I agreed with you. I think Cordeiro is much worse. I have been a strong critics of Gulati, but at least the dude seems to have a genuine interest in growing soccer in the US; and to his credit; he did. He even went out and spend crazy $$$ on a foreign coach that challenged his power and the authority. As for Cordeiro, what the f*ck does he do exactly? Has anyone heard a peep from him?
Interesting and important idea. Some disjointed thoughts: 1. The big picture sentiment appears to be that given the state of the MNT and especially its corporate management at the SUM/USSF level, something big and dramatic needs to happen to try to spur change. I totally co-sign on this broad notion. If Couva did not spark radical reorganization, then we can't trust the leadership to do anything meaningful just based on the team's actual results. 2. In terms of whether a fan protest and boycott would work, these are actually two different things. A protest entails action while a boycott entails inaction, though they both seek to achieve the same end. My sense is that the former would be more effective than the latter. If we could convince a lot of people just not to attend games or watch them on TV, there might be a dip in ticket sales or Neilsen ratings (or whatever metric measures viewership of live sports), but (a) that's not that visible, and (b) the USSF could explain it away or just hide it. By contrast, a big and embarrassing series of dramatic ongoing protests--that could do some damage by getting media attention and hurting the USSF's brand and prestige. Plus, it would more effectively channel the sense of rage and frustration that many of us feel around here by engaging in action rather than just not showing up. There's also a way to blend these two, for example the mass organized walkout suggested elsewhere. Imagine if they sold out the US Soccer supporters section and then had everyone leave except for 20 or so fans holding up a series of banners--"Berhalter out," "USSF sucks," or something much more clever and impactful that I am not in a position to think about right now. Then you'd have a conspicuously empty and silent section of the stadium except for some people with one big unmissable banner. I'm not wedded to that particular idea but my overall sense is (1) yes people would be on board with something like this, (2) action would be more impactful than inaction, especially if it was embarrassing to USSF/SUM, and (3) it would have to be really really big and visible--something that TV could not ignore and that media would talk about--in order to work well. ETA a couple things: First, what I've said here is entirely consistent, and perhaps dependent on, support and participation from fan groups. Who else could effectuate these kinds of visible protests? Second, these kinds of impactful and embarrassing (to USSF/SUM, not to the team) protests could have impact by harming sponsors--that bad vibe is not something you want to be associated with. Imagine if when media showed pictures of fans with protest banners at the games, companies' ads were included in the background. Terrible PR.
Carlos's strength is building relationships with other members nations and confederation heads. Not saying that is right/wrong, just that is what he's good at and spends a lot of time doing it. Sunil liked the public face, charismatic, etc. Carlos seems to be behind the scenes with top counterparts in the industry/corporate relationships. He has 2-3 layers below him focusing on the technical.
Honestly, if you go to a game without a bag over your head or protest banner, then you're more than complicit. You're enabling. Stop it.
What you need is for the supporters' section to hollow out but leave a three or four deep perimeter so security cannot get through and remove the small group in the middle holding the banner. And that lets the protesters in the middle know that while it looks like they are standing alone, a lot of people have their back. Groups operate better this way.
We are not pleased. This isn't about an individual result. It's about a year (well, years) of poor results. We need a change in attitude and we need to see wins. https://t.co/mlrx9xP0dN— AO (@AmericanOutlaws) November 12, 2019 If someone can get a hold of them, I think that would at least be an interesting dialogue. I'm happy to talk to them myself, their DMs are closed. I'm curious if they are interested in a show of some kind of protest. I'd rather not have it be personalized to Greg Berhalter or even Stewart - whom I have no personal animus towards and don't believe deserve being publicly reviled - but rather towards USSF, targeting their incompetence and highlighting the risk they bringing upon US Soccer.
I am more than happy to help with this. Let me know if there's anything you need help with in this effort. PM is fine too if you prefer.
Personally, I do not believe there is corruption at play, and note that any evidence of it is purely circumstantial - in that Jay Berhalter words for US Soccer, and Earnie Stewart and Berhalter are friends. Thus I don't think taking a corruption angle is the right one here either. I think the best thing to protest is incompetence and poor governance. I note there's posts above that note that there is governance where I've alleged there is none. I'm happy to see that there is a Board of Directors there. Publicly, they have not updated their business plan since 2003. https://www.ussoccer.com/governance/board-of-directors/business-plans I've looked through their meeting minutes since June 6 of 2018, when Stewart was hired as GM. As it related to the US MNT August 16th, 2018 - Carlos Bocanegra and Ryan Mooney reviewed the process of hiring of men’s national team general manager. Earnie Stewart discussed his goals and objectives as the new men’s national team general manager. Oct 3rd, 2018 - None October 19th, 2018 - None December 1st - 2018 - The Board was presented with (1) a presentation summarizing the search and selection process for the position and the General Manager’s recommendation for the hire, previously approved by the Technical Committee; (please note - the following people are listed on US Soccer's technical committee TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Committee Co-Chairs Carlos Bocanegra - Former USMNT player Lori Lindsey - Former USWMNT player Staff Liaison Committee Members Mike Cullina - general US Soccer leader, does not seem to have a professional soccer career a player, holds US A license, was not a member at this time Don Garber - we all know who he is John Motta - Never a player, serves as President of US Adult Soccer Association Tim Turney - does not seem to have a professional career as a player, long time Youth soccer soch, National A License. a big player in Youth soccer) December 11th, 2018 - None February 15th - Earnie Stewart updated the Board on the January camp and the Men’s National Team activities. Two behind the scenes videos of the Men’s National Team were shown. May 25th, 2019 - None July 1st, 2019 - None I also reviewed the hierarchy, What it shows is people report to Stewart as his employees. I do not see evidence of an independent board or committee that assesses the performance of our MNT, YNTs, etc - or is there to provide guidance, and as necessary, veto power of the GM. Further, I do not see evidence of technical expertise from a soccer point on the Board, other than Carlos Bocanegra and Lori Lindsey. There is an Athletes Council, but it does not seem to have power, nor does it have posted minutes or meetings. It is also not listed among official US Soccer governance committees. https://www.ussoccer.com/governance/committees And in fact, none of those committees would seem to provide oversight of the USMNT
As I look into US Soccer, I think the following would be my demands: A true technical committee, that works with the US Soccer GM. They would be made up of current and former directors, GMs, managers, coaches and ex-players, both men and woman. I would suggest a minimum of 15. They would provide the GM position technical recommendations on all positions in the Senior and Youth positions, as well as the power to force action on any coaching position, by some sort of voting methodology. They would also review performance of al National Teams and their coaches. An immediate review of the current MNT coach, by that technical committee representation of Yanks Abroad in some form or manner. They need a voice, equal to that of MLS Sunshine on all meetings minutes as it relates to our National Team. Within in reason A US Soccer Supporters representative to be on the Board, as voted upon by supporters Bi-Annual shareholders meetings, to include supporters, domestic and YA representation, and of course media coverage These are just some initial thoughts, would welcome others.
