2026 World Cup - USA team thread

[Grant Green]

That wasn’t my impression of Lalas’s take at all; it seemed to be this is a money making enterprise for people so let them earn as much as they can. He didn’t reference talent building or development at all.

They are discussing it in the context of making America better at soccer. This tweet seems to support that.

 

[Midnighter]

They are discussing it in the context of making America better at soccer. This tweet seems to support that.

So, equating highest paid with best? That true? Results don’t seem to back that up.

 

[Grant Green]

So, equating highest paid with best? That true? Results don’t seem to back that up.

Isn't that generally true? For examples, don't football teams pay more for the best coaches?
The point he is making is that you have to pay for coaching if you want better development. Otherwise, you have a bunch of dads coaching like we did in the 80s. As someone who grew up being coached by said dads and saw my kids coached by paid professionals, I can't argue with this. Unfortunately the catch is that this system weeds out kids who can't afford it, which is the point made by the other guy. I wish I knew the solution, but it's not underpaying coaches.

 

[KingLando]

Not really much of a story. Lalas believes that more trained/paid coaches will result in better talent. Jack thinks that forcing families to foot the bill weeds out kids that can't afford it. Both are probably correct. I think the big difference between the US and countries like England is that parents pay for the training in the US and clubs pay for scouting and training in England. English soccer clubs have way more money to throw around than US clubs.

How is anyone being weeded out? This isn't costing millions. Sacrifice for your kids and find a way if they're talented. That's a parent's obligation.

 

[PSUForever]

The fundamental youth soccer model in the U.S. is broken or at best sub optimal. These club teams are expensive and not providing the needed training for whatever reason (coaching?, training?).

When I toured the Real Madrid stadium last month they talked about a youth development program. They had kids as young as four or five that are identified as high potential and then they are part of a program at no cost to them. When they reach 12 or so it ramps up in competitiveness and intensity and they spend more and more time in training and development. I think these youth programs across Europe and in England are much more intense and just at a much better quality than any kind of club program in the U.S.

The confounding thing is our denominator is so big and so much bigger than these European countries. There about 110 million households in the U.S. all having kids or most having kids. I did a quick Google search and in 2024 there were about 55 million kids aged 5-17. Say half are boys and you are at 27.5 million boys. That has to be significantly higher than any of these countries now in the final 8 like Spain, France, England, Belgium. Yes, many of the top athletes will go to football or basketball. But there still should be a good pool of players. Look at all the athletes playing lacrosse. Lacrosse is not helping the American soccer cause.

As far as us making progress with placing players in the top 5 European leagues. Yep, that is a good thing obviously but my question is how good these guys are relative to the whole population of players in these 5 elite leagues? Are they all starters? I highly doubt it. My guess is many of the guys are bench/depth guys. I could be wrong. It is like if the NFL had a lot of guys from say France and most were backups. Then if there was a World Cup of football (not futbol) you would expect the U.S. to dominate France.

 

[Grant Green]

How is anyone being weeded out? This isn't costing millions. Sacrifice for your kids and find a way if they're talented. That's a parent's obligation.

Youth soccer cost is probably about $3k to $5k per year from the age of 6 years old or so. There are a lot of families that can't afford that, including many Latino immigrants.

 

[BobPSU92]

So, equating highest paid with best? That true? Results don’t seem to back that up.

Wasn‘t our Sandy the highest-paid AD in “college” athletics () ?

 

[KingLando]

The fundamental youth soccer model in the U.S. is broken or at best sub optimal. These club teams are expensive and not providing the needed training for whatever reason (coaching?, training?).

When I toured the Real Madrid stadium last month they talked about a youth development program. They had kids as young as four or five that are identified as high potential and then they are part of a program at no cost to them. When they reach 12 or so it ramps up in competitiveness and intensity and they spend more and more time in training and development. I think these youth programs across Europe and in England are much more intense and just at a much better quality than any kind of club program in the U.S.

The confounding thing is our denominator is so big and so much bigger than these European countries. There about 110 million households in the U.S. all having kids or most having kids. I did a quick Google search and in 2024 there were about 55 million kids aged 5-17. Say half are boys and you are at 27.5 million boys. That has to be significantly higher than any of these countries now in the final 8 like Spain, France, England, Belgium. Yes, many of the top athletes will go to football or basketball. But there still should be a good pool of players. Look at all the athletes playing lacrosse. Lacrosse is not helping the American soccer cause.

