Our coach’s mentality doesn’t reflect the Nigerian mindset

[txj]

CIC has it right. Some of you are making this more complicated than it is. Football fundamentally is about the quality of individual players...around which tactics, preparation, fitness, and chemistry are meaningful.

All things being equal, save some luck, the team with the better players wins more often. Obviously there are upsets. There are outlier runs, like Greece when it won the Euros a few years back.

And to produce enough quality players, it's a numbers game. Give as many kids as possible an opportunity with the necessary support. Along the way, the cream rises. A good league, program management, coaching, and continuity result in a NT that produces enough players to do consistently well.

Finally, yes, the better players tend to command positions on the best club teams. For the cost efficiency CIC described. And nobody is saying a collection of names means other teams without them should roll over...only that the team with the better players is more likely to win.

We've all played this game. It's simple enough. Put the better guys on the same team and they'll more often win.

You talk sense when you are not talking politics! Hierro said: "It’s the players who play. We’re sitting on the bench.” 9 times out of 10, the team with better players will win. Tactics, grit, organisation, etc can help the inferior team beat the superior team.

The production of world class talent depends on a lot of factors. Sometimes it's just luck - like our 94 team. Having structures in place can help you produce a lot of good players.

Of course the team with better players win more often than not. That is not the issue in the debate. It's about how you measure the quality of players.

A European manager who signs a Nigerian player for Barcelona makes his decision based on his and his clubs best interest.

True, given the standard at Barca, that would ordinarily mean such a player is of high quality.

At the same time, a Nigerian national team manager could judge the same player differently, and assign less weight to his qualities. That is exactly what initially happened between Yekini (then of Africa Sports) and Owubokiri (then in Portugal).

What is to say the Nigerian manager's decision is less valid than Barca's?

[mate]

Txj

The best teams in the world select on the highest standards: skill, football IQ, role, speed, strength. They consider style and compatibility among players. They try to be cost efficient. I doubt this can vary much, as a great player is a great player and will be selected by most managers if given a chance.

Let me ask you on this note: would a Nigerian NT today take a Modric, Rakitic, or Perisic? I think so. For the same reason their respective clubs do. And they would blend them into what would work.

I don't think they would be rejected due to weighting of certain qualities.

[mate]

CIC has it right. Some of you are making this more complicated than it is. Football fundamentally is about the quality of individual players...around which tactics, preparation, fitness, and chemistry are meaningful.

All things being equal, save some luck, the team with the better players wins more often. Obviously there are upsets. There are outlier runs, like Greece when it won the Euros a few years back.

And to produce enough quality players, it's a numbers game. Give as many kids as possible an opportunity with the necessary support. Along the way, the cream rises. A good league, program management, coaching, and continuity result in a NT that produces enough players to do consistently well.

Finally, yes, the better players tend to command positions on the best club teams. For the cost efficiency CIC described. And nobody is saying a collection of names means other teams without them should roll over...only that the team with the better players is more likely to win.

We've all played this game. It's simple enough. Put the better guys on the same team and they'll more often win.

You talk sense when you are not talking politics! Hierro said: "It’s the players who play. We’re sitting on the bench.” 9 times out of 10, the team with better players will win. Tactics, grit, organisation, etc can help the inferior team beat the superior team.

The production of world class talent depends on a lot of factors. Sometimes it's just luck - like our 94 team. Having structures in place can help you produce a lot of good players.

I've given up politics.



The world is turning into a svhit show. Never seen so much obsession with partisan and identity politics. Across the spectrum.

Back to football!

[Cellular]

Txj

The best teams in the world select on the highest standards: skill, football IQ, role, speed, strength. They consider style and compatibility among players. They try to be cost efficient. I doubt this can vary much, as a great player is a great player and will be selected by most managers if given a chance.

Let me ask you on this note: would a Nigerian NT today take a Modric, Rakitic, or Perisic? I think so. For the same reason their respective clubs do. And they would blend them into what would work.

I don't think they would be rejected due to weighting of certain qualities.

They would take a Modric, Rakitic and Perisic based on where they play and not necessarily based on their skillset. We still have an aversion for players that do the basic things in football consistently.

Personally, I thought a Nwakali (both brothers), Azubuike Okechukwu, Victor Osimnhen would have added to the team but would only have been chosen had they been playing or not playing for a big team.

