My counter argument is if this was true they wouldn't have had the sprinklers on before the game. The game in St Louis should show whether this is true but even though we needed a last minute wonder goal against them at Jerry World we controlled that game and missed a ton of chances while they got an extremely lucky goal early and hung on (kind of the opposite of this game). I was worried about their speed but it didn't really manifest. We also have a lot of very fast players.
Um, Wynalda was a different cat but having Harkes nobbling his wife for the whole team to see didnt help his mental health.
I'm just saying Jozy never made that step to the next tier that McBride did to actually be a reliable Big-4 starter. I always thought he could've made that leap eventually if he hadn't come back to MLS but we can't change history. Balogun and Pepi have both shown they can be excellent strikers in the top leagues below the Big 4. So even if you rate Jozy higher (I'm not disputing valid arguments can be made there), the three have essentially achieved the same level and comparing them is a matter of personal preference. Wynalda is a hard one to gauge, and I'm a big enough fan I literally have a 94 jersey with his name on it. He hit 9 goals in the Bundesliga in 92 which makes me want to rank him as a Big-4 level striker but then the rest of his career was essentially good 2nd division player like Josh Sargent, who we forget also had 5 goals in the Bundesliga at a much younger age. Was Wynalda's one year a fluke? Honestly I may be underrating both Sargent and Wynalda and both may have shown enough to be considered good strikers in the leagues below the Big 4 but I feel with Josh we really need to see more to say that and we didn't have the chance to see more with Wynalda because of injuries and MLS.
Undoubtedly true, but... he was always kinda like that. The thing with him and the rest of the national team starters at that point is that every one of them interrupted their careers (some had better, some had worse) to build MLS, and while in most cases that definitely affected their club career trajectories for the worse, I will never penalize them for that. We NEEDED a viable domestic league, and the fact that we have one is the (only) reason why we perennially have a more talented program now than we did then. They deserve credit for helping get that project off the ground.
i like thinking about mathis and mckennie in the same timeline. what an incredibly fun disaster that would almost certainly be.
He had a work permit. He was released because Ron Atkinson didn't think he was good enough for (a much weaker) Premier League.
And I think a couple of posters remarked the field may have held back Jamaica more than the US. The field was in poor condition and made for a poor match, and it happens that way a lot, that’s all.
Reggae Boyz coach Heimir Hallgrimsson, while being impressed so far with the local talent on offer in his short time in Jamaica, is adamant that the longstanding problem of improvement to the playing surfaces on the island must be addressed.
It is clearly possible for there to be good/great fields in tropical climates. Just look at the newer fields in Costa Rica and The Dominican Republic (just to mention a couple of the better field sets i have seen in southern climates.) It is not any fact of climate that makes fields in some countries very bad (BTW: At the other extreme look at how many really bad fields exist in Canada but we know cold climates can have great fields as well) it is a choice where teams/countries/federations choose to spend money and most are currently not choosing to put money into fields at this time. However I think that the fields hurt both the teams playing and the image of the countries involved. It is unfortunate that many countries put so little money toward having good fields and redirect much toward feeding, sheltering and clothing their people. It is also clear that many countries do not do that particularly well either.