"They say our love won't pay the rent
Before it's earned, our money's all been spent
I guess that's so, we don't have a pot
But at least I'm sure of all the things we got
Babe
I got you babe I got you babe." -- Sonny & Cher, "I Got You Babe."
Okay, one more pertinent quote before we dive head first into all this, though the imagine of Sunil Gulati and Bob Bradley singing this treachly love song to each other is something more horrific than most M. Night Shyamalan flicks.
"Don't drive angry, don't ever drive angry." -- Phil Connors, "Groundhog Day."
As a general rule, don't blog angry either.
The news that broke a little while ago on Monday that Bradley will get another four years in charge of the U.S. National Team didn't exactly conjure anger, more just sad resignation than anything else.
Bill Murray in Harold Ramis' "Groundhog Day" on the international soccer fields, as it were.
As apt as the "Groundhog Day" comparision might be, in the fact that it's back to the same drawing board for another four years, I've been marinating on an analogy for the last few weeks I was hoping I'd never have to make, but here goes anyway.
Gulati and the USSF bringing back Bradley is tantamount to what "The Office" has been the last three or so seasons, in essence spinning it's wheels, recycling the same plot lines and gags. Are the antics of Michael Scott and the rest of the crew at Dunder Mifflin still funny? Sure, most of the time.
Yet it's hard to say the show hasn't stagnated. It's hard to stay fresh(*) for seven seasons on a network sitcom.
(*) Losing Michael Schur and Greg Daniels to the superior "Parks and Rec" doesn't help. A story for another day.
Look at some of the chances "The Office" had to change in its recent seasons:
Michael leaves Dunder Mifflin due to Stringer Bell's management tactics ... but he's back to his old job within four episodes.
Michael and Jim become co-managers of the office, Michael is back to his own role within the course of the episode.
It's the old principle of television, if it ain't broke, don't fix it ... and milk it until the rating go completely sour.
At least with "The Office" star Steve Carrell is officially leaving after the seventh season when his contract expires. Rumored replacements include Rhys Darby (Murray from "Flight of the Conchords") and Danny McBride (if you don't know who he is, well, you're probably reading the wrong blog. Sorry.)
So Dunder Mifflin's Scranton Branch might get its version of Kenny Powers to mix things up.
The U.S., through the 2014 World Cup cycle, sadly will not. It's not that Bradley did a bad job, decisions vs. Ghana notwithstanding. It's just, are we sure we're on board with another eight years of Bradley? Wouldn't a fresh set of eyes make a little more sense?
That said, is Bradley "Satan in Sweats" as some might have you believe? No.
Is he the world's greatest tactical mind? Of course not.
Did Bradley help to building an ethos/personality -- think hard work/belief it's never over/fighting spirit(*) -- of how the U.S. plays? To his credit, yes.
(*) Does this rah-rah/college approach get you over the hump against the world elite? Or is it the best approach? For now, unfortunately, unless we find a way to naturalize a Andres Iniesta or Wesley Sneijder type, yes.
Are the statistics the USSF wants to push on people a little misleading about Bradley? You bet.
Does the average U.S. fan love his lineup selections, style of play and general aloofness? No.
Does the U.S. need a wildman coach like Diego Maradona making headlines by snorting coke off a stripper's buttocks? Well, that's not the kind of attention the folks in Chicago want.
Would Jurgen Klinsmann -- the only real viable candidate anyone's better able to produce -- have led the U.S. to World Cup glory? Impossible to say.
One thing you can deduce is that Klinsmann never really wanted the job in the first place. Not in 2006 and again not in 2010.
If the German legend actually wanted to coach the U.S., wouldn't he have taken it four years ago, when players like Landon Donovan, Clint Dempsey, Oguchi Onyewu, etc. were still in their primes? And if you're Klinsmann and you objectively look at the U.S. from top-to-bottom, what do you see? An aging core and not a whole lot of givens the pipeline, though the 2014 cycle is in its infancy.
Throw in the fact Gulati probably wouldn't be able to break the bank on Klinsmann or any other coach of any merit and we're back to the boring, safe, tight-lipped world of Bob Bradley.
The hard reality here, too, is that the U.S. job simply isn't all that an attractive of a position and the USSF doesn't have the financial cout to entice candidates to think otherwise. Nobody else wanted it, nobody across the Atlantic wanted Bradley at their club, so here we stand back where we were four years ago.
