General Discussion on CMNT

[El Hombre]

Sorry, dude, it's math.  The only way Belgium can compete is if they have 52 Martinezes running up and down the touchline barking orders.  Numbers don't lie.

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

https://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/men?dateId=id11545

They were 2nd.

He was appointed the 3rd of August, those are the rankings from the 11th. They were 1st for a lot of the first part of that year. 

They were also first in 2014

Mind you, in the early 2000s they were back in the 40s and worse. So it wasn't Martínez alone who raised their level, it was generational and the previous coaches (Wilmot think it was). 

Still, you ask around who fans would want to coach their national team, say if it's Austria, Japan or Ghana or Chile, and I am pretty sure who most would pick.

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 hours ago, Sal333 said:

I'll throw you a lifeline. I'll even admit Herdman is not the tactic brains behind this team. I suspect it's the Spaniard Eric Tenllado. But even that credits Herdman with an awareness of his strengths and weaknesses. And credits him with an ability to see talent on and off the pitch.

Re Tenllado.

He's quite the mind, if you look at the content he produces, very high level-- but a bit heady I think. I am sure he contributes some interesting stuff, both analysing rivals and thinking of how to sort out a quandary, and the virtue is that Herdman listens to him and Tenllado knows his place and stays in the background. 

By heady, I mean I think he's smart and really knows his stuff. But he is unproven as a coach (he was in Espanyol academies, a connection I am sure helps with Koleosho, not to mention Eric spends his holidays back here in Barcelona), and will need to make that same move to prove his worth in all the other things coaches have to have. Just being a tactical wiz is not enough, but it is a role to appreciate. Lillo with Guardiola, well Lillo was not a great coach, but he's a powerful soccer mind. You could argue Bielsa is that kind of manager too, I remember reading Bielsa's columns I think on the Japan-Korea WC, he was fabulous. But as a coach, there are things that don't always work.

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

20 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

They were also first in 2014

Mind you, in the early 2000s they were back in the 40s and worse. So it wasn't Martínez alone who raised their level, it was generational and the previous coaches (Wilmot think it was). 

Still, you ask around who fans would want to coach their national team, say if it's Austria, Japan or Ghana or Chile, and I am pretty sure who most would pick.

Belgium lost a friendly to Spain in September 2016, his first match, I believe. I am suprised you don't remember that.  One of the reasons they went down to 5th by November, I would guess.

It wasn't Martinez who raised their level at all - they were, as you say, up there well before and he basically maintained it with a golden generation. 

Are you saying those nations would want Martinez?  I personally would trust the fans who watched him manage up front and personal: the English fans I know would never want him anywhere close to their national team.  Do you think the Spanish would want him?  

Edited September 13, 2022 by WestHamCanadianinOxford

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 minutes ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

Belgium lost a friendly to Spain in September 2016, his first match, I believe. I am suprised you don't remember that.  One of the reasons they went down to 5th by November, I would guess.

It wasn't Martinez who raised their level at all, there were, as you say, up there well before and he maintain it with a golden generation. 

Are you saying those nations would want Martinez?  I personally would trust the fans who watched him manage up front and personal: the English fans I know would never want him anywhere close to their national team.  Do you think the Spanish would want him?  

He has often been rumoured for Spain, he was when Luis Enrique resigned after his daughter's tragic death. Then they gave it interim to his assistant, Roberto Moreno, who has much less pedigree.

He also comes up frequently for top Spanish clubs. 

An interesting case, regardless. You saying no one in EPL would touch him, think you are overstating a bit there.

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

12 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

He has often been rumoured for Spain, he was when Luis Enrique resigned after his daughter's tragic death. Then they gave it interim to his assistant, Roberto Moreno, who has much less pedigree.

He also comes up frequently for top Spanish clubs. 

An interesting case, regardless. You saying no one in EPL would touch him, think you are overstating a bit there.

I was saying the national team but Premier League teams that are looking to push on and be top half even - no.  Everton were desperate last year and I think I heard stories of an interim job share but it was rejected.  They went with Fat Frank instead, much to my amusement.  

Edited September 13, 2022 by WestHamCanadianinOxford

[Unnamed Trialist]

14 minutes ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

I was saying the national team but Premier League teams that are looking to push on and be top half even - no.  Everton were desperate last year and I think I heard stories of an interim job share but it was rejected.  They went with Fat Frank instead, much to my amusement.  

