Not defending Klinsmann, but he's certainly not the first to pull headscratchers on player selects... Heck, the same exact thing was said (and rightfully so) about Bob-O selecting Findley... I think the broader questions are as much tactical with JK... where's the coherent, purposeful style excecuted? We've seen a wide range of execution (or lack thereof)... comparing the Scotland friendly to the HON match is performance is so starkly different... I also wonder what exactly the players think... All reports are he lost the German team over tactics (or lack thereof) as the scathing comments from Phillip Lamm indicate - a complete indictment on Klinsy's inability to coach/implement wholistic game tactics. Makes you wonder if Donovan's sabbatical might have something to do with (in part) not buying what Klinsy's selling. I mean, Germany was smart enough to realize they needed a hands-on, effective tactical coach and got Low and respectfully transitioned Klinsy out... a move that now looks like a genius way to fix their coaching problem and still let a beloved national team player/icon move on with some dignity. I know I drank the Kool Aid and wanted to believe, but I think there is enough history/proof now to see we have a problem. I think we may be naive if we don't wake up and smell the coffee (and maybe were naive to hire him in the first place.)... If you make the same mistakes, history often repeats itself.
Let's not forget that Donovan played nearly 100% of these matches. As did Dempsey. Only the two best players of their generation. I am not going to argue about personnel as I think we are better than we think we are. Just pick a formation, pick a style and stick with it. If anything we are further away from where we should be than 8 months ago.
Except Bob actually made Findley work quite well for a good three matches. Granted, he didn't do much with the ball, but he made sense from a tactical standpoint. Not saying Bob never pulled a head scratcher (Costa Rica, away, WCQ). That's fair. Donovan was in his prime. I just don't think that gives Juergen enough of an excuse. The closest thing I saw to a cohesive identity, shape, and style that looked like all the players understood what they were doing was the Scotland game. Scotland were tired, but the U.S. ran like clockwork overall. The result meant little to me. The performance was quite good, and we actually looked like we had a clue. But we've really not seen a system like that since that game, and I've no idea why.
No but ... if you pile one mistake on top of another - as in "Zusi + Gonzalez + the scheme + the subs" - then you end up losing a bunch of matches. No and it wasn't with Bob either. It was under Arena but Bruce also ran into the wall of his own tactical limitations. It was Bayen (and Vazquez) rather than Germany (and Löw), although both had their share of "head scratchers", as you say. I actually think that Klinsmann and Löw made more odd tactical decisions with Germany than with Bayern. However, if Uli Höneß has it right, JK was asked if he needed reinforcements for the club and he only asked for Donovan, when it was pretty clear that there were other problem spots on the squad (Rensing in goal, Oddo/Lell on the right flank of defense, Ottl in midfield). In other words, he knew the players. He just couldn't appraise them properly. Which reminds me of Graham Zusi again. PS. If JK was like Harry Redknapp, he'd have busted Bayern's budget to bring in the world class players in droves. Even Pep said that he wants Luiz Suarez at any (rumored to be $65M) cost. PPS. Donovan doesn't have other options in terms of the national career. If he were playing for the Galz and not for the US, it'd be something else.
Thanks for pointing that out. I actually thought after I posted that "wait, maybe Lamm's comments were Bayern-related..." been a while since I read them... Indeed - I guess what I am saying is, is it possible that he'd rather not play for NATS at all then play for Kilnsy?
Answered your own question. Scotland didnt give a damn and Donovan didnt either. He was out there having a laugh, but he was there. Remember the next match? The US getting undone by a subpar U23 Brazilian squad? I flash back to Belgium, where the team shape was bloody awful. Just acres of open space. Then flash to France where we kept very good formation and offered zero attack. None. Then Italy where we had a really nice goal, but honestly were beaten all night on the longball over the top because of that idiotic high line. I hate to say it, but I would almost say we play better as a team without Donovan, Dempsey and Bradley in the line up...because the players have no where to look but inward. The team has to find a way to score, not find a way to get the ball to Dempsey.
Thiago Silva, Marcelo, Sandro, Romulo, Neymar, Lucas Moura, Hulk, Leandro Damiao, Pato, Oscar. Hardly sub-par. http://espnfc.com/us/en/gamecast/337036/gamecast.html?soccernet=true&cc=5901
the way they barely managed to beat Denmark and getting undone by Mexico...both subpar. Even against the US they looked manageable, we just didnt play well.
And, like I said, the result didn't matter. The performance was good. It was something to build on. But Juergen didn't build on it, playing Maurice Edu high up the pitch and Michael Bradley as the #6 in the following game. Donovan didn't pinch inside and inspire the U.S. attack like he did against Scotland, neither of Edu or Jones tried to burst forward, so Jose Torres was just stuck dancing with the ball, waiting for some form of kineticism from his players that never came. No movement = useless Paco. Juergen got caught up in neutralizing Brazil's attack wayyy too much. He should have taken a note from Bob Bradley's book. If you can't stop every threat, offer one of your own. Once we did in the second half, we started to get a bit more of a foothold in the game.