As far as us making progress with placing players in the top 5 European leagues. Yep, that is a good thing obviously but my question is how good these guys are relative to the whole population of players in these 5 elite leagues? Are they all starters? I highly doubt it. My guess is many of the guys are bench/depth guys. I could be wrong. It is like if the NFL had a lot of guys from say France and most were backups. Then if there was a World Cup of football (not futbol) you would expect the U.S. to dominate France.

Honestly...if your kid is that good move to Europe. Soccer is never going to be on that level in the US.

 

[KingLando]

Youth soccer cost is probably about $3k to $5k per year from the age of 6 years old or so. There are a lot of families that can't afford that, including many Latino immigrants.

That's like $300 a month (the middle)...$75 a week...find a way.

 

[Erial_Lion]

As far as us making progress with placing players in the top 5 European leagues. Yep, that is a good thing obviously but my question is how good these guys are relative to the whole population of players in these 5 elite leagues? Are they all starters? I highly doubt it. My guess is many of the guys are bench/depth guys. I could be wrong. It is like if the NFL had a lot of guys from say France and most were backups. Then if there was a World Cup of football (not futbol) you would expect the U.S. to dominate France.

Almost all are starters.

 

[Grant Green]

That's like $300 a month (the middle)...$75 a week...find a way.

$300 a month is a lot for some families that may have multiple kids. I'm just trying to tell you how it is. You can go take it up with them.

 

[Erial_Lion]

$300 a month is a lot for some families that may have multiple kids. I'm just trying to tell you how it is. You can go take it up with them.

$300/month is a lot for a LOT of families. That’s not some nominal amount. It’s a barrier to many, but there isn’t an easy solution.

 

[PSUForever]

Isn't that generally true? For examples, don't football teams pay more for the best coaches?
The point he is making is that you have to pay for coaching if you want better development. Otherwise, you have a bunch of dads coaching like we did in the 80s. As someone who grew up being coached by said dads and saw my kids coached by paid professionals, I can't argue with this. Unfortunately the catch is that this system weeds out kids who can't afford it, which is the point made by the other guy. I wish I knew the solution, but it's not underpaying coaches.

You also have to look at coaching quality. I watched that game on Monday and so many sloppy touches, imprecise passing, and a complete inability to handle the ball in tight spacing. Our ball handling and touch with the ball is clearly well below the elite standard level set by the European teams and South American teams. Not to mention a lack of aggressiveness and what seemed a lower "soccer IQ" than Belgium.

We have a pool of 30 million boys to draw from and this is what we get? Very frustrating especcially when I see some Belgium dude who looks like he weighs a buck 50 and never has lifted a weight in his life totally dominate us and score two goals. Really really frustrating.

 

[Erial_Lion]

You also have to look at coaching quality. I watched that game on Monday and so many sloppy touches, imprecise passing, and a complete inability to handle the ball in tight spacing. Our ball handling and touch with the ball is clearly well below the elite standard level set by the European teams and South American teams. Not to mention a lack of aggressiveness and what seemed a lower "soccer IQ" than Belgium.

We have a pool of 30 million boys to draw from and this is what we get? Very frustrating especcially when I see some Belgium dude who looks like he weighs a buck 50 and never has lifted a weight in his life totally dominate us and score two goals. Really really frustrating.

It’s a small sample size to take all this from one game. We dominated a South American team a few weeks ago. We played poorly on Monday night (and Belgium played really well).

 

[Grant Green]

It’s a small sample size to take all this from one game.

And hence why betting against the public is almost never a bad idea.

 

[DaytonRickster]

How is anyone being weeded out? This isn't costing millions. Sacrifice for your kids and find a way if they're talented. That's a parent's obligation.

Maybe you're not familiar with the costs? Extremely expensive. It prices lots of kids out.

 

[Erial_Lion]

And hence why betting against the public is almost never a bad idea.

Exactly. I mentioned here (or maybe it was elsewhere) the other night that if we played Belgium 10 more times in the Seattle, we'd likely win 4-5 of them. People thought I was crazy and said 1-2 tops.

