Eric Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Whathever, man. You seem far too bitter and this issue seems a bit too personal (to you) for me to have a rational debate with you on it. Especially in regards to TFC Academy, which you brought up by name (I was talking about all of them as a whole). Childish shots at "real pro" vs. "MLS pro" soccer worlds just illustrate my point. Apparently the entire American program is full of non-real pros, considering the bulk of them got their start in MLS. As for the actual side-discussion, I don't believe that the MLS academies are the be all and end all to getting Canada on the right track, but I can see that they are a crucial step in the right direction. The prvincial programs have proven their lot over the past 25 years, so it's time to go in a different direction. Is not about bitterness man! you're missing the point. And you can't have a rational debate with me on this issue because obviously you don't have enough information about what's going on there, but I do. "Childish shots at "real pro" vs. "MLS pro" soccer worlds" what? you can't tell the difference either? Don't compare the American program to the Canadian program, they won 3-0 yesterday we loss 3-0 yesterday. Time will tell us that all this "academy" business is just a way of taking pressure off the lack of positive results and a way to make us believe they care about Canadian players development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Don't be a prick and assume what I was suggesting Eric (I encourage you to come out and watch my 11 year olds train - they are all tiny and knock the ball around the whole pitch!). Max is 6ft1, yes, and unless he becomes Valdes that isn't tall enough for a long-term dominant career at a high level. Ivanovski is correct 6-2, 6-3+ is required. BUT, at 17, yes, he is not done growing....big hopes for the lad. The only prick here is you dude, thinking that a GK needs to be 6-2 to 6-3 to become a pro or an international. Do you really want me to put a list together of famous GKs around the world who were shorter than 6-2? and if I do what would be your comeback? that in the EPL or the Bundesliga they are all that tall? please open your eyes and google the info yourself before talking ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villus Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 We need to Put a bunch past Rwanda and get some kind of result against England and we have a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 The goalkeeper Crepeau was our best player in this game, but some people here talk about our fantastic and positive performance! any time I've seen a team where their GK was the best player on the field, that itself tell you the team's performance was very poor. It may often be true that when the MOTM for a team is the goalkeeper the team played poorly but that is not always the case. And someone who is criticizing Thiku for generalizations about keeper height should not be making their own keeper generalizations. I do think Crepeau was the MOTM for Canada but I would also say that the Uruguayan's best player was their keeper as well. He made some tremendous saves against us. I would say that the strong performances from both keepers shows that both teams played very offensively and open soccer and did not have defending as their first priority. Unfortunately a few basic defensive mistakes prevented us from getting a result but these are things that can be worked on. What is positive is that for the most part we were able to play fast paced, possession, attacking oriented football with a strong South American side. The ability to do this is something that requires both certain natural talents and a lot of technical training so it is a positive to see we have players with these abilities. As far as who gets credit for this, I agree that many of the players have not been in the various academies all that long so I am not willing to say this improvement is due to the academies. However, one probably has to give them some credit as well even if it is just giving players extra motivation by placing them in a professional environment where they can see there is a possible future career in football, something much harder to see if you are only playing on a CSL team no matter how good the coach is. You talk about the Academies poaching players but bigger clubs poaching players from smaller clubs is 50% of what academies do worldwide the other 50% being developing the players. If you can not scout talent you can not develop it. Obviously this is even going to be even more extreme when we have pretty new academies like the ones here. So I have to agree with Rudi (WOW) that the academies are a step in the right direction even if the current U-17 team may be more a result of some good amateur coaches or just a better naturally talented than average crop of players. The one worrying thing I find in the academies is that we tend to be following the Canadian trend of hiring ex-players who have little coaching experience something we do both at the national team and club level in Canada. Of course this is partly because the lack of professional teams makes it hard for Canadian coaches to get much experience and foreign coaches are obviously more expensive. Nevertheless, without criticizing the guys who are currently in charge of the academies or saying they should be let go, it would be nice to see the bigger clubs spend a bit of money and hire a top level foreign youth coach to run their academies. Possibly Richard Grootscholten of the Caps academy fits this profile but even his CV is not that impressive (technical director of a lower table 2nd division Dutch club). The