Richmond "Richie" Laryea

[Bigandy]

2 hours ago, Obinna said:

Because Orlando were short-sighted and released him prematurely (have seen Orlando fans say that online) and Toronto were stocked with CMs already. He didn't reinvent himself and ask to be played at fullback, far as I recall. I believe it was Toronto who chose to plug him into the position because they needed depth there. Lucky for him and the club it worked out better than either could have imagined.

This seems a bit of hindsight 20/20. Of course with how things turned out, it makes sense to regret releasing him. But he 100% turned from a CM to a RB. Toronto could have put anyone there and kept richie at CM. They had a need and saw he can handle RB much better. 

 

2 hours ago, Obinna said:

Because he joined Forest during a massive winning streak which saw them get promoted against all odds and during that run they were reluctant to change a winning formula.

Thats a bit of a cop out. Plenty of players go into that situation and force their way into the squad. However, even if the coach was 100% unwilling to budge, laryea couldve stayed on with NF for when spence left. He obviously didnt show enough to stay on with the team. To say laryea was 100% at that level but his lack of game time is only due to the winning run is a bit of a nearsighted statement. 

 

2 hours ago, Obinna said:

Because he is excellent at doing so. This seems obvious to me. 

Loads of players are excellent at one thing but still have many different weapons in their arsenal to become more unpredictable. If you dont know if richie is going left or right, then it becomes easier for the time he does run down the line when he does go right. Unless your one attribute is world class like robben, you probably want to become a diversified player. Im going to guess that championship defenders dont allow richie to do the cutbacks as often and therefore his attacking output is severely impacted. Are there any EPL RB's who rely on this? 

 

2 hours ago, Obinna said:

I agree. I think his ceiling is high Championship or lower EPL club because of his pace, agility, and craft. I am lauding his touch, close control, etc., but these aspects of his game are not world class, they are merely at the baseline for what it takes to be a high Championship or lower EPL player. It's the pace, agility and craft that make him attractive, but without the touch, close control, etc., he probably wouldn't have gotten the contract at Forest to begin with.

I think this is our biggest difference of opinion. I think his touch etc is lower championship level and hes not an EPL guy. I love richie but I just dont see the next level quality in him like you see with kone. 

 

2 hours ago, Obinna said:

I mean, he's never going to be Pirlo, but I see more potential in him as a central player than you do, it seems. This reads as a backhanded compliment to me, as of to say only in the scrappy games could he be useful in that role. But it is what it is, we won't know until we see it in practice.

The best thing would be for Ahmed or Choniere to make the 3rd midfield position their own, because if we are shifting Laryea or Johnston it's because these guys haven't stepped up. 

 That wasnt meant as a backhanded compliment. It was meant to say richie as a CM is likely to be all over the place with his engine. He will win second balls better than anyone else. That scrappy play suits richie in any position whereas it likely hinders a guy like hoilett. However, if we are on a good pitch against a low block like belguim, theres no space for richie to run. It seems like his best attributes would be nullified in that game so it really doesnt make sense to put him CM in that context. 

[Obinna]

45 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

This seems a bit of hindsight 20/20. Of course with how things turned out, it makes sense to regret releasing him. But he 100% turned from a CM to a RB. Toronto could have put anyone there and kept richie at CM. They had a need and saw he can handle RB much better. 

I disagree with your take here. To say they moved him to RB because he could "handle" it better than CM is a revisionist take on the situation. He was there on trial and they were under no obligation to find him a position he could "handle". I could be wrong here, but I am pretty sure Vanney shifted him to right back because he figured Richie was the best solution to finding cover for Auro, not because Vanney determined it was a position Richie could "handle". 

 

45 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Thats a bit of a cop out. Plenty of players go into that situation and force their way into the squad. However, even if the coach was 100% unwilling to budge, laryea couldve stayed on with NF for when spence left. He obviously didnt show enough to stay on with the team. To say laryea was 100% at that level but his lack of game time is only due to the winning run is a bit of a nearsighted statement. 

Is it a cop out? He forced his way into the squad by earning 5 appearances. I get your point that, generally speaking, if you are good enough you are going straight into the team, but you seem to give 0% credence to the circumstances at Forest when he arrived. If Forest never thought he could be useful they wouldn't have signed him, right? Someone at the club obviously figured he could be a useful Championship player, which is my opinion on Richie and I am not alone on that. Few expected Forest to go from mid-table to the promotion playoffs and then actually get promoted on top of that.