I often ask myself how would I grade a team if I didn't know the pedigree of the players or their names?

[txj]

"We watched this very boring video, 500 times, of Sacchi doing defensive drills, using sticks and without the ball, with Maldini, Baresi and Albertini. We used to think before then that if the other players are better, you have to lose. After that we learned anything is possible – you can beat better teams by using tactics." Jurgen Klopp

Txj

The best teams in the world select on the highest standards: skill, football IQ, role, speed, strength. They consider style and compatibility among players. They try to be cost efficient. I doubt this can vary much, as a great player is a great player and will be selected by most managers if given a chance.

Let me ask you on this note: would a Nigerian NT today take a Modric, Rakitic, or Perisic? I think so. For the same reason their respective clubs do. And they would blend them into what would work.

I don't think they would be rejected due to weighting of certain qualities.

[cic old boy]

Of course the team with better players win more often than not. That is not the issue in the debate. It's about how you measure the quality of players.

A European manager who signs a Nigerian player for Barcelona makes his decision based on his and his clubs best interest.

True, given the standard at Barca, that would ordinarily mean such a player is of high quality.

At the same time, a Nigerian national team manager could judge the same player differently, and assign less weight to his qualities. That is exactly what initially happened between Yekini (then of Africa Sports) and Owubokiri (then in Portugal).

What is to say the Nigerian manager's decision is less valid than Barca's?

The first measure of quality is technical ability. That comes b/4 anything else. Africans with great technical ability have always thrived (Weah, Finidi, Mane, etc). Our problem right now is that we are not producing enough of those technically-gifted players.

Sometimes there are other factors at play. A coach could trust one player more than another. E.g. on technique alone, Yaya was better than Busquests. But the latter was a product of the system, followed Pep from the B team, his dad was an assistant coach and a former team-mate of Pep's, etc. Another e.g: France in 98 left 2 of their most technically gifted players, Cantona and Ginola, out of the WC squad. Aime Jacquet felt they were disruptive influences that could affect the team chemistry. He would have been killed if they didn't win the WC.

[mojojojo]

What is annoying is that we have never gone to any world cup as favorites to win the group.

In terms of player quality we have always had players playing in lower leagues. Keshi even took home based players.

Yet we have qualified from our groups before.

I think also an average age of 25 is not too young to do well in the world cup.

I just hope he is saying this as mind games and he does not truly believe it.

I remember Keshi used the same approach in the 2013 nations cup. He used to constantly insist that he was building a team until he won the cup.

[fabio]

What is annoying is that we have never gone to any world cup as favorites to win the group.

In terms of player quality we have always had players playing in lower leagues. Keshi even took home based players.

Yet we have qualified from our groups before.

I think also an average age of 25 is not too young to do well in the world cup.

I just hope he is saying this as mind games and he does not truly believe it.

I remember Keshi used the same approach in the 2013 nations cup. He used to constantly insist that he was building a team until he won the cup.

As per bold... He actually believes it. And that belief comes from Pinnick, who has always reminded us that HB players and those who learnt their trade in Nigeria before flying out are inferior especially to those born abroad. If you need Pinnick quotes to buttress my points, please let me know.

[mojojojo]

What is annoying is that we have never gone to any world cup as favorites to win the group.

In terms of player quality we have always had players playing in lower leagues. Keshi even took home based players.

Yet we have qualified from our groups before.

I think also an average age of 25 is not too young to do well in the world cup.

I just hope he is saying this as mind games and he does not truly believe it.

I remember Keshi used the same approach in the 2013 nations cup. He used to constantly insist that he was building a team until he won the cup.

As per bold... He actually believes it. And that belief comes from Pinnick, who has always reminded us that HB players and those who learnt their trade in Nigeria before flying out are inferior especially to those born abroad. If you need Pinnick quotes to buttress my points, please let me know.

I think I posted some analysis a while ago about how countries are better at football.

Difference between HB and FB is not just quality, it is dependent on the needs and preferences on foreign clubs and their scouts.

You cannot build a team of FB players purely based on the fact that they play abroad neither can you build a team of HB players.

European teams tend to go for our DM and Striker type players so we are not in short supply. Other positions have to filled by scouts of the national team regardless of whether they are HB or FB in order to get a more complete team.

Examples are Sunday Mba and Michael Babatunde who made significant contributions to our AM effort.

