AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 1:27 pm
England has more talent, and is a higher ranked soccer country. But the US had the opportunity to play a WC on home soil, and does not lack for talent. And probably has more younger talent in the pool with experience than England. I agree that Pochettino likely chooses the Lions over the Yanks, but it's not a slam dunk decision.
England's talent and the US' talent are in no way comparable. What "younger talent" are you referring to for the US? For some reason, the US media still treats our players like they are young, but Adams, McKennie, Pulisic, etc. are all mid-20s. This is their prime years and they aren't that good.
For comparison, they're the same age as guys like TAA and Declan Rice and older than Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham.
AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 1:27 pm
England has more talent, and is a higher ranked soccer country. But the US had the opportunity to play a WC on home soil, and does not lack for talent. And probably has more younger talent in the pool with experience than England. I agree that Pochettino likely chooses the Lions over the Yanks, but it's not a slam dunk decision.
England's talent and the US' talent are in no way comparable. What "younger talent" are you referring to for the US? For some reason, the US media still treats our players like they are young, but Adams, McKennie, Pulisic, etc. are all mid-20s. This is their prime years and they aren't that good.
For comparison, they're the same age as guys like TAA and Declan Rice and older than Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham.
About half of England's Euro roster will be 30+ come the next World Cup. Only Tim Ream and our goalies, who often don't reach their prime until their 30s, will be 30+ in 2026. England has plenty of young talent, but they are untested for the most part. Which was one of the negatives against Southgate. He played older favorites over more talented, but younger options.
The US had the youngest roster in the last World Cup. This core has been together for a while. And now, well be playing on home soil. There's reason for higher expectations. And a reason why there's a case to be made that for the rest of this cycle, the US has some positives for a coach.
It has a little to do with their age but moreso they didn’t really have a philosophy of how they wanted to play or players that complimented each other.
For example, Kane is world class if he’s able to float around the box but if he’s spending most of his time in his own third he’s useless. He’s not able to go long on a counter so if you are going to play that way someone like Ashford is more well suited. Also, Foden is excellent when playing alongside the cyborg Haaland who sucks up the defense and he can come swoop in from 20 yards and smash one in.
Player selection - and no doubt Southgate had his favorites - was the problem along with no real identity or approach.
Lots of all-stars, but no real game plan. Not like a Spain or Argentina.
AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 1:27 pm
England has more talent, and is a higher ranked soccer country. But the US had the opportunity to play a WC on home soil, and does not lack for talent. And probably has more younger talent in the pool with experience than England. I agree that Pochettino likely chooses the Lions over the Yanks, but it's not a slam dunk decision.
England's talent and the US' talent are in no way comparable. What "younger talent" are you referring to for the US? For some reason, the US media still treats our players like they are young, but Adams, McKennie, Pulisic, etc. are all mid-20s. This is their prime years and they aren't that good.
For comparison, they're the same age as guys like TAA and Declan Rice and older than Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham.
About half of England's Euro roster will be 30+ come the next World Cup. Only Tim Ream and our goalies, who often don't reach their prime until their 30s, will be 30+ in 2026. England has plenty of young talent, but they are untested for the most part. Which was one of the negatives against Southgate. He played older favorites over more talented, but younger options.
The US had the youngest roster in the last World Cup. This core has been together for a while. And now, well be playing on home soil. There's reason for higher expectations. And a reason why there's a case to be made that for the rest of this cycle, the US has some positives for a coach.
How is England's young talent "untested" exactly?
Bellingham was player of the year in La Liga. Foden was player of the year in the EPL. Saka was the leading scorer for Arsenal. Palmer was the leading scorer for Chelsea. At the same age, the US player were...(checks notes)...getting played off the field and relegated at Leeds or riding the end of that same Chelsea bench.
The only England starters other than Kane who will be in their 30s in 2026 are the defenders, and they have young options.
Even if they were "untested" now then certainly 2 years from now they would only be more experienced and even better right?
The US has not improved on either a player level or a team level for all of those games played together since the last World Cup. I'm not sure why you think these guys would suddenly improve in the back half of their 20s.
