are they finally letting the young bucks play? or are they sticking with 35 year old cac's who don't do shit on offense or defense balding looking like a fucking dentist out there on the pitch having them lead the charge?
As Klinsman will be the first to say, "their" young ones are better than the US
young ones, etc...The US has a lot of money, and is well organised, but in the
rest of the world, football is the only sport they play, and so the US will have to
make a greater committment to the game before it can become a power. Think
US-Belgium when the tire hits the road. The disparity between the US and other
teams becomes as it was in that game...
The US will stall its development in the sport if it does not get rid of the anti
competitive nature of its league. In the rest of the world, football is layered. You
have the highest division, the second highest, the third highest etc.... all of them
belonging to one football association. The worst 2 or 3 in each division always
get demoted to the lower division, and the best promoted. As such, the necessity of
avoiding demotion, and of attaining promotion, spurs the highest level of competition.
Also, in world football, every team plays every other team once at home, and once
away, so that at the end of the year, the teams can be ranked to determine who
won league based purely on the regular season record. The regular season
championship is big deal and this ensures that every game is tightly contested affair..
This is why football in other countries will remain superior to that of the US