Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by neems, Jan 18, 2018.
So, basically tactically unaware.
Calling BS on that as Bob was the only one with authority to fill out a line up card. He had a choice he chose to bow down to his lords and masters just like BA did and we see where that got us.
If he wasn't for it, he should have filled out the line up and forced them to fire him. Hhe still gets paid and we probably qualify for this world cup, as the ensuing scandal would have shaken the corrupt enterprise to its very core. Instead it has gotten even more foul and incestuous since then. We now resemble a being that is couple of chromosomes short of a full set. ******** them all with a donkey dong.
So Bob, Bruce and Tim Howard think things are fine.
Definitely need to burn it down now....no doubt about it.
I feel like twitter takes this “problem” and makes it worse to an exponential degree. At least on bigsoccer there is usually some semblance of back and forth discussion.
Us soccer fans on Twitter are a sewage of snark.
People should actually listen to this whole interview and the one Bob did on Max & Herc's podcast. If you'd allow me to synthesize his solutions it's to increase access to opportunity for people left out and to get more passionate, informed people involved in the game.
That's what a small, but vocal, number of people are. At one point they posted on here but their inability to have a conversation beyond spouting slogans did them/him in. Maybe there's a multisyllabic German word that provides a more nuanced understanding, but until I learn it I'm sticking with my word choice.
If I had said pro/rel didn't solve any problems I'd be wrong, but I didn't, so I'm not. England is a great counter-example to the silver bullet crowd and the specific ways their argument fails. Pro/rel organizes incentives, it does not in and of itself innovate (there's actually some great recent research that shows the local effect of prior invention on future inventors, essentially the transmission of knowledge and the resulting likelihood to build on it).
1. I think Michael, Bob's son has been extremely curt, sometimes belligerent with exactly the 'informed and impassioned' people you mention. For a very long time anyone who questioned their tactics and strategy simply got shut out, laughed out or in some cases, fired and shouted down. Those are facts. Ask one of your colleagues at Sport Illustrated. Or Fox Sports. 2. Even though it is the internet,Big soccer as far as I can see, for the US team is remarkably intelligent and well mannered. Mossey on down to a Liverpool or Stoke board. That's some next level spouting. 3. Pro / Rel exists in every single major league. Not just EPL. Strangely enough none of them have a playoff system. WHy? The season is the playoff.
But then 30 minutes in it was ok to bring in Mo Edu? Sounds fishy, but I do like the excitement conspiracy theories generate...
Like I said. Take it however you will.
am I misinterpreting something, or are you contradicting yourself, or are we playing game of semantics of changing the word “question” to problem”
Why are you arguing with the silver bullet crowd? You seem smarter than that but fall back on these simplistic argument tactics. This argument is as “shallow” as when people say, “see little Johnny failed in Europe so there must not be any magic pixie dust”. What your example doesn’t prove is that England could improve their youth the way they are doing now if they a disjointed system like us.
If you don’t think out structure is Fu(ked, then say so. I’d be surprised if anyone other than senile and arrogant people within in the Fed would try to make that argument. So instead of calling people names who are a suggesting a system that “organizes incentives”, which our current system doesn’t, why don’t you provide an alternative system that is better.
Bob Bradley on the recent Max & Herc podcast name drops Matt Olosunde. The anecdote about him starts @39:50.
Max and Herc have no idea who he is and Bradley thinks most of the USSF candidates probably don't know about this unorthodox avenue of development Matt went through as well.
Everyone is so quick to say USSF is racist, ignores minorities in ALL communities blah blah blah but fails to realize that there are actually SOME good people in the US looking to develop kids in inner cities and Matt is a beneficiary of that.
Who says USSF is racist? They are? Just throwing that out as fact to then prove it's wrong using Matt O.
I think our U20 games had almost all Black and Latino in a World Cup games. Not true then, not true now.
I don't want to pollute this thread but it's been the major response to this Jonathan Gonzalez situation that the USSF leadership and scouts purposefully neglect inner cities. I think Bob is just trying to say that before you go off talking bad about how USSF ignores minorities that you should at least know the landscape and where good things ARE being done, which most people fail to do.
There is alot of fault to go around for losing J. Gonzalez. He was known, considered a great prospect, called up dozens of times, from Santa Rosa, CA which is not inner city, its a bedroom community 60 miles outside SF. I agree that we have alot of problems with USSF but to use racism as one of them is intellectually lazy and will in no way truly solve the problems that truly do plague us.
To me your posts on this have weird savior complex undertones.
Individual anecdotes don't discount the institutional, cultural and historical trends that are recently being pointed out with new fervor.
The fact that your default interpretation of the overarching conversation here is of USSF being labeled as an outright racist organization, blah blah blah, suggest to me that you don't really get it.