You're just kinda throwing a bunch of non-sensical arguments together.
AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 1:27 pm
England has more talent, and is a higher ranked soccer country. But the US had the opportunity to play a WC on home soil, and does not lack for talent. And probably has more younger talent in the pool with experience than England. I agree that Pochettino likely chooses the Lions over the Yanks, but it's not a slam dunk decision.
England's talent and the US' talent are in no way comparable. What "younger talent" are you referring to for the US? For some reason, the US media still treats our players like they are young, but Adams, McKennie, Pulisic, etc. are all mid-20s. This is their prime years and they aren't that good.
For comparison, they're the same age as guys like TAA and Declan Rice and older than Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham.
About half of England's Euro roster will be 30+ come the next World Cup. Only Tim Ream and our goalies, who often don't reach their prime until their 30s, will be 30+ in 2026. England has plenty of young talent, but they are untested for the most part. Which was one of the negatives against Southgate. He played older favorites over more talented, but younger options.
The US had the youngest roster in the last World Cup. This core has been together for a while. And now, well be playing on home soil. There's reason for higher expectations. And a reason why there's a case to be made that for the rest of this cycle, the US has some positives for a coach.
How is England's young talent "untested" exactly?
Bellingham was player of the year in La Liga. Foden was player of the year in the EPL. Saka was the leading scorer for Arsenal. Palmer was the leading scorer for Chelsea. At the same age, the US player were...(checks notes)...getting played off the field and relegated at Leeds or riding the end of that same Chelsea bench.
The only England starters other than Kane who will be in their 30s in 2026 are the defenders, and they have young options.
Even if they were "untested" now then certainly 2 years from now they would only be more experienced and even better right?
The US has not improved on either a player level or a team level for all of those games played together since the last World Cup. I'm not sure why you think these guys would suddenly improve in the back half of their 20s.
You're just kinda throwing a bunch of non-sensical arguments together.
They aren't untested for club. But playing for country is a different animal. Different manager. Limited practice time. Different teammates and players often play a different system, if not a different position completely. There are some players who excel for club, but never really impact country. And even rare players that star for country, but struggle on the club level.
And yes, the US, despite the talent playing together for a while, hasn't improved. It's why Berhalter was fired and why we're looking for his replacement. The saying goes, the right country coach can improve a team by 10%. The wrong guy by -30%. Berhalter was the wrong guy. Hire the right guy, throw in playing the World Cup at home and the fact this group already made it to a knock out round, and the potential is there.
AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 1:27 pm
England has more talent, and is a higher ranked soccer country. But the US had the opportunity to play a WC on home soil, and does not lack for talent. And probably has more younger talent in the pool with experience than England. I agree that Pochettino likely chooses the Lions over the Yanks, but it's not a slam dunk decision.
England's talent and the US' talent are in no way comparable. What "younger talent" are you referring to for the US? For some reason, the US media still treats our players like they are young, but Adams, McKennie, Pulisic, etc. are all mid-20s. This is their prime years and they aren't that good.
For comparison, they're the same age as guys like TAA and Declan Rice and older than Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham.
About half of England's Euro roster will be 30+ come the next World Cup. Only Tim Ream and our goalies, who often don't reach their prime until their 30s, will be 30+ in 2026. England has plenty of young talent, but they are untested for the most part. Which was one of the negatives against Southgate. He played older favorites over more talented, but younger options.
The US had the youngest roster in the last World Cup. This core has been together for a while. And now, well be playing on home soil. There's reason for higher expectations. And a reason why there's a case to be made that for the rest of this cycle, the US has some positives for a coach.
How is England's young talent "untested" exactly?
Bellingham was player of the year in La Liga. Foden was player of the year in the EPL. Saka was the leading scorer for Arsenal. Palmer was the leading scorer for Chelsea. At the same age, the US player were...(checks notes)...getting played off the field and relegated at Leeds or riding the end of that same Chelsea bench.
The only England starters other than Kane who will be in their 30s in 2026 are the defenders, and they have young options.
