Q: the Experience factor?

[talker]

I would be interested in hearing opinion's on how people think Experience will impact our ability to be successful at this summer's World Cup. By Experience I mean the experience (or lack thereof) that individuals on our team have had in the World Cup, in international competition, or at increasingly higher levels of club play, in Europe.

In framing my curiosity, I'll make some general (and very subjective) commentary on the '98 and '02 USA World Cup campaigns.

France 98
In '98, I'd say our experience actually hurt us, maybe even killed us. Obviously, the disarray and lack of cohesion of Sampson's squad played contributed greatly to our lack of success, but I'd say that certain players failed to deliver as we'd needed them.

Notably, Reyna, Dooley, Burns, Deering, and I hesitate, but will include Wynalda and Moore, all players with experience in Europe, and most with previous World Cup experience, delivered less than we needed. I'd posit that some of this had to do with their experience as players, in two ways.

First, a charge that has certainly been levied against Reyna on these boards, I think those players did not have the mentality that the US team could win in a World Cup atmosphere against a team like Germany. They knew the consequence and magnitude of the moment, and were awed by it. It's a bit counter-intuitive of what experience should afford you, but in France 98, I think it worked that way.

Second, some of those players were known quantities, and were exposed because of it. Germany was familiar with Reyna, with Dooley, with Deering (all having played in Budesliga 1 or 2) and could expose those weaknesses. Jeremies knew Reyna would not stand up to a physical beating, and therefore gave it to him.

Our inexperienced players in France 98 were a mixed bag. Some played well (McBride), some were revelatory (Hejduk, Pope), and some were disasters (Maissoneuve). Inexperience at the World Cup functions in weird ways. An inexperienced player can show their greeness, their lack of understanding and awareness, and be badly exposed. Alternatively, an inexperienced player can play as innocent, unfettered by expectation, and perform at their quality. Most important, an inexperienced player can be an unkown quantity, and cause an opponent to underestimate or fail to account for them, turning in a performance exceeding expectations. I think we saw a bit of all of this for our boys in 98.

Korea 2002
Contrast to Arena's 02 squad, and we could, and often do, argue that our inexperience was one of the prime reasons for our success... The attitude and approach, starting from Mathis and Wolff in Columbus, and carried through to Donovan, Beasley, (and to a weaker qualification of my definition of experience) Sanneh, Lewis, McBride, and maybe even O'Brien defined the team's approach to the '02 tournament. Portugal underestimated us, and paid for it. Germany almost did. And our inexperience allowed players new to this level of play to shine, playing to and beyond their level.

In 02, experience was a mixed bag, but probably still a net positive. We had experienced players who showed tremendous class and composure (Friedel, O'Brien, Pope, Berhalter) who provided a foundation for our success, and others (Reyna, Agoos) who were more uneven in their contribution. More telling, perhaps, was the lack of contribution entirely of experienced players (due to coach's decisions) like Joe-Max, Regis, Llamosa...

Germany 06
So, quite a preamble, and I'm sure people could pick apart my evaluations and interpretations of 98 and 02, but the question I have is about 06. How does our experience and inexperience help us or hurt us? And what cases are people most interested to watch?

For me:
Beasley - playing at PSV, I think will only make Beasley better. I'm excited, I think his experience is net postive.
Donovan - a big question mark . I don't think his experience will change his attitude, but does it change his approach to the game? But probably more worryingsome, and this applies to Beasley, too, as known quanitities, will our opponents be able to make them less effective?
Keller - this is Keller's Cup. The guy has played at every level, has played lights out for the US time and again. But Germany 06 could re-define his legacy. Does that impact him? Does his knowledge of the European game help him, playing against Czech perhaps?
Reyna, O'Brien, Berhalter, - as veterans on this team, the lingering question... do these guys have the belief that can drive the team past teams like Italy and Czech?
McBride, Lewis - how will their experience impact them, having spent all or part of the period between 02 and 06 building successful careers in England...
Twellman, Dempsey, Bocanegra, Gibbs, Convey - guys who have never played quite in a World Cup atmosphere - can they maintain their level, or step up?
Arena - can he prepare a team with the same attitude as 02? will he be able to make the right tactical and strategic choices to compete through the Cup?

So, a lot of talk from me. Maybe interesting, maybe not. I would be very interested to hear the thoughts of the board. How will experience or inexperience impact our team and specific players in Germany?

