I haven't watched it yet, but the Netflix docuseries Under Pressure drops today, so I decided to create a thread for discussion as posters watch it. The Equalizer already has a review of it up: Does Netflix's new USWNT docuseries, "Under Pressure," do enough to bring in a new audience, or does it does it just serve the already-initiated? @EvanDavisSports asks the important questions in his review of the new series. Read it here! ➡️📎https://t.co/6eHvT815hV pic.twitter.com/l9E6HwJiV3— The Equalizer (@EqualizerSoccer) December 11, 2023
Just finished binge watching the 4 episodes, and here are some initial thoughts (I bolded what I think are the most key, for those who want a TL/DR): -In the first couple of minutes, I thought, "Oh, no! This is too much Lalas and Lloyd!" But it really is only to introduce the series, and they don't come back in until later. -In the first episode, Kristie Mewis said that multiple doctors have told Sam Mewis she won’t ever play again (apparently that's even after the surgery she had to correct the career-ending injury she played on for 4 years). Kristie thinks she will play again, and Sam, I guess, is also optimistic, but it doesn't look good in case any posters here were still holding out hope. -There's not enough of a counterpoint when telling people they made the roster, meaning that there was not a player shown or interviewed who didn't make the roster. I can understand why a player cut wouldn't want that shown, but it would have made for better storytelling, even if it was to interview one of the veterans like Sauerbrunn who was left off the roster because of injury. -Also did we need 1.5 episodes on the buildup to the WWC? I'm not sure what the contract was: would we have gotten more episodes if the team had gone deeper, or was it strictly 4 episodes, and so they would have shown less of the buildup if there had been more tournament to show? The pacing of the series was just weird. Also if you know the actual timeline, you will notice that the producers/editors mess a bit with the timeline in those first 2 episodes. -The series focuses in mainly on just a few players with other players not featuring at all. Rapinoe, Horan, and Morgan are obviously included in sit-down interviews, and Alyssa Thompson also features as the newcomer, but the best moments of the entire series are with Kristie Mewis and Lynn Williams as more "bubble players." (I personally wouldn't have put Lynn Williams in the "bubble player" category considering who all was out with injury, but the series does.) Those two make the show, imo. -Morgan said that some bench players maybe lost confidence because they were told before the WWC what their role would be as a "game changer" but then were not actually used much as subs. -To help set expectations: There is much more focus on a story, meaning focusing on what happened that drives the intended narrative, with sit-down interviews than there is behind-the-scenes/off-the-field footage. Some things aren't shown at all: closed-door match before the WWC, very little of the training camp in New Zealand, the team conversations as they tried to figure out what wasn't working and how to change things (we know a team-only meeting happened before the knockout rounds, but this isn't mentioned), Naeher taking a penalty kick in the shootout (Naeher doesn't feature at all in the interviews, so maybe they would have shown that if they had interviews with her as well), etc. While they do spend time on Swanson going down with an injury and Sam Mewis being out, there's no real mention of Sauerbrunn (mentioned only in passing), Macario, Heath, Press, Davidson, etc. all being out with injuries. There's also no mention of the team's underwhelming performances in the lead-up to the WWC, such as the games in Europe. -On players who don't feature in the series: apparently all of the players were given the option, but were not required to do so. -In the Netherlands game, Horan says that what Ertz told her as she was about to get in a fight with van de Donk right before the corner kick, "The best thing you can do right now is score." And so she did. -Kristie said that she was surprised when she was subbed on in the final minutes of extra time to take a penalty in the Sweden game. Apparently players may not have been aware of in advance of who the go-to penalty shootout takers were going to be. -Most of the 4th episode is commentators (more Lloyd, but also Foudy and Wright) and the featured players talking about what went wrong. I didn't agree with all of that analysis, and I would have liked more player insight there than the commentators', but I do think talking to players 5 years down the road about this will yield some different answers than these interviews did. I think the story telling would have also been better if they had shown more of what went wrong throughout all 4 episodes rather than just having commentators at the end speculate on what went wrong. Show; don't tell! -Finally, would I recommend it or not? It is not targeted at the avid USWNT fan who follows the team and the NWSL. If that's you (which I guess would be most in this forum), it won't tell you anything you didn't already know. Maybe I'd still recommend it if you're an avid fan of one of the players featured, especially if you're a big fan of Mewis or Williams. It could interest someone though who is interested in soccer or other sports in general and doesn't know much about the USWNT. Overall, even for that casual fan, it was just okay.
