Suggestions for next USMNT Asst Coach

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by keller4president, Jul 23, 2019.

  1. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    What kind of doors is he opening, honestly, really, dude.....he bounced around Hannover's system, period of time at Stuttgart, is opening so many doors he's out of work and seemingly getting doors slammed in his face instead. If you had argued Marsch or Wagner I might listen. But Dolo? The whole reason Sarachan kicked his tires before is he is out of work and available. Basically Eurosnobbery talking. You take someone struggling for a foothold and declare that any return home would undermine the ambition apparatus. When objectively it would be, high level player, former captain, leader, some assistant experience with kids and adults, can't stay employed in Germany.

    FWIW I would be curious which of these guys speak German. Playing is different than coaching, and even then I wonder if our backgrounds hurt us. I get grumpy at the way American coaches are treated in the UK, where we speak the language. But something not discussed is whether Dolo and Marsch speak German (I know Wagner does) and that changes the matrix for them coaching there. I mean, this is something not discussed enough regarding how our players and coaches fare abroad, period.
     
  2. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    I mean, if you look at GB's staff, would you pick Wolff off a global list? That's Crew. Estevez, Crew, give or take some caretaker matches didn't run a Spanish team higher than Valencia B. Tashjan, performance, Crew. BJ Callaghan, never heard of him, no bigtime pro career, no recognizable coaching cred, Union assistant, basically Stewart's guy. Literally no one with independent cred who doesn't owe their job to either Berhalter or Stewart. And I wouldn't be impressed if this was a MLS staff much less USMNT.

    To me the bench coach -- lead assistant -- should have their own cred and maybe even a league title to their name. That's the level brains I want my head coach tapped into. And to me the ability to force your retainers onto my staff is a function of prior proven success. Prior success shows that this set of retainers is high quality and underrated.

    This is yet another way in which this whole thing feels corrupt. Crew coach and Union GM, mediocre teams, pick Crew and Union staff choices. Just as clubby as USSF picking their brother as coach.
     
    Marius Tresor and Eleven Bravo repped this.
  3. truefan420

    truefan420 Member+

    May 30, 2010
    oakland
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    He’s not opening doors I said potentially. Those names you listed are good examples of people tho I’m not sure I’d included Wagner. I want as many of our coaches going abroad to work as possible. I want to raise the profile of our nation and having coaches and players littered throughout the top leagues will do that. Dolo speaks German. Coming back to the US then MLS might be what he needs but it will be much harder for him to go back. The reality is Europe isn’t looking to our coaches for a reason. Like it or not. Hopefully Marsch helps change that. I hoped Bradley could have done better in England and help swing that as well (tho that wasn’t all on him).
     
  4. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    What you're saying sounds nice, but the 2 years before Bradley came in I was actually in the Swansea Supporter's Trust that owned 20% of the team (until the sale). I wanted to try a more involved approach with soccer so I paid the membership. I liked the pretty soccer they had been playing for a period of years. So this made it where I could in a strained way say "I own that" and watch Swansea on top of my MLS team. But by the second year in, they had sold many of the attractive players, swapped out coaches, were relegation fighting and abandoned pretty soccer, which hasn't returned since.

    They got bought out, an American leading the group, freakout ensues. I start getting uncomfortable as an American.

    American owner, several games into the season -- ie not at a window where he can control selection -- decides to hire American Bradley as coach. Further freakout ensues. Felt to me like the team wasn't playing for Bradley.

    Roughly then I bailed. Quit watching. Didn't renew my membership the next season. I am not going to be part of a team whose fans reactionarily dislike Americans.

    Sorry, no, do not pretend like this is just a performance thing where someone just needs to show them we can do it. It is much more complex and includes fairly broadly held bias in elite leagues, some outright bigotry in some corners, some racism in some corners, and if you found the right big city team with probably an American owner, you'd then have to prove yourself.