Even if they were "untested" now then certainly 2 years from now they would only be more experienced and even better right?
The US has not improved on either a player level or a team level for all of those games played together since the last World Cup. I'm not sure why you think these guys would suddenly improve in the back half of their 20s.
You're just kinda throwing a bunch of non-sensical arguments together.
They aren't untested for club. But playing for country is a different animal. Different manager. Limited practice time. Different teammates and players often play a different system, if not a different position completely. There are some players who excel for club, but never really impact country. And even rare players that star for country, but struggle on the club level.
And yes, the US, despite the talent playing together for a while, hasn't improved. It's why Berhalter was fired and why we're looking for his replacement. The saying goes, the right country coach can improve a team by 10%. The wrong guy by -30%. Berhalter was the wrong guy. Hire the right guy, throw in playing the World Cup at home and the fact this group already made it to a knock out round, and the potential is there.
You're still not making a coherent point.
With a good manager, the US is a fringe top-16 team with no shot of winning the 2026 WC even if it were played in Christian Pulisic's basement.
With a good manager, England is a top-4 team with a real shot of winning the 2026 WC.
England's talent and the US' talent are in no way comparable. What "younger talent" are you referring to for the US? For some reason, the US media still treats our players like they are young, but Adams, McKennie, Pulisic, etc. are all mid-20s. This is their prime years and they aren't that good.
For comparison, they're the same age as guys like TAA and Declan Rice and older than Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham.
About half of England's Euro roster will be 30+ come the next World Cup. Only Tim Ream and our goalies, who often don't reach their prime until their 30s, will be 30+ in 2026. England has plenty of young talent, but they are untested for the most part. Which was one of the negatives against Southgate. He played older favorites over more talented, but younger options.
The US had the youngest roster in the last World Cup. This core has been together for a while. And now, well be playing on home soil. There's reason for higher expectations. And a reason why there's a case to be made that for the rest of this cycle, the US has some positives for a coach.
How is England's young talent "untested" exactly?
Bellingham was player of the year in La Liga. Foden was player of the year in the EPL. Saka was the leading scorer for Arsenal. Palmer was the leading scorer for Chelsea. At the same age, the US player were...(checks notes)...getting played off the field and relegated at Leeds or riding the end of that same Chelsea bench.
The only England starters other than Kane who will be in their 30s in 2026 are the defenders, and they have young options.
Even if they were "untested" now then certainly 2 years from now they would only be more experienced and even better right?
The US has not improved on either a player level or a team level for all of those games played together since the last World Cup. I'm not sure why you think these guys would suddenly improve in the back half of their 20s.
You're just kinda throwing a bunch of non-sensical arguments together.
They aren't untested for club. But playing for country is a different animal. Different manager. Limited practice time. Different teammates and players often play a different system, if not a different position completely. There are some players who excel for club, but never really impact country. And even rare players that star for country, but struggle on the club level.
And yes, the US, despite the talent playing together for a while, hasn't improved. It's why Berhalter was fired and why we're looking for his replacement. The saying goes, the right country coach can improve a team by 10%. The wrong guy by -30%. Berhalter was the wrong guy. Hire the right guy, throw in playing the World Cup at home and the fact this group already made it to a knock out round, and the potential is there.
You're still not making a coherent point.
With a good manager, the US is a fringe top-16 team with no shot of winning the 2026 WC even if it were played in Christian Pulisic's basement.
With a good manager, England is a top-4 team with a real shot of winning the 2026 WC.
Well, we had a poor manager, playing on the other side of the world, with our current core of players, and made a World Cup knockout round. And you're argument is with a better manager, on home soil, and same core of players, there's no way we can do any better?
About half of England's Euro roster will be 30+ come the next World Cup. Only Tim Ream and our goalies, who often don't reach their prime until their 30s, will be 30+ in 2026. England has plenty of young talent, but they are untested for the most part. Which was one of the negatives against Southgate. He played older favorites over more talented, but younger options.
The US had the youngest roster in the last World Cup. This core has been together for a while. And now, well be playing on home soil. There's reason for higher expectations. And a reason why there's a case to be made that for the rest of this cycle, the US has some positives for a coach.