Keshi kept inviting players and some of us thought he had ulterior motives.


But in hindsight he was discovering gems that european scouting agents missed that could be great additions to the team.

[Lolly]

CIC has it right. Some of you are making this more complicated than it is. Football fundamentally is about the quality of individual players...around which tactics, preparation, fitness, and chemistry are meaningful.

All things being equal, save some luck, the team with the better players wins more often. Obviously there are upsets. There are outlier runs, like Greece when it won the Euros a few years back.

And to produce enough quality players, it's a numbers game. Give as many kids as possible an opportunity with the necessary support. Along the way, the cream rises. A good league, program management, coaching, and continuity result in a NT that produces enough players to do consistently well.

Finally, yes, the better players tend to command positions on the best club teams. For the cost efficiency CIC described. And nobody is saying a collection of names means other teams without them should roll over...only that the team with the better players is more likely to win.

We've all played this game. It's simple enough. Put the better guys on the same team and they'll more often win.

You talk sense when you are not talking politics! Hierro said: "It’s the players who play. We’re sitting on the bench.” 7 times out of 10, the team with better players will win. Tactics, grit, organisation, etc can help the inferior team beat the superior team.

The production of world class talent depends on a lot of factors. Sometimes it's just luck - like our 94 team. Having structures in place can help you produce a lot of good players.

Fixed.

The probability is lower.

[Tbite]

Why are we arguing about probability.

It DOES NOT matter what the probability is, makes no difference whatsoever. I could care less if the probability of Nigeria winning was 1 in a Billion, I would still expect the coach to go out there to win!

Rohr has no idea what job he took on, and even when he reflects on his thoughts (He still does not understand), he thinks that we are confident based on some misplaced knowledge about our ability. Our confidence DOES NOT come from quantifiable metric. it makes no difference whatsoever what the statistics say, what the probability is, as Nigerians we simply believe in the impossible.

And this is not based on nothing. In Europe you might have German efficiency, but in Africa we have Nigerian impossibility. Nigerians do the impossible. For many decades, Europeans have struggled to understand how some of our societies can even function! They really do not know! Rem Koolhaas went to Lagos to study how modernism could transform into something so dynamic, so interstitial.

Words such as chaos, unorganized do not exist, there is no such thing as chaos. There are ALWAYS structures, our people learned to do the impossible, they punch above their weight, because they do it without easily recognisable institutions. They are in a way, more efficient than the Germans. But that is not the point, the the important thing to understand is in Nigeria we do the impossible, and a lot of the time, it actually works. I am not glorifying this system, I am not even a proponent of it (necessarily), I am simply saying, whatever system you have, if there is a chance to succeed (which there undoubtedly is), then you obviously must not deter, and you must go on to try to win.

It is not that we say to Rohr, go out there and win the World Cup, because we so desire it, but we do know in football, winning is not so predictable or easily quantifiable. It would be foolish to immerse yourselves in rankings and club affiliation, especially when it does not help matters in any way shape or form! The only statistics Rohr should be looking at, is the strengths of the opponents, how they shape up, their tactics etc., so that he can use that to inform his team. Nobody hired a historian or a football commentator.

In fact, what Rohr is doing actually makes his team WEAKER! That is the issue. it is not that we do not understand probability, but his defeatist attitude, makes us even weaker than our own ranking! There is nothing weaker than a team who does not believe, and that is how we played against Croatia. Passively, within the back line etc.

Nobody gives a damn about the probability, just play to strength. We did not play to strength against Croatia. After all this talk about probability, they (Croatia) weren't even that impressive. I have seen more competition from Africa itself, before! Morocco was more impressive in this WC, than Croatia against Nigeria!

And if Rohr does not want to understand this, he should resign. Nobody kidnapped him and forced him to take the job. There are losses and then there are losses. Our loss to Croatia was pathetic. Croatia were not that good, and we did not play to our strength, so what does that say in the end? If we play to strength AND we lose, fine..but that is not what happened and Rohr knows it. He is looking for excuses to hide the fact that he FAILED. And not because of the strength of our opponent, but the manner in which we lost reflects his incompetence on the day.

[Tbite]

I watched Morocco, that is a DEFEAT that is an acceptable loss.

They played to strength and they still lost, THEN YOU can bring up your random probability and statistics.