We have to do better than, "we're not racist (no one said you were), look at my hand picked minority here."
There's a lot more complexity and nuance to the issues than that.
You're right, it is a very complex situation. Which is exactly why I think Bob brought up Matt in the first place since in this period where we had JoGo leave in a fracas that apparently our lead scout lied about the situation, we also have people like 'Mooch" running soccer clubs in inner city Trenton to give people of all walks of life an opportunity.
There's been alot of criticism towards USSF after the JoGo situation basically implying institutional racism in the federation. I'm just saying there may be problems in specific leaderships position in the US youth development landscape but there are also situations like this where inner city kids ARE being given opportunities. I would like to see if the people online spouting off about USSF being a racist organization knew about these other avenues being set up by people like Mooch. In other words, it's not ALL bad, it's a mixed bag here in America.
Links Please. I know of no credible sources indicating 'racism' as the problem with J. Gonzalez.
The reason are basically a few successive boneheaded decisions by a rudder less ship after all positions of power had quit after not qualifying for the WC.
He wasn't on our U20 WC Roster
We fail to qualify for WC
He wasn't on Portugal roster
We fail to recruit him
We lose him to Mexico
A lot of the feeling of racism comes from microagressions and being "othered" by the system (despite the ethnicity of those who are doing it). In Jona's case, he was given a 10 minute ultimatum at 7:00 PM by Tab Ramos to join Bradenton - right as he had plans to join Rayados. He was 14 at the time. His father felt bullied by the situation, and Tab Ramos basically said "take it or leave it, but we have someone else who can play your position." Not to mention you have Thomas Rongen lying by saying that he visited Jona's house three times only to backtrack later and say that he never visited his home.
Now, I agree that there is more going on than that with this federation. There are -so- many problems. Not going to the World Cup is the ultimate culmination, and the best recruitment tool that Mexico and other nations have for dual nationals. However, the USSF history is rooted in Eurocentrism and it places the EPL at the pinnacle, when many kids in the states have their eye on LigaMX.
I'll also note that this doesn't mean that people in the system aren't trying. Oscar Pareja and Fernando Clavijo were mentioned in the Barca article:
"Apart from FC Dallas, which sends its scouts to several cities, we only see the other teams when the event is taking place in their city. For example, when we go to Denver, the Colorado Rapids will be there. However, in each city we go to there will always be scouts from a lot of Mexican teams there," explained Escoto.
"The United States Soccer Federation must better engage with America’s Latino population and hire coaches who “think outside the box” if it doesn’t want a repeat of rising star Jonathan González’s defection to Mexico. That’s the takeaway from those who say the sport’s governing body is “arrogant” and ignoring the country’s ever-growing Hispanic population."
"For example, there are eight kids who went through Alianza de Futbol who are youth players at Pachuca, which many say have the best youth system in Mexico. Each one is eligible to play for the U.S. How many times have they been called? Zero," stressed Escoto."
1. They seem fairly blind to criticism buy I would prefer for the quality of the criticism to increase so that it's less easily dismissed. Bob talks about how a challenge of leadership is getting/digesting the right information. If the majority of the criticism one hears is not particularly constructive or inciteful then, as someone who gets a lot of information, they will be more likely to ignore it. Their status also seems to make them particularly vulnerable to appeals to authority and the converse source bias logical fallacy.
3. Small, rich, densely populated countries adopted it readily. It coming from the originators of the game didn't hurt. Historically the most divergent countries I can think of are Mexico and Brazil.
They don't have playoffs, they have cup competitions. Playoffs started as a way for two competing leagues to prove which league's best team was better. That was successful and so even after a merger the leagues stayed separate (likely because they were both of equal power/health) and only the two best teams at the end of the season played one another.
America is very large and spread out so travel was difficult and the place where sports were heavily ingrained into the culture, universities, largely played in geographically distinct leagues and then eventually had one post season game that required greater travel. Playoffs are useful for large leagues that don't play balanced schedules.
Now we don't have the same practical concerns and can create our own solutions. The only thing holding us back is entrenched interests and path dependency.
I should have used "every" instead of "any" to prevent confusion.
This argument is using a real world example to isolate variables. The people who operate within a system and their knowledge base is an important variable in determining on field outcomes. In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king; pro/rel rewards the best in one particular country, not the whole world. Pro/rel increases the rewards and costs for success and failure against your domestic competition. The level of human capital, compared across borders, is important. England has adopted ideas from other countries and the implementation of that knowledge is resulting in better outcomes. My entire point is that actually knowing how to develop great youth players is not dependent solely on the system like the silver bullet crowd would have you think.
