General Discussion on CMNT

[Vasi]

15 minutes ago, Stoppage Time said:

Thanks, Peter.

Here is my list for Qatar. One person suggested that Didc could be there, and Henry likely will be. Regardless, I wonder for how many of these I will be correct.

The CPL guys are partly warranted and partly a public relations move to create CPL excitement. Do any of these guys belong in this practice squad?

Keepers (3) Crepeau, St Clair, plus one of Pantemis, Breza or Hasal

Defenders (8)  Cornelius, Miller, Waterman, Johnston, Laryea, Edwards, Brault-Guillard, Marshal-Rutty

Midfield (6)  Kaye, Kone, Osorio, Piette, M. Choiniere, Nelson

Forwards (8) Akinola, Tabla, Cavallini, O. de Rosario, Rea, Pacius, Shaffelburg, Russel-Rowe.

I would not be surprised if a few u20's join from european clubs. I believe this was mentioned on the pod. 

[BearcatSA]

39 minutes ago, Vasi said:

I would not be surprised if a few u20's join from european clubs. I believe this was mentioned on the pod. 

They'll pick up the bibs and cones after training.

[Ally McCoist]

7 hours ago, red card said:

On Canada twitter at least, soccer is almost on par with hockey for the 1 year ending Oct 16th.

The top soccer hashtag was CANMNT focused. Davies was one of the top 5 people.

 

https://twitter.com/FirstNameConor/status/1585642197034016769

 

Hockey is a dying sport in this country. Way too expensive.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Dying might be overstating it but soccer and basketball are definitely the future.

[jhoops__]

You have to think the WC squad will be announced on the 12th, right?   Most players will be finished club football on the 12th or 13th.   You’d figure they’d be on fights to Qatar on Monday the 14th at the latest…

[Sal333]

30 minutes ago, jhoops__ said:

You have to think the WC squad will be announced on the 12th, right?   Most players will be finished club football on the 12th or 13th.   You’d figure they’d be on fights to Qatar on Monday the 14th at the latest…

So you're predicting the end of the "brotherhood"?

 

P.S. I know it's a typo but the subconscious moves in mysterious ways.

[Bigandy]

15 hours ago, InglewoodJack said:

I don't think you're giving enough credit to Turkey, and a little too much credit to Ligue 1. Yes, France has a better league on aggregate, but Larin played for a much better team in Besiktas. You are saying he has only scored more than 7 goals in a single european season, but that year he scored 19 goals, which is pretty comparable to "peak Ugbo" ie 16 goals in Belgium.

Neymar shares his goals with Mbappe, Messi, and the rest of their all star team. Jonathan David has 1 less goal than Kylian Mbappe, but no one is going to argue that David is at Mbappe's level, so if a hypothetical Cyle Larin came close to Neymar's goal total, I don't think that makes them comparable. It just means that Cyle Larin plays for a team that depends on him for goals, Neymar plays with two of the best goal scorers of this generation. 

With Yaremchuk, that cutoff number is also misleading. He scored 17 goals his last season in Belgium.  He scored 10 before that, 8 before that, 9 before that. He scored 3 champions league goals with Benfica last year. Club Brugge paid 17.5M euros for him. Obviously they're going to play him, Larin came to them on a free transfer got iced out of the lineup through no fault of his own- the guys in front of him are playing out of their minds. Jutgla is probably going to end up back in Spain or England in the next few years. 

Have you watched Larin at Club Brugge? He's played well when given time. If he was in a similar situation to JD at Lille ie he needs to score every goal, then yeah, he hits 10. 

There's more than just looking at the overall quality of the league and defining a player's quality because of it. Pretty sure Genk explicitly didn't want Ugbo back- he had 3 goals in 18 games for Genk last year which isn't far off from what Larin is scoring for Brugge averaging like 7.5 minutes/game. 

I think there is a difference in terms of league quality. Just look at the leagues coefficients where france is 5th and Turkey is 16th. I am not saying the coefficients are perfectly accurate by any means but to say they are very comparable leagues is quite a stretch. In champions league, the french teams do much better than the turkish teams (which is why theres a huge difference in coefficients). Then look at the players that france sells. Every year they sell several star players to the top 4 leagues (onana, botman, tchoumeni, dolberg, paqueta,bruno, kamara, saliba, milik, Tel, aguerd, and like 10-20 PSG players) . How many top quality exports does turkey produce ( Kim min jae, marcao) ? There is a big difference in quality of leagues as shown by all the numbers. 

