Match Thread: CONCACAF U-20 - Group Stage - Canada v USA - June 20, 2022 - 8:30pm ET/5:30pm PT

[Dominic94]

I think one thing we have to remember is a lot of those US guys have multiple pro seasons, a lot of ours are rookie pros our academy players, the US team Has camps as of like age 12, we don’t. I don’t think the overall talent gap is an issue, don’t get me wrong man for man they are better across the pool, but we have the talent to beat them 3-4 on 10. the coaching really is the problem. Also, Lowell Wright’s goal was top class, he will move up soon. People will take note of him bullying players like that.

[narduch]

Wright's goal reminds me of peak Altidore 

[costarg]

10 hours ago, Jack1997 said:

 these guys are supposed to be anaylists who know things not just cocky Americans 

"You can take the girl out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the girl".  They're still butt-hurt from WCQ, and just looking for ways to trash us.

[DeRo_Is_King]

While perhaps expected as an older player on this Canadian team, Franklin really stood out for me last night. I can see why others on here rate him highly.

His bursts of speed and willingness to run at defenders positions him well as a prospective wing option for the senior team.

Fortunately or unfortunately, between Buchanan, Millar, Corbeanu and Davies, there really isn't much more room for wing talent atm - nor will there be in the future. He will have to work extremely hard to make it. 

For the rest, apart from Wright, I really don't see anything super promising about this crop. It was a good result, but as others have said, we were extremely lucky to escape with a draw. 

Well, Alexander was decent. The strikes from McGlynn and Cowell were really special. Nothing he could do about those. 

 

[youllneverwalkalone]

Idk, they seem to have 5-6 JMRs. Kids playing in MLS who are hyped but who don't do much. We are missing a couple of these kids and have fewer because we have fewer MLS clubs. We were certainly second best on the pitch, but I don't think the differences on paper are that great. These kids are still way too young to judge. The CPL is on the rise.

[dyslexic nam]

6 minutes ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

Idk, they seem to have 5-6 JMRs. Kids playing in MLS who are hyped but who don't do much. We are missing a couple of these kids and have fewer because we have fewer MLS clubs. We were certainly second best on the pitch, but I don't think the differences on paper are that great. These kids are still way too young to judge. The CPL is on the rise.

That wasn’t the game I was watching.  I saw Aaronson, Clarke and Cowell have strong games and show why they are (or have been) consistent players in MLS despite their age.   

Edited June 21, 2022 by dyslexic nam

[narduch]

7 minutes ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

Idk, they seem to have 5-6 JMRs. Kids playing in MLS who are hyped but who don't do much. We are missing a couple of these kids and have fewer because we have fewer MLS clubs. We were certainly second best on the pitch, but I don't think the differences on paper are that great. These kids are still way too young to judge. The CPL is on the rise.

Imagine how good the Americans would be if most of their MLS teams played more than 2 Americans each match.

Edited June 21, 2022 by narduch

[Gian-Luca]

1 hour ago, dyslexic nam said:

Come on man.  They had like 70% possession, outchanced us by a landslide, and were by far the better team last night.  We got lucky with a strange own goal while they hit the crossbar and just missed like 2 or 3 other goals.  Anyone who was pessimistic going into that game had good reason to be, and the run of play reinforced that.  We should be able to beat SKN and advance but we need to massively improve to compete in this tournament.  
 

EDIT:  I will admit that we did play much better last night than against Cuba.  And hopefully we can continue to build on that with a win over SKN that gets our confidence up.  Teams that don’t have a ton of time together pre-tournament can grow throughout their tourney play just as a function of the increased time together (we do it in international hockey tournaments all the time - start slow and build).  Hopefully that will happen here - because it has to if we have any hope of achieving a result overall.  

Being pessimistic is one thing. Confidently predicting that Canada was going to get pummeled (and by extension, that we have no hope of obtaining result) is being cynical more than it is being pessimistic. Under the circumstances it was always likely that Canada was going to bunker & play counter-attack football in the exact opposite way that we didn't play against Cuba, so the notion that we would get pummeled by 5 goals despite playing a style designed to prevent goals seemed unduly negative and came across as supporters (the very people who should be staying on the bandwagon at all times) jumping off the bandwagon after one match.

No-one is suggesting that we were the better team and for what possession stats are worth (which aren't that much when a team is trailing for large chunks of the game, just like we had a ton of possession against Cuba), that's not the really issue for me.

[dyslexic nam]

1 minute ago, Gian-Luca said:

Being pessimistic is one thing. Confidently predicting that Canada was going to get pummeled (and by extension, that we have no hope of obtaining result) is being cynical more than it is being pessimistic. Under the circumstances it was always likely that Canada was going to bunker & play counter-attack football in the exact opposite way that we didn't play against Cuba, so the notion that we would get pummeled by 5 goals despite playing a style designed to prevent goals seemed unduly negative and came across as supporters (the very people who should be staying on the bandwagon at all times) jumping off the bandwagon after one match.

