USMNT Thread Part VIII

[bleedblue1223]

Best-case, I see us becoming what Mexico is, that should be what our realistic goal is. Have a talented squad that can compete with the top and consistently control our region, but realistically never really challenging to knock of the top.

 

[bluesfan94]

Best-case, I see us becoming what Mexico is, that should be what our realistic goal is. Have a talented squad that can compete with the top and consistently control our region, but realistically never really challenging to knock of the top.

I don't think that's necessarily best case, but I think it's best case for this generation. If soccer's popularity continues to grow and other sports' popularity wanes, there's the potential for increased American soccer growth

 

[Basement Cat]

Best-case, I see us becoming what Mexico is, that should be what our realistic goal is. Have a talented squad that can compete with the top and consistently control our region, but realistically never really challenging to knock of the top.

Absolutely, I'd sign up for that in a heartbeat along with MLS becoming an Eredivisie-level league within 10 years or so (consistently churning out young talent and sending it up the ladder in Europe).

 

[YNWA14]

I see no problem with suggesting we are on track towards becoming top 10 with some consistency. That tweet doesn't say it's going to happen in the next year or two. There really aren't ten countries out there that have better U23 players than we do. Whether that amounts to being top 10 in the world in 5, 10, 15 years is another question.

England, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Netherlands, Brazil, Argentina, Begium, Portugal just off the top of my head, and there’s likely more which also doesn’t take into account quality of coaching/development and so on.

 

[kingsboy11]

This country is going to need several cycles in a row before I really consider the US to be challenging top 10. But I think one thing that has really helped is Pulisic showing the world just how good the American player can be and really opened up the doors to other players making it to Europe. It also helps that getting players from the US is really cheap and could be easily profitable. I mean the Galaxy have lost 3 quality players to Europe for free and they never played a single MLS game.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

England, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Netherlands, Brazil, Argentina, Begium, Portugal just off the top of my head, and there’s likely more which also doesn’t take into account quality of coaching/development and so on.

I think our U23 mix is at least in the same range as Germany, Italy, Argentina, Belgium, Spain.

Top Five U23 players by transfermarkt value:

England: 452.65
France: 429.55
Italy: 283.8
Brazil: 272.8
Netherlands: 262.9
Spain: 249.15
Portugal: 240.9
Germany: 168.75
Argentina: 155.65
Belgium: 113.3

USA: 141.9

If you go by transfermarkt value, USA is better than Belgium. And the difference between USA and Germany/Argentina is how they value Havertz compared to Pulisic compared to Lautaro. Pulisic arguably should be valued higher than those two, which would give us the edge on both those teams.

And I'm not saying that transfermarkt value is the only measure. I think they overvalue England's players, Spain's players, Italy's players. I'm also not suggesting that top five U23 players by transfermarkt value is the only way to measure who has the best U23 group of players, but I think my point remains that USA is top 10 or at least right there.

 

[YNWA14]

I think our U23 mix is at least in the same range as Germany, Italy, Argentina, Belgium, Spain.

Top Five U23 players by transfermarkt value:

England: 452.65
France: 429.55
Italy: 283.8
Brazil: 272.8
Netherlands: 262.9
Spain: 249.15
Portugal: 240.9
Germany: 168.75
Argentina: 155.65
Belgium: 113.3

USA: 141.9

If you go by transfermarkt value, USA is better than Belgium. And the difference between USA and Germany/Argentina is how they value Havertz compared to Pulisic compared to Lautaro. Pulisic arguably should be valued higher than those two, which would give us the edge on both those teams.

And I'm not saying that transfermarkt value is the only measure. I think they overvalue England's players, Spain's players, Italy's players. I'm also not suggesting that top five U23 players by transfermarkt value is the only way to measure who has the best U23 group of players, but I think my point remains that USA is top 10 or at least right there.

Transfermarkt value really doesn't mean anything to me, and 5 players don't make a team either. What about the top 20 players from the same age category? All of those other nations are deeper, and are much more likely to continue to produce players that we haven't even considered near the top yet in that age bracket.

I don't think the US crack the top 10, probably not even the top 15. There are plenty of countries undervalued that are pushing through strong programs/players like Japan, Korea, Turkey, Algeria (among other African countries) etc.

 

[John Price]

 

[Juve]

I was happy when Juve signed Mckennie. He was always one of my favorite FM signings because his playstyle resembled Vidal. That's exactly what we were missing on the real team.

I was surprised Pirlo started him over other players considering he's new and young. Him and Ramsey were the two best players on the pitch. I love him he even more now.