Besides the moments with Kristie Mewis and Lynn Williams, I found some of the moments in the locker room worth watching: #UnderPressure #USWNT spoilers:Crystal Dunn: 'Work your fucking ass off, this is the most important game of this tournament'Kelley O'Hara: 'Level these bitches the first second you get a chance! All right, come on now guys!' pic.twitter.com/pXwmcYfxsK— For Peter (Steph Insixiengmay) (@statsandedits) December 12, 2023 KO going to be KO whether she's starting or a sub. Maybe also I should add a warning: in episode 4, re-watching clips of the Sweden game and, I thought, "Why am I doing this to myself again?" I think other avid fans might feel the same (like I still can't really re-watch the 2003 or 2007 semifinal.) Also speaking of certain things not being shown, the clips re-showing the shoot-out only focus on the players featured. It shows Mewis making her kick, and Rapinoe and O'Hara missing theirs, but doesn't show Naeher taking one or Smith missing hers.
The Athletic has an article on the docuseries with some information on players choosing whether or not to participate (with some players not wanting to be a part of it) and on what was allowed to be filmed. Williams said, “We had decided that we weren’t going to do it as a group, as a team. There were enough people that didn’t feel comfortable having the crew around, rightfully so. But it was more open too. If you feel compelled to do it, please do it. But if you don’t want to do it, then don’t do it. No knock to anybody who does it and no knock to anybody who does. And that’s just where we landed.” Williams also said that some environments, such as the team hotel, were off limits for filming, which is understandable if you have some players who weren't comfortable with the film crew anyway. Gitlitz (the director) said, "I think everybody has a different level of comfort around media and cameras. And I think first and foremost, we knew and believed that the World Cup came first. ...People want to be in the zone. Sophia Smith is a very focused player, this is the process that she needs."
I thought the documentary was good. I'll give it a "B." Lynn Williams was the closest thing to a "star" in the documentary with her candor and insight. I also appreciated the observations of Kristie Mewis as a bubble player. Alex Morgan was likeable. I could have done with less of commentators (Lalas and Lloyd especially), and more on the players -- although I realize that many players didn't want to participate in the documentary. I would have liked to have seen the observations of a player who didn't make the team, especially Ashley Hatch, who to my mind was wronged in being left off the team. I didn't care much for the constant reference to "resources." What this world cup demonstrated to me is that gritty, underfinanced teams -- Morocco, Colombia, Jamaica, etc. -- do well with 10 percent (or less) of U.S. resources. Those are the more interesting stories. And maybe the most interesting story of all in the World Cup is Spain. Its triumph is inexplicable given all the rhetoric devoted to team solidarity, morale, and other cliches. If ever a team should have finished last rather than first based on conventional wisdom it was Spain. In other words, the documentary could have given us half an hour of insight into the other teams in the World Cup -- and omitted half an hour of the ruminations of observers and commentators.
I saw the first episode; the USWNT members called Vlatko at the beginning “a player’s coach” & “very tactical” so basically very like able by the players. We’ll have to see if support drops by the 4th & last episode.I do like that Morgan did mention that the “the world has an evolved since 2019”( something that die hard fans still refuse to admit). Skipped any mention of the mixed results of the 2021 Olympics(where results were mixed). First episode ends with Vlatko calling the players up to tell them they made the WC roster. ———————————————————— whether broso or woso, Hollywood seems to have an hard time portraying soccer as compared to other sports like Football Boxing an Auto Racing. So don’t think this is the best docu ever made, or at least could of been made better ——————————————————- btw….any Netflix members know when the new season of Cobra Kai suppose to start?
Underwhelming. C or D. zero effort to really get any inside analysis of the selections or anything controversial. I agree the players all come off very likable… besides Pinoe who seems like a full blown narcissist. But perhaps she has to be that way with how divisive she’s become and how much hate she takes.
