USMNT Thread Part VIII

[Chimaera]

I think Hoppe should have a role in the next couple years, but I don't know if he's ready to lead the line consistently in important matches going forward.

Striker is still a point of development that needs to happen.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

The quote gives better context, but Pulisic shouldn’t have to cede a spot to the favored German’s, Mount, or Ziyech. Americans haven’t forgot that Pulisic didn’t start leg 2 against Real Madrid or the UCL final after what he did in leg 1 against Madrid.

have Americans forgot that Chelsea won the UCL tho

 

[kingsboy11]

would you like them to play 2 keepers at once?

If one day we can be like Germany or France where there is an insanely large pool of players and we lose players the caliber of Jermaine Jones, John Brooks, Fabian Johnson, and Timmy Chandler that's obviously different, but we aren't there yet.

 

[Chimaera]

He isn’t even in the top 3 for the position right now. He might not be in four or five seasons either. If he goes to Mexico, he might be first or second choice in 3-4 seasons. He plays a position where really, one healthy, fit keeper will likely play the spot for 6-7+ years.

The others are much different as you need a bunch of field players, and a keeper? Eh, not so much. Maybe if he was the best in the pool. But he isn’t.

Jermaine Jones was a CL playing midfielder for a big club in Germany, who walked into the midfield for the US for basically close to a decade. He also was likely never playing for Germany any large amount.

John Brooks, Chandler and Johnson are all in similar situations of not being in the top choice for German sides, and then getting real playing time for the Americans with a switch. Of those, only really John Brooks is still a factor. Johnson could be, but he’s aging out, and behind a number of players. They all play a part, and the US was lucky to get them, but none makes the difference. Honestly, if that’s where the US is in five years, to where they’re begging for scraps from Germany or Mexico or whomever, they haven’t progressed in development to where they want to be. It will basically say they’re close to a decade and a half ago.

At this point, with all the young talent that’s coming through, they should be an attractive choice for players who can cut it. Those who can’t can go elsewhere.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Yeah, keeper is different, you usually have 1 guy that holds down the position for years. He wasn't going to play a significant role for USMNT, so it's not a big deal.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

have Americans forgot that Chelsea won the UCL tho

Why should we care? We aren’t Chelsea fans. If you want to play our best attackers at wingback or as bench options with worse players in the lineup at their position, what do you expect will be the reaction?

 

[Chimaera]

Honestly, with the young, exciting talent coming in, anyone who doesn’t want to stay, who isn’t a potential top level player can kick rocks. If they’re not in, it is what it is. As the USMNT moves forward, talent is expanding.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Why should we care? We aren’t Chelsea fans. If you want to play our best attackers at wingback or as bench options with worse players in the lineup at their position, what do you expect will be the reaction?

Pulisic isn't better than Havertz or Mount...

He also doesn't line up at wing-back...

 

[Chimaera]

To be fair, I don’t really care if Pulisic learns to track back, as long as he stays fit.

 

[bleedblue1223]

To be fair, I don’t really care if Pulisic learns to track back, as long as he stays fit.

Yeah, that's all his issues are. He's rarely fit enough to play 90 minutes week in and week out.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Pulisic isn't better than Havertz or Mount...

He also doesn't line up at wing-back...

I will beg to differ. If he’s not needed this season as a starting option, sell him. Why not?

And he absolutely has lined up at wingback the last two preseason games.

 

[Chimaera]

Note, the better players are going to want to play for the best option and with the best talent they can. If you’re a stud young American kid, playing with Reyna, Pulisic, McKinnie, Dest and company should be desirable.

If they continue to get results, play an attractive attacking football, showcase some younger players, continue to put in the work development wise (it’s more down to MLS and getting smart moves abroad tbh) then players declaring for whichever sides will take care of itself

 

[Chimaera]

I will beg to differ. If he’s not needed this season as a starting option, sell him. Why not?

And he absolutely has lined up at wingback the last two preseason games.

For what it’s worth, you don’t sell everyone who isn’t a bang on starter. Especially if he can offer you something off the bench to change the match. And if you’re Chelsea and money/wages don’t matter.

I don’t care as long as he’s playing and fit. All that matters to the US.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I will beg to differ. If he’s not needed this season as a starting option, sell him. Why not?

And he absolutely has lined up at wingback the last two preseason games.

Because you need more than 11 starters to win, and more than 11 players get quality minutes.

