I understand Sunil is looking to the immediate future with coaches and next year with tournaments, but meanwhile we have burned 4 months without a game this year, and have none scheduled the rest of the year, either. "Burning daylight" comes to mind. 4 months are 1/12 of our inter-WC allotment, and perhaps 1/6 of the time before qualifying starts again. Whether we play one or two tournaments next year, we're just going to waste this year, and that's valuable development time. If any team needs to play catchup, we do, and yet we're hibernating. Hmmm....
I agree we need to get a coach ASAP and get some freaking games scheduled, but I'll accept the wait if it means we get the right/best guy for the job.
I agree, that is way more important than getting some games in, cause really when it comes to the next WC, which is more important, a good coach or some game four years ago?
i'm not so sure those are mutually exclusive. i'd rather see a temp in there, tho i understand the need to wait for the end of mls' season.
With international dates for European qualifying dating back to late summer, I don't see the MLS season and Nat games as mutually exclusive, either. Dallas' Nunez and Ruiz, Houston's Moreno, and other players have been hustling off for Latin American friendlies. Why can't we? For that matter, if we see the MLS conflict as too great, we could always schedule a game to be played in Europe with Euro-based players, we do that all the time. Before Myernick's death, we could have run out a team capably under his leadership, and we still could send out players under some other caretaker. Plenty of coaches are around who have national team histories. [My theory on this: Gulati doesn't want any pressure from picking a caretaker who then might lay claim to the full job.] The "no coach" excuse reminds me of me when I want to procrastinate. I'm pretty good at finding things that can be a higher priority to do instead, but then it will occur to me that the thing I needed to do is not seeming to ever get done. Considering our awful WC finish, we clearly need work, and the sooner, the better. Frankly, all this TALK of getting a coach and playing Copa America next year, does not replace us getting off our tails and actually getting a coach and playing. It smells of public relations at a time when we really need player development. Does it really take ages to hire someone and start playing? It's not like this is France or Italy, where we can toss an 11 out there and expect success. Let's not waste more time.
How does scheduling a game or two and picking a caretaker impede hiring the full time coach? I've seen Mexico and others play in the midst of hiring searches before, why do we have to wait? The only thing I can come up with is that Gulati might lose some control of the process (people might like the caretaker and take up his cause), which is a control issue more than anything else.
This issue has been kicked around a lot on BS in recent months, but your complaint remains valid. Not playing at all is an example of poor USSF planning (or worse).* Here's a current article on the matter: http://www.cleveland.com/sports/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/1161255792153120.xml&coll=2 Anyway, what interests me is not how many USMNT supporters accept the delay - a position I understand (however much I disagree) - but how many actually try to spin the delay into something positive. Even if we get the 'right' coach (JK?) and he gets going (say) in January, we'll never get those 'lost' six months back. We're not a team that should be treading water while other teams are swimming - hard upstream (Euro 2008) or gently downstream (friendlies). No, this isn't a crisis, but it has been a lost opportunity. ---------- * Do everyone a favor and don't ask.
I'd say we have a limited clue if it's a crisis or just an opportunity wasted, unless we are our Fearless US Soccer Leader and know whether he's being turned down right and left. Is this a PR-spin of us not being able to sign anyone? Or is he really just being thorough? Plus, I am concerned that Gulati is pursuing Mark Cuban-esque personal attention at the expense of the entity that we acually care about, the team itself. It's SG we hear about, and not "US Soccer". I don't care about Copa America buzz, or who we claim to be considering for coach. We had plenty of WC buzz going into Germany. I'm an anti-hype dude, so you earn it on the field with me. I'm not sure who the right coach is. Worth noting is that Germany was an 02 finalist, making 06 semifinalist status not necessarily a positive finish or sign of coaching prowess. Argentina looked good on occasion and lost on a miracle goal, but that team was trophy-talented and arguably underperformed in even being in overtime with Mexico. Nowak reportedly made racist comments this preseason, and would be coaching a multicultural team that is not "under contract and has to grin and bear it", so to speak. Sven Eriksson, don't make me laugh. Personally, I like the Portuguese coach Scolari, whose team overperformed, as well as Bob Bradley. But, I'm not sure if those two are big candidates.