[NoSix]

I think the '98 squad was rife with dissension, while the '02 squad was harmonious and close-knit, and that difference had far more to do with the greater success of the '02 squad than any differences in capability or experience between the two squads.

As a general rule, I think experience is more important vis-a-vis capability the closer to goal you play, and vice-versa. That is, experience is much more important than capability for goalkeepers and defenders, who tend to get better with experience, even in some cases as their capabilities start to decline into their late 30's. Midfielders seem to peak in their late 20's when they have achieved a balance between capability and experience, while forwards generally peak in their early 20's when their peak physical capabilities more than compensate for their lack of experience. For every Dennis Bergkamp, there seem to be 50 forwards whose goal-scoring output is in decline by the time they hit 25.

I think Bruce Arena understands this. I think the 2006 US team will be more capable, albeit less experienced than the 2002 squad. With wily veterans like Keller, Pope, and Lewis in the back, balanced with capable young attackers like Donovan and Johnson up front, the mix on this US team strikes me as just about right.

[Galaxian]

I've been saying experience will help us in this cup , and I really do think it will .
Having more players playing at a higher level in Europe , and playing consistently , week in and week out , at a high level , will be very good for our squad . In 2002 , we had some key players playing in Europe , but also some key players not playing in Europe . Right now , it looks like we have more of our squad playing overseas , and I think this will help us .
We still have some players playing here , LD , EJ , Mastro , that will help us in Germany . Two of which are very experienced and playing in korea .
Young is good to have in the squad , players who arent afraid to go at defenders , no matter who they are , and I hope some MLS players make the squad and get playing time .
Our grisly veterans , Keller , BMB , Reyna , will be there to lead the team , like they did in 2002 , and I think they are all performing better now than they were before 2002 ,( except for reyna , because of his injuries )
I think our squad is very well rounded , with some great young talent , mixed wtih some experienced veterans , and I think we will do well this summer .

[Dooglas]

weve seen youngsters like ld and bmb take control of the team, and i think dempsey and twellman will do that this year, im placing my bet on them going to germany.

[usfooty7]

Do you mean, the Surprise Factor? Qualifiying for 2002 was a good accomplishment in it's own right, but our results in Korea was surprising perhaps because the world remembered our squad's poor exit in 98. We had some key breakout players new to the world arena in 2002 (Donovan, Beasley), and let's face it, Arena's style and skill as head coach has been remarkable. But, that said, I don't think it's important to mount some kind of sneak-attack on world soccer with guys like Gooch and Twellman, them not being global names.

US Soccer doesn't have a distinct style like say, Brasil (on the ground, fancy footwork, style), or Italy (long balls, strong, opportunitive). Well, I can't describe US Soccer in anecdotal terms but somebody might. We have Heart - that's our best attribute. Forever underdogs in the world game.

3 games - that is our certainty in June. Our boys, heavily experienced on the world stage or not, have to understand that these 3 chances are all they got to get a result. Bruce will get that into their heads, I have confidence. The experience trickles down from the elders, and right now I think we have a tight group who get along well together.

[dsp87260]

Good comments and analysis from all here....

But, I think that NoSix hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments re dissension.

In 1998 the dissension and low morale was the decisive factor and conversely the team unity and cohesiveness was the decisive factor in 2002.

There are many "great" teams with "great" players who fail to win vs lesser teams. I would point to which side had the better team chemistry and unity as being the deciding factor in a lot of these cases.

The debate between talent and team chemistry (which is more important) rages on....

[swedust]

In one of the USSoccer.com podcast interviews, Arena notes that he admires Bill Bellichek of the NFL's New England Patriots (among others) as fellow coaches.

One thing Bellichek does really well is integrate veterans and new players; I don't know if this is a skill unto itself or the cumulative outcome of several other, separate coaching skills, but I suggest to you that Bruce has the same capability.

So put me in the harmony/disharmony camp, as well: it's not whether our players this time around are more or less experienced, it's how well they bring their varying levels of experience together behind a unified team approach and strategy.

And while I'm not as good at my job as the USMNT players are at theirs, I do work in a profession where teamwork and cohesion and a shared sense of responsibility are absolutely crucial to doing the best work. In such an environment, except in very unusual circumstances or isolated events, a mish-mash of talent -- even superior talent -- cannot overcome sustained and coordinated effort.

[Raulduke]

Obviously, you would rather have an experienced quality player over an inexperienced player of the same calliber. However, when you talk about the night and day difference between what the national team accomplished in 2002 as opposed to 1998, I think the most important factor was talent.

