4 Year Plan: Consensus Is?

[Li mu bei]

1. Hire Coach

Consensus: Jurgen Klinsman.

Is there a naysayer?

2. Establish “Vision”

Consensus: ?????

I say that we need at least to reach the semi-finals in 2010; I say that we have the talent to achieve that goal.

What does everyone else think?

I believe that our number one problem is attacking the final third of the field.

We need an offense. Without neglecting D, a better offense will help relieve pressure and allow us to play confidently across the entire pitch.

We have four years to come up with something better than the “offense” of either (1) counter-attacking with speed or (2) lobbing the ball in the box to a slower than average, technically deficient target man.

We need to develop a TOTAL game, and—for the first time in history—we have the players to do it.

Does anyone think we need to add more to our “Vision”?

3. Identify Players

Consensus Core of: Howard, Cherundolo, Gibbs, Onyewu, Mastroeni (?), Donovan, Dempsey, Beasley, Convey, and Johnson

Consensus Periphery of: Guzan, Bocanegra, Pearce, Whitbread, Sturgis, Spector, Burciaga, Demerit, Kljestan, Wynne, Clark, Bradley, Szetela, Kirk, Pause, Caroll, Mapp, Gaven, Adu, Nguyen, Fielhaber, Rolfe, Cooper, Jaqua, etc. ( I know I left names out, but it doesn’t really matter, because . . .)

Whoever the next coach is, he needs to take a look at the pool and decide RIGHT NOW who are the 25 to 30 players most likely to make an IMPACT four years into the future. The decision needs made without focusing overly much on where a player’s game is right now—it is about potential.

Once that determination is made, those players need game time, NOW and for FOUR years. We need to PUSH the young guys.

Indeed, now is the time to start giving guys like Fielhaber TONS of minutes with the senior team, in order to accelerate their development. If they get more PT with country, it will help elevate their club game (disgruntled coaches aside), which will ultimately benefit the National Team.

It might be a rough ride in the short-term, but it is just that: a short-term price, for long term results.

Are there still compelling reasons to follow Arena’s strategy of “focusing” primarily on qualifying out of COCA-CAF and then wasting time looking at whatever crappy players are around after we’ve qualified?

4. Develop Team

Consensus: Play better quality competition; play more games in Europe and South America.

We need to play in Copa America.

Moreover, we need to play on every FIFA international game date in order to avoid, as much as possible, disgruntled European club coaches.

We need to play all our matches with the young kids. We need to qualify with the kids.

We have FOUR years to create a team.

5. Execute Vision at WC 2010

Consensus: We’ll do better in 2010 than in 2006 because . . .

. . . our group won't be as tough, our coach will be better, and/or our team will be better.

* * * *

Personally, I will have no problem with the coach or US Soccer if this plan is followed, no matter what happens over four years. It really is time to look beyond achieving results in a single COCA-CAF qualifying cycle.

Comments? Other points that need added to the "plan"?

[babytiger2001]

1. Hire Coach

Consensus: Jurgen Klinsman.

Is there a naysayer?

Not I, certainly.

To me, it's not "if", but "when"... just a matter of time.

2. Establish “Vision”

Consensus: ?????

I say that we need at least to reach the semi-finals in 2010; I say that we have the talent to achieve that goal.

What does everyone else think?

Right now, even though that sort of ambition is good, perhaps it might not be a bad idea to take a step back in order to go forward. Do better in 2010 than we did at WC'06 -- that might not be a bad thing at all.

But having said that, seeing what Klinsmann did with Germany and actually making them a "watchable" team with flair and style that not just carved out results but damn well dictated them, he may very well do the same with this team... provided that the USSF hires him.

I believe that our number one problem is attacking the final third of the field.

We need an offense. Without neglecting D, a better offense will help relieve pressure and allow us to play confidently across the entire pitch.

We have four years to come up with something better than the “offense” of either (1) counter-attacking with speed or (2) lobbing the ball in the box to a slower than average, technically deficient target man.

We need to develop a TOTAL game, and—for the first time in history—we have the players to do it.