 

[N o o d l e s]

Boavista? We need to step our game up

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

I think our U23 mix is at least in the same range as Germany, Italy, Argentina, Belgium, Spain.

Top Five U23 players by transfermarkt value:

England: 452.65
France: 429.55
Italy: 283.8
Brazil: 272.8
Netherlands: 262.9
Spain: 249.15
Portugal: 240.9
Germany: 168.75
Argentina: 155.65
Belgium: 113.3

USA: 141.9

That's a pretty bold statement. I would love to see a top 10 u23 players. I remain unconvinced. Especially about Pulisic being arguably at a higher value than Kai. What ever that means.

 

[East Coast Bias]

I would target getting in the range of Peru, Denmark, Chile, Poland before anything. I find it hard to believe the US is going to rocket into the top 10.

There needs to be a massive depth to the u23 list because a lot of these kids don’t work out. We have seen this tons of times where an 18 year old goes to a European club, we hype it up and he never amounts to the hype. Miazga, CCV, etc.

Not that they’re awful players but if that’s your top CB prospects in a cycle, and neither looks to be good enough for top level, you’re not becoming a top 10 team.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Boavista? We need to step our game up

I know you're joking, but that player is really Lille. Lille owner owns Boavista and had interest in Cannon. They have a good starting RB this year, so Cannon signs with his farm team, and after a year or two, he'll transfer to Lille to be their starting RB. They could've signed him at Lille and loaned him out to Boavista, but they already did that with a player or two, so they are trying to balance the accounting books.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

That's a pretty bold statement. I would love to see a top 10 u23 players. I remain unconvinced. Especially about Pulisic being arguably at a higher value than Kai. What ever that means.

No offense, but I have no desire to take the time to calculate top 10 values. I don't think it helps my point as much as top 5 did, so I used top 5. Either way, it's not like you need 10 great players for a five year window, and these players are all still pretty young, so others will still emerge. It's not like if you are U20 and aren't listed with over 15M value on transfermarkt that you can't be world class. There could be many reasons why you aren't listed yet. I was only making the point that if the US keeps up that level of production over a consistent basis, we're top 10.

As to Havertz vs. Pulisic, Pulisic is more proven right now. The guy was one of the best attackers in the Premier League last season. Havertz value is more based on potential right now. I think after Mbappe, Sancho and Haaland, there is a group of 5-10 U23 players (Havertz, Pulisic, Lautaro, TAA, Rashford, Frankie, de Ligt, etc.) that you can order in any way. There's not much separation between them.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

No offense, but I have no desire to take the time to calculate top 10 values. I don't think it helps my point as much as top 5 did, so I used top 5. Either way, it's not like you need 10 great players for a five year window, and these players are all still pretty young, so others will still emerge. It's not like if you are U20 and aren't listed with over 15M value on transfermarkt that you can't be world class. There could be many reasons why you aren't listed yet. I was only making the point that if the US keeps up that level of production over a consistent basis, we're top 10.

As to Havertz vs. Pulisic, Pulisic is more proven right now. The guy was one of the best attackers in the Premier League last season. Havertz value is more based on potential right now.

I didnt mean the value of a top 10 players u23.... just a list of the 10 best players u23. Like I and others have said that website is largely irrelevant.

Kai is definitely not based on potential he took his team to the quarters in Europe and was one of the best players in the bundesliga. He will be far better than the Murican.

 

[YNWA14]

The point is that you still need high quality players/depth around the 'top 5', and using transfermarkt values to try and prove that those top 5 are among the top 10 groups in the word is disingenuous. Also in what way does only using the top 5 help your point anyway? You can take the top 5 prospects from most European and South American nations at any point in time and 5-10 years down the road generally a bunch of players from those countries ended up being better; that's the point of considering the depth of talent when 'ranking' the countries. The US just does not have anywhere near that depth, even if you think those values you're using are reflective of talent (which is a stretch). There are a lot of players that don't have as much exposure, or who haven't moved, etc. that are more better and have more potential than the ones you're using to calculate this number (do you really believe Dest is as good as Cherki?).

Also why would TAA be in the 2nd group? He's widely regarded already as the best RB in the world, is a CL/PL winner and has already set numerous records for his position. I think he's separated himself from most along with Davies.