    I also think there is some naivete about the backgrounds of the ones who are doing it, Marsch is a very bright Ivy graduate being hired by the parent clubs of his last MLS team. Wagner was a foreign based dual national who like our most recent Germans just decided to play for us. He sounds German when he talks. Dolo played his whole career there, probably speaks the language, was supposed to be the "mayor," and you see what happened.

    My impression is the UK is the natural home but they can be biased or bigoted. Some folks have made some inroads in Germany but most of us won't speak the language and most of the ones who get any traction have an "in" or were born there. Our success or even involvement has been generally around the edges. Hammarby. Stabek. The egos and snobs would promote the big tickets but the most success is at the smaller clubs around the periphery. I would like to see one of our coaches in Scotland. Scandinavia. Holland.

    And against that background I do not hold it against our players or coaches to be like, MLS wants me and the bias disappears and language isn't a barrier. I get that's not as ambitious as you want but the unemployed may not have a choice and the coaches need to balance ambition with realism and a sense of fan/club support for them. Bradley was on a ledge alone. The fans didn't have his back. The team didn't have his back. And he took over a struggling relegation type team looking for people to blame and b*tch about.

    I think it's a little easier for players but in the end they reach some similar issues. Is there bias against them. Do they start. Do they get opportunities. Are they just there to be loaned and sold. Is language a barrier. Are the fans bigoted or racist. I'd always known we were fighting a little bit of snobbery there, an assumption we were less than or cheap talent, but the way some black players have been treated, the way Swansea's fans treated Bradley,sorry, no, this is not just some pure performance test, some of it is can you overcome a fairly high entry barrier and then overcome bullsh*t once there.
     
  5. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #30 juvechelsea, Jul 24, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
    The whole premise of the bias is false. I buy that a few in demand coaches at elite teams are better than our best. But most of English football is not coached by the equivalent of Pep or Klopp. Chris Wilder at The Blades hasn't coached in the EPL. Javi Gracia at Watford has only 3 seasons in the past decade where he won more games than he lost. Conversely, Owen Coyle and a few other marginal EPL coaches have come to MLS and gotten creamed.

    Personally I think Porter, Arena, Armas, Vanney, Schelotto, Bradley, Almeyda, and Vermes could all handle the level. The issue is they will not be given the top jobs where the team is set to win, and the bottom relegation jobs for which they are competitive, are often panic selected off an approved list of mediocre but English managers, many of whom upon further scrutiny having previously relegated some other team as well. So the people they will go with are either almost perceived as another country's nationals (Wagner with his German accent) or they will be Americans probably hired by an American owner, at which point if it's anywhere outside cosmopolitan London the fans will freak.

    Someplace like Fulham would probably be the interesting perch, owner is a citizen, has an American team, team has plenty of American history, team is in a cosmopolitan part of London. But the fact you have to go down a suitability checklist says a lot.

    Last issue we face is that a normal progression item for a coach would be regional progression but Mexico can be a safety and payment issue, similar for the few other pro leagues, no Canada high level league, and then many many amateur leagues. So like Sampson or Bora might try it but that door isn't very open. Which makes you look like a MLS creature even if you don't have much regional choice.
     
  6. dougtee

    dougtee Member+

    Feb 7, 2007
    i dont care who as long as they are interested in recruiting dual nationals since no one else seems so inclined
     
  7. skim172

    skim172 Member+

    Feb 20, 2013
    Dave Sarachan.

    Wait, he might be over-qualified.
     
    Marius Tresor and keller4president repped this.
  8. keller4president

    Jan 5, 2006
    To people who want current MLS head coaches to become USMNT assistants - it just ain't happening. No coach in their right mind would make that change, which likely also involves a pay cut.
     
    Marko72, tomásbernal and Pegasus repped this.
  9. keller4president

    Jan 5, 2006
    I think my original list offered a good balance of names.

    If we want someone with head coaching experience, let's get Mastroeni or Kinnear.

    If we want someone who will coach our strikers/attackers, let's go with Ante Razov or Preki. And Conor Casey might not be a bad option if Colorado decides not to make him permanent coach.

