News: Sunil Gulati Q&A w. Grant Wahl

He was much more candid than a lot of people here would have guessed.

 

He was definitely saying some of the things I would like for him to say. The question is if he will do some of the things I would like for him to do.

 

It sounds like Gulati would fire Bradley if we play poorly in this year's round of qualifying, even if we make it to the hex. Or at least consider it. That's good news.

 

Rightly or wrongly, he talks like the "superfan" that Bruce Arena accused him of being. I'm starting to think that's a good attitude for now, because no one else in the system with any real power seems interested in shaking things up. I don't know if Sunil can, or will, but it is good to read frustration in his voice.

By the way, Sunil (and I know you're reading this), here's another prediction: You'll be giving the EXACT same interview after three WC 2010 matches if Bob Bradley is our head coach for that tournement. We are NOT going to advance under his rule. Do something before it's too late.

As an aside-- I didn't realize we were 9th. Being the highest scoring, non-advancing team sucks. We make the group of death now. We need to get used to that.

 

Wow. SG is more tuned into the details of acutal games than I would have thought.... and he sounds like a Freddy fan.

 

He can talk the talk but can he walk the walk??

 

I couldn't agree with you more. I wonder what a loss to Guatemala would do?

 

Sunil cooked this dinner. He oughtn't to complain when it tastes bad.

 

Interesting that he mentioned Adu being subbed out, something many of us have wondered about.

The Bradley-Nowak regime has a bit of an issue there with the "good person" quote and at the same time the automatic pencilling in of Michael into the starting lineup. Michael of the reckless tackles, interesting post-game comments, interesting decision to get a second yellow and interesting post-game incident against Chile in the U20s. Someone should remind him that you can get red cards after a game. Ask Thorsten Frings.

 

Gulati: We needed to just not lose our mind on a few cases. And if CharlieDavies' ball goes in, sure we get a tie. But it wouldn't have exactly been a draw with the run of play. Fine, we've lost games when we've had the run of play. But that game became completely artificial as soon as Michael [Orozco] he went off. We're on our heels and planning to be on our heels.

I have no idea what point the Dweeb is trying to make here. Especially given this:

SI.com: What did you think of Nowak's performance in this tournament?

Gulati: You know, aside from extraordinary moves of taking an unproven player and making a player out of him, things like that, you end up judging coaches mostly on results.

And can anyone tell me what unproven player Nowak "made a player out of."

Overall, this is some of the most nonsensical incoherent doubletalk I've ever read.

"We may have gotten the result, but it wasn't with the run of play... Results are all that matters..."

"I don't second guess coaches... Of course I asked Nowak why he took Freddy off."

"I don't evaluate Peter, I evaluate the team.... and the team clearly didn't get the job done... but hey, that's not all bad!"

Does Columbia offer any speech classes?

 

Maybe, but the Teacher's College offers an M.A. in Leadership. I think Sunil could use it.

Lesson 1:

Grow a pair.

 

I like Sunil. He seems to have his head straight and keeps his goals in mind.
I trust that he wants to advance the program. Let's see if he can make the right decisions to do so.

Was there another "good person" quote, btw? Or just the previous one?

 

Sunil Gulati: "You know, aside from extraordinary moves of taking an unproven player and making a player out of him, things like that, you end up judging coaches mostly on results."

Can we sticky this quote and make it required reading before anyone is allowed to start a "Fire Bob" thread?

 

Gulati fought the system and lost, badly ( the Klinsmann deal).
He's as lame as a lame duck can be right now. In the end, he's the one that's going to take the heat.

He's been reading Big Soccer again (but not posting).

Maybe he was talking about Edu playing center mid (the "unproven player"), who knows.
Being nonsensical is a hallmark trait from those that pretend to lead in this country.

 

Maybe it should have been "I" and not "you".
He doesn't speak for me, nor does he speak for many on these boards or in this country.
He was simply referring to Nowak, btw, and the lack of those cherished "results".

 

Gulati just can't win. If he cares about the team and let's it be known that he won't tolerate poor results, he is a superfan. If he keeps quiet and stays out of the limelight, he is an aloof idiot who isn't fit to lead. A bitter crybaby in Arena has a hissyfit on his way out the door, and we here keep repeating that foolishness ad nauseum. Oy vey.

 

Do we know for sure that he means win-loss results? Or results in the broader sense?

The one thing that bugged me was saying that drawing Argentina at home was a "fantastic" result. A decent result, I would agree with. A home draw is never a fantastic result.

 

Yes he can. He scheduled great friendlies against England, Spain, and Argentina. Not to mention Sweden and Poland. All wins.

His track record with coaching hires, however, is a monumental loss. And their losses reflect on his, continuously highlighting his inability to deliver.

@ others in this thread: for those who think coaching should be measured only by CONCACAF results, remind me again how Bruce Arena did in 2006 Qualification vs the 2006 World Cup. You'd have to be a criminally stupid person to not take a more holistic view.

 

Why should he?
It isn't about him anyway, it's about the players and what they deserve.
I don't believe for a minute that you sincerely believe the people running the show in this country are doing a good job in a strictly utilitarian definition; which is, after all, what their job is suppose to be based upon.

 

I've said it before, and I'll repeat it. Those at USSF headquarters didn't WANT to hire Bradley. I don't have proof of it, but i'm going on what i saw. They were perfectly fine with waiting this out and having Bradley be the interim, but pressure outside of the fed, from the coaching ranks and from the MLS brotherhood in general kept mounting as the US continued winning and ultimately won the Gold Cup. It became a nonstop parade of MLS broadcasters, coaches, and players piling on support for Bradley and flippant comments towards the USSF. Hell, even here on BS, it was probably 3-1 in favor of Bradley, with people saying that with Klinsmann out of the picture, we just had to hire someone with experience with the "American player" and that the USSF was tying the hands of Bradley by not giving him the job by forcing him to get results rather than work on improving the team (which it was assumed he would do if he had the permanent job). The USSF caved to what the general American soccer world was clamoring for. Now he gets trashed incessantly for it.

Would i have liked for him to stand firm, and continue his search? Absolutely. Does he failure to do so negatively impact by opinion of him as a leader? Absolutely. However, acting like he was drooling over getting Bradley and company is just plain revisionist.

 

The problem isn't that ogfc or I think or are acting like Bob was always Sunil's guy. I know for a fact neither one of us think that. We both know differently. You're inferring way, way too much here.

 

Sure, and let's make it dayglo, so that all those threads after Copa America would have rightly shone

 

well maybe that sentence is a bit excessive on my part. but i think that we put a little too much blame on Sunil. Outside forces led to Bradley being permanent. Again, that's a weakness that absolutely falls on his shoulders, but i don't think that makes him the idiot that he is assumed to be here. Having said that doesn't mean that I don't think we can do much better than Sunil as well.

 

I really doubt it was 3-1 in favor of Bradley here on BS. Far more likely that, after 6 months of "interim coaching" it was high time to get a "noninterim" coach. 3-1 of us in favor of stopping this interim crap does NOT mean 3-1 in favor of Bradley. I, for one, was hoping that the interim tag was genuinely just that and that USSF was actively searching for a genuinely strong manager. That Bradley just slid into the role, the interim being dropped, with no hint of anybody else being interviewed or taken seriously by USSF, tells me that USSF had their man. Now, this may well have been against Sunil's better inclination, as I think it was. The USSF has far more powerful people working in it than Sunil, as the debacle with Klinsmann makes obvious. Bradley is there because some of those powerful people wanted him there, plain and simple.