Commentary
Tab Ramos holds London audition for U-20 World Cup spots
- by Mike Woitalla @MikeWoitalla, Apr 4, 2017
Nineteen players who weren't part of the USA's Concacaf U-20 Championship win last month are part of Coach Tab Ramos' April 3-10 training camp in London, England, in preparation for the 2017 U-20 World Cup that kicks off in late May.
“This camp provides one more opportunity for players we have already seen with the U-20 national team and also players who have done well with our U-19 national team,” Ramos said. “We will be able to see players in highly competitive environments playing against very good competition.”
Among those called in is outside back Marcello Borges, who missed the qualifying tournament with an injury. Ten players are making their U-20 player pool
debuts: Danny Barbir, Sebastian Des Pres, Felipe Hernandez, Lagos Kunga, Djordje Mihailovic, Keaton Parks, Stephen Payne, Brandon Terwege and Mason Toye.
Barbir played for the USA at the 2015 U-17 World Cup. He as well as Hernandez, Mihailovic, Kunga, Terwege and Toye have played for Coach Brad Friedel's U.S. U-19 national team.
Southern Californian Payne left UCLA after his sophomore year to join Portugal’s Estoril Praia. Texan Parks has played 10 games for Portuguese second division Varzim. Des Pres, formerly of
RSL-Arizona, plays for the U-18s of English four-tier club Blackpool.
“All players coming in to this camp have the potential to make our U-20 World Cup final squad,” Ramos said. “I am sure that there will be a few players who will be selected for the U-20 World Cup based on their performance at this camp.”
Mukwelle Akale is one of the European-based players who wasn't available for the qualifying tournament.
The USA, in Group F play of the 2017 U-20 World Cup, faces Ecuador (May 22), (May 25) and Saudi Arabia (May 28).
U.S. U-20 men’s national team
GOALKEEPERS (4): Jonathan Klinsmann* (Univ. of California; Newport Beach, Calif.), JT Marcinkowski*
(Georgetown Univ.; Alamo, Calif.), Brady Scott (De Anza Force; Petaluma, Calif.), Justin Vom Steeg (Fortuna Dusseldorf; Santa Barbara, Calif.).
DEFENDERS (8): Hugo Arellano (LA
Galaxy; Norwalk, Calif.), Danny Barbir (West Bromwich Albion; Allentown, Pa.), Marcello Borges (Univ. of Michigan; Kearny, N.J.), Aaron Herrera* (Univ. of New Mexico; Casa Grande, Ariz.), John Nelson
(Internationals SC; Medina, OH), Keaton Parks (Plano, Texas; Unattached), Miles Robinson (Atlanta United FC; Arlington, Mass.), Brandon Terwege (FC Dallas; Highland Village, Texas).
MIDFIELDERS (7): Mukwelle Akale (Villarreal CF; Minneapolis, Minn.), Collin Fernandez (Chicago Fire; Bridgeview, IL), Jeremiah Gutjahr* (Indiana University; Bloomington, IN), Djordje
Mihailovic (Chicago Fire; Bridgeview, Ill.), James Murphy (Sheffield Wednesday F.C.; Scotch Plains, N.J.), Yosef Samuel (Bethlehem Steel FC; Atlanta, Ga.), Eryk Williamson* (Univ. of Maryland;
Alexandria, Va.).
FORWARDS (6): Sebastien Des Pres (Blackpool FC; San Diego, Calif.), Felipe Hernandez (Swope Park Rangers; Murfreesboro, Tenn.), Lagos Kunga (Atlanta United
FC, Tucker, Ga.), Stephen Payne (Estoril Praia; Birmingham, Ala.), Emmanuel Sabbi* (UD Las Palmas; Columbus, OH), Mason Toye (PDA, South Orange, N.J.).
* Part of Concacaf U-20 Championship
squad.
Hugo Perez takes charge of Northern California's Juventus
Hugo Perez, a Hall of Famer and former U.S. U-14 and U-15 national team coach and former U.S. Soccer Northwest Technical Advisor, has joined Northern California youth club Juventus as Director of Coaching and Youth Development.