Sounds a lot more like your fault than his, for believing something so ridiculous. Champion of what, exactly? It all comes down to talent. JK didn't organize the talent in a way to win in Honduras... but that said, the intention was pretty clear. Clog the middle, let crosses come in and have the defenders deal with them. And I honestly don't know what happens if Honduras doesn't get a miracle goal on the back of 3 straight defensive brainfarts (Bradley's clearance, Chandler's idiotic casual dealing with the bad clearance which led to the corner, and then failing to challenge the cross after the corner). And, once again, people seem to have amazingly short memories around here but the US isn't going to play like a really good team for a long time. Because it's not a country that is home to many really good soccer players or coaches. CONCACAF will be difficult in patches for a long time to come. It took Bradley's worst game for the US and tons of stupid giveaways and Honduras got a win at home on the back of a 1 in 100 goal. I'm not freaking out at all, certainly not to the extent to say "IDENTITY LOST" or some other such overreaction.
The esprit has definitely gone AWOL...led by Corporal Donovan...he'll be ready for Bruce by April, but he has nothing to say to lefttenant Klinsmann? Klinsi has put his faith in guys named Jones, Williams, Johnson and Chandler...pretty all amerikan of him and them in name...but that's a faction of nearly 40% of the starting line-up built on left over Deustch markers. None of these G-Americans has shown anything to be drooling over, yet they are automatic call ups and starters. Must be a bitch to be a hard working American kid in that environment...
I'm probably more sensitive on the team's esprit de corps than anyone here. Before my sophmore year in college, I missed all of our official/unofficial preseason practices, and fitness training. I finally showed up a few days before the season started, and when the coach announced (the day of the first game) that I was starting, I still remember gasps and "no"s and one upperclassman slamming something loudly. Some sort of trust and comraderie had been broken, and we were never the same.
I posted this in the coaching thread, but I'll cross post it here. It goes, I believe, to the root of what someone else posted here about JK expecting our players to forge their own identity which we aren't ready for. One concern I have about JK is the influence his pedigree has on his perspective. The same thing that potentially makes him a good coach can be his Achilles heel and I fear it is. He is an uber-athlete. Exceptional athletes have a hard time understanding that not everyone can do what they can. Specifically I think JK believes if you are a professional soccer player, you should be able to adapt and play everywhere (hence his playing players out of position, saying "anyone" can play left back, etc...) He truly believes that because honestly he probably could have played anywhere. I don't think he believes any of the USMNT pool is on his level, but clearly he believes they can be, they just need to work harder. Reality is IMHO, that is not the case. Most if not all of our pool are professional players because they focused their efforts on the areas they could develop enough to make a living. Which is how most pro players make it. You can't throw Donovan or Bradley into CB roles and expect them to be successful. They have develpoed specific skillsets for specific roles. There are very few Kobe's or LeBron's or Jordan's or Dion Sander's who could be successful pretty much anywhere in any sport simply because they are physical outliers. I hope he figures out our players play best where they are comfortable and none of them will be uber-athletes who could play anywhere they want if they would just work hard enough. Another is I believe he thinks he knows the American culture better than he actually does and there is no one around him who can call him on it. I tend to give JK the benefit of the doubt because I truly believe he has good intentions. For example, I can understand him calling out Dempsey (if you want to classify it as such). I get it. But you also have to understand your players as human beings and the development environment to best motivate them. Again, he is highly motivated and driven to "prove" himself, so when a coach tells him he hasn't done sh*t he responds. That doesn't work for everyone. I have no idea if it works for Dempsey, but I do know Americans like a little positive stroking along with there cup of "you ain't shit". They need to know their coach cares about them as a person. I'm not really seeing that level of relationship with JK. And cuddles and hugs aren't a strong characteristic of Germans (I am one, full-blooded, so I can say that). They grew up establishing relationships with coaches who helped them reach their goals. They did not grow up under the German Development Machine. All of that to say, they need some clear direction and a coach they can rally behind. I fear we have neither.
What is Zusi exactly? 'Cause according to this coaching staff Zusi is a - and I quote - "flank player".
IMO Graham Zusi would not be playing for any other national team, save, perhaps, Canada. First of all, if I may be so brazen...Graham, you have to lose the hair band, it will improve your game by 50% percent. Camaraderie on the team in general looks to be at all time low. Dempsey scores a great goal, and his response is so muted. Were the US afraid to celebrate as if they had just scored the first goal in an away WC qualifier? His tepid salute was no broken arrow. Who was there to jump on his back and say "F#ck yeah, Deuce!" ? JK has lived the gilded life. International superstar, WC winner, elite amongst the elite. Yes, he worked to get everything he got and was not given anything on a silver platter. The German-Americans on this squad were basically begged to choose to play for the USA...Chandler in particular created a soap opera sub-plot. I'm sure that went over well with the guys, not. One question, when the German-Americans come off the field, does JK speak to them in English? Do they speak English in the locker room? Do they keep to themselves in a clique and banter in German. Nothing more disruptive on a team than to have the people around you speak a language you don't understand. Cherondolo is the obvious buffer to this potential scenario, but, alas, poor Stevie, he's injured. He should have been brought along solely to bridge this gap.
