Entirely true. But I also think the current zeitgeist that they selected a manager because he (effectively) guaranteed them PT or because they felt they could cruise is almost certainly hogwash. This group absolutely has something of a focus issue on a player by player basis, and intensity issue at times. I don't think there's a "want to" issue and those are completely different things. And the solution to those kind of things are often complex, sometimes never exist and most commonly are internal to the individual. We may need a sports psychologist more than a disciplinarian or rah rah coach. Or more likely, different things for different players. I mean, at one point, I'm sure people wanted to discipline Dennis Rodman. And then they learned you are better off just trying to contain him. I don't think anyone from the outside can easily know.
I dislike using the word "talent" because it absolutely pushed the conversation to potential instead of performance. We have some still young players, and if guys like Reyna and Musah play to their talent, this will be a much better team. But if you remove the national team from the equation -- neither is playing to their talent at Club yet. Pulisic is. Jedi is. But we've got a slew of guys who are below their talent either because of injuries, a bad year or in most cases, simply youth. Others are possibly playing to their talent but aren't as good as people thought early on -- maybe that's Josh Sargent? Toss in a really bad situation at the most important position -- where we've usually been stacked -- and it's more of a wait and see. Two years could do wonders. Let's hope so.
That is absolutely part of it but at the heart is the identity driven culture war through which people filter reality. The perception of relative player quality is also very influenced by those identity politics. The perception of his performances and his results are also influenced by this. His connection to a Fed higher up also amplified those idpol feelings. It had him hated by many before he even started the job with a general reaction of disappointment. The most negative take on Klinsmann here at the start of his tenure (and thus probably the most negative anywhere) was skepticism based on a world famous player (who the best manager in history singled out for being particularly smart) saying that JK was bad at his job, his struggles in other positions, and the perception that his success with Germany relied on a talented assistant who went on the surpass him. The general reaction to his hiring was celebratory.
Yes, these players were all as talented in 2018 as they will be in 2026. What changes is their level, their ability to perform. That ability determines how good the pool is in the moment and how impressive or disappointing the results are. Same goes for the downslope of the age curve. Mexico in 2021 were at a different level than Mexico in 2024. Chile in 2016 were at a different level than Chile in 2024.
Pretty spot on. I also think there are several players that just play worse for the USMNT than they do for their clubs... see Richards, Wes (recently) and Tillman (not that many minutes) come to mind.
does that have any relation to the manager/how the national team plays? or are they simply worse players individually in a different kit?
This is the important point -- no factual basis. It's a statement based on almost nothing. Just feelings.
If someone really wants the easiest path forward so that national team duty doesn't tire them out for the club season, that's easy. Don't accept the invitation! It's not plausible that a number of them are consciously embarking on NT duty planning to lollygag around and without really caring about winning. A more plausible version might be that subconsciously, they live under false assumptions or motivated reasoning about how hard they have to work to win. Without any visibility into practice or into the psychology of a couple dozen individuals, that's just guesswork. Players generally perform their best for someone who respects them. But someone can respect you and still push you to work harder.
It may be for different reasons. It can't help someone like Tillman to be forced to play out of position in a 4-3-3... where there is no 10 and the wingers are traditional.... but he has been pretty consistent for PSV and we have seen some really poor touches from him w/ the USMNT. Very uncharacteristic IMO. So is it in his head? Not sure. But I think Richards is a good case... he doesn't play out of position per se (3CB w/ club in 2CB w/ NT) but he looks slower and more uncertain on the ball w/ the USMNT. I can't recall him making a single line-breaking pass w/ the USMNT.... He basically works to recover the ball and then hands it off to someone else. Where is the confidence/aggression? Now... Wes might be an entirely different case. It seems like people bagged on him forever for relying on athleticism as opposed to technique. This season clearly improved his technique / soccer IQ but it appears to be at the expense of the athleticism (and joy) he used to play the game with. There was a point in his Juve career where he quite purposely stopped joining in the goal celebrations w/ his team. Not sure why... but he seems to play the entire game now w/o that chip on his shoulder... and more importantly... he seems to lack that gitty-up that was so effective. So... in Wes' case... has he bought into the "YAs need to be more technical" argument too much?