There are quite a few rather workaday, journeyman managers in EPL, I guess you could say the same for all of the top leagues. It is not like anything past the top 8-10 in any of the best leagues are anything special. 

The whole point I am getting at is someone on this thread dissing the rest of the NT managers in our group and touting Herdman as superior. Which I don't think can be reasonably argued. If you think that Herdman was good taking a mediocre underperforming team and raising its level, then I don't understand why Martínez could not get credit for that too. And then, he manages elite players at the highest NT level, which Herdman cannot say. Henry is his assistant, we can argue all we want that Thierry is an unproven manager, fine. But we have Biello, de Vos, had Caldwell, Tenllado. Eaddy does our goalkeeper coaching. Olivieri. It is pretty damn modest. 

Edited September 13, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

Just now, Unnamed Trialist said:

If you think that Herdman was good taking a mediocre underperforming team and raising its level, then I don't understand why Martínez could not get credit for that too. 

When has Martinez taken a mediocre team and raised its level?  Maybe Swansea but a better manager had to come in and really finish the job.  He has treaded water with the teams he took over and then seen them drop in later years.  

[Unnamed Trialist]

4 hours ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

When has Martinez taken a mediocre team and raised its level?  Maybe Swansea but a better manager had to come in and really finish the job.  He has treaded water with the teams he took over and then seen them drop in later years.  

Our job isn't finished yet either. 

We haven't won Nations League, haven't made a Gold Cup final never mind win, as of now haven't scored in a World Cup. Herdman could leave after the WC, maybe in function of his kids as well, and he'll forever be the guy who got us to Qatar but won nothing.

I don't mind as long as the next guy, if he wins silverware with us, gets to be called "the guy who really finished the job".

Or "the better manager".

Edited September 13, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

1 minute ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Our job isn't finished yet either. 

We haven't won Nations League, haven't made a Gold Cup final never mind win, as of now haven't scored in a World Cup. Herdman could leave after the WC, maybe in function of his kids as well, and he'll forever be the guy who got us to Qatar but won nothing.

I have actually said nothing about Herdman from the beginning.  Like someone said above they are in wildly different situations and came from wildly different situations. But we were not expected to make the World Cup and you would expect the Belgians to win something with those players in the 6 years he has been there.  

Most people think Martinez has underachieved and most think that Herdman has overachieved.  And a lot of your defense of Martinez have been based on assertions that are just not true.  They were second when he took over and they are second now and have won nothing. He did well start building Swansea and keep Wigan from being relegated until he didn't but doesn't that match the CMNT rise over the last few years in terms of raising the level of a team. If that is your criteria.

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

5 minutes ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

I have actually said nothing about Herdman from the beginning.  Like someone said above they are in wildly different situations and came from wildly different situations. But we were not expected to make the World Cup and you would expect the Belgians to win something with those players in the 6 years he has been there.  

Most people think Martinez has underachieved and most think that Herdman has overachieved.  And a lot of your defense of Martinez have been based on assertions that are just not true.  They were second when he took over and they are second now and have won nothing. He did well start building Swansea and keep Wigan from being relegated until he didn't but doesn't that match the CMNT rise over the last few years in terms of raising the level of a team. If that is your criteria.

 

So you agree with others that Canada's coach is better than Belgium's?

We haven't even started with Croatia yet, because the argument was that Herdman and staff were head and shoulders better than all our rivals coaches.

In any case, arguing you did not do much because the team was 2nd in the world when you got it, it moved up to 1st, and now is 2nd again, 6 years worth, that's a pretty tendentious way to define coaching mediocrity.

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

1 minute ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

So you agree with others that Canada's coach is better than Belgium's?

We haven't even started with Croatia yet, because the argument was that Herdman and staff were head and shoulders better than all our rivals coaches.

In any case, arguing you did not do much because the team was 2nd in the world when you got it, it moved up to 1st, and now is 2nd again, 6 years worth, that's a pretty tendentious way to define coaching mediocrity.

No you can't put words in my mouth and you can't make another person's argument a strawman in mine.

My only argument was Martinez was a good man-manager and self-promoter but overall a less than creative mediocre manager with clubs I watched a fair bit and that he should have done better with one of best pools of players in the world during the last 6 years. 