    If we want someone with maximum experience and X's and O's knowledge, go with Kinnear (18 years experience in MLS coaching), Robin Fraser (12 years experience), Kerry Zavagnin (10 years experience), Mike Lapper (9 years experience), or Steve Ralston (8 years experience).

    I also like Tab Ramos and think it's time for a change at the u-20 level, but not sure Tab wants to be #2 under Gregg.

    Cherundolo also a good option with five years experience, but most of that at the youth level.

    I would love Landon as the assistant, but he's such a big name that he would draw the focus away from Gregg I think. Plus not sure he wants to scout and watch video of all the opponents, which is a lot of the job.

    None of the TV guys want to coach - that's why they're on TV. Easier money.
     
    TimB4Last repped this.
  10. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    yeah, i am concerned it still feels like a political issue to be managed -- slow trialing of options -- as opposed to, these are who i see the best players as. i thought the idea was going to be get back to this being a sporting question. nor do i think it would be an issue where the players cared that much unless we kept bringing old cycle players back who might revive it. it's the old team that thought foreigners were being favored. the kids wouldn't have a beef, too busy fighting for playing time and no history to base a beef off of.
     
    Marius Tresor repped this.
  11. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    You're confusing HC experience with currently being a first division coach. Wynalda is a HC but in USL. Sarachan won SS and USOC but is in USL. Kinnear won 2 MLS titles but is currently an assistant.

    There is little more tepid than offering Friedel and then offering his assistant Lapper, offf that dog of a NER team. This is supposed to be about getting a brain trust of successes together not elevating one of the bigger MLS flops into NT jobs because they are out of work. Are you kidding me.

    Similarly mindboggling is hearing Ralston suggested. He was in Houston when it began to deteriorate, followed Kinnear to SJ, that didn’t go well. What is recommending these people? Player caps? This is a coaching job. How did the teams they coach, actually do?

    In both these cases, the switch to Arena and Almeyda has proven massive. Why on earth would I want the staff from the dog periods?

    I’m not sure who I listed that is a current HC in MLS and would have that combination of contract binding and salary cut. That argument might fly for the broadcasters, but don’t they work irregularly? They might be at a higher paygrade when they work but it would matter how busy they are.

    And beyond that, I would prompt a discussion of national pride. We have arguably selected a bargain basement HC on supposed “value.” But we have 9 figures in the USSF bank. We could splash out money for the men and pursue the level of coaching the women get – relative to their competition. But we don’t. And the argument that people should favor the money is basically a define-your-life-as-economics one. What about national pride? Many of these guys are set. They earned 7 figures as players year after year. How about giving back? A substantial chunk of their career is commentary and critique of the NT. If you really give a crap – like you act on TV – why not get this side of the mic and fix things. I mean, I could understand your paycut argument if we’re talking some random MLS vet. Kyle Martino or something. Never hit the contract lottery. Had to retire early. Needs the money. But most of this list who you are saying take the money, they are already rich, it’s a game where the account number keeps a score. I don’t want to get too political but dude everything is not just money.

    We act like this needs to get better. We act like it’s still something of a crisis. OK, drop the cushy job and help fix it. Or we can hire second rate former players who got fired from their last coaching gig on a poor team and pretend like somehow the NT gets better by scrapeing the bottom of the MLS barrel. I mean, have you not kicked around Cincy’s coaching staff that just got fired? I am sure they are available...

    FWIW I see a similar clash between moneygrubbing and national pride in the club snobbery conundrum we are in. Freddy Adu recently pointed out in an interview he wishes he didn’t always take the biggest deal each time, and that he had worked harder while he was playing. How many players do we have on loans or benches? People mock Bradley/Altidore/Dempsey for coming home but it used to be a routine thing among many such players to lock in positive playing situations around qualifying. You would take risks after the world cup but try to be someplace getting playing time when we needed to qualify. That sort of selfless, pro-NT effort is now seen by the snobs as anathema, as insufficiently ambitious. Are we trying to make money and play for the biggest name or are we trying to have the sharpest NT? Sometimes you have a choice.

