Re: World Cup 2018 Qualification
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:33 pm
He's 10. We'll probably never hear from him again.
It's the sixth version of The Swamp. What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.sportsfrog.net/phpbb/
wlu_lax6 wrote:Italy and Sweden has been good so far.
wlu_lax6 wrote:wlu_lax6 wrote:Italy and Sweden has been good so far.
I also like that Italy's striker is "Immobile"
“For a soccer player … man, ask anyone and they’ll tell you — those age 16–18 years are everything,” Pulisic wrote. “From a developmental perspective, it’s almost like this sweet spot: It’s the age where a player’s growth and skill sort of intersect, in just the right way — and where, with the right direction, a player can make their biggest leap in development by far.”
He then went on to explain, and in some places opine about, the difference between spending those years in the U.S. versus in Europe:
“In the U.S. system, too often the best player on an under-17 team will be treated like a ‘star’ — not having to work for the ball, being the focus of the offense at all times, etc. — at a time when they should be having to fight tooth and nail for their spot. In Europe, on the other hand, the average level of ability around you is just so much higher. It’s a pool of players where everyone has been ‘the best player,’ and everyone is fighting for a spot — truly week in and week out. Which makes the intensity and humility that you need to bring to the field every day — both from a mental and physical perspective — just unlike anything that you can really experience in U.S. developmental soccer.
“Without those experiences, there’s simply no way that I would be at anywhere close to the level that I am today.”
“For a soccer player … man, ask anyone and they’ll tell you — those age 16–18 years are everything,” Pulisic wrote. “From a developmental perspective, it’s almost like this sweet spot: It’s the age where a player’s growth and skill sort of intersect, in just the right way — and where, with the right direction, a player can make their biggest leap in development by far.”
sancarlos wrote:Christian Pulisic wrote an interesting piece in the Players' Tribune“For a soccer player … man, ask anyone and they’ll tell you — those age 16–18 years are everything,” Pulisic wrote. “From a developmental perspective, it’s almost like this sweet spot: It’s the age where a player’s growth and skill sort of intersect, in just the right way — and where, with the right direction, a player can make their biggest leap in development by far.”
He then went on to explain, and in some places opine about, the difference between spending those years in the U.S. versus in Europe:
“In the U.S. system, too often the best player on an under-17 team will be treated like a ‘star’ — not having to work for the ball, being the focus of the offense at all times, etc. — at a time when they should be having to fight tooth and nail for their spot. In Europe, on the other hand, the average level of ability around you is just so much higher. It’s a pool of players where everyone has been ‘the best player,’ and everyone is fighting for a spot — truly week in and week out. Which makes the intensity and humility that you need to bring to the field every day — both from a mental and physical perspective — just unlike anything that you can really experience in U.S. developmental soccer.
“Without those experiences, there’s simply no way that I would be at anywhere close to the level that I am today.”
Good analysis of it, here:
Players' Tribune essay, here:
degenerasian wrote:Who's watching Italy-Sweden?
Italy need goals but still refuse to start Insigne
In Europe, on the other hand, the average level of ability around you is just so much higher. It’s a pool of players where everyone has been ‘the best player,’ and everyone is fighting for a spot — truly week in and week out. Which makes the intensity and humility that you need to bring to the field every day — both from a mental and physical perspective — just unlike anything that you can really experience in U.S. developmental soccer.
Sabo wrote:In Europe, on the other hand, the average level of ability around you is just so much higher. It’s a pool of players where everyone has been ‘the best player,’ and everyone is fighting for a spot — truly week in and week out. Which makes the intensity and humility that you need to bring to the field every day — both from a mental and physical perspective — just unlike anything that you can really experience in U.S. developmental soccer.
This is the very same thing Jermaine Jones talked about in the video he posted after the US crashed out of the World Cup. Go watch his video if you haven't yet.
In the U.S. system, too often the best player on an under-17 team will be treated like a “star” — not having to work for the ball, being the focus of the offense at all times, etc. — at a time when they should be having to fight tooth and nail for their spot. In Europe, on the other hand, the average level of ability around you is just so much higher. It’s a pool of players where everyone has been “the best player,” and everyone is fighting for a spot — truly week in and week out. Which makes the intensity and humility that you need to bring to the field every day — both from a mental and physical perspective — just unlike anything that you can really experience in U.S. developmental soccer.
Without those experiences, there’s simply no way that I would be at anywhere close to the level that I am today.
And so I really just wonder, you know: Why is it that E.U. players are allowed to move country once they turn 16 … but non-Europeans can only do so at 18? Why aren’t we campaigning for a level playing field, where our best 16 year olds — who may not have an E.U. passport like I had — are free to move when they turn 16, like the best young players in Europe can? And in the meanwhile, as long as some of our best young players aren’t getting the opportunity like I had to go to Europe when they’re 16 … are we doing everything in our power to make sure the level of play in U.S. soccer is high enough so that they can continue to develop up to their maximum potential? So that they can continue to develop until they are allowed to play at the top level their talent dictates — wherever that is in the world?