But if we are taking just about raising the level of a team, Herdman has demonstrably done better.  You put that out as something Martinez should be praised for, which makes no sense. Belgium was not mediocre when he got there, they were great if not champions and there they remain.  

[Free kick]

On 9/12/2022 at 1:23 PM, rkomar said:

 that is mostly about Herdman, but says a lot about the whole program: article.  The article is fairly long, so kudos to the author for putting in the extra effort.  

Thanks for that!!!!!

That's a great piece and a very good (and must) read.  One part that really resonated with me is this:

quote: "But I think what's changed is just grabbing people for the sake of it, I think that’s something that we've been way more deliberate around in the last year and a half. Like I think when I first took over, you know, I think you know anyone at a club that was at a good level, we were just trying to grab them, look at them and then assess to see who is going to be right.”

“But now, we’re really deliberate in what will trigger a selection in this team, because this is a good f**ing team. I always hear comments about people bringing this player in, and that player in, and I'm thinking for who? For Junior Hoilett? Pff. Tajon Buchanan? Alphonso Davies? Iké Ugbo, who is scoring against PSG? Yeah...”

When I read that, I was thinking of many (not all) of the endless threads (over the years and even today) on individual players (e.g.: not part of the current pool) that linger on for long stretches on the front page of this forum.   Whereby, I would sift through the player profile & body of work and wonder to myself: why "would we ever need this guy?".  Or "why would anyone think that we would ever need this guy?".

Edited September 14, 2022 by Free kick

[Gian-Luca]

1 hour ago, Free kick said:

Thanks for that!!!!!

That's a great piece and a very good (and must) read.  One part that really resonated with me is this:

quote: "But I think what's changed is just grabbing people for the sake of it, I think that’s something that we've been way more deliberate around in the last year and a half. Like I think when I first took over, you know, I think you know anyone at a club that was at a good level, we were just trying to grab them, look at them and then assess to see who is going to be right.”

“But now, we’re really deliberate in what will trigger a selection in this team, because this is a good f**ing team. I always hear comments about people bringing this player in, and that player in, and I'm thinking for who? For Junior Hoilett? Pff. Tajon Buchanan? Alphonso Davies? Iké Ugbo, who is scoring against PSG? Yeah...”

When I read that, I was thinking of many of the endless threads (over the years and even today) on individual players that linger on for long stretches on the front page of this forum.   Whereby, I would sift through the player profile & body of work and wonder to myself: why "would we ever need this guy?".  Or "why would anyone think that we would ever need this guy?".

Sounds like he is aiming his comments at the fans clamouring for him to call up Mitrovic

[Free kick]

1 hour ago, Gian-Luca said:

Sounds like he is aiming his comments at the fans clamouring for him to call up Mitrovic

That just one example,   🙂

I could name tons (without even mentioning Joey Torchia).  I've seen ppl use the Joey Torchia as symbol or synonymous with this phenomena.  However,  there is are a gazillion Joey Torchia-like individuals and topics; often its dual nationals.  And pages upon pages of discussions.    Nothing wrong with discussions, I guess,  but inevitably you start to see comments like: "This guy should be called"

 

PS.:  I have NOT read the Mitrovic thread yet.

Edited September 14, 2022 by Free kick

[El Hombre]

10 hours ago, Free kick said:

PS.:  I have NOT read the Mitrovic thread yet.

A word of advice from a like-minded individual: Don't.

[Shway]

12 hours ago, Free kick said:

Thanks for that!!!!!

That's a great piece and a very good (and must) read.  One part that really resonated with me is this:

quote: "But I think what's changed is just grabbing people for the sake of it, I think that’s something that we've been way more deliberate around in the last year and a half. Like I think when I first took over, you know, I think you know anyone at a club that was at a good level, we were just trying to grab them, look at them and then assess to see who is going to be right.”

“But now, we’re really deliberate in what will trigger a selection in this team, because this is a good f**ing team. I always hear comments about people bringing this player in, and that player in, and I'm thinking for who? For Junior Hoilett? Pff. Tajon Buchanan? Alphonso Davies? Iké Ugbo, who is scoring against PSG? Yeah...”