How is England's young talent "untested" exactly?
Bellingham was player of the year in La Liga. Foden was player of the year in the EPL. Saka was the leading scorer for Arsenal. Palmer was the leading scorer for Chelsea. At the same age, the US player were...(checks notes)...getting played off the field and relegated at Leeds or riding the end of that same Chelsea bench.
The only England starters other than Kane who will be in their 30s in 2026 are the defenders, and they have young options.
Even if they were "untested" now then certainly 2 years from now they would only be more experienced and even better right?
The US has not improved on either a player level or a team level for all of those games played together since the last World Cup. I'm not sure why you think these guys would suddenly improve in the back half of their 20s.
You're just kinda throwing a bunch of non-sensical arguments together.
They aren't untested for club. But playing for country is a different animal. Different manager. Limited practice time. Different teammates and players often play a different system, if not a different position completely. There are some players who excel for club, but never really impact country. And even rare players that star for country, but struggle on the club level.
And yes, the US, despite the talent playing together for a while, hasn't improved. It's why Berhalter was fired and why we're looking for his replacement. The saying goes, the right country coach can improve a team by 10%. The wrong guy by -30%. Berhalter was the wrong guy. Hire the right guy, throw in playing the World Cup at home and the fact this group already made it to a knock out round, and the potential is there.
You're still not making a coherent point.
With a good manager, the US is a fringe top-16 team with no shot of winning the 2026 WC even if it were played in Christian Pulisic's basement.
With a good manager, England is a top-4 team with a real shot of winning the 2026 WC.
Well, we had a poor manager, playing on the other side of the world, with our current core of players, and made a World Cup knockout round. And you're argument is with a better manager, on home soil, and same core of players, there's no way we can do any better?
Yes, we got out of a group with two bad teams and then got played off the field by a mediocre team in Qatar.
2022 will have an extra round given the expanded field. I think it's a little better than even money we win one knockout game so get to the round of 16 again, but depends heavily on the draw.
I would certainly bet very heavily on England's current roster progressing further than the US' current roster if given equal managers.
Bellingham was player of the year in La Liga. Foden was player of the year in the EPL. Saka was the leading scorer for Arsenal. Palmer was the leading scorer for Chelsea. At the same age, the US player were...(checks notes)...getting played off the field and relegated at Leeds or riding the end of that same Chelsea bench.
The only England starters other than Kane who will be in their 30s in 2026 are the defenders, and they have young options.
Even if they were "untested" now then certainly 2 years from now they would only be more experienced and even better right?
The US has not improved on either a player level or a team level for all of those games played together since the last World Cup. I'm not sure why you think these guys would suddenly improve in the back half of their 20s.
You're just kinda throwing a bunch of non-sensical arguments together.
They aren't untested for club. But playing for country is a different animal. Different manager. Limited practice time. Different teammates and players often play a different system, if not a different position completely. There are some players who excel for club, but never really impact country. And even rare players that star for country, but struggle on the club level.
And yes, the US, despite the talent playing together for a while, hasn't improved. It's why Berhalter was fired and why we're looking for his replacement. The saying goes, the right country coach can improve a team by 10%. The wrong guy by -30%. Berhalter was the wrong guy. Hire the right guy, throw in playing the World Cup at home and the fact this group already made it to a knock out round, and the potential is there.
You're still not making a coherent point.
With a good manager, the US is a fringe top-16 team with no shot of winning the 2026 WC even if it were played in Christian Pulisic's basement.
With a good manager, England is a top-4 team with a real shot of winning the 2026 WC.
Well, we had a poor manager, playing on the other side of the world, with our current core of players, and made a World Cup knockout round. And you're argument is with a better manager, on home soil, and same core of players, there's no way we can do any better?
Yes, we got out of a group with two bad teams and then got played off the field by a mediocre team in Qatar.
2022 will have an extra round given the expanded field. I think it's a little better than even money we win one knockout game so get to the round of 16 again, but depends heavily on the draw.
