Soccer thread 08/09 (will have spoilers!)

Post by **Jared** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:59 pm

True, the performance did suck. Although it is a very good Brazil team that they played against, so I'm going to wait until the Egypt game before calling for Bradley's head.

I'm afraid Beasley's time might be past. It seems like he's lost a half-step, and with it, his ability to juke past defenders. And unfortunately, he's never had a great first touch, crossing ability, technical skills, etc. I would love if he could reinvent himself with his work rate and some work on possession. But man, has he been horrible lately.

Dempsey didn't really show up as well. But at least the 0-2 start will (hopefully) get Bradley to go with an "experimental" lineup against Egypt. I'd love to see him give Adu a chance (either as a left winger or as a CAM behind Altidore), and/or get Torres in there in the middle.

Though as a positive, Donovan looked good in both games. And I thought (apart from finishing), our performance in the Italy game was good before going down to 10 men.

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:06 pm

Not a bad word about Harkes, he's an Owl! I don't listen to any of that analysis anymore from ESPN. It is horrible. we need a manager with no American connection that will judge the team as it should be judged and pick the players that should be picked.

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 4:25 pm

Egypt wins so we will probably get the same old lineup even with the -5 goal difference.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 4:42 pm

fsquid wrote:Egypt wins so we will probably get the same old lineup even with the -5 goal difference.

As I said, Bradley is just one dimension of the failure, but that would be a fireable offense on its face IMO. To not even look at your other options when you've seen "Plan A" is totally inadequate would be inexcusable.

US Soccer needs to realize that given events since, 2002 was a fortunate aberration, not the result of systemic development. And then they need to address the problems system-wide: Scouting, development, coaching, the relationship with MLS, the NCAA problem, keeping talent from fleeing etc.

Unfortunately, there are significant impediments to their doing so. Financially, they continue to do fine as long as ESPN is on board and Nike is pumping the money in. That won't change as long as they keep dominating CONCACAF. Until the incentives, definition of success and goals change, we'll be stuck in this holding pattern indefinitely.

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 4:45 pm

we should pump more money into ODP.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:43 pm

Or find a way to make basketball, baseball and football less attractive.

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:46 pm

Easy win for England U-21 over Spain u-21, 2-0 with a missed penalty. The current Spanish side needs to fill its boots and win stuff now, because on the evidence of their 2 games so far, the future is not Spanish.

On a brighter note, the club that was ruining football until the Madrid Fascista FC decided to burn all their loan money at once demonstrated the stupidity of that statement (well, it was Platini, so that's a sort of given) by providing 3 of the back 5 for the u-21's.

Strange how the squashed frog has kept schtum since El Grande Crook Numero Uno Sepp Blatter came out over the weekend to say that in his opinion Real's bids weren't an issue. That was obviously where City went wrong in January then....not the bidding for Kaka, even though I wouldn't personally rate him as one of the top 5 in the world, but not greasing the right palms. Still, I'll be looking forward to more favourable penalty stats this season. Just a pity that City will never match United's record of having not one penalty awarded against them at Old Trafford for almost ten consecutive seasons.

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:10 pm

can you put that into English?

Naples39 · Post by **Naples39** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:41 pm

Allow me to pile on the US after watching my DVR recording of the game.

How many games do we need to see the US come out and look completely and totally unprepared? Game after game we come out looking like crap and as if the players have never met each other before.

It's also pretty sad that we start Kljestan in place of suspended Clark, and not only is Kljestan terrible, but he gets red carded too. Unbelievable. Jermaine Jones can't get here fast enough.

Maybe with Jones-Bradley in there our central midfield will be respectable, and I think our central D is OK. We all know LB is a major weakness, but the real issue is out wide. Dempsey isn't fast enough to be a winger, Donovan prefers to play inside, and Convey and Beasley, though still in their mid-20s, look like they should be taken out behind the barn and shot. Put in Adu, he can't possibly be worse than Beasley.

As is, the team is totally lifeless and appears as if they are just looking for an excuse to quit every game.

Oh, let me also express some disappointment with Howard. He has conceded 10 goals in his last 4 games, and while you can't blame for many of the goals, if he was as good as advertised he'd come up with a big save every now again.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:05 pm

wco81 wrote:Or find a way to make basketball, baseball and football less attractive.

I've always agreed with that sentiment, but lately I've begun to question the conventional wisdom a bit.

It seems to me that despite the lure of the more popular sports, there should be ample talent left to produce a world class squad of footballers. Sheer demographics alone would seem to dictate as much. There are millions of soccer players in this country, and given the relatively small number of elite players necessary to put together a squad I'm pretty convinced that the fault (as I've articulated above) lies with the process of scouting, development and management of the talent pool.

I would love to see some hard analysis of the data regarding the demographics etc., because I'm quite willing to admit that I may be wrong. But even if I am, it hardly seems unreasonable to conclude that a nation of our size, wealth and composition, should be able to produce a team capable of challenging the world's best on a regular basis regardless of the cultural primacy of the NFL et al.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:14 pm

Is there a national powerhouse which doesn't have strong domestic leagues?

Maybe some of the Eastern European countries?

Perhaps the next country to break through in International competition will be Russia, as long as the petro dollars keep flowing.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:54 pm

wco81 wrote:Is there a national powerhouse which doesn't have strong domestic leagues?

Maybe some of the Eastern European countries?

Perhaps the next country to break through in International competition will be Russia, as long as the petro dollars keep flowing.

The "emergence" of MLS was cited as one of the reasons that the US had turned the corner in '02. At least there was recognition that a functional domestic league was necessary to develop and evaluate talent.