When I read that, I was thinking of many (not all) of the endless threads (over the years and even today) on individual players (e.g.: not part of the current pool) that linger on for long stretches on the front page of this forum.   Whereby, I would sift through the player profile & body of work and wonder to myself: why "would we ever need this guy?".  Or "why would anyone think that we would ever need this guy?".

This change of thinking is what will keep our depth limited, it kind of makes me think he’s running it like a club. However, unlike club football, the MNT program has career commitments…and if we aren’t actively weaning in new young talent to ensure that there is future options we’ll end up with just having “golden generations” and continue to miss out on talent because of dumb decisions of not calling up a 27th player to camp. If you look at it this way, in hindsight we’ve essentially lost “insert player name here” for Campagnas continuous camp spots.

All we are saying is to call them up, give them hope. Nobody has said for them to play over Davies, Buchanan, or whoever. 
 

I wish these journs would ask the REAL tough questions at least sometimes. 

[Corazon]

1 hour ago, Shway said:

This change of thinking is what will keep our depth limited, it kind of makes me think he’s running it like a club. However, unlike club football, the MNT program has career commitments…and if we aren’t actively weaning in new young talent to ensure that there is future options we’ll end up with just having “golden generations” and continue to miss out on talent because of dumb decisions of not calling up a 27th player to camp. If you look at it this way, in hindsight we’ve essentially lost “insert player name here” for Campagnas continuous camp spots.

All we are saying is to call them up, give them hope. Nobody has said for them to play over Davies, Buchanan, or whoever. 
 

I wish these journs would ask the REAL tough questions at least sometimes. 

Thank you!  Couldn't have said it any clearer myself.  The biggest flaw with this thinking is that we alienate young, talented players.  And look at us now, some of this core group is not playing and heading to Qatar in poor shape and poor playing form.  And we have no one that is integrated in our program if they join now.  A player like Waterman should have already attended numerous camps going into this September camp but we decided to call injured players (and Campagna) instead.  Secondly, the inclusion of young, rising fringe players can benefit our program long term.  First with a slow integration into the program.  Second, being invited and attending these camps can leave a strong impression on dual nationals.  The same way, dual nationals are more difficult to bring back to Canada when playing youth for other countries.  For example, I do not see how an invite to a player like Batyrev hurts, even if he does not play in any friendlies.

[Free kick]

1 hour ago, Shway said:

This change of thinking is what will keep our depth limited, it kind of makes me think he’s running it like a club. However, unlike club football, the MNT program has career commitments…and if we aren’t actively weaning in new young talent to ensure that there is future options we’ll end up with just having “golden generations” and continue to miss out on talent because of dumb decisions of not calling up a 27th player to camp. If you look at it this way, in hindsight we’ve essentially lost “insert player name here” for Campagnas continuous camp spots.

All we are saying is to call them up, give them hope. Nobody has said for them to play over Davies, Buchanan, or whoever. 
 

I wish these journs would ask the REAL tough questions at least sometimes. 

I disagree.  I dont see most of these “said players” as depth at all if you are a good team looking to perform at the WC level. “ Depth talent” can mean different things if you looking to consistently qualify and play at the WC versus if you are, for example,  national team of a small carribean nation looking to gain respectability.

Edited September 14, 2022 by Free kick

[Free kick]

29 minutes ago, Corazon said:

Thank you!  Couldn't have said it any clearer myself.  The biggest flaw with this thinking is that we alienate young, talented players.  And look at us now, some of this core group is not playing and heading to Qatar in poor shape and poor playing form.  And we have no one that is integrated in our program if they join now.  A player like Waterman should have already attended numerous camps going into this September camp but we decided to call injured players (and Campagna) instead.  Secondly, the inclusion of young, rising fringe players can benefit our program long term.  First with a slow integration into the program.  Second, being invited and attending these camps can leave a strong impression on dual nationals.  The same way, dual nationals are more difficult to bring back to Canada when playing youth for other countries.  For example, I do not see how an invite to a player like Batyrev hurts, even if he does not play in any friendlies.

I would say the same about “Talent” or “prospective talent” as what i said about “depth”.     It means different things and is defined differently from good teams playing at the WC versus smaller nations trying to attain respectability in a regional tournament.  
 

some people have hard time (or refuse) realizing that we have a good team.  

