Belgium vs. England, the loser wins

El OchoCinco said:
This is a young team with average ages 24-27 and almost all of them play in PL, most in top 5 teams. Surprising such a young talent pool with no representation in the Reals, Barcas, Bayerns etc. made it to Final Four. There are no world class players like Hazard, Mbappe, Modric, Nemar etc. on that team. Kane is just below that level.

They overachieved quite a bit for a young team so the future looks bright for them. Granted their path out of all the teams in late stages was easiest they still had to get there. England, like Germany, loves to score on set pieces so no surprise they put one in first on a free kick.

They do lack a playmaker at MF which is why you see mostly 1 v. 1 attacks down the side which is why they fall short. I do not see a Modric, Hazard, Neymar, Messi in their future so that will certainly be an issue at Euros 2020. MF is quite an issue as they often tend to develop good center backs and fullbacks.

I still think they have an impressive future being so young and inexperienced to get to top 4 so we will see what happens in next two years. Home grown talent is being displaced by overseas talent in the PL so it will be tough. I doubt you will see any top English striker playing for the Manchesters, Chelsea, Liverpool or Arsenal (even Rooney was a disappointment).

From the U.S. soccer perspective I would rather have their problem that ours with no creative talent at all haha. But England now has to see what they accomplished and do some internal study to figure out how to take the team to the next level and find their MF playmakers.
More...
You can thank the MLS business model for that. US Teams are allowed to have 8 or more international players in their rosters (somewhere I read the number is actually unlimited), while EUFA only allows 3 players out of the EU. No wonder the US is so far behind. A little protectionism seems to work sometimes..

http://www.espn.com/soccer/major-le...ice-aspirations-are-limiting-domestic-players
 
The PL, Bundisliga and Liga are international leagues attracting the world's best players. What makes Germany and Spain so good is that their nationals are good enough to play in their own leagues with this world talent and that carries over to the national team.

When Dempsey, Howard and a few others were playing in Europe the USMNT was better than it is now.

The MLS is a second tier league, to be honest. In order to get better the USMNT has to have players playing in Europe against the best, not in the MLS against college trained kids and European and Latin American scrubs. The problem with MLS is the U.S. players are being drafted out of college after playing 4 years of mediocre amateur football while European counterparts are turning pro at 16. By the time Eden Hazard and Christian Ronaldo are 22, they are world class playing amongs the best while U.S. players are just coming out of college to play in MLS.

I think you are incorrect on your EUFA rules because the general rule is up to 17 foreign players and roster of 25 if you have 8 homegrown but homegrown is loosely defined. UEFA teams want to win and make money so they will sign best talent whether it is foreign or homegrown. England is coming around with its youth. England's 25 year olds got a lot further than many older more experienced teams. But England, despite inventing the sport, never developed their own style/flair like Brazil, Spain or Italy. Very vanilla...

MLS is not the cause of USMNT problems, not letting talented kids develop and train professionally is what holds us back. Travel soccer has exploded so the talent pool has grown considerably and can have good effects down the road. But look at the current men's roster and where most play professionally. No way they can compete but no surprise why Pulisic was clearly our best player (playing in Germany past 2 years).
 
Yeah, I have very good friends on the other side of the political spectrum. When we exchange ideas and criticisms is always in good nature. The politics section on this board is far from that.

Great post btw. I am not sure if your "EUFA rules because the general rule is up to 17 foreign players" means players from outside the league country. My statement, which is correct I believe, relates to players 'out' of the EU. The rule states only three players are allowed per team. I am a Barcelona fan, and this issue was the reason why they had to re-sell Paulihno to make room for Arthur.

My point was that EUFA is cultivating their own native talent, the MLS is not geared to this goal, and I believe that is the reason why an Iceland team from 330K citizens has a better team than the US with 320MM. But I don't know enough about US soccer, so I appreciate your comments. :)
 
Chelsea fan here...

Ok i misunderstood. The rules I mentioned said foreign,i.e. outside of the country, but I ovrelooked the rule about outside EU. So it says up to 5 under contract non-EU and can only field up to 3. So yes you are correct, EU is protecting its own haha. Sucks for Brazil and African players when they want to go to a large club with a few others already there.

However, if you play in Spain for 5+ years you count as an EU player which is why Messi does not count as non-EU nor does Dani Alves... Neymar won't count in a few years so always a rule to get around when star players are involved haha.

Belgium is another great example..top 4 in the world with world class talent playing all over Europe and a VERY small country with a domestic league that is meh.

I think Belgium and Iceland prove it is not your talent pool but where your talent is developed. Iceland and Belgium have players in top leagues and USA....not so much.

I think this all comes down to the fact that Europe is the best league in the world.
 
El OchoCinco said:
Chelsea fan here...

Ok i misunderstood. The rules I mentioned said foreign,i.e. outside of the country, but I ovrelooked the rule about outside EU. So it says up to 5 under contract non-EU and can only field up to 3. So yes you are correct, EU is protecting its own haha. Sucks for Brazil and African players when they want to go to a large club with a few others already there.

However, if you play in Spain for 5+ years you count as an EU player which is why Messi does not count as non-EU nor does Dani Alves... Neymar won't count in a few years so always a rule to get around when star players are involved haha.

Belgium is another great example..top 4 in the world with world class talent playing all over Europe and a VERY small country with a domestic league that is meh.

I think Belgium and Iceland prove it is not your talent pool but where your talent is developed. Iceland and Belgium have players in top leagues and USA....not so much.

I think this all comes down to the fact that Europe is the best league in the world.
More...
I didn't know about the 5 years rule. Great post.
 
Spurs and Man City crashed the party and now there is a top 6 (foreign money as well as players).


Chelsea, ManUre, Man Shitty, Liverpoop, Ass-enal, Spuds


Also once in a blue moon an outsider tries to poke their way in but does not last long (Leicester).

Most parity up top among the big European Leagues IMHO....
 
Most parity....agreed.

I understand Conte is out and that Barca has selected Hazard as it's top summer target. Is the team being sold-off in bits or is there a cohesive strategy going forward?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top