O/T: USMNT - Klinsman fired
- Thread starter BigLou
- Start date
Bruce Arena is supposed to be the leading candidate
Word in the twitterverse is that final contract points already being hammered out.
LA Sunday Times had an article about Arena's contract with The Galaxy and the potential to take over the US Men's National Team. http://www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/la-sp-soccer-baxter-20161119-story.html
Saw former RU soccer player and current Sporting Kansas City MLS coach Peter Vermes ('85-'87) mentioned as one of three candidates last week but looks like it's going to be Arena.
Yup. Vermes, Reyna, etc., will get their shot but I think RIGHT NOW, in the situation this team finds itself, you've got to go to Arena.
Please have him be American. We are aggressive by nature. The coach needs to understand this mindset. European strategy and style doesn't work here. The academy programs are good though.
Makes sense , thought it would have been best (if JK agreed) if he was National program lead and relieved of coaching duties. He's done a great job setting up the young kids , in my opinion.
I'm dreaming, but I'm hoping for Hecking, Bielsa, Mancini, or Pellegrini. But that's far too creative for Gulati and US Soccer...so Arena it will be. And back to kick and chase.
That's not far too creative. It's down right ridiculous; At least in regard to Mancini, Pellegrini, or Hecking ever even taking a moment to consider an offer from US Soccer. Bielsa maybe they could get but would be a disaster IMO.
Pellegrini is managing a Chinese Super League team right now. Mancini and Hecking are in the unemployment line...so why not?
Big picture, the USMNT situation reminds me of Rutgers sports in the 80's-90's. Coaches come and coaches go as teams underwhelm during a period the program is trying to grow but the accountability never goes to the top. With Rutgers it was Gruninger the golf coach, with the USMNT it is the economics professor Gulati that keeps getting voted in to make the decisions no matter how many times he fails.
Whomever it is, this is most likely a short term appointment. We are too far along in this WC cycle to start from scratch. This has to be someone with knowledge of the players and American soccer. Arena makes sense through 2018. After that we can address the position again.
Problem in this country is the old argument about the best male athletes are not going out for soccer (opposite for women). In addition, men's college soccer doesn't really prepare them for int'l soccer. American players are fit ,structured, and predictable, but play with no creativity and little field awareness. Foreign coaches believe Americans should be less obsessed with fitness and know the game better. Call me Captain Obvious.
It's amazing that people don't realize this. Soccer players in other countries first learn the game by playing it recreationally and informally, much like American kids learn basketball and football. You can't really play the game creatively when you're initially learning it by rote in a structured environment. Most of the best male athletes in other countries play soccer. Here, they play football, basketball, and maybe baseball. The heightened concern about injuries in football may change some part of that equation going forward, though.
We have roughly 180MM males in this country. Even skimming off the elite of the elite for football/basketball, that leaves far more men playing the game then many other countries. I don't buy the athletic thing. Rarely do I watch a game and think the other team has better athletes.
I think it is more the way the kids play growing up in such structured ways. We need to embrace what we are. We aren't going to have the most technical team. But we can be the fittest and more aggressive. And that can work too.
Apex fitness is growing across all sports. Read an interesting article recently about pro tennis players. Total fitness game now. The amount of time they practice on the court with rackets pales in comparison to what those before them did. In a physical game like soccer, that advantage can be exploited further.
It's time to be honest about what US soccer is, not what some Euro wants it to be. Those days are over for the time being. Maybe someday that changes, but it's not now.
I think it is more the way the kids play growing up in such structured ways. We need to embrace what we are. We aren't going to have the most technical team. But we can be the fittest and more aggressive. And that can work too.
Apex fitness is growing across all sports. Read an interesting article recently about pro tennis players. Total fitness game now. The amount of time they practice on the court with rackets pales in comparison to what those before them did. In a physical game like soccer, that advantage can be exploited further.
It's time to be honest about what US soccer is, not what some Euro wants it to be. Those days are over for the time being. Maybe someday that changes, but it's not now.
I'm not big on the US soccer-needs-more-athletes argument.
The guys we field on the pitch can all run and kick with the best of them -- we've seen that.
IMO, the problem is actually too many athletes and not enough soccer players.
The difference between a good soccer player and a great one comes down to just two things: 1.) first touch (skill) and 2.) anticipation (sport IQ).
Notice neither of those two elements necessarily require one to be a superb athlete.