No question about it. Klinsmann -- or whoever the next coach is -- is in a similar position where Arena was in October of 1998, and that's to mold the team in his own mindset of what it takes to carve out results. And mind you, we shouldn't under-estimate Jurgen Klinsmann's ability to identify American talent: he does have a fair deal of familiarity with the system and some measurable portions of the talent pool.


4. Develop Team

Consensus: Play better quality competition; play more games in Europe and South America.

We need to play in Copa America.

Moreover, we need to play on every FIFA international game date in order to avoid, as much as possible, disgruntled European club coaches.

We need to play all our matches with the young kids. We need to qualify with the kids.

We have FOUR years to create a team.

Agreed as well -- playing in Copa America is definitely Step A in the uphill climb.

5. Execute Vision at WC 2010

Consensus: We’ll do better in 2010 than in 2006 because . . .



...it certainly can't be much worse than what we've experienced.

But what we can also bear in mind is that following the 1998 W.C., we were trying to dig ourselves out of a lower abyss at that time, and with a talent pool of the great unknown, relatively speaking.

Now, we didn't do as badly in the 2006 W.C. as we did in 1998, and we all have some better knowledge of the current talent pool.

[Asprilla9]

2. Establish “Vision”
3. Identify Players
4. Develop Team
philosophically speaking, my one and only objective relates to 2, 3 and 4. and here it is:

no shoulder-shrugging in 2010.

'but what does that mean, Asprilla?', 'what are you talking about?', 'have you gone mad? that doesn't make any sense.' well, i'll explain it.


no more getting to the WC, then realizing you don't have certain players. for my US team, there will never, ever, ever be a time where the manager gets to 2 months before a WC and realizes, 'hey, i don't have any strikers!' and shrugs his shoulders, and trots out a defeatist formation. THIS is unacceptable and will be so until the end of time.

my 4 year plan is: FIND YOUR F$%*ING PLAYERS. no shoulder shrugging allowed. we're a nation of 290+ million, and we have some of the highest youth participation rates in the world. we have a decent domestic league, and growing amount of youth players getting European contracts. you (JK, i presume) have 4 years: find your players. if we get to 2010 and they don't perform, well, that happens. you make your player selections and live with them. but don't get all the way to 2010, fizzle out, and say things like, "we'll, we just don't have enough goal scorers ... i just realized we weren't gonna score many goals." not acceptable. you have 4 years: FIND A FREAKING GOALSCORER. same could be said for any other position, i just picked striker b/c the example hits so close to home. :) don't get to 2010 and say, 'well, we have no one on our shores that can play left back.' this is horsesh1t. Juergen, you have 4 years ... find your players.


btw, as a post-script, this is an entirely different deal in the US. in England, if you need a LB, you just take the best-performing LBs in the EPL and try 'em out. same goes for the other big league countries. the US is different, b/c MLS is such a wild card. you really have no idea which standout players are gonna perform on the world stage and which won't (i.e. Twellman, MVP, leading goalscorer = shite on international level, '02 Mastroeni = steps game to higher level on international level). thus you have to cast a wide net. this includes UEFA-based club players, many are not established, so again, you don't know exactly how they'll perform. the next 4 years is your chance to find out.

Juergen, do whatever you want in the next 4 years, just don't get to May 2010 and shrug your shoulders and say, "well, we don't have any guys in the US that can score goals ... i guess we'll have to bunker and play a 5-5-0." that is unacceptable for our country at this stage. you have a league and you have players overseas ... find your freaking players.

[Monkey Boy]

I say that we need at least to reach the semi-finals in 2010; I say that we have the talent to achieve that goal.

What does everyone else think?


I would disagree with this assessment. It is extremely difficult to make it to the semi's and there's a large number of great teams that don't get that far.

I would be satisfied with a team that played their hearts out and stuck to our style of soccer instead of being sucked into playing into the other teams' hands. That's exactly what went wrong against the Czech. We played this slow down passing game, which was perfect for the older/slower Czech team. The US team was faster and younger, we should have ran that team into the ground the way Ghana did.

The only must in my mind is advancing out of the group stage. If we play hard in the round of 16, but lose in a close match, then I would be happy with the team. We need to be more consistent and play together as a team.