“I am extremely excited to join Juventus Sport Club,” said Perez in a press release. “I think that with all the players that we have in this country, we could play great football. Not good — but great football. And it is my goal and pledge to ensure that Juventus Sport Club is known throughout the country as the premier club for youth development.”
Juventus, which competes in the U.S. Soccer Boys Development Academy, was founded in 1956 by Italian immigrants.
Perez’s U-14 U.S. national team in 2012 included players such as Luca De La Torre, Matthew Olosunde, Christian Pulisic, Joshua Perez and Haji Wright who went on to represent the USA at the 2015 U.S. U-17 World Cup. He moved on to coach the U-15 national team before being replaced in 2014. Ian Mork succeeded Perez as Northwest Technical Advisor, but Mork has recently left the post and U.S. Soccer has not yet named a replacement.
Sophia Smith, age 16, called up to full national team
Sophia Smith, who in the last six weeks scored 10 goals for the U.S. U-18, U-20 and U-23 national teams, was called up by Coach Jill Ellis for training camp ahead of friendlies against Russia in Texas April 6 and April 9.
The Real Colorado product scored the winner for the U-23s in a 2-1 victory
over the NWSL's Portland Thorns before leaving the U-23s, along with 17-year-old Jaelin Howell, also of Real Colorado.
Smith, a member of the 2016 U-17 World Cup team, is headed to Stanford when after she graduates from Fossil Ridge High School.
I'd still like to know why Klinsmann fired Hugo Perez. Maybe there was a legitimate reason, but not being a Klinsmann fan I have to wonder.
All this nonsense for a U20 team ? I guess when one has money to waste they find ways and means.. USSF better win the World Cup U20 else I will never support a soccer organization again until I see serious changes..
Well I can pretty much guarantee they won't win it so I guess we won't be hearing from you any longer...
Fire, yes I 999% guarantee you that. I have my level of tolerance for USSF monopolistic nonsense and it's now reaching borderline..you can continue supporting them with their wild ambitions while being amazed that countries with much much much less than the US win simple U20 and U16 cups.. USSF existed longer than 90% than other soccer organizations, US been playing soccer longer than all of South America and we were in the First World Cup and where are we with USSF ?? No effing where..That organization is poison if you ask me..
QB is right. Many SouthAmericans have told me that American kids play way more organized soccer games than they do in Argentina Brazil etc. What do we have to show for it? Neymar played futsal mostly up to age 13-14 when he joined his first Academy. Never played 11v11 before that age and played some 5v5 or 7v7. What does that tell you? I know what it tells me. The importance isnt in structure or how much money you spend. Its how you enjoy playing the game and playing as much of it as you want under little to no structure at all. It is funny as hell to hear so many idiots claim Barcelona developed Messi. Wrong. The development years that made Messi different from everyone else were spent playing in Argentina and the style played there. But you won't get most of the posters hear admit the obvious because they all make money from youth here. Ethics go right out the window.
As usual, you rely on the patently false claim that the US had an older and more firmly established soccer culture than South America. The claim that South Americans just play in the street and somehow turn into great players is also false. Brazil, in fact, has an extremely organized and structured youth development system. No doubt they do things differently than us but they don't just rely on street games to develop players. And I'm not denigrating free play as part of development. It's great. But it's not the only part of a player's development.
Also, according to Wikipedia at least, Neymar joined his first club at age 7 and joined Santos at 11 so he was in a structured environment from a very early age. I'm sure he also played on the streets but that wasn't the only place he was learning the game.
Oh, and finally, I don't make a cent from any youth soccer and never have so your efforts to question my ethics on that front are in vain.
Fire, the US has been playing soccer just as long or longer than most South American countries-- we have also been in the World Cup from the very beginnings and almost all countries in that initial World Cup in 1930 have at least made a World Cup finals except us-- which statement is incorrect ? The USSF has never done anything for soccer except monitize the sport and spent it carelessly-- We should be investigating them in addition to FIFA..
Only very recently has soccer been more than a fringe sport in the US. The people of South America have been living and breathing soccer for 100+ years. We still don't live and breathe soccer in the US. The fact a handful of people were playing soccer 100 years ago doesn't mean we have a long-time soccer culture and I don't know why you keep repeating this non-argument.