You do not play below strength and they start talking about probability. All losses are NOT equal. Morocco lost, but they can hold their head up high. In fact I would argue they are a better team than some of the sides that will qualify for the R16.

Rohr on the other hand set his team up to play garbage and then he is hiding behind probability? What a foolish tactic. Moronic!

What does that even do to a team's mentality? If I was Pinnick I would bring in Rohr for an emergency meeting. He must be demoralizing the players, even if that is not his intention. Rohr should just keep quiet from here on out and stick to basic platitudes.

"We will go out against Iceland and see how it goes" "Tomorrow will be tough" "We respect our opponents", anything to do with his personal insights, he should just keep it to himself.

[cchinukw]

Why are we arguing about probability.

It DOES NOT matter what the probability is, makes no difference whatsoever. I could care less if the probability of Nigeria winning was 1 in a Billion, I would still expect the coach to go out there to win!

Rohr has no idea what job he took on, and even when he reflects on his thoughts (He still does not understand), he thinks that we are confident based on some misplaced knowledge about our ability. Our confidence DOES NOT come from quantifiable metric. it makes no difference whatsoever what the statistics say, what the probability is, as Nigerians we simply believe in the impossible.

And this is not based on nothing. In Europe you might have German efficiency, but in Africa we have Nigerian impossibility. Nigerians do the impossible. For many decades, Europeans have struggled to understand how some of our societies can even function! They really do not know! Rem Koolhaas went to Lagos to study how modernism could transform into something so dynamic, so interstitial.

Words such as chaos, unorganized do not exist, there is no such thing as chaos. There are ALWAYS structures, our people learned to do the impossible, they punch above their weight, because they do it without easily recognisable institutions. They are in a way, more efficient than the Germans. But that is not the point, the the important thing to understand is in Nigeria we do the impossible, and a lot of the time, it actually works. I am not glorifying this system, I am not even a proponent of it (necessarily), I am simply saying, whatever system you have, if there is a chance to succeed (which there undoubtedly is), then you obviously must not deter, and you must go on to try to win.

It is not that we say to Rohr, go out there and win the World Cup, because we so desire it, but we do know in football, winning is not so predictable or easily quantifiable. It would be foolish to immerse yourselves in rankings and club affiliation, especially when it does not help matters in any way shape or form! The only statistics Rohr should be looking at, is the strengths of the opponents, how they shape up, their tactics etc., so that he can use that to inform his team. Nobody hired a historian or a football commentator.

In fact, what Rohr is doing actually makes his team WEAKER! That is the issue. it is not that we do not understand probability, but his defeatist attitude, makes us even weaker than our own ranking! There is nothing weaker than a team who does not believe, and that is how we played against Croatia. Passively, within the back line etc.

Nobody gives a damn about the probability, just play to strength. We did not play to strength against Croatia. After all this talk about probability, they (Croatia) weren't even that impressive. I have seen more competition from Africa itself, before! Morocco was more impressive in this WC, than Croatia against Nigeria!

And if Rohr does not want to understand this, he should resign. Nobody kidnapped him and forced him to take the job. There are losses and then there are losses. Our loss to Croatia was pathetic. Croatia were not that good, and we did not play to our strength, so what does that say in the end? If we play to strength AND we lose, fine..but that is not what happened and Rohr knows it. He is looking for excuses to hide the fact that he FAILED. And not because of the strength of our opponent, but the manner in which we lost reflects his incompetence on the day.

Tbite, you cannot help a German who thinks like a German.

A typical German will hardly thrive in an unstructured or failed setup.

In order for them to at least thrive they will first have to control a lot of factors.

[Sampo]

Why are we arguing about probability.

It DOES NOT matter what the probability is, makes no difference whatsoever. I could care less if the probability of Nigeria winning was 1 in a Billion, I would still expect the coach to go out there to win!

Rohr has no idea what job he took on, and even when he reflects on his thoughts (He still does not understand), he thinks that we are confident based on some misplaced knowledge about our ability. Our confidence DOES NOT come from quantifiable metric. it makes no difference whatsoever what the statistics say, what the probability is, as Nigerians we simply believe in the impossible.

And this is not based on nothing. In Europe you might have German efficiency, but in Africa we have Nigerian impossibility. Nigerians do the impossible. For many decades, Europeans have struggled to understand how some of our societies can even function! They really do not know! Rem Koolhaas went to Lagos to study how modernism could transform into something so dynamic, so interstitial.