With all due respect, it's a bit disingenuous to not factor that context into the discussion and merely say if he was good enough he would have played more. I mean, that's pretty obvious statement, but it's just a generalist statement you apply to a unique situation.

It's like considering Larin's tenure at Club Brugge, with his woeful lack of playing time, and then deducing that he's not good enough for a big Belgian club, but in some cases there is not a fit and it could be for many reasons aside from how good the player is. 

Same for Richie in my opinion. 

Edit - to add, the few times Richie did play for Forest he actually did very well and the fans were generally pleased with his contribution, and this was for the hottest team in the Championship at the time, so did he not prove to be up to the standard?

45 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

I think this is our biggest difference of opinion. I think his touch etc is lower championship level and hes not an EPL guy. I love richie but I just dont see the next level quality in him like you see with kone. 

I could probably meet you in the middle on that by saying his touch etc is Championship level and not EPL level. To say his touch is "lower" Championship level strikes me as being inaccurate. In my view, he has an unorthodox playing style, but his actual touch and close control are very good. For the national team it's rare his touch gets away from him.

I'll be taking a closer look though in the future to see if I can see what you see.

45 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

That wasnt meant as a backhanded compliment. It was meant to say richie as a CM is likely to be all over the place with his engine. He will win second balls better than anyone else. That scrappy play suits richie in any position whereas it likely hinders a guy like hoilett. However, if we are on a good pitch against a low block like belguim, theres no space for richie to run. It seems like his best attributes would be nullified in that game so it really doesnt make sense to put him CM in that context. 

Fair enough. Appreciate the clarification!

Edited January 15 by Obinna

[Bigandy]

22 minutes ago, Obinna said:

I disagree with your take here. To say they moved him to RB because he could "handle" it better than CM is a revisionist take on the situation. He was there on trial and they were under no obligation to find him a position he could "handle". I could be wrong here, but I am pretty sure Vanney shifted him to right back because he figured Richie was the best solution to finding cover for Auro, not because Vanney determined it was a position Richie could "handle". 

I said he could handle it better than CM. All evidence suggests this to be true. Every team views him as a RB now. If he was a short term solution at RB but viewed as a CM, he likely would have shifted back. Look at sigur. Hes at RB due to depth but will likely move back to CM in the future. Thats not what happened to richie. Perhaps youre thinking im slagging on richie by using the phrase "handle". Thats not my intent but rather poor word selection. 

 

22 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Is it a cop out? He forced his way into the squad by earning 5 appearances. I get your point that, generally speaking, if you are good enough you are going straight into the team, but you seem to give 0% credence to the circumstances at Forest when he arrived. If Forest never thought he could be useful they wouldn't have signed him, right? Someone at the club obviously figured he could be a useful Championship player, which is my opinion on Richie and I am not alone on that. Few expected Forest to go from mid-table to the promotion playoffs and then actually get promoted on top of that.

With all due respect, it's a bit disingenuous to not factor that context into the discussion and merely say if he was good enough he would have played more. I mean, that's pretty obvious statement, but it's just a generalist statement you apply to a unique situation.

 

I think you misread my last post. My first line is that plenty of players can break into squads that are winning so its not impossible for him to do. I then moved on and talked about how he was viewed once the season is over. I said even if the coach is unwilling to budge, laryea was a ready made replacement when spence left. they decided to loan richie out so they dont think hes epl quality at the time. Plenty of players take a year or 2 to break into the team as theres a transitionary period. All of peps signings typically go thru this. However, my point is that its telling that they were not patient with him and grooming him to take over spences spot. Why would they get rid of him if they saw him as an EPL quality player.... many possible reasons but Im inclined to think hes missing elements to his game that cannot be covered up by sheer athleticism. 
 

22 minutes ago, Obinna said:

le on that by saying his touch etc is Championship level and not EPL level. To say his touch is "lower" Championship level strikes me as being inaccurate. In my view, he has an unorthodox playing style, but his actual touch and close control are very good. For the national team it's rare his touch gets away from him.

 

My statement about his touch is probably a bit inaccurate as youre right his touch is probably championship level. What I should have said is that his overall ability (tempo, touch under pressure, decision making etc) is probably a lower to mid championship player compared to a low EPL to high championship.  

We seem to be getting a bit off topic because I feel like im starting to slag on laryea which i dont wnat to do. I love the guy and think he could easily be successful in the championship. However, I think he has flaws to his game that get more exposed vs better players. Would laryea be able to play for celtic if he had johnstons pace? I dont think so and thats why I think his athleticism is crucial for him. 