Fire, I can only go by history and you know that every sport in the US starts off as a fringe sport but when the USSF was formed it was base on developing the sport just like baseball and football.. the USSF has been a complete failure for over 100 years even though they had the resources and people from the beginning-- Even today they are overspending on nonsense. There are no sporting organizations in the US that cannot count a major men's championship in its history except yeah you guess it USSF..
That's not true of course. For example, has USA rugby ever won a rugby world cup? Why not? Failures!!!! Oh wait, maybe it's because hardly anyone plays rugby or follows it here even though I'm sure you can find some people who were playing it 100 years ago. Soccer wasn't much different than rugby 25 years ago. Now look at it.
They made Rugby a pay to play sport at a high cost so no wonder it hasnt won anything in Usa. How can you even compare Rugby to soccer as far as popularity is concerned which is your main point? Soccer is and has been extremely popular in Usa for quite some time now. It certainly is more popular than many other sports where we have won medals in at Olympics that I personally don't even know people that even play them. So the main issue has to be in how it is run when you compare. Liga MX is the most watched soccer league in Usa. Is Mls targeting this demographic at all? Are they doing clinics and camps in the barrios? How about scouting them? No effort whatsoever to identify with this community. Does that make any sense if wanting to become a soccer powerhoise is main objective? To basically ignore our most passionate community? Havent we had a large Hispanic soccer loving community for many years now?
Depends what you mean by "many years". Not for 100 years like QTD claims. In any event, does that community mean that the US, as a whole, has a more ingrained soccer culture than Brazil or Argentina like QTD claims? Of course not. That's laughable.
QTD said we have won men's championships in every sport. But we haven't in rugby. Yes, you are right that it isn't as popular as soccer. Similarly, soccer isn't as popular as baseball, football or basketball. Other countries don't have any other sports competing for players like we do. US soccer has come a long way in 20-25 years and it's impossible not to see that unless you are being willfully blind. Of course, we have a way to go, no one is denying that.
For example, the day the USMNT beat Honduras, march madness leads sportscenter. That doesn't happen in South America or Europe. The national team's game would be by far the main sports story.
By popular I mean we dont have a certain demographic that picks Rugby first. We have had a very large community for many years that has picked soccer first. Hispanics. Why would we need a more engrained culture than that to have better results? Black people dominate football and basketball and they make up less of the population than Hispanics. No matter how well engrained that sport has been in the white community they cant seem to get numbers up in the Nba and Nfl. Black people almost instantly took over basketball once they started playing it even though white people invented it and had that ever so important "head start" you speak of. Panama who dominated us, is a small country that picks baseball first and boxing is right up there. Argentina has already won a world basketball championship even though it loses its best athletes to soccer, according to your logic. Rugby is huge in Argentina as well. Wanting to believe something and actual facts are 2 different things.
You gave Usmnt as the example to popularity of soccer in Usa? Overall fans of soccer events like Liga MX are alot closer to March Madness games. Also, thats a poor comparison because March Madness is a few weeks long event that happens once a year. You also cant compare the Nba season games to March Madness or even a season Nfl game. You trying too hard dude.
I'm not even sure what your argument is any longer. Yes, there is a portion of the US population for whom soccer is the #1 sport. So what? That means we should win world cups? Basketball and football are poor comparators because there isn't serious international competition in those sports. Yes, there is some pro basketball international play but the US dominates that. They've lost one game in the past 11 years.
There is increasing competition in basketball internationally but thats besides the point, which is, internally Usa basketball has been dominated for decades by the same small minority which proves that a sport does not need to be embraced by an entire population or even 1/2 of it. Let's be honest. If black people had not stepped in and put their own flavor and style on basketball to then dominate it, it would be less popular than hockey or even rugby.
That's not true. Lots of non-black people like basketball. It is far far more popular than soccer in the US although hopefully that will change. It's an apples to oranges comparison in any event because in the other top basketball countries in the world basketball is a fringe sport. If we want to compete in the world of soccer we have to compete against populous countries where soccer is far and away the #1 sport. Your expectations are totally absurd.