Even though psg shares goals, they scored 90 and teams in the bottom of the table had 35. In larins best season,  besiktas scored 89 goals. This shows how many chances they created. Larin going to a team that scored 35 goals will obviously create way fewer chances. I dont think larin scores more goals with less chances in a better league.

I understand the argument that a lower team may rely on one player for the majority of their goals, but that doesnt mean larin will deliver the goals just because the team needs him to. Scoring 10 goals is quite a feat in ligue 1 and many top top players did not achieve this. I am not saying scoring the same as neymar would make larin at neymars level, i am saying that all these players who have consistently scored for fun in their careers in some of the best leagues in the world, struggle to score 10 goals in ligue 1. Why would larin all of the sudden jump up a level, play 90's, score 10 goals a season against some of the best teams he has faced in league play, while having lower quality team mates compared to his besiktas or club brugge creators. If he was able to score 19 goals every season in turkey and belguim, then i think you may have an argument. 

As for yarmchuk, i do not see why his numbers are misleading. My claim is that he struggles to score 10 goals in a season and the numbers show that he doesnt score 10 goals a season. I agree that he will play over larin and i think that is because he is a better player. If he is a better player or even an equal player and he never made it 10 league goals in a top 5 league, why would larin, given that larin has very comparable stats.

I just dont understand the argument that if you need to be the goal scorer, you will score goals. That is not how soccer works. If larin was the guy on a ligue 1 team where he is so good at scoring that the entire team tactics would be geared around setting him up to score, then you may have an argument. But he is so far from being the most dominant player on a ligue 1 team that is an unrealistic scenario. 

I fully agree that theres more to a players quality than the league they play for. You see young players outgrow leagues all the time. Larin is 27 and in his prime. He has had a one season wonder. Other than that, he has not shown any indication that he is ready to make a step up to a stronger league and be the most important player on that team scoring 10 goals. Once you reach the top level of sport, the margins that separate the best from the rest are pretty small. Larin is currently a ways off from getting meaningful sub minutes, then he has to become a starter, then he has to dominate and bang in goals to even get looked at in france, then he has to prove he is worthy of minutes all over, then he has to become extremely dominant in that league to score 10 goals. It isnt impossible for him to do that and i will support him with the hopes he can do this. However, i think his current role, comparisons to other similar players, his seasonal goal record, the fact that he would be playing for a team in ligue 1 who create significantly less chances, the fact that he would need to score against teams that are better, all indicate that its highly unlikely that larin scores 10 goals in ligue 1. 

The only argument is see that supports him scoring 10 is that he had 1 season when he scored 19 goals (weak argument because that was several years ago and theres no consistency) and that if he plays on a team that needs him to score, that he will (poor argument. Theres no correlation between a team needing a player to score and his ability to score. If i played in ligue 1 i would not score 10 goals just because the team needs me to. The argument has to be about player quality rather than team needs.) 

[PegCityCam]

So both Mexico and the US are ranked higher than us according to TSN. Thoughts?

https://www.tsn.ca/fifa-world-cup-brazil-france-argentina-england-belgium-canada-1.1869540

[jhoops__]

Rankings look pretty accurate.   Also, considering the groups we are all in I’m not surprised the US and Mex is ranked higher.  They have a better chance of advancing.

[Free kick]

37 minutes ago, PegCityCam said:

So both Mexico and the US are ranked higher than us according to TSN. Thoughts?

https://www.tsn.ca/fifa-world-cup-brazil-france-argentina-england-belgium-canada-1.1869540

I saw that last night on the airing of the show.  I was surprised that a Canadian outlet would have ranked the US and Mex higher given the questions marks that came in Concacaf qualifying.  Every Concacaf team that qualified has question marks, but I would think that (judging from qualifying), there are more question marks surrounding the US and Mexico than Canada.  The reason why i would not rip them for putting Mex and US ahead of us is because they (Mex and US) have a longer track record behind them and we don’t.  This is essentially our first WC. So its understandable that if you take the thirty thousand feet view of things, that you would put them ahead of Canada.  Most neutral observers would do the same.

