Nutmeg

Dear Bob, there's a reason your team plays ugly.

2008-02-07T06:52:00.000-08:00

2nd Viewing: First Half Analysis

Holy crap, it really is as bad as I thought. US Defenders simply don't know how to pass. They don't know when to play calmly. They show no patience. They show little skill and less precision. Their judgment is horrific.

I don't know how else I can frame the argument, but watching and tracking US progression out of the back is making me sick to my stomach. Bob, if you cannot fix this, you need to be fired.

Now.

Are you listening Sunil? I've tracked the US progression out of the back closely over the last 3 games, and if anything, it is only getting worse. While I understand clearing the ball when you are under pressure, I don't understand what I termed after the last game as "clearing the puck."

No pressure, no reason to launch the ball upfield and give it back to the other team, yet time and time again, that's exactly what US defenders do. Don't give me any crap about Bocanegra having a good game. He didn't. He may have done a pretty good job of breaking things up defensively, but he was miserable in giving the ball right back to Mexico. So, we get to play defense all over again.

Figure. It. Out. Bob.

Percentage of total passes from defenders played long = 76%
Percentage of total passes from defenders played short = 24%

Long pass success percentage = 17%
Short pass success percentage = 89%.

Everyone, sit and think about those numbers for a while. It's ugly. It really is.

2nd half and total analysis to come.

Mexico, Reloaded

2008-01-24T04:47:00.000-08:00

9-1-2

While most US fans like to taunt Mexico with the numbers 2 and 0, these are the numbers that I'm most proud of as a fan. That's our record against Mexico since the year 2000. Their only two wins came in a home atmosphere you have to physically experience - the noises, the people, the smell, the air, and most importantly, the energy - to understand how improbable getting any result in the Azteca really is.

Outside of those confines, Mexico, we own you. We own your best teams, we own your C teams. We own your imported foreign coaches and players, we own your domestic heroes. We don't spend a lot of time talking about you anymore, simply because we don't hate you anymore. It's worse than that. We're apathetic. We just don't care about Mexico these days. We're that much better than you.

But those of us who are die-hard fans, those of us who still remember all the cheap shots, the kick to Alexi's nuts, Luiz Hernandez's elbows, Carlos Hermosillo's freakin' headed goal off of Kasey Keller's goal kick, Rafa Marquez trying to behead Cobi Jones, and most recently, that pussy Oswald taking a dive at Eddie Johnson's legs, our hate can be rekindled pretty quickly. Just remind us what a dirty, disgusting, unsportsmanlike group of chumps you will devolve into after losing to us, and we'll hate you all over again.

There are also some of us who quietly pay attention to Mexico. Not rabidly, and not consistently. Every once in a while, though, we check in, just to see how you're doing. I've done exactly that since I lived in Mexico. I still harbor dichotomous feelings towards the country - a deep love of the people, culture, food, and landscape, and yet an intense ability to hate their beloved El Tri. But, it keeps me checking back in from time to time. If you check in these days as a fan of the US Team, you may have reason to worry these days of owning Mexico may not last forever. Here are some new faces to watch out for...

Juan Carlos Cacho
My guess is this isn't the name you expected me to put down first as an up and coming Mexican. Maybe it should be. The guy is a finisher, and if you give him a window, he can burn you. He's unafraid of taking shots outside the penalty area, and perfectly capable of burying them. He's scored a couple of ridiculous goals in the Mexican league from more than 40 yards out when goalkeepers have fallen asleep off their lines. In 2007, he scored 38 - thirty eight - goals in Mexican league play. Our defenders will not be able to back off and give him space, or he'll be painting corners on the US goal. He debuted for Mexico in the Copa America and will likely start against the US next month in Houston. US defenders simply cannot lose sight of this guy.

Andres Guardado
One of a few Mexicans now playing in Spain, I find myself cheering for him as a Depor fan, and begrudgingly admiring him when he plays for Mexico. Guardado's rise to El Tri was nothing short of meteoric. He debuted for Atlas in August of 2005, and four months later was called up for the national team. One year after starting his professional career, he was on Mexico's World Cup squad. So, no, he's not an up and coming Mexican. He's already arrived, but he's only 21 years old. He'll be here for a while. This year at Depor he's been one of the few bright spots on the team. In last summer's Gold Cup, he could best be described as a menacing handful for the unfortunates tasked with marking him. He's a creative player with exquisite ball skills, and he's lightning quick. If he comes back next month, he's going to be the best left midfielder any US right back has had to mark since we played against him last time.