Do people not watch Champions League games were a team blows someone out, then comes back two weeks later and gets dominated? Why do so many take more from 90 minutes than from weeks/months/years of results?

 

[DaytonRickster]

Youth soccer cost is probably about $3k to $5k per year from the age of 6 years old or so. There are a lot of families that can't afford that, including many Latino immigrants.

Even more expensive when you add in actual travel, lodging. and meals for the player, parent(s) and sibling(s).

 

[KingLando]

$300 a month is a lot for some families that may have multiple kids. I'm just trying to tell you how it is. You can go take it up with them.

I didn't say it wasn't a lot--I said you find a way. I don't need to take it up with anyway. Life is full of choices but complaining about cost for high level training is absurd.

 

[KingLando]

$300/month is a lot for a LOT of families. That’s not some nominal amount. It’s a barrier to many, but there isn’t an easy solution.

That's what it costs--you either find a way or you don't. It's truly that simple. If you want elite training you pay for it. If you can't then you can't and do the best you can. I can't even imagine how much money was spent on me growing up to play hockey. I spent way more than 300 a month for my kids growing up for their training. That's what parents do. I don't understand why people think everything should be free. You pay for what you get.

 

[KingLando]

Maybe you're not familiar with the costs? Extremely expensive. It prices lots of kids out.

$75-100 a week isn't pricing anyone out. It's harder for some than others but that's life. If you want your kid to get elite training you find a way--how many stories of elite athletes have you heard with parents working multiple jobs to help get them where they are. There's a way if you're willing. Always.

 

[KingLando]

Worst case--if your kid is actually good enough to warrant that type of training (hint most aren't) start a GoFundMe

 

[DaytonRickster]

It’s a small sample size to take all this from one game. We dominated a South American team a few weeks ago. We played poorly on Monday night (and Belgium played really well).

U.S. played tentative, unsure of themselves from the very beginning against what they knew was a step up in competition. The U.S. does lack enough players with the ability to play well in tight spaces.

 

[Midnighter]

It’s a small sample size to take all this from one game. We dominated a South American team a few weeks ago. We played poorly on Monday night (and Belgium played really well).

Feel like there is an entire history of average play to take it from given the size and resources of this country; not just one game (though it’s a microcosm of American soccer to be honest).

 

[CyphaPSU]

Regarding the conversation about improving the youth soccer situation and finding a better solution for catchment, I thought this was a fairly good take to consider. I've been on the fence about pro/rel in the US because, while I see the potential benefits, I am skeptical that a large structural concept which falls outside of the American sports schema will find it easy to implement—especially in a nation this size. MLS owners would have little incentive to change to a pyramid system. However, I think he is correct about how a multi-tier system would likely draw in more smaller investors and lead to additional academies over time.

One thing I would add to this conversation, though, is that youth clubs at any level who had a hand in developing a player need to receive a cut of the compensation from a transfer fee when that player earns a transfer at the professional level (e.g., your local town's youth soccer club is paid a small percentage of the transfer fee by an MLS team who just sold him to a club in Europe). This is known as the Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism—MLS teams in recent years indeed have started to follow this rule, especially since 2019. However, there are still some cases in which some local soccer clubs who should qualify for compensation have been denied (usually on procedural grounds). If it can be systemically guaranteed that any and all youth clubs which help train a player in his career are compensated by future transfer fees, then additional money might be available to help fund other kids to play for such clubs.

 

[PSUForever]

It’s a small sample size to take all this from one game. We dominated a South American team a few weeks ago. We played poorly on Monday night (and Belgium played really well).

We're not there and not close to these elite teams. Belgium beats us even if we play better. And Belgium is not one of the top 5. USMNT is PSU losing to OSU every year like clockwork. We lose to the best teams or even the 2nd tier teams (teams ranked 6-15 globally). Every once in a while we pull off a PSU vs OSU 2016 game but all too often we are schooled by the elite teams and look like we don't belong on the same pitch.

To your other point that we have starters in the European leagues on the USMNT. Then it is coaching or confidence or they may start but none of them are elite players in those leagues as in top 10-20% of players. We don't have a guy like a Haaland or Mbappe or Kane or Bellingham and certainly not Messi. These elite teams have a couple if not 3 or 4 elite guys.

