Klinsi rejection: the real reason according to ESPN espanol this morning

You have obviously never lived in or worked with or within the true German mentality - they generally look at all potential problems or pitfalls and want them solved UP FRONT. They do not want any excusse for failure to be on their shoulders.

Klinsi said, I want the job, but I need what I want when I want it if I am going to succeed. I can just see the MLS and USSF trying to grease him into a corner, oh you will get 65% of the available players you asked for 45% of the time in 25% of the cases, unless these 15 things are in the way.

Like a true German he made comporomised in other areas that had to do with his personal success (maybe he caved on money or something), but no team success.

If this is true, then the US should have done its homework on German negotiations, once he made up his mind that team selection was crucial for a successful campaign, nothing in the world would change his mind.

 

Maybe.

Or maybe JK was determined to push and push and push to get his A-list players, not worrying about what that would mean post-South Africa for players' club careers, and Sunil and the Fed *DID* think the long term view mattered.

 

I still think this is 1/3 of the truth at best, and utter bullshit at worst. For one thing, I'm trying to imagine the Fed dictating Bruce's roster and Bruce meekly taking it. And I can't conjure that up.

 

Great post, unfortunately, I have to wait a while before repping you again.

Gibbs, if he returns to full health.

And in terms of playing a guy in summer 2007 in hopes he'll be good in summer 2010, I like Ihemelu.

And just to add another player dilemma...if it were Bruce Arena, you know he would have had Beasley as his starting left wing for one tourney, and Convey for the other, and let each sit one out. Perhaps Klinsi wanted both of them for both tournaments. Now, as German national coach, he could get away with such things. Their Nats get a level of respect ours don't. As the US coach, that's just begging for trouble for one or both players at their clubs.

 

Klinsmann said he wanted to be coach and I think he truly does. Gulati said he wanted Klinsmann as coach, he was the first choice and he went out of his way to try and make it happen. We all agree, this is probably unanimous on BS (a Big Soccer first!) that you don't wait 6 months to name Bob Bradley as coach. If you're going to have an interim coach, you name Bradley back in July or August, let him become fulltime at the end of the MLS season and you negotiate in leisure.

They both apparently wanted this deal to work out but after 2 months of pretty serious, intense, one-on-one talks, they couldn't get it done. Nor does this seem like a last minute thing--the AP article a week ago indicated that there were impasses that had to be resolved and it was close to a point where either it would be clear an agreement was possible or it wasn't. In otherwords, this wasn't a last-minute curve-ball deal.

From the git-go, I've been saying that Klinsmann is negotiating from a position of strength. He doesn't want to sacrifice his personal life (and he's already shown TWICE that he's not willing to do so). People countered by saying "well, flying to the East Coast isn't like flying to Europe and he'll hold camps in LA anyway" which ignores the reality that Klinsmann has chosen exactly what he wants for his lifestyle (such as hitchhiking across the USA incognito) and isn't willing to sacrifice that. People say "it was about the money" and ignore the reality that Klinsmann is wealthy, has no need to work for the rest of his life and has a successful consulting business and will clearly be in demand in Europe or with other national teams (he was on Mexico's short list without even expressing interest) and this would still be true 4 years from now. People say "USSF refused to change" and it ignores the reality that USSF made a ton of changes for Arena (such as: changing their initial contract from 2 years to 4 years, raising his pay, giving him a fulltime assistant). And USSF has ALWAYS insisted that the NT coach provide direction, input or control over the U-whatever teams. That's why Bora lost his job as NT coach--he didn't want to do that, just wanted to coach the NT and ignore the U-teams.

Klinsmann could have played longer at the club level and chose the time to walk away. He chose to say "no" to Gulati with MLS. He chose to say "no" to LAG with a role with them. He chose to say "goodbye" to Germany after a WC where he was a national hero. And now he said "no" to USSF.

He wants it exactly the way he wants it. I'm sure there was some "give" by Klinsmann on issues. But ultimately, this is a guy who doesn't need this job or any job. I"m not even sure it's about stubbornness. It's about Klinsmann being very clear on his priorities, what he wants and knowing that he can always walk away. And if there is one thing everyone should be very, very, very clear about with Juergen Klinsmann is that if the arrangement isn't how he wants it, he'll either walk or refuse to do business. That was his history as a player and as a coach. And he has the resources to be able to afford to do that.