I like the YA representation. It’s a shame that players who play abroad basically kiss their NT goodbye unless/until they make it big. I’d add Performance Measures. What are they? In nearly every job in America, there is a line in the sand that says, hey, we need these things accomplished. For instance, Win Gold Cup. Win LoN. Win Hex. Advance out of Group. Make QF in WC. Press Conferences with AO and other fan groups. There has to be someone other than the USSF toadies who ask some questions. Annual Player Surveys. What do the players think? I can’t believe that Pulisic and company feel good about the program right now. Now, it’s true that not everything needs to be aired from the locker room but there’s also the point that we don’t need to wait until there’s a scandal to give the players a voice.
Respectfully, appoo, they could do a lot of this and nothing would change. they would fill the technical committee with yes-men and get to the same place we are now. besides it would take forever. I fear that they only thing one could reasonable ask is for someone(s) to resign. I haven't thought it through but structural reform is way beyond what we could hope to achieve.
I appreciate @appoo's generosity of spirit in saying that there's no corruption here. I also think it's unlikely that there's no large-scale, massive dark conspiracy going on at USSF. I think it's just the kind of systemic incompetence and self-oriented decisionmaking that often arises when organizations ossify. I don't actually think if you gave the USSF decision makers sodium pentathol, they'd say anything that different than they are publicly. But that's just the problem: They're all engaged in groupthink so that they really do believe that their course is the best one, and will continue believing this despite just about any evidence to the contrary. You see this in many large-scale disasters featuring organizations--the subprime mortgage crisis, for example, was created by people who really did believe what they were doing was ok and even good (housing always goes up in value, right??), but were just tragically and dangerously wrong. So I don't think USSF is likely to change at all, and certainly not without some kind of exogenous shock. I think the only way this might happen is if they start losing money and prestige--mainly, sponsors. (Ticket sales mostly come from opposing fans and mildly interested neutrals, so a supporters' boycott could do only so much--though still a good idea IMO.) And even then they might not budge, but just become more defense, as Earnie has while the evidence of Gagg's mismanagement mounts.
I think the first demand should be to separate MLS/SUM from the USSF. As long as they're still intertwined, conflicts of interests continues to exist and progress for USSF is not possible.
I think that MLS is far too influential with USSF as there's no one strong enough to stand up to Garber but that's not the same thing as corruption. It's terrible governance and bad decision making. That being said, incompetence isn't really better than bad intent.
This won't be necessary if you separate MLS/SUM from the USSF. If this MLS/SUM/USSF marriage stays intact, YA representation wouldn't have their voice heard anyway, IMO. Also, I like the idea of having a committee/board overseeing the coach's hiring and performance assessment. This committee/board should be able to ask the coach some tough questions (such as why a certain YA is not called up, what does player X bring vs Player Y, why was it that we lost to 2-0 to Canada with only 2 shots on goal, what changes need to happen in the next game, etc.) Having 1 man in charge might work for the club level, but not for a National sporting organization. The Olympics is not run by 1 man (at least I hope not).
As I posted earlier, these are the group of people that can make the most changes (in the particular order below). 1 - The players. One player might not make a difference, but if a group of players stand up and walk together; they can force change. There will not be a team without the players, just like there won't be a GM or Ford without the union workers. 2 - The sponsors. Money talk. You can't sell your products or advertise your brand without the affiliations you have with powerful people and corporate sponsors. If Nike, Coca Cola, Visa, etc. threaten to pull their partnerships; they will force USSF to make changes. 3 - The supporters/fans. Once supporters/fans start to protest and boycott games, the players will take notice. The sponsors will take notice, and they will react. It's a ripple effect, but it has to start somewhere. And I think it's easiest to start with the supporters/fans. Once the players see the movements, they will start to send out a few tweets of supports, and things will begin to take off.
Someone did resign, and I think things got worse. What we need is more characters and attitudes in this program. We need some crazy heads like Klinsi, Jones, Lalas, etc. in the USSF leadership that's more than willing to stand up and challenge the authority and dare to think outside the box.
Can't that be done with the current set up? Just push to replace the leadership and add a specific person.