The Class of 2005
Giovanni Dos Santos and Carlos Vela. Two names that have concerned US Soccer fans since they exploded onto the national scene in the 2005 Under 17 World Cup. How good are they? They're good enough that two of the world's elite clubs - in fact just two years ago the two teams facing each other in the Champions League finals - own their rights. Dos Santos is getting minutes for FC Barcelona in Spain's Liga Primera. Vela's rights are owned by Arsenal of the Premiership, but he, too, is plying his trade in Spain's top league as a regular in Osasuna's lineup. Arsenal's manager, Arsene Wenger, has made it clear that Vela will be brought back this summer and given a shot to make it in their first team. Like most young talented players just getting their feet wet, these 18 year olds can be inconsistent. What forces you to pay attention, though, are those flashes of play when they show you what they're capable of. And both of these 18 year olds are capable of world-class quality. Dos Santos can play as a forward or any attacking midfield position, including on the wings. Vela is more of an out and out striker.

It's unknown if any of these players will be called on by Mexican coach Hugo Sanchez to play against the United States. If history is an indicator, though, Hugo wants to make a statement by beating his northern rival and reclaim the undisputed top dog of CONCACAF title for El Tri. We are also still not sure if Bradley will bring in any of his young guns. Because it is an international date, Bradley has the right to call in kids like Freddy Adu and Michael Bradley, who are making names for themselves overseas. What we do know is that both teams seem to be reloading themselves with young talent. The concern you have to have as a US fan is, are we keeping up? February 6th will be a good indication of what lies ahead in this critical year of World Cup Qualification.

What do you think? Will the US be able to maintain its domination of Mexico? Why or why not?

US v Sweden thoughts, random stats, and pseudoanalysis

2008-01-20T05:27:00.000-08:00

It wasn't a pretty game, by any stretch. The players ran hard, passes were completed, and the play was back and forth. We had a few shots, a couple of goals, and the US will put a check box in the win column. Both sides, though, lacked a key element in soccer entertainment - creativity to do the unexpected. It was remarkable to see both teams consistently attempt, and more often than not succeed, in doing exactly what you would expect them to do. While predictable execution may be a coach's wet dream, it makes for a bit of a sleeper for the viewing audience.

CLEARING THE PUCK

I don't pretend to be any sort of a hockey expert, but one thing I do know is that when a hockey team is pinned down in their own end, their defensive goal is to clear the puck - meaning, whack it down the ice as far as it will go. Then, I believe, you get to pin the team in their end, put a ton of pressure on them in tight space, hope that they turn it over or make some defensive lapse, and maybe put the biscuit past the 5 hole.

I think Bob Bradley is a hockey fan. He doesn't want his team to create goals. What a silly idea. Why not kick the ball as far down the field as you can, essentially giving away possession (Who wants possession anyway? The longer your team has the ball, the higher the chance is they'll lose it!), pressure them, and let their screw ups (hopefully there are some screw ups) create goals for you? Now that is GENIUS.

You'll forgive me, but there is a reason I'm not a hockey fan. It's boring. To me it is, anyway. I consider myself mostly realistic, and I realize many goals in high levels of soccer are scored directly as a result of a defensive screw up - what I call soccer turnovers. In fact, I've endorsed the idea of creating a team that is poised to both force turnovers and quickly strike once a team has coughed up a turnover. But here's where I draw the line - when you aren't under pressure, you're holding the ball in your defense, you have options to keep possession, and you choose to "clear the puck" instead.

I first started documenting US progression out of the back against South Africa. What I am charting here is how the US defense plays the ball forward when the US has first gained possession, not every single touch from a US defender.

In that game, we played long balls 46% of the time. Against Sweden, we cleared the puck 47% of the time, not counting the GK's long kicks to nowhere.

Our GK, Guzan, launched the ball forward 83% of the time, with the US retaining just 5% of those passes.

Against South Africa, we completed 9% of our long passes from the back. Against Sweden, we completed 26% of the same type of passes, a much better percentage.

There is one area we were significantly better. Against South Africa, I made this observation:

Our attacking progression is predictable. From the back, we play either route one soccer from our central defense, or our outside backs play to our central midfielders. Remarkable was the rarity with which our outside defenders and wide midfielders tried to work combinations.

Our progression was much more varied against Sweden, and both Donovan and Davis received a lot of balls out of the back. Both Corrales and Moore did a fine job of playing in the wide midfielders and making themselves options for combination play, too.

One last thought on defense before I move on. Goodsen was a surprising standout to me, physically more than held his own, and made a lot of important tackles and clearances to preserve a shutout. Sadly, the one area he most needs to improve is in his distribution. It's the story of US defenders I guess. But Clarence Goodsen deserves more looks.

6 IN ONE, EDU IN THE OTHER

Maurice Edu and Ricardo Clark played great games against Sweden. Perhaps they compliment each other so well because they are, um, the same freakin' player.

Passing percentages:

Percentage of passes completed: 85% Edu, 87% Clark

Percentage of passes played backwards: 12% Edu, 21% Clark

Percentage of passes played lateral: Edu 42%, Clark 28%

Percentage of passes played forward: Edu 39%, Clark 51%

Percentage of forward passes completed: Edu 62%, Clark 80%

OK, so they're not exactly the same player, but their games are eerily similar. These aren't the throwback days of Chris Armas when a completed forward pass from our defensive midfielder merited a standing ovation. Both Clark and Edu are willing and able to complete forward passes. They combined to get forward, they both played incisive through balls, and generally did a great job of running the US Team, involving their teammates all over the field.

