It's not the system that's the problem, it's the kick and chase/route 1 soccer that is the problem. Heinrich, Ellis, French are the biggest culprits of teaching that style of play.
Other than the general lack of the ability to win a penalty shoot out by the US at any level, the difference here isnt the coach. The difference here is professional players against a college all-star team.
This entire U20 process was a joke. It is Heinrichs and Ellis and it is the female cronies they continue to appoint jobs to. It's not sexist to criticize female coaches. It's part of the territory just like analyzing male coaches (BJ Snow crashed too and somehow is still with U17s). I'm sure there are some female coaches that could do great...no doubt. But the ones in power right now and making decisions aren't up to standard and are clueless. In addition, Reyna never made one decision intended for the female program and, even if he did, those two wouldn't be able to translate his thoughts. When you're the Technical Director and Development Director-turned-NT coach respectively, then Heinrichs and Ellis are the issue. How can you have those full time titles and salaries and not be responsible for the NT youth program? Impossible!
I doubt that other teams will pull away in terms of technical skills. At least when it comes to the senior side. Plenty of adept talent there. Horan, Pugh and Lavelle sure might add to that fold one day.
Why so defensive. All I pointed out is that the move to a 4-3-3 came from the curriculum Reyna developed and, yes, it is for both males and females. And, it is incorporated in the USFS coach education and licensing system from top to bottom. I am not defending Heinrichs and Ellis, nor have I ever. I'm just stating facts, since a poster attributed the 4-3-3 to Heinrichs and Ellis. Given your post, you obviously have not known the facts on where the movement towards a 4-3-3 has come from. Now you know.
Tournaments at youth age groups, I think, are more about identifying players could contribute to the full squad rather than gauging which nations will be powerhouses in the future. Some teams that do quite well at youth levels (North Korea or the African nations are a great example) often fail to translate at the full national team level. I'd still like to see more than a handful of US players playing better, technically and tactically, and at least put in a performance that isn't mediocre at best. They looked sapped of all confidence pretty early on.
No matter where the mandate to play that formation came from, it's a coach's job to recognize when something doesn't work and change it. If the powers of US soccer come down on her afterward, then so be it. Better to ask forgiveness than permission. French looked perplexed and certainly Heinrichs, Ellis, and the couple of other people in charge of US Women's Soccer youth development must bear some of the responsibility. They gave French the job.
Stop echoing out the public propaganda that USSF spits out. Most people on here, me included, read the Reyna curriculum (Klinsmann really followed that huh?). Who cares? NOTHING do to with the shortcomings of the female YNT program. And what goes on in coaching education and licensing system has nothing to do with it either. Everything you're saying IS defending Heinrichs, Ellis and French. French is at a World Cup. Be a coach. Have a feel for the game and a vision for the team you picked and play any formation you want. Don't even try to tell people French did what she did (or didn't do) because of USSF's direction. And the same stuff will happen next year with Ellis and the Full Team. Namdynamo said it best..."clueless." Semantics, jargon, mathematics and long winded explanations can't hide the fact that the females in charge need to be fired.
This team was destined to fail soon as Michelle French was hired. The reaction when that hire was announced was 'Huh?!'. Because she no high level coaching experience yet somehow was selected to lead a National team. Pathetic direction for US Soccer. To coach a National team you need experience, an ability coach and motivate, and be able to read the game. Being a lesbian shouldn't be one the qualities that they need to look for; has no bearing on if you can coach or not yet US Soccer thinks that is important on the female coaching side.
Well there will be times when the talent out weighs the disadvantage. But look at the 2012 team. All those players on the German team had just come off an 8 month season in the Bundesliga. Maroszan has been a pro since she was 14. She was starter for an always strong Frankfurt team. She had already had caps with their full team. That's one of the reasons the 2012 championship was one to savor. If the goal was to win the U20 WC every two years, and I dont believe it should be the goal, then the way to do it is pull all the players out of school, put them in residency for 6 months before the tournament and let the coaching staff actually effect the way they play. The actual goal is to give players international experience in a WC environment. To that end it is working and occasionally, their team will be so talented theyll win.