Words such as chaos, unorganized do not exist, there is no such thing as chaos. There are ALWAYS structures, our people learned to do the impossible, they punch above their weight, because they do it without easily recognisable institutions. They are in a way, more efficient than the Germans. But that is not the point, the the important thing to understand is in Nigeria we do the impossible, and a lot of the time, it actually works. I am not glorifying this system, I am not even a proponent of it (necessarily), I am simply saying, whatever system you have, if there is a chance to succeed (which there undoubtedly is), then you obviously must not deter, and you must go on to try to win.

It is not that we say to Rohr, go out there and win the World Cup, because we so desire it, but we do know in football, winning is not so predictable or easily quantifiable. It would be foolish to immerse yourselves in rankings and club affiliation, especially when it does not help matters in any way shape or form! The only statistics Rohr should be looking at, is the strengths of the opponents, how they shape up, their tactics etc., so that he can use that to inform his team. Nobody hired a historian or a football commentator.

In fact, what Rohr is doing actually makes his team WEAKER! That is the issue. it is not that we do not understand probability, but his defeatist attitude, makes us even weaker than our own ranking! There is nothing weaker than a team who does not believe, and that is how we played against Croatia. Passively, within the back line etc.

Nobody gives a damn about the probability, just play to strength. We did not play to strength against Croatia. After all this talk about probability, they (Croatia) weren't even that impressive. I have seen more competition from Africa itself, before! Morocco was more impressive in this WC, than Croatia against Nigeria!

And if Rohr does not want to understand this, he should resign. Nobody kidnapped him and forced him to take the job. There are losses and then there are losses. Our loss to Croatia was pathetic. Croatia were not that good, and we did not play to our strength, so what does that say in the end? If we play to strength AND we lose, fine..but that is not what happened and Rohr knows it. He is looking for excuses to hide the fact that he FAILED. And not because of the strength of our opponent, but the manner in which we lost reflects his incompetence on the day.

Tbite, you cannot help a German who thinks like a German.

A typical German will hardly thrive in an unstructured or failed setup.

In order for them to at least thrive they will first have to control a lot of factors.

This is strongly on point!
It is particularly so, in contrast with the Dutch mentality, as they approach life in general. Examples abound in the way the Dutch deal with the socially less organised structures in far-away lands like Indonesia, and their Afro-Caribbean territories like Aruba, Guyana (Suriname), for instance. .

Little wonder, then, that our past Dutch coaches (Westerhof, Bonfrere) didn't exhibit this Rohr trait.They did not show any sign they were "daunted" by the systemic challenges they found in our notorious structures. Instead, they believed, then focused on our potential and help unearth a lot of gems and help build cohesive, hard-to-beat blend. Never once did this pair sound defeatist by talks yielding to the strengths of the opponents. And they didn't lose so many games in a row either.

So, you are right that this matter is in the psyche. Between the Germans and the Dutch, the mentality of the latter feels more at home ddealing with and thriving around the unknown. In fact, they embrace it, very much unlike the Germans would.

[Siddonlook11]

They have not changed nearly enough. Nwakali's talent is globally recognized. How a european coach interpret's his skill sets and the values he assigns to them is what determines how far he'll go in the game, a point made by JJ a few years ago, on his experience at PSG. If he sees value in the skills set, he'll progress in the game. If he merely sees 'tricks', he stands no chance...

He has a much greater chance of finding a manager who identifies with such skills in a Nigerian manager than a European.

And this is but just one aspect of the impact of international transfers on African players.

Complete reliance on such a club classification system, without ground truthing it, is erroneous.

Brian Clough once said "football is a simple game complicated by idi*ts". If Nwakali's talent is globally recognised, a European coach (they are part of the globe) would see it - even if his current coach doesn't. It is very difficult to suppress genuine talent. Our problem is overhyping average players - esp the grown azz men that dominate in youth tournaments. Where is Chrisantus these days?

See o ..I don find Chrisantus for you - He is in Finland just came on as sub ( they ae bing thrashed 0-3 ) ...

https://www.flashscores.co.uk/match/l6jodNL4/#lineups;1

[Siddonlook11]

Update ...

Chrisantus scores o ...1-3