Pino has to have gone through some kind of weird "I can do what I want, when I want, to whom I want, it's all about me" therapy. If you watch her early appearances with the WNT, she's like a skittish deer in headlights. Polar opposite of her current persona. I thought that it was used as kind of a hatchet job on Vlatko. I turned it off when they started the recapitulation phase in episode 4, as it seemed like it was about to veer into someone's pet theory about how to improve soccer in the US. I wanted to watch a doc about the WC. Not a propaganda piece for someone's pet theory, Which will, inevitably, be victim-based (saying that as a moderate liberal). Back to Vlat, the primary criticism of him is, imo, unfounded. From what I say. They say "he froze." And, the bench players didn't feel valued. The only example of that is no subs vs. Netherlands. I think Vlat made a reasonable choice there. A draw gets us through. We had a draw, the game was hanging by a thread. Just see it out. I think it's a lame criticism. And, from what I saw, they kept saying "you can't just blame Vlatko, it's the players, too." But, they never name a player or say why a player should be blamed. They don't talk about Morgan's absolute lack of production. They don't talk about any of the PK takers. They don't talk about why there was a difference in play between the Group and Sweden. No player is critiqued. Just "Vlatko froze" - because he took a reasonable approach to the NL match. Lastly, here's a rant. I am soooo sick of Foudy being treated as some kind of goddess on Mount Olympus. Before you click on the show, you know you're going to get Foudy being shoved down your throat as if you're a goose being fattened up for fois gras. And, they don't disappoint. Especially, the post WC segment, you get a fullllll dose of meaningless Foudy platitudes. Vacuous verbiage being spoken as if we should be grateful to receive it. Please.move.on. Why, Foudy, always Foudy? The worst is when they are showing USWNT legends at the Sweden match. Look, there's Foudy with Joy fricking Fawcett. The caption says "Julie Foudy." We know that, she's been slathered all over the movie so far. Do the producers/directors not even know who Joy frickin' Fawcett is? FFS. I give it a D. It was great to get to see Williams' and Mewis' personalities. Huerta and Fox are always easy on the eyes (shoot me). Demelo comes across super well. The cutest scene is when Demelo and Fox are getting a coffee and Demelo is telling the vastly more experienced Fox how things are going to go (not result wise, but just the mechanics of the event), and Fox is nodding along "hmmm, mm hmm", just letting Savannah talk to release energy. Super sweet. Last, the most minor nit to pick. I read somewhere that Tiffany Roberts was part of the staff. It would have been nice to at lease show her, in one scene?, acknowledge her borderline greatness as a player.
I disagree with Rapinoe making some huge shift. Rapinoe became more comfortable with the media, I think, and using her off-the-field platform, which is to be expected as you become used to an environment and just as you get older. But, personality-wise she hasn't changed a bit. I remember an older US Soccer video (maybe pre-2011 WWC?) when she even talked about being the class clown and liking to be the center of attention growing up. In the part you didn't watch, from what I remember, Horan and Morgan both take responsibility as players (Horan, more so). The players featured actually take more responsibility and don't blame it on Vlakto as much. It's the commentators who put it more on Vlatko. The doc also spends some time on O'Hara and Rapinoe missing the PKs (more on Rapinoe missing; it doesn't show Smith because, again, Smith apparently didn't want to be part of the series).
That's off the field. Look at her body language on the field in her early days. I've neve seen a more timid player in the WNT.
Agree. Don’t get the obsession with Foudy. I think in women’s soccer the repeated narrative just gets old. You want to grow the game? Move on from 1999. Move on from Foudy. Move on from Morgan and Pinoe. Less victims.. think of more creative ways to highlight current players. No sport seems as stuck on the same 3-5 players or storylines as women’s soccer. I don’t recall a lot of personal player accountability. Morgan mentioned how forwards need to score and she didn’t. Horan had one vague comment how the players are the ones that play. horan did mention that the US needs to adopt/incorporate possession style soccer at all levels-
Everybody’s picking on Alex Morgan, but she’s hasn’t officially retired from the USNWT. With the Olympic roster currently limited to 18 players, be interesting if she’ll still want to make that roster—it could be an Landon Donovan size controversy if she don’t. I mean to most ardent soccer fans, they know she must go, but to the more bigger, casual fans, it might be the only name left linking them to interest in the USWNT. So surely the USSF would want her on the squad as way to get the $$$ through advo & endorsements, but an no nonsense coach like Emma Hayes(more concerned about winning)might think otherwise. Anyways the Alex Morgan story lines will keep things interesting
Perhaps. I spend a lot of time with non-soccer enthusiasts who seem to only pipe up WC or Olympic time. Even they recognize she doesn’t seem to get it done anymore. Also her “popularity” with a decent portion of the population has taken a hit with the trans stuff and getting tied into Pinoe. The swimsuit/sex appeal stuff also changes when it’s a 33 year old plus mom. but she’s obviously still a big name that is marketable so I could see a Donovan type controversy happening though I really don’t think much happens if she’s left off from here on out… oh, and I think there’s no question she’s still trying to make these rosters.