The job of the US coach isnt to teach anyone to play soccer. The job is to identify players and fit them together as best they can. IMO French went out of her way to try and select some technical players even tho she had to dip in high school age players to do it. The problem is much bigger than who coaches the team. In fact I dont think u could find any coach who could consistently win with the current development system.
It isn't the job of a coach to teach anyone to play at the full international level, but it is most certainly the job of a youth coach to teach players, guide them, and ultimately instill in them the confidence to use all of that coaching and training in games. At this age level, I think a coach needs to have the ability to know when something isn't working and relay that information to his or her players. I certainly don't know what French said at halftime or from the sideline, but I doubt she said, "Well ladies, I picked you but you're on your own from here." It didn't appear like the US changed much except pushing Horan higher up the field toward the end. The onus is on French and her staff for that. We all know the development system is broken. In a perfect world, players would arrive with technical and tactical ability which would allow a coach to just fit players together like a puzzle—like you said. If that's not realistic, I would hope the coach has the ability to teach and, if you can't win every game or every tournament you enter, at least make better players for the future.
As a Goal Keeper, and one of the biggest supporters of Kate Rowland, I was extremely disappointed in the preparation of both her and the rest of the shooting players on the US squad. The first 3 kicks from the US were equivilant of players at U12. Soft and in the middle third of the goal. Brutal. As far as Rowland, she was so hesitant on every effort. Especially the equalizer in regular time. Commit to the side you read and you make those saves. No excuse to make the right move only to not be able to corral a simple shot. Emba5rrassing on her and the US shooters
Lavelle is the biggest reason they lost today. She kicked a really horrible back pass that turned the ball over which led to the handball in the box on Amack. Lavelle's game today was as disappointing as Michael Bradley in the World Cup. Very unexpected like. Also, Horan should always play up top. You don't need to get tricky by putting her in the midfield. She'll get more touches in or near the box if she plays up top, which is what this team needed most in a close game. With Lavelle crumbling today, and Horan not being active up top, this led to no offense after the 6th minute.
Well if u wanted an inspirational speech, French was probably the wrong coach. I agree with u 100% that the development system needs an over haul. I also agree that the coaching philosophy in general for US national teams across the board is ill conceived and badly implemented. But at the end of the day Korea DPR didnt get a goal in the run of play despite all that possession and the US could have won by making their PKs.
Does Rowland always kick like that or was it the wet conditions. While she is a great punter her goal kicks were dying before midfield.
I think (sorry for bringing up this issue) its a turf thing. She tends to drive her foot into the groung hitting down on the ball on Goal Kicks. In most of the college ball in the Pac 12 the games are played on immaculate natural surface. Atificial surface grabs at the cleat upon contact and can kill a Goal Kick. I was more disappointed with her inaccuracy on pass backs. She seemed to never take a touch and just boot (mostly out of bounds) The one time she made a true distribution later in the game to the left, it opened the field considerably. Not sure why they didn't build from the back more vers the booming punt
This is nonsense. Horan was by far the u.s. best player and did great in the #10 role. She masked a clear lack of quality in this side with her hold up play. Lavelle didn't have a great game per her standards, but she was still one of the top 3 on the field for u.s. and comparing her game to Bradley's debacle at WC is ridiculous. If anything I only fault french for starting that atrocious Harvard kid and sticking with her far too long...bottom line is this group of players isn't good enough compared to the best in the world.
You are correct...and I officially come off as an ass....Pristine pitch that in my crappy streaming feed gave no show of divits or any other blemishes. Disregard my prior comments
I didn't say Horan can't be good in the midfield. I'm saying this was not the ideal game to play her in that role. They need her presence up top, because no one else is really going to give them anything against North Korea. Doniak only had one good chance, and thankfully she buried it off the rebound. Purse, Green, and Jordan were shut down, and that was going to be the case against North Korea's organized defense.