Edited October 28, 2022 by Free kick

[narduch]

I'm predicting USA to finish last in their group

Edited October 28, 2022 by narduch

[InglewoodJack]

24 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

I think there is a difference in terms of league quality. Just look at the leagues coefficients where france is 5th and Turkey is 16th. I am not saying the coefficients are perfectly accurate by any means but to say they are very comparable leagues is quite a stretch. In champions league, the french teams do much better than the turkish teams (which is why theres a huge difference in coefficients). Then look at the players that france sells. Every year they sell several star players to the top 4 leagues (onana, botman, tchoumeni, dolberg, paqueta,bruno, kamara, saliba, milik, Tel, aguerd, and like 10-20 PSG players) . How many top quality exports does turkey produce ( Kim min jae, marcao) ? There is a big difference in quality of leagues as shown by all the numbers. 

Even though psg shares goals, they scored 90 and teams in the bottom of the table had 35. In larins best season,  besiktas scored 89 goals. This shows how many chances they created. Larin going to a team that scored 35 goals will obviously create way fewer chances. I dont think larin scores more goals with less chances in a better league.

I understand the argument that a lower team may rely on one player for the majority of their goals, but that doesnt mean larin will deliver the goals just because the team needs him to. Scoring 10 goals is quite a feat in ligue 1 and many top top players did not achieve this. I am not saying scoring the same as neymar would make larin at neymars level, i am saying that all these players who have consistently scored for fun in their careers in some of the best leagues in the world, struggle to score 10 goals in ligue 1. Why would larin all of the sudden jump up a level, play 90's, score 10 goals a season against some of the best teams he has faced in league play, while having lower quality team mates compared to his besiktas or club brugge creators. If he was able to score 19 goals every season in turkey and belguim, then i think you may have an argument. 

As for yarmchuk, i do not see why his numbers are misleading. My claim is that he struggles to score 10 goals in a season and the numbers show that he doesnt score 10 goals a season. I agree that he will play over larin and i think that is because he is a better player. If he is a better player or even an equal player and he never made it 10 league goals in a top 5 league, why would larin, given that larin has very comparable stats.

I just dont understand the argument that if you need to be the goal scorer, you will score goals. That is not how soccer works. If larin was the guy on a ligue 1 team where he is so good at scoring that the entire team tactics would be geared around setting him up to score, then you may have an argument. But he is so far from being the most dominant player on a ligue 1 team that is an unrealistic scenario. 

I fully agree that theres more to a players quality than the league they play for. You see young players outgrow leagues all the time. Larin is 27 and in his prime. He has had a one season wonder. Other than that, he has not shown any indication that he is ready to make a step up to a stronger league and be the most important player on that team scoring 10 goals. Once you reach the top level of sport, the margins that separate the best from the rest are pretty small. Larin is currently a ways off from getting meaningful sub minutes, then he has to become a starter, then he has to dominate and bang in goals to even get looked at in france, then he has to prove he is worthy of minutes all over, then he has to become extremely dominant in that league to score 10 goals. It isnt impossible for him to do that and i will support him with the hopes he can do this. However, i think his current role, comparisons to other similar players, his seasonal goal record, the fact that he would be playing for a team in ligue 1 who create significantly less chances, the fact that he would need to score against teams that are better, all indicate that its highly unlikely that larin scores 10 goals in ligue 1. 

The only argument is see that supports him scoring 10 is that he had 1 season when he scored 19 goals (weak argument because that was several years ago and theres no consistency) and that if he plays on a team that needs him to score, that he will (poor argument. Theres no correlation between a team needing a player to score and his ability to score. If i played in ligue 1 i would not score 10 goals just because the team needs me to. The argument has to be about player quality rather than team needs.) 

France is heavily skewed because PSG is in the conversation for best club in the world, and then there's a drop off to the Marseilles, Lyons, Lilles of the league, and then an even bigger drop off between them and midtier, and an even bigger one between them and the bottom of the table. You see a similar thing in Turkey between the Istanbul teams and the rest, but we're also talking about Larin, a guy who played at the top of the Turkish league, and Ugbo, a guy who plays for a bottom feeder.