I am for the increase in the accurate knowledge of the populace. Understanding why and how something is useful is important, that's how knowledge can be built upon. People who make grandiose claims do a disservice to their audience because they are under and misinforming them. I don't see much value in useful idiots. Again, I am not proposing that a non-pro/rel system to organize different levels of leagues is better. I am talking about the importance of what other things must be done beyond that to achieve the desired results.
I want to be clear, my post was not meant to challenge the integrity of your information, rather the absurdity of any professional coach ever "following orders mid-world cup."
Any coach worth a bucket of spit says bump that and does what he thinks is needed to win the game. What are they going to do fire you in the pregame? No coach with any pride or character would willingly compromise even a miniscule chance of winning a WC.
Good grief. Tactical discussions of our team have been going on for ages around here. It takes effort to find sometimes, but there are some really good discussions. Unfortunately, they eventually get found out by the frothing lovers of authority. People get tired. Before the great failure, there were some sweet analyses of Michael, but they got turned into "I can ignore these arguments because I think you are mad about nepotism a long time ago. Mike is white and suburban. Capt. America. Bald Eagle. I can root for him because he looks like me. It's the Germans' faults. And anyone else except Mike. He scored a lot in Holland."
And the bit about Olosunde is ********ing precious. We know who Matt Olosunde is, have for a long time, and we probably know more about what he's doing now than Bob. To Bob he's merely an anecdote sent down from corporate.
And the end of the day MLS Bob is all "nothing to see, everyone else is a moron, not our fault!" Just like his buddy and just like his son. Of course, we didn't qualify for the WC in large part because of those two, but Team Boss!
MLS is for suckers. ******** that league. -- signed inaugural Crew attendee and then Fire season ticket holder. I don't give a shit about young SA players and hustlin' Yanks.
Pretty good summary. Basically said he feels its not his role to comment about people in public, but he'll give his strong opinions where he feels discussions should happen. I completely agree with his position that anyone that wants a seat at the player development discussion table should be able to point to players they had a role in developing.
I don't expect USSoccer or Barcelona or MLSyoungSouthAmericanteamX to invite me to sit at the table to help plan player development.
At the same time, I sure hope you're not claiming that insight only can come from those who have "done". Observation is like this super cool thing humans can do. Coupled with propositional knowledge -- even if never yet applied! -- smart things can be deduced or inferred and listened to and applied. Analysis isn't just a word that makes dummies giggle.
But I understand, some people really just like the big dick of authority. Even if it's just another dildo.
It is healthiest when there is a mix.
US Soccer reminds me a bit of Nike right now. Nike leadership fell in love with "business" guys. A bunch of Ivy-league suits without applied knowledge of developing and marketing products. You can see it in Nike's product releases over the past 5 years. Nothing innovative. Everything safe. Innovation is replaced by a different color of the same shoe. US Soccer also has a lot of suits. A lot of management consultant types without practical, hands-dirty experience.
Listening to Bradley, there are a number of things I agree with:
1. I did not learn how to coach in a classroom.
2. What the US needs more than anything are more passionate, informed, educated and just better coaches.
3. There are pockets of things being done well.
I learned to coach in the Athletic Bilbao system. Developing our own players; staying in La Liga. Those two things are pretty much the only things that matter to almost every Athletic supporter. Our club's survival depended on good coaches, identifying the best players in a small population, and developing them to contribute in the best league on earth.
Like Bradley, I did not learn in a classroom. Classrooms are good for learning theories and setting foundational ground work. Unless you apply what you learn by actually coaching, the classroom has limited use.
The difference is - I had some of the best teachers in the world teaching me how to coach, day in and day out. Some were Basque. Some were from Barcelona. Others were from Germany. One of my very favorites was from Turkey. Another from Holland. We could not afford to ignore the best thinking, regardless of where it came from.
I became a good coach because I was taught by good coaches, who exposed me to a variety of approaches to the game. Not in classrooms. Not in coaching clinics. Not in speeches at coaching conventions. Not by sending people to an academy in France. I learned at 8:30 AM in the morning when I would show up to the training ground, a better coach than me would be there, observe what I was doing, and guide me through the process. It was applied, real-world learning.
There are pockets of this happening. I think Real Salt Lake is going about things the right way, with the resources they have. They are pockets. They are the exception that proves the rule. I have been to too many US academy sessions to count anymore. The rule is kids will be taught by a mediocre coach, who already thinks he has it all figured out, who is not open to divergent thought.
You see it way too often here on BigSoccer these days. The narrative includes a nativist, xenophobic tone few will say out loud, but in practice it is 'Merica vs. the Furriners.
For US Soccer to improve, I hope it is not either/or. Bring in the best thinking, wherever that may originate. Educate the best American coaches in applied training. Develop the American coach, and the American player will follow.