I was thinking about some of the questionable USMNT decisions over the past decade. Here's what I came up with - in no particular order (Funny how most of these are 95-98) Am I missing any ? +++++++ Leaving Keller off of the 94 Roster Sampson's scouring of Germany for any player who might have ever visited a McDonald's - Brought us David Wagner, Matthew Mason Sampson bringing up Regis - At the time, it didn't bother me. Guy had size and pedigree in overseas league, at position we needed. But, I fear it mixed up chemistry. Leaving Harkes off 98 Roster. He might have said something stupid, but this was where Steve started to lose his team. Inclusion of Deering, Maisonneuve vs Germany in 98. I think he did this b/c they looked good versus the Austria friendly.
Couple disagreements: Meola had a great cup in 94. KK might be a better keeper, but he wasn't going to outperform tony in that tourney, Bora is a pretty good judge of defensive talent, IMO. It wasn't Regis getting beat near post in that cup, btw. The inclusion of Burns was a worse call. Also, and loudly did this argument ring on BS pre cup 02, Agoos. Not fair to call it an all time blunder, but he looked to be slowing down before the cup made it really obvious. There's an argument about Gansler and his kids in 90, but they did set a tone for the decade. So maybe, while tactically odd, history vindicated the choice.
Okay. good point. But, would the US have gotten any further with KK. No way. and Meola was great vs colombia and brazil.
A few bad lineup decisions by Bruce: 1. Sticking with Agoos in the WC. It had become pretty clear that although Goose helped us out a ton in qualifying, he was simply not an international-caliber fullback. Bruce could have groomed Bocanegra to replaced Goose, or could also have relied on Berhalter, as he did after Goose got injured. 2. Going with a 4-3-3 against Honduras at RFK in the WC qualifier. Why go with a three-man midfield against a team that counterattacks like the blazes? Sure enough, Honduras tore through our midfield, and our backline could not handle the constant pressure of the Hondurans running at then with a full head of steam. 3. Shortly after the Honduras debacle, going with a 5-3-2 against Costa Rica in the WC qualifier in Saprissa. Did Bruce really think he could bunker for 90 minutes against Costa Rica in Costa Rica, and come away with a draw? Costa Rica played the entire game around our penalty box, and eventually got the inevitable goal. Now, before everyone jumps on me, I realize that under Bruce, we did qualify for the WC and made the quarter-finals, so I think Bruce did the job and is a good coach. But he's not perfect, and these are some of the mistakes I think he made.
WRT: 1) Boca was hurt and unavailable. 3) Weren't the US on their 5th and 6th string forwards for that match.
1) You're probably right -- Boca may have been hurt and unavailable. But even if he was unavailable, I think Berhalter proved to be preferable to Agoos. And were Boca healthy and available, I can't see Bruce taking him over Agoos. 3) I think you're right -- the US was on their 5th and 6th string forwards for that match (and we may have had a bunch of injured midfielders as well). But even so, I don't think playing with 5th and 6th string forwards justified bunkering in a 5-3-2.
I totally agree with the argument regarding the 5-3-2 in Costa Rica. That is one of the first non-Sampson blunder I thought about. It was just pathetic because if I recall Richie and Armas played D-Mid so it was almost like 7 guys playing back. It was just a poor judgement in my mind to go and play bunker ball. Thankfully for all of us, Bruce made most of the right decisions in Korea. Friedel over Keller, Hejduk over Regis, LD and DMB starting, not taking Regis off the bench.
Probably not, he would have gone instead of someone else, and I don't remember who wound up getting that spot -- Vanney was also considered before he got hurt.
He's more perfect than any other coach we've had, IMO. 1. Bocanegra clearly would not have been ready. Berhalter is about as snake-bitten as Agoos in my opinion 2. So bunker in at home? 3. Go all out attack on the road? Bruce did qualify the US for the WC Just messin' with ya. I agree, he's not perfect but he is a damn good coach
I would argue that both Gansler in '90 and Bora in 94 both matched BA in 02. Getting a team, at all, into a WC after a 40 year absense (yeah, yeah, mexico was banned, but I watched us in the 80s and we were a bad jr team) was a huge accomplishment, and figuring out how to get a moderately talented bunch into the second round, and beating colombia in the bargain, was also massive. BA took us a step forward. Nothing wrong at all, but he wasn't building from death valley. At the very least, he was standing on the shoulders of guys of average height.
2 and 3 were certainly the glaring tactical/line-up mistakes. CR away was tricky due to injuries etc. but we may as well have stayed home with that line up. Hondo home was more a failure of strategy than line up. Why we were trying to run and gun with the run and gunners I'll have no idea. We played them tight away and pipped the win on a crappy field in front of 45k. We played the rest of the hex tight, careful and picked our spots to break. Again, dunno why we abandoned then. Maybe Regis and Dolo went nuts together or maybe it was just a bad call by Bruce. Bruce stuck with Agoos too long. I can't agree with the anti-Regis camp, tho I do think Bruce moved him out at the right time, even if was in favor of the ankle-seeking wind-up toy. I don't know if SS dumping Harkes was the symptom or the cause, but there were certainly some player management issues in '98.
I won't even pretend to understand what that means. I'm such a throwback I can't even figure out why those freaky "have a nice day things" end up in people's posts. But I'm say Burns/Regis, you make the call.
Can this be the 20th post and no one has mentioned three little words.... three six one ? Also, in general, I think Los Bruce could do a better job getting the next striker generation involved in some of these friendlies. Alecko, Johnson, Buddle and dare I say "Him"?
Actually, Bocanegra was more or less healthy during the World Cup, he was playing for the Fire while the WC was going on. When he was hurt was during the beginning of the run up to the World Cup, meaning because Bruce was slow to recognize he might need a younger replacement for Agoos, Bocanegra only had a few caps during the 2002 Gold Cup and hadn't been worked fully into the team yet, and now was unavailable for the run up as a chance to get into the squad. He had roughly as much National Team experience as Beasley up until that point. I don't think you can give Arena a full pass on this. Clearly if he recognizes early back in 2001 that Agoos could represent a problem come 2002, he could have used 2001 to bleed a young defender or two into the mix. He didn't and Agoos nearly made him pay dearly. The way Bocanegra shot by every defender on the depth chart (save Pope) and should have been the player of the year in 2003, doesn't make what happened look any better.
I agree that he needed to have another plan in place, but the problem was that Agoos was probably the most solid defender in early qualifying when we were so successful, and by late 2001, I don't think Bruce thought that he could afford to bring in an untested defender.
harkening to the 3-5-2, where the outside wings in the 5 some times resembles a 5-3-2 might be the best option for the USA... Convey or Beasley as wing backs on the left offer great mobility. The huge key is finding who fills the role on the right, with Cherundolo or Stewart offering the best options now. bocanegra pope and gibbs would be my three central defenders... i'd have mastroeni and reyna and mathis as the central mids, with donovan and mcbride up top... donovan and mathis can switch between amid and forward as the play dictates