As for USSF, they can't give Klinsmann everything he wants. As a non-profit, you've got a range of governance rules that either outright prohibit some actions or require a bunch of very time-consuming issues like: changing your bylaws and constitution, getting the Board of Governors or other leadership figures to approve changes, renegotiating various contracts. For instance, when an Ellinger moves to Bradenton, he probably asked for some guaranteed money--he was giving up his real job for a new role as residency U-17 coach. Arena probably could have replaced him but more likely USSF would have ask if they could "let his contract expire and then we'll replace him." Remember, USSF has insisted since the Detmar Cramer days that the NT coach get involved in the U-coaching stuff and direct the overall program so it's just not plausible to me that USSF refused to let Klinsmann have any say or control over the U-whatever coaching slots.

USSF gets sponsorship deals with an Adidas or Nike or Phillips and they're great for the revenue stream and guaranteed money. But they come with strings--that you have to use certain products (or can't use others), that you have to use a particular facility or play a particular opponent once a year. Once USSF has signed some of those contracts, a Gulati can't just fiat that USSF will violate them. You might renegotiate them (and that takes time). Furthermore, some of those contracts (and sponsors) might be ones that aren't the best choice for the men's NT but are best for USSF overall (b/c of what they do for youth soccer or all of our players or media exposure).

Some people take the "player guarantees" to mean that MLS or USSF were trying to decide who was on rosters. That happens in Cameroon. But Bruce Arena with his big mouth never indicated that he was told who to put on his roster or he couldn't have someone. He's always admitted that foreign coaches made life difficult and threatened players (with reduced playing time or lose of a starting job). Why would USSF change this now and starting trying to control who's on the roster? I don't think that's a reasonable interpretation.

I bet USSF has some sort of internal requirements on vendors and how they are awarded contracts (to keep people from steering games to the facility of someone's uncle or using your aunt's catering service or renting a building from your brother). You can laugh but FIFA just had CONCACAF head Jack Warner being reviewed for exactly that kind of monkey business (making a profit off of WC tickets). So Klinsmann says "I insist you use this sports medicine firm in Arizona" and USSF apparently can't say "we guarantee it." I don't know why that was a hangup (could have been that Gulati and Flynn heard from other resources they weren't so hot--remember, they're O'Brien's firm). Could be it created a conflict with another agreement within USSF. I don't know. But just b/c Gulati is the figurehead and visible member of USSF doesn't mean he has absolute authority over everything.

 

That was certainly what was said in public, but do you really think it was all Arena's idea. He went along with it, but I always felt like that kind of thing was being dictated to him somewhat. Perhaps that's unfounded speculation, but I don't think you know for sure that what you say was truly "Arena's choice"

 

I think one of the things that frustrated Arena was that as NT coach he wasn't God. Instead, he had to cajole and sweet-talk people. He had to talk Friedel out of not quitting. And than it was Keller, And than it was Joe Max Moore. He had to talk nice to the Ajax staff to find ways to callup or not callup JOB that wouldn't piss them off. He wanted to have long camps and the best way to get cooperation from MLS teams (who would also withhold the release of other Concacaf players to the minimum required date) was to cooperate with them (by not continually calling up players regardless of the schedule). For instance, I don't think it made Arena happy when Nicol suspended Dempsey this preseason b/c them Arena didn't call up Dempsey for the Germany friendly. But Arena didn't want to be seen as undercutting Nicol (and also Dempsey then gets the message 'hey, if there's a friendly coming up and I don't want to play in a club match, I'll just punch Franchino.'). I think Arena got pissed and tired of all of those things. And I THINK (but do not know) that Klinsmann told USSF "guarantee me that when I call a player up, he will come. He won't say he's on his honeymoon (as McBride and Friedel did), he won't say he needs a rest (as Reyna did). He won't say it may cost him his starting job (as JOB did). I won't have to sweet-talk managers with Fulham or Moenchengladbach or Hamburg. If any manager or player starts to waffle or complain, I want USSF to come down like a hammer."

That is what I think happened (among other things). And there is no Federation in the planet that would do that.

