The US U-17's crashed out of the World Cup yesterday in less than dramatic fashion, courtesy of a 4-0 thumping from the Germans. And it really wasn't that close.
After Wilmer Cabrera's boys opened the tournament with a victory over fellow group heavyweights, the Czech Republic. After that, the Americans never seemed to find that same form, falling to Uzbekistan and barely showing up for a 0-0 draw with New Zealand to squeak into the round of 16.
While there were some brights spots, the shot stopping of Kellen McIntosh, timely goals from Alfred Koroma, and inventive stuff in the midfield from Alejandro Guido, it seems to be a frightening plague for American teams at all levels to not be able to string performances together. We saw it in the Gold Cup where the senior could not muster two solid efforts together, we saw it as the U-20's failed to qualify for the World Cup with a crushing semifinal loss and we see it again in Mexico with the U-17's.
After watching the latest short coming for the US, it is still obvious the only area of the game which we approach an elite level is goalkeeping. Though commendable, not the way to grow the game and/or players. The US is solid in most areas, i.e. skill, speed/athleticism, organization, intelligence, etc., but are not elite in any. Any match where they do encounter a team at a high level in any one of these multiple measures and they can be greatly exposed.
Germany looked highly superior in every category, but looking back to the Uzbek match one can only cite a superior commitment and organization (with a bit of individual skill from Timur Khakimov) to a gap in level.
This could be a indictment against the training and managing of the players. Or, as postulated before, we could be looking at the middle of a generational dip in form for the US.
27.6.11
Almost there on the Road to Nowhere - The USMNT
Never has a 2-0 lead looked so unmistakably tenuous. Two years ago I was blinded by hope and optimism that they could hold a two tally advantage, even against one of the most dynamic attacks in the world. Even as far back as our time in the Far East, a 3-0 lead on the Portuguese did not feel right. This time, as I saw Landycakes finish off the second goal against the run of play, my excitement quickly morphed into fear. I knew it could happen again. Somehow, I knew it would happen again.
Do we lack a world class coach? Yes, but that alone is not the answer. I still commend Sweatpants Bob for his tireless commitment and ability to pull results from punching above our weight class.
Do we lack depth? Yes, Bornstein (aka the Mexican Tostada) was over-matched before he hit the pitch, fielding two strikers is an exercise in futility at the moment, and though Timmy isn't going anywhere soon, a goalkeeping successor isn't waiting in the wings.
Do we have lack a true play-making #10, one that can take over a match? Once again, yes, no explanation necessary.
But where does the root of the problem lie? How does two goals to the cause equal doubt in an outcome regularly?
All things considered, it still comes down to the American player in the American style. I would defy anyone to offer a breakdown of the consistent style that lends itself to the USMNT. We have been historically reflexive in how we approach teams on a match to match basis. There is no base from which to adjust, there seems to be a new full scale plan implemented. But this issue
becomes a conversation of the chicken and the egg. An effective style is not obvious because our player pool does not lend itself to any one choice. There is a lack of skill to play a possession based attack, a lack of athleticism for a direct system and a lack of smarts to play in an adaptive style.
So what do we fix first? Do you pick a system and mold your development, or do you highlight your talent and adapt your system?
What US Soccer needs is better leadership from the top down to guide a youth system that falls short at some point. We can consistently produce high level talent for U-17 and U-20 squads, but rarely see these players provide the same play at a senior level. Youth soccer is still about the $$ and not about the player in this country, and unfortunately that will take time to break.
All things considered, this may be a period of downturn for US Soccer. It happens to every country, a generation is merely lacking in the talent that comes before and after it. Could we be staring this in the face? There is a real possibility.
The only thing that is certain surrounding the USMNT is that we as a soccer nation are just not there yet. It takes more than commitment, passion and unrelenting effort to produce true soccer success. Those things will win you games, but will not produce a system in which players can thrive and create a culture for success. A culture that feels like we can celebrate with a 2-0 lead would be nice as well.
Do we lack a world class coach? Yes, but that alone is not the answer. I still commend Sweatpants Bob for his tireless commitment and ability to pull results from punching above our weight class.
Do we lack depth? Yes, Bornstein (aka the Mexican Tostada) was over-matched before he hit the pitch, fielding two strikers is an exercise in futility at the moment, and though Timmy isn't going anywhere soon, a goalkeeping successor isn't waiting in the wings.
Do we have lack a true play-making #10, one that can take over a match? Once again, yes, no explanation necessary.
But where does the root of the problem lie? How does two goals to the cause equal doubt in an outcome regularly?
