With Steve Sampson, an ex-USA coach, coaching the national team of Costa Rica, I thought it would be a good time to ask a question about the present USA coach, Bruce Arena??? US soccer fans, myself included, think of Bruce Arena as THE best coach the USMNT has ever had (or, at least, most of us do). I'm interested in hearing what fans throughout CONCACAF think of Mr. Arena, as a soccer coach?? What do you think of his coaching abilities?? How do you rate his technical & tactical strategies? Just interested about your opinions on his coaching abilities & how you rate him with other coaches, past and present!! Forget the fact that he's the USA coach. Thanks.
The man has taken us farther than we have ever been...he's the best ever in my book...his squad selections are crap though. We have fast and young talent, and that's who we need in the lineup day in and day out.
Arena is a great coach and deserves his share for getting us as far as we are now. He is the player's coach, and will shape the players available to him into a team unit, regardless of circumstances. But his cardinal weakness (every great protagonist has one) is that he will unconditionally stand by certain players - Agoos, Kirovski, to name two - until he is proven wrong by the dire consequences that come out of his selections.
It wouldn't be fair to rate him now. After the Gold Cup (which he rated as a higher priority than the Confed Cup), is when I believe he can be fairly judged. One could also argue that the reason why the US did so well in the WC was their new talent and not because the coaching was so great. Even I could coach Real Madrid to consecutive La Liga titles, a world club cup title, the Champs League, etc. with Ronaldo, Raul, Zidane, Figo, R. Carlos yadda yadda...CM told me so...
I agree, with jd6885, that we must wait until the Gold Cup is over to judge him fairly as a coach (perhaps even until WCQ for 2006 is over). However, I do worry about his "unrelenting" loyalty to certain players, even at the expense of the team's overall performance. After the first two games of the Confed Cup, another name must be added to Kirvoski & Agoos.......Berhalter, who's been HORRIBLE!!!! Another aspect of his coaching, which has NEVER been questioned, is his motivational style. But, after watching the USMNT put in back-to-back "listless" performances, I'm wondering what went wrong??!!! Arena can add to his coaching credentials IMHO with a SOLID performance & WINNING the Gold Cup!
We certainly aren't winning the GC. Brazil, Mexico, CR and co. are gonna actually play futbol. He'll just say he's just doing some more testing <sigh>.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=1252739#post1252739 Bruce Arena, like 95% of the English/German styled and trained coaches in the USA put no emphasis on style, creativity, flair, passing & technique/skill. Look how beautiful the Colombians and Japanese play the game! The ball at their feet, amazing passing, flair & a reason to pay money to watch. If we lost and playrd like that I'd be fine. Problem is Arena & the vast majority of "coaches" in the USA have their fundamental beliefs from a English and German style which basically is BORING to watch. This is entertainment last time I checked! We need to start encouraging our most skillful & creative players not our most athletic & aggresive. We might win a few games, but in the end. Brazil will beat Germany 9 out of 10 times in the final by dribbling around this big bafoons. Arena, MLS, USSoccer, NSCAA, USYSA, AYSO and the like ..... PROMOTE ATTACKING/CREATIVE/BEAUITIFUL futbol, that players enjoy to play and fans enjoy watching!!!
I agree with you, futbol571, TOTALLY on your points. However, there are some "hard-line" beliefs that must be overcome in order to achieve true world-class soccer, or should I say, futbol status!! The "team-first" mentality in American sports that starts at the early youth level through college must be loosened, at least in soccer. It may work in the other sports, but not in soocer. "Individuality" MUST be encouraged & nurtured at the earliest ages. I don't see this as making the "team concept" obslete, but enhancing our soccer results, internationally!! Hopefully, Arena will see the wisdom & long-term success potential in this "style-change". Being the MOST powerful & influential man in US soccer, Arena is the obvious choice to lead the change from a BORING, CONSERVATIVE style to an EXCITING, ATTACKING one!! Let's hope, for US soccer's sake, that he listens to the fans' pleas!!
So? CR and Mexico were in the last GC and we won it. You seem to have this impression that we play ugly soccer any good-passing team can blow us away. But in the WC the Koreans only tied us, Portugal lost to us, Mexico lost to us... the only teams we lost to were the two "ugliest" teams we played: Poland and Germany. Here's my plea as a fan to Bruce Arena: Keep it up. The USMNT has done more than I ever would have imagined under your watch.
Well, if you equate passing the ball elegantly around midfield with success, then Colmbia actually won the 94 Cup by a mile. Of course, if you insist that a team actually wins matches, well, '94 was a perfect illustration that your opportunities to show your pretty passing will be limited to the first round. Then you get to go home and watch the rest of the teams play for three more weeks.
I don't like him much personally, but I respect him as a coach & his ability to get the US team unified (something that Steve Sampson apparently failed to do in France 98). You can't argue with his success vs. Steve Sampson, but I do think the US had a better team in 2002 than 1998 anyway. I'll be interested to see how Steve Sampson does in Costa Rica, especially since the Ticos first meaningful match as their head coach is the Gold Cup opener against my country.