No-one is suggesting that we were the better team and for what possession stats are worth (which aren't that much when a team is trailing for large chunks of the game, just like we had a ton of possession against Cuba), that's not the really issue for me.

I just don’t think it is part of being a supporter to necessarily expect a positive outcome every time.  I have been around a long time so there is no getting off the bandwagon for me.  I just don’t think I necessarily have to pretend I am expecting a more positive result than I think will actually happen. Last night’s game could have very easily been 5-1 (based on the run of play) and those negative predictors would have been right. 

[SpursFlu]

I didn't see the first game but thought yesterday wasn't terrible. I kinda put it down more to the US being pretty damn good. I thought our guys kept their cool and stayed switched on. I did think at time they could have been a little more direct. A few times they went backwards when they didn't need to and just created problems for themselves 

[Obinna]

I gave a 3-1 or 2-0 defeat prediction, but to be honest I never thought predictions of getting pumped by 4 or 5 goals was unreasonable. I wouldn't have been surprised in the least, but there are reasons I never predicted that. 

Firstly, we clearly had more talent than Cuba, and Cuba overachieve at the youth level, so I wasn't too distraught at the loss. Disappointed, yes (it's Cuba), but the sky wasn't falling. 

Secondly, blow out wins to the tune of 10-0 are hard to gauge. I have been on both sides of that. The team getting pumped stops trying at some point, so you can't necessarily take much from the score. The only thing you can say for sure is that one team is far better than the other, which we already knew of course.

Third, when you lose a tight game you should win, or at least draw, you have a lot to prove in the next match. The USA in comparison could not draw the same type motivation, considering their first match. I won't go as far as saying they gave themselves a false sense of security, because I cannot claim to know that, but I can reasonably say Canada were likely the team feeling they had something to prove in this one. 

So considering the all of that, and considering the gap in quality, a hard fought loss by 2 goals felt right to me.

I just finished watching the replay and obviously I am pleased with the result. Seemed like the missing luck from Cuba arrived against the States.

That's football, I guess. 

[Gian-Luca]

5 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

I just don’t think it is part of being a supporter to necessarily expect a positive outcome every time.  I have been around a long time so there is no getting off the bandwagon for me.  I just don’t think I necessarily have to pretend I am expecting a more positive result than I think will actually happen. Last night’s game could have very easily been 5-1 (based on the run of play) and those negative predictors would have been right. 

I mean, I don't want to belabor the point too much, but again, I'm wasn't referring to people who were predicting that we were going to lose the match. That wouldn't exactly be going out on a limb in terms of predictions given that the US were the clear favourites for a whole bevy of reasons. But predicting a loss and predicting a humiliation are two different things. I am referring to situations of the latter which seemed too cynical to me, especially as I can't recall the last time one of our teams lost by 4 or 5 goals to the US (actually, I can, I think it was in January 2003 at a match in Ft. Lauderdale that I attended where we sent a de facto B team (not helped by De Ro injuring his ankle a day or two before the match, so Sita Taty Matondo played instead) and got smacked 4-0). But we usually play the US tough even in all those years we didn't win (I think the same year our U20 team beat them 3-2 with two goals by Iain Hume) just like Cuba is always a pain in the ass to us.

I should also add that I wasn't picking on anyone in particular with my comment - I honestly couldn't recall who was predicting an absolute pasting or shellacking because I saw tons of these confident predictions, not just on his forum but Facebook, Twitter and so forth. The level of cynicism to my eyes seemed abnormally high - the fact that Kamal Miller has even had to (politely) shut some of it down on Twitter is quite telling IMO - but I wouldn't sweat it, if you simply were that pessimistic about our team rather than cynical then that is fair enough. You aren't known as a cynical poster in general. The tons of others "we're going to get utterly humiliated" posts, I probably won't give the benefit of the doubt without further information/posting history.

[dyslexic nam]

4 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said:

I mean, I don't want to belabor the point too much, but again, I'm wasn't referring to people who were predicting that we were going to lose the match. That wouldn't exactly be going out on a limb in terms of predictions given that the US were the clear favourites for a whole bevy of reasons. But predicting a loss and predicting a humiliation are two different things. I am referring to situations of the latter which seemed too cynical to me, especially as I can't recall the last time one of our teams lost by 4 or 5 goals to the US (actually, I can, I think it was in January 2003 at a match in Ft. Lauderdale that I attended where we sent a de facto B team (not helped by De Ro injuring his ankle a day or two before the match, so Sita Taty Matondo played instead) and got smacked 4-0). But we usually play the US tough even in all those years we didn't win (I think the same year our U20 team beat them 3-2 with two goals by Iain Hume) just like Cuba is always a pain in the ass to us.

I should also add that I wasn't picking on anyone in particular with my comment - I honestly couldn't recall who was predicting an absolute pasting or shellacking because I saw tons of these confident predictions, not just on his forum but Facebook, Twitter and so forth. The level of cynicism to my eyes seemed abnormally high - the fact that Kamal Miller has even had to (politely) shut some of it down on Twitter is quite telling IMO - but I wouldn't sweat it, if you simply were that pessimistic about our team rather than cynical then that is fair enough. You aren't known as a cynical poster in general. The tons of others "we're going to get utterly humiliated" posts, I probably won't give the benefit of the doubt without further information/posting history.