The first and hardest thing for a new coach will be establishing a style of play and sticking with it. Once that happens, then the coach can select players that fit the style and create a cohesive unit. Then keep that group of players together with the same style so that the players will grow within the system.

As stated before, this will be very difficult and may produce some poor results, but over time the team will come together. We have a great advantage in the US though with not having major competitions until WC qualifying starts again in 2 years. That gives a lot of time to play exhibitions against European teams in order to practice and help the players grow without the pressure of results. In essence it could allow the coach and players to grow together.

[ugaaccountant]

We have a great advantage in the US though with not having major competitions until WC qualifying starts again in 2 years. That gives a lot of time to play exhibitions against European teams in order to practice and help the players grow without the pressure of results. In essence it could allow the coach and players to grow together.

That is not an advantage. You need major competitions and pressure to grow, for those of us who have been here since 90 or so we can see that our player pool doesn't get enough high level competition from there clubs so there can be a stagnation of talent. Our key guys from 02 did not raise their games by 06 and many of us see that as a direct result of not playing COPA america in 04. We have a chance that they might take us in 07 and I say USSF needs to beg for it.

Also few european teams will be playing us in the near future as they have Euro08 qualifying right around the corner. That is how they improve.

[Zoidberg]

philosophically speaking, my one and only objective relates to 2, 3 and 4. and here it is:

no shoulder-shrugging in 2010.

'but what does that mean, Asprilla?', 'what are you talking about?', 'have you gone mad? that doesn't make any sense.' well, i'll explain it.


no more getting to the WC, then realizing you don't have certain players. for my US team, there will never, ever, ever be a time where the manager gets to 2 months before a WC and realizes, 'hey, i don't have any strikers!' and shrugs his shoulders, and trots out a defeatist formation. THIS is unacceptable and will be so until the end of time.



Sorry, BA only F'D up the last month or so, he was fine the rest of the time. Don't you know this?:rolleyes:

It's amazing how many are still shrugging their shoulders with BA on this one.

He didn't have anyone else! C'mon now. The wasted 4 years doesn't matter.
It's the players fault!:rolleyes:

[FakeFlopper]

The most important thing that I hope the new coach and accomplish is make a 1st team and 2nd team almost as good as each other. For whatever reason, we were not able to do that this time around.

I also don't think anyone should be considered a lock, not even Donovan. Everyone should be made to earn their spots from day one, and I hope new faces are given "fair" chances at cracking the USMNT.

Either than that, I say that we have a very good well rounded team in the next 8 year span than ever. Tactically, we can change a lot and be very successful.

[miked9]

Sorry, BA only F'D up the last month or so, he was fine the rest of the time. Don't you know this?:rolleyes:

It's amazing how many are still shrugging their shoulders with BA on this one.

He didn't have anyone else! C'mon now. The wasted 4 years doesn't matter.
It's the players fault!:rolleyes:

Good Lord, man. You've been making this same post FOR A MONTH. On every thread. Over and over again. Enough, already.

As for the 4 year plan--

The semi's are a bit of a stretch in my opinion. Over the next four years, we should look to become a more consistent team against top level competition. In a lot of ways, we were put in a terrible situation this WC, in that our qualification run didn't prepare us for our WC games.

By that I DON'T mean that CONCACAF qualifying is a walk in the park. I think it's tremendously challenging, and not *that* far behind Euro qualifying. What I mean is that when we play in CONCACAF, we're can almost always impose our will on the opponents. In the WC, however, the level of opponents simply wouldn't allow this (although I think it did, to some degree, in the Italy game).

So we have to become better at adapting our style to get results against stronger opponents. The book was pretty clear on us--we didn't attack well against numbers, we liked to break out on the wings, etc etc. I think to get to the next level we need to become more versatile, especially in attack.

We need to put the premier MLS players in high-pressure situations. For example, as ridiculous as the MLS vs Real Madrid game in Madrid may have been, I think getting toasted by Ronaldo was the best thing for Jimmy Conrad. Whether it's international competitions, reforming the playoff structure, or moving guys to European leagues, the top guys just have to be better under pressure.