All-and-all, is Bradley coming back for another four years the worst thing in the world? No. There's a fair enough chance that Klinsmann wouldn't have panned out.(*)
(*) Maybe we need to redefine success for the USMNT. Are all the eggs in the World Cup basket? Is it four years or bust? Is it just the unfortunate reality of being one of two big fishes in the small pond of CONCACAF?
Let's face it, barring a total calamity the U.S. is going to qualify for the 2014 World Cup. Along the way there's the suddenly important 2011 Gold Cup -- trying to figure out a way to slow down Mexico's re-ascendancy in CONCACAF, too. There is the long, mostly tedious process of qualification and sorting out a fractured player pool spread across MLS and most of Europe. (Admittedly, identifying the best U.S. talent and where to play it isn't the easiest thing in the world.)
And once Brazil 2014 rolls around, we're back to where we were on June 26, when the U.S. had it all set up for them on a platter against Ghana in the Round of 16. Bradley whiffed that day, playing Ricardo Clark then second-guessing himself by substituting the ex-Dynamo midfielder in the first half. The U.S. is never going to have it as laid out for them on a silver platter as this summer in South Africa. When Bradley stepped up to the plate, he whiffed, plain-and-simple.
We know Bradley is smart enough to get the U.S. into major tournaments, and as we saw at the Confederations Cup, given the right situation he's not a bad game-planner. Yet the same problems -- leaking early goals, first and foremost -- continued to plague the squad. If he goes back to the same hands that got him there this summer, we're looking at a repeat of the 2006 Bruce Arena flame out in Germany where he thought the 2002 crew still had what it took at the top level.
Wherein the problem lies, I'd gather from most fans, is that four more years of Bradley rocking his stern looks and sweatpants on the sidelines simply isn't exciting. Should a coach's A-1 priority be to jazz up the fanbase or say crazy things, like say Ozzie Guillen? Obviously not.
Beyond that level of "blah-ness" Bradley exudes, there's this perceived notion of "Bob's Guys." His reliance on the same players (cough, cough Jon Bornstein ... who wasn't a disaster in South Africa in fairness) and stale tactics leave many fans wanting more.
The results (2007 Gold Cup, runner up 2009 Confederations Cup) and resume of Bradley speak for themselves. Maybe the bigger question is to why the good bulk of U.S. fans seemingly wanted anyone not named Bob Bradley heading into 2011?
Perhaps Monday's announcement all boils down to this simple fact: should excitement level be the determine factor in hiring an international soccer coach?
Time will tell ... however it'll be hard to watch a U.S. game for the next four years without the sound of Sonny & Cher's serenading each other playing in the back of your head.
Before it's earned, our money's all been spent
I guess that's so, we don't have a pot
But at least I'm sure of all the things we got
Babe
I got you babe I got you babe." -- Sonny & Cher, "I Got You Babe."
Okay, one more pertinent quote before we dive head first into all this, though the imagine of Sunil Gulati and Bob Bradley singing this treachly love song to each other is something more horrific than most M. Night Shyamalan flicks.
"Don't drive angry, don't ever drive angry." -- Phil Connors, "Groundhog Day."
As a general rule, don't blog angry either.
The news that broke a little while ago on Monday that Bradley will get another four years in charge of the U.S. National Team didn't exactly conjure anger, more just sad resignation than anything else.
Bill Murray in Harold Ramis' "Groundhog Day" on the international soccer fields, as it were.
As apt as the "Groundhog Day" comparision might be, in the fact that it's back to the same drawing board for another four years, I've been marinating on an analogy for the last few weeks I was hoping I'd never have to make, but here goes anyway.
Gulati and the USSF bringing back Bradley is tantamount to what "The Office" has been the last three or so seasons, in essence spinning it's wheels, recycling the same plot lines and gags. Are the antics of Michael Scott and the rest of the crew at Dunder Mifflin still funny? Sure, most of the time.
Yet it's hard to say the show hasn't stagnated. It's hard to stay fresh(*) for seven seasons on a network sitcom.
(*) Losing Michael Schur and Greg Daniels to the superior "Parks and Rec" doesn't help. A story for another day.
Look at some of the chances "The Office" had to change in its recent seasons:
Michael leaves Dunder Mifflin due to Stringer Bell's management tactics ... but he's back to his old job within four episodes.
Michael and Jim become co-managers of the office, Michael is back to his own role within the course of the episode.