Edited January 15 by Bigandy

[kacbru]

Just to add to the NF context - they bought something like 43 players after they promoted, so it seems they thought the majority of their squad was not at EPL level. It is likely that the players like Laryea out on loan were insurance for if they relegated. 

[Bigandy]

22 minutes ago, kacbru said:

Just to add to the NF context - they bought something like 43 players after they promoted, so it seems they thought the majority of their squad was not at EPL level. It is likely that the players like Laryea out on loan were insurance for if they relegated. 

Good point but they didnt really wheel and deal their starters. They brought in about 19 guys( plus 3 loans) on first team contracts with 3 being GKs.

They brought in alot of depth pieces and trimmed the lower end guys. They didnt really replace any of the guys that started the promotion playoff match vs huddersfield (except for the GK and loans expiring).

It another hill for richie to climb but they kept the guys they trusted around which is further evidence they dont trust richie. 

[Watchmen]

So much of Laryea's situation seems tied up more with the NF situation (too many players, too many loans) than directly with Laryea's quality.  I don't think he's an EPL player, but he'd have more options if NF was better run.

Mind you, NF is now facing a points deduction.  If he wants another shot at the Championship, he might get it next year.

[Shway]

6 hours ago, Bigandy said:

.....Would laryea be able to play for celtic if he had johnstons pace? I dont think so and thats why I think his athleticism is crucial for him. 

I think this is complete bullshit.
And I say this because Laryea has developed as a more complete modern fullback than Johnston, the only benefit Allistair has is that he has more time to exceed Laryea's development ceiling........but he's not there yet regardless if he's a Celtic. 

Technically, and skillfully I think Laryea is better than Johnston. Better touch, better dribbling, better passing, better 1 v1 defensively and offensively. I think the Ironman Johnstons run in WCQ swayed opinions, but Laryea was as crucial. In recent times the former's quality has dropped while the latter has been consistent for the national team. 

Lastly, I just find it funny how inconsistent some people rate the SPFL. It seems as if it is only used to fit a person's narrative as in this case. Celtic have been absolute shite in Europe, but play in the same league as Rangers, Motherwell, St. Johnstone, and Ross County...a bunch of teams where a lot of our current player pool have played. 

It's easy to say Laryea's "athleticism" but you can't neglect his IQ. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

5 hours ago, Shway said:

I think this is complete bullshit.
And I say this because Laryea has developed as a more complete modern fullback than Johnston, the only benefit Allistair has is that he has more time to exceed Laryea's development ceiling........but he's not there yet regardless if he's a Celtic. 

Technically, and skillfully I think Laryea is better than Johnston. Better touch, better dribbling, better passing, better 1 v1 defensively and offensively. I think the Ironman Johnstons run in WCQ swayed opinions, but Laryea was as crucial. In recent times the former's quality has dropped while the latter has been consistent for the national team. 

Lastly, I just find it funny how inconsistent some people rate the SPFL. It seems as if it is only used to fit a person's narrative as in this case. Celtic have been absolute shite in Europe, but play in the same league as Rangers, Motherwell, St. Johnstone, and Ross County...a bunch of teams where a lot of our current player pool have played. 

It's easy to say Laryea's "athleticism" but you can't neglect his IQ. 

Johnston is mentally more disciplined, positionally sharper, his fitness is as good and does not go on wild mood swings, and he has personal confidence in his capacity. Laryea has slash and burn virtues, most of his highlights are those plays in the final third where he makes something happen, including scoring, but he is weaker--or at last not stronger-- in the other 86 minutes when the highlight reel is not spinning.

In WC qualifying Alistair was more important than Richie, who is dicking around with his potential. He was a childhood friend with Larin, maybe he should take a lesson. Signing in Vancouver when he could have asked his agent to at least seek out a Championship team, that was an overly comfortable decision, to the point of lazy. 

I personally feel he is being unambitious, happy to collect his salary, instead of announcing he was returning to his club, as is and was his legal right. He would be doing them a favour in fact, because that'd take a loanee off their books for this financial fair play ruling. 

Your fantasy report on Laryea seems mostly based on him having been a TFC player and Johnston at not, why tack or jibe when you can run.

[Obinna]

15 hours ago, Bigandy said:

I said he could handle it better than CM. All evidence suggests this to be true. Every team views him as a RB now. If he was a short term solution at RB but viewed as a CM, he likely would have shifted back. Look at sigur. Hes at RB due to depth but will likely move back to CM in the future. Thats not what happened to richie. Perhaps youre thinking im slagging on richie by using the phrase "handle". Thats not my intent but rather poor word selection. 

