I tried ignoring most talk about the chants, which is the focus of other threads, and even if i do not consider myself in the "sky is falling" camp, i tried to highlight stuff that can be useful to understand the performance yesterday, and how in the future, we don't show up as poorly: No Games This Summer A Setback http://www.ctnow.com/sports/columnists/hc-trecker-0211,1,3633427.column?coll=hc “It is easy to suggest reasons why the Under-23 side failed to qualify, but much harder to come up with solutions. Clearly the level of play that American kids get between the ages of 18 and 23, still must be raised. Not enough of the kids who sign with Major League Soccer get regular playing time and there is no effective youth development vehicle that stretches their games . Because MLS cannot afford to run full reserve teams and youth development academies the day when developing players get the kind of consistent minutes of their global counterparts remains way off. ….. Obviously, the United States has a problem developing defenders. The Under-23 team, although winning three games, allowed 10 goals in four matches. Arena is searching, too, for backs, a point made clear by his decision to play Convey, the gifted midfielder, as a wide defender at the senior level.” U.S. Doesn't Qualify For Summer Olympics http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30633-2004Feb10.html …….. and the shell-shocked Americans, slow in defense and ineffective at midfield, never recovered. "We were clearly exposed by our inexperience coupled with our lack of pace at the back. And at this level you pay for that," said Coach Glenn Myernick, ….. Against a compact Mexican defense that made few errors, the Americans -- who finished the game with 10 men on the field – were unable to beat Mexican midfielders one-on-one and posed little threat in the final third of the field, while Mexico used its speed to take advantage of the U.S.'s slow and inexperienced backline. Inexperience hurts, coach says http://www.usatoday.com/sports/soccer/2004-02-11-mexico-us-side_x.htm ……. "A big difference in the game is clearly the soccer they play is of a better standard than a number of our players," said Myernick of his Under-23 team. "We have players starting on our team who are substitutes in the MLS who don't get match experience that they require to play at this level. I think you saw some of that exposed tonight." …… "There were too many times tonight when our defenders didn't do a good enough job of slowing the attack down," Myernick said. Mexico Downs U.S. 4-0, Ruins Olympic Dream http://www.ussoccer.com/news/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=53302 Article is way too kind….At least the quote sheet is interesting: “On the difficulty in handling Mexico's all-out attack: "We were disappointed in our ability to defend. Any team's defending starts with the quality of their one-on-one defending, and there were just too many times tonight when our defenders didn't do a good enough job of slowing the attack down, making a player on Mexico play a negative pass and giving themselves more of a chance to get numbers across the back." The U.S. Is Vanquished by Taunts and Mexico http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/11/sports/soccer/11SOCC.html ..... In the 26th minute, the throng began chanting "Osama! Osama!" at the Americans, but they appeared inured to such taunting and eager for a game of beautiful desperation in an attempt to reach the Olympics. And then, out of nowhere, it all fell apart. Defense had become a vulnerability for the United States in this qualifying tournament, and its opponent deftly pounced on this weakness ...
What went wrong and how to fix it-wow, that would take a long time to explore. Yes, we need MLS to prosper so that they can move towards reserve and youth teams. Some of the U-23 players are not starters with their clubs and they just haven't gotten enough quality minutes. But this discussion would have to go well beyond the deficiencies of MLS or of the 17-23 age group. I believe it goes all the way back to when players begin, somewhere between 4-9 years old. Not only do the Mexican players grow up in a soccer-passionate culture, resulting in players that are constantly looking to refine their games, their national "style" encourages skill and technique, so that the vast majority of gifted athletes who make it to the professional level are technically fundamentally sound. Contrast that with the typical American pro, who's gotten there on superior athleticism and drive, but does not automatically have a sound technical foundation (though some do, of course). The American soccer culture has not yet progressed to where enough kids are motivated to consistently working on their own to hone their skills, nor do we have enough qualified coaches at the youngest ages who can inspire players to try more than the very basic skills. One way to compare the difference in technical ability is to observe the average Mexican pro vs. the average American pro. Watch the wingers come down the field and cross the ball into the box. The average Mexican player will be near target at least 6-7 out of every 10 tries, while the typical American player will make it maybe 3-4 times out of 10. And some American players may only be successful once or twice (Frankie Hejduk? Jay Heaps?) If you extrapolate these differences in all technical areas (passing, trapping, heading, dribbling, etc.), you can understand why the Mexicans can link passes, maintain possession, get shots on goal (not over it), etc., much more effectively than can the American players. So, how can the U.S. ever defeat Mexican teams? Same story- superior athleticism, size, strength, and at times, better motivation. But maybe one day the Fed and other soccer people will begin to turn their attention to improving the soccer development of the youngest age groups, so that by the time that the most gifted among them reaches 13-14, the coaches will have better raw material to work with.
A bad defense can expose even the best of teams - well, in the sense that the teams are otherwise skilled in the other positions. Brazil, for example. Traditionally, its defense has been a weak spot, if such a brilliant team can have a weak spot. This Olympics, we sit out with Brazil - who actually had a better qualifying shot (more fair set-up, IMHO) and still failed to make the grade. Of course, Brazil's defense is better than ours. But I don't completely agree with the earlier post that says our players are not as skilled as the Mexican players at a younger age. Some are very skilled. In my opinion, the problem is that these players are not placed in defensive positions. Face it, the defense is not the glamour position in soccer. The midfield controls, the goalies save, and the forwards score. In youth soccer, the players who can hold, trap and pass are almost always allocated to the top end of the field. In the "give everyone a chance" system of AYSO and other youth teams, the weak players are put on the defense. By the time good players start playing defense seriously, they may be years behind. However, we have a recent example of how it might be possible to catch up quickly. Spector is at Man U. now as a defender who is actually a converted forward. Brandi Chastain is another example. If our most skilled players at the youth level are forwards, who better to convert to meet our defensive deficiencies? At the senior level, we have probably been saved by God (AKA Eddie Pope, who really has incredible skill and concentration) and the blind luck of some players having great games (Hedjuk, Mastroeni, etc) but Mexico has probably done us a favor by exposing our defensive weakness so blatently. We still have time to invest in our talent (Bocanegra,for one, if he disciplines himself) and to go out and to search for new prospects to develop. I hear this Adu kid is pretty good with his feet, and has some skill on the ball. He might make a decent defender.