It's the old principle of television, if it ain't broke, don't fix it ... and milk it until the rating go completely sour.
At least with "The Office" star Steve Carrell is officially leaving after the seventh season when his contract expires. Rumored replacements include Rhys Darby (Murray from "Flight of the Conchords") and Danny McBride (if you don't know who he is, well, you're probably reading the wrong blog. Sorry.)
So Dunder Mifflin's Scranton Branch might get its version of Kenny Powers to mix things up.
The U.S., through the 2014 World Cup cycle, sadly will not. It's not that Bradley did a bad job, decisions vs. Ghana notwithstanding. It's just, are we sure we're on board with another eight years of Bradley? Wouldn't a fresh set of eyes make a little more sense?
That said, is Bradley "Satan in Sweats" as some might have you believe? No.
Is he the world's greatest tactical mind? Of course not.
Did Bradley help to building an ethos/personality -- think hard work/belief it's never over/fighting spirit(*) -- of how the U.S. plays? To his credit, yes.
(*) Does this rah-rah/college approach get you over the hump against the world elite? Or is it the best approach? For now, unfortunately, unless we find a way to naturalize a Andres Iniesta or Wesley Sneijder type, yes.
Are the statistics the USSF wants to push on people a little misleading about Bradley? You bet.
Does the average U.S. fan love his lineup selections, style of play and general aloofness? No.
Does the U.S. need a wildman coach like Diego Maradona making headlines by snorting coke off a stripper's buttocks? Well, that's not the kind of attention the folks in Chicago want.
Would Jurgen Klinsmann -- the only real viable candidate anyone's better able to produce -- have led the U.S. to World Cup glory? Impossible to say.
One thing you can deduce is that Klinsmann never really wanted the job in the first place. Not in 2006 and again not in 2010.
If the German legend actually wanted to coach the U.S., wouldn't he have taken it four years ago, when players like Landon Donovan, Clint Dempsey, Oguchi Onyewu, etc. were still in their primes? And if you're Klinsmann and you objectively look at the U.S. from top-to-bottom, what do you see? An aging core and not a whole lot of givens the pipeline, though the 2014 cycle is in its infancy.
Throw in the fact Gulati probably wouldn't be able to break the bank on Klinsmann or any other coach of any merit and we're back to the boring, safe, tight-lipped world of Bob Bradley.
The hard reality here, too, is that the U.S. job simply isn't all that an attractive of a position and the USSF doesn't have the financial cout to entice candidates to think otherwise. Nobody else wanted it, nobody across the Atlantic wanted Bradley at their club, so here we stand back where we were four years ago.
All-and-all, is Bradley coming back for another four years the worst thing in the world? No. There's a fair enough chance that Klinsmann wouldn't have panned out.(*)
(*) Maybe we need to redefine success for the USMNT. Are all the eggs in the World Cup basket? Is it four years or bust? Is it just the unfortunate reality of being one of two big fishes in the small pond of CONCACAF?
Let's face it, barring a total calamity the U.S. is going to qualify for the 2014 World Cup. Along the way there's the suddenly important 2011 Gold Cup -- trying to figure out a way to slow down Mexico's re-ascendancy in CONCACAF, too. There is the long, mostly tedious process of qualification and sorting out a fractured player pool spread across MLS and most of Europe. (Admittedly, identifying the best U.S. talent and where to play it isn't the easiest thing in the world.)
And once Brazil 2014 rolls around, we're back to where we were on June 26, when the U.S. had it all set up for them on a platter against Ghana in the Round of 16. Bradley whiffed that day, playing Ricardo Clark then second-guessing himself by substituting the ex-Dynamo midfielder in the first half. The U.S. is never going to have it as laid out for them on a silver platter as this summer in South Africa. When Bradley stepped up to the plate, he whiffed, plain-and-simple.
We know Bradley is smart enough to get the U.S. into major tournaments, and as we saw at the Confederations Cup, given the right situation he's not a bad game-planner. Yet the same problems -- leaking early goals, first and foremost -- continued to plague the squad. If he goes back to the same hands that got him there this summer, we're looking at a repeat of the 2006 Bruce Arena flame out in Germany where he thought the 2002 crew still had what it took at the top level.
