With all due respect, this post makes no sense. If the USSF had their man, they wouldn't have waited the 6 months to hire him full-time. You don't wait 6 months to take off an interim tag if he's your guy from day 1. They SETTLED for him.
I've said this 10's of times on different threads, Gulati didn't want Bradley, Dan Flynn and Co., including Garber, did. There's quite a few others, including Nutmeg, that also know that to be true. I don't know who exactly is writing the revisions to history here, but it certainly isn't the few of us that have different connections to people within the system. I've been saying these things for quite awhile about the "inside job" so to speak with regards to Bradley's appointment. I have repeatedly said that Gulati is not an idiot, but a man that has been caught up in a momentum that he helped create. Again, there are those that believe that the symbiotic relationships that exist in US Soccer are merely coincidental, and are accepting of the fact that it serves the game well in this country. Then there are people like me that have seen first hand the way those very relationships are used to manipulate the process. I have, for some time, said that there is no difference between the USSF and the MLS, and people have come out and said that I was crazy and used as their defense the emblems of US Soccer and the MLS to prove their point...............brilliant stuff, by the way. Not understanding the relationships that exist within the game here leads some to believe that a person who is responsible for leading the largest marketing company of soccer in North America, is also the leader of the same league that his own company benefits more than anyone, and than gets to vote in the non-profit organization that is charged with the guidance of the game in this country, can do all of this from an altruistic point of view. Gulati is as much a part of this as Garber is, and all the political wrangling on his part isn't going to change that fact. He's not an idiot at all, but clearly understands that the "in general" American soccer public is just as stupid as the "in general" American voting public.
He's saying it's hard to judge Nowak on the Nigeria game because Orozco got red carded so early. That's his point. He's saying that unless a coach does that, you can only judge him on results. I think you need to try to figure out what Sunil is saying instead of looking for an excuse to bash him. More stuff that's easy to figure out. He's saying that you can't excuse Nowak by saying, oh, if only Davies' header had gone in. After that, you're using multiple ellipses.
What I have been told, by people I believe would know, is that anyone who would challenge US Soccer (by that I mean both USSF and MLS and the spaghetti mess of youth soccer) would not get the job. Part of Bob accepting the gig is agreeing to tow the party line. So that seems to be consistent with what you're hearing.
Uh, that's my point. You can take whatever point you want from Sunil's diatribe. He's saying a lot of stuff without saying anything definitive.
Reading the interview, the vibe I get is the same vibe I get when listening to/reading a Tim Leiweke interview. Not a good thing. Demands for performance without the least bit of understanding what it takes to actually get them. That doesnt exactly warm my heart either.
Out of curiosity, Nutmeg, does this mean that Bob is not going to choose the best roster he can for qualifiers? In essence, does MLS have a big say/veto on callups?
The interesting thing about this interview is that he appears to be implying that the U23 coach will be judged harshly because we have the talent to be highly competitive at that level, whereas he's willing to accept moral victories at the men's level because our talent is relatively weaker there. Two things - 1: Unless Gulati does not believe that U23 soccer is indicative of future performance, it appears that our men's coach will be judged by much harsher standards in a few years; and 2: It's a bit unfortunate that Bradley did not coach in the Olympics, because this would have been the only tournament until the Confederations Cup where Bradley would have been challenged with high quality opposition in a tournament setting with all of, if not more, of the same expectations that he will face in the World Cup.
But the thing is, the "quotes" you posted weren't actual quotes. They were your paraphrasings. Maybe there was indeed "nonsensical" "doubletalk" in that interview, but you can't demonstrate that by paraphrasing portions of what he said, removing any context in between, and saying, "Ah ha!" It would be like responding to your post #19 here in this way: Nutmeg said, "Gulati really delivered by scheduling those great, A-list friendlies... That guy has this continuous inability to deliver." Geez, what a bunch of doubletalk from Nutmeg! See? It's just not an accurate way to make a case.
With all due respect, your response makes no sense. You DO wait 6 months to take "interim" off the tag if you realize that your having blocked Klinsmann is going to have p*ssed off so many folks that immediately declaring Bradley as your main man would not be politically savvy. The fact that they knew exactly what, and why, they were doing in blocking Klinsmann, and had Bradley on hand to be his replacement, shows us both their wanting someone who was "their man" --and in Bradley having a man whose loyalty to them is unquestioned. That they made no serious effort to find a replacement for Mr. Interim in those 6 months shows they were happy with him. The rest was gamesmanship. By "they" I do NOT mean Sunil, who has always seemed sincere in very much having wanted Klinsmann, and has always seemed lukewarm about roboB. I mean Those Amazing Old Men in Their Flynnian Machine
As to your first point, I do hope so. As to your excellent second point let's look at the Mexican Federation, which found Sanchez's handling of their Olympic team to be a determinative litmus test of his capacity to lead them into the WC. Would we had a Federation with even half the cojones of that of Mexico.