Where would a Pulisic or our other top guys rank on the elite teams like France or Spain or Germany?

And I will say it again, collectively our ball skills are below the ball skills of these elite teams.

 

[PSUForever]

Exactly. I mentioned here (or maybe it was elsewhere) the other night that if we played Belgium 10 more times in the Seattle, we'd likely win 4-5 of them. People thought I was crazy and said 1-2 tops.

Do people not watch Champions League games were a team blows someone out, then comes back two weeks later and gets dominated? Why do so many take more from 90 minutes than from weeks/months/years of results?

No rd of 16 win since 2002. Need to deliver results at some point and not rely on potential. Belgium was much better. We made mistakes but hey that is the game. Don't forget 90% of the crowd was cheering for us and they still school us. What will be the excuse in 2030 when we get our a$$ kicked again in the round of 16 or maybe it is rd of 32?

 

[Grant Green]

Exactly. I mentioned here (or maybe it was elsewhere) the other night that if we played Belgium 10 more times in the Seattle, we'd likely win 4-5 of them. People thought I was crazy and said 1-2 tops.

Do people not watch Champions League games were a team blows someone out, then comes back two weeks later and gets dominated? Why do so many take more from 90 minutes than from weeks/months/years of results?

Yeah, I saw that and had a laugh. It's frustrating until you remember that is the mentality that results in a lot of dead money in the betting market.

 

[Grant Green]

Even more expensive when you add in actual travel, lodging. and meals for the player, parent(s) and sibling(s).

My wife said the same thing. Out of town tournaments = hundreds of dollars in fuel and hotels. Living in the west, kids have to fly to a lot of tournaments, even league games if you play in something like ECNL. I never want to know the total amount of money we spent on youth sports for two kids. (But a good chunk was worth it).

 

[kgilbert78]

One of the differences is in Europe (and SA) is the club system. They are actual clubs--with their own fields, clubhouse, restaurant, etc. This like a country club, but not as fancy. Many teams at all levels of competition. This was true of bigger teams in Europe as well, though in the past 30 years, most of the top level teams have been split off from the main organization to protect the finances (when a pro team went bankrupt, that took the entire club with them). An example: Bayer Leverkusen was once the factory club for Bayer Chemicals. There are hundreds and thousands of these clubs, so there is plenty of competition at the local level. We have some of this in the US--in my hometown of Warminster, PA, there's VE (Vereiningung Erzegeberge) which has been doing this for I think a century or more--and have made the first round proper of the US Open Cup a couple of times. United German Hungarians are another in the Philly area. The social activities of the clubs also support the sporting side. These clubs in Europe also sponsor a whole lot of other sports, some of which are surprising. Bayern used to have a chess team, and former Bundesliga team Unterhaching had a bobsled division. Some of these clubs have done well at other sports. Bayern and Real Madrid have top basketball teams, and Bayer Leverkusen was quite famous for its Olympic track and field athletes well before they ever had a Bundesliga team. Being local, there's not as much travel needed.

We do need our MLS sides to continue to develop an academy system, but that's only 30 or so around the country. There are gaps.

 

[LaJollaCreek]

Exactly. I mentioned here (or maybe it was elsewhere) the other night that if we played Belgium 10 more times in the Seattle, we'd likely win 4-5 of them. People thought I was crazy and said 1-2 tops.

Do people not watch Champions League games were a team blows someone out, then comes back two weeks later and gets dominated? Why do so many take more from 90 minutes than from weeks/months/years of results?

I've watched the Champions League for decades and while yes once in a while a mediocre team at home may pull off a big W, the vast majority of the time the better team wins out in the end. Of course you get upsets now and then...but they are called upsets for a reason. Belgium from an overall talent perspective was and is a full step above the US at every single level of the pitch. 3 times maybe out of 10 if the US got lucky with 2 of them, but the US has lost the last 3 to them and 2 of them haven't been close. The US is 1-7 all time and the one win came in 1930.