    FWIW2: I am sure many of the USWNT could make more money in France. But you notice where they all play right now. And that probably facilitates all the camps and games they get together. And you notice what is in the trophy case.
     
  12. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #37 juvechelsea, Jul 25, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2019
    FWIW you dissed the broadcasters as coaches thing but cursory web searching reveals Cobi Jones is a LA area club coach and Balboa is Colorado academy coach when he's not on TV. Landon has coached in the Homegrown Game. The leap I am suggesting is modest and some are already toe in the water in coaching already. The sales pitch is fairly simple. You are set on money. You love the NT. We need your help. You already look like you want to coach. Make this your day job. When you get sick of it TV will probably welcome you right back.

    I mean what stuns me is with the set of people we have run through our program, McBride, Landon, Beasley, Wynalda, Howard, Keller, etc. etc., the coaching is going to be second rate trash from the leftovers. Everyone we've had play and it's going to be Berhalter and Wolff, and then, what Lapper? Zavagnin? Really?

    I would indulge some of the smart bench player gibberish if they had resumes that impressed any. But it feels a little too much like settling in terms of both their playing and coaching careers.
     
  13. keller4president

    Jan 5, 2006
    What dual-nationals are you speaking of? I'm not aware of any that are really crucial at the point. Theoson Siebatcheu is the major one - but I don't think the coach will make the difference for him. Kik Pierie is another - but he seems pretty committed to the Netherlands.

    Recruiting for the US is easy - you either want to play for us or you don't, with an almost guaranteed chance of playing in World Cup every four years (if you're good enough), plus good marketing opportunities.
     
  14. gogorath

    gogorath Member

    None
    United States
    May 12, 2019
    Alex Mendez, Richie Ledezma, Julian Araujo, Uly Llanez and so on.

    A significant portion of the talented youth in the US system is Mexican American.

    Toss in someone like Sergino Dest from Europe as well.
     
    Marius Tresor repped this.
  15. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    Winoman repped this.
  16. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #41 juvechelsea, Jul 26, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2019
    I see zero point in bringing back the same set of people you just camped and played a month. You're trying to grow and you didn't finish first. That requires some degree of change for rational possibility. To bring back the same set would be to suggest you had a chemistry problem with Mexico and not a talent or selection (or injury) one.

    There are a few of the U20s who should be brought in, if but to test where they are in their development, and whether wrinkles and all they are better than the proverbial 23rd veteran man on the roster.

    eg, Richards, Soto, Weah, Mendez, Pomykal. I get the argument will be "but they're not proven yet." But that basically begs the question. And is Mihailovic? Roldan? Trapp? The team already has a fair amount of trash that hasn't had to perform, and all you have to do is be better than one. Hell, in some cases, it should suffice that someone like Mendez can cream a free kick on cage and that alone is tactically useful. We have lost the plot on tactically useful subs and a balanced bench with speed, height, technique, defense. Which is why we're sending in a LB down a goal. Is he'd rather send out someone he favors, and leave Boyd in the doghouse, than make a situationally appropriate change to chase the result most aggressively.

    I thought Gall, Lletget, and Holmes this year undermined the idea that any given player on hand -- the incumbent -- is better and more proven than his untried competition. Too many times a sub comes in and outplays his starter. We have a bad incumbency bias/defensive reaction, for a team that is not top of the pile, and is in a rebuild. I get settling on certain key players but it says something when Roldan is a repeat cap and beats out Sargent for a last roster spot.

    I think that while GB has been fairly thorough of many in MLS, there are probably a handful of players like Miles Robinson who are playing well but not on the team yet, who deserve their chance.

    I would also like to see a wisely curated set of unfortunate injured players back, Holmes, Adams, Lletget. I fear that will also include Brooks and Yedlin which is going backwards.

    To me even if you loved that GC team, it had several games of run out, and you save that for LoN. You want to know what else is out there. And clearly I don't buy that for various reasons we were optimized to even have that attitude. I think we should continue tire kicking with a goal of settling on a unit for qualifying when that arrives.
     