I also understand, of course, that — even with the option to leave — leaving the States might not be for everyone. Staying is fine, and I totally respect it. But at the same time, I’ve gotta say: It really does frustrate me, when I watch MLS, and I see our best U-17 players — who, again, are so talented and so capable — being rostered … but then not being put on the field much to actually play. I watch that, and I just think about how I was given a chance … a real chance … and it changed my life. Why then are we seemingly hesitant to allow these other talents to blossom?
tennbengal wrote:More from Pulisic - I could not agree more:In the U.S. system, too often the best player on an under-17 team will be treated like a “star” — not having to work for the ball, being the focus of the offense at all times, etc. — at a time when they should be having to fight tooth and nail for their spot. In Europe, on the other hand, the average level of ability around you is just so much higher. It’s a pool of players where everyone has been “the best player,” and everyone is fighting for a spot — truly week in and week out. Which makes the intensity and humility that you need to bring to the field every day — both from a mental and physical perspective — just unlike anything that you can really experience in U.S. developmental soccer.
Without those experiences, there’s simply no way that I would be at anywhere close to the level that I am today.
And so I really just wonder, you know: Why is it that E.U. players are allowed to move country once they turn 16 … but non-Europeans can only do so at 18? Why aren’t we campaigning for a level playing field, where our best 16 year olds — who may not have an E.U. passport like I had — are free to move when they turn 16, like the best young players in Europe can? And in the meanwhile, as long as some of our best young players aren’t getting the opportunity like I had to go to Europe when they’re 16 … are we doing everything in our power to make sure the level of play in U.S. soccer is high enough so that they can continue to develop up to their maximum potential? So that they can continue to develop until they are allowed to play at the top level their talent dictates — wherever that is in the world?
I also understand, of course, that — even with the option to leave — leaving the States might not be for everyone. Staying is fine, and I totally respect it. But at the same time, I’ve gotta say: It really does frustrate me, when I watch MLS, and I see our best U-17 players — who, again, are so talented and so capable — being rostered … but then not being put on the field much to actually play. I watch that, and I just think about how I was given a chance … a real chance … and it changed my life. Why then are we seemingly hesitant to allow these other talents to blossom?
Again, from points I made either earlier in this thread, or other soccer threads on here, the issue in the US is NOT the U14 development programs in my opinion, it is what happens in the age 14-17 years - that's where the slippage occurs with respect to keeping up with the rest of the world. By the time they get to 18 and finally get to go overseas, they have lost extremely valuable development time...
wlu_lax6 wrote:tennbengal wrote:More from Pulisic - I could not agree more:In the U.S. system, too often the best player on an under-17 team will be treated like a “star” — not having to work for the ball, being the focus of the offense at all times, etc. — at a time when they should be having to fight tooth and nail for their spot. In Europe, on the other hand, the average level of ability around you is just so much higher. It’s a pool of players where everyone has been “the best player,” and everyone is fighting for a spot — truly week in and week out. Which makes the intensity and humility that you need to bring to the field every day — both from a mental and physical perspective — just unlike anything that you can really experience in U.S. developmental soccer.
Without those experiences, there’s simply no way that I would be at anywhere close to the level that I am today.
And so I really just wonder, you know: Why is it that E.U. players are allowed to move country once they turn 16 … but non-Europeans can only do so at 18? Why aren’t we campaigning for a level playing field, where our best 16 year olds — who may not have an E.U. passport like I had — are free to move when they turn 16, like the best young players in Europe can? And in the meanwhile, as long as some of our best young players aren’t getting the opportunity like I had to go to Europe when they’re 16 … are we doing everything in our power to make sure the level of play in U.S. soccer is high enough so that they can continue to develop up to their maximum potential? So that they can continue to develop until they are allowed to play at the top level their talent dictates — wherever that is in the world?
I also understand, of course, that — even with the option to leave — leaving the States might not be for everyone. Staying is fine, and I totally respect it. But at the same time, I’ve gotta say: It really does frustrate me, when I watch MLS, and I see our best U-17 players — who, again, are so talented and so capable — being rostered … but then not being put on the field much to actually play. I watch that, and I just think about how I was given a chance … a real chance … and it changed my life. Why then are we seemingly hesitant to allow these other talents to blossom?
Again, from points I made either earlier in this thread, or other soccer threads on here, the issue in the US is NOT the U14 development programs in my opinion, it is what happens in the age 14-17 years - that's where the slippage occurs with respect to keeping up with the rest of the world. By the time they get to 18 and finally get to go overseas, they have lost extremely valuable development time...
It creates a really interesting cultural question. There are very small subset of kids where going overseas makes sense. Truly gifted soccer players who can make the gamble of giving up on education to be a professional soccer player. And many of them will wash out or hit bad luck. Julian Green, Gedion Zelalem. But if your kid had that talent would you put it all on the table or hedge and say you will have a great experience playing for a MLS Academy/Development Academy team with good coaches and training. A chance to get a high school diploma and a decision to go pro (Chris Durkin, Bill Hamid), start college and then go pro (Jordan Morris, Robbie Rodgers), or graduate and go pro (Bobby Warshaw has a degree from Stanford).
Or go to high school, get drafted by the MLS, go to college and play football, and then kick for the Chargers and Jacksonville in the NFL.