I don't think you are slagging on Richie at all by using the phrase "handle", but you seem to believe that Vanney moved Laryea to RB because he would do better there and I disagree with that entirely. Vanney moved Laryea to RB because he needed a player to cover for Auro. It hand nothing to do with finding the best position for Laryea, even though it turned out to be the best position for him, I believe.

Does my disagreement make sense to you now?

15 hours ago, Bigandy said:

I think you misread my last post. My first line is that plenty of players can break into squads that are winning so its not impossible for him to do. I then moved on and talked about how he was viewed once the season is over. I said even if the coach is unwilling to budge, laryea was a ready made replacement when spence left. they decided to loan richie out so they dont think hes epl quality at the time. Plenty of players take a year or 2 to break into the team as theres a transitionary period. All of peps signings typically go thru this. However, my point is that its telling that they were not patient with him and grooming him to take over spences spot. Why would they get rid of him if they saw him as an EPL quality player.... many possible reasons but Im inclined to think hes missing elements to his game that cannot be covered up by sheer athleticism. 

But I don't think they signed Laryea to be an EPL player....

They signed him to be a Championship player and when they signed him they were firmly in the Championship, not particularly close to the playoff spots. So, it's not telling at all they loaned him out once they promoted. It wasn't surprising and didn't reveal something we didn't already know, which is that EPL is a bit out of reach for Laryea.

As I previously stated, I think at his ceiling he would be a low level player in the EPL, but Forest are a historic club, former European Champions, who spent a long time out of the top flight, so this was not Luton getting promoted. They are far more ambitious and we're always unlikely to bring Laryea up with them in that debut season.

I think Laryea would need the right circumstances to find himself on an EPL team and play meaningful minutes.

16 hours ago, Bigandy said:

My statement about his touch is probably a bit inaccurate as youre right his touch is probably championship level. What I should have said is that his overall ability (tempo, touch under pressure, decision making etc) is probably a lower to mid championship player compared to a low EPL to high championship.  

But once again, I have to disagree with you here. The tempo, touch under pressure, decision making, all of these things he does well. Not world class, but well enough to be a Championship level player, or given the right circumstances, a fringe EPL player.

Tempo was one thing in particular Herdman talked about when he first brought Richie into the National team. He mentioned how he was impressed Richie could match the tempo of the other players right away. No wonder then Richie has played and started so many games for Canada.

I believe he came off the bench against Belgium and did well, wasn't exposed as you'd expect if a player was nothing but speed and agility. Those players cannot hide when the quality goes up, but again, I think Richie is good enough in these aspects that he can hang. We see evidence for it time and again with Canada, whether it is Belgium, USA, Mexico, etc.

Again, I don't think you are slagging on him, but I definitely don't think you are giving him credit and I think your analysis of him as a player is very shallow. You don't seem to see beyond his speed and agility.

[Obinna]

3 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Johnston is mentally more disciplined, positionally sharper, his fitness is as good and does not go on wild mood swings, and he has personal confidence in his capacity. Laryea has slash and burn virtues, most of his highlights are those plays in the final third where he makes something happen, including scoring, but he is weaker--or at last not stronger-- in the other 86 minutes when the highlight reel is not spinning.

In WC qualifying Alistair was more important than Richie, who is dicking around with his potential. He was a childhood friend with Larin, maybe he should take a lesson. Signing in Vancouver when he could have asked his agent to at least seek out a Championship team, that was an overly comfortable decision, to the point of lazy. 

I personally feel he is being unambitious, happy to collect his salary, instead of announcing he was returning to his club, as is and was his legal right. He would be doing them a favour in fact, because that'd take a loanee off their books for this financial fair play ruling. 

Your fantasy report on Laryea seems mostly based on him having been a TFC player and Johnston at not, why tack or jibe when you can run.

This post has a very condescending tone and is littered with jabs that I assume are being tossed in because you of who you are responding to. Fantasy report? @Shway is just giving an opinion here. 

My criticism of Johnston lately is that he spends to much time on the ball. I first noticed that in the NL finals when Pulisic closed him down in our own third and blocked Johnston's clearance, but Alistair was coming back from injury so I chalked it up to that. But his hasn't really gotten better and he still seems half a second too slow on the ball. Maybe he gets too much time on the ball in Scotland with Celtic who dominate everyone?