We have a lot of holes in our lineup to fill. Who takes the place of Reyna on the field? Who takes the place of Hejduk in the locker room? Who takes the place of McBride in the box? Looking back on it, if our defenders finished headers better, we're into the second round. We need to bag those opportunities when we get them.

There's no way we can predict 4 years down the road--years 3 & 4 are so dependent on what happens in the first 2. So for the next 2 years, I think the to-do list has to be:
1) Get the new manager and his staff in place.
2) Identify players in league play for the Gold Cup run / possible Copa America.
3) Win the Gold Cup (qualify for Confed Cup)
4) Identify domestic players from the Gold Cup/Copa America runs that have the potential to be difference-makers on the international level. Get those players into higher pressure situations, in their league or in qualifying.

[superdave]

2. Establish “Vision”

Consensus: ?????

I say that we need at least to reach the semi-finals in 2010; I say that we have the talent to achieve that goal.
If you're saying we'll be among the 4 most talented teams in the world, such that we can fairly expect to reach the semifinals unless the draw puts us up against one of the other 3 in the quarterfinals, I think you're high.

If you're saying we'll be good enough that we can go into saying we have a shot at making the semifinals, well, that's true, but it was true in 2002 and 2006. I think we'll need fewer breaks in 2010 than the last two cycles to make the semifinals...but we'll still need some breaks.

QUESTION-how many players do you think we'll have in 2010 who either start on a champion of one of the big 3 leagues, or start on a CL quarterfinalist? How many players from Brazil, Argentina, Holland, Italy, Spain, Germany, England, and France will fit that description?

Of the 9 nations I named, I'd be shocked if we didn't have the fewest.

[ATLGunner]

The one thing I disagree about is the core of players. The core of players is the question that remains unanswered.

My belief:
Dempsey, Onyewu, Feilhaber, Howard, Adu are clear.
Nguyen, Wynne, Spector, Gibbs, Guzan, Cooper, Johnson, Donovan, Beasley, Bornstein, Kljestan, Altidore are the next group.

[sidefootsitter]

...I would be satisfied with a team that played their hearts out and stuck to our style of soccer instead of being sucked into playing into the other teams' hands. That's exactly what went wrong against the Czech. We played this slow down passing game, which was perfect for the older/slower Czech team. The US team was faster and younger, we should have ran that team into the ground the way Ghana did.... The problem with that was the US being unable to triangulate the ball out of trouble because Arena never practiced that. That left the "ball-to-feet" scenario or long passes and the Czechs read the first one and closed the space efficiently and the the US had no skill or size to play long-ball against a disciplned physical defense.

Brückner scouted the US perfectly and easily picked up its weakest points. It wasn't the formational approach as such, but a matter of finding an appropriate counter-style to what the US has always done regardless of a particular formation Arena has fielded.

But Arena didn't understand how easy it was to prepare for him.

Big "ooops".

PS. There are a slew of better coaches in Germany than Klinsmann. They just didn't want the thankless National job.

[Fan123]

I say that we need at least to reach the semi-finals in 2010; I say that we have the talent to achieve that goal.

What does everyone else think?


"At least" reach the semifinal? I am expecting the USA to win it all by 2014 and to make it to the final in 2010. I think THAT'S a more realistic goal.:rolleyes:

Even the likes of England and Holland has manage to get there once in a blue moon. The Argentines hasn't been there since 1990, and Portugal waited for 40 years to get there. Spain, I still don't know if they were ever semifinalist.

All these teams also have the talent to get to the semifinal. Not only that, they're all superpowers. You think it's so easy to make the semifinal. (Well, for certain teams who have good connections with the referees. But USA isn't one of them.) Also, the road to the semifinal in 2010 may not include USA's beat-up doll, Mexico, but it may include some "good" teams.

USA should focus on getting past a Group of Death first. Since there's a big possibility of being put in one. Or in the case that doesn't happen, you could also be put in a group with 2 Europeans, teams USA has never done well against bar Portugal in 02 (and also remember Poland in 02. )

I'd say Rof16 is successful enough for USA, if you happen to get a card like Mexico and meet a powerful team by that round. If you can lose playing the way Mexico did against Arg., that's successful already.