We played one game in 2002 after the WC. If we had played three, do you really think that would have made any difference whatsoever in 2006? I'd like to see a game because it's fun, but the notion that a friendly or two in 2006 has anything to do with preparing our team in 2010 is fantasy.
I don't want to get drawn back into this futile argument, but no one knows the future value of a friendly or three this early in the cycle. Everyone else (except Mexico) is playing, so not playing at all is by far the minority position. And however significant WC 2010 (preparation) is to the USMNT, there are other factors to consider, particularly the continued growth of the sport in the US. To me it seems very counterintuitive to have a big build-up to WC 2006 only to put the team on ice for six months thereafter. Protect MLS' interest, sure, but find a reasonable middle ground. MLS is firmly in the driver's seat right now - with SG in their pocket - and don't kid yourself otherwise. That may or may not expalin why we don't have a coach yet, but it's the only reasonable explanation for the USMNT not playing at all. Playing a game under an assistant/interim coach isn't that difficult, and no, it wouldn't be counterproductive.
Considering we had such a lousy WC, pointing out anything between 02 and 06 as "enough" or "too much" (or even something we should repeat in any fashion) is questionable. Considering we had such a bad WC, you'd think we'd play more, not less. The 11s we sent out looked like they'd never played competitive soccer together (or even as individuals, what with Reyna handing the ball over and Boca not being able to execute a basic head clearance, much less our lack of general team play), in Germany. Brazil's played several games this fall, and continental rivals Canada, Jamaica, and Trinidad all think they should be playing, but, oh, you're certain it's pointless, why bother. It's not like the Euros who stomped our brains in last WC are playing competitive matches while we twiddle our collective thumbs . Everyone else is just playing for the heck of it, I guess.
It's US Soccer control freaking. SG does not want the potential of a Hugo Sanchez coming in under the interim title and laying claim to the position. He wants to control the process, hence no one will get to coach the team in an interregnum, hence we won't play. Personally, I think this speaks to a problem in US Soccer, where organizational notions are placed above the team. I think we played a bunch of pre-WC friendlies to make money, but so many that Arena had to play around with lineups to try and keep people fresh. The net result was no set lineup going into the WC and chaos upon opening of the competition. More games and "series" might mean visibility and buzz, but the sense I get from Arena's comments regarding control freaking is that the team is being run too much from above. Arena might have gone back and apologized for his own reasons, but I think he had a good point. MLS is having to indulge plenty of other nat teams' call-ups, and we could have played earlier in the year (eg, September), so I don't buy the league angle.
Would playing more friendlies in late 2002 have made Reyna or Boca play any better? Have you ever heard of Euro 2008?
The issue, as I hinted at with the separate individual and group comments, is that some of our players appeared to lack international readiness, and the team as a whole did as well. Frankly, Reyna and Boca may not have played enough international soccer in the 06 buildup. I know Reyna was hurt, but his play, with the exception of the one Czech shot, was that of someone out of the groove. Even if they're supposedly such great players (and I think there's a significant amount of hype and europhilia involved when Dempsey outplays everyone, including England-based Reyna), we can't just punch your ticket every four years on reputation alone. People need to be ready to play international soccer, which is not the same as lining up for City every week. [You might recall Reyna kissed off the Nats for a period, which could be seen as (in a way) mirroring the whole team going dormant for a period.] And that's not even to discuss the need to develop and blood young talent, or to look at veterans whose reputations are not currently so sterling, but who may merit the selection if given the chance. As far as European play goes, it was a joke, hence the smile. The joke had a point, though: we got one WC point against Euro teams that are constantly playing meaningful games. [Even in 2002 we only got 3 pts from the two European matchups, including Portugal. We were eliminated by European Germany.] You might want to consider why that happens.
i don't see the relevance of the urgency to play a match... if you can't wait till january of 2007 to get started, with an extended camp so a new coach can evaluate tons of players, then i'm confused... this importance of playing matches autumn 2006 without the guy who'll be running the show isn't the approach i'd take...