  17. keller4president

    Jan 5, 2006
    All these players are pretty safely in the US camp. If they leave, it's because they're not good enough for our team. I don't think the identity of the coach plays a big role for dual-nationals - it's more about which country they feel more allegiance too (and which nation offers better marketing opportunities).
     
  18. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    All due respect but we've lost at least one player in recent years who felt insufficiently wanted. I get the spin is blame the player for loyalty. But at a certain point that's just excusing laziness if the player just wanted to be talked to like he is in the plans, or brought in and capped early, and we were disorganized, in a hiring process, buck-passing, or otherwise unable to respond.

    This is basically a college coach who blames the recruits he loses for how his recruiting class looks. I actually understand a Subotic or Rossi. I am not going to beat us up over that. But I think at this point we may be losing people instead because (a) we are no longer top dog and (b) we have become smug and excuse laden on the ones we miss.

    What I expect is we try hard and what happens, happens. If a player publicly says he is in play, I don't even want to hear this self serving loyalty gibberish because they communicated they were within the realm of a pitch to acquire their services. Our job is to put together the best team possible, not wrap ourselves in the flag.

    I think loyalty should be sorted on the field. I think the far more sporting-valid concern is do they look fully committed and good in the shirt. I don't really care if they made the fans feel fuzzy with press comments.
     
    Marius Tresor repped this.
  19. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    I mean, add up the layers of suboptimal self regard here

    a coach who plays favorites
    fans who want him to field only dual nationals deemed loyal enough
    fans who want us to run out big club players
    whatever doghouse or injury thing happened with boyd where he subs a LB instead

    cumulatively we are veering further and further away from the best selection that starts the best performers

    it's like USMNT
    caveat does the coach like you
    caveat did you p*ss him off
    caveat did he bring a favorite instead
    caveat do you play for the right team
    caveat do you get enough minutes to satisfy him
     
    Marius Tresor and manq360 repped this.
  20. manq360

    manq360 Member

    Jun 17, 2009
    Portland, OR
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, too many things get in the way of selecting the best team for our country. Gregg is hampered, I believe, by his bosses in who he selects. He is hampered, tho he need not be, by his biases toward any specific player. Gregg also plays to favorites (see, Michael B. and Will T.) And, like so many on BS, he is afraid (or just does not want) to play more or less unproven youngsters. This, I believe, will be the thing most likely to come back and bite him in the a$$. The youth movement should have started when he took over...or before. Time moves fast, and we will soon be in qualifying games for 2022. Throw those youngsters in now, start building for the future. I know he wanted to win the Gold Cup, so he thought he was being safe with his picks...you see where that got him. Please no more of, "he's not old enough or proven". If he is right for the part...play him.

    Back on topic. I do not see him or his superiors selecting anyone who does not go along with the party line. I do not think that those who have been mentioned who do not go along with Gregg's previous selections, will not be considered. I hope I am wrong.
     
    Marius Tresor repped this.
  21. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    one thing that concerned me structurally was when I heard something like, that stewart's GM office was not just a scouting apparatus for the coach, but that he would be sitting down meeting with them for recommendations. i want them to hire the coach for how he picks players. i want them to hire the GM for how he hires coaches and handles practical administration. if anyone is talking to the coach about scouting and selection, i want them to report to the coach or be in a deferential position. i do not like the idea of a non-coach who on paper is his boss, coming to GB to talk about names. i would think the conflict of interest there would lead to pressure to select some or all of the top-down suggestions.

    put differently, i am not sure i want the old midtable Union GM suggesting names. too much of what is happening feels like we are staffing a mediocre MLS team on a budget and not the national team. i wanted him to hire GB and then start hiring the various YNT openings we had. but ironically i think USSF retained a lot of that power.
     
