canucklefan Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 I don't agree with every single thing you say, but one thing I am 100% in agreement with is that I'd like to see Floro get "2 kicks at that can" ... if they don't qualify for 2018 but do reasonably (make the HEX, say) then I hope he gets a shot to qualify for 2022. Unfortunately, I don't think this is very likely. Then I understand that you think that we failed to qualify to Brazil only because of Hart or that you think that we can qualify to Russia. We can bet if you want, its going to be easy money for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soccerpro Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 It's tough for Floro considering the lack of quality in our squad. I just hope he's around long enough to coach our younger players with promising talent that come to fruition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addona Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 Then I understand that you think that we failed to qualify to Brazil only because of Hart or that you think that we can qualify to Russia. We can bet if you want, its going to be easy money for me. I don't think it is one absolute or the other ... I don't think it is solely Hart's fault that we didn't qualify for Brazil. I don't hate Hart, I think he did ok, but obviously there are some things that could have gone better, even setting the 8-1 game aside. I do think that it is plausible that we could have made the Hex had we had Floro. I agree with you that if we qualify for Russia then Floro will have overachieved ... Really, for me, the Hex is a realistic goal with our talent right now. With the guys we have coming up, I think we could qualify for 2022 ... Hence why I would not necessarily want a new coach starting over at the start of the 2022 WCQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmonte Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 I don't think it is one absolute or the other ... I don't think it is solely Hart's fault that we didn't qualify for Brazil. I don't hate Hart, I think he did ok, but obviously there are some things that could have gone better, even setting the 8-1 game aside. I do think that it is plausible that we could have made the Hex had we had Floro. I agree with you that if we qualify for Russia then Floro will have overachieved ... Really, for me, the Hex is a realistic goal with our talent right now. With the guys we have coming up, I think we could qualify for 2022 ... Hence why I would not necessarily want a new coach starting over at the start of the 2022 WCQ. It probably is plausible adonna, I agree, even if you base it solely on the workrate of the camps so far, compared to anything our boys experienced, again, just as comparison, under Hart. And I'm not one in the camp thinking Hart did a horrible job, it's just that there are decent coaches like Hart, and really good coaches like Floro. In Floro we trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditty Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 I'm not sure if this has gotten any run on the forum, but de Guzman said something pretty telling in his interview on the CSA website following the Colombia game. He said, roughly, "A lot of the guys, they all say, this is the first time they come into a session and they learn something and I think it's a special thing for a Canadian professional to do, to learn something new and grow into a better professional." I think it's fair to say the players definitely feel the team and the program is moving forward under Benito. It's clearly a transition from the 2014 qualifying team to this group and the most positive thing for me is that he is moulding a clear style and is getting buy-in from the players. I'm really looking forward to the Gold Cup to see how Benito manages in a tournament. It's also probably a good thing that we'll be in the 2nd round (?) of qualifying so he gets even more opportunity to work with the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 I still think Simeon Jackson is our best striker. I think after playing a lot more at Coventry City he will be back on Floro's radar. I think he may have missed recent calls ups because he was not playing a lot and also maybe he was more concerned about finding a steady job somewhere. After Danny Welbeck (playing Coventry) beat Jack Wilshere (Bayern Munich) on FIFA, Wilshere exclaimed "how do you make Simeon Jackson do that?!!!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 And I'm not one in the camp thinking Hart did a horrible job, it's just that there are decent coaches like Hart, and really good coaches like Floro. In Floro we trust. I think a lot more of it has to do with the messenger as opposed to the message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmonte Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 ^That can still make all the difference. Belief is a helluva thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 Definitely, because I think going with a coach of Floro's experience and CV brings more cred to what is trying to be instilled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 I'm not sure if this has gotten any run on the forum, but de Guzman said something pretty telling in his interview on the CSA website following the Colombia game. He said, roughly, "A lot of the guys, they all say, this is the first time they come into a session and they learn something and I think it's a special thing for a Canadian professional to do, to learn something new and grow into a better professional." I think it's fair to say the players definitely feel the team and the program is moving forward under Benito. It's clearly a transition from the 2014 qualifying team to this group and the most positive thing for me is that he is moulding a clear style and is getting buy-in from the players. I'm really looking forward to the Gold Cup to see how Benito manages in a tournament. It's also probably