At least we seem to be past the Beckerman stage.

I'm still pissed about Bradley being fired.

would the US really be that much better with Bradley right now? I honestly doubt it.

The talent stuff is beyond either coach. But Bradley is a much better tactician that would be willing to play a more effective counterattack style.

Let's be honest, Bradley's record for Egypt isn't exactly stellar since he took over there. They've missed the ANC twice and he took over a team that won the ANC in 2010. That's not exactly a feather in his cap.

In no way am I making this a post in support of Klinsmann. I'm just putting things in the proper perspective (especially since a lot of this thread wanted bradley's head for a while too).

Fact is, the talent on the US is dreadful at the back. Unless a coach like Hiddink, Trap, or Big Phil are brought in (and we really really really don't want trap), the severe problems will continue regardless of the coach. The US is also having players that have been a part of this set up for a long time starting to have their age show. The inverse problem is that no one has really stepped up to replace them. There was a ton of outcry about landy, but it ignores the fact that he really hasn't been playing all that well this year, so far, in the MLS. If he can't dominate the MLS the way he used to, how on earth is he supposed to be international quality?

So, that leaves us with what is current and there's more wheel spinning. The US would probably get 1st or 2nd in the hex with bradley and the US will probably get 1st or 2nd in the hex with klinsmann. I honestly don't know what the best option is going forward.

His W-L record is strong per Wikipedia, qualification is a crapshoot (Bradley w/Egypt). Anyways, I stand by my posts from 6669-6682 itt regarding Jurgen.

Yeah, might be something going on with Egypt.... Wonder how many other teams do well with that kind of chaos going on.

look at the teams they've had to play in the ANC. This isn't WC qualification where you have less groups. Egypt is one of the top teams in Africa and they haven't exactly been stellar when it counts. They've also generally played lesser competition than the US has.

because no south american team has EVER had to play under totalitarian or upheaval circumstances. nope, none at all.

iirc most African teams, even top ones, are hugely inconsistent due to a variety of continental factors. Intuiting something significant and negative about Bradley from a 16-4-6 spell with an African country literally undergoing a revolution is, prima facie, extremely dubious. (Don't think it's all that pertinent to
"Bradley > Klinsmann, either.)

The South America point is pretty silly imo. Can you show that those South American teams were unaffected by the upheaval? Are the examples recent? Throwing something out there like "other countries have had upheavals!" as an actual reply is kinda ridiculous, rhetorically speaking.

These are Egypt's results since Bradley took over, judge for yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt_n...l_team#Results



if you want to cite the revolution, then how much better would they really be without it? Would they be undefeated? You can't have it both ways on it


edit: I'm not defending jurgi. I'm more than willing to concede it isn't working. But, it was a risk worth taking IMO as I'd rather see something different to try to shake things up than continue with the busy-bee rut that the US has been in for basically it's entire football history

What? That's not the way it works. You're the one who thinks his record is something to be embarrassed about. It looks perfectly OK to me at first glance.

It's like taking someone who went 10-4 despite his stadium being destroyed by a hurricane, claiming "oh, well the 10-4 is disappointing because of factors X, Y, Z", then responding to "well there was that hurricane which may have been a factor" with "so would he have gone undefeated otherwise? quit trying to have it both ways!". It just doesn't follow rhetorically or logically.

eta: I also think "continue with the busy-bee rut that the US has been in for basically its entire football history is massively inaccurate. Massively, massively, massively, massively inaccurate. So inaccurate that I don't care to debate it (again, kinda, since I addressed some of it in the megaposts I linked.)

Looks like they've only missed 1 ACN under Bradley to me, and it was amid the crazy stuff that happened. They lost in a shootout.

Seems pretty obvious to me that he's having reasonable success over there and from what I've seen, they love him there.

Doesn't matter anyway and obviously we're stuck with Jurgen regardless(unless we go something crazy like 0-3-2 in these 5 games and Sunil realizes his mistake.