Great point, Fire. Basketball is as mainstream in the US as it gets. So is baseball for that matter. These sports get World Cup numbers during their championships and average millions of viewers throughout the entire season. Even though whites might not have a big handprint on how game is played in the NBA, but white people are a humongous part of why it's such a popular sport on the whole. Their is absolutely no way that JUST the latin population can carry the sport of soccer in the US. They are a big part, but it has to be truly mainstream for even much of that population to jump in, much less the majority of the country.
Yes basketball is very popular with nonblack people and probably a much higher % than the 14% that black people make up of entire population and thats my point. It doesnt take a great % of Americans to love a sport to dominate it. Nor does it take many years or overcoming a "headstart". Black people proved that with basketball. They are a smaller % of the people that love and play it and they overcame that headstart almost instantly. Both are excuses we have for soccer and our own history with basketball proves otherwise. Focus on that first. Once you grasp what i just said think about the fact that every year we have more foreign born and developed players in the Nba and many "World Class" players like Parker and Ginobli while we dont have yet one American world class soccer player. Not one single one. That only means that our entire approach is wrong. We don't have the right people scouting, coaching, developing. We dont have the right elite clubs in place that are meeting this demand. There is no demand. Our Mls doesnt enforce rules to promote world class player development. Our Ussf doesnt demand it from Mls. Mls teams sign random homegrown just to get people off their back or to be able to market. Not all of them but I know first hand of a few of them. This all goes together. You will say there are exiting players coming up. I think we have always had that but something happens along the way. What i do know is we have the same people in place that are supposed to help with the development proccess.
Don yes white people are the biggest reason basketball is so popular but that doesnt translate into white people dominating baskatball. Far from it. Black people love basketball. Hispanic Americans love soccer. Black people dominate basketball completely. We go to H.S. games to recruit them. Do we offer the same opportunities to Hispanics in soccer? No we dont. No where near. We are not targeting thay community as we should. That is clear. If you ignored black people the same way we would see the same or close to it.
But once there is more money in Usa for soccer and Us soccer and Mls start to see the value $$ of Hispanic stars that are homegrown american born then that will all change. Its a matter of time and its undeniable. You heard it here first.
Did it ever occur to you that it's a lot easier to "dominate" basketball because other than the US, there is probably no other country where it is the most popular sport? The next best countries at basketball are Spain, Argentina, France, Russia, Serbia etc. Soccer is king in in all of those places (and basketball is behind rugby in France and Argentina and behind hockey in Russia).
Gary - First of all, there is no way that you can compare the ascendance of blacks in basketball 50 years ago to the sporting landscape today. Second of all, if we are not scouting properly and everything else about our development system is out of whack, and on the other hand Mexican scouts are all over the "barrios" as you suggest and they are doing everything right, then why haven't we seen them produce stars from these kids that they take back to Mexico? There have been a few success stories, but nothing close to a game changer.
Fire, come on dude, you dissapointing me now. Focus. Forget about the rest of the world. Black people inside Usa dominated a sport they did not invent or were even allowed to participate in. They make up less than 14% of the population and made up much less than that when they first started dominating the game. Under your logic, white people had the advantage because they invented it and have many more people playing it and loving it. But black people still manage to completelt dominate it. Comprende?
Don, why cant I compare? Black people dominate basketball today as they did back then. Point is they prove that you dont need to be a large portion of a population. A small minority in one country can overcome a "headstart" and completely dominate a sport. Why would it be any different for soccer?
Don towards your2nd question. Its a great question by the way and I have the answer for you. Many of the kids that they find here dont leave for many reasons. I know several stories personally but comes down to legal status of parents, players, so poor they are scared to have expenses back if they cant make it, away from home, etc. And lately it was announced that Fifa is not allowing Liga MX to tale any players from Usa under age 18 which is currently under debate. Several players were sent back to Usa just for that reason a few years ago.
They are not good enough -- that's why.
Don, even though Mls makes no effort to target the barrios the best DAs in the country are overwhelmingly Hispanic. Fc Dallas La Galaxy to name a few. Can you imagine if Mls did target that community? Not good enough? You crack me up.