a good thing that we'll be in the 2nd round (?) of qualifying so he gets even more opportunity to work with the team. There have been quite a few comments like this from players. With Floro we are now in the position we should be as a national team, the players are coming to train under a coach better than they have at club level and are learning and becoming better players after camps and games. Under Yallop, Mitchell and Hart the coaches were below the standard most players had in their clubs. Now with Floro we are seeing players perform at their maximum and often are surprised that certain players are doing better than we expected. For the last 12 years I have always been frustrated watching the teams play well below what I think they were capable of. Whether or not the team we will have in WCQ will be talented enough to qualify for the next World Cup even with a good coach or not is questionable. However, if after 12 horrible years of play I will at least be somewhat satisfied and feel that we are on the right track if I can see our players giving 100% and playing to their maximum under a good coach and the team not getting outcoached by top level managers hired by 3rd world countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 I think a lot more of it has to do with the messenger as opposed to the message. While that may be a factor, I think it is the message they are getting that is the big difference. Training from a coach who has worked at the highest levels and who has a deep understanding of the game. You can only get so far delivering a poor message convincingly and lets not forget Hart was well liked by the players and was a good communicator. The main difference between Floro and Hart is the former is delivering a much higher quality message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 While that may be a factor, I think it is the message they are getting that is the big difference. Training from a coach who has worked at the highest levels and who has a deep understanding of the game. You can only get so far delivering a poor message convincingly and lets not forget Hart was well liked by the players and was a good communicator. The main difference between Floro and Hart is the former is delivering a much higher quality message. Well, all I can say is that I'm looking forward to seeing how the team progresses and how it does at next summer's Gold Cup. I just don't see us changing much from a defence first, poach goals from set plays and off the counter with the incumbents he has available. But he will get results, close wins and (unfortunately) close losses. Hoping for very few of the latter at key times. He's definitely the right guy at the right time for this program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANC Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Grizzley maybe I did not explain myself clearly. Under Hart we scored goals fairly consistently in almost every game. Actually I read it was some of our best scoring runs. Once we lost, through injury, Simpson, Gerba, Friend & in Panama DeRosario (for the rest of the qualification) goal scoring deminished. Jackson and Occean were guilty of some woeful finishing. Who could forget Jacksons misses at the GC , and against USA & Honduras in WCQ, both from within the 6 yard box at BIMO. Occean in almost every game was wasteful. It had nothing to do with deployment of strikers. Occean has never been convincing or clinical as say Gerba. As for set plays just look at the Honduras game at BIMO we threw away three glorious set play opportunities. My point is Benito may get us in front of goal, but goal scoring remains in the hands of a quality striker or two, it has little to do with coaching especially at the International level. Now with Bonito in one year we only managed goals in open play against a very under strength Jamaica. The fact remains its not like we are creating chance after chance. As I said it remains to be seen how we progress, I in for the ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barthez-Battalion Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Occean benefited from Canada' good run of form and being able to score against poor opponents. Our list of strikers during the 2014 WC cycle was poor. De Ro is really a second striker so I won't count him. But between Jackson, Ricketts, and Occean, there weren't any real good options up top. Hume was also pretty meh during the cycle. At least now we have guys like Larin and Hamilton, and maybe Akindele and Cavallini that offer more to the team. Although formation will be key. I want to see what Floro goes for when he has all the players he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obinna Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Occean benefited from Canada' good run of form and being able to score against poor opponents. Our list of strikers during the 2014 WC cycle was poor. De Ro is really a second striker so I won't count him. But between Jackson, Ricketts, and Occean, there weren't any real good options up top. Hume was also pretty meh during the cycle. At least now we have guys like Larin and Hamilton, and maybe Akindele and Cavallini that offer more to the team. Although formation will be key. I want to see what Floro goes for when he has all the players he wants. So, what I am getting is that Akendele, Cavallini, Hamilton and Larin offer more to the team than Ricketts, Jackson and Occean? Do you care to back this opinion up with any reasoning? Hamilton and Larin are exciting prospects, but you're confusing growth potential with proven ability. At this moment, Jackson, Ricketts and Occean are likely far more useful to our cause than those teenagers. We're talking about professionals that have spent many years scoring in Europe - as opposed to teenagers who are barely/not even professionals. I have high hopes for the kids but you can't honestly say those guys have more to offer than veterans. There is simply far more