 

but Klinsmann is a smart guy (and he does have 2 years of NT managerial experience and i'm sure he had some limitations and problems while trying to get players for the German NT -- though they probably were not on the scale of the self-inflicted scheduling conflicts that USSF/MLS have set up for 2007) and JK should have known coming ino the negotiations (and maybe he did know) that he could not get that "hammer" guarantee out of USSF, even though USSF may seem young and naive and willing to bow to the mighty JK's demands.

i'm not sure what it is that prevented SG and JK from reaching an agreement, and although player selection/availablity issues seem like a logical sticking point (or even deal breaker), there must have been something else the specifically stopped JK from taking the job to start 2007.

with all this in mind, i really think JK will be the USMNT coach at either the 2010WC or the 2014WC, but not both.

by not taking the job now, Klinsmann may have helped the USSF by perhaps forcing the organization to realize what may be wrong within its structure and SOP. JK might (and this is a purely optimistic view) be able to do more good for US Soccer in the long run by not being the USMNT in 2007.

 

At least now we can understand a little bit better what took so long.

 

interesting take on JK possibly being in the usmnt future...

clearly, didn't burn bridges, but made his point to the annoyance of many...

businessmen don't hold grudges, and if the continued ussf search is barren, can we say...

JK took a sneaky way to take 2007 and rides to the rescue in 2008...

perhaps 5% chance here, but I would NOT discount a kiss and make-up

 

Klinsmann is an old hand at international football, and Im sure he knows very well the limitations imposed on NT coaches regarding player availability, on the other hand, a couple of weeks ago; when LA Opinion started the rumor of Pekerman taking the job, one of the reasons listed for Klinsmann not taking the position was that US Soccer wanted to impose a staff on him, while he wanted -naturally- to chose his own aides, and pay them himself from the 3 million a year he was asking, thus; having complete control on them, while if his assistants are under the control of US soccer, the possibility of conflict is always present for a number of reasons

To me thats a more plausible reason for the breakup in negotiations.

 

about Klinsi ´s real reason why he rejected jobs we will hear many rumors, many opinions.

and my mission here at US boards informing you about Klinsi is acommplished

I personally think Klinsi has done right decision - hops - I know soem of you hate me for this

 

bltleo 1 - bltleo gainsayers 0

 

Everyone needs to realize the USSF has skipped on Copa America everytime it's been offered since 95 because of the timing conflict with MLS. That's a given for anyone who's been paying attention.

It was also always pretty damn clear to me that the USSF only agreed to going to CA this time round if 2 different squads were taken to the 2 events. This was what most people were proposing years ago when they were turning down invitations and I thought that was still the expectation. It's pretty silly for people to be up in arms.

Garber, Payne, Gulati and the rest of the MLS influence on the Fed were not going to have all their best americans miss 2 straight months of the MLS season. It just wasn't going to happen. Their were only two options open for consideration, sending 2 different teams or skipping CA.

I don't know if this is what killed the JK deal but people need to get a grip on reality.

 

wow..i appreciate this...DANKE.

 

JK and SG could not agree on "everything" after six months of discussions, but BB and SG agreed on "everything" in less than six nanoseconds. Amazing!

 

What player has the Fed or MLS held out in the past?

What federation is not a model of bureaucratic ineptitude?

 

The difference is between hiring a new boss or hiring a new employee.

 

Yes, it sounds plausible. It's just not true.

1. Bruce Arena has his choice of assistants. He even got USSF staffers fired or replaced that he didn't like (like PR/media folks). He changed trainers and physio people.

2. USSF has always maintained that the NT coach needs to do more than coach the NT, he needs to drive the national program, set priorities, advise or even pick who the U-whatever coaches are. That's been a deal breaker in the past--that's why Bora Miluntonic wasn't retained in "94--all he wanted to do was coach the NT, not have to mess with the U-teams. When Sampson was replaced by Arena (and other folks like Andy Roxburgh and Ruud Gullit and Carlos Queirox were considered), a factor in who was available was their willingness to do more than coach the NT--they had to be willing to direct the youth direction as well.

3. I think the only demand in terms of staffing that the USSF would have of any NT coach would be that there be at least one American coach as an assistant. For Pekerman that's easy--he needs someone who speaks English and knows MLS and there was already a handshake deal with Clavijo to do this. For Quieroz, that's easy--it's Dan Gaspar (a USSF "A" license holder, former pro assistant and now college coach). I doubt it would be an issue for Klinsmann--he's good friends with Arena and Sigi Schmid and was criticized in Germany for bringing in too many Americans and American methods.