I'll give you an example that many can relate to. LJ Smith was much more athletic than Jason Witten. However, Jason's skill (catching) and IQ (getting open on option routes) makes him a hall-of-famer lock while Smith has been out of the league several years now.
It helps to be athletic, but at the World Cup everyone is athletic -- it takes more than that.
Much more.
The guys we field on the pitch can all run and kick with the best of them -- we've seen that.
IMO, the problem is actually too many athletes and not enough soccer players.
The difference between a good soccer player and a great one comes down to just two things: 1.) first touch (skill) and 2.) anticipation (sport IQ).
Notice neither of those two elements necessarily require one to be a superb athlete.
I'll give you an example that many can relate to. LJ Smith was much more athletic than Jason Witten. However, Jason's skill (catching) and IQ (getting open on option routes) makes him a hall-of-famer lock while Smith has been out of the league several years now.
It helps to be athletic, but at the World Cup everyone is athletic -- it takes more than that.
Much more.
I think Arena is a downgrade. And I think the problems with the USMNT start somewhere beyond coaching. Klinsmann knows the game, knows how to teach it and coach it. IMO, he isn't the problem, although I suppose when things aren't working, something has to change.
Our players have demonstrated a fine tactical understanding of the game. They obviously understand the roles and responsibilities of the positions they play and they obviously understand the fundamentals of combination play, defensive support play, etc. Those things are on clear display when playing slower, less skilled competition. So that's not the problem either, IMO.
Unlike some of you, I do think the problem is indeed partially athletic. Our players, in general, appear to lack the pace to be competitive with the top 16 teams in the world. At almost any level of the game, lack of pace is deadly, especially on defense, all other things being equal.
But one area in which we are consistently behind top competition is in individual skill. Our players are very skilled, no doubt. But the top players in other countries are just that much better; more natural and instinctive. It shows up most when we are under intense pressure from a good defensive team. We tend to break down because we're just too slow with the ball.
I also still wonder if we are doing a good enough job identifying the best possible players for the MNT. There seem to be some improvements in this, but perhaps not enough. As some have said earlier in the thread, we have a lot of people in this country and a lot of soccer players. It's hard to imagine that we cannot locate more naturally skilled, faster players for our national team.
Our players have demonstrated a fine tactical understanding of the game. They obviously understand the roles and responsibilities of the positions they play and they obviously understand the fundamentals of combination play, defensive support play, etc. Those things are on clear display when playing slower, less skilled competition. So that's not the problem either, IMO.
Unlike some of you, I do think the problem is indeed partially athletic. Our players, in general, appear to lack the pace to be competitive with the top 16 teams in the world. At almost any level of the game, lack of pace is deadly, especially on defense, all other things being equal.
But one area in which we are consistently behind top competition is in individual skill. Our players are very skilled, no doubt. But the top players in other countries are just that much better; more natural and instinctive. It shows up most when we are under intense pressure from a good defensive team. We tend to break down because we're just too slow with the ball.
I also still wonder if we are doing a good enough job identifying the best possible players for the MNT. There seem to be some improvements in this, but perhaps not enough. As some have said earlier in the thread, we have a lot of people in this country and a lot of soccer players. It's hard to imagine that we cannot locate more naturally skilled, faster players for our national team.
I'll side with the argument that athletic ability and skill is lacking at the USMNT. If you watched the game in Copa America against Argentina last summer, and had never seen a soccer game before in your life and had walked out of the room each time a goal was scored and you didn't know the score. you still would have known which team was far superior to the other. Our passing is not as accurate, our ability to handle a pass not as good (first touch as mentioned above)and our ability to handle the ball in crowds and maneuver to get a shot off also falls short. This is why Klinsman went for the foreign born players in an attempt to raise our skill level. Pulisisc seems to be the type of player that we have lacked in the past but we need more of these creative types.
Honestly, until we show the ability to reverse fields quickly and consistently, it's going to be very difficult to break high pressing and/or congested midfields.
Like in basketball, the only way to get out of pressure is to play into space. Good opponents will always make sure that the only available space is the most difficult pass to complete. It's usually a diagonal long ball to the other side of the field.
It puts a LOT of pressure on the passer to 1.) see the open man and 2.) complete the pass.
Also, the player receiving the pass must immediately get control of the ball and know where he's going because the defense is recovering while the ball is in the air. It's really similar to a return man in football -- need to know where you're going before you make the catch.
If you don't watch much soccer, flip on one of the "name" teams and watch how effortlessly a 30-40 yard diagonal cross-field pass can be completed.