Wherein the problem lies, I'd gather from most fans, is that four more years of Bradley rocking his stern looks and sweatpants on the sidelines simply isn't exciting. Should a coach's A-1 priority be to jazz up the fanbase or say crazy things, like say Ozzie Guillen? Obviously not.
Beyond that level of "blah-ness" Bradley exudes, there's this perceived notion of "Bob's Guys." His reliance on the same players (cough, cough Jon Bornstein ... who wasn't a disaster in South Africa in fairness) and stale tactics leave many fans wanting more.
The results (2007 Gold Cup, runner up 2009 Confederations Cup) and resume of Bradley speak for themselves. Maybe the bigger question is to why the good bulk of U.S. fans seemingly wanted anyone not named Bob Bradley heading into 2011?
Perhaps Monday's announcement all boils down to this simple fact: should excitement level be the determine factor in hiring an international soccer coach?
Time will tell ... however it'll be hard to watch a U.S. game for the next four years without the sound of Sonny & Cher's serenading each other playing in the back of your head.
Labels: bob bradley, jurgen klinsmann, Soccer, sunil gulati, USMNT
This just ruined my night
Your point about the job of an international manager isn't to jazz things up or spew random quotes of non-sequitor greatness. BUT there should be some excitement about what lies ahead. Knowing Bradley is at the helm doesn't really inspire us (USMNT fans) to believe that things can get better.
We know the Bob can navigate the rigors of CONCACAF with some ease and competancy. What we don't know is what Klinsy could've brought to the table. The fascination with the German is that he could either be a complete failure (think 2nd or 3rd in CONCACAF and bowing out 0-0-3 in WC 2014) or he could hold all of the keys to propel us to glory.
What he and Jogi Loew accomplished, guiding a less than stellar side to some inspiring displays in Germany 06, the remnants of which were on full dislpay in South Africa, is nothing short of fantastic. Would it be the same for the US? Probably not, but the chance is there. Bob hasn't inspired us with the hope that they could do something great. Did he have a chance in SA? Really? I think we all knew what was going to happen in the Ghana game, we just couldn't admit it to ourselves.
My last thought on the hiring is this: the USMNT is still a young international team and can grow exponentially. The question is which direction will we grow in the next four years? Will we continue with yeoman-like efforts against pedestrian opposition and continue to produce hard working, efficient, yet tactically naive players, or will we start to learn some possession and create a national team that is capable of playing multiple different styles? Given who the coach is going to be the next four years, that question now becomes 99.5% rhetorical.
Chicago Way / Japan vs. USA
Sunil Gulati has it pretty good. He runs a sport where his name only comes up in the media for good news not bad. He is sorta the anti- Goodell/Selig/Stern. They get in the press when something goes wrong. Their sports are followed by so many people that good news is generally ignored but steriods/lockouts/ref scandals; their name comes up. America doesn't care about soccer so its the opposite. Sunil gets press when he's hanging with Clinton after the Slovenia game or when he delivers the US WC bid. But when the small percentage of USMNT soccer fans are outraged... the media just doesn't report it.
My bet is they offered Jurgen as much as he wanted, yet he looked at the roster and threw up. *He's actually being rumored for the Villa job right now... take that Bob. So I can't fault Sunil there. Where I fault him is why not reach out to other candidates? Money can't be the only reason top international coaches stay away... so what is it?
Japan vs. USMNT.
Japan was just turned down by Peligrini but is considering between Aguirre(who Id take in second) Marco Van Basten, and an ex Porto coach. Why the hell is Japan a sexier job than the US. Japan has the same or less players playing in Europe. Its domestic league is worse or similar to the MLS. The pressure from the Japan media is heavier than the US media. Both have extremely easy qualifying groups, and little expectations once in the World Cup. Yet Japan decides its going to go after a few great Euro coaches and a successful Americas coach and the US turns to Bradley once one Euro coach says no? http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/sports/news/20100826p2g00m0sp061000c.html
So why is Japan a more attractive job?
Final Thought - A friend looked at the extension as an NFL contract. It's not so much money that the USSF can't wait to see how the Gold Cup goes and just fire him in a year or two. Mexico had 4 coaches from 2006-10. So I'm going to wait til the Jan 2013 before I get really angry.
I'm no particular fan of Ricardo Clark's, but subbing him out vs. Ghana wasn't technically "second-guessing himself," since at that point the US was down a goal and needed to equalize.
