I updated this thread from last year to now. It really is remarkable how many times this team has conceded first and gotten a result. There really can only be one adequate word to describe this group under Bradley: resilient. ----------------------------------------------------------- Today's match got me thinking about how hard it is to fight back after conceding the first goal. I know watching the USA throughout the years, I always lived in trepidation of who got the first goal, because I knew in my heart if we conceded first it was unlikely we were going to get anything out of the match. I went back and looked at the comparison between Bradley and Bruce (who undoubtedly was our most successful manager before Bob) to see how our team responded when they went behind. The following is comparative data for all matches under their tenures when we conceded first during competitive matches. I did not take friendlies into account here. Bruce Arena's Tenure Total Competitive matches we conceded first: 15 Costa Rica 2-1 USA ( 7/23/00 - Saprissa 2002 WCQ) Costa Rica 2-0 USA ( 5/9/01 - Saprissa 2002 WCQ) Mexico 1-0 USA ( 7/1/08 - Azteca 2002 WCQ) USA 1-3 Poland ( 6/4/02 - Daejeon 2002 WC Group Stage) Germany 1-0 USA (6/21/02 - Ulsan 2002 WC Quarterfinal) Brazil 1-0 USA ( 6/21/03 - Lyon 2003 Confederation Cup Group Stage) USA 3-2 Costa Rica ( 7/26/03 - Orange Bowl 2003 Gold Cup) Jamaica 1-1 USA (8/18/04 - Kingston 2006 WCQ) Panama 1-1 USA (9/15/04 - Panama City 2006 WCQ) Mexico 2-1 USA (3/27/05 - Azteca 2006 WCQ) USA 2-1 Honduras (7/21/05 - Giants Stadium 2005 Gold Cup Semifinal) Costa Rica 3-0 USA (10/8/05 - Saprissa 2006 WCQ) USA 0-3 Czech Republic (6/12/06 - Gelsenkirchen 2006 WC Group Stage) Italy 1-1 USA (6/17/06 - Kaiserslautern 2006 WC Group Stage) Ghana 2-1 USA (6/22/06 - Nuremburg 2006 WC Group Stage) Total Record when conceding first: 2 wins, 10 losses, 3 draws Bob Bradley's Tenure USA 2-1 Mexico (6/24/07 - Chicago 2007 Gold Cup Final) USA 1-3 Paraguay (7/2/07 - Barinas 2007 Copa America) Colombia 1-0 USA (7/5/07 - Barquisimento 2007 Copa America) Trinidad & Tobago 2-1 USA (10/15/08 - Port-of-Prince 2010 WCQ) El Salvador 2-2 USA (3/28/09 - San Salvador 2010 WCQ) Costa Rica 3-1 USA (6/3/09 - Saprissa 2010 WCQ) USA 2-1 Honduras (6/6/09 - Chicago 2010 WCQ) USA 0-2 Brazil (6/18/09 - Pretoria Confederations Cup) USA 2-1 Panama AET (7/18/09 - Philadelphia Gold Cup QF) USA 0-5 Mexico (7/26/09 - New York Gold Cup Final) USA 2-1 El Salvador (9/5/09 - Sandy, UT 2010 WCQ) Honduras 2-3 USA (10/10/09 - San Pedro Sula 2010 WCQ) USA 2-2 Costa Rica (10/14/09 - Washington 2010 WCQ) England 1-1 USA (6/12/10 - Rustenberg 2010 WC Group C) Slovenia 2-2 USA (6/18/10 - Johanessburg 2010 WC Group C) Total Record when conceding first: 5 wins, 6 losses, 4 draws I don't want anyone to think this data is an indictment of anyone. For example, I didn't look at blown leads, importance of the game in the standings, etc. It had just occurred to me that we seemed to have fought back a few times under Bob and I was wondering if the data supported it, and it seems to. Any ideas on why this is? Better personnel? Falling behind to inferior competition? Coaching? --------------------------------------------------------- The data shows that of the 15 times we've fallen behind in competitive matches, we've gotten a result in 9. I am not a statistician, but getting something from a match 60% of the time when you concede first has to be a high number. Even more impressively, the last FIVE times we've conceded first competitively, we've not lost. It does go to show the resilience of this team, and, even if we do concede first to Ghana, the players must know by now all is not lost. Never in my time of watching the USA have I had this feeling. Before now, it was always "crap they scored, it's all over now". Under Arena's tenure we fell behind 15 times competitively and lost 10, under Bob that number is only 6. I didn't take account rosters for this data, but I suppose one could even go further and make the argument that 3 of the losses (in the Copa/Gold Cup) were with undermanned squads too.
This, to me, is the most impressive thing in RoboBob's tenure. He clearly has become able to instill a belief, a confidence, or at least actively aid that belief, and confidence, in the core group of players for the USMNT. This is a very tricky part of management, of leadership in general, and is something distinct from ordinary technique of soccer management [training methods, choice of personnel, strategy and tactics, in game management, etc...]. I can't say [have no basis for saying] Bradley is a natural leader...in fact, I tend to doubt it. But he clearly has become someone who can work with the core of this team and inspire in them a sure belief in themselves, their teammates, and the general line of attack for that specific game. In addition, and again I suspect against his natural inclination, I've seen some evidence of RoboBob seeking out, and getting, advice and thought from his players--not only about themselves but also about the willingness to have the team think "outside the box". You might call this the triumph of reason over personality, in Bradley's case at least. Win or lose against Ghana, I am confident we won't be blaming the team's lack of effort or strength of character. For this, Robert deserves praise. Now, Go USA!
Re: Bob as a natural leader - I think we can point to his history coaching and suggest that perhaps he is a natural leader. He is NOT naturally charismatic in the media. But if you look at his club coaching career, as a Fire fan, arguably our best years were with Bob. We were consistently one of the top teams with him as coach. Granted it's not all about the coach, we had good management too. But you can't discount that. And again, at Chivas he led arguably the best successes at Chivas if I remember correctly. So of the 3 professional teams he's coached plus this stint as national team you have at least 3 out of 4 teams perform quite well. I think that can point to him being a natural leader. Perhaps he doesn't fit a traditional image of a leader, but I'd point to his results and suggest that repeated success is more than just luck. I'm not saying, and I don't hear many others saying, that he's on the level of a Vince Lombardi, Phil Jackson, Mike Krzyzewski, John Wooden, etc, etc. But as far as I'm concerned he's probably better than he's been given credit for. And if he can lead his team to a few more victorys he'll earn some more deserved respect.