The US won't lose the Gold Cup because Costa Rica or Brazil or Mexico are in it, they'll lose the Gold Cup probably because they'll have to play Mexico in the Azteca in the final....
Bruce Arena is a very good coach. Some of you guys would like to see the style of game played differentlly but you must also understand that the USA team doesnt have as much tactic as say the Colombians or Costa Ricans. Your strenght is defensive, counter attacking, collective football, tahts the strengths of your players and Arena does a great job capitalizing on that. Why change what is not broken? You have had great results lately. Germany plays horribly and look where they ended up in tha last WC? How about Italy? Next to Brazil this have been the 2 most successful teams in history and in the 20 or so years and they cant play any uglier. I think most of you here might think the USA has been the best team in the last 2 years but I would argue that and say C.R. is the best team right now. We won the Hex. by 6 points beating every single team in the head to head series. We played the Gold Cup Final and lost to the host. And yeah, in the World Cup we didnt pass the qualifying round but we played the 1st and 3rd place teams. In the Gold Cup we will be without arguebly our best player Wanchope so I think winning it all might be out of reach but as long as we stay away from the Estadio Azteca we have a good chance of winning.
That's going to be tough to do since the final is at Azteca. Then again, you guys have actually beaten Mexico there recently, so maybe your team will have the confidence that they can do it again. As for Wanchope missing, fair enough, but keep in mind most teams will be missing more than one top player at the Gold Cup. For example, Canada's roster hasn't been released yet, but already we know that our two best strikers, Radzinski & De Rosario, will be missing due to injury. And I've already noticed some familiar names missing from Mexico, the US & Colombia's roster as well.
Wow, Concacaf - I think that was a great post. You said what I was thinking in a very clear way. I agree that CR is currently on a level with the US and Mexico, and that they got a terrible draw at the WC (and almost got through anyway).
Arena did go far in wc But his insistance on having the big center forward is questionable when we have so many speedy wingers. his callups are horrible and he tends to get favorites and stick to them for to long ie Kirovski, Olsen, Albright, and Agoos. Heck if Agoos hadnt gotten hurt in WC im sure he woulda let him keep playing the wholew tournament. hes no Beckenbauer but hes no Sampson either. his lineups for confederation cup were awful. but as long as he keeps beating Mexico lets keep him.
I'm going to defend Arena's situation and not the coach himself. I'm neither a staunch supporter nor detractor of the man, but recognize that he does the best he can given what he has to work with. Do you think Arena would use the same boring tactics, as you describe them, if the US team was loaded with the finest and most talented Brazillians on the planet? Jeez, folks, this is an easy one...before blaming a coach, look at what his player pool consists of and then ask yourself if this pool has the capability to produce style, creativity, flair, and all the rest of it... The whole is only as good as the sum of its parts.
SUPERB point, cl_hanley!! Unfortunately, there are no Ronaldos, Zidanes, or Peles on the USMNT, so Arena has to work with what he's got. However, I think that is what makes Arena such a great coach. He "maximizes" the potential of his team & makes it work. My hope is that he doesn't wear "thin" on the players before WC 2006. BTW, I do think that Donovan, Beasley, McBride, Friedel & Keller can "hold their own" on the international futbol scene. And the US is producing players that might make the world take notice very soon. Adu, Martino, & Howard, just to name a few. Perhaps, Arena will be USMNT long enough to "maximize" their potential!!
At the risk of getting labeled "US Hater" here it goes: Arena is not a "great coach" all he has shown is a team that packs the first quarter of the field and hopes to score in a counter attack. If the goal comes, GREAT! If it doesn't, well, too bad! Some one mentioned the US doesn't have a Ronaldo, Zidane or Pele, but guess what? Neither does Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras or Japan to name a few and that does not stop the coaches of these nations from promoting attractive, attacking futbol. Arena also benefits from the fact that futbol is not big in the States. He does not have the kind of pressure fans, Media and Federation place in 99% of the World coaches out there.
Yes, but...Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, and Japan have, generally speaking, players with superior individual skills and talent. All these countries are able to pull off the exhilarating one-touch, on the move style of attack that makes for entertaining soccer. To pull this off, the US would require, as an example, an offensive run where the only players involved in the play are O'Brien, Mathis, and Donovan (for the sake of brevity I've excluded one or two others). As soon as one of our other "clubfeet" players got involved the play would die. Again, a team is only as good as the combined sum of its good and bad parts. Now, if Arena were to take over one of the other teams you mentioned, and their style of play became robotic and unimaginative, then you would have a basis to make your claim. Right now, Arena has found what he feels to be the best formula to produce a victory in spite of the limitations imposed by the quality of the players.
That's ok, EvilRick. I'm not afraid to say that I'm A "BIG Mexico HATER"!!!!!! I'll ALWAYS be & I'm PROUD to say it!!!
I give Arena lots of credit as a coach. He has succeeded at every level he has ever been involved in. NCAA championship. MLS championship. Furthest World Cup advancement (dont' talk to me about 1930) of any coach in US history. What more do you want? And most to his credit is that his US nats team, in my opinion, has overachieved to reach these levels. That is the essence of good coaching.