I think that clearly, the addition of Beasley and Donovan were huge upgrades in the talent level that allowed us to have some good outings against quality sides in 2002.

Now, in 2006, Arena has more talent than ever before in US soccer history. I think some of our youthful talent with less cap experience may serve us better than some of our vets. In particular, I'm more intrigued to see TT than McBride and some of the other players instead of Reyna who I'm not big on.

[dsp87260]

Obviously, you would rather have an experienced quality player over an inexperienced player of the same calliber. However, when you talk about the night and day difference between what the national team accomplished in 2002 as opposed to 1998, I think the most important factor was talent.

I think that clearly, the addition of Beasley and Donovan were huge upgrades in the talent level that allowed us to have some good outings against quality sides in 2002.

Now, in 2006, Arena has more talent than ever before in US soccer history. I think some of our youthful talent with less cap experience may serve us better than some of our vets. In particular, I'm more intrigued to see TT than McBride and some of the other players instead of Reyna who I'm not big on.

I disagree. (see this thread here (http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=313952) for this debate)

IMO both teams were about equally talented, the difference was how the coach harnessed that talent and the team unity.

One way to look at this is to compare our 98 WC team to the 2002 Portugal WC team. (OK, nobody freak out....I'm not saying they are equal in talent or potential.)
In 1998 we had the talent to do much better than we did but we tanked because of poor coaching and dissension within the team.
Portugal, didn't have the dissension problems (at least none that I'm aware of), but they obviously had a poor mentality approaching the games (and I would say poor coaching too as having your team mentally prepared is one of the coach's most important responsibilities.......and one that Bruce Arena does very well.)
These days people look back and say how poor that 2002 Portugal team was and how good they've become since......forgetting that their greatest ever players comprised that team.
A lot of people are doing the same with our 1998 team. Some of our greatest ever players were on that team, but we forget that, and the potential we had, and only look at the results.

[seanT]

It does seem like Bruce, understandably, likes a mix.

but it sure seems like I recall him saying several times over the last few years that he thinks the World Cup if for young men. Largely physical because of the short recovery time but also not being over-awed by the whole thing.

[russ]

Great stuff ,guys.

I think that experience has to be a factor.Most of our players have at least tried out in Europe for clubs ,many of them as regulars or competing for playing time.

Nevertheless, I can't get the Bruce Arena quote out of my head,"International soccer is a young man's game."

We will see some young legs in germany.Dempsey for certain,Eddie Johnson and Twellman (not young,but not highly experienced either),perhaps a Pearce or Spector in the back.

These players will integrate into the systems that Bruce will plan for each of our first-round opponents.

[talker]

Thanks for the feedback, good reading. I'd like to clarify my original point a little bit - I didn't mean to imply that experience or inexperience was the decisive factor in our team's (or any individual's) success in 1998 versus 2002. Talent, coaching/team management, and team cohesion (a result of team management) all contributed, some more than others, and probably all of them more than experience. But, experience still played some role, and in some of the cases I listed, a sort of unintuitive role in impacting performance.

Take as a contrasting case, Claudio Reyna in 1998 and Landon Donovan in 2002. Why did Donovan have so much more success in '02 than Reyna in '98?

I don't think talent is a great argument here, in the sense that Donovan 02 was a more talented player than Reyna 98. Talent, in the sense of the overall talent of the team surrounding the player has a lot of merit (though some might debate it...)

Team Management probably played a huge role, in terms of tactics, and in terms of building a team, something Arena does well, apparently, and Sampson did terribly in 98. In no way do I mean to underplay this.

But Experience played an interesting role, as I described. I would argue that Reyna's experience may be impacted his attitude approaching the cup, where, having played in Europe and having a specific respect for the German team and the World Cup itself may have taken an edge off of Reyna's attitude. Donovan, being relatively inexperienced, was able to take a very different approach... more aggressive, more unburdened, and more winning. Of course, this is all speculation, since I am in neither player's head.

More tangibly, Reyna's experience as a professional in Europe certainly exposed him to tactics in Germany - specifically, to Jens Jeremies. Donovan's lack of exposure made him an X-factor, throughout Korea...

Those elements of experience will be changed, on a player by player basis, for 2006. How each player will respond to those differences (either because they have gained more experience, or because they are new to the international game, and therefore inexperienced) I think will have a deep impact on our success, allowing us to either exceed or underachieve the success that our talent, tactics, and team management should allow us