I'm also not saying that Turkey is better than france, just that the gap is a lot less wide than you may believe. Last year, the worst team in France was Bordeaux. Their top scorer, Ui-Jo Hwang scored 11 goals. He then went to Nottingham forrest, got Laryea'd, then loaned to Olympiacos, where he isn't even a full time starter. Before he signed with CB, Larin was an Olympiacos target. The 3rd worst team in the league last year, St. Etienne's leading scorer was Wahbi Khazri who scored 10. He now plays as a part time starter for Montpellier. Troyes staved off elimination in part because of Ugbo, and now he can barely play. Point here is these crappy teams have to rely on somebody, and if that somebody is at least decent, which Cyle Larin certainly is, you eventually get your goals.

Troyes scored 37 goals last year and Ugbo scored 5 goals playing 1/3 of their games. With the form he was in, I think he would've reached at least 10 over a full season, but with your argument that chances are positively correlated to goals, which is true to an extent, this is a guy who'd be expected to score like 25 goals if he had the chances that PSG generates, which I don't think is accurate.

The reason I find your characterization of Yaremchuk's numbers misleading is because saying he's only scored over 10 goals in a season once when A) that season was a year and a half ago, and B ) it was 17 goals which is a lot more than 10, and C) he scored 13 total goals for Benfica last year. Club Brugge and Benfica are also better than a lot of top 5 league teams.

Also, I don't think that's a fair characterization of Larin's situation at Brugge too. He scored in his only start, his per minute stats are excellent, there's nothing more he can do to get minutes because Brugge has poor roster construction and created a logjam at his position. In the event that Lang, Olsen, Jutgla and Yaremchuk all get injured at the exact same time and Larin is forced to play, yeah he'll score goals and be good enough for CB not to need to go out and buy his replacement. 

 

tl;dr- not out of the ordinary for guys in france to score 10+ goals then disappear, Larin is a guy who can score a bunch of goals, and given the right playing time, he can run up his numbers. Ugbo went to Troyes because he couldn't play at Genk, so I wouldn't even be shocked if Larin makes a similar move next year.

8 minutes ago, PegCityCam said:

So both Mexico and the US are ranked higher than us according to TSN. Thoughts?

https://www.tsn.ca/fifa-world-cup-brazil-france-argentina-england-belgium-canada-1.1869540

I think historical performance has to count for something. It's not hard to convince an unbiased commentator that Canada concacaf'd our opponents by making them play on disgusting frozen pitches and that we would not achieve those same results on the perfectly manicured grounds of the World Cup. Not to mention, after our undefeated streak, we kinda stumbled to qualify and weren't as good as we could've been in Nations League.

[Gian-Luca]

31 minutes ago, jhoops__ said:

Rankings look pretty accurate.   Also, considering the groups we are all in I’m not surprised the US and Mex is ranked higher.  They have a better chance of advancing.

Although that wasn't the rationale the panel gave for their picks (although Kilbane said that he ranked Canada above Mexico). De Guzman was worried about Canada's lack of experience outside Concacaf, Caldwell said the US has more quality and talent in the roster.

Other bits (from the parts on TSN's website) that were amusing if not interesting - Kilbane also said that Argentina were crap (not the words he used, but he ranked them something like 9th and said any of the top 12 teams could beat them). Wileman chided Kilbane that he was alone with that pick and that England would have been ranked even higher had Kilbane not ranked them 32nd (which was a joke).

[PegCityCam]

As an aside it's nice to see these guys loosen up a bit and let their personalities shine through. They tend to be pretty bland and stiff imo. Even caught myself chuckling. Credit to Luke for stirring the pot and taking the piss.

[Kadenge]

Mexico and the US underperformed in WCQ and we punched above our weight. Mexico has some injury issues as do we, but largely its based on the overall talent quality on paper and WC experience of the 3 squads. Btw England has looked very poor recently but their manager keeps sticking to his guys like Sterling. 

[Bigandy]

35 minutes ago, InglewoodJack said:

France is heavily skewed because PSG is in the conversation for best club in the world, and then there's a drop off to the Marseilles, Lyons, Lilles of the league, and then an even bigger drop off between them and midtier, and an even bigger one between them and the bottom of the table. You see a similar thing in Turkey between the Istanbul teams and the rest, but we're also talking about Larin, a guy who played at the top of the Turkish league, and Ugbo, a guy who plays for a bottom feeder.