The US has a unique problem though in that the NCAA system draws too many quality players. This was supposed to be addressed by the Bradenton facility, but clearly this move alone was insufficient. Bottom line: As long as MLS is financially weak their scouting will be limited and salaries will remain low. Quality players are going to choose NCAA careers for themselves...if for no other reason than to get themselves an education to fall back on. In order for MLS to grow we need to imrove interest in soccer across the board...something many claim can't happen until the US improves in World Cup play. A true Catch-22.

The NCAA conundrum turns the chronic criticism of faux student athletes in baketball and football on its head. We need soccer players who care less about an education more than we need football and hoops players who care more.

Silly, but there's a serious underlying point. If soccer drew more from the underprivileged in this country we may see more young people choosing to gamble on making it big on their talent. But the cost-prohibitive structure of youth soccer in this country totally negates any half-hearted marketing efforts to the contrary. And scouting in this country is completely entwined with club soccer.

The more I think on it and talk about it, the more clear it is that we're looking at a Gordian knot when it comes to fixing US soccer. Quick fixes like foreign coaches or transfer rules for MLS are good for nothing.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:27 am

In Western Europe at least, university education isn't expensive but you have to demonstrate aptitude.

The academy system must dovetail with that. By the time a prospect is 15 years old or so, they'll know if he has a future in the sport. Or whether he's going to continue his education beyond the baccalaureate.

So you don't have to make the choice between going for an athletic scholarship and shooting to become a professional player.

But in poorer countries like Argentina and Brazil, there must be some other system for identifying and cultivating talent, in the absence of rich clubs.

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:51 am

fsquid wrote:can you put that into English?

It already is....I can put it into American especially for you, Squid, but I'll have to think carefully in order to capture all of the misspellings that you lot prefer.

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:54 am

wco81 wrote:In Western Europe at least, university education isn't expensive but you have to demonstrate aptitude.

The academy system must dovetail with that. By the time a prospect is 15 years old or so, they'll know if he has a future in the sport. Or whether he's going to continue his education beyond the baccalaureate.

So you don't have to make the choice between going for an athletic scholarship and shooting to become a professional player.

But in poorer countries like Argentina and Brazil, there must be some other system for identifying and cultivating talent, in the absence of rich clubs.

University education isn't expensive ? On what do you base that statement (asks he, working at one).

In a sense, that's irrelevant, as no one who is going to make a career playing soccer is going to be even thinking about higher education.

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:02 am

davet010 wrote:
fsquid wrote:can you put that into English?
It already is....I can put it into American especially for you, Squid, but I'll have to think carefully in order to capture all of the misspellings that you lot prefer.

I think you were making a reference to Real Madrid and that no one is calling them out on their spending. But I'm unsure.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:41 am

Euro students don't have to pay $50,000 a year in tuition like students at American universities, do they?

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:58 am

wco81 wrote:Euro students don't have to pay $50,000 a year in tuition like students at American universities, do they?

No, but it depends what that includes.

At a UK uni like the one I work for, the standard fee for a home undergrad is £3,125 per annum (tuition only), on top of that you'd be talking about accomodation and food costs of, I guess, about £6k. We also get funding of about 11k per student from the government, but that's high because we are a music conservatoire - the usual value is 4k-8k depending on subject.

Overseas students will pay fees of 15k-20k per annum (tuition only), but music students of the highest calibre are in a sellers market, so they'll hawk themselves to insitutions across Europe and probably end up with a minimum of full fee scholarships. We currently have 115 o/s students, of which only 13 don't get any sort of scholarship.

To be honest, WCO, I never realised that US fees were so high - I take it that includes accomodation as well ? from the little I know of US institutions, they also tend to have much higher levels of endowments as well, which therefore leads to more scholarships etc. I do know that we recruit less than 10 students per annum from the US.

I must do a bit more research to see what percentage of students in the US get awards of some sort.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:27 pm

I believe some private university tuitions approach $50k.

But others are around $35-40k.

At the wealthy schools a lot of financial aid and grants are available.

Public state universities are more affordable if you have residency in that state.

But an athletic scholarship includes room and board so a lot of athletes will be hard-pressed to pass those up.

Especially when the route to a lot of pro sports go through 4-year university athletic programs anyways.

Baseball is maybe the exception where prospects out of high school can go directly into a minor league system. However, in recent years, more prospects go to college before signing with a pro team.

Post by **Jared** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:33 pm

Highest tuitions are around $40k, not including room/board. Ivy League schools tend to be around $35k, +/- about $3k. At state schools, tuition is pretty inexpensive for in-state students...Univ. of Florida, for example, is about $4.4k a year.

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:08 pm

Scolari for America.

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:57 pm

In footy related news, Setanta have now lost their live Premiership games packages for next year, as they were unable to come up with the first £30m for next season. One of the 2 packages of 23 games will no doubt be snapped up by Sky, but as EU competition law prevents them from owning all 6, this leaves the way for someone to snap them up at a lower price...ESPN maybe ?

The effect on the Premiership teams should be relatively small. However, the SPL teams are bricking it as if Setanta actually go bust, no one is going to pay out the sort of money that Setanta were for SPL games - I don't think that Sky even bothered bidding last time. That prospect became more likely as the rumoured outside investor has been frightened off by the fact that Setanta apparently owe the taxman £50m as well as the cash owed on their TV contracts.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:10 pm

Wonder how much the North American rights cost.

Once in awhile, you see EPL games tape delayed on Fox Sportsnet.

I think espn360.com also shows select EPL games.

Direct TV used to have a $200 EPL package.

But maybe there would be interest in La Liga from the growing Hispanic population. They'd have to outnumber the UK expats here.

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:16 pm

Setanta North America and Setanta Ireland are not affected by this though since they are actually profitable.

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 4:29 am

Surprised that they aren't cross subsidising then, as that presumably means they won't be showing any Premiership games in Ireland at all.