Now for some possible negatives of appointing Bob Bradley as the U.S. national team coach.
One MLS championship is what Bradley has accomplished in nine years as a head coach. His Princeton teams never won the NCAA title, so that's not a lot of experience leading squads to the highest peak. His New York teams also struggled to make the playoffs - considering how improved New York looks now, it's hard to consider Bob a big upgrade from Bruce Arena.
The tie versus Guatemala may be an inconsequential blip to some, but to others, it featured some red flag elements - a frustrated U.S. squad applying a mechanical approach to the game that simply wasn't working. Little creativity, connection or skill was on display from the U.S. in that match - and considering it was the most recent game (all those elements could be easily forgiven in a debut) under Bob's system, it does not bode well.
The glow of the "new guy" may wear off quickly. Interim coach Steve Sampson rode early results in 1995 to the permanent position, and the players seemed to love him then as much as the players do with Bob now. However, things with Sampson went sour, partly because personal animosities sprang up between the coach and players who believed (not without some reason) that they had had a hand in his being given the position.
Bob could be too connected to really work independently. While a Klinsmann might clean house and make decisions without too much regard for the consequences, Bob has so many loyalties to various people in U.S. soccer circles that go back so far, it could compromise his objectivity and effectiveness. It only further complicates matters when Bob is already under the microscope of scrutiny for preferences to his former MLS players, including his son Michael.
The vision thing - does Bob have a clear picture to elevate the U.S. program to another level, and not just continue to grind out results? His giving away of Chivas USA's designated player spot for Amado Guevara seems to indicate a distrust of a new approach and an unwillingness to make a truly bold move.
There's no comparison to landing an international name coach in terms of media visibility. People across the world would be interested in such a development. Also, though thankfully Bob does not display the sarcasm and contempt for the press that Bruce Arena often did, Bob is so careful in the information he dispenses to them that he comes off as boring in many ways. He's actually quite brilliant, but most media won't pick up on that, because on the surface, he's not a colorful character.
6 comments:
Luis - Did we ever get the full picture about why Klinsmann didn't get the job? In an ideal world, I'd like to see USSF and Klinsmann put their differences aside and do what all initially hoped would happen.
Nobody knows what happened but Sunil and Klinsmann, and if anyone else does they're not sharing.
That only leads to speculation about what things ultimately kept them apart because we know it wasn't money. Maybe if Bob or another coach is hired full time, we can find out what happened.
Well, this was one of my posts, and not that of Luis, though I'm sure he'll chime in if he has more inside info.
Klinsmann didn't get the job because he turned it down. He was Sunil's top choice. Klinsmann didn't want the job badly enough to bend on some point that Sunil said couldn't be worked around. I don't know what that sticking point was.
It could very well have been that Klinsman wanted a longer rest between coaching stints - wanting to appoint an interim until 2008. Sunil, however, wanted what he's going to do appoint now - a permanent coach in place for this summer's tournaments.
I'm in two minds on the coach. On one hand I do think the coach should be American. I don't think US soccer is quite ready for a sophisticated tactical European coach. We're not at a high enough technical ability yet.
On the other hand, I'm tired of this revolving door of American coaches. As soon as one guy gets fired, he just waits until the next job opening and gets the call. I mean, we're gonna hire the guy who was a total failure in NY to be our Nat. team coach?
I felt all along that you needed a clean break from the Bruce Arena era and that hiring a foreigner was the only way to do it. I wasn't so much against Bob Bradley as I was for a clean break and a fresh set of eyes.
I must admit, though, that I had been swayed in Bob's direction after the four games but now that the team has been off for a while and we've had time to digest the whole situation, I can reflect on that some more. I honestly haven't given the USMNT too much thought since the MLS season started. I've been too focused on MLS.
Klinsi is in the past. We need to move on. I'm not totally convinced he would have been the "saviour" of US soccer. You have to aim high if you really want to move forward. Mourinho, Hiddick, Peckerman, Quieroz, Rikkard are more viable teachers of the game. In the meantime, we really are just having to settle for BOB B. Gulati made a bonehead decision to give him an interim tag 6 months after the WC. I don't think US soccer has that much of an upside compared to Mexico. A daring coach could change that. BOB B. is no exception. Thank you for pointing that out to us.
Post a Comment