All things considered, it still comes down to the American player in the American style. I would defy anyone to offer a breakdown of the consistent style that lends itself to the USMNT. We have been historically reflexive in how we approach teams on a match to match basis. There is no base from which to adjust, there seems to be a new full scale plan implemented. But this issue
becomes a conversation of the chicken and the egg. An effective style is not obvious because our player pool does not lend itself to any one choice. There is a lack of skill to play a possession based attack, a lack of athleticism for a direct system and a lack of smarts to play in an adaptive style.
So what do we fix first? Do you pick a system and mold your development, or do you highlight your talent and adapt your system?
What US Soccer needs is better leadership from the top down to guide a youth system that falls short at some point. We can consistently produce high level talent for U-17 and U-20 squads, but rarely see these players provide the same play at a senior level. Youth soccer is still about the $$ and not about the player in this country, and unfortunately that will take time to break.
All things considered, this may be a period of downturn for US Soccer. It happens to every country, a generation is merely lacking in the talent that comes before and after it. Could we be staring this in the face? There is a real possibility.
The only thing that is certain surrounding the USMNT is that we as a soccer nation are just not there yet. It takes more than commitment, passion and unrelenting effort to produce true soccer success. Those things will win you games, but will not produce a system in which players can thrive and create a culture for success. A culture that feels like we can celebrate with a 2-0 lead would be nice as well.
30.12.09
4.12.09
Yank 2010 Draw Reactions - Key to the City
All things considered, the 2010 draw for SA must be looked upon as the first victory in the finals for the USMNT. Though passage will not be a forgone conclusion, the alternatives to the reality of Group C seem a more daunting nightmare. Not only does the competition in the group appear to favor American passage, but travel arrangements and geography , along with a general familiarity with their home base area all suggest the Americans hold the keys to the round of 16.
England is the obvious choice to provide the Yanks with their toughest test of the Group Stage. A draw, or dare I say win, in the 1950 rematch would prove a dream start. Neither is beyond the capabilities of Bob's side, but a performance on par with that of the Confederations Cup triumphs would have to be in order. That being said, for better or for worse, the Brits pose a different challenge than the Spaniards or Brazilians did. A physically gifted group that would have the upper hand on flighted balls and restarts, as well as (depending on team selection) pace to burn down the flanks could cause major problems for what may prove to be a cut and paste backline for the US. This is also the same backline is still searching for an answer to the enigma that is left back. Nothing, however, should come as a surprise to Bradley and company as a litany of his squad ply their trade week in and week out in England's top flight.
After the Brits, a perplexing Slovenian side awaits. Still the team that surprised Russia in the playoff, they lack the instant recognition of any big names. A team that will surely rely upon their cohesiveness, organization and desire, it resembles a team that could be likened to a Greek side from Euro '04 (organized and driven). The US should expect to be favored in the match, but must be wary of such precedents as the Iran debacle of '98.
Another surprise addition would be the Algerians to round out group play. Once again, a side that the US will have little familiarity with going into the match which is always a tricky proposition. Qualification out of a strong CAF field after upsetting bitter rival Egypt is no small task. Players, coaches, pundits and supporters alike will expect an American result from this match as well, which, in a perfect scenario, could be a game the US are looking to gain goal difference to win the group. Both matches after the opener should be ripe with opportunities for athletic American forwards (Jozy, Clint, Landon, Robbie Findlay, Jeff Cunningham or whomever they may be) to exploit spaces behind and between less gifted backlines.
The draw, however, will only ultimately be considered favorable upon successful passage to the knock phase. At least for this WC cycle in South Africa, the USMNT has been handed keys and shown the correct door in the game show of FIFA ping pong ball lottery. Now they only need to seize the opportunity and open the door.
England is the obvious choice to provide the Yanks with their toughest test of the Group Stage. A draw, or dare I say win, in the 1950 rematch would prove a dream start. Neither is beyond the capabilities of Bob's side, but a performance on par with that of the Confederations Cup triumphs would have to be in order. That being said, for better or for worse, the Brits pose a different challenge than the Spaniards or Brazilians did. A physically gifted group that would have the upper hand on flighted balls and restarts, as well as (depending on team selection) pace to burn down the flanks could cause major problems for what may prove to be a cut and paste backline for the US. This is also the same backline is still searching for an answer to the enigma that is left back. Nothing, however, should come as a surprise to Bradley and company as a litany of his squad ply their trade week in and week out in England's top flight.
After the Brits, a perplexing Slovenian side awaits. Still the team that surprised Russia in the playoff, they lack the instant recognition of any big names. A team that will surely rely upon their cohesiveness, organization and desire, it resembles a team that could be likened to a Greek side from Euro '04 (organized and driven). The US should expect to be favored in the match, but must be wary of such precedents as the Iran debacle of '98.