There is a pretty sizeable talent gap in goal(their backup keeper would be our #1 for the next decade), in the midfield, and quite frankly all over the field including the bench. Better touch, better discipline, and a coach that basically said we aren't going to give you a cheap goal with your press....you need to earn it and the US looked like clowns out there. I get we get sucked in when they do have a decent run of games, but the fact is Belgium's bench would have beaten our starting 11 IMO on that night. They were sharper, hungrier, and played with much better skill. The US still has way too many holes for a team with Belgium's current quality.

 

[CyphaPSU]

One of the differences is in Europe (and SA) is the club system. They are actual clubs--with their own fields, clubhouse, restaurant, etc. This like a country club, but not as fancy. Many teams at all levels of competition. This was true of bigger teams in Europe as well, though in the past 30 years, most of the top level teams have been split off from the main organization to protect the finances (when a pro team went bankrupt, that took the entire club with them). An example: Bayer Leverkusen was once the factory club for Bayer Chemicals. There are hundreds and thousands of these clubs, so there is plenty of competition at the local level. We have some of this in the US--in my hometown of Warminster, PA, there's VE (Vereiningung Erzegeberge) which has been doing this for I think a century or more--and have made the first round proper of the US Open Cup a couple of times. United German Hungarians are another in the Philly area. The social activities of the clubs also support the sporting side. These clubs in Europe also sponsor a whole lot of other sports, some of which are surprising. Bayern used to have a chess team, and former Bundesliga team Unterhaching had a bobsled division. Some of these clubs have done well at other sports. Bayern and Real Madrid have top basketball teams, and Bayer Leverkusen was quite famous for its Olympic track and field athletes well before they ever had a Bundesliga team. Being local, there's not as much travel needed.

As a kid, I remember attending a match under the lights at the United German Hungarian club in Lower Bucks (I think it was an important youth game, if I recall correctly). You're right, continental Europe definitely has a different concept of "club" than we do.

We do need our MLS sides to continue to develop an academy system, but that's only 30 or so around the country. There are gaps.

That's why the idea of promotion/relegation makes sense as it would incentivize additional investment in youth academies since various clubs around the country would now have a pathway of advancement (whether through sales or through promotion with said players). In practice, though, I don't see owners and investors in MLS being willing to install the system.

 

[KingLando]

I've watched the Champions League for decades and while yes once in a while a mediocre team at home may pull off a big W, the vast majority of the time the better team wins out in the end. Of course you get upsets now and then...but they are called upsets for a reason. Belgium from an overall talent perspective was and is a full step above the US at every single level of the pitch. 3 times maybe out of 10 if the US got lucky with 2 of them, but the US has lost the last 3 to them and 2 of them haven't been close. The US is 1-7 all time and the one win came in 1930.

There is a pretty sizeable talent gap in goal(their backup keeper would be our #1 for the next decade), in the midfield, and quite frankly all over the field including the bench. Better touch, better discipline, and a coach that basically said we aren't going to give you a cheap goal with your press....you need to earn it and the US looked like clowns out there. I get we get sucked in when they do have a decent run of games, but the fact is Belgium's bench would have beaten our starting 11 IMO on that night. They were sharper, hungrier, and played with much better skill. The US still has way too many holes for a team with Belgium's current quality.

Agreed...sorry but Belgium vs the US isn't going to split 10 games. Now if it would have been said 7 or 8 would be highly competitive with us potentially winning 3 games I'd be on board but do we really have the GK capable of winning these games? Tell me we upgrade there and I'll buy into 4-5 games. They have a significant advantage in net.

 

[PSUAXE70]

Agreed...sorry but Belgium vs the US isn't going to split 10 games. Now if it would have been said 7 or 8 would be highly competitive with us potentially winning 3 games I'd be on board but do we really have the GK capable of winning these games? Tell me we upgrade there and I'll buy into 4-5 games. They have a significant advantage in net.

No mention of the man who fired up the Belgian team? The team that mocked him and posted OVERTURN THIS. The more motivated team won and our team was flat. Who cares what would happen if they played 10 times? They had one chance and the other team rose to the challenge.

 

[BobPSU92]

No mention of the man who fired up the Belgian team? The team that mocked him and posted OVERTURN THIS. The more motivated team won and our team was flat. Who cares what would happen if they played 10 times? They had one chance and the other team rose to the challenge.

The U.S. sucked balls against Belgium.