They also both had 1 shot, 1 clearance, 2 fouls suffered, and both won 63% of the 50/50 balls they challenged. I'm telling you, it's freaky. By my count, though, Edu had 5 takeaways, while Clark only had 2. But, Clark had more touches overall, and his shot was on goal. Who was the better player yesterday? Who knows.

THE BREAKDOWN

So we have defenders who are doing a decent job of varying their play out of the back, when they're not clearing the puck. In the midfield, Clark and Edu are both playing solid games, and Donovan is playing well. Davis is finding his spots and keeping the ball moving. Everything is looking rosy, right?

Eh, no.

We won 2-0, and Bob can pat himself on the back - if the only thing that mattered was the scoreboard.

It's not. The US front line is broken, and Bob isn't adjusting to fix it. The lack of ideas here is frustrating. Bob, maybe we don't play two forwards, because it is painfully obvious to all who love and watch this team that we don't have two decent forwards to play together.

The US team breaks down because our forwards, like Taylor Twellman, can do one thing - score. I can hear moronic Revolution fans snickering from across the country. Here's the thing, if another player lays the ball on a silver platter, Twellman will occasionally help himself to the gravy. Sadly, on the US team, as often as not, he tries to eat that gravy with a fork, and we moan in agony as a wide open header goes just over the crossbar. He doesn't help create opportunities, gets knocked around like a pinball, loses possession, and can't find his teammates in combination play.

Noonan, well, he tries. In fact, his pass to Altidore set up Donovan's PK, so you know what? STANDING OVATION!

In US Soccer, it's often one step forward, another step back.

Kinnear to Bradley: The Kill Stroke

2007-07-26T10:47:00.000-07:00

The scoreline may not seem that impressive, but the Dynamo's finishing of Club America in their 1-0 Superliga win was execution at its finest. Dominic Kinnear is making a case for himself as the best coach in US Soccer, and perhaps the biggest bullet point in his "Pros" list is his in-game management.

When Dominic's Dynamo have you down, the best you can hope for is to tie the game, and that is a long shot.

Consider this - the Dynamo have had a lead on their opponents in eleven 2007 MLS League games. They have won 10 of those games, and they have only given up points just once. In their last game against New England, they briefly held a lead in a back and forth battle before the Revolution were able to capture a tie on a controversial penalty kick. That means the Dynamo have a 94% (10-0-1) winning percentage, and they have conceded a total of 3 goals after going ahead.

Let's compare that briefly with Bradley's US Team:

Bradley's US teams have also held the lead eleven times. Bradley has a stellar record in those games as well, going 10-1-0 for a 91% winning percentage. There's a little more to worry about behind those numbers, though. Where Dominic's Dynamo have given up only 3 goals after gaining the lead, Bradley and the US have given up 9. Four of those were after the 75th minute.

The numbers reflect a story we've seen on the field. The United States under Bradley's direction hasn't adjusted their high-pressure, high-energy style of play after getting a lead. That nonstop running has resulted in the US appearing to tire and let the game get away from them. This started in the Gold Cup. Against Panama, the US gave up a goal in the 85th minute after dominating most of the game. The last few minutes were a mad scramble to finish the game. It got worse against Canada in the semifinals. After stomping on the Canadians in the first half, the US fell apart after the break. Canada got a goal back in the 76th minute, and things even got worse for the US. They lost shape and they lost composure, and Julian De Guzman and his teammates started to run the show from the Canadian midfield. The US managed to hang onto the lead until the very end, when Canada finally scored the equalizer, only to see it wrongfully called back by a horrific offsides call.

In contrast, see what the Dynamo did to Club America last night in the Superliga. They owned possession in the second half, picking and choosing when to attack, and when to back off and keep America chasing. Dominic and the Dynamo had control of the game and kept generating chances without exposing themselves defensively. America had a couple of semi-opportunities that didn't amount to anything, but it was interesting to see it was the team down a goal trying to apply high-pressure, counter attack, quick strike soccer. By the time the referee blew the whistle, America players had no legs underneath them and were ready for the game to come to an end.

I believe there is a primary difference between the Bradley and Kinnear philosophies. Bradley subscribes to the Arena school of thought. You kill games by conceding possession and subbing in more defenders once you've established a lead. Kinnear subscribes to the philosophies used by Frank Yallop during the San Jose's Earthquakes' domination of MLS earlier this decade. You kill games by controlling the pace of play through possession, and you substitute fresh midfielders and attackers to keep the opposing team honest.

Frankly, I think Kinnear's method is better. I think his teams adjust far better to what we've seen with Bradley and the US Team. I think Bradley would be wise to put on a tape of last night's Dynamo-America game to see one way how he can reverse the late game meltdowns trend of his US teams.

My Take on Beckham's Debut

2007-07-21T20:04:00.000-07:00

Eric Wynalda pointed out Tom Cruise's mother isn't Victoria Beckham.