Another surprise addition would be the Algerians to round out group play. Once again, a side that the US will have little familiarity with going into the match which is always a tricky proposition. Qualification out of a strong CAF field after upsetting bitter rival Egypt is no small task. Players, coaches, pundits and supporters alike will expect an American result from this match as well, which, in a perfect scenario, could be a game the US are looking to gain goal difference to win the group. Both matches after the opener should be ripe with opportunities for athletic American forwards (Jozy, Clint, Landon, Robbie Findlay, Jeff Cunningham or whomever they may be) to exploit spaces behind and between less gifted backlines.
The draw, however, will only ultimately be considered favorable upon successful passage to the knock phase. At least for this WC cycle in South Africa, the USMNT has been handed keys and shown the correct door in the game show of FIFA ping pong ball lottery. Now they only need to seize the opportunity and open the door.
29.11.09
Gaffer is Back!
After quite the hiatus, the Gaffer has returned! Stay tuned for more updates and follow on Twitter, @TheUnrulyGaffer!
17.6.09
Italy 3 - United States 1
I have let the 3-1 scoreline marinate for two days, trying to find some reason on which to base the match as a failure, as any two goal defeat should be labeled. However, even after trolling the message boards that continue to spell doom for the USMNT, I still do not buy into the fact that the match can be labeled a disappointment.
One of my biggest gripes during any national team performance is the work rate and effectiveness put out by many of our higher profile players (Landon, Clint, etc). The Italians, however, always seem to bring the best out of our #10, as his work rate and composure were on level with where you would expect a player of his caliber to be. Dempsey, to his credit, was also measurably better, as he was able to help the play through the midfield. Combined with the efforts of Jozy, Benny and Bradley, it was the first time in recent memory (save the early qualifying rounds) that I felt the Americans were dangerous through the run of play.
That being said, it was still a haul of zero points. Results now are not paramount, but with the expulsion of Ricardo Clark (unwarranted I might add), Bob Bradley was left handcuffed in his ability to find real 90 minute solution in the center of the park. The effort and performance can be commended, but the Americans were not to legitimately answer any of the questions coming into the match. That leaves a stern test tomorrow morning when they face a Brazil side looking to dispel the nightmares of the Egyptian scare.
Player Ratings (out of 10)
Tim Howard: 5. Nothing to really blame the American keeper for, three well taken goals and some good saves at the end to keep the boys alive. As my goalkeeper trainer always harped, however, three goals is three goals.
Jonathan Bornstein: 4. Was the culprit of numerous poor touches and seemed to get exposed out wide (not to mention the near own goal that would have surely undone the side). Still a better option than Beasley.
Oguchi Onyewu: 6. Solid in the air, commanded his area. Did not look completely comfortable communicating with fellow center back Jay DeMerit (chalk that up to unfamiliarity). Why does he still take long throws into the box?
Jay DeMerit: 5. Provided a number of strong challenges and clean tackles that the US have seem to been missing in recent matches. Organization was decent, may have been able to step earlier on the first goal. Undone on the third, was completely gassed though.
Jonathan Spector: 6. Second game in a row he looked strong in the back and comfortable going forward. For the love of God please let him remain fit.
Landon Donovan: 7. Best, most industrious match this year. Displayed the fire and leadership necessary from him (except in the post match interviews, of coarse). Showed courage once again to step up and bury an important penalty. Still needs to find a solid connection with someone up top.
Ricardo Clark: 5. Robbed of the match with the poor decision. Still, he must understand his reputation preceeds him for being a harsh, sometimes clumsy tackler. Would have liked to see his influence on a full 90 minutes.
Michael Bradley: 7. Was the catalyst for most of the offensive flow and organization. Worked hard in the middle to break up attacks once Clark was sent off. Why is there so much derrision towards this player from so many circles? I don't care if it's nepatism, the boy can play.
Benny Feilhaber: 5. The match was a microcosm of his career: wonderful play to setup Jozy's attack that drew the penalty. Poor giveaway to set up Rossi's blast. If he can minimize mistakes, he's an automatic selection.
Clint Dempsey: 6. Looked more like the Fulham man who USMNT fans have been waiting to see for their side. Must have the feeling like the breakout is coming soon...
Jozy Altidore: 7. Did well to draw the penalty. The Italians were happy to see him go midway through the second interval, as he was causing them all sorts of problems. Help was too late to come once he got the ball. Bradley must find a way to make his support more dynamic so he is not a tackling dummy again. Did I hear 4-4-2?...