Is it possible people are looking at part of this from the wrong angle? What if Bob was Sunil's man all along? He's stuck waiting for Bob to hear back from Aston Villa so he lets it leak that he met with Klinsi to try to get things moving one way or the other. AV says they're not really into Bob and the next thing you know the deal is done.
I just don't think Klinsi was ever really an option unless Bob bolted.
All in all it's not the worst thing in the world that Bradley will be back. He's certainly got his faults but outside of the Ghana match was generally praised for pulling the right levers in SA. An overhaul of the entire US system is probably needed but I'm skeptical Klinsman would have the political power to do that like he did in Germany. It seems there weren't many great options so they went with the safe choice.
Any chance they included a "no sweats" clause?
It's just the US settling for the safe, easy approach. The USSF knows what they are getting with Bob: qualification in 2014, and a chance to make it out of the group. If they go another direction, what will they get? Remember when Sven was running Mexico and they were in danger of not qualifying. I think Sunil's fear of mixing things up - with the equal risk that things will improve or digress (but they won't remain stagnant) - is what drove him to rehire Bob. Unfortunately, no risk = no reward, and as Cardillo correctly notes, the next four years are going to look sadly similar to the last four. For those of us who support the US team every year, as opposed to every four, that is the biggest disappointment: rightly or wrongly we view the US team as having more potential then they consistently show, and with Bob back, it will just be more of the same.
I am more upset that it seems there was not more of a search outside of Klinsy, if he was even offered the job. I was on record saying that I felt Steve Nichol would have been a perfect choice. Outside of not winning a MLS Cup, he has done everything else that MLS has to offer. He knows the US player, and he can build a team and system around a dominant defensive midfielder, Shari Joseph = Bradley Jr.
But let us keep some other things in mind here. Bradley still might not be the coach in 2014 in Brazil. A bad run of results, not qualifying for the Confederation Cup for instance could get him fired. Also, maybe Klinsky did not want the job now. Maybe he said, talk to me in 2 years if things are not looking up.
Also, Brazil 2014, outside of a few countries, not sure if I would want to be a National Team Coach for that one. Its going to be crazy hard to do anything of note in Brazil. Probably harder to win and move on in Brazil then it was in Germany 4 years ago. Its going to be crazy. Not sure if I would want that one on my resume, the chances of it being a good run are slim. Its a no win situation. I think Bradley is being set up to be a fall guy here.
I also wonder how much Donovan has to say here. And even Bradley Jr.
Anyway, this is not the end of the world. More of a continuation of the same instead of excitement of something potentially great.
@HBO ...
Like your comparison of Japan.
Maybe it boils down to the fact that throughout its soccer culture Japan has embraced foreign influence (think many Brazil players when the J-League began in the early 1990s.)
In the U.S. there seems to be some kind of misguided pride in keeping the coach American. The fact that the US infastructure + MLS is so radically different than most places (a problem that probably is more pressing the coach himself) keeps the candidate pool small.
This is a simple case of the taking the best available option, in my mind. Regardless of whether Klinsmann was interested, I maintain he would be no improvement over Bradley. He took a solid host nation to the semi-finals 2006, and that's pretty much it. No qualification process. He ran Bayern to the brink of missing the Champions League. And most importantly, he didn't really get along with Donovan when he was on loan there.
The USMNT can't be an overly appearling job. The pay is not great, there is no interest, a limited pool of talent, European players have to fly overseas for your games, and basically nothing for four years. The kinds of names that we as US fans want are the kinds of guys who want to manage in Spain, England, Italy, or European national teams.
If we really want a change, the best thing that can happen for us is to crap out at the Gold Cup and get Hiddink to take over after Euro 2012 with Turkey, or someone of that ilk. Or maybe Alexei Lalas can take over, he seems to have all the answers.
I'm disappointed in Bradley staying on because second cycle coaches don't do well. Grant Wahl put out an article describing just how poorly they do and about 75% or more did worse the second time around including greats such as Lippi and Lobanovskyi.
I am also disappointed in the fact that it seems the choices for coach were the same as the last time around. It was either Klinsi or Sweats without anyone else really even being rumored as real candidates. I'm sure we'll hear some BS about someone like Fabio Capello being interviewed in 4 years just like we did before the World Cup.
Ironic, Klinsi got along great with Donovan at Bayern. That was part of his problem because the rest of the team and club management didn't like Donovan. They felt he was getting playing time ahead of better players because he was a Californian like Klinsi.