I'm not going to provide a link because I don't want the dude to get credit, but there is a story titled "U.S. coach Bradley misses chance to give experience to fresh new talent" by George Dohrmann, and man its bad. This is up there with Schaerlackens. I'll start out with a couple decent points that he made: Alright, that's all I could find. So here are some more dandies from the "article": Bradley capped 92 players . . . 2007 Copa America . . . 2009 Gold Cup . . . Its hard to be wrong so much in one sentence. A true "B" squad? I think most people not named Dunga would have taken that "B" squad over the team taken to the World Cup. And yes this team was mostly World Cup veterans. Bob didn't want the team to get embarrassed. However, this team was without Dempsey, Holden, Onyewu, Demerit, and Donovan was experimented at SS again. Altidore didn't start either. Does he seriously think Ream or a youth player could have done better? Damn, apparently he does. It is a noble aim to test our young players against Brazil, but what positive would come from them getting blasted? Bedoya almost made the World Cup roster and he was in shambles in the second half. Brazil's 18 year olds are superstar players on league champions in their league. The US's 18 year olds are at best bit players in MLS or on reserve teams in Portugal. Bob should have wasted a call up on a player that may or may not ever decide to play for the US? He should have used a player who has ZERO games of professional first team experience against Alexandre Pato??? I know I get tired ot the constant bashing of US Soccer coverage. Its not all that bad. But its impossible to defend this stuff that gets out.
It's ok, when potential journalists graduate from college, the stupidest guys get stuck with soccer. But the premise is pretty stupid. A huge reason Bob got the job, according to Sunil, was that Bob was prepared to call up new, younger guys rather than the experienced European based Americans during his caretaker games. He had to try some new things after 2006 and he did.
Yep. That's why its so annoying. All it takes is the simplest research to prevent this type of crap from getting out. It would have taken him about 5 minutes to see that the premise of the entire article was 100% false. At least then the worst part of the article would be the players he thought should have gotten eaten alive by Brazil.
Huh? Sit Michael for a game, or even a half ? Why start now? You knew the second you saw him in the starting lineup he wasn't coming out, regardless of the fact that it was a friendly with extra subs allowed. And, after watching the Brazil game, you wonder how poorly Michael would have to play for Dad to actually yank him. I don't think it has EVER happened. At the same time, guys like Torres and Feilhaber get pulled without slightest hesitation. What game was it during qualifying where Torres had an exceptional first half, only to be gone after the half (and not get playing time for a very long time afterwards)? You'd almost think dad was worried about someone showing up his son. And Mike was "tired" for some reason? Long summer? Sheesh. How much rest does he need between games? More than a month?
meh. one columnist isn't going to ruin SI for me. Wahl and Wilson are still awesome. And Davis is fine, as well.
True. It kinda depends on how much he is writing though, becuase SI has gotten a lot better lately. Schaerlaeckens became the main writer for ESPN, even for US stuff. As long as Wahl and co. continue to be the main guys, then this is just noe horrible article among better ones.
Just maybe, Ream was considered (I don't think so, but lets pretend), he may have been passed up because his MLS club had a game the next night where he was expected to go 90 minutes and 5 of his teammates have already been called up to other countries national teams. We all like to bitch about MLS and Int. dates, but USSF does usually consider this stuff when building a roster. I know Findley had a game Weds. as well, probably why he didn't start, but he has already been intergrated to the team.
Dude, this guy is nowhere near Schaerlaeckens level. That guy is the all time biggest US soccer hack in history. I thought this article was relatively fair, and honestly I agree with some of the young guy considerations. Why not? How many games do we get a year? Might as well try an Agbossoumonde, Ream, etc. I highly doubt Hoyos would have come but an olive branch isn't the worst idea. I don't think it's about feeding our youngsters to the wolves, but sometimes the sink or swim approach can really bolster a young player's game. I would have rather seen those guys than terrible Bornstein, a tired Boca and a pointless Findley cameo. Also, that was definitely a 'B squad' no matter how you look at it. Sure, any other country would love to half those players, but more than have had 1 cap or less, let alone went to the World Cup. Just because it's a 'B squad' doesn't mean they suck. They're just that deep.
1) There's no reason to think an October friendly against a Brazil team that might have been better than its World Cup squad is a good place to give a bunch of guys their first cap. Especially when the team has one day of practice to prepare. 2) Ream is promising but not nearly as ready for international play as his boosters seem to think. 3) Has Agbossoumonde actually played a game for his club's first team? 4) Do we actually know that Bradley didn't call Hoyos? I'm not saying he did; he probably didn't. But a lot of the time columnists assume these things without evidence.
Maybe I'm not up on the latest with Hoyos, but isn't his heart set on playing for Argentina? That was the big flaw I saw in that statement.