As for positioning, I broke down the Nicholson goal in our last match at BMO and showed how Johnston was in absolute no-mans land, pushing up the field rather than holding his position and giving Eustaquio an outlet, which led to him getting closed down and tackled by Lowe and turning over the ball in a dangerous area.

So while Johnston may seem positionally sharper, he certainly wasn't on that play.

Fact is, in general he hasn't been that good for Canada recently. If we aren't playing with 3 at the back I am not sure he's a locked in starter based on his recent play.

Edited January 16 by Obinna

[Treppy2]

10 hours ago, Watchmen said:

So much of Laryea's situation seems tied up more with the NF situation (too many players, too many loans) than directly with Laryea's quality.  I don't think he's an EPL player, but he'd have more options if NF was better run.

Mind you, NF is now facing a points deduction.  If he wants another shot at the Championship, he might get it next year.

Laryea's not mentioned in it, but The Guardian has a good article on the situation at NF: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/jan/15/nottingham-forest-the-latest-club-in-crosshairs-over-football-short-termism

[Bigandy]

9 hours ago, Shway said:

I think this is complete bullshit.
And I say this because Laryea has developed as a more complete modern fullback than Johnston, the only benefit Allistair has is that he has more time to exceed Laryea's development ceiling........but he's not there yet regardless if he's a Celtic. 

Technically, and skillfully I think Laryea is better than Johnston. Better touch, better dribbling, better passing, better 1 v1 defensively and offensively. I think the Ironman Johnstons run in WCQ swayed opinions, but Laryea was as crucial. In recent times the former's quality has dropped while the latter has been consistent for the national team. 

Lastly, I just find it funny how inconsistent some people rate the SPFL. It seems as if it is only used to fit a person's narrative as in this case. Celtic have been absolute shite in Europe, but play in the same league as Rangers, Motherwell, St. Johnstone, and Ross County...a bunch of teams where a lot of our current player pool have played. 

It's easy to say Laryea's "athleticism" but you can't neglect his IQ. 

I love laryea and he adds so much value to CMNT. He's the perfect concacaf player. He matches up well against a team with jamaicas attack etc. Phenomenal. I just think he's a bit one dimensional and therefore not complete. The same thing can be said about davies. He's an elite player but I dont think hes anywhere near a complete player. 

If you look at laryeas dribbling and 1v1's, they are only better because of his athleticism. He doesnt actually dribble through players, he just dribbles past them. Usually he acts a bit flat footed going back to his own goal and then quickly knock's the ball past his man. How many of laryeas 1v1's and dribbles would end up with the same result if he didnt have that quick acceleration and top end speed? He's still preforming the initial movement to beat his man which is top quality, but he needs the acceleration to create distance for himself.

Is laryea a more effective RB for CMNT? I think so. But he wouldnt be without his speed IMO. His IQ is good but not top end by any means. His athleticism is in a more elite bracket than his IQ is. 

[Obinna]

@Unnamed Trialist I forgot to address the claim he is unambitious. The guy was offered the top salary for a full back in MLS, around a million dollars, and he turned it down to go to the UK and play with Forest, a new club in a new league where things would be less comfortable and playing time would not be guaranteed. That was a bold decision, not a lazy complacent one. He could have easily just re-signed in his hometown and called it a day, but he didn't 

[Shway]

9 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

I love laryea and he adds so much value to CMNT. He's the perfect concacaf player. He matches up well against a team with jamaicas attack etc. Phenomenal. I just think he's a bit one dimensional and therefore not complete. The same thing can be said about davies. He's an elite player but I dont think hes anywhere near a complete player. 

I don't get how he can be 1 dimensional as a wingback, you have to be offensively and defensively sound. The same thing can be said about Davies. You can't make those feelings as statements, because there isn't any basis. 

9 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

If you look at laryeas dribbling and 1v1's, they are only better because of his athleticism. He doesnt actually dribble through players, he just dribbles past them. Usually he acts a bit flat footed going back to his own goal and then quickly knock's the ball past his man. How many of laryeas 1v1's and dribbles would end up with the same result if he didnt have that quick acceleration and top end speed? He's still preforming the initial movement to beat his man which is top quality, but he needs the acceleration to create distance for himself.

So your main point is Laryea's not good, he's just athletic.... but his athleticism makes him good? Am I following?