experience playing, scoring and winning for club and country. Those things matter. Now, Akindele and Cavallini? I think you can make a case there (although it is still early for both). However, it is easy for one to deem new options more desirable (I catch myself doing it often). Could Jackson, Ricketts and Occean conceivably tally 7 goals in an MLS season? Of course. What about scoring for fun in Uruguay? Probably. So do Akindele/Cavallni clearly offer more? Debatable - but understand they've become the trendy choice on this board. Point being, we (as a group) are too quick to discard the old-guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barthez-Battalion Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 So, what I am getting is that Akendele, Cavallini, Hamilton and Larin offer more to the team than Ricketts, Jackson and Occean? Do you care to back this opinion up with any reasoning? Hamilton and Larin are exciting prospects, but you're confusing growth potential with proven ability. At this moment, Jackson, Ricketts and Occean are likely far more useful to our cause than those teenagers. We're talking about professionals that have spent many years scoring in Europe - as opposed to teenagers who are barely/not even professionals. I have high hopes for the kids but you can't honestly say those guys have more to offer than veterans. There is simply far more experience playing, scoring and winning for club and country. Those things matter. Now, Akindele and Cavallini? I think you can make a case there (although it is still early for both). However, it is easy for one to deem new options more desirable (I catch myself doing it often). Could Jackson, Ricketts and Occean conceivably tally 7 goals in an MLS season? Of course. What about scoring for fun in Uruguay? Probably. So do Akindele/Cavallni clearly offer more? Debatable - but understand they've become the trendy choice on this board. Point being, we (as a group) are too quick to discard the old-guard. I don't think Jackson could get 7 goals in MLS. He strikes me as a Robbie Findley type of player. And not the good Robbie Findley. I dond't know about Ricketts. I like the guy but he's never really scored much in any league he's played in. He has yet to score in league play for his club in Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I don't think Jackson could get 7 goals in MLS. He strikes me as a Robbie Findley type of player. And not the good Robbie Findley. I dond't know about Ricketts. I like the guy but he's never really scored much in any league he's played in. He has yet to score in league play for his club in Israel. Someone who scored 13 goals in the Championship could not score 7 in MLS. Sorry but your comments are not even worth taking seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barthez-Battalion Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Someone who scored 13 goals in the Championship could not score 7 in MLS. Sorry but your comments are not even worth taking seriously. Have you seen Jackson recently?, His strike rate has been poor since leaving Norwich. He's worse than what he was a years ago when he was in the Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king1010 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Have you seen Jackson recently?, His strike rate has been poor since leaving Norwich. He's worse than what he was a years ago when he was in the Championship. Bradley Wright Phillips wasn't exactly lighting it up in League 1 before he cames to MLS. Look at him now. Sometimes all you need is a change of scenery. I could see Simeon easily scoring 7 goals on a decent team. Heck I could see him scoring 10 if the service and minutes are there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king1010 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 double post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Have you seen Jackson recently?, His strike rate has been poor since leaving Norwich. He's worse than what he was a years ago when he was in the Championship. Other than his short stint in the Bundesliga his strike rate per minute has not been that poor even in the Premiership. He has mostly been a substitute for the last couple of years mostly because he has been playing at the highest levels which were probably too high for him. Obviously the strategy of going to League 1 was an attempt to become a starter again and start scoring goals regularly and while that has not happened yet he has not been at Coventry very long and came in after the season had started. That being said no one would dispute that our strikers are below the level we would like at an international level. However, your assertion that "Larin and Hamilton, and maybe Akindele and Cavallini" offer more to the team than guys like Jackson, Ricketts, Occean and Hume did in the last cycle is ridiculous. You are comparing a college player, an academy player, a first year MLS player (who has not played for us yet and possibly never will) with a decent but average strike rate and a guy scoring goals in a league that has a low playing level (who doesn't seem interested in playing for us) to guys who may not be top level but have still scored at decent professional levels. The young guys may or may not have more potential than our current strikers but at the moment Floro's available striker pool is poorer than what Hart had available. And until the young guys start playing well for the national team and/or establish themselves as professional strikers we can not rule out players like Jackson, Ricketts and Occean. And while I can agree with the fact our striker pool has been poor since Gerba and Radzinski stopped playing for us, I don't think Hart really understood how to play the strikers we had so they could perform to the best of their ability. We never looked offensively dangerous under Hart, had extreme difficulties to penetrate the box or provide service to the strikers. Look at how much better Ricketts has