 2011.
I find it interesting how the U-23s and the WNT actually start to look more sophisticated after they get away from the youth system. I saw the USWNT play Brasil in Chicago recently. That match was no contest. Forget the scoreline. Brasil were not of the same quality as the USWNT all over the field. It is so instructive to actually go watch these players in person. And tactically, even though I am not a Jill Ellis fan, I have to admit the USWNT were way way more sophisticated.
You look at the youth players available and it is hard to argue the USA is lacking in quality on the women's side. And they are for the most part, in essentially every match, at least the physical equal of the teams they play. Quality and physical tools and you should be successful if you have quality coaching. Hmmmm. My concern, as it has always been, is that USSF thinks that creating the GDA will solve their problems. The BDA solved the problem of good players being in scattered leagues. But there is nothing that says some guy named Joe couldn't have started a league and US Soccer on the Men's side would have be in a worse place. For all we know, Joe might have done a better job and US Soccer on the Men's side would be in a better place. Maybe after 10 freaking years we would actually have players brought up in the system who could contribute to the USMNT and maybe, just maybe, the US would have qualified for Russia 2018. Where are you Joe?!!
USSF thinks they are the solution when one could build at least as strong a case that they are part of the problem. Players don't play and quality coaches don't coach in beautiful brownstones in Chicago.
Off my soapbox. Back to work!
|
|
|
Post by krazykickers on Aug 13, 2018 16:05:09 GMT -5
Agree, the first game against Japan was almost painful to watch. Japan dominated with the US only having about a 10 minute span near the end of the game where they showed anything remotely promising. 2nd game was much better but they played Paraguay. They looked great in that 2nd game but then they met Spain. Theses kids in my opinion have been handed everything possible to be successful but it just didn't happen. Going out in the group stage is bad business.
|
|
|
Post by zizou on Aug 13, 2018 16:45:02 GMT -5
Agree, the first game against Japan was almost painful to watch. Japan dominated with the US only having about a 10 minute span near the end of the game where they showed anything remotely promising. 2nd game was much better but they played Paraguay. They looked great in that 2nd game but then they met Spain. Theses kids in my opinion have been handed everything possible to be successful but it just didn't happen. Going out in the group stage is bad business. I absolutely agree that they looked dangerous, really dangerous, in the last 10 min against Japan. I would say things started to turn a bit after they took off Sanchez and put on Kim. They started to play a physically imposing brand of soccer. Just trying to jam it down Japan's throat. I thought for sure they were going to score. I liked the way they looked at that point. I don't care that they were not trying to possess. They played to their strength, which was size and speed and overwhelming physical presence. What is wrong with that? That is what the Senior side did to Japan in the ToN a few weeks back. This comes back to coaching and understanding your team. If they really wanted to play through lines they obviously should have selected different players.
|
|