I honestly believe that the "interim" tag was a ruse to quiet detractors and that Bradley was going to get the job no matter what happened. What were the alternatives after you make yourself look like children to the rest of the world? If he lost the Gold Cup, and is fired, whom would have replaced him?, Nowak?, Sorber? They boxed themselves into a corner the minute they named him "whatever" coach, and the rest of it was just spin.
Your point is taken, mine stays the same. Gulati's taking little pot shots at Nowak without having the balls to come out and make a real statement. It's the worst form of leadership. As Via_Chicago said, he needs to grow a pair.
Gulati has stated emphatically that the only two people involved in the negotiations with Klinsmann were Dan Flynn and Sunil Gulati. Dan Flynn can be best compared to a US Senator who is in the back pocket of a Political Action Committee, better known as lobbyists. As much as he would like to appear to be speaking independently of any other interest, he is beholding to the MLS and SUM. Their interests are his interests, and while true that some of those interests are in the best interest of US Soccer, it would be naive to believe that all are. It was he, speaking in the proxy of those other interests, that disallowed the hiring of a Klinsmann-like coach. It's never black and white, and I'm sure he presented compelling arguments to the contrary to Gulati. It's very easy to over-simplify (which, btw, I'm not even remotely suggesting you are, it seems to be a common occurrence on BS over all) the entire issue into the "he's an idiot", neither is an idiot, they are men with business interests that are effected by their every decision, that in turn, effect the highest level league in this country and the national team. The emotional aspect of all this enters into what one believes the best road to travel, allow the MLS to dictate the progression of the national team, or, obviously, the other way-round. The rub comes from the conflict of interests that must surely arise between all entities involved, and why certain situations are merely looked at with a blind-eye. I'm not a big fan of either man, and believe, as I have alwyas believed, that the players in this country, whether at the club level, or the national level, deserve better.
It was always about who controlled whom, as has been stated earlier in this thread and multiple past threads.
I haven't heard anything about a player callup getting shot down for the qualifiers. For example, I don't believe you can blame the Sunil/Garber spaghetti bowl for Cooper or Buddle not being included. What I understand is that Bob was made to tread lightly on MLS rosters for the England and Spain games. So perhaps some players who may have been bled were passed over for a guy like Josh Wolff. Then again, from what I understand and what england66 has confirmed numerous times, it's going to take an act of God for Kenny to be part of Bob's squad. Bob wants a back to the goal traditional target man just like Arena had in McBride, and Kenny isn't that player. Others more knowledgeable can confirm or deny this. All I have on the internal politics of Bradley and Sunil is 2nd or 3rd hand information.
This is hard to fathom in terms of logic. Slight stylistic differences aside, the only player in the pool who is remotely closer in style to McBride than Cooper is Ching, who obviously (while I think he is good for this round of qualifying) is not a long-term solution. In other words, this logic amount to the theory that because Cooper is not exactly similar to McBride, Bradley is rejecting him in favor of guys who are even less like McBride. Combined with a quick review of Bradley's teams in MLS where his line was led by very un-McBride like players such as Razov, I call complete BS on this.
I'm not saying you're wrong. But look at it from a skeptic's perspective. The kind of people who would say this would also pretty obviously have a big incentive to use "back channels" to boost their agenda of root-and-branch change. But it doesn't necessarily follow that they're telling the truth. Those types of people would be predisposed to oppose someone like Bradley, who is the quintessential product of the US system (college, MLS assistant, MLS head coach.)
goff, wahl, ives, jones, jp, balboa, etc etc etc I'll go back to the same argument I made at the time. There's NO EVIDENCE that Klinsman would have been an effective administrator, NO EVIDENCE that he would have been able to set up a better youth program, NO EVIDENCE that he'd be a quality supervisor. The man played. Then he coached Germany, the #2 alltime soccer power, to a 3rd place finish at home. I'm sorry, but that just is not a dazzling resume. If it had been Pekerman, who has a track record, then the BS sturm und drang would make some sense.
The funny thing about all this: Does everyone remember the Bradley supporters who used to say, "At the international level, the coach isn't that important; it's all about the players." Then why doesn't Hardworkin' Bob choose the best forwards, rather than the ones that best fit his system? Rightly or wrongly, Hardworkin' Bob doesn't seem to agree with those arguments in his favor.
Sunil screwed this whole situation up starting from the moment the ref blew his whistle on our loss vs. Ghana. By not having a better process and candidates already in place BEFORE canning Arena, he was setting himself up to fail. By putting all his eggs in the Klinsmann basket (according to appearances), he was setting himself up to fail. If Sunil wants a world-class coach for the USMNT, he has to make it attractive for a world-class coach to want the job. Repeatedly talking about the need to "understand the American player and system", coupled with the ironclad fist of the USSF bearing down on anyone trying to change the system, is enough to scare anyone away. The problem with firing Bob now -- and I'm all for it -- is finding a replacement, just like after Arena was fired. Sunil needs to be talking to world-class coaches all the time, trying to gauge interest in the job, and cultivating that interest so that when the time comes to make a change, we don't have to twist in the wind for 6 months and then settle for the next available MLS retread.