Really, I have nothing else to offer here.

As a fan of soccer, Jesus.

2007 All American Eleven Midyear Selections

2007-07-20T13:59:00.000-07:00

It's been a while. If you're unfamiliar with the AAXI, it all started way back when as my personal project. Over time, others jumped in and helped with the heavy lifting, but as anyone who ever helped out with the project would tell you, the work was demanding, the pay sucked, and the readers were more often than not a collective pain in the ass.

July 4th would hit, the nominations would dry up, and the project would die the death of a terminal cancer patient - slow, painful, and with few people willing to stick around for the end's agony.

I am not saying that I am resurrecting my oncologic victim here. The weekly AAXI remains dead. There is, however, some news sure to stun the former readers of the AAXI. The Crew is representin', yo. And even more shocking, we undertake a new AAXI journey without a Mapp. I make no guarantees on the regularity of future AAXI selections. I still reserve the right to refuse service to any PITA fanbase. But here, in my little corner of the Internet, I will try to select the very best American performers in Major League Soccer every once in a while.

Eddie Johnson - As a lifelong Seattle Seahawk fan, don't talk to me about Eddie's 10 goals in 10 games. Who cares? EJ gave props to Brian Bosworth at the all star game. I haven't seen a hairdo like that since I watched Bo Jackson run over Bosworth, out of the Kingdome, and a few miles down I5 before he realized he'd already scored a touchdown.

Taylor Twellman - I dislike Taylor Twellman.

Michael Harrington - The AAXI left midfield spot used to be reserved for Mississippi Maradona. The Chicago Fire have sucked the fun out of soccer, though, and this left midfielder is producing. He not only has 3 goals and 3 assists, he's shown versatility by also helping out in defense when needed.

Ned Grabavoy - The best passer in Major League Soccer. I won't bother with statistics because until recently, his teammates' inability to convert the opportunities Ned handed them on silver platters meant his production didn't show up in the numbers. All season long, however, Ned has seen lanes nobody else sees. He reminds me of another slow nonathletic player.

Maurice Edu - He can be dominant. He can be horrific. He's a rookie central midfielder, and I expect nothing different. The one thing I didn't expect was his talent. He's unique in US Soccer in his speed, size, strength, composure, vision, passing, and aggressiveness. He's neither a DMid or an AMid. He's a central midfielder capable of both, and I think he'll be making waves with the US Olympic Team this time next year.

Brian Mullan - The energizer bunny - this guy is the only player in the league who might push Frankie in a fitness test. His tenacity and relentlessness sets the tone for Houston's team. I'm giving Mullan the Billie, awarded to the player most like Bill Laimbeer. To get the Billie, you have to hack and get hacked regularly. You have to get under your opponents' skin. You have to play a key role on a very good team. You don't have to be the most skilled guy in the game, and your numbers don't have to be spectacular, but your contributions should be apparent to anyone who watches you play. I can't think of a better candidate for the Billie than Brian Mullan...

Wade Barrett - The heart of MLS's best overall team and the organizer of its best defense. He is never spectacular, but he's rarely beaten. He's a solid passer, a solid defender, and he's grown into a great leader. His best games are those where he's come out of nowhere to support other defenders and make some key stops. He's had a lot of those games so far this year.

Eddie Robinson - Hmm, I may have given away the Billie too soon.

Michael Parkhurst - He's the anti-Robinson. He's surrounded by marginal decision-makers, and he covers up for their mistakes. He's not fast and he's not physical, but he's rarely beaten by fast and physical players. He's the smartest, most consistent defender in MLS. I have no idea why he wasn't in Bradley's Copa America team, but I'm sure Revs fans were thrilled with Bob's decision. As a US fan, I wasn't.

Frankie Hejduk - He really could be a factor in the 2010 World Cup, couldn't he? He just never stops. Ever. And the longer he keeps going, the more you have to admire him. Only the nerdy asshole who never played team sports (debate club doesn't count) would rip on Frankie. Anyone who has ever played any sport would have loved playing alongside Surfer Dude. He was great to watch for the US Team, too. Even though you may want a guy with a little more skill out there, do you want to give up the spark and never-say-die attitude Frankie brings? The Crew wouldn't.

Brad Guzan - Why did Kasey Keller start over him at Copa America? Remember when Kasey used to make not just a singular spectacular save, but when he'd pull off a sequence of 2-3 amazing saves in a row? That's Guzan now.

Others receiving consideration, though I don't believe the MLS Collective Bargaining Agreement entitles them to AAXI pay: BIWHWA (because I wish he were American) Toja, Ben Olsen, Chris Rolfe, BIWHWA Schelloto, Seth Stammler, and the entire roster of the Houston Dynamo.

The Temptress

2007-07-20T12:21:00.000-07:00

In my 7th grade Physical Science class, Molly McMann dominated my thoughts. How was I supposed to memorize the 3 basic rock types when she was sitting across the table from me? As soon as Mr. Marks said igneous, I went into the Molly Haze. Molly was hideous. Acne hit her early. She physically smelled - the formaldehyde was an upgrade - and she wore the same two outfits on alternating days.

