Tuesday, May 15, 2007


Do you think that the opposition to Bob Bradley as coach would be greater had Sunil Gulati made the choice earlier, without putting Bradley through the trial period?

Or that the support would be greater?

Or that it made no difference at all?



Anonymous said...

I would vote for "no difference". The opposition comes from those who really want that foreign, high-profile coach, and I don't think Bob's track record so far has convinced them.

OTOH, if he had lost a couple games in his trial period, the opposition would be greater now, and I don't think he would get the job. I believe Bradley earned it, and congratulations to him.

Anonymous said...

Soccer fans are a fickle bunch and tend to remember only the recent results. The fact that Bradley won 3 of 4 games he coached, including a big win over Mexico certainly helped him.

To more objective observers, Bradley showed that he is capable of organizing and fielding a competitive national side. There are still no guarantees that Bradley will improve the program beyond Arena's level, but he did show that he will not embarrass the federation.

Adam said...

opposition to Bradley or Sunil? there seems to be only one villain here, and he is not a soccer man.

Toddzilla said...

Very good question...

Much as I've been impatient with Sunil's apparent dawdling around with this, I think the support for Bradley is far more solid now than it was many months ago, and in the end, that's a positive, if only from a fan's perspective.

For one, I don't think I would have been on board with it as much as I am now, and just from what I've read around the internet from seemingly legit sources, I don't at all remember a lot of support for Bradley before. It's definitely increased as the team has performed well for the most part.

Besides, what other coach is so easily recognizable by the way he stands? Go Bipod Bob!

pb said...

Dear Reporters,

Even after all this time, I still don't know whether to support or oppose Bradley because I don't know how much he costs or how much the alternatives would've cost (or even who they were). Now that the USSF has settled for the cheaper option, I'm also wondering how the leftover money will be spent.

So for me, it all depends on whether Gulati provides satisfactory, forthright answers to my concerns. If he does, I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. If not, I'll probably start watching more basketball than soccer ... following the godawful US display of last summer, there's no way I'll just sit tight.

J.S. said...

It really doeesn't matter. Gulati can not make a proper decision to save his life. US Soccer players need a world-class caliber coach that can offset the overall lack of technical skill that most us players have. We need a coach who can develop the next playmaker and harvest a few more to help us compete against the giants. Instead, we get a coach with a mediocre bakground in a mediocre league.

Gene said...

Put me down in the category of "no difference." As I commented to Luis's earlier post on the same topic, I don't think these games were particularly edifying, one way or the other.

Be that as it may, I wish him the best of luck and to take the program beyond Arena's level.

John said...

As far as technical deficiencies, I'd blame our local youth clubs more than I'd look at our USMNT head coach.

Youth development in the US is really the biggest barrier to the US reaching the next level in soccer. Topdrawer soccer has done a lot of writing on this subject, and in summary, youth clubs emphasize winning too much at young ages and not development, which is why it is important for MLS to take a bigger role in this area.

L.B. said...

I asked Landon Donovan about this very subject at training on Tuesday.

He said:

"What he went through is not easy. He gets to be the national team coach so it’s a great gig but to be the interim coach is tough. For him to have to deal with that and still kind of get on with that is impressive. It would be hard for a lot of people. That’s a lot of pressure."