re: US Soccer's lack of stars

Thanks Rick Reilly.

Our biggest issue right now is talent identification. Look at our Olympic programs. We dominate Olympic sports that have far less committed fan bases than our emerging soccer market, simply because we can throw out enough resources (read: money) toward identifying, developing and fielding medal-winning athletes. Relatively nobody cares about speed skating, fencing or swimming unless its the Olympics, yet we found niche athletes to crowd out the medal stands. Some of these sports have way more fans in other countries, but those nations can't compete with our resources and advanced training.

Our soccer players don't "suck" compared to others around the world; just compared to our freak NBA/NFL depictions of athleticism. Jozy Altidore is probably stronger than most strikers in the Premier League. Doesn't make him better than most of them.

This is I think why Michael Bradley is the ideal construct of our unique soccer player. Bradley possesses the genes from a family of exceptional athletes, while also exhibiting the polished game of a modern European midfielder.

We just need a bunch of B-/C+ American athletes trained and scouted for soccer.

quote:

---

Our biggest issue right now is talent identification. Look at our Olympic programs. We dominate Olympic sports that have far less committed fan bases than our emerging soccer market, simply because we can throw out enough resources (read: money) toward identifying, developing and fielding medal-winning athletes. Relatively nobody cares about speed skating, fencing or swimming unless its the Olympics, yet we found niche athletes to crowd out the medal stands. Some of these sports have way more fans in other countries, but can't compete with our resources and advanced training.

---

I don't think this is right. The question is whether other countries are A LOT more focused on the Olympic Sports than we are, and the answer to that is probably no in most cases. Where they are, we don't dominate, despite our resources.

The reason we don't identify talent is that people generally have not cared. Now that we are focusing on soccer, talent will be identified.
Case in point: I am a fairly athletic, 6'0 170' left-footer that played zero soccer after the 3rd grade (25 years ago). There was none to be played anywhere around me. None of my friends played it, none of their parents followed it at the national or club level. My kids, on the other hand, play soccer every day in the backyard. They're going to play organized for the first time this year at 4 and 6 years old and unless they want to stop, will not stop until they reach their ceiling. If they have the ability to become stars, they will be noticed and given that chance. My general story is being repeated all over the country in a million families.

I think talent identification is the biggest problem, though I'm not exactly sure how to accurately express what I am about to say.

If there is a child superbly gifted in fencing or speed skating, chances are they will be put into a program to cultivate those skills.

If a child is superbly gifted in soccer, chances are he/she is also superbly gifted in one of either football, baseball or basketball.

Because at such a young age soccer is lumped into the "main" sports categories, many athletes who have a brighter future in soccer wind up playing one of the other big 3 sports, or just give the sport up entirely.

quote:

---

I don't care about goalies and highly doubtful/debatable Dempsey is starting over Lampard, Gerrard, Wilshere, Walcott, Ox, Cleverley in the midfield.

---

No team gets by more on reputation than England. There has been nothing special about any of their recent teams and the vast majority of players I've seen in recent years.

quote:

---

Michael Bradley is more than good enough to start for England.

---

In front of whom? Gerrard, Lampard, Wilshire, Milner, Ox. No, no, no, no, and no.

quote:

---

There has been nothing special about any of their recent teams and the vast majority of players I've seen in recent years.

---

Probably true. But they still have wayyy more talent than we do. We don't have a player that would get on the field for England, outside of Cakes and maybe Howard. Hart is just as good or better than Timmy though, and younger.

quote:

---

I'm not saying the USMNT aren't worth a shite, they are. Better than most countries, and getting better. I'm as big a fan as you will see, just pointing out facts here. Or what I consider facts

---

I'm not even talking up the USA. I'm just telling the truth about England which, for some reason, so many are unable or unwilling to see. They're always made out to be some team of all stars who just can't get it together. The reality is they're just not that talented.

quote:

---

The reality is they're just not that talented.

---

The reality is, yes they are. All of these unalented players you speak of are starters for some of the best club teams in the world. United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal, etc don't just hand out starting spots based on a player being English.

quote:

---

I'm just telling the truth about England which, for some reason, so many are unable or unwilling to see.

---

You're a little late to the party. This maybe used to be the case. It seems recently though, that England is the en vogue team to shite on. The reality is that they are very, very good. Just because they aren't on par with the 3 or 4 best national teams in the world doesn't mean they are crap.

quote:

---

quote:
225bred


God you are such a douche

---

agreed

quote:

---

Saying England isn't on par with the top 3 or 4 national teams is like saying Virginia Tech isn't on par with Alabama in football.

---

Stupid analogy. Not accurate either. And not funny, as you had intended. I'm winning this argument.