    Marius Tresor repped this.
  22. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    it should be a team of the best players we have, thing being, last cycle a bunch of players retired or aged out, and then some of the bunch after them like nagbe have proven mediocre, and about all the foundation that was left was pulisic. so to me it's a cupboard's bare situation where the next burst of quality is the kids coming up at 20 or so. i think there are a bunch of overrated trapp type players a la nagbe but they can claim they have their pro careers going. so in many cases it's proven mediocrity versus the argument that someone's pro career has barely started. one can argue rhetorically that we at least know the mediocre are solid pros but that's often kind of a fib. and it also tends to downplay that many young players got a cap and goal history last year we now ignore. they are not all a tabula rasa, and some showed better than others.

    far as i am concerned it's a team that would rather take the risk of going off the cliff on a 30 year old than take the risk of anything on a 20 year old. it's a contradictory position to take given how pulisic and mckennie have done.

    the conflict I see is "win now" versus "win in 3 years." not saying we try to lose ever but the reason we err on the side of age and have done so for several years now, is the idea that the devil you know is the better chance at winning Gold Cup or whatever competition we have that week. the problem being not enough effort is going into running out a team that will be young and fit and ready come next year, or for Qatar. we systematically overrate the chance of the vets to win now, and omit that prospects have both upside and downside risks. so vets with proven losing histories are somehow seen as sunshine while kids are somehow associated with risk. if we were not so obsessed with winning next week we'd see it the exact opposite, that betting on 30 year olds is a losing game and that if this is going to get better it's going to be identifying the new talent with upside. there are no guarantees but the idea is to run them through in bulk and keep the ones who excel.

    i don't even mind it if sensibly aged veterans like nagbe or morales get an equal runout. i just think they should be judged by the same metric of performance and not with a finger on the scale that "he's been there" or "devil we know." we didn't qualify with been there and devils we know. so the incumbency and veteran favoritism should go away until it's earned. we could run a team this way before because we did well and qualified giving some rational justification to status quo and veteran bias.

    also, like i was saying above, there needs to be some consideration for squad rotation, for how the bench sets up, for having plenty of players available with a variety of skill sets. fast wings. someone who can head a ball at striker. someone like Mendez who can hit a dead ball hard on cage and get periodic goals. both trinidad and the GC final felt like roster messes. plan like we might have to come from behind. don't leave yourself a trash bench of hustle players who are your gritty favorites but lack the speed or precision to create a goal when we need one.
     
    Marius Tresor repped this.
  23. gogorath

    gogorath Member

    None
    United States
    May 12, 2019
    At the end of the day, there should always be some movement in the roster to evaluate new talent, even if only to plan for the future and injuries.

    The question is: how much?

    I don't think it is overly productive to do almost a clean sweep in a short camp scenario, mostly because I don't think there's a ton of value in evaluating players in a situation where everyone is new, no one has cohesion and the overall talent level of the player's teammates is well below the standard they would actually be in if they made the roster.

    I don't know if we flip over the entire team and get crushed against Mexico ... what evaluation do you get out of that that you couldn't from film and camp?

    So I'd like to see focused, targeted testing of players based on team needs and attempting to not change too many things in interrelated positions (if we are trying out a new Pulisic backup and a new left back, let's give them Arriola to play with, not Johnathon Lewis).

    My focus areas were: Striker, DM, Wingers and LB.

    If DM is going to be solved by Adams or other internal options, that shifts the priorities.

    But that means perhaps we see Weah (winger), Sargent (striker), Robinson (LB), Pomykal (shifting CM) plus some of the guys who were hurt (Holmes, Yedlin).

    I don't think it's the best idea to see 10+ turnover in a 23 man roster unless some of our top players are opting out. Ideally each game would see only 3-4 outfield options changing. I don't want to Pomykal out there with Roldan and Trapp and wonder why he isn't working wonders.
     
  24. Marius Tresor

    Marius Tresor Member

    Aug 1, 2014
    Nepotism running wild there. The problem is, nepotism can only get you so far.
     
  25. Pegasus

    Pegasus Member+

    Apr 20, 1999
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    BTW, all of the Wolff talk makes me wonder whatever happened to Clint Mathis?
     

Share This Page