Cheers man. TBH, I have just been frustrated watching these games.  I had higher hopes that with the development and talent we are starting to see, we might see the youth teams start to mirror a bit of the success of the senior team.  Watching the infinitely frustrating loss to Cuba sort of tipped me off into negativity.   

I am absolutely hoping that we can beat SKN comfortably and get some much needed confidence.  
 

[Obinna]

6 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

Cheers man. TBH, I have just been frustrated watching these games.  I had higher hopes that with the development and talent we are starting to see, we might see the youth teams start to mirror a bit of the success of the senior team.  Watching the infinitely frustrating loss to Cuba sort of tipped me off into negativity.   

I am absolutely hoping that we can beat SKN comfortably and get some much needed confidence.  
 

I think it's a bit of a reality check, at least for myself. It's the same old story because we haven't done anything different. There wasn't a lot of prep and we don't have a Jonathan David or Alphonso Davies to make up the difference. There is no Herdman working with the kids behind the scenes (as far as I know) to get the most out of these guys mentally. It's just a group of our best available thrown together into the fire.

At least our players are further along in their development than previous U-20 cycles, where nobody was playing first team football. Now thanks to the CPL we have several, plus we have others who are just breaking into MLS. 

The U-20 guys have reached the stage in their development where our U-23 guys were during the 2012 U-23 cycle, the one that had Henry, Cavallini, etc. Those guys back then were just breaking into pro environments in their early 20s (anyone remember Evan James?).

Now our guys are doing the same in their late teens. That's definitely progress. Too bad the USA and others are progressing too. We haven't closed the gap, because both countries are improving at basically the same rate. 

[kacbru]

8 hours ago, DeRo_Is_King said:

While perhaps expected as an older player on this Canadian team, Franklin really stood out for me last night. I can see why others on here rate him highly.

His bursts of speed and willingness to run at defenders positions him well as a prospective wing option for the senior team.

Fortunately or unfortunately, between Buchanan, Millar, Corbeanu and Davies, there really isn't much more room for wing talent atm - nor will there be in the future. He will have to work extremely hard to make it. 

For the rest, apart from Wright, I really don't see anything super promising about this crop. It was a good result, but as others have said, we were extremely lucky to escape with a draw. 

Well, Alexander was decent. The strikes from McGlynn and Cowell were really special. Nothing he could do about those. 

 

I agree there is potential and skill with Franklin, but I thought he looked too timid and cautious. There were a many times where he made poor decisions with the ball that put teammates in terrible positions or poor decisions without the ball where he just took off down the field when what was needed was to make himself available for a pass.  I wasn't impressed.  But that could all be related to an unfamiliarity that comes in what is essentially an all-star game, rather than a U20 program.

[Shway]

1 hour ago, kacbru said:

…..But that could all be related to an unfamiliarity that comes in what is essentially an all-star game, rather than a U20 program.

This is the best description! It’s the epitome of the situation.

[One American]

The disappointing thing about the Canadian team is how many of the hyped Euro-based players don't seem to be very good. Smith aside, of course. 

[Floortom]

3 hours ago, One American said:

The disappointing thing about the Canadian team is how many of the hyped Euro-based players don't seem to be very good. Smith aside, of course. 

Are any of them really hyped? Costa maybe but he just turned 17 so hard to make much of a judgement of his at this point.

[hodgkiss]

Was thinking the same thing - I don't think any players have been hyped outside of Smith and even his "hype" has been relatively tame. Maybe it's Americans putting the hype on Canadian players because we are the best team in Concacaf .

Edited June 22, 2022 by hodgkiss

[Gian-Luca]

The only Euro-based players that I think that had anything close to hype about them would be Smith, Goodman and Koleosho. One of them has lived up to the hype and the other two aren't there.

The other players at this level I saw receiving hype are JMR, Zouhir, Bunbury and Thompson, 75% of which aren't there.

If there was hype or discussion about anyone else, the hype train didn't do a good enough job of reaching enough people as I really don't recall hearing or seeing any hype about them. I do recall a couple of people talking about Costa on this board after the Costa Rica friendlies in which I believe he scored or posted his own instagram stories about, but I"m not sure that qualifies as hype. 

[blueseeka]

I do think even Zouhir had a much better 2nd game. It is way too early ro write some of these guys out

[Kadenge]

Jordan Hamilton outplayed Cyle Larin at the 2015  U20s WCQ for example. Still think Hamilton could have had a better senior career in the right circumstances. 

[narduch]

7 minutes ago, Kadenge said:

Jordan Hamilton outplayed Cyle Larin at the 2015  U20s WCQ for example. Still think Hamilton could have had a better senior career in the right circumstances. 

It was all downhill after that loan to Portugal basically 

[toontownman]

7 minutes ago, narduch said:

It was all downhill after that loan to Portugal basically 

He stayed in Toronto far too long.