 

[East Coast Bias]

As to Havertz vs. Pulisic, Pulisic is more proven right now. The guy was one of the best attackers in the Premier League last season. Havertz value is more based on potential right now. I think after Mbappe, Sancho and Haaland, there is a group of 5-10 U23 players (Havertz, Pulisic, Lautaro, TAA, Rashford, Frankie, de Ligt, etc.) that you can order in any way. There's not much separation between them.

wait a minute. we all had to hear about how amazing the Bundesliga is, why would Sancho want to ever join clubs like Chelsea/United, the PL and its fans are arrogant, the league is overrated, etc etc etc. You legit spent weeks this summer talking about how arrogant it was for fans of these PL clubs to think Sancho would take a step down to join them, but now we're switching it up for this debate?

Now Pulisic is better than Kai because he proved it in the PL? Come on.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I didnt mean the value of a top 10 players u23.... just a list of the 10 best players u23. Like I and others have said that website is largely irrelevant.

Then thats much easier.

Mbappe: 198M
Sancho: 128.7M
Alexander-Arnold: 121M
Felix: 89.1M
Havertz: 89.1M
Davies: 88M
Haaland: 88M
Rashford: 88M
Frenkie: 79.2M
Lautaro: 77M

Like I already said, it's not great. I disagree with a lot of that, but there probably isn't a better website for neutral evaluations.

Kai is definitely not based on potential he took his team to the quarters in Europe and was one of the best players in the bundesliga. He will be far better than the Murican.

I don't know. He wasn't bad, but 3797 minutes, 18G, 9A. 4 of those goals were PK's. Certainly good, but I don't know if he produces numbers at the level of the elite like Mbappe, Sancho, Haaland. For example, Sancho had 20G, 20A in 3274 mins. Mbappe had 30G, 19A in 2718 minutes. Haaland was 44G, 10A in 2751 minutes.

And not all of that is a great measure. Ligue One is weaker than Bundesliga. Haaland did some of that in the Austrian Bundesliga, as well, but as you can see, these guys put up elite stats. Havertz stats are merely very good, but even worse than guys like Pulisic, Lautaro, Rashford, which is around where I'd group him. He's not in that top tier, but falls somewhere in that next tier. Transfermarkt ranks him above all those guys, even above Haaland. I think his ranking is mostly based on his theoretical potential. Same reason I think Felix is ranked so high.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

The point is that you still need high quality players/depth around the 'top 5', and using transfermarkt values to try and prove that those top 5 are among the top 10 groups in the word is disingenuous.

So what should I use? Should I use the opinion of someone who tells me Dest was a bad Eredivisie player?

I tried to use a neutral barometer that essentially backs up what I said. There's nothing controversial about what I said. Some people just don't want to accept it.

Also in what way does only using the top 5 help your point anyway? You can take the top 5 prospects from most European and South American nations at any point in time and 5-10 years down the road generally a bunch of players from those countries ended up being better

And the same could be said players 6-10/15/20. Thats true of any list when you are projecting forward. I tend to think it's more reliable to use the players that are at the top of the list. They have a higher chance of being there 10 years later.

The US just does not have anywhere near that depth, even if you think those values you're using are reflective of talent (which is a stretch). There are a lot of players that don't have as much exposure, or who haven't moved, etc. that are more better and have more potential than the ones you're using to calculate this number (do you really believe Dest is as good as Cherki?).

I already addressed this, but another thing I'll point out is that this website doesn't favor American players. It's not an American website, and its values of players certainly don't favor American players.

Also why would TAA be in the 2nd group? He's widely regarded already as the best RB in the world, is a CL/PL winner and has already set numerous records for his position. I think he's separated himself from most along with Davies.

How much value does a fullback really have? An elite attacker is worth a lot more than an elite fullback.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Then thats much easier.

Mbappe: 198M
Sancho: 128.7M
Alexander-Arnold: 121M
Felix: 89.1M
Havertz: 89.1M
Davies: 88M
Haaland: 88M
Rashford: 88M
Frenkie: 79.2M
Lautaro: 77M

Like I already said, it's not great. I disagree with a lot of that, but there probably isn't a better website for neutral evaluations.



I don't know. He wasn't bad, but 3797 minutes, 18G, 9A. 4 of those goals were PK's. Certainly good, but I don't know if he produces numbers at the level of the elite like Mbappe, Sancho, Haaland. For example, Sancho had 20G, 20A in 3274 mins. Mbappe had 30G, 19A in 2718 minutes. Haaland was 44G, 10A in 2751 minutes.

And not all of that is a great measure. Ligue One is weaker than Bundesliga. Haaland did some of that in the Austrian Bundesliga, as well, but as you can see, these guys put up elite stats. Havertz stats are merely very good, but even worse than guys like Pulisic, Lautaro, Rashford, which is around where I'd group him. He's not in that top tier, but falls somewhere in that next tier. Transfermarkt ranks him above all those guys, even above Haaland. I think his ranking is mostly based on his theoretical potential. Same reason I think Felix is ranked so high.