[Li mu bei]

If you're saying we'll be among the 4 most talented teams in the world, such that we can fairly expect to reach the semifinals unless the draw puts us up against one of the other 3 in the quarterfinals, I think you're high.

I don't think we can expect anything . . . .

If you're saying we'll be good enough that we can go into saying we have a shot at making the semifinals, well, that's true, but it was true in 2002 and 2006. I think we'll need fewer breaks in 2010 than the last two cycles to make the semifinals...but we'll still need some breaks.

Depending on your definition of "breaks," I think that I disagree (is it a "break" to have a game "fairly," but perhaps not even perfectly, called?). This time around, I think we will have a team, good enough to MAKE "luck."

Also, I think this team will be fundamentally different than the ones of 2002 and 2006. In 2002, we had no expectations, but were capable of playing well. In 2006, we had expectations, but we were never really capable of playing well. In 2010, I see our performance meeting our expectations.

But, I suppose that I agree that, this time around, we will not be as dependant on the bounce of the ball.

QUESTION-how many players do you think we'll have in 2010 who either start on a champion of one of the big 3 leagues, or start on a CL quarterfinalist? How many players from Brazil, Argentina, Holland, Italy, Spain, Germany, England, and France will fit that description?

Of the 9 nations I named, I'd be shocked if we didn't have the fewest.

[puts fingers to temples] . . . ooooooooommmmmmm . . . [releases psychic energies]

The answer is . . . .














AYFKM!?!?!?

HTF am I supposed to know how many players will play in a "top 3" league or on a CL quarterfinalist? It's not clear whether you specifically mean the 2010 club season, or generally mean at some point over the next 4 years. It's not even clear whether you mean your "top 3" leagues or the "top 3" leagues as held by "conventional wisdom."

But, FWIW, I wouldn't be "shocked" if, at some point over the next 4 years, we had more players than, say, England in the CL. That would take a few European signings on our part in the next four years, and what . . . Liverpool and United crashing out, while Arsenal plays without Englishmen, Chelsea fields one or two, and Bayern field Hargreaves if he's still there.

Sure, it would be suprising, but not "shocking."

But, I'll make it easy on you and let you know that I don't think our success in the WC will be "directly" tied to the number of players we have in top "3" clubs or in the Champions League.

I know that doesn't sound properly eurosnobish, but I hope that it also precludes me from sounding petulant and mean-spirited.

[rollo]

Sorry, BA only F'D up the last month or so, he was fine the rest of the time. Don't you know this?:rolleyes:

It's amazing how many are still shrugging their shoulders with BA on this one.

He didn't have anyone else! C'mon now. The wasted 4 years doesn't matter.
It's the players fault!:rolleyes:

Life is so easy on paper......:rolleyes:

[rollo]

Also, I think this team will be fundamentally different than the ones of 2002 and 2006. In 2002, we had no expectations, but were capable of playing well. In 2006, we had expectations, but we were never really capable of playing well. In 2010, I see our performance meeting our expectations.


LOL:D

Here we go again!

[rollo]

The problem with that was the US being unable to triangulate the ball out of trouble because Arena never practiced that. That left the "ball-to-feet" scenario or long passes and the Czechs read the first one and closed the space efficiently and the the US had no skill or size to play long-ball against a disciplned physical defense.


and how do you know this? Look at the US playing weaker concacaf teams - they triangulate out the wazoo. This was the first improvement BA made for the USMNT.

[Fan123]

I don't think we can expect anything . . . .

In 2010, I see our performance meeting our expectations.



Expectations of reaching the semifinal? Or the final? or winning it all?

I'd like to know your expectations, particularly how USA need to get to "at least" the semi?

[rollo]

The most important thing that I hope the new coach and accomplish is make a 1st team and 2nd team almost as good as each other. For whatever reason, we were not able to do that this time around.