Edited September 14, 2022 by Free kick

[Corazon]

2 minutes ago, Free kick said:

I would say the same about “Talent” as what i said about “depth”.     It means different things and is defined differently from good teams playing at the WC versus smaller nations trying to attain respectability in a regional tournament.  
 

some people here have hard time realizing that we have a good team

I think we have a good team right now, I just don’t necessarily think this formula leads to a consistently good program.

Minor alterations mentioned aren’t going to take away from our current team but I think it will bring more stability to our program as a whole in the longer run.

[CanadaFan123]

I’ll assume Herdman just means in the context of the current stage of the team pre-WC. Many of his current selection were capped as a “let’s see” so it would seem foolish to suggest we’re past that. We can always use new looks. Remember Buchanan and Johnston, two pencilled in starters, had never even been capped last year. Johnston, Corbeanu, Millar, Wotherspoon, Cornelius and Kennedy would all be classified as guys who were “let’s see” calls and they’ve all been welcome additions to the pool. 
 

When you look at their respective journeys it’s disingenuous to say that the aforementioned players deserved a call but Ennin doesn’t. Let’s not even mention other calls such as Paton, Sturing, Ferreira, Brym, Shaffelburg, Kone, ZBG, Gutierrez etc. 

[El Hombre]

1 hour ago, Corazon said:

Thank you!  Couldn't have said it any clearer myself.  The biggest flaw with this thinking is that we alienate young, talented players.  And look at us now, some of this core group is not playing and heading to Qatar in poor shape and poor playing form.  And we have no one that is integrated in our program if they join now.  A player like Waterman should have already attended numerous camps going into this September camp but we decided to call injured players (and Campagna) instead.  Secondly, the inclusion of young, rising fringe players can benefit our program long term.  First with a slow integration into the program.  Second, being invited and attending these camps can leave a strong impression on dual nationals.  The same way, dual nationals are more difficult to bring back to Canada when playing youth for other countries.  For example, I do not see how an invite to a player like Batyrev hurts, even if he does not play in any friendlies.

The problem though is that this is already happening but maybe not with the players you want.  

For example, the following "young" players were brought in over the past 12-14 months:

Luca Koleosho
Charles-Andreas Brym
Ismael Kone
Zachary Brault-Guillard
Cristian Gutierrez
Jacob Shaffleburg
Theo Corbeanu (not to mention a bunch of others during Gold Cup)

And older players were brought in as backups (Raheem Edwards, Derek Cornelius, David Wotherspoon, etc.).  So it seems like fringe players are being included but they're not sexy dual-nationals that are playing footsie with other nations.

It really sounds like everyone is clamouring for huge 26 to 30 man camps without really taking into account the logistics.  With that many players you either increase idle time for them or spread your coaching staff thin.  The last thing you want is idle time for your key players and you want to make sure you maximize the coach instruction time because camps are a short window.  So that leaves a number of peripheral players sitting around and watching.  That might be interesting for some, but you also have to take into account that you're bringing these kids over from Europe.  They may not want to miss time with their club to sit around and watch drills.  Somebody like Campagna is a low-risk body because you can call him in to make numbers if necessary and tell him to fuck off when not needed.  You may not want to necessarily do that with a young prospect.

That is why I think the time spent keeping in contact with players, especially those that aren't in the regular 18, is much more important than the camp sizes.

(Cue CSA releasing the roster with 21 names on it)

[Corazon]

On 9/14/2022 at 12:21 PM, El Hombre said:

The problem though is that this is already happening but maybe not with the players you want.  

For example, the following "young" players were brought in over the past 12-14 months:

Luca Koleosho
Charles-Andreas Brym
Ismael Kone
Zachary Brault-Guillard
Cristian Gutierrez
Jacob Shaffleburg
Theo Corbeanu (not to mention a bunch of others during Gold Cup)

And older players were brought in as backups (Raheem Edwards, Derek Cornelius, David Wotherspoon, etc.).  So it seems like fringe players are being included but they're not sexy dual-nationals that are playing footsie with other nations.

It really sounds like everyone is clamouring for huge 26 to 30 man camps without really taking into account the logistics.  With that many players you either increase idle time for them or spread your coaching staff thin.  The last thing you want is idle time for your key players and you want to make sure you maximize the coach instruction time because camps are a short window.  So that leaves a number of peripheral players sitting around and watching.  That might be interesting for some, but you also have to take into account that you're bringing these kids over from Europe.  They may not want to miss time with their club to sit around and watch drills.  Somebody like Campagna is a low-risk body because you can call him in to make numbers if necessary and tell him to fuck off when not needed.  You may not want to necessarily do that with a young prospect.