I meant show me a list of the best USA prospects (regardless of transfermarkt) in comparison to Germany, Spain or Argentina. Kai is also a midfielder using stats to compare him to a Haaland is wrong.

He eats up Lautaro so, he's definitely not in that group. He smarter, a better passer and has more technical ability.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

wait a minute. we all had to hear about how amazing the Bundesliga is, why would Sancho want to ever join clubs like Chelsea/United, the PL and its fans are arrogant, the league is overrated, etc etc etc. You legit spent weeks this summer talking about how arrogant it was for fans of these PL clubs to think Sancho would take a step down to join them, but now we're switching it up for this debate?

Now Pulisic is better than Kai because he proved it in the PL? Come on.

What an odd rant. Are you sure you don't want to do another one against Zack Steffen?

Havertz has never produced elite numbers any season of his career. And his stats this season were boosted by being a PK taker, which is an easy stat boost. It's like always being out at the end of a hockey game when the net is empty and collecting an extra five goals per season that way. Pulisic doesn't get that boost. And he's a player that draws a lot of PK's, so many of his plays to influence goals last season were reflected in Willian's stat sheet. Meanwhile, Pulisic still put up better numbers last season than Havertz.

Either way, there's really no real argument for Havertz for being in the tier a website like that and people like you put him in other than potential. He simply doesn't produce at the level that players like Mbappe, Sancho, Haaland have. He doesn't even produce the numbers that Rashford has, another guy that gets the free PK boost.

If you don't know what you're saying, no one's forcing you to comment. I don't know a US fan that thinks Matt Miazga, whose 25, is the USA's best U23 CB. And who rates Carter-Vickers either? Sounds like you don't really follow our team if you think those are our top CB's.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Kai is also a midfielder using stats to compare him to a Haaland is wrong.

He's played CAM, LW, RW, CF like 95% of his games in the last year. I don't think calling him a general midfielder is an accurate description.

He eats up Lautaro so, he's definitely not in that group. He smarter, a better passer and has more technical ability.

Maybe. It's all subjective, which is why I used an objective measure for my point. I'm not trying to start arguments here. I used an objective measure to back up my opinion, and then a bunch of people who aren't fans of the USMNT got mad at that objective measure. I can only imagine what a back and forth of subjective opinions would devolve into. I don't want to take part, with all due respect.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Havertz has never produced elite numbers any season of his career. And his stats this season were boosted by being a PK taker, which is an easy stat boost. It's like always being out at the end of a hockey game when the net is empty and collecting an extra five goals per season that way. Pulisic doesn't get that boost. And he's a player that draws a lot of PK's, so many of his plays to influence goals last season were reflected in Willian's stat sheet. Meanwhile, Pulisic still put up better numbers last season than Havertz.
.

OOf a lot of wrong in there but I'll just say that when comparing them in the bundesliga had 13G and 18 Assists in 90 games. Averages out to 0.14 goals per game and 0.20 assists. Kai had 36 in 118 games 0.30 goals per game and 25 assists 0.21 assists. So Kai produced more goals and just slightly more assists in the Bundesliga while on the worse team.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

He's played CAM, LW, RW, CF like 95% of his games in the last year. I don't think calling him a general midfielder is an accurate description.



Maybe. It's all subjective, which is why I used an objective measure for my point. I'm not trying to start arguments here. I used an objective measure to back up my opinion, and then a bunch of people who aren't fans of the USMNT got mad at that objective measure. I can only imagine what a back and forth of subjective opinions would devolve into. I don't want to take part, with all due respect.

He's played like 3 games at CF towards the end of the season. Some of it is on the wing but mostly in the middle. When you watch he's at his best when in a free role popping in everywhere in the pitch.

But it isnt subjective. Kai is better than Lautaro. I hate saying it but its true. I wish I was wrong but I'd be lying.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

OOf a lot of wrong in there but I'll just say that when comparing them in the bundesliga had 13G and 18 Assists in 90 games. Averages out to 0.14 goals per game and 0.20 assists. Kai had 36 in 118 games 0.30 goals per game and 25 assists 0.21 assists. So Kai produced more goals and just slightly more assists in the Bundesliga while on the worse team.

I'm not debating that. Pulisic improved a lot last season, so if we are comparing the players now, using Pulisic's Bundesliga stats doesn't accurately reflect his current ability. Also, the top few leagues are roughly the same level that we don't need to distinguish between the leagues, and go for a comparison of when players played in the same leagues instead of what is current as of today.