I wonder which game Klinsi thought about more when he was staring at the ceiling and couldnt sleep during camp cupake A) the quali coming up against Jamaica in June B) the reunion with Jogi for the USA/Germany friendly coming up this summer
@GrantWahl: In 4 away WCQs under Klinsmann, US has taken lead every time, only to lose 8 of possible 12 points from winning positions.
To clarify why I posted the above statement. Teams with a strong identity and tight bond recover from going down early and fighting back. Teams who lack team identity and have low morale score early and then fade when the going gets tough.
This pretty much strikes at the heart of the issue in my opinion. My biggest concern with bringing in Klinsmann was the suspicion that Joachim Low was actually a bigger part of Germany's game to game success than Juergen was, even while serving as an assistant coach under Juergen. My guess is that it worked because having a visionary, philosophy oriented head coach like Juergen backed up by really good application and tactical oriented assistant coaches like Low achieved some sort of balance. That and Germany has the talent to do well even under mediocre coaching circumstances. Fast forward to the current US situation and my biggest worry is that we are getting a bunch of ephemeral philosophy with Juergen and very little in the way of solid application and tactical know-how to fit the reality of our talent pool and to deal with unique challenges of Concacaf qualifying. Worst case scenario is the Juergen and his staff are naive to the reality of what they are working with, lost in the clouds of some overly general philosophy and tactically weak on top of all of that. I would really like to believe that Juergen is actually a very good tactical and strategic oriented coach in addition to being good at that big picture stuff, or that Martin Vazquez and other assistants are more tactically talented than we know, but the performances in qualifying (in both rounds so far) aren't really pointing to that. I emphasize performance rather than just results in this case because even when we have managed to get a positive result in a qualifying match I can't remember ever being confident or even satisfied with how the team has looked in those games. In fact even during wins or draws in the last round I have felt uneasy or concerned with how we played in the end either way. Its somewhat confusing too when you factor in the European friendlies where we have looked competitive against some big opponents (Italy, Russia and to some degree France), and the smack down of Scotland. All friendlies of course, but still, those games seem like complete outliers compared to our performances in qualifying. The bottom line is that at this juncture I am missing the grounded nature and roots based understanding that I knew we had with both Bruce and Bob. Each had some obvious flaws and some infuriating obsessions, but both of those guys understood what we were working with and understood the challenge of being the US in this sport, and more importantly knew the importance of what we have been trying to build and had real sense of how far we had come and the state of the team in general. The danger with bringing in a foreign coach was always that they might be too detached from the reality of where the US was talent wise and try an apply some pet approach that would never mesh with facts on the ground so to speak. To be fair to Juergen he has a more intimate understanding of the US team than any other foreign coach we could have hired, but I'm still concerned that he is attempting to apply a framework that neglects the aspect of simply keeping the train running smoothly from point A to B to C. As odd as it may sound to say this I would feel a lot more comfortable if Bob Bradley was an assistant under Juergen. As unrealistic as that combination might be I feel like the qualities that Bob had would balance out what we have seen from Juergen thus far. Anyway I wanted to echo the fact that I also see a lack of "identity" at this point and that my concern is that Juergen may not be good at forging that kind of day to day, boots on the ground, tweaking and balancing that can deliver a clear approach. Say what you will about Bruce and Bob, but we knew what were getting with both of them and the systems that they employed were clear, even to the point of being stale or stubborn, but in the end I think the US still needs that kind of clarity to gel around because we aren't going to overwhelm anyone with our individual talent. I really hope Juergen and the team prove us wrong about this, but my sense as of now is that the lack of identity is simply a reflection of the fact that Juergen doesn't really work that way, nor may even have sense of why its critical for the US National Team.
Jogi was a Klinsmann appointment. As JK tells it, he had to threaten and force the board to accept Jogi because he didnt have all his coaching creds or something. Some prominent ESPN writers wrote on the first day that JK was only as good as his #2 and his #2 , MV, was horrible.
There doesn't seem to be much evidence that coaches make a big difference to any team. Klinsy took Germany to 4th place, which seems about right for Germany (at home) with me coaching. There is nobody who has taken a subpar team and turned it a consistent winner, at club, or country. Sure, there are some one season wonders, and englishmen always talk about Clough (forgetting his many failures and large purse with Forest) but every successful manager over the long term has had many great players. And any team with great players (over time) plays well no matter if the manager is Mourinho or Avram Grant.
Jobs and Woz started Apple and many would have compared them with a jk /low pairing. Woz was the guy who actually built the first Apple computers. Jobs was fired eventually and replaced by the CEO of Pepsi because Wall Street said that it was time for shareholders to have the kind of management that would run the company like a business. Years later with the company on the ropes, the board came crawling back to Jobs who had spent his time unemployed creating Pixar. I dont question what JK did with Germany. He just got distracted by some odd ideas with the USA Nats.