Subs:
Charlie Davies: 6. Did the same things Altidore did to the defense when he came in. Circumstances of the match did not provide him with a platform to succeed, as he was asked to chase rather than attack. This kid looks primed to be a super choice of the bench for Bradley in 2010.
DaMarcus Beasley: 4. Looked to have more life than in previous matches when he came in. Still did not look sharp on passing or service.
Sacha Kljestan: 6. Provided a spark and almost leveled the score with a curling hammer that would have beaten Buffon with a little better weight on it. Wasn't on long enough to make a real impact or make any poor mistakes.
One of my biggest gripes during any national team performance is the work rate and effectiveness put out by many of our higher profile players (Landon, Clint, etc). The Italians, however, always seem to bring the best out of our #10, as his work rate and composure were on level with where you would expect a player of his caliber to be. Dempsey, to his credit, was also measurably better, as he was able to help the play through the midfield. Combined with the efforts of Jozy, Benny and Bradley, it was the first time in recent memory (save the early qualifying rounds) that I felt the Americans were dangerous through the run of play.
That being said, it was still a haul of zero points. Results now are not paramount, but with the expulsion of Ricardo Clark (unwarranted I might add), Bob Bradley was left handcuffed in his ability to find real 90 minute solution in the center of the park. The effort and performance can be commended, but the Americans were not to legitimately answer any of the questions coming into the match. That leaves a stern test tomorrow morning when they face a Brazil side looking to dispel the nightmares of the Egyptian scare.
Player Ratings (out of 10)
Tim Howard: 5. Nothing to really blame the American keeper for, three well taken goals and some good saves at the end to keep the boys alive. As my goalkeeper trainer always harped, however, three goals is three goals.
Jonathan Bornstein: 4. Was the culprit of numerous poor touches and seemed to get exposed out wide (not to mention the near own goal that would have surely undone the side). Still a better option than Beasley.
Oguchi Onyewu: 6. Solid in the air, commanded his area. Did not look completely comfortable communicating with fellow center back Jay DeMerit (chalk that up to unfamiliarity). Why does he still take long throws into the box?
Jay DeMerit: 5. Provided a number of strong challenges and clean tackles that the US have seem to been missing in recent matches. Organization was decent, may have been able to step earlier on the first goal. Undone on the third, was completely gassed though.
Jonathan Spector: 6. Second game in a row he looked strong in the back and comfortable going forward. For the love of God please let him remain fit.
Landon Donovan: 7. Best, most industrious match this year. Displayed the fire and leadership necessary from him (except in the post match interviews, of coarse). Showed courage once again to step up and bury an important penalty. Still needs to find a solid connection with someone up top.
Ricardo Clark: 5. Robbed of the match with the poor decision. Still, he must understand his reputation preceeds him for being a harsh, sometimes clumsy tackler. Would have liked to see his influence on a full 90 minutes.
Michael Bradley: 7. Was the catalyst for most of the offensive flow and organization. Worked hard in the middle to break up attacks once Clark was sent off. Why is there so much derrision towards this player from so many circles? I don't care if it's nepatism, the boy can play.
Benny Feilhaber: 5. The match was a microcosm of his career: wonderful play to setup Jozy's attack that drew the penalty. Poor giveaway to set up Rossi's blast. If he can minimize mistakes, he's an automatic selection.
Clint Dempsey: 6. Looked more like the Fulham man who USMNT fans have been waiting to see for their side. Must have the feeling like the breakout is coming soon...
Jozy Altidore: 7. Did well to draw the penalty. The Italians were happy to see him go midway through the second interval, as he was causing them all sorts of problems. Help was too late to come once he got the ball. Bradley must find a way to make his support more dynamic so he is not a tackling dummy again. Did I hear 4-4-2?...
Subs:
Charlie Davies: 6. Did the same things Altidore did to the defense when he came in. Circumstances of the match did not provide him with a platform to succeed, as he was asked to chase rather than attack. This kid looks primed to be a super choice of the bench for Bradley in 2010.
DaMarcus Beasley: 4. Looked to have more life than in previous matches when he came in. Still did not look sharp on passing or service.
Sacha Kljestan: 6. Provided a spark and almost leveled the score with a curling hammer that would have beaten Buffon with a little better weight on it. Wasn't on long enough to make a real impact or make any poor mistakes.
15.6.09
Italian Job
For the USMNT to capture their first championship at this eighth version of the Confederations Cup, it seems they will have to pull of a heist of sorts, the likes of which Marky Mark and his crew could only dream of. That being said, to label the U.S. as sitting ducks might be under estimating a recently battle tested group who has been working together for the better part of three weeks.