In 1998 the "USMNT supporter universe" might have been 1/10 the size, if that, and no one much at all cared from 1954 to 1986, so Bob is likely correct in aggregate terms.
Is it that hard to believe that some coaches are more demanding of consistent sharpness than others, or that some allow complacency (not in effort but rather security in their positions) than others?
I didn't say any of that. I said that maybe Gregg is too busy being their friend and not their boss. Too much checking with the players and leadership team.
It's probably better to distinguish who spoke up to derail Crocker's plan and from those that went along after fact. My point is that there's likely a group of players that envisioned a style of play better suited for WC2026. Messi & Ronaldo are unlikely to participate; wouldn't you expect players to prepare against the next gen superstars? Wouldn't they be discussing the evolution of the game with faster players, passing that uses most of the field, etc. How could they handle the speed of Morocco's counter attack? Or the discipline of Croatia's formation and players (semi-finalists and in Canada's group)? With the WC next coming to the US, wouldn't we want a group of players to think about what the team needs to evolve into? Perhaps, Crocker was naive and didn't expect USSF and some players to work against him. Forget about Marsch's personality for a second as the team was already evolving without Berhalter on the sidelines. The bar that Crocker/Marsch could have been initially shooting for was to be better than Hudson & BJ. Evolving the team to tactics more suited for NT play, rebuilding the player pool, and encouraging Beasley's types to switch positions are items for a new 4 year cycle. If it didn't work out, they could have an understanding to mutually agree to separate as many Euro coaches announce. Crocker's plan should have been the only one, but it was hijacked by a few players and whoever was reaching out to them. Did these players ever allow Crocker to make his case? Was the normal 4 year cycle evolution blocked by those that created a sudden urgency event of losing Berhalter along with key players' resistance based on incorrect assumptions? There's a chicken & egg issue with players' statements was we never know their circumstances when given. The Berhalter's announcement came as a surprise to many players; and it resulted in Crocker's plan was replaced with no plan. Isn't it safe to assume that there are a few players responsible for Berhalter 2.0 and a sizable number that never conceded to these players to having such a greater say in the direction of the NT? The question is how do we move forward? Players can solve their internal issues, but have the external issues grown too large? We have critical public statements from multiple other federations, more than a handful from players' clubs, and known unknown circumstances of Crocker's process that resulted in Berhalter 2.0. The US fed and media can ignore these issues, but there's no reason to assume that coaches that put together 50 page plans to interview will be obvious to a more accurate picture of the USSF.
Broadly speaking, you are correct. That said, for the 2025 edition of the Gold Cup I think there will be several very interesting teams participating as a tune up. Not sure on the windows/scheduling (e.g what WCQ looks like and who that rules out) but I’m guessing it’ll be 24 teams and it’ll include a number of teams who think they have a real shot to qualify for the World Cup in an expanded format and want some additional competitive games.
You are usually very good at providing metrics to support your empirical conclusions. Is there any analysis that supports that conclusion?
I'm sure somebody has mentioned that Goff has reported that Spain's de la Fuente, whose contract is expiring, has expressed interest in the USMNT job, per his representatives. I'm personally taking that one with a huge contract re-negotiation-sized grain of salt, but it apparently is something that has been expressed, and that would legitimately count as news of a sort...
The difference is the perception among certain elements of our fanbase overrates our talent level. So they blame the coach when we don’t perform like an elite team. Whereas previous coaches didn’t have that same level of expectation.
And coaching hires fall apart at the last minute all the time. Sometimes the coach changes their mind and sometimes the team decides to go in a different direction. Nothing is final till all the paperwork is signed. And none of that really warrants the way Marsch has spoken of the process.
Yeah, makes sense to consolidate that topic on the Next Coach 2.0 thread or whatever it's called. He's more serious than you might think for reasons I laid out there.