been playing under Floro. This year he already has two goals in 4 games and should have had a penalty against Colombia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Grizzley maybe I did not explain myself clearly. Under Hart we scored goals fairly consistently in almost every game. Actually I read it was some of our best scoring runs. Once we lost, through injury, Simpson, Gerba, Friend & in Panama DeRosario (for the rest of the qualification) goal scoring deminished. Jackson and Occean were guilty of some woeful finishing. Who could forget Jacksons misses at the GC , and against USA & Honduras in WCQ, both from within the 6 yard box at BIMO. Occean in almost every game was wasteful. It had nothing to do with deployment of strikers. Occean has never been convincing or clinical as say Gerba. As for set plays just look at the Honduras game at BIMO we threw away three glorious set play opportunities. My point is Benito may get us in front of goal, but goal scoring remains in the hands of a quality striker or two, it has little to do with coaching especially at the International level. Now with Bonito in one year we only managed goals in open play against a very under strength Jamaica. The fact remains its not like we are creating chance after chance. As I said it remains to be seen how we progress, I in for the ride. We did not score fairly consistently under Hart, we were blanked in many games. Look at the game scores under Hart, they do not support your claim. We played extremely cautious under Hart and even had trouble scoring against minnows getting blanked twice by very poor teams in the first round of qualifying. Hart is a smart enough guy and gained a lot of experience training us and is getting more good training and experience working with Leo Beenhakker with Trinidad. Maybe one day he will be an international level coach but during the time he was with us he was at best a NASL level coach and just like NASL players are not international level neither are coaches at that level. We never improved under him, the team played the same disjointed style at the end of his reign as at the beginning. We had the occasional good game which you would get under any coach but never anything consistent. You never heard players talk about how much they were learning from Hart like you hear now with Floro. You never saw players improving under him like we are seeing under Floro. There was never a development plan under Hart like there has been under Floro. You never saw the team play like a team with effective tactical formations under Hart like we are seeing under Floro. The team looks dangerous now on the attack and the defence is getting more solid. What exactly is the argument against Floro, a couple of poor results in his first few games when he just took over the team and was experimenting a lot? And 3 of the teams we played during that period were better than us and we still played pretty well in the loss. This year we have one win, 2 ties and a loss against strong teams and have scored in every game except against top team Colombia and even in that game we should have been awarded a penalty. And we have looked good in each game despite missing a lot of players. Indeed while injuries hurt our last WCQ and every coach is better if he has better players available they are part of the game and I would argue Floro has had even less quality players available for most matches than Hart did for most matches. And when Hart was missing a key player you noticed we were much poorer but when Floro is missing one we are continually surprised we can still play well without them. We actually played well against Colombia while missing Atiba, by far our best player. I find it hard to believe that anyone who watched how we played under Hart can have some revisionist historical longings for having him back. You said you read we had our best scoring runs under him, did you even watch the games. If you read the old posts on the forum you can see that I and others constantly criticized how the team was playing under Hart and predicted exactly what would happen under him in WCQ. And not because we have something against him, it was because the team played poorly. If you watched the games you would see we struggled a lot against the minnow teams in the first round, twice playing to 0-0 ties. And then some people said it doesn't matter how we played we got through to which I replied if we play like this we will not get through the next round. And still people say now that we were one point away from getting to the Hex which is true but that is mostly because there was a really weak team in the group that we just squeaked out 2 wins against. We did not play one really good game in the final round, we played ok against Honduras and Panama at home but couldn't score against the former and got a bit of an undeserved win on the run of play against Panama on a smart but still flukey goal. We struggled against lowly Cuba, barely winning away and struggling to score against the B team with not even a full squad they brought here after already being eliminated. Then we got killed against Panama and Honduras away. Why would we want to return to this? Our player pool is not strong and it remains to be seen whether Floro is magician enough to qualify us for the next WC because on paper we do not have the talent to qualify. However, he is improving the team, helping the players develop and whether or not we qualify the program and the players will be better for having worked with a top level coach. The Yallop, Mitchell and Hart eras were eras of stagnation and the program and players were the same level of mediocrity on their departure as when they arrived. We need to constantly have top coaches with the national team not be a training school for amateur coaches and former players. Having a top coach is not a guarantee that we will qualify but it will improve the players and the program and at least get us on the path to being a team