I'm also not saying that Turkey is better than france, just that the gap is a lot less wide than you may believe. Last year, the worst team in France was Bordeaux. Their top scorer, Ui-Jo Hwang scored 11 goals. He then went to Nottingham forrest, got Laryea'd, then loaned to Olympiacos, where he isn't even a full time starter. Before he signed with CB, Larin was an Olympiacos target. The 3rd worst team in the league last year, St. Etienne's leading scorer was Wahbi Khazri who scored 10. He now plays as a part time starter for Montpellier. Troyes staved off elimination in part because of Ugbo, and now he can barely play. Point here is these crappy teams have to rely on somebody, and if that somebody is at least decent, which Cyle Larin certainly is, you eventually get your goals.

Troyes scored 37 goals last year and Ugbo scored 5 goals playing 1/3 of their games. With the form he was in, I think he would've reached at least 10 over a full season, but with your argument that chances are positively correlated to goals, which is true to an extent, this is a guy who'd be expected to score like 25 goals if he had the chances that PSG generates, which I don't think is accurate.

The reason I find your characterization of Yaremchuk's numbers misleading is because saying he's only scored over 10 goals in a season once when A) that season was a year and a half ago, and B ) it was 17 goals which is a lot more than 10, and C) he scored 13 total goals for Benfica last year. Club Brugge and Benfica are also better than a lot of top 5 league teams.

Also, I don't think that's a fair characterization of Larin's situation at Brugge too. He scored in his only start, his per minute stats are excellent, there's nothing more he can do to get minutes because Brugge has poor roster construction and created a logjam at his position. In the event that Lang, Olsen, Jutgla and Yaremchuk all get injured at the exact same time and Larin is forced to play, yeah he'll score goals and be good enough for CB not to need to go out and buy his replacement. 

 

tl;dr- not out of the ordinary for guys in france to score 10+ goals then disappear, Larin is a guy who can score a bunch of goals, and given the right playing time, he can run up his numbers. Ugbo went to Troyes because he couldn't play at Genk, so I wouldn't even be shocked if Larin makes a similar move next year.

I think historical performance has to count for something. It's not hard to convince an unbiased commentator that Canada concacaf'd our opponents by making them play on disgusting frozen pitches and that we would not achieve those same results on the perfectly manicured grounds of the World Cup. Not to mention, after our undefeated streak, we kinda stumbled to qualify and weren't as good as we could've been in Nations League.

That is just false. In 2010 france was 5th on the coefficient list before the psg takeover. Of course psg helps but france was top 5 without psgs mega squad. All leagues have a drop off from the top teams to the bottom teams.

I think its an incredibly weak argument to say that someone will eventually get goals if a team needs it and then suggest that it will magically be Larin who fulfills that unsubstantiated claim. 

I think we can both agree that more chances will result in more goals when looking at averages. The law of diminishing returns also applies to this. I am not saying that larin scores double the goals with double the chances created. I am saying that when you take:
1. larins output in europe(under 10 goals a season except once)
2. cut his chances by less than half
3.put him in a stronger league
4. have him on a bottom of the table team playing psg, marseille, lyon etc instead of on the best team in the league playing extremely weak opposition
5. look at how poor his current situation is

That he is more likely to have his output lowered rather than increased.  Those 5 points above are all strong arguments to reinforce a lower output. 

The only argument for his output increasing is:
1. He would be on a team that needs goals and therefore he will score the goals the team needs (weak argument).
2. he has scored 19 goals in a season for besiktas. (maybe an ok argument if he did this consistently, it wasnt several seasons ago, his current minutes werent as awful as they currently are) 

I just dont see any evidence to suggest that larin can score 10 goals a season in france. It seems strictly a claim made on bias because hes canadian. 

Maybe we should wait and see if he can even score 10 goals in belguim even.  I think he can, but he needs to prove himself before we automatically assume he can do it at a higher level. 