The whole dribbling through vs past thing doesn't make any sense to me either and maybe you're explaining it wrong. But to me, that doesn't make a difference. It sounds like those stupid Messi v Ronaldo comparisons where someone would say "Messi dribbles past players, and Ronaldo would dribble through them that's why Ronaldo is better"....when in the end the main purpose is to create or score goals!

9 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Is laryea a more effective RB for CMNT? I think so. But he wouldnt be without his speed IMO. His IQ is good but not top end by any means. His athleticism is in a more elite bracket than his IQ is. 

You're doing a lot of backend complimenting lol. 

The reality is you can like both players but prefer one over the other. It's easy to do that, as they are men with different personalities and it shows on the pitch. I prefer Laryea because he's sound defensively but is better at creating (he has nearly 3x the amount of assists).

The last thing I'll say with facts is that Laryea and Johnston have verrrryy similar outputs for the national team. There are minimal differences, it's just down to preference and you don't have to slag (this is for @Unnamed Trialist) someone who continually shows commitment to the national team just because you personally don't like him because of his personal career decisions. That's beyond weird. 

[Obinna]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

I believe he came off the bench against Belgium and did well, wasn't exposed as you'd expect if a player was nothing but speed and agility. Those players cannot hide when the quality goes up, but again, I think Richie is good enough in these aspects that he can hang. We see evidence for it time and again with Canada, whether it is Belgium, USA, Mexico, etc.

@Bigandy I will quote myself to add one more point before I move on from this topic.

The reason I have been pushing so hard here is because when we play top teams, I have admittedly been surprised by just how proficent Laryea is when it comes to his touch, his ability to play at a high tempo, his decision making, his long passing, etc.

Every time I think the level will be too high for him, he's proven me wrong. He's proven me wrong when we play the States. he's proven me wrong when we play Mexico. He's proved me wrong with how well he played at the World Cup.

It's forced me to challenge my own opinion of the player. The way you view him now is how I used to view him, so I get where you are coming from.

Maybe it will take us playing Argentina this summer to finally see Laryea overwhelmed by the skill level, but I suspect he wouldn't be the only Canadian overwhelmed if we earn the chance to play them. 

[InglewoodJack]

2 hours ago, Obinna said:

Maybe it will take us playing Argentina this summer to finally see Laryea overwhelmed by the skill level, but I suspect he wouldn't be the only Canadian overwhelmed if we earn the chance to play them. 

Laryea at the world cup:

- Created 4 chances vs. Belgium (most of either team). 2/4 ground duels. I believe he lined up on the same side as Hazard, Vertonghen, Carrasco.

3/5 ground duels, won a tackle vs. Croatia- one of our higher rated players in a game where outside of Davies and Tajon, we didn't have much going.

- Second highest rated player against the US in the NL finals- drew a bunch of fouls, won 8 duels, 2 tackles, etc.

 

He was good enough against Croatia that he somehow had to get double teamed by Modric and Kramaric:

 

Not much to add to the convo, but Laryea has shown he can do it against top top international teams. I don't think he has anything more to prove to us at that level- I guess it would be cool to see him play against Brazil or Argentina, though we'll likely get to see him match up against Messi at some point this MLS season.

 

As for Laryea ceiling/ambitions for clubs (general comment, not directed at anyone), I think he is the last of a generation of canadians who got shafted by the lack of opportunities as a young player. He played his first pro minutes at 22, and played his first full season at 24. The transfer to NF came at 27, which is old for your first european experience, despite all of the changes at NF and how they immediately went on a massive run when they signed him, icing him out of the squad. If he had the opportunities a player like TJ Tahid has, let alone the additional buzz for Canadian players that guys like Davies and David generated a few years after he turned pro, I think he'd probably be a premier league quality player by now. Teams in the championship aren't incentivized to prioritize a 27 year old foreign MLS player who isn't an instant hit. If he turned pro in the CPL at 18, he makes that move to Europe at 23, and from there, who knows.

[Bigandy]

2 hours ago, Shway said:

I don't get how he can be 1 dimensional as a wingback, you have to be offensively and defensively sound. The same thing can be said about Davies. You can't make those feelings as statements, because there isn't any basis. 

So your main point is Laryea's not good, he's just athletic.... but his athleticism makes him good? Am I following?

Technically speaking, no player at a world cup level is truly one dimensional. However, in terms of relativity, a guy like TAA is much more rounded than laryea. 

I do feel like you think im slagging on laryea. I am just making the point that laryea is terrific but not super well rounded. 85% of his attacking play is getting behind the opposing fullback and cutting it back. Great play but one dimensional. 