Now watch any rerun of a USMNT game against a quality opponent and count how many times we can do that...
Like in basketball, the only way to get out of pressure is to play into space. Good opponents will always make sure that the only available space is the most difficult pass to complete. It's usually a diagonal long ball to the other side of the field.
It puts a LOT of pressure on the passer to 1.) see the open man and 2.) complete the pass.
Also, the player receiving the pass must immediately get control of the ball and know where he's going because the defense is recovering while the ball is in the air. It's really similar to a return man in football -- need to know where you're going before you make the catch.
If you don't watch much soccer, flip on one of the "name" teams and watch how effortlessly a 30-40 yard diagonal cross-field pass can be completed.
Now watch any rerun of a USMNT game against a quality opponent and count how many times we can do that...
And any coach of the USMNT and any player on that team will know that switching the field can be a great way to counter pressure. That is soccer 101 and they are all well versed in it.
But it typically takes our players a couple passes, minimum, to do so without losing possession. A back pass followed by the switch. The ball being largely played on or close to the ground which makes receipt of the ball on the far side of the field easier.
Unfortunately, that double or sometimes triple pass switch is much easier to defend as it gives the defending team lots more time to rotate the defense, establish the new first defender, his support, and cover players. That also allows the opposing defense's weak-side players, the cover players, to do one of two things, both of which can be counter-productive for us: (a) keep the weak-side cover players back, closer to the line of attack which prevents penetration or (b) allow the weak-side cover players to be aggressive and challenge the switch which can trap the ball at the center of the field in the USMNT's defensive third - never a great thing.
Watch better teams with more skilled players do it, and they can switch the field in a single airborne pass that is very easily brought down by the opposing wing mid or wing defender (without breaking stride, if need be). Which puts considerably more pressure on the defenders and can unbalance the defense. And even when using multiple passes to switch the ball, the players still do it much faster than we do.
So again, it's not knowledge of the correct tactics - the US players know all this as it's basic stuff; it's pace and individual skill that let's us down. Is why, IMO, we have to find faster, stronger players that play with more skill. Coaching changes can only help so much.
Hm... just occurred to me, the parallels to the RU football team at the moment. :)
mildone: yup. It's not a tactical issue.
Or an athlete issue. It's a skill/IQ issue.
Now JK confounded the situation with tactical blunders like throwing out a 3-5-2 without the right personnel and hoping increased fitness and work rate would make up the talent deficit.
He's a great motivator/speaker and certainly a visionary, but his tactics equated to checkers.
Or an athlete issue. It's a skill/IQ issue.
Now JK confounded the situation with tactical blunders like throwing out a 3-5-2 without the right personnel and hoping increased fitness and work rate would make up the talent deficit.
He's a great motivator/speaker and certainly a visionary, but his tactics equated to checkers.
To your last point. Just so happens I was in Philly during the copa cup. Also happens I was sitting at hotel bar next to Eric wynalda watching the games. I had no idea who he was until people starting asking for pics and autographs. During our conversation about the US team he repeatedly stated as least 3 or 4 of the top US players weren't on the team. Said that was his biggest beef with the coach who he had no love for BTW. He was gushing about some young defender from Colorado who Klingsman didn't like for some reason.
Hard to know if Wynalda's take on who the top US players are is perfect either, I guess. Not sure any one person can have enough perspective. Seems like a systemic problem to me more than a question of who the USMNT coach chooses to play.
I think the identification has to start at a young age and has to exclude money from the equation as much as possible. Many great young players do not come from the sort of money it takes to participate in the tournaments and showcases where players can be seen competing at the highest levels of youth soccer. There's a fair bit of player sponsorship to help address that problem. But I wonder if it's enough.
I also wonder if the counter-productive focus on competition at young ages is as pervasive as it seems. By which I mean, I often see really good coaches focusing too much on winning games (at pre-high-school ages) when what they should be doing to maximize a player's development is to be focusing almost exclusively development of individual skills (up to around 12) and then mixing in small group tactics from 12 to HS.
I also think the quality of coaching at the HS level, that I've seen in NJ, is very hit and miss, with misses being more common. A lot of potentially good players often don't play for their HS teams because the quality of coaching (and play) is so poor. But conversely, a lot of financially challenged kids can't pay to play in the so-called premier clubs instead of HS. And some of those players may be quite a bit better than their better-off counterparts. So they miss out on some potentially really great, organic soccer coaching during their HS years.