As for yaremchuk: A) doing something once is my point. Whether he did it last year or 3, 5 years ago, it doesnt matter when my argument is about consistently producing 10+ goal seasons. His track record proves he has not consistently scored 10 or more goals. B. He scored 17 goals which is a lot. He had a great season. Again, this doesnt change the fact that he hasnt done it before or since. C. Talking about goals outside of league play to justify your point is misleading and changes the topic of larins ability to score 10 goals in ligue 1. We are only talking 10 goals in ligue 1 and not 10 goals in a calendar year for a french team. I agree that brugge and benfica are better than alot of top 5 teams. If he cant score 10 goals a season on a top team against, weaker opposition, he is unlikely to score more goals against better. Same as larin and every other player (This is on average as there are exceptions to the rule. It also does not include young players who can increase output at a higher level as their development increases exponentially) 

I think using larins 200 minutes and extrapolating from such a small sample size is misleading. If a player comes on as a sub and scores in 10 munutes, you surely would not say that he is a goal a game player or extrapolate any stats based on one goal.  Same goes for Larin, you cannot extrapolate one goal in 200 minutes as his standard as it is just waaaaay to small of a sample size.

Larin can absolutely do something about his spot on the depth chart. This happens in every team in the world - competition. He can prove himself in training that he is head and shoulders above the other options. The problem is that he isnt better than any of the options in front of him at this point. 


 

[VinceA]

 

Which one of you is this mad man

[johnyb]

Mexico and US are in weaker groups than we are. I assumed that's why we were ranked behind them as they have a greater chance to get out of their groups.

[InglewoodJack]

22 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

That is just false. In 2010 france was 5th on the coefficient list before the psg takeover. Of course psg helps but france was top 5 without psgs mega squad. All leagues have a drop off from the top teams to the bottom teams.

I think its an incredibly weak argument to say that someone will eventually get goals if a team needs it and then suggest that it will magically be Larin who fulfills that unsubstantiated claim.

I think we can both agree that more chances will result in more goals when looking at averages. The law of diminishing returns also applies to this. I am not saying that larin scores double the goals with double the chances created. I am saying that when you take:
1. larins output in europe(under 10 goals a season except once)
2. cut his chances by less than half
3.put him in a stronger league
4. have him on a bottom of the table team playing psg, marseille, lyon etc instead of on the best team in the league playing extremely weak opposition
5. look at how poor his current situation is

I gave you examples of irrelevant players who scored 10 goals for bad teams and then either went to other leagues or got sent to the bench on other French teams. Ui-Jo Hwang scored 11 last year, and currently has 0 in 5 for Olympiacos. He even started the season playing for Bordeaux in Ligue 2. He did this without scoring goals against the teams you mention. Larin's situation is no fault of his own- Brugge is stacked, and the guys ahead of him are excellent.

 

35 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

 

The only argument for his output increasing is:
1. He would be on a team that needs goals and therefore he will score the goals the team needs (weak argument).
2. he has scored 19 goals in a season for besiktas. (maybe an ok argument if he did this consistently, it wasnt several seasons ago, his current minutes werent as awful as they currently are) 

I just dont see any evidence to suggest that larin can score 10 goals a season in france. It seems strictly a claim made on bias because hes canadian. 

Maybe we should wait and see if he can even score 10 goals in belguim even.  I think he can, but he needs to prove himself before we automatically assume he can do it at a higher level.

"Several years ago" was the 2020-2021 season which ended 17 months ago. Bringing up Champions League goals just means he can score against good teams.

 

56 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

I think using larins 200 minutes and extrapolating from such a small sample size is misleading. If a player comes on as a sub and scores in 10 munutes, you surely would not say that he is a goal a game player or extrapolate any stats based on one goal.  Same goes for Larin, you cannot extrapolate one goal in 200 minutes as his standard as it is just waaaaay to small of a sample size.

Larin can absolutely do something about his spot on the depth chart. This happens in every team in the world - competition. He can prove himself in training that he is head and shoulders above the other options. The problem is that he isnt better than any of the options in front of him at this point.
 

The whole point about Larin's per 90 numbers with such a small sample size points to the fact that in the minimal time he has, he has capitalized on it. No one thinks he'd average the same 1.1xG per 90 he has currently on a 35 game schedule, but if the argument is he needs to do more to get his spot on the team, that falls flat, because there isn't much more he can do. I don't buy the "he needs to be better in practice", because that's purely speculative, and we have no idea what he is doing in practice. A friend of mine is an athletic therapist who has attended CF Montreal practices- apparently Rida Zouhir is one of the most talented players in practice, but he played like 45 seconds this season. You can find examples of this in every sport. Justin Smith looked awesome in preseason for Quevilly and now plays for their B team.