Just plain getting out there and playing competitive international ball to remain used to that quality of play, is an additional concern beyond player evaluation and development, which itself would be shortened by the lack of game play. You will have players who've not played internationally in half a year or more (and that's for the WC roster people, much less people who got cut or not considered and thus have been on even longer hiatus). You will have 6 fewer months to look at players, and, you can't call the whole pool in every time, there are limits to how many we can roster for games or demand to show up with no guarantee of PT (we only got away with it this year b/c the WC was the carrot). Considering the template for your January 2007 get-together is arguably the January 2006 confab, which led up to the poor showing we had in '06 Germany, that's a questionable approach. I don't think "MLS all-star"-type camps are what we need; I think we need blended efforts that include the Euro talent with the MLSers. It's OK to occasionally tilt towards Europe or America for a game, but we seem to have relied too much lately on a proven-false-in-Germany idea that we can just ... clink ... plug in the European-based when the time is called for. Our performance in the German friendly this year, as well as in the Cup itself, ought to disspell that idea. Lastly, our rank and reputation are deteriorating from dormancy and our recent poor form, and the taste in everyone's mouth is bad from how we did. Until we play, the image remains in everyone's eyes, the taste in their mouth. You don't want that lingering forever, and the rank can affect our seed-ability at tournaments. I know the tournaments next year sound interesting, but we ought to be dealing with the demons of Germany ASAP rather than just advertising next year's schedule. I worry there'll be a dip in form and we'll have to fight for qualifying next time. A lot of the older minstays are retiring, and we need to re-establish ourselves quickly.
On this issue (at least), I'm afraid you are confused. If we had appointed a new coach in July, who would be arguing that we should wait until January 2007 to get started? Waiting that long only 'makes sense' because we don't have a coach.* We're arguing that waiting that long still doesn't make much sense, because there's some value - though clearly not as much - is simply getting the players together and playing. Virtually all other countries share that view and keep playing whether they 'have to' or not. You're arguing that not playing at all is just fine, thank you. And you're making a lot of assumptions - here especially that we'll have an extended January camp with tons of players - most of which have to come true to support your argument. You have much more faith in SG & Co. than I have, obviously. ---------- * And whose fault is that?
if you had a coach in july, then matches would have been played... no manager means no matches... and since JK is the "likely" guy, getting him, waiting for him, is worth MORE than playing some match or two... in the grand scheme, the lack of friendlies autumn of 2006 will have zero affect on the on-going program... i think people just want to see a usmnt kit out there, so they have something to watch.... the developmental aspect is marginal.... HOWARD Tim ALBRIGHT Chris BOCANEGRA Carlos MASTROENI Pablo CHERUNDOLO Steve LEWIS Eddie DEMPSEY Clint CHING Brian CONVEY Bobby BEASLEY DaMarcus DONOVAN Landon ONYEWU Oguchi are guys from the final 23, who'd be in the mix right now, basically half of the squad, and MOST of the starters... so basically, the other half of a prospective roster will be new, and it's conceivable 2 or 3 of the 2002 guys don't make the 2010 roster... so there's a radical change coming... i'd prefer an extended camp, like a 2-3 week january one where tons of new guys get a serious look, have 2-3 matches to blood them... any autumn 2006 match would have been largely the holdover guys, plus a handful of newbies... i don't see much being learned there... a new coach, a new approach, introduce the system, and go from there... a 2 or 3 day camp, where there's really only 1 hard quality work-out isn't the route i'd take, and i don't see it as overly beneficial
I'll take a wild guess --- because our youth sports culture/soccer clubs/ODP/college/Bradenton don't develop world class players very efficiently compared to the European nations?
As the efforts of our old folks' home players at the WC should indicate, assuming who should make the team can often be foolish (did Reyna really earn his slot, before blowing the Ghana game right in front of our eyes? should Beasley have been playing as much as he did, in his form?), and some of the best players will be riding in from out of nowhere, a la Dempsey. I like playing a lot of games with a lot of different players now, so that we can be more settled for qualifying and the Cup itself next go-round. I felt like we took too long to make up our mind last cycle.