Because we didn't have any wing-back options available, so Tuchel went to the emergency options, something I already posted about. Pulisic and Hudson-Odoi are just the 3rd choice wing-backs. If you were Canadian, would you complain how Bayern made Davies play in the back?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

For what it’s worth, you don’t sell everyone who isn’t a bang on starter. Especially if he can offer you something off the bench to change the match. And if you’re Chelsea and money/wages don’t matter.

I don’t care as long as he’s playing and fit. All that matters to the US.

I know that. I’m not suggesting he’ll be sold, unless he asks for it, which he might eventually. Tuchel has never rated him. This is going all the way back to his time at Dortmund. I’m all for not overreacting. I didn’t when Tuchel came in. Pulisic at that time needed to stay fit. Playing time was a secondary concern. But now this is season two and it’s looking like he’s not going to be given a chance to start. Or if he does, it’ll be a position we don’t want him playing and surely he doesn’t want to play either. We have every right to want him to play or be sold. He has the same right. If Chelsea and their fans prefer other players, why are they complaining that we don’t like this?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

If you were Canadian, would you complain how Bayern made Davies play in the back?

Davies was moved to wingback before he broke into the Bayern team. It got him a spot with one of the most successful teams in the world, so it’s a different situation. Pulisic was more than proven before Tuchel ever used him at WB. If Canada felt Davies was better used for their National Team at LW, why wouldn’t they complain now though?

And we have plenty of RB’s. It’s our deepest position. Even if he becomes a RWB at Chelsea, he still may not be our best RWB. We want him playing as an attacker. If he doesn’t, we won’t like it. It actively hurts our NT to have our best players not playing or playing out of position for their clubs. Nothing I said is unreasonable. Chelsea fans need to accept we don’t like it.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Again, he is not going to be a wing-back. Pulisic and Hudson-Odoi have been their in pre-season because our 4 other options haven't been available. I get you want him to start every match on the club team, but that'll just destroy him for when we need him for national duty. Spot starting and rotating in, while still getting quality minutes is ideal to try and maintain his fitness for when we need him.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Jesus motherf***ing christ you're posting like Pulisic has been given #3 and reverse-Gareth Baled. Two pre-season games does not a positional change make.

Anyway, USMNT fans should be grateful that Tuchel likes Puli best as an off-the-bench wildcard option because it's the only way that his hamstrings will stay intact.

 

[Chimaera]

Yep, kick him to the stands for all of qualifying

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Again, he is not going to be a wing-back. Pulisic and Hudson-Odoi have been their in pre-season because our 4 other options haven't been available. I get you want him to start every match on the club team, but that'll just destroy him for when we need him for national duty. Spot starting and rotating in, while still getting quality minutes is ideal to try and maintain his fitness for when we need him.

I didn't ask every match. How about starting him in the return leg against Real Madrid after he scored a crucial goal in the first leg? How about starting him in the final when he's been the team's best attacker during that stretch? Pulisic is not a starter under Tuchel. Your attempts to twist the situation don't change that. Spot starting and rotating in is another phrasing for not a starter.

Let's also be up front about your interest. Your interest in this discussion is to back Chelsea. You will back Chelsea over the player or what best helps his National Team. The majority of us that post in this thread do not back Chelsea. We want to see Pulisic be a starter for Chelsea. If he's not, we will complain about it. To try to lie about it benefitting Pulisic or the USMNT is ridiculous. You aren't deceiving us. The guy is fit now. He was fit to start in crucial games last season we thought he should've started in, and he didn't. No one has asked he start every game. Don't move the goalposts or try to play mediator. There can be diverging interests in this situation where not everyone has to agree about what should happen.

Jesus motherf***ing christ you're posting like Pulisic has been given #3 and reverse-Gareth Baled. Two pre-season games does not a positional change make.

We just went through a half season of Tuchel, and now we see the coach's preferences in preseason.

Also did you not come into the thread about our players and tell us what you think benefits your team that most of us don't support? If I thought Sabres fans should demand a lesser price for Eichel because I think it benefits my team to pay a lesser price, I'm not going to go to their section of the website, and tell them that they need to view it the way I do. I'm not saying you need to view it the way we do or you can't contribute to this thread, but you are encroaching on our territory and not understanding our viewpoint to this. We have every right to not like how he's used, and you aren't going to be able to tell us we need to view it the way Chelsea spins it.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'm a Chelsea fan and USMNT fan. When Pulisic made the transfer to Chelsea, I maintained how I was skeptical because of how often we change managers/systems and how much we have the urge to upgrade the squad, so take that crap somewhere else. He will play enough for it not to impact his performance with USMNT, it's just fitness over the course of a season that can become a problem for him.