Most popular sports in Usa are completely dominated by a minority that make up less than 14% of entire population. You mean to tell me that just recently we have had more than that % playing soccer as first sport? Lol. You right. It is a nonargument. As for Brazil, I dint think yoy know about their structure than someone who came up through that system in Brazil.
I was responding to your point about Neymar. Unless you have some basis to dispute the wikipedia article on him, you were totally wrong that he didn't join a club until 14. He was at a club at age 7 where Santos spotted him. He joined them at 11.
I just know what I read online regarding the Brazilian youth system. Depending on when your source went through the system, his info may be out of date.
Also, I'm not disputing that Brazilian kids play more street games than kids here. I'm sure that's true. But the top young players aren't just playing in the street.
Let me research that. The top young players aren't just playing in the street. May be true but for sure there are no top talent that did not play street soccer. Thats a fact.
There are no top players that didn't learn in the street. That sounds dubious. But in any event my point was that great players develop at clubs for the most part and Neymar is just another example. This myth that come kid who only played in the street is somehow a great player at age 16 is just that - a myth. That isn't how it happens.
All you have to do is take the time to read bios of the best players ever like Zidane, Cruyff, Pele, Maradona, Neymar, Ronaldinho, etc. They all say the same thing. They all credit their "unique" skills to street play. All of them. But I guess you are a greater player that can prove otherwise. Lol.
And of course it's just not street soccer that makes them successful but no doubt it is what sets them apart and that is conveneiently overlooked by people like you. It appears that the more street soccer they play the better they are. No where near the same results for more structured training with little street play. That is a researchable fact.
I agree playing street soccer during spare time is better than not playing soccer at all. So we should encourage that. But we should also recognize it's not the only ingredient that goes into making a great player.
Not only ingredient but is most important one if greatness is objective. Proven fact. Main ingredient. Qhich only means it's more important than structured training development. Hands down.
How is it a proven fact? Based on what?
Based on the greatest players bios. Check them out.
Gary - Your argument doesn't make sense because there are just as you say that there are no great players to ever not play street soccer, you will also find that no great player has ever developed by only playing in the street. Even if you are referring to futsal, that is highly structured and competitive in Brazil. They are both vital, but your argument has always been that street soccer is the only one that is actually important. In fact you have said on many occasions that coaching and structured play are actually harmful for development.
Don, first of all, players are born playing futsla because it is thr easiest thing to play with ball at your feet apart from srteet soccer. Accessability. Rec soccer in Usa is structured and thats as organized as it gets for futsal at ages 5-13. Its just somehwere to play. Of course that all great players run into structured environment sooner or later. Thats a given and yes it is needed. But surely if you NEVER played street soccer you most likely are not a great player. Its all the extra touches on your own where you have no one not letting you express yourself. Its the inner drive motivating you to beat your friend or archrival or neigborhood bully. Its where you gain gamesmanship and flair. Presonality. Are these things achievable away from street soccer? Sure. Nothing is impossible and I am firm believer of that but there is little doubt that street soccer plays a big role in the difference between great and just good. Messi years at Argentina and environment are surely the difference between him and his Barca teammates, who are really good but not as great as Messi. I mean why can't you just accept what every great player states for themselves? Running a structured club cant blind you from factual statement. Instead of trying to minimilize maybe you should embrace it for yourself?
Gary - I fully embrace the importance of free play. That has never been the issue -- the debate has always been your bitterness toward structured environments going as far as to say that coaching and organization are harmful for player development. FYI - I don't run a "structured club." I run an independent academy and free play and inclusion of all cultures are things that we facilitate.
Im not bitter at all. I coach in a youth club and have developed the best players in my state with limited resources. I dont know anyone with better nunbers than me as far developing players. But even I can see what our limitations are. I compare my work with the local and not so local Academies. Academies are simply not developing individual talent and not even trying. Thr best players they get usually get there at 15-17 years old and usually from much poorer and simple environments. I see that and I see what Brazil produces amongst many other examples. Everyday I try to get creative in getting parents to get their kids play close to every day. Playing more with the correct style of play works every time. Its a simple secret of mine. I do have a huge problem with clubs around me charging $2000-$3500 a year for basically nothing much but a few former pro players and nice emails and gear. La Liga Methology. Blah blah and they produce worse players every year then come and poach mine offering free play for them. In reality its not free. Its using them to keep their paying customers happy with getting results while stunting my players on going development. Everything has a cost.