That is why I think the time spent keeping in contact with players, especially those that aren't in the regular 18, is much more important than the camp sizes.

(Cue CSA releasing the roster with 21 names on it)

Valid points.  And I wanted all of those players included but I was just saying there is room for more.  But if you can find me a Nation that has less player pool from the last 12 months, I'd be shocked.  Either way, we are the only aspiring CONCACAF soccer nation doing the minimum.

Canada - 36 players called in past 12 months

Mexico - 55 players called in the past 12 months

Costa Rica - 59 players called in the past 12 months

USA - 61 players called in the past 12 months

El Salvador - 71 players called in the past 12 months

Honduras - 72 players called in the past 12 months

Panama - 83 players called in the 12 months

Jamaica - 86 players called in the past 12 months

So Mexico is the closest country to us (from final CONCACAF qualifying round) with 19 more players called in the past 12 months compared to Canada.  I'm not saying that we aren't introducing young talented players.  I'm saying we could be doing more.  Our fellow CONCACAF nations are keeping a pool of players double what Canada is.  Yes, some of those countries are able to play more friendlies than us.  Yes, we won the group with our small player pool.  I just don't see how a few additional players at camp will do us more harm than good.  

So are we logistically handicapped?  In comparison to all other top CONCACAF programs?  As @Shwaymentioned, we logistically are able to include Campagna as a training player every Canada camp.  We are able to call in and pay for several injured Canadian regulars to attend camp even if they're not playing or training.

 

Edited September 16, 2022 by Corazon

[El Hombre]

24 minutes ago, Corazon said:

Valid points.  And I wanted all of those players included but I was just saying there is room for more.  But if you can find me a Nation that has less player pool from the last 12 months, I'd be shocked.  Either way, we are the only aspiring CONCACAF soccer nation doing the minimum.

Canada - 36 players called in past 12 months

Mexico - 55 players called in the past 12 months

Costa Rica - 59 players called in the past 12 months

USA - 61 players called in the past 12 months

El Salvador - 71 players called in the past 12 months

Honduras - 83 players called in the past 12 months

Jamaica - 86 players called in the past 12 months

So Mexico is the closest country to us (from final CONCACAF qualifying round) with 19 more players called in the past 12 months compared to Canada.  I'm not saying that we aren't introducing young talented players.  I'm saying we could be doing more.  Our fellow CONCACAF nations are keeping a pool of players double what Canada is.  Yes, some of those countries are able to play more friendlies than us.  Yes, we won the group with our small player pool.  I just don't see how a few additional players at camp will do us more harm than good.  

So are we logistically handicapped?  In comparison to all other top CONCACAF programs?  As @Shwaymentioned, we logistically are able to include Campagna as a training player every Canada camp.  We are able to call in and pay for several injured Canadian regulars to attend camp even if they're not playing or training.

 

Interesting analysis.  I was curious as to how we ranked against the other nations, so that's really good to know.

A couple points to offer:

1) I think the CSA is improving, but slowly, so we are still working with a shoe-string budget in some respects.  I think this might be where the CSA could improve.  But it also makes it hard for us to compare ourselves to Mexico and US.

2) So, if we remove them, we are left with comparing ourselves to CR, ES, Honduras and Jamaica.  How many of those nations called in non-domestic players just to have a look-see?  CR, ES and Honduras rely a lot on domestic players, but what I hear most often is not that we should call in more domestic guys but guys over in Europe which is logistically more difficult.  I think there would still be complaints even if we were bringing in the Jayden Nelson/Choiniere/Godinho/Petrasso players (which I thought we did for Gold Cup).

3) I think the most similar to us would be Jamaica who bring a lot of players from the UK.  Unfortunately (for me), they excel in this respect, so what do I know?  Maybe it's cause they're a tire fire?  Can't really explain that one.

With regards to Campagna specifically, there are a couple things working in his favour:

1) He's nearby.  Easy enough to get him a North American flight to wherever the camp is.
2) He's cheap. It's unlikely he's getting per diems (or the same as regular players would get) or appearance fees (or whatever you call them for players who show up).  The more official callups you make, the more expensive it is.