Its called lack of depth and we have had it. The problem is the depth we have is mostly mediocre (true for many other countries with the exception of your Brazil and Argentina etc). Making them equal with the pool we have will mean making the first team worse. I do acknowledge your point about getting experience to the second team. But we have been doing that if only due to the split in availability between European and MLS based players. I agree with everyone that we need to look at youth development and getting the widest net to identify players but realistically how many players can really be looked at in the time frame and evaluated realistically? We all have our personal insight into players we think will or not blossom given the chance (I was fed up with chances for Bobby Convey and wanted Dempsey and Rolfe for example) but we all cannot be right. In the end the coach will have to decide and will face the ire and condescending wrath of BS posters for not choosing their favorite player - if the team does well, this wrath will be quieted by the gloating homers of the coach, and if the team does not, then we will have BA 2006 revisited. History is indeed written by the victors.

[Geneva]

[b]3. Identify Players

Consensus Core of: Howard, Cherundolo, Gibbs, Onyewu, Mastroeni (?), Donovan, Dempsey, Beasley, Convey, and Johnson

Consensus Periphery of: Guzan, Bocanegra, Pearce, Whitbread, Sturgis, Spector, Burciaga, Demerit, Kljestan, Wynne, Clark, Bradley, Szetela, Kirk, Pause, Caroll, Mapp, Gaven, Adu, Nguyen, Fielhaber, Rolfe, Cooper, Jaqua, etc. ( I know I left names out, but it doesn’t really matter, because . . .)

Whoever the next coach is, he needs to take a look at the pool and decide RIGHT NOW who are the 25 to 30 players most likely to make an IMPACT four years into the future. The decision needs made without focusing overly much on where a player’s game is right now—it is about potential.
I liked your post.

I don't know how you decide about the player pool now. Certainly you want to develop some of the most talented young guys. This would involve not just NT camps and playing time, but possibly advice & career assistance so they are in the right club situation. But there are so many variables - injuries, attitudes, guys coming out of nowhere. You've got to be flexible, familiar with a big player pool, and have a system that they all know & can be plugged into.

Even Adu....Mr. Potential himself. Do we know he's going to be able to contribute in 2010? What's his position on the field? What's his club situation (bench @ Chelsea?) and form going to be like? You could invest a ton in him & then be stuck with a burned-out 20 year old with an attitude.

I think the last year is where you narrow down your pool.

[Li mu bei]

"At least" reach the semifinal? I am expecting the USA to win it all by 2014 and to make it to the final in 2010. I think THAT'S a more realistic goal.:rolleyes:

OK, Bruce . . . it's time for you to go concentrate on your club team.

Even the likes of England and Holland has manage to get there once in a blue moon. The Argentines hasn't been there since 1990, and Portugal waited for 40 years to get there. Spain, I still don't know if they were ever semifinalist.

England and Holland manage it only once in a blue moon! Portugal's done it once! Golly . . . .

Ok boys . . . let's skip the next few cycles and then wait in line (That's "queue" to you Eurosnobs) for our turn. England, Holland, Argentina, Spain, et al. are so ********ing awesome that we need to sit here and wait untill they have successfully hunted glory.

All these teams also have the talent to get to the semifinal. Not only that, they're all superpowers. You think it's so easy to make the semifinal.


Look at me thinking my thoughts. Crap, I thought all we had to do was show up in 2010 and make the quarters. Are you telling me that that is not the case?

I forgot that it is stupid to set goals that while achievable, will require serious work.

(Well, for certain teams who have good connections with the referees. But USA isn't one of them.)

I've changed my mind. Scrap the plan. Let's work on referees the next four years.

Also, the road to the semifinal in 2010 may not include USA's beat-up doll, Mexico, but it may include some "good" teams.

The teams that we have to sit behind and watch as they hunt glory?

USA should focus on getting past a Group of Death first. Since there's a big possibility of being put in one. Or in the case that doesn't happen, you could also be put in a group with 2 Europeans, teams USA has never done well against bar Portugal in 02 (and also remember Poland in 02. )

Darn it!!!!! The plan doesn't take account of a group of death. It was only focused on getting to the semis. Stupid, stupid, stupid, me.

I'd say Rof16 is successful enough for USA, if you happen to get a card like Mexico and meet a powerful team by that round. If you can lose playing the way Mexico did against Arg., that's successful already.

Ok guys, we just made it out of our group. Time to go home. Here we come 2014!

Awesome!