[Bigandy]

1 hour ago, InglewoodJack said:

I gave you examples of irrelevant players who scored 10 goals for bad teams and then either went to other leagues or got sent to the bench on other French teams. Ui-Jo Hwang scored 11 last year, and currently has 0 in 5 for Olympiacos. He even started the season playing for Bordeaux in Ligue 2. He did this without scoring goals against the teams you mention. Larin's situation is no fault of his own- Brugge is stacked, and the guys ahead of him are excellent.

 

"Several years ago" was the 2020-2021 season which ended 17 months ago. Bringing up Champions League goals just means he can score against good teams.

 

The whole point about Larin's per 90 numbers with such a small sample size points to the fact that in the minimal time he has, he has capitalized on it. No one thinks he'd average the same 1.1xG per 90 he has currently on a 35 game schedule, but if the argument is he needs to do more to get his spot on the team, that falls flat, because there isn't much more he can do. I don't buy the "he needs to be better in practice", because that's purely speculative, and we have no idea what he is doing in practice. A friend of mine is an athletic therapist who has attended CF Montreal practices- apparently Rida Zouhir is one of the most talented players in practice, but he played like 45 seconds this season. You can find examples of this in every sport. Justin Smith looked awesome in preseason for Quevilly and now plays for their B team.

Khazri is not irrelevant. Hes a proven ligue 1 and premier league goal scorer. He also plays in midfield so its not a direct comparison. Hes clearly a level above larin and has struggled his whole career to get to the 10 goals per season mark. This shows how difficult it is to score 10 goals in ligue 1.

Ui- Jo Hwang - has 2 starts in 5 games which is normal for a player who recently transfered to a new club and country and missed preseason. Maybe give him more than 5 games before calling him irrelevant. (same can be applied to Larin, but I dont think giving time to Larin is evidence that he would score 10 goals in ligue 1 when he hasnt proven himself to consistently be at 10+ goals a season prior to his transfer.)

Yaremchuk - We both believe hes quality. Clearly a level above larin. He scores against champions league opponents but even he struggles to have10+ season goals in lesser leagues than ligue 1. 

The point of this is to show that these players are proven at a higher level than larin has played and they struggle to get 10 goals. Larin won't just step up a level and magically score more goals than he ever has (not including a one season wonder). 

Your correct that larins good season was 2 seasons prior. Several seasons makes it sound longer and i shouldve have said a couple seasons, rather than several. However, i don't think the verbage between several, or a couple really diminishes my point of it being a one season wonder so far.  

As for larins sample size, the original argument is that larin would not easily score 10+ goals in ligue 1. One of the pieces of evidence for this is that he hasnt done this in turkey or belguim consistently. If the coaching staff believed he was able to score 10+ goals easily in the belgian league, he would most likely be getting more minutes than he is. They may believe he can score that many, but not "easily". 

Not to be offensive but an athletic therapist doesnt have the same insight as a professional coach. His assesment of zouhir may be different to the coaches. Every coach in the world says players have to show well in training to break into the squad. I can't see why this is any different for Larin. 

My point though, which i think was missed in your last post, is that there are many statistical arguments to dispute that larin would easily score 10+ goals in ligue 1. The only statistical argument that larin may be able to score 10+ goals is that he had 1 really good season at besiktas, which is the statistical exception and not the rule for larins goal scoring record.  

Other than canadian bias and his one season at besiktas, is there any statistical or historical achievements that Larin could easily score 10+ goals in a better league than he has ever played in, on a team that creates fewer chances than he has ever played on? 

If larin has 2-3 seasons in a row where he scores around 15 goals a season in belguim, i think then there is an argument for him to be able to score 10 goals in ligue 1. But until he actually proves his goal scoring, i think its just bias to say hes easily a 10+ goals a season in ligue 1.

[InglewoodJack]

2 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Khazri is not irrelevant. Hes a proven ligue 1 and premier league goal scorer. He also plays in midfield so its not a direct comparison. Hes clearly a level above larin and has struggled his whole career to get to the 10 goals per season mark. This shows how difficult it is to score 10 goals in ligue 1.

Ui- Jo Hwang - has 2 starts in 5 games which is normal for a player who recently transfered to a new club and country and missed preseason. Maybe give him more than 5 games before calling him irrelevant. (same can be applied to Larin, but I dont think giving time to Larin is evidence that he would score 10 goals in ligue 1 when he hasnt proven himself to consistently be at 10+ goals a season prior to his transfer.)

