http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=656068&sec=us&root=us&cc=5901 Interesting perspective. I tend to agree with the analysis, but not the conclusion. I think what Dyer is missing is that many of us that are calling for Bradley's head has nothing to do with the quality of the American talent pool, but his execution as head coach. It's not the fact that DaMarcus Beasley has decided to suck, but the fact that Bradley doesn't seem inclined to give someone else a chance to suck. It's the fact that the team seems increasingly unprepared to play. It's the defensive bunker mentality that has taken over the MNT program (I don't mean "on the field", but in the way the team interacts with the media). He's right. We don't have "world class" players up and down the line. Nor are we likely to send a team of college kids to the World Cup like we did twenty years ago. But I do feel that many of the criticisms of Bradley have merit, and are fair game. It goes with the job.
Wow. Awesome analysis. Could not have put it better myself. Specially about 2002 being smoke and mirrors (I have posted in detail in other threads about this).
as I've said on other threads, I've seen just about every US/Brazil game since the WC 94 one. Off the top of my head, we competed better with Brazil in every single one of those games ... than we did the other day in S.Africa. and just about every one of those rosters was less talented than the one we have now. If that's not a reason to criticize the coach, I don't know what is. hell, our U-20's BEAT a Brazil team with Pato, Jo, Leandro Lima, Renato Augusto and Luisao. not only did we beat them, we pretty much out-samba'd the samba kings. 3-0 disgrace? you can't tell me that that was all we can expect to do against Brazil.
Obviously Mr Dyer hasn't watched what a properly coached team like Egypt can accomplish with ZERO world class players.
I said this in another thread, but our 8 previous encounters with Brazil, prior to Bradley's tenure were all decided by 1 goal. And we arguably could have gotten a result against Brazil in our last encounter were it not for two atrocious calls from the referee. 3-0 should not have been an "expected" result. The overall team performance should not have been "expected" either based on prior performances against Brazil.
Terrible article. What does the following have to do with our talent? The last attempt at an argument for why Bradley should keep his job boiled down to the idea that we should have lost to CR, Italy and Brazil, because we suck and have no talent. I think it has a little more to do with HOW we lost, from earlier: 9-2 Zero goals from the run of play. One of them a meaningless gift in Saprissa. Twice going down 1-0 within 10 minutes, for a "defense" first team. Playing Beasley in all 3 games. 2 Stupid red cards and yeah that is on the coach. It is not some "get out of criticism free card." Showing some semblance of heart in one out of 3 games. Playing a stupid ass formation in Saprissa, in a stupid way, with the wrong players in the wrong positions. Repeating that against Italy with Benny on the wing. Playing another stupid formation against Brazil with the players in the wrong positions. The substitutions, or lack thereof, or speed thereof. Nope, he is not getting off with one line about the stupid, idiotic, moronic asinine substitution patterns: Subbing one of your best player out of Costa Rica, without explanation. Never addressing it, not playing him since. Not playing Adu since Saprissa, despite him showing as well as anyone and getting the single, solitary shot on goal of the match. Having the opposition use all three subs first when you are down a man against Italy and the players are obviously gassed. Using only one of those subs to help the midfield where the player went out and you are being beaten the worst and the players are most tired. NOT USING ONE OF YOUR SUBS WHEN DOWN A MAN AND ANY GOAL, OR PREVENTION OF A GOAL COULD BE THE DIFFERENCE IN ADVANCING. Hypocrisy. Calling out one of your players for not getting club time. While sitting Torres who gets top 2-3 club time and starting Beasley the very next match. I could go on, but I think I made my point. This is about a lot more than losing a few games we were expected to lose. This is about a long unchanged pattern of conduct and an absolutely abysmal level of play. It is not a one off event, or learning experience due to the level of competition. You are right about one thing though. It is not time to panic. It is time to be cool, calm, rational and make a level headed decision. It is time to fire Bob Bradley.
I really hate articles like this that tell me what to expect. I'll tell this ass what i expect. I expect not to come in last place every time. I expect a few goals from the run of play and i expect not to look like F-ing clown shoes. i guess thats to damn much to ask for. My sights are just to damn high!
you know, i forgot he was the coach of that team until i rewatched those highlights today. can't believe i forgot that. well i say 'yes.' thomas rongen must be the next head coach of the us nats.