Monday-Tuesday-Wednesday - Pepsi Sweatshirt (obviously she was too poor to get the Coca Cola sweatshirts us cool kids wore)
Tuesday-Thursday - Gotya (knockoff of Gotcha - whatever happened to those shirts, anyway?)

I could go on and on about Molly. She stole people’s paper and pens. She picked her nose. She had hot lunch stuck in her braces every day. She was awful. But she had boobs. Not just the hint of boobs that made us 7th grade hormone tornadoes wonder. Molly’s boobs worked all of us into violent F5s in a Kansas trailer park. We’d talk about them. We’d ogle them. A couple of guys got in serious trouble because they developed instant Parkinson’s and accidentally, uncontrollably, handled them.

Now is the point where I should say there were never any guarantees this blog would hold itself to a standard of class, dignity, and political correctness. If you’re a man and can’t remember what boobs did to you in 7th grade, you probably should be reading a newspaper anyway.

The MLS All-Star game is, to me as an adult soccer fan, the new Molly McMann. It’s hideous, tacky, and repulsive, but yet I still watch and enjoy the spectacle every year. It has boobs. I can’t help myself.

The temptation of the All-Star game is that we can believe, for one night, that our little domestic league with our little domestic players can stack up to the rest of the world. That belief is the boobs of the hideous spectacle. We see past the pathetic cheerleading of ESPN announcers. We ignore the Beckham hype. We turn the channel when the god freakin’ awful half-time pimple faced homeless man’s wannabe Nirvana embarrasses the sport on National TV.

But during the game, if you’re like me, you set aside logic and watch our players rip one of the most ardently followed teams in the world to shreds. You let yourself believe that Dwayne DeRosario is an undiscovered jewel, toiling under the Houston Refineries’ smoke where the world can’t see him, and enjoy watching him embarrass the Celtic midfield. You imagine he could be doing this in any league in the world, and you wonder why he isn’t signed immediately after the game.

It isn’t just DeRo, either. Ricardo Clark, Michael Parkhurst, Shalrie Joseph - a number of MLS players looked head and shoulders above their preseason Celtic counterparts. I know this would be a different game, with possibly a very different outcome, if Celtic were in midseason form and acclimated to Denver’s altitude. But the boobs are all I can see when I’m watching and enjoying MLS players dominate a meaningless game, and there will be time for logic later.

Grading US Youth Coaches

2007-07-19T10:23:00.000-07:00

From now on, here's how I'm rating US Youth Coaches and Teams:

Identify and help develop/showcase:
- 0 future USMNT starters + poor tournament performance = F
- 0 future USMNT starters + decent tournament performance = D
- 1 future USMNT starters regardless of tournament performance = C
- 2 future USMNT starters regardless of tournament performance = B
- 3 future USMNT starters regardless of tournament performance = A

Point being that if we develop future regulars with the US National Team, I don't care how well the team performs in youth tournaments. History clearly indicates, however, that the more future USMNT starters are identified, the better our results will be.

The drawback of this rating method is that you don't get to judge until a few years down the road. The payback of this method is that you don't get to judge while you're still pissed about how a particular game was managed. Youth teams are all about the long-term view, and not game or even tournament management.

So here are the grades of the U17 and U20 teams from 1999 until today. The U17 coaches need to identify the very best young talent. The U20 coaches have to do more than matriculate the U17 talent into their U20 teams. They also have to identify other players that didn't come through the Bradenton channel. (I = Incomplete, or yet to be determined)

U17s:
- 1999 - A: Donovan, Beasley, Convey, Onyewu (probably our best U17 class ever)
- 2001 - D: Johnson (very close to an F here - this class was a disaster)
- 2003 - I (C): Still strong potentials in Spector, Adu, and longer shots in Szetela, Harrington, and Gaven
- 2005 - I: Still too early to tell, but aside from Altidore (not a factor in the 05 tourney), this group has to date made very little impact at a higher level

U20s:
- 1999 - I: Cherundolo, Bocanegra, Howard, Gibbs, Albright, Twellman (no previous Bradenton class, so hard to grade)
- 2001 - D: Some OK pros, but no USMNT regulars aside from U17 products
- 2003 - B: Clark, Dempsey
- 2005 - I (B potential): Feilhaber, Sturgis has potential
- 2007 - I (B potential): Zizzo, Rogers

Our 1999 class brought false hopes and expectations from the Bradenton program. Since then, it has struggled to identify and develop the 3-4 regular national teamers we need from that age range on a biannual basis. The sooner Bradenton is abandoned and replaced with a more comprehensive development program for the U17 age range, the better. Credit to Ellinger for identifying so many future USMNT players and a few solid additional professionals in 1999, but he and his successors have bombed since. Overall I'd give Ellinger a C as a US Youth Coach.