Despite some disappointing performances in their last two outings, a fair amount of pressure has been lifted from their shoulders. They will not see near the amount of hostility they saw from crowds largely looking to derail the Americans in Costa Rica, and yes, even in Chicago. The weather in the current South African fall is very mild with temperatures dropping down into the 40's. The pitches should be in great shape as they continue to ready them for next year's event. All in all, the footballing conditions should be near perfect.
What worries most American fans is the world class competition the Americans will be facing straight out of the gate. After today's match with defending World Cup champion Italy, the U.S. gets a seemingly full strength Brazil in three days, then rounds out the group stage with a dangerous Egyptian side. What is important to remember is that though this competition can and should be used as a measuring stick, it is not the final verdict. Bob Bradley should be focusing his efforts on molding a side who can gain some familiarity with each other and finally generate the run of play attacking form their talents are capable of. Results are important for many reasons, but we should look at the performances that come out of the next two and a half weeks. Getting too high or low following such a competition will do no one any good.
Now, on to the match at hand. For the Americans to give themselves a fighting chance in the competition, points from the opener are crucial. A 1-0 win would be the dream result, but with the spotty defensive play recently, I am not convinced we can keep the Italians at bay. That being said, a defensive shell for a 0-0 draw will only stifle the ability for Bob and company to develop any offensive flow that we sorely need. As mentioned earlier, this competition is more about the performances and development, packing it in will not do us any good in the long run. Therefore, I see us going forward, surprising the Azzuri and pulling ahead before the interval, but succumbing around the 75th minute. Final prediction: Draw 1-1.
Projected Starting 11
4-4-1-1
-Howard-
-Spector- -Onyewu- -Bocanegra- -Bornstein-
-Dempsey- -Clark- -Bradley- -Torres-
-Donovan-
-Altidore-
'Gaffer's Choice 11
4-4-2
-Howard-
-Spector- -DeMerit- -Bocanegra- -Bornstein-
-Dempsey- -Clark- -Bradley- -Donovan-
-Altidore- -Davies-
Match Info:
Location: Loftus Versfeld Stadium, Pretoria, South Africa
Time: 2:25 ET
TV: ESPN
"Italians can't win the game against you, but you can lose the game against the Italians."
-Johan Cryuff
GO ON YOU YANKS!
Despite some disappointing performances in their last two outings, a fair amount of pressure has been lifted from their shoulders. They will not see near the amount of hostility they saw from crowds largely looking to derail the Americans in Costa Rica, and yes, even in Chicago. The weather in the current South African fall is very mild with temperatures dropping down into the 40's. The pitches should be in great shape as they continue to ready them for next year's event. All in all, the footballing conditions should be near perfect.
What worries most American fans is the world class competition the Americans will be facing straight out of the gate. After today's match with defending World Cup champion Italy, the U.S. gets a seemingly full strength Brazil in three days, then rounds out the group stage with a dangerous Egyptian side. What is important to remember is that though this competition can and should be used as a measuring stick, it is not the final verdict. Bob Bradley should be focusing his efforts on molding a side who can gain some familiarity with each other and finally generate the run of play attacking form their talents are capable of. Results are important for many reasons, but we should look at the performances that come out of the next two and a half weeks. Getting too high or low following such a competition will do no one any good.
Now, on to the match at hand. For the Americans to give themselves a fighting chance in the competition, points from the opener are crucial. A 1-0 win would be the dream result, but with the spotty defensive play recently, I am not convinced we can keep the Italians at bay. That being said, a defensive shell for a 0-0 draw will only stifle the ability for Bob and company to develop any offensive flow that we sorely need. As mentioned earlier, this competition is more about the performances and development, packing it in will not do us any good in the long run. Therefore, I see us going forward, surprising the Azzuri and pulling ahead before the interval, but succumbing around the 75th minute. Final prediction: Draw 1-1.
Projected Starting 11
4-4-1-1
-Howard-
-Spector- -Onyewu- -Bocanegra- -Bornstein-
-Dempsey- -Clark- -Bradley- -Torres-
-Donovan-
-Altidore-
'Gaffer's Choice 11
4-4-2
-Howard-
-Spector- -DeMerit- -Bocanegra- -Bornstein-
-Dempsey- -Clark- -Bradley- -Donovan-
-Altidore- -Davies-
Match Info:
Location: Loftus Versfeld Stadium, Pretoria, South Africa
Time: 2:25 ET
TV: ESPN
"Italians can't win the game against you, but you can lose the game against the Italians."
-Johan Cryuff
GO ON YOU YANKS!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)