You sounds really bitter.
To you. You have well established here that you have your own reality and dont care about facts. Dont you know I am loco ese?
si, claro
Your one liners are better arguments ese
Everyone in Brazil belongs to a local club at young ages but only train twice a week if that and mostly join just to play futsal league. 90% of their touches are done on the street up until age 14-15.
Source for that information. And if it's just some Brazilian guy you talked to once, I'm going to need more proof.
Actually it's quite a few of them that cane up through Brazil system and played pro. What's your source?
My source for what? Neymar's bio? His wikipedia. Sure, it's not an unimpeachable source but it looks accurate to me.
It said Neymar played for a local club. No where does it specify how or where he trained. No footage of him playing soccer at age 13 or under. Just Futsal.
Haha, ok yes I'm sure he played nothing but futsal until 13. After all, you said so with absolutely nothing to support your statements. Must be true.
Can you support yours? I went to same source as you. Saids nothing about his training or if he even played soccer at 11. That club has futsal teams that age and my info was verified with several brazilian former pros i know. Do you have better sources? Haha
The Wikipedia page said he played at a club beginning at age 7 and joined Santos at age 11. I don't think it's much of an assumption to assume he played soccer at Santos do you?
He played futsal with santos. Brazilians dont play much soccer before 13-14. If they do its more of 5v5 setup. Neymar was mostly futsal player up to 13. The structure at those young ages is not more advanced than park district here as well as committment. That tells you that less structure at young ages but more free play unsupervised gives you much more skilled and talented players than the ones being drilled and trained at young ages. Your welcome.
Again - no proof of anything you say other you repeating it over and over.
Same as you
That's wrong actually. You said Neymar just played in the street until age 14 and I showed that in face he first joined a club at age 7 where Santos spotted him at age 11. Then your story changed.
My story didnt change. I actually asked several former pro brazilians about that. He was spotted playing futsal like a majority of brazilians that age. There are clubs all over Brazil that organize them to play futsal. Those are facts. You have nothing to support your claim. You insunate because thats your agenda. I took the time to ask people that grew up there and go every year. Not convenient for you. I know.
Oh for crying out loud and in da bucket guys!!! Here I thought that you'd be writing as to why Ramos is in England looking for some young talent as opposed to looking right here in our very own back yard! LMAO!!! One thing for sure, it is costing US Soccer lots of bucks in travel/meals/lodging etc to have Ramos do his thing in jolly old England. And while I am, talking about England, it'd behoove some of you guys to see, no,
continued from above, READ about the "morphology" on the history of the beginning of BOTH football (later called "soccer") and rugby, i.e. how they formed, etc.... Still, I'd rather spend our dinero here in the states and give Ramos some leeway to look for talent here at home. Hmmm!, it sorta sound like his former boss, JK, when preferred going to Germany to look for German-american players, 'cept that Ramos is looking for US talent training in foggy England!
Exactly Ric. Working backwards. These guys talk all day about how so far along we are development wise yet we focus on bringing in foreign born players more than ever.
I'm not sure why they chose London for this camp but that doesn't mean he's scouting for foreign talent there.
Gary - Who are the foreign born players in this camp?
Just talking out of my ass on this one but we have been looking more for foreign born players at a time we promote a great advancement in player devlopment.
Klinnsmann was looking for foreign players and he's gone now. As far as I know all of these guys were raised in the US. If you know otherwise, let us know.
I think they're having the camp in Europe to showcase the players to European scouts.
Better fields and less bickering about playing on the street. Geeze, this one is like reading our local soccer forum parents arguing about one club being bad and the other worse.
I would think London for oh...shopping players to EPL clubs so the MLS doesn't try to snap a good players as homegrown for $50k and peddle them and hope for the solidarity payments that the USSF has laid claim too. I believe there is a great schism between the two organizations.