In 1999, Sigi Schmid did an excellent job of coaching the U20 team, losing only to eventual U20 finalists Spain and Japan (and the Spanish match looked like a nail biting 3-2 loss). He identified a number of USMNT regulars. In 2005, Schmid went outside the box to find Feilhaber and Sturgis. Feilhaber looks to be a long-term fixture with the USMNT, and Sturgis looks to be on his way. In spite of some tournament disappointments, when you look at the players Sigi's identified, you have to be impressed. I give him a B.

Rongen and Schmid have basically swapped U20 Cycles (Wolfgang Suhnholz being a disastrous exception), and Rongen has also held his own in the player identification department. In 2003 Rongen brought along two kids from Furman, one who scored in the last World Cup for the USA, and one who looks to be a long-term fixture with the team. This cycle is still an incomplete for Rongen, but bringing along Zizzo and Rogers (and Smith would be included if not injured) looks inspired, especially Zizzo. Also credit Rongen for taking a chance on Wallace, who although raw, looks to have some real potential in the long run. I give Rongen a B- right now, but that probably goes up long term.

The biggest disappointment since 1999 has been Hackworth. Yes, so far he rates only an incomplete, but the 2005 U17 team has gone on to do very, very little beyond Bradenton. Zimmerman was an alternate with the U20s where other starters like Arvizu, Soroka, and Nakazawa have basically disappeared. Kirk probably would have been on the U20 roster if fully healthy, but aside from Altidore, all of them are current long shots to do anything with or for the USMNT. Hack gets an I right now, but he's headed for a sub-C grade when the final results are counted.

U20s - Mission Accomplished?

2007-07-15T11:37:00.000-07:00

The question has long been debated among those who follow the US Youth National Teams – is it more important to win youth tournaments, or is it more important to develop great young players? Realizing the two aren’t mutually exclusive, the best answer of course is, “Both.”

If I had to choose, though, I am in the camp that would rather see 3-4 potential senior national team fixtures over teams that perform well in youth tournaments like the U20s, but don’t have any obvious stars. This is why I believe in spite of Coach Rongen running his players into the ground this year, and despite some questionable substitutions or lack thereof, I’m not overly upset about another premature departure from a youth tournament.

We knew Rongen was an almost-coach before the tournament began. We knew he could put together exciting teams to watch and fill his attackers with confidence and freedom. We also knew he would make some bone-headed substitutions. We also knew he wouldn’t adjust to his opponents, instead choosing to sit quietly on the bench as an opponent’s game plan is neutralizing the attacking players who just a couple game before looked so promising. This tournament’s bow out falls on Rongen, but give the man some credit. Once again, he’s uncovered some talent.

The biggest eye opener, or reopener, is Freddy Adu. He’s still among the very best group of players in the world +/- 2 years his age. Another player that opened eyes, before he was injured and looked less effective, was Sal Zizzo. Look for him to land and develop in Europe as a novelty in US Soccer – a right midfielder. We all knew about Jozy Altidore, and he delivered. It is still refreshing to see a forward willing to attack the goal, but playing within the concept of the team as well. What some people may not realize is that perhaps the biggest gamebreaker during qualification was Johann Smith, unfortunately injured right before the tournament. And there are still players like Nathan Sturgis and Chris Seitz, Michael Bradley, and Robbie Rogers.

Bottom line, this team was a collection of a few young players who look like locks in the National Team a few years down the road. And if a couple other guys pan out as well, it may make the biggest contribution to the US Team, in terms of quality and quantity, of any US Youth Team since the 1999 U17 team. That, in my mind, is a team still worth being excited about, and ultimately, a mission accomplished.

Cards All Around

2007-07-13T07:03:00.001-07:00

The best acknowledgment a referee likely can hope for from any fan base is to go unnoticed. Fans are, by definition, going to see every call against them as unfair, and they will see every overlooked slight against their team as obvious signs of bias. We’re no objective, impartial observers of the game. Referees at best to fans are invisible, and at worst are minions of the conspiring underworld. I start with these thoughts because I don’t pretend to be anything but a fan.

So instead of passing judgment and condemning the referee performances I’ve seen as a fan of the US Soccer program, I’ll begin with a question. Is there mounting evidence that certain referees are either grossly incompetent or have it out for the US Soccer program?

And here’s my stated bias when tackling this question: this past month, certain referees have made US Soccer teams look miserable.

Here is the evidence I see, in chronological order:

Vs. Guatemala in the Gold Cup (CONCACAF Referee)
My verdict: Gross incompetence and a bias towards Guatemala’s style of play
“Impartial” Evidence: Fouls called in favor of Guatemala 21-15, 4 Yellow Cards issued against the US Team and one player ejected despite the obvious exaggerations of contact (aka diving) led by a man who got his nickname based on his ability to flop, El Pescadito, “The Little Fish.” The result? The US squeaked out an ugly win, 1-0, against a team we’re obviously superior to in every aspect of the game. Had the referee instead carded Guatemalans for diving and called the fouls they were committing against the US Team even thought we didn’t dive, the justified lopsided result would have been the fair outcome.