Jurgen needs to get his head out of his ass and get the lineup in every meanginful game right. That alone will go miles. We were missing some key guys for this game and I doubt everyone is going to go 90 vs Germany, but we need to perform better on Sunday.

he hasn't qualified for 2 straight ANCs. That negates Egypt beating up on minnows in Egypt. The ANC isn't anywhere near as bad to qualify for as the World Cup. Yet you are trying to make it the same. It's not.


Using the revolution is a bit much as well. South American teams have their own history of being successful under domestic strife. This isn't something new to the general footballing world.



Let's look at this in another way. Let's say there is an America's cup that includes CONCACAF and CONMEBOL. The US has constantly qualified for it and has won it a few times. A new coach comes in and doesn't qualify for the next two. Even if there was a major upheaval in the US, this thread would be calling for his head. That's Bradley's situation in Egypt with a nation that has generally dominated the tournament. They have 4 ANC wins since 98 and 2012 was the first time since 78 they didn't qualify. They haven't qualified 4x in their history of the tournament (withdrew several times) and 2 of those times are under Bradley.


edit: I don't feel like arguing this any further. I'd rather talk about what the possible solutions for the US are.

Same. But just so it's clear:

Egypt failed to qualify for the 2012 tournament before Bradley took over.

you're right. my bad on that one

Of course Bradley over JK

I mean, even if we fired JK tomorrow it's not like Bradley would be rehired. We'd bring in someone else, and it wouldn't be someone expensive. It'd be Kreis or whoever.

As far as how to fix the team as it is, it's hard to say. I don't really think it needs that much fixing, but if it doesn't get any at all it will continue to struggle mightily. If Jozy isn't able to perform or isn't able to link up with the guys we are able to deploy, there really isn't any shame in just not playing him or using him as a sub.

The real answer here could be a club stable Freddy Adu, but that will never happen because he is somehow quite literally the most incapable player on the planet of holding down a spot on a club.

I'll just go dream about a world where a healthy and in form Holden, Adu and Davies exist.

I wish there was a more talented American coach out there. Maybe Porter can become that guy as Portland have been playing much better this season. I just worry that it would be someone like Kries who wouldn't really take the US to a better level IMO.

One principal problem has been that young talented Americans aren't either getting better or have stagnated. Aguedelo just hasn't played at all and like you noted, Adu can't stop bouncing around clubs (which could be a sign of something else). Hopefully Nagbe becomes a citizen as he looks like he could be a possible creative talent for the US.

I think we will struggle as long as the current youth system is in place. IMO we need a a professional league with pro/rel and then we need to completely shake up the youth system in this country. If anyone thinks the current ODP and u17 residency camps are working you are sorely mistaken.

damn straight. A problem is that college is in the way. You HAVE to go to college here, so it's extremely hard to get those hours in with younger players. Many High School coaches are usually Gym teachers, and it's not like they are terribly familiar with coaching on the ball skills. There would have to be a seismic shift in going after players to change things.

I would honestly love if the MLS started putting $2-3m aside each year to use as college money in growing accounts for young players. This way you can also entice inner city kids to keep up with the game (or even start) as there would be a financial reward that could greatly improve their lot in life. These players would also (hopefully) be attached with MLS clubs and come up through those systems. While that wouldn't necessarily be great, I would much rather trust the MLS to put in at least competant coaches at those levels as opposed to what's current.

And most youth clubs are also a problem. It's more about winning then it is developing players at the youth level here. Too many clubs are too focused on getting as many players/teams as possible so they can make some money and put development second.

again, completely agree. Kids are playing wayyyyyy too many matches as opposed to working on ball skills. This is also why I'd rather the USSF dismantle the current system and put the principle focus on the MLS youth academies. I would generally trust MLS teams to take a longer look at how youth players come through as opposed to some random private club coach.

the fact that the USA try to have the same system for football as they have for the NBA and NFL really hurts the MLS

I wonder if the desire is even there from the MLS clubs to run youth academies. They would have to go completely against the current high school/college system that is currently in place.