The US has not been successful in the last two major events, so I think the fans would understand if Emma cuts veterans from the roster.
Morgan's still relevant in 2023; made over $1 mill alone on Instagram, still has a ton of sponcers(Nike, Under Armour, AT&T Grubhub, eccedra) only American soccer payer to had an movie named after her(Alex & Me). Been featured just this year in an variety of commercils, here's a few; super bowl ad for Michelob Ultra lite-- (31) MICHELOB ULTRA | MICHELOB ULTRA ALEX MORGAN COMMERCIAL | ALEX MORGAN | WOMEN'S U.S. SOCCER CHAMPION - YouTube Nike's 1 minute mock up of Alex Morgan perfume (31) Effort Made Effortlessly | Alex Morgan | Nike Football - YouTube even for Calvin Klein (31) Alex Morgan, Chloe Kelly, Mana Iwabuchi and more in Calvins or nothing | Calvin Klein - YouTube I'm willing to bet there be some 'Morgies'(ala Swifties) pissed off if she don't make the squad
got to add; Morgan’s got 10 million plus instagram followers/3.4 mil on X/Twitter & 346K on tick tok in comparison all time fav Julie Ertz only got 946K instagram followers
Sounds like yourself included. She may be relevant…mostly to her own benefit. Joy rides gonna end soon. Thanks for nothing on the last 2 major tourneys, not paving the way for future stars, consistent soccer ineptitude. No wonder Lloyd is so pissed…her old ass trying to salvage the last Olys around these “stars” then re-living the experience while hosting the WC train wreck. They just signed a Mexico NT player to a 1.5 million contract—- in our league. Simply put, that one plays good—and that’s one way to inspire a program and it’s fans. Good riddance, Alex Morgan. The ire of your rabid fans is a small price to pay for the betterment of the program.
lol—-I’m looking forward to the day USSF rejects Morgan, just don’t think they got they the guts to do it since she’s been their cash cow
Apologies if I pegged you wrong, I just wouldn’t even waste the time to research her so called accolades—- that don’t involve a soccer pitch…
I'm a USWNT fan, and thus almost couldn't help but mostly enjoy Under Pressure. But in the end, I feel the whole endeavor was superficial in that it identified and started pulling the right strings for possible explanations for under-performance but then didn't really help me land on any particular conclusion. A few other random notes: As others have said, the closeups on K.Mewis and Williams while waiting for their call-ups was excellent and moving. They did miss an opportunity to show someone on the wrong side of the cut...but maybe all of their "cooperators" ended up on the team. The best moment of the whole show was after Mewis learned she was on the team and the ensuing discussion when she shared the news with Sam Kerr (I'll leave out the details because you all should really get to enjoy that moment for yourself). Their coverage of the games was weird...maybe they had limitations on how they could use the actual WC footage, but so many details and key moments were left out. If we're trying to diagnose the root causes for what went wrong, don't we need a bit more about the proximate causes on the field...who specifically under-performed, what tactical options Vlatko might have had that he didn't (or did) choose, issues with injuries (Lavelle especially) that affected who played, etc? I agree with whoever wrote that this seems like they planned a much longer show based on a longer WC stay, and then didn't adjust based on what happened. Although they had good access, what they didn't get might have doomed them to mediocrity. No in-depth talks with Vlatko or any coaches. No inside view to players who got cut. Failed to get close to Smith who clearly wasn't shy of the media focus and was one of the folks who delivered far less than expected. And then perhaps they were missing really good interviewers or enough time with the players during the tournament because I don't feel like we got beyond platitudes on the WC performances, even from the players who did actively participate.
FIFA strictly controls their footage of the games, which I'm sure at least partly influenced how they could show the stories of the matches. On another note, in the Re-Cap podcast (with Press and Heath), Heath said that all of the WWC teams she has been on (which would be 2011, 2015, and 2019) had various film crews/documentary directors request to follow and film the team at the WWC, and the answer from the team was always no. For 2023, the answer from the team as a whole was no, but the team was okay with individual players participating. It does make me wonder what all went into the change in the decision to participate, given that some of the players who obviously were fine with participating in this one were still in previous WWC's on teams (and leaders on those teams) that said no to being filmed. And will future teams be more or less likely to participate in a documentary type project again?
Well, if we factor in how many players in this sport are superstitious and what was the outcome of this WWC, I'd say: "Not likely!".