I would certainly bet very heavily on England's current roster progressing further than the US' current roster if given equal managers.
The US has a lower ceiling than England, but likely lower risk. The US core of players have been together for years, know each other, and can adapt to a new coach quickly. Especially if said coach is an upgrade.
England has the talent to win it all in 2026. But the new coach will likely be changing the core of players as he won't be playing Southgate's older favorites as much. Bigger risk, and if the new English guy gets it wrong, they could crumble.
wyo-cat wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2024 10:31 am
Football fucks up our Soccer and Rugby teams.
We could be world class in both, but all the skilled dudes go for the NFL.
Imagine Randy Moss at goalie.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
Olympics is a young roster. All under 23 minus 3 special picks. Big tournaments have the A team. Smaller ones have a B team. Olympics is basically the C team. A lot of youngsters that you just haven't heard much about.
With that said, the US is up 2-0 on Guinea right now, about 15 minutes left in the first half. Win, and we play Morocco in the Quarterfinals. Last time the US made an Olympic knockout round was 2000. Two years later, we made the Quarters of a World Cup. It's great experience for the players.
USA beat Guinea 3-0 to set up a quarterfinal with Morocco on Friday morning, 9:00 AM Eastern (6:00 AM Arizona). We're playing well, and there are some kids on the team that should be in consideration for the squad in 2026, including Kevin Paredes, who put two into the net today. He's only 21, and has a bright future in my opinion.
Carcassdragger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2024 9:17 am
USA women playing Brazil for Olympic gold. Of course, 54 minutes into the game and a zero zero score in this most boring of sports.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
I’m not a huge Ponchettino fan, but that’s in relation to him running a top ten in the world type club.
For us, who were looking at names like Viera or Henry (who would have definitely sucked), this does feel like a ray of sunshine. Sure he might bottle it, but at least I won’t be depressed for two years until our invariable terrible showing at home in 2026 under someone like Viera.
Tottenham starts the year off with an underwhelming draw against a team they dominated the whole game.
In other words, it will be another long fucking season.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
All Spurs kidding aside, the first week of the premier league was kinda meh.
All the teams that were supposed to win (except for Tottenham) won, but nobody was really impressive. As the Brits would say, all of the big clubs looked undercooked.
Spurs are shit. What’s the point of possessing the ball for two thirds of the match if you can’t put the goddamn thing in the net?
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
Chicat wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2024 7:29 am
Spurs are shit. What’s the point of possessing the ball for two thirds of the match if you can’t put the goddamn thing in the net?
Plus their high line always gives the opponent a chance to slip in behind like Newcastle did on their winning goal.
At least you don’t have refs giving bullshit red cards to decide a game.
EastCoastCat wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2024 3:46 pm
Chi…ring, ring. London Derby coming up. Gunners without Rice because of a BS red card against Brighton.
Whatcha think?
Gunners by double digits.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
LOL the ref must feel a kinship with the Arsenal players since their warm ups are the same colors as the ref’s jerseys.
How many yellow cards is he going to hand the Spurs for what are completely normal plays in the second half? We’re going to end up playing 5 on 12.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
Chicat wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2024 6:52 am
LOL the ref must feel a kinship with the Arsenal players since their warm ups are the same colors as the ref’s jerseys.
How many yellow cards is he going to hand the Spurs for what are completely normal plays in the second half? We’re going to end up playing 5 on 12.
I agree questionable yellows today although it looks like no second yellows are coming out. All of them are fouls though.
Good match. Lots of passion as only a North London Derby can provide.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
Great win. Actually a must win if we want a title this year.
So impressive the way they played without Rice and Odegaard today. Tough, gritty performance and relied on their bread and butter - the set piece - to get the win.
The PL refs, especially Michael Oliver, have to be the worst in sports. They try and be part of the story every fucking game.
This second yellow card on Trossard at the end of the first half has ruined an otherwise classic heavyweight matchup between Arsenal and Manchester City.
Good guys are leading the cheaters 2-1 at halftime but now have to defend the lead with 10 men for 45+ minutes against the best scoring team in the league.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