 

[Erial_Lion]

I've watched the Champions League for decades and while yes once in a while a mediocre team at home may pull off a big W, the vast majority of the time the better team wins out in the end. Of course you get upsets now and then...but they are called upsets for a reason. Belgium from an overall talent perspective was and is a full step above the US at every single level of the pitch. 3 times maybe out of 10 if the US got lucky with 2 of them, but the US has lost the last 3 to them and 2 of them haven't been close. The US is 1-7 all time and the one win came in 1930.

There is a pretty sizeable talent gap in goal(their backup keeper would be our #1 for the next decade), in the midfield, and quite frankly all over the field including the bench. Better touch, better discipline, and a coach that basically said we aren't going to give you a cheap goal with your press....you need to earn it and the US looked like clowns out there. I get we get sucked in when they do have a decent run of games, but the fact is Belgium's bench would have beaten our starting 11 IMO on that night. They were sharper, hungrier, and played with much better skill. The US still has way too many holes for a team with Belgium's current quality.

Here is what I'll say...the market for an international soccer event like the World Cup is about as sharp as it gets with the limits/amount of $ involved, the number of heavy hitters involved in it, etc. We went off with a ~54% chance to win...the market wouldn't ever be off by 34%. This is still a Belgium team that got outplayed by Senegal for most of the game, looked lackluster against Iran, struggled against some lesser teams in qualifying, etc...they have talent (some of it getting older), but hadn't put up many great results as of late until Monday.

And on the flip side...we dominated Paraguay for 90 minutes in a 4-1 win, have beaten them all 4 times we've played them in the last 15 years, etc. And we wouldn't be an overwhelming favorite to beat them tomorrow if we played them again in LA. They are much better than they played that night.

 

[Erial_Lion]

No mention of the man who fired up the Belgian team? The team that mocked him and posted OVERTURN THIS. The more motivated team won and our team was flat. Who cares what would happen if they played 10 times? They had one chance and the other team rose to the challenge.

Why would anyone mention it? If you're not motivated for a Round of 16 World Cup game, something is very wrong with you.

 

[LaJollaCreek]

Here is what I'll say...the market for an international soccer event like the World Cup is about as sharp as it gets with the limits/amount of $ involved, the number of heavy hitters involved in it, etc. We went off with a ~54% chance to win...the market wouldn't ever be off by 34%. This is still a Belgium team that got outplayed by Senegal for most of the game, looked lackluster against Iran, struggled against some lesser teams in qualifying, etc...they have talent (some of it getting older), but hadn't put up many great results as of late until Monday.

And on the flip side...we dominated Paraguay for 90 minutes in a 4-1 win, have beaten them all 4 times we've played them in the last 15 years, etc. And we wouldn't be an overwhelming favorite to beat them tomorrow if we played them again in LA. They are much better than they played that night.

That late comeback lit the fire under Belgium in the prior match IMO. It happens, walk off home run or late OT TD run by Barkley against Minn that sparked a team for the rest of the year. IMO they woke up as they did look pedestrian prior much like Spain has.

It was by far their best match in the WC. Belgium also felt a bit of disrespect IMO. My point is they are a more talented team with better technical skill in most spots. That will win more matches most of the time. Current form going into that match the US looked better no doubt, but Belgium absolutely dominated the US. All teams have dips and spikes...but overall they are simply better in the long run currently. Progress is being made, but the US still has more holes than most of the top 10 rosters.

 

[Grant Green]

Here is what I'll say...the market for an international soccer event like the World Cup is about as sharp as it gets with the limits/amount of $ involved, the number of heavy hitters involved in it, etc. We went off with a ~54% chance to win...the market wouldn't ever be off by 34%. This is still a Belgium team that got outplayed by Senegal for most of the game, looked lackluster against Iran, struggled against some lesser teams in qualifying, etc...they have talent (some of it getting older), but hadn't put up many great results as of late until Monday.

And on the flip side...we dominated Paraguay for 90 minutes in a 4-1 win, have beaten them all 4 times we've played them in the last 15 years, etc. And we wouldn't be an overwhelming favorite to beat them tomorrow if we played them again in LA. They are much better than they played that night.

Well said.

 

[CyphaPSU]

We have talented guys in our team. Tillman is the present and future of our midfield.