If you want to say he's better than Mount, then I really don't know what to say. At least say that he should've started in a front 3 over Werner.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I'm a Chelsea fan and USMNT fan. When Pulisic made the transfer to Chelsea, I maintained how I was skeptical because of how often we change managers/systems and how much we have the urge to upgrade the squad, so take that crap somewhere else. He will play enough for it not to impact his performance with USMNT, it's just fitness over the course of a season that can become a problem for him.

If you want to say he's better than Mount, then I really don't know what to say. At least say that he should've started in a front 3 over Werner.

I mentioned Werner. He was better in his first season than either Werner and Havertz were. I'm not sure there's a great deal of difference between Pulisic, Werner, Havertz, and Ziyech, but Pulisic in his first season was better than any of those three were in their first season. None of those guys were that good last season. Pulisic wasn't either, but he was also injured and lacked fitness. However, when he was fit, of all these players who weren't that good, Pulisic was the one who wasn't starting the big games and now coming into this season might play wingback. Why not put Timo Werner at wingback? If he can't finish and lacks technique, let him be the one that can make runs at RWB.

Mount is the one that doesn't belong. Mount is one of the wildly overrated players in world football. He gets a big reputation because he looks like he's doing a lot when he does really little. Pedri is another like this. I actually think Mount is the biggest problem with Chelsea's attack. Positionless player. Doesn't have the physical requirements or passing range of a midfielder or the goal influence of an attacker. What it ends up being is that Chelsea is playing with one less attacker, considering Tuchel uses Mount as an attacker. Mount has played nearly 8000 minutes for Chelsea the last two seasons (7983), and he only has 17G, 15A. Meanwhile Pulisic (who wasn't even good last season) has 17G, 14A. He did that 4800 minutes. Same number of goals and one less assist in a little more than the equivalent of 35 less full games. But Mount is better? No wonder Chelsea doesn't score goals.

And I never said Pulisic won't play enough to hurt his NT form. Thats never been a contention made. What has been said is that playing at wingback will hurt the National Team. Playing enough minutes to not hurt a player substantially coming back to the National Team is also not the same as being in great form heading to the National Team to be able to carry that over to the National Team. Pulisic has nothing to prove compared to the other options. Either Tuchel changes how he manages or Pulisic should leave. Thats my take, and thats the take of many fans of the US National Team. Obviously using him as a wingback would be a further escalation of that. How many teams have their #10 play wingback?

 

[N o o d l e s]

Sounds like Sargent will be learning from Puukki party, love it

 

[Peen]

I mentioned Werner. He was better in his first season than either Werner and Havertz were. I'm not sure there's a great deal of difference between Pulisic, Werner, Havertz, and Ziyech, but Pulisic in his first season was better than any of those three were in their first season. None of those guys were that good last season. Pulisic wasn't either, but he was also injured and lacked fitness. However, when he was fit, of all these players who weren't that good, Pulisic was the one who wasn't starting the big games and now coming into this season might play wingback. Why not put Timo Werner at wingback? If he can't finish and lacks technique, let him be the one that can make runs at RWB.

Mount is the one that doesn't belong. Mount is one of the wildly overrated players in world football. He gets a big reputation because he looks like he's doing a lot when he does really little. Pedri is another like this. I actually think Mount is the biggest problem with Chelsea's attack. Positionless player. Doesn't have the physical requirements or passing range of a midfielder or the goal influence of an attacker. What it ends up being is that Chelsea is playing with one less attacker, considering Tuchel uses Mount as an attacker. Mount has played nearly 8000 minutes for Chelsea the last two seasons (7983), and he only has 17G, 15A. Meanwhile Pulisic (who wasn't even good last season) has 17G, 14A. He did that 4800 minutes. Same number of goals and one less assist in a little more than the equivalent of 35 less full games. But Mount is better? No wonder Chelsea doesn't score goals.

And I never said Pulisic won't play enough to hurt his NT form. Thats never been a contention made. What has been said is that playing at wingback will hurt the National Team. Playing enough minutes to not hurt a player substantially coming back to the National Team is also not the same as being in great form heading to the National Team to be able to carry that over to the National Team. Pulisic has nothing to prove compared to the other options. Either Tuchel changes how he manages or Pulisic should leave. Thats my take, and thats the take of many fans of the US National Team. Obviously using him as a wingback would be a further escalation of that. How many teams have their #10 play wingback?

I say this respectfully sir but I’ve never seen you have a good take

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I say this respectfully sir but I’ve never seen you have a good take

I’ll take that as a compliment and not read your posts any longer.