I have a lot more questions than answers here. But I have to think we can do better than we are doing w/finding and developing national team players.
So it wasn't tactical with JK? You were fine with that 3-5-2 against Mexico, having to the best of my knowledge never lined up like that before? Not even in a friendly? Clearly Klinsmann questioned it because he bailed out after about twenty minutes when we were getting lit up.
And if he knew the game/his team in my opinion he wouldn't have 1) played Chandler against CR 2) having played him, positioned him where he did 3) having positioned him, have him press up the field and get burned time after time.
The most egregious thing historically he did was dropping Donovan for the WC. We don't have the depth as a nation even with him past his prime for that move. And to add a German kid that's not near ready and barely played anyway, late Belgium goal aside? I'd be livid if I were on that team. JK was too busy running psych experiments instead of actually beating teams that don't suck.
Klinsmann to me is another in a long line of stars that cant manage. Happens in every sport.
In general, I try to avoid questioning specific game-day tactics when I'm not familiar with everything the coach knew prior to the game. And all coaches make mistakes. Hindsight makes everybody a genius.
You can point to just about any great coach in the history of any team sport and find things to argue about. I'm not really a fan of doing that except in extreme cases - and this is not one of those cases, IMO.
I feel pretty confident that Klinsmann has forgotten more about soccer coaching than you and I combined. So if we want to question his record or his results, okay, fine; that's fair game. But I'm not about to pretend I know more than he does and would've done a better job. Maybe you feel you would have done better?
In any event, I don't much care what tactics or strategies or systems of play were used, we weren't winning any world cups with the players we had.
HS coaching is not relevant because the best boy players do not play HS anymore - they play academy soccer which is year-round. The girls are switching to this next year. The academies are more interested in winning, getting kids into college and making money than developing players for international. There has been such a lack of players who make it internationally that youth players don't even think about it to be honest. A good college is the end game for most.
Many young athletic players are also persuaded to play lax than soccer because college scholarships are easier to get (national college sport but regional HS sport). 5 players from my daughter's club team have quit playing to play lax full-time - they all got D1 schollies they would have never got from soccer - from big schools also.
I never would have played in a new formation against Mexico of all teams in a WC qualifier if that is what you are asking.
That's not retrospective either and I am far from the only person to have pointed this out at the time. Plenty of people who "have forgotten more than you and I...." had some interesting comments at the time on Twitter.
He lost the team IMO. You could see it against CR. That formation choice may have been the final straw.
To add to the above, when questioned after the game Klinsmann blamed Jones and Bradley for the formatiom not working. That's how you lose a team.
Imagine if we came out in a pro style against PSU and we have Arch at fullback and he misses a few blocks and we end up losing a close one. In the post game do you think Ash would say "yeah I know we never played it in a game, but we looked great in practice and we thought Arch would block a lot better than he actually did."
That's the kind of stuff JK does. Never him. Always the players fault.
Many in the European soccer community would disagree, including his pal Joachim Low
That's interesting. I wasn't aware Low said something. I know Lahm did in his book. Is this just a rumor thing or is there an actual quote? Any criticism would speak volumes since Low owes JK for helping launh his career.
It's been mentioned on air a couple of times. Once during the world cup, and once during a premier league game, that I have personally heard. It wasn't like "Klinsman sucks" or anything like that. The announcers framed it more as friendly ribbing, but that there was still some truth to it, from what they said.
Do people generally blame JK or the lack of talent? IMO, the lack of talent is why we've been in neutral for a long time now. The fact that we still count on Jozy Altidore as our attacking threat speaks for itself - dude was a complete washout in the Premier League. Our center backs our decent enough, our speed is getting better on the outside with players like Yedlin, but our center mids and strikers are just not good enough - not threatening, not skillful enough, and way too many turnovers (Bradley has become a turnover machine). The comments about first touches and not changing the field (awareness and vision) are correct - we are very mechanical. Germany is mechanical as well, but they have great skill, great finishers and a great GK. It's clear JK was trying to mold us like Germany, but I don't blame him for the talent level.
I agree with your point that the talent has to improve to get to the level we ultimately want to but losing to Costa Rica 4-0? These players are good enough right now where that should never happen.
Specifically, Bradley and Jones should not be playing together IMO. One or the other. Yedlin has his issues but he has talent and Chandler is just not right at the moment. These are immediate changes that will make us better, however marginally.