Yaremchuk - We both believe hes quality. Clearly a level above larin. He scores against champions league opponents but even he struggles to have10+ season goals in lesser leagues than ligue 1. 

The point of this is to show that these players are proven at a higher level than larin has played and they struggle to get 10 goals. Larin won't just step up a level and magically score more goals than he ever has (not including a one season wonder). 

Your correct that larins good season was 2 seasons prior. Several seasons makes it sound longer and i shouldve have said a couple seasons, rather than several. However, i don't think the verbage between several, or a couple really diminishes my point of it being a one season wonder so far.  

As for larins sample size, the original argument is that larin would not easily score 10+ goals in ligue 1. One of the pieces of evidence for this is that he hasnt done this in turkey or belguim consistently. If the coaching staff believed he was able to score 10+ goals easily in the belgian league, he would most likely be getting more minutes than he is. They may believe he can score that many, but not "easily". 

Not to be offensive but an athletic therapist doesnt have the same insight as a professional coach. His assesment of zouhir may be different to the coaches. Every coach in the world says players have to show well in training to break into the squad. I can't see why this is any different for Larin. 

My point though, which i think was missed in your last post, is that there are many statistical arguments to dispute that larin would easily score 10+ goals in ligue 1. The only statistical argument that larin may be able to score 10+ goals is that he had 1 really good season at besiktas, which is the statistical exception and not the rule for larins goal scoring record.  

Other than canadian bias and his one season at besiktas, is there any statistical or historical achievements that Larin could easily score 10+ goals in a better league than he has ever played in, on a team that creates fewer chances than he has ever played on? 

If larin has 2-3 seasons in a row where he scores around 15 goals a season in belguim, i think then there is an argument for him to be able to score 10 goals in ligue 1. But until he actually proves his goal scoring, i think its just bias to say hes easily a 10+ goals a season in ligue 1.

I don't think we're going to agree on this one, so we can leave it here. By irrelevant players I meant that you don't need to be an elite star to score 10 goals in France. Guys have done it once and then never again. Guys have scored 10 goals and never played in France after that. Point there is that Larin scoring 10 in France doesn't mean he's this elite goal scorer whose name belongs next to Neymar and Mbappe and Jonathan David, it just means that a player who can get hot on a team that feeds him the ball so much because no one else can score can reach 10 goals. Larin could score 10 goals for Ajaccio and then get banished to the Whitecaps the next season.

 

Every coach says players have to work hard in the media because it's a feel good story that makes fans think sports is a meritocracy. I'm not saying my friend is an expert eye for talent, I'm just saying that players showing out on the practice pitch don't necessarily get the corresponding minutes because there are other considerations like the players above them, or players they spent money on, etc.

"Other than canadian bias and his one season at besiktas, is there any statistical or historical achievements that Larin could easily score 10+ goals in a better league than he has ever played in, on a team that creates fewer chances than he has ever played on? " yeah man, mediocre players do this every season. Larin is a guy who gets hot and scores a bunch of goals, then gets cold. This is less of a bias towards Larin and more of an indictment of the type of players who have historically been able to score those numbers in France.

[Kadenge]

[Sal333]

5 hours ago, narduch said:

I'm predicting USA to finish last in their group

You're really sticking your neck out and making the obvious prediction.

[Sal333]

4 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

Although that wasn't the rationale the panel gave for their picks (although Kilbane said that he ranked Canada above Mexico). De Guzman was worried about Canada's lack of experience outside Concacaf, Caldwell said the US has more quality and talent in the roster.

Other bits (from the parts on TSN's website) that were amusing if not interesting - Kilbane also said that Argentina were crap (not the words he used, but he ranked them something like 9th and said any of the top 12 teams could beat them). Wileman chided Kilbane that he was alone with that pick and that England would have been ranked even higher had Kilbane not ranked them 32nd (which was a joke).

Kilbane is Irish and there's no love lost on the part of the Irish when it comes to England.

[Sal333]

4 hours ago, PegCityCam said:

As an aside it's nice to see these guys loosen up a bit and let their personalities shine through. They tend to be pretty bland and stiff imo. Even caught myself chuckling. Credit to Luke for stirring the pot and taking the piss.

He did that on national TV? 😉