Vs. Trinidad and Tobago in the Gold Cup (CONCACAF Referee)
My verdict: Jack Warner (T&T native and CONCACAF President) assigned morons to the game to keep his B Team (his A-Team refused to play because even though Warner makes millions from CONCACAF business, they were screwed in 2006 World Cup incentive pay) from being embarrassed.
"Impartial" Evidence: Repeatedly blown offsides calls that prevented the US from scoring 4 more goals than they did in their win. Again, fouls called in favor of the US opponent, 22-18.

Vs. Panama in the Gold Cup (CONCACAF Referee)
My verdict: Referee bias against the US resulted in Panamanians going ballistic, hacking US players, and showing an embarrassing amount of dissent as they ganged up to argue against any call against them.
“Impartial” Evidence: In spite of Panamanians repeatedly committing ugly fouls, the CONCACAF referee refused to expel any of them, even as they surrounded, bumped, and screamed at him each time a foul was called. Amazingly, US yet again was the loser in the Fouls Called statistic, 22-18, when Panama, after the game got away from them, was clearly out for blood.

Vs. South Korea in the U20 World Cup (CONCACAF Referee)
My verdict: A bitter CONCACAF referee that obviously hates the United States allowed South Korean players to bulldoze their US counterparts, but whistled and even carded the US for even the slightest touch.
“Impartial” Evidence: Fouls called in favor of South Korea. The Yellow Card issued to Robbie Rogers. Case closed.

Vs. Uruguay in the U20 Gold Cup (Notorious US hater Referee)
My verdict: Ravshan Irmatov, still angry at the US after they filed a complaint against him for a horrific referee performance in the 2003 U17 Championship, used this game to get even against the US.
“Impartial” Evidence: In perhaps the ugliest display yet, Uruguayan thugs were allowed to hack on Jozy Altidore, uncalled and uncarded, until Altidore had to be carried off the field. In spite of the blatant cheating, diving, and hacking of the Uruguayan players, US was yet again the loser in the Fouls Card statistic, this time by a closer margin of 30-27. Even more disgusting, the US was issued 5 Yellow Cards, when it was clear which team was violating the rules, both in letter and in spirit, of the game.

Partial evidence spun by a biased fan aside, if I didn’t have to endure another referee from CONCACAF, especially those who have been clearly bribed by the South Korean underworld, and above all those Uzbekistan bastards still bitter about who won the Cold War, I’d be a much happier fan. It’s a sign of the US Teams’ quality they’ve managed to grind out results in spite of the cards stacked against them by too many officials.

Adjust

2007-07-11T20:36:00.000-07:00

Immediate reactions to the U20 knockout game vs Uruguay

Give them credit: Uruguay scouted the US team well. They cut off Freddy Adu and forced Bradley to be the attacking catalyst for the US team. Bradley’s response was to repeatedly give the ball away, as he’s been prone to do with the U20 team. Uruguay let the US carry the ball from the back, but locked down our players once we tried to bring it forward from the midfield, then ran counters at us, and their plan worked for 87 minutes. And mostly, if you’re a fan of soccer, you had to appreciate what Uruguay’s Luis Suarez did today. He was a handful for the US backline, and willed himself a goal after backup US goalkeeper Brian Perk coughed up a dubious rebound.

And that’s where I end the nice comments about Uruguay. On balance, they displayed a lack of class and gamesmanship, both during and after the game, that we’ve come to expect from US opponents shocked to discover that the US Soccer program is not only no longer a pushover, but a better team of more talented players.

And that is why I am frustrated right now. I’m happy we ground out a tough win. Sometimes it is what you need to do. But our inability to adjust - to read and respond to the game situation - made today’s game harder than it needed to be. Here were some things I kept expecting, but never happened:

1) Bring Freddy back: Rongen kept playing him up high in the attack where Uruguay was isolating him and preventing him from getting the ball. I kept expecting Rongen to bring him farther back into the midfield to have more of an impact on the game and orchestrate a US attack that could not seem to string together passes.

2) When in Rome: Do as the divers do. Uruguay realized that the referee was falling for exaggerations of contact. It is high time the US Soccer realized there is a time to be macho, and a time to take advantage of what’s happening. If diving is working and the ref is buying, then do it. It’s the best form of repayment.

3) Take out Michael Bradley: Who knows - I’m probably wrong here, but the kid was miserable today. Good for him for tapping in an unmissable goal. Other than that, he sucked. He’s a clumsy defender and a miserable passer. He even more than Uruguay killed the US attack. When a player is having that bad of a game (not to mention his overall performance in the tournament), sub him.

Rongen didn’t make what I thought were some simple adjustments to change the flow of the game, and I thought his paralysis was going to cost us. He did, however, bring in McCarty for Zizzo, which proved to be instrumental. McCarty looked outstanding as an out of position fullback, and that versatility allowed us to kill the game. Good move.

