seems going through all the trouble to call players in and have camps only for 1 friendly when most other teams (and the usmnt in the past) always have 2 is a waste. why? what is the rationale (if any) behind this? if players are flying over from europe for a match (or even just leaving their team in north america) ...should have 2 matches not just 1, imo. with 1, not every player will get their chance -despite flying over....many players from jan camp didnt even get playing time.....weak from USSF, imo.
News shocker! An organization that had a lame duck president, no technical director, and no full-time coach failed to organize as many friendlies as they could have. We're lucky we got what we did........
that doesnt answer my question. if youre gonna go through with 1 friendly...why not 2? can't really be that much extra work to go from 1 to 2. youre telling me all the logistical work of jan camp plus a friendly would be much different than a jan camp and 2 friendlies??? is there some kind of reason beyond laziness? it seems intentional, imo...and i'm curious what is behind that intention. is sarachan behind this? maybe he thinks less games increases his chances of getting the full-time gig???
I think this point is valid. My only guess is USSF figures to lose money during this time, we’re not invested because everything will change with the new coach, we’re hoping to avoid further embarrassment, and the point of these matches are simply to offer some interest for fans to not totally tune out.
There should be no excuse for not scheduling 2 games. A country with as much influence as the USA and a federation with as much money as the USSF should always be scheduling two. I don't like these excuses people are making. Did Italy and Netherlands not schedule two games?
I guess the real question is which Federation who did not play these last couple days wanted to play the USA? There really is not much incentive for teams to play Estados Unidos.
THey could have found another nation in the same boat as us wanting to give young players some international experience. It didn't have to be a "big team." I don't know. Czech Republic. Cameroon. Canada. China. I'm just working my way thru the C's here..................... Cape Verde Islands, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cote d'Ivoire (oh I had to cheat there). We could have just had somebody work thru the rolodex in alphabetical order. The horrible truth is this. As somebody said earlier, it would be a money loser (a bad excuse, but probably is an excuse). And there really was nobody in charge when the decisions needed to be made.
it' not just this window...it's every window since the world cup, even jan camp.... can a reporter with access ask sarachan and co. why?
The fewer the games the fewer the disappointments and the fewer the chances of unearthing talent capable of a run of good play with the USMNT. So the fewer the times USSF can be questioned, and fewer the moments where the old guard needs to explain itself. This is a maximally minimal solution to the extrema problem of a extremely incompetent leadership. Cordeiro, like Sunil, likes the Economy of it all.
It really is a combo of things. Teams right now want to play other teams that qualified for the World Cup as tune-ups. In addition, the fans are still not showing up, they can't find anyone to take their powerless and pointless GM job, so they can't start a real search for the coach. And a half time president. No way they were ever going to be able to pull off 2 games a window.
I don't buy the excuse of lack of availability when there are about 80 teams which would be passable. It does in all likelihood come down to (short-sighted) monetary interests and maybe disappointment while also needing to appease the public with a half-measure of hope. Don't even think having 1 friendly instead of 2 constitutes a half-measure. Because a sample of one does next to nothing when it comes to info extraction while 2 does if they're both clearly positive or negative in one direction. Like to evaluate new players on a majority of three sample. Also think one friendly puts pressure on players and being in camp away from their club that long with only a 1 game payoff largely wastes our player's times.
What's the point of gathering all of this data on players when the current coaching staff is temporary? There will likely be a new coach and staff by the summer. Then that coach and staff will want/need to evaluate players and gather their own data. IMO, these past two windows have been a waste. They are doing the bare minimum to fulfill their media contract during a period of uncertainty.
I keep on hearing this philosophy, and it's such hullaballoo. Like new managers today don't have access to televisions and computers to draw conclusions from just like for club games only this is a more translatable sample. If we can get a gauge on players then so can they.
American soccer-related forums online have become cemeteries. It's sad: that at the moment we suck is no reason to stop loving the game.
data-gathering is only part of why these games are useful....even then, data from these games is still useful no matter who is coaching. obviously more useful if the current coach gathers data but in the mean time....having games now doesnt mean they cant be illuminating.... aside from that....work permit restrictions require a % of games played to qualify for EPL....so yedlin, miazga, EPB, etc etc any other player that wants to play in EPL can benefit just from being capped. also....some of these players will be mainstays in the next cycle...the more they get to know each other and form connections the better....this can only help chemistry the more they play together....in theory, these games could accelerate team-chemistry for the next cyle. young players need opportunities.....the national team games can only help these younger players....and the more the better.....the quicker they acclimate to this level the better....and the only that will happen is with games....the more the better. also....scouts are watching. imagine weah or another player on the fringe of starting for his club has a breakout game vs a good team like paraguay....say scores a hattrick like he did vs their u20 team....might lead to something professionally. also club teams might decide that a player they have is more valuable than previously assumed and worth investing more playing time in if they perform well in international friendlies. (why i wouldve called in parks and hyndman, for example)....these types of games could theoretically help a player's club situation....provided they perform well. i'm sure chelsea will be watching miazga, for example. imagine hyndman played well vs paraguay....might help him either get playing time with bournemouth or find a better situation if he decides to leave...... i agree with your observation of what the current regime is doing and why....but i disagree with that approach.
I'm not counting down days until the World Cup because we're not in it, but I'm still watching clubs, and I'll watch us in Gold Cup 2019 and later meaningful games. If the Red Bulls win the CCL, I'll count down the days until the Club World Cup. It's not fans' fault that our friendlies before the World Cup don't matter as much because there aren't players competing for World Cup spots.
After last night... the more this seems relevant. I’d be perfectly fine if we went with this group if we had another game GK Hamid (Steffen) 46 RB Moore CB Miazga CB Carter-Vickers (Palmer-Brown) 80 LB Robinson (Lichaj) 70 DM Trapp RM Nagbe CM Roldan (Delgado) 70 CM Adams LM Saief (Weah) 60 FW Novakovich (Rubin) 60
Also, another reason why we don't get as many friendlies is, if some Old World team wants to come visit, they rather play Mexico and get a full house.