Anyone else sick of the condescending attitude the soccer "media" has toward American soccer fans? Like we just started watching the sport yesterday and watch with our finger up our nose the whole time. It all goes back to a sort of "contentedness = sophistication" that really is not an accurate reflection of how international soccer works. Countries do legitimately get better over time if they put the work in. Spain, of course, is a wonderful example of that. I thought Project 2010 was a recognition of that and at least a start to trying to accomplish it. Apparently knowing "your place" is what makes you truly sophisticated. I personally think the US's place is hoisting the World Cup over its head, and want to see a plan emerge to eventually accomplish that. I don't know about Dyer, but I've seen us play Brazil several times before, and this is the first time I ever remember them making us look that bad. For a country that is supposed to be on a path of _growth_ in ability, doesn't that strike everyone as not such a good thing? Apparently not.
I think Dyer is wrong, though he does have a point. There certainly is a group on BS (shrinking in size over the last week) who thought we were the kings of CONCACAF, that qualification would be a breeze, and that we were somehow getting screwed in the FIFA rankings that had us 15-20. For these folks, he has a point. For the rest of us, no. 1) Egypt doesn't have "world class" players up and down their roster either, yet they put 3 past Brazil and beat Italy. Managed to string passes together, and kept 11 guys on the field the whole time. 2) Brazil and Italy aren't that strong right now. Italy are still good, but are a bit in transition. Brazil under Dunga are a far cry from swashbuckling Brazil teams of the past: Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho, Adriano, etc. They sit back and counter, you can play against them. If you are any good. 3) It's not just that we lost, but how we lost. Again, compare to Egypt. 4) It's not just the results, it's the strange tactics and double standards. Why play a 4-3-3 @Saprissa and then go with two d-mids at home? Start youngsters @Saprissa, then bury them on the bench due to a poor performance (what did he expect). Most people would start the youngsters at home, and the veterans away. But veterans or ex-Bradley players who play poorly get 2nd and 3rd chances (Mastroeni, Beasley, Kljestan, Bornstein) while others never get a chance or just get one chance no matter how they perform (Torres, Adu, Marshall, Conrad, etc). So, I think Dyer has it wrong.
To Paraphrase the article: "I like my writing gig, and would like to keep it. I need access. Ummm, it's not Bob's fault." God, I am absolutely sick to death of fish hacks and mediots continually misrespresenting the views of people who want Bob out. It's absolutely disgusting. None of us believe we have a world class player pool, or even a second tier player pool. We just know when a coach isn't getting the most out of his talent available, (and continually putting his team at a disadvantage with hid decision making) and in all the other sports in this country, that gets coaches fired, save for international soccer. That's why we're frustrated.
Dyer is a freaking idiot who should stick to writing puff pieces for USSF. Expecting a coach to realize that a player like Beasley doesn't have it anymore is not setting high expectations. Expecting a coach to realize that Benny should not play on the wings is not setting high expectations. Expecting a coach to realize that he has one sub left to use is not setting high expectations.
This is pretty much the exact same thing I posted last night. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1071661
Is it too much to ask that we score goals in the run of play? Is it too much to ask that we don't consistently give up early goals when we are a defensive minded team? Is it too much to ask that we play midfielders that are good at passing and possession? I mean, tell me when I'm being unreasonable. We might not be that good, but we sure as heck aren't this bad, either.
Beautiful take. One thing worth noting, listening to the podcast a week ago, Jen Chang made it a point to mention that while Bob wasn't very helpful in an interview, it was clear from his meeting with him post-game after Saprissa, that Torres was subbed off because he was super pissed about Torres work on the defensive end. Just goes to show how much of a complete dunderhead our coach is, particularly in light of how often his pet projects have contributed to disasters (how about benching his son after his son, gassed from PLAYING TOO MANY G D Matches, gave the worst display of defending against Costa Rica I've ever seen in my entire life, or benching Beas after his disaster against Costa Rica, or in any other of his terrible performances (in just about every single game he's played for the nats since '05, save the home demolition of T&T a few months ago). Our coach is a disingenuous b.s. artist w/double standards a plenty in his evaluation of talent, and his evaluation of who should play/start, and who should be punished and sat (and for the record, im not a nepotism guy, I think Michael is a super talent who'd be playing magical ball for us if his coach wasn't such a terrible, untalented, hack, as it is, I think he plays well for the most part other than rash challenges).
beasley's defense was utter crap all the way back to atleast El Salvador and torres gets yanked and beasley gets starts.
But Beasley runs more. That's defense in the Bob Bradley school of thought. If when he pulls out the stat sheet, he sees a high number next to "meters covered", it means that you were doing your job.
IMHO, that's not something to be proud of. Making posts analogous to our sycophantic, arse-kissing, never give constructive criticism about a us soccer coach until he's fired media (or do we forget all the puff pieces Arena got in the spring of '06 just before the guillotine fell). For the record, I respect your right to an opinion (and often quite respect your takes), I just think your dead wrong on this.