My nitpicking is done. At the end of the day, we did what is rare in soccer. We came back in the dying minutes of the game and tied, then won. After what happened to Rongen against Argentina in his last World Cup knockout game, you wonder if justice is being repaid.

Summer of 2007: Where is the US National Team Now?

2007-07-11T08:53:00.000-07:00

One fan's opinion on the current state of the US team:

The core has been identified: Starting from the back, this team will be built around:
- Tim Howard, GK
- Carlos Bocanegra, CD
- Steve Cherundolo, RB
- Jonathan Bornstein, LB
- DaMarcus Beasley, LM
- Benny Feilhaber, CM
- Clint Dempsey, AM/F
- Landon Donovan, RM/F

That’s 8 out of 11 starting positions that have essentially been locked down, barring a meteoric rise in a contending player or a disastrous drop in form or injury of one of these guys. The success or failure of the US team will largely be a result of how this group performs. The good news is that this nucleus of players will easily lead the US to CONCACAF Qualification. It’s a solid group that at times can author some beautiful soccer. There are no superstars, but as a unit, this unit has the potential to advance out of their WC group.

The question marks that remain:

Finishing: It isn’t just a forward problem. In both the Gold Cup and Copa America, the entire team was guilty of not putting away chances, both half chances and wide open sitters. Players were also reluctant to individually attack the goal. It’s easy to blame the forwards - they’ve earned a good percentage of it - but it’s equally shortsighted. Think about some of the best blown opportunities, and it’s apparent the entire team falls short of expectations. As the competition gets better, opportunities get fewer. If we’re going to be successful, we have to attack the goal and finish a higher percentage of our chances.

Forwards: Beyond the finishing, our forwards are a huge question mark right now. Ching performed well enough. Donovan and Dempsey did OK when they were put there. Donovan, though, looks like an answer at Right Midfield, and Dempsey also looks better in the midfield.

Defense: In both summer tournaments stupid defensive lapses, however brief, resulted in opportunities or goals against the US. Defensive decision-making, including that of defensive midfielders, has to be more consistent. Mistakes have to be minimized, and against the best teams, eliminated entirely.

Depth: Copa America did nothing to ease reservations about players on the fringe, or even on the bench, or even on the field. While we have a lot of players in the pool, we don’t appear to have a lot of good players or at least players ready to contribute right now in the pool.

Here is one fan’s answers to those questions:

Finishing: To me, finishing a soccer opportunity is no different than draining the clutch putt in golf, hitting the game-winning field goal, or sinking the clinching shot. The common denominator between Nicklaus, Vinateri, and Horry is the temperature of their blood. The best finishers run ice cold. They’re at their best when the pressure is most intense. That means our finishers - meaning anyone who has an opportunity - have to be put into and get used to pressure situations. A typical MLS game doesn’t provide that pressure. This doesn’t mean I’m advocating a wholesale shipment to Europe. It does mean that US players in MLS need more games with the US team, or games in playoffs or in international competition, to get comfortable with the situation.

Forwards: I think we go away from two forwards at this point. It doesn’t suit our present talent. Instead, I think we go with the 4-2-3-1 and run three tweener midfielders in front of two central midfielders. Right now the starting tweeners are Beasley, Dempsey, and Donovan. The current starting lone forward is Ching. In the next 18 months, I think Convey will reemerge to challenge Beasley, and I can see Rogers adding depth on the right. Perhaps the real one to watch is Freddy Adu. I realize he’s a polarizer so I won’t say much on this subject, but this kid could be a legitimate difference maker.

Defense: Gooch needs experience against good attacking competition. He needs to better his anticipation and decision-making as a Central Defender. He has time, but he needs games against good opponents. I see Conrad helping here short term, and I think Parkhurst and Sturgis could be viable long-term candidates. We need a "brain" in the back - the guy who will collect and organize the defense around him.

Depth: For the next 8-12 months, our roster will be filled out with experienced role players, largely replaceable and largely anonymous. Perhaps every once in a while they’ll pull a Hejduk and hit an amazing shot in off the post. For the most part, they’ll fill in spots and at their best play solid games. As often as not, they’ll frustrate us. 12 months and forward, look to our youth, where there’s a lot to be excited about. As soon as the 06 World Cup ended, I’ve said the next two tournaments that really mattered in player identification were the U20 WC and then Olympics. Names like Adu, and Edu, Altidore, Sturgis, Rogers, Seitz, and a couple other names I probably don’t even know much about yet will materialize and press the incumbents.

As a long-time fan of the US team, I’ve never seen a US Team in better shape this early in a World Cup cycle. We have a solid core of young players already with a good deal of experience and already with a good deal of success at their clubs and with their country. Around that core we have viable alternatives at every position but one - forward. That need has to be addressed creatively by Bradley. As frustrating as the Gold Cup was at times, and as ugly as the Copa America experience was, many questions were answered. We can now look to our youth teams and league play to get the stragglers figured out.