4. Wow--I can't believe the MLS conspiracy theorists here. Folks, MLS has already shown a willingness to give up players for expended periods. They've done it for Gold cups in the past, for the WC. The real players this would be an issue for are the Euro players. If a Klinsmann had asked Keller to play in 2 tournaments plus camps and warmup friendlies, there goes his entire offseason. Arena worked very hard in the past to never put a player in the position where he said "no" to a callup. He gave vacations to Hejduk and Reyna, a 4-year cycle off to O'Brien and Stewart, a belated honeymoon to Friedel and on and on. Arena realized that if he called up whatever player he wanted whenever he wanted, eventually some of the players (to avoid being seen as unpatriotic) would "retire" from international play. Or lose their starting spots with Ajax or Wolfsburg or Rangers or Leicester City or Hamburg or Energie Cottbus or whomever.

There is exactly one example where an MLS club has denied our NT a player when he wanted him (early, before mandatory FIFA date). I really don't like to get personal here but some of the conspiracy ideas are just wacko--they totally ignore the personalities involved. Kevin Payne for instance is a huge booster of the USNT, has always taken pride in every callup of a DC United player to the NT. Besides, why would Payne do this? What players would DCU be sure to lose for 2 months at this point? Troy Perkins? Boswell? Olsen? Gros? Adu? They've eagerly loaned those players out to the NT or youth teams (see the Bobby Convey example) and none of those players would likely be in our starting 11 if best Yanks for a NT game tomorrow.

Go back and read the threads in July about whether or not the USA should compete in the Copa. A lot of the proponents of competing were saying things like "just send the Olympic team" or "it isn't difficult to create two USNT teams".

Let's be realistic. Assume Keller sits out. Other than Gooch and Bocanegra and Donovan and Dempsey, we don't have a clear "A" and "B". Name our two starting forwards now that McBride has retired? EJ and Ching? Twellman and Rolfe? Jaqua and Cooper? Razov and Cunningham? Noonan and Eskandarian? Exactly--you can't. There's a real good case for taking 2 teams. This is especially true for a new NT coach foreign to MLS--2 tournaments with 2 teams exposes him to likely the 40 best American players at this moment. Start Convey at left mid one tourney and DMB the other. Play Boswell in one tournament and Conrad in another. Give Adu a runout at A-mid (that's his best position and also the one Donovan plays).

 

mls with it's PLAY-OFF dominant system can afford for players to miss a month at a time...

it's the rare exception where missing a month causes you to get eliminated from the play-offs...

it''s more the case, mls side getting hot in september and october, is the critical phase of the mls season...

just ask dc united....

i'd think success at the national level trickles down a bit, getting the incremental fan to go to an mls match....

if the soccer pawns start competing with one another, rather than co-operating, the game will self destruct, or should I say mls will self-destruct...

it wouldn't take much to go out of business

 

This dc fan says our front office would say, the Supporter's Shield is also important, which kind of shoots down your post.

 

Joe you are way off base on this one. MLS is required to release players for the Gold Cup and the World Cup, FIFA rules, that doesn't mean that they are happy about it. The Gold Cup is our regions championship, it's important to the USSF, copa america is not important.

It's silly to ignore the fact that the USSF has turned down every Copa America invitation since 1995 because of the scheduling conflict with MLS. MLS has never been willing to give up players for an extra extended period of time so the US can play in someone else's continental championships. BTW, Kevin Payne is on the USSF Board and he represents the interests of all of MLS not just DC.

The comparison of Copa America to the World Cup or even the Gold Cup is rediculous. Joe you are completely misguided on this topic. Copa america is not a meaningful event in US soccer and MLS is not willing to lose all it's best american players for a competition that isn't meaningful to US soccer. Again, look at all the past CA invitations that the USSF turned down because of MLS.

Sure, and that's exactly what the MLS powers want and that's the only reason that the USSF agreed to participate this time. Your arguement just took a crazy left turn and you now agree that MLS doesn't want to lose it top Americans for both tournaments. Glad we resolved that.



By the way this issue is not over the effects on playoff possibilities, it's about MLS marketing and not wanting to go 6 weeks to 2 months without their best players.

 

I'm sorry, you can't compare MLSers missing time for the Gold Cup, and MLSers missing time for the Gold Cup AND the Copa.

 

supporters shield is just like an nfl side having the best record...

and NOT winning the super bowl...

no one views them as champion...

same for dc united amassing the most points...

no MLS cup trophy...no title...spin doctor it all you want...

you need to win in the play-offs for a real title

 

says you. people can value them how they like, for now. the team stated it as a goal early in the year. so your view is not mine. but thanks for offering.

also we got one of the two CCC spots.