 

2 hours ago, Shway said:

The whole dribbling through vs past thing doesn't make any sense to me either and maybe you're explaining it wrong. But to me, that doesn't make a difference. It sounds like those stupid Messi v Ronaldo comparisons where someone would say "Messi dribbles past players, and Ronaldo would dribble through them that's why Ronaldo is better"....when in the end the main purpose is to create or score goals!

You're doing a lot of backend complimenting lol. 

I see your example and its fair, but thats not what I mean. Laryea's dribbling is longer touches to cover ground. Hes fantastic at it.... but hes not a bernardo silva type dribbler how wiggles his way out of pressure from tight control. Its a different style of dribbling. Laryeas style of dribbling requires pace. Again, its fantastic and effective but I wouldnt say hes well rounded because of it. 

 

2 hours ago, Shway said:

The reality is you can like both players but prefer one over the other. It's easy to do that, as they are men with different personalities and it shows on the pitch. I prefer Laryea because he's sound defensively but is better at creating (he has nearly 3x the amount of assists).

The last thing I'll say with facts is that Laryea and Johnston have verrrryy similar outputs for the national team. There are minimal differences, it's just down to preference and you don't have to slag (this is for @Unnamed Trialist) someone who continually shows commitment to the national team just because you personally don't like him because of his personal career decisions. That's beyond weird. 

I prefer laryea as well. My point is not about which is the better player or my personal choice. The only point I have is that laryea's style relies too much on athleticism for him to be considered a completely well rounded footballer. I dont mean to slag on laryea at all. I just am trying to be accurate in my assesment of his strengths and how most of his strengths (dribbling, cutbacks, recovery 1v1 defending) all embrace his near elite athleticism.  

[Obinna]

24 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

I see your example and its fair, but thats not what I mean. Laryea's dribbling is longer touches to cover ground. Hes fantastic at it.... but hes not a bernardo silva type dribbler how wiggles his way out of pressure from tight control. Its a different style of dribbling. Laryeas style of dribbling requires pace. Again, its fantastic and effective but I wouldnt say hes well rounded because of it. 

Laryea wiggles himself out of impossible situations all of the time. That's his fortay. Sometimes it's jaw dropping how well he gets himself out of trouble. 

[Bigandy]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

Laryea wiggles himself out of impossible situations all of the time. That's his fortay. Sometimes it's jaw dropping how well he gets himself out of trouble. 

He's a very different type of dribbler to silva. He glides past his man with change of pace. To compare them stylistically is not correct. 

[Bigandy]

4 hours ago, Obinna said:

@Bigandy I will quote myself to add one more point before I move on from this topic.

The reason I have been pushing so hard here is because when we play top teams, I have admittedly been surprised by just how proficent Laryea is when it comes to his touch, his ability to play at a high tempo, his decision making, his long passing, etc.

Every time I think the level will be too high for him, he's proven me wrong. He's proven me wrong when we play the States. he's proven me wrong when we play Mexico. He's proved me wrong with how well he played at the World Cup.

It's forced me to challenge my own opinion of the player. The way you view him now is how I used to view him, so I get where you are coming from.

Maybe it will take us playing Argentina this summer to finally see Laryea overwhelmed by the skill level, but I suspect he wouldn't be the only Canadian overwhelmed if we earn the chance to play them. 

All of this is true and Im not debating any of this. However, I still think that without his athleticism, he wouldnt be nearly the same player and is therefore not very complete. It's the same for davies and buchanan. Are they complete or do they utilize their strengths to help in other areas. All players do this and theres nothing wrong with that. I just dont think laryea is complete and I honestly think theres alot of bias towards him to say otherwise. The only real argument is that he can "do it all" but every player at that level can "do it all". However theres a difference between how you accomplish the "do it all" which is all im speaking to. 

[Obinna]

22 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

The only real argument is that he can "do it all"

This is the only argument required in my mind.

Ignoring what a player is best at when deciding how complete they are is backwards thinking, imo.

23 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

but every player at that level can "do it all". 

Not true. Staq for example cannot dribble, or use his left foot. Or at least hasn't demonstrated he can in any pro game I have watched. I have never seen Johnston dribble a player either. 

26 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

 However theres a difference between how you accomplish the "do it all" which is all im speaking to. 

I don't mean to be difficult, but I don't know what you mean by that. Maybe you are referring to his touch, tempo of play, etc., but we have talked about these things to death now and we still don't seem to agree on these abilities, maybe we should move on?