that qualifies sometimes. Canada results: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_men's_national_soccer_team_match_results Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barthez-Battalion Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 We did not score fairly consistently under Hart, we were blanked in many games. Look at the game scores under Hart, they do not support your claim. We played extremely cautious under Hart and even had trouble scoring against minnows getting blanked twice by very poor teams in the first round of qualifying. Hart is a smart enough guy and gained a lot of experience training us and is getting more good training and experience working with Leo Beenhakker with Trinidad. Maybe one day he will be an international level coach but during the time he was with us he was at best a NASL level coach and just like NASL players are not international level neither are coaches at that level. We never improved under him, the team played the same disjointed style at the end of his reign as at the beginning. We had the occasional good game which you would get under any coach but never anything consistent. You never heard players talk about how much they were learning from Hart like you hear now with Floro. You never saw players improving under him like we are seeing under Floro. There was never a development plan under Hart like there has been under Floro. You never saw the team play like a team with effective tactical formations under Hart like we are seeing under Floro. The team looks dangerous now on the attack and the defence is getting more solid. What exactly is the argument against Floro, a couple of poor results in his first few games when he just took over the team and was experimenting a lot? And 3 of the teams we played during that period were better than us and we still played pretty well in the loss. This year we have one win, 2 ties and a loss against strong teams and have scored in every game except against top team Colombia and even in that game we should have been awarded a penalty. And we have looked good in each game despite missing a lot of players. Indeed while injuries hurt our last WCQ and every coach is better if he has better players available they are part of the game and I would argue Floro has had even less quality players available for most matches than Hart did for most matches. And when Hart was missing a key player you noticed we were much poorer but when Floro is missing one we are continually surprised we can still play well without them. We actually played well against Colombia while missing Atiba, by far our best player. I find it hard to believe that anyone who watched how we played under Hart can have some revisionist historical longings for having him back. You said you read we had our best scoring runs under him, did you even watch the games. If you read the old posts on the forum you can see that I and others constantly criticized how the team was playing under Hart and predicted exactly what would happen under him in WCQ. And not because we have something against him, it was because the team played poorly. If you watched the games you would see we struggled a lot against the minnow teams in the first round, twice playing to 0-0 ties. And then some people said it doesn't matter how we played we got through to which I replied if we play like this we will not get through the next round. And still people say now that we were one point away from getting to the Hex which is true but that is mostly because there was a really weak team in the group that we just squeaked out 2 wins against. We did not play one really good game in the final round, we played ok against Honduras and Panama at home but couldn't score against the former and got a bit of an undeserved win on the run of play against Panama on a smart but still flukey goal. We struggled against lowly Cuba, barely winning away and struggling to score against the B team with not even a full squad they brought here after already being eliminated. Then we got killed against Panama and Honduras away. Why would we want to return to this? Our player pool is not strong and it remains to be seen whether Floro is magician enough to qualify us for the next WC because on paper we do not have the talent to qualify. However, he is improving the team, helping the players develop and whether or not we qualify the program and the players will be better for having worked with a top level coach. The Yallop, Mitchell and Hart eras were eras of stagnation and the program and players were the same level of mediocrity on their departure as when they arrived. We need to constantly have top coaches with the national team not be a training school for amateur coaches and former players. Having a top coach is not a guarantee that we will qualify but it will improve the players and the program and at least get us on the path to being a team that qualifies sometimes. Canada results: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_men's_national_soccer_team_match_results The aim should not be to get to the WC. The aim should be to improve our players and system and lay the foundation for future success in CONCACAF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The aim should not be to get to the WC. The aim should be to improve our players and system and lay the foundation for future success in CONCACAF. The ONLY aim is to qualify for the WC! Improving our players and system is for technical staff, not for a NT coach to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The aim should not be to get to the WC. The aim should be to improve our players and system and lay the foundation for future success in CONCACAF. The aim should be both getting to the WC and making improvements that will help us in the future. Hart gave us neither while Floro gives us a better chance at qualifying but if we don't is giving us a lot of things that will help us in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.