Impact's Philippe Eullaffroy also has European coaching experience but again at academies of 2nd division teams. I am not syaing they are poor coaches but when looking at the coaching staffs of the academies it is hard to see that they are obviously better than those of some of the CSL teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 The only prick here is you dude, thinking that a GK needs to be 6-2 to 6-3 to become a pro or an international. Do you really want me to put a list together of famous GKs around the world who were shorter than 6-2? and if I do what would be your comeback? that in the EPL or the Bundesliga they are all that tall? please open your eyes and google the info yourself before talking ****. I would encourage you to read my post again. Never once said had to be 6-2 or 6-3 to be pro. My exact quote was referring to "high level." There are exceptions to every rule, which is why I also mentioned "Valdes." This topic seems to have you quite riled up top to bottom....chill-out chief. Yer having a go at everyone in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 I'm not trying to have a go at everybody in this thread at all body, as a matter of fact I don't see any disagreement in Grizzly's post based on what I said in regards to the academies. I just don't like the fact that most people in Ontario buy the lie TCF is selling out there, when all you need to do is to talk to the players and they will tell you themselves, who develop them and how the practices with TFC academy are. I wish we can have competitive national teams just like every other Canadian soccer fan, but in order to have that we all need to be more demanding and hold the system accountable for what they are doing wrong when they definitely have all the tools to make it right but they don't really want to or they simply don't care. Our acceptance of their excuses and lies is what makes it easy for them to keep doing the wrong things and getting away with it. We need to demand change and not support liars any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 I would encourage you to read my post again. Never once said had to be 6-2 or 6-3 to be pro. My exact quote was referring to "high level." There are exceptions to every rule, which is why I also mentioned "Valdes." This topic seems to have you quite riled up top to bottom....chill-out chief. Yer having a go at everyone in this thread. Your assessment about keepers was spot on. At the highest level most of them are tall guys (6'2 plus) and the exception are the smaller guys. The shorter keepers suh as Valdes and Hart usually have tremendous athletic abilities (quickness and reflex) to make amend for their lack of height. It's like basketball where the center and power forward position usually belongs to tall guys but some shorter players have been able to succeed. BTW, looking at Crepeau distribution I couldn't help but think he has more distance than MNT keepers like Lars and Sutton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metro Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Crepeau out for the rest of the tournament, according to CBC, though the injury apparently isn't as bad as it looked: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/story/2011/06/20/sp-u17-canada-crepeau.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 ^^I am not surprised because the injury did not look as serious to me as some people were claiming. It looked like really hard knee to knee contact but the contact was made in a really solid part of the knee for both players. Had one of the player's knees made contact lower down on the leg it could have been a really serious career threatening injury. I suspect that this is just the type of injury that will hurt for a while and stop him from training/playing for some weeks but shouldn't set him back other than taking him out of a major international tournament which could have given him a lot of exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted June 20, 2011 Author Share Posted June 20, 2011 When i saw the replay it looked to me like shin-to-shin contact and Crepeau's shin had buckled in (hence why i thought it was a break). Thankfully that was not the case! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 When i saw the replay it looked to me like shin-to-shin contact and Crepeau's shin had buckled in (hence why i thought it was a break). Thankfully that was not the case! I watched game not live but on the later CBC replay after already reading the forum here so I was really watching closely given the descriptions on here and I did not see any buckling and really thought it was knee to knee. Haven't seen a replay of it since though to confirm that impression. However, both players had fortunate reactions after the contact, ie. no one got their foot stuck on the turf or landed on the leg of the other. It is always different watching live and watching with foreknowledge, ie. no emotional reaction and my impression at the time was given the comments on here I was expecting something worse. Obviously this hurts the team since Crepeau is an excellent keeper but on the plus side at least it gives someone else a chance to shine. We already know what Crepeau can do and it would be nice to have additional prospects at keeper since keeper depth is always a problem for us. Of course, a good performance in the whole tournament may have put Crepeau on the radar of some much bigger clubs than the Impact so that is unfortunate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metro Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Crepeau's knee was hyper-extended. It could have been worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.