39 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

 I just dont think laryea is complete and I honestly think theres alot of bias towards him to say otherwise. 

It comes down to your unique criteria for "complete", I think. Of course you'll come to a different conclusion if your starting point is different. 

[Obinna]

48 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

He's a very different type of dribbler to silva. He glides past his man with change of pace. To compare them stylistically is not correct. 

Few players compare to Laryea the way he dribbles. It's very unique, especially how he uses both feet, in particular the outside of his left foot at times. Not saying they play the same way, but in this specific regard it reminds me a bit of Pozuelo and how he was able to dribble with both feet. 

But yeah, I know he's a different dribbler to Silva style wise, but he wiggles himself out of trouble very efficently and I wanted to point that out. 

[Bigandy]

15 minutes ago, Obinna said:

This is the only argument required in my mind.

Ignoring what a player is best at when deciding how complete they are is backwards thinking, imo.

Not true. Staq for example cannot dribble, or use his left foot. Or at least hasn't demonstrated he can in any pro game I have watched. I have never seen Johnston dribble a player either. 

I don't mean to be difficult, but I don't know what you mean by that. Maybe you are referring to his touch, tempo of play, etc., but we have talked about these things to death now and we still don't seem to agree on these abilities, maybe we should move on?

It comes down to your unique criteria for "complete", I think. Of course you'll come to a different conclusion if your starting point is different. 

"do it all" is a cop out though and thats my point. The reason being is that the implied definition of "do it all" is that he can defend and attack. However, that lacks nuance. "do it all" is simplifying the game to basically say, he can attack and defend and pass and shoot. However all pros can pass the ball and shoot etc. The quality and tempo at which pros can perform these skills is a much better indication of "do it all" than a broad statement of "attack" or "pass". By this definition, all box to box cm's and all fullbacks are complete because they play 2 way and "do it all". But thats not the proper definition of complete. Could richie dictate the tempo of our play? No. Does Richie have a top top quality IQ to understand where to be tactically? No but he has much more leeway because he has recovery pace. 

I guess at the end of the day, do you think that if we look at every possible attribute, that richie would score a championship level across them (Obviously no one is arguing he is 100% the finished article so theres leeway on this). Or do you think hes fantastic in some areas, lacks in others, but his strengths hide his weaknesses? 

Daley blind cant defend 1v1 to save his life but he rarely gets beat because hes so smart. I would say this is not a complete player. He is effective and can attack and defend. If you call richie complete then surely a guy like blind is also complete? 

[Obinna]

1 minute ago, Bigandy said:

I guess at the end of the day, do you think that if we look at every possible attribute, that richie would score a championship level across them (Obviously no one is arguing he is 100% the finished article so theres leeway on this). Or do you think hes fantastic in some areas, lacks in others, but his strengths hide his weaknesses? 

Yes I do think he would score close enough to a "championship level" baseline on whatever attribute you want to consider, and in addition I thnk he would score relatively high on things like speed, agility and dribbling. 

At the end of the day, what you see as "weaknesses" in his game are things I don't view him as being particularly weak in.

Seems like an "agree to disagree" scenario at this point. 

7 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

"do it all" is a cop out though and thats my point. The reason being is that the implied definition of "do it all" is that he can defend and attack. However, that lacks nuance. "do it all" is simplifying the game to basically say, he can attack and defend and pass and shoot. However all pros can pass the ball and shoot etc. The quality and tempo at which pros can perform these skills is a much better indication of "do it all" than a broad statement of "attack" or "pass".

And this is my problem with your argument. You are being very ignorant of his game here.

How many players can dribble and shift defenders with their opposite foot, in a game? Hell, there are plenty of pro players who flat out shy away from using their left foot to pass the ball, let alone dribble with it. His comfort with his left foot goes beyond the norm of what an average right-footed pro can do. He's very ambidextrous. Not afraid to shoot with that left peg, either. 

Again, close control, dribbling, fast player, agile player, ability to play out wide or central, can play long, can play short. 

But you read that and decide it's too simplistic of a way to view the matter. And to make it worse you call it a "cop out", as if I am somehow grasping at straws or trying to hide behind some sort of bias or hidden agenda. I am just calling it how I see it. You don't have to agree with it. 

[Obinna]

@Bigandy I'll extend an Olive branch here. Could we say Laryea is amongst the most complete players on the National Team and, at the same time, say that nobody on the National Team is particularly complete if we are consider the entire scope of World Soccer? That's something I could say, what say you?