For fans of the New England Revolution this has been a pretty tough offseason.  Reading a very interesting interview with Steve Nicol at FoxSoccer.com made it very clear that there are some very interesting hurdles to make it over this year.

• Paul Mariner: Hugely respected Assistant coach with vast experience and knowledge – gone.   What did Nicol have to say in the interview? “To be honest you can’t replace him” 
• Jay Heaps: Defensive leader who was part of the “soul” of the team – gone.   Heaps wasn’t called out in the interview, but Nicol glowed about Heaps the player/man during his retirement event.
• Jeff Larentowicz: Half of our reliable, trusted midfield core – gone.   In the interview, Nicol says “Jeff was huge for us. . .”
• Steve Ralston: Team captain and a player that made all the others around him better – gone.   Nicol, though asked about Twellman and Ralston, only commented on Twellman’s importance.   Interesting, as they were probably negotiating Ralston’s contract . . . and we saw how that ended.
• Taylor Twellman: Goal machine and often the “face” of the Revs – still here, still trying to get well.
• Matt Reis: Confidence inspiring keeper, one of the best in the league: out injured.
• Chris Albright: While less of a Revolution mainstay, an experienced player with a winning tradition – gone.

So where does that leave the Revs?  Enter the Steve and Shalrie show.  

Steve Nicol, the longest tenured coach in MLS is the one constant in this team over the last few years.   He is respected by players and other coaches alike, due to his stewardship of the Revolution as well as his history as a Liverpool great and Footballer of the Year.   Last year his managerial skills were tested during an injury filled campaign that left him without key players (Twellman, Albright, Ralston to name just a few) for long stretches of the season.   The team made the playoffs, but rarely dazzled.   Given the roster issues, that’s probably considered a success.   Unless some major acquisitions are announced before the season, Nicol will again need to wring out the most of an unspectacular roster.  

One area of interest – and big question mark so far – will be what Steve’s draft choices can offer.   MLS draftees are typically less impactful than in some other major sports, but the Revolution have been among the best at pulling solid MLS players from the draft, and often, MLS standouts.  Surprisingly stellar rookie campaigns from Kevin Alston and Darrius Barnes last year helped buoy a troubled back line.   It will be interesting to see if a similar magic act is performed this year.

The other constant is the excellence of Shalrie Joseph.  Nicol put it this way in the recent interview, “How Shalrie Joseph does not win the MVP award is beyond me.”   Many Revolution fans agree, as do quite a few MLS watchers.   If Shalrie isn’t wearing the captain’s armband next season, there will quite a few fans scratching their heads during the season.  But Shalrie is only human.   His game is the engine that keeps the team humming, but the more that is asked of him – and the fewer trusted players around him – can only serve to lessen his impact.   He cannot simultaneously be the midfield general, defensive anchor and center forward.

So the Revolution Front Office and fan base have put their trust in Steve Nicol to steer the ship for the last few years and for the foreseeable future.  (A good choice.)   He has Shalrie Joseph – and Taylor Twellman, if healthy?? – and a band of supporting characters with which to work with in 2010.  He’ll need every ounce of coaching to make this season work, but a couple pre-season signings wouldn’t hurt.  (I see they’ve already hit their “Steve” quota again despite Ralston’s departure with the addition of new Assistant Coach Stephen Myles.)

There are other signs of hope that we can dig through at another time.   But if Shalrie pulls up injured in pre-season, we’ll need to have Revolution fans – and their team manager –  hand over any sharp objects, belts and anything else they could use to end the misery.

It went widely unnoticed or cared about, but when Soccer America reported that Eric Wynalda is being given a trial run as an Under-20 National Team assistant coach . . . my head started spinning.  

Would Eric use his brash style, deep history and strong playing experience as a force of good to help groom our promising “next generation” of players?   Or would he lapse into his occasional MLS bashing and venting that would be counterproductive and potentially confusing to new (or nearly new) professional players?

Let’s be clear . . . I like what I know of Eric Wynalda.  By the way, if you don’t know much about him, Yanks Abroad had a great 2 article piece on him not too long ago.   You should check out Part One and Part Two – a great read.

As a player, he got the job done.   Being an early American  to break into the German First Division doesn’t come easy.   His exploits with the National Team are also widely known.   Scoring the first goal in MLS history was also a fitting notch in his belt.   Of course, he was at times known as difficult, fiery (putting it kindly) and often a petulant player.

Wynalda is probably known next for his commentary at ESPN and now Fox Soccer Channel as well as his (almost) off the record commentary.    His statements often rub many people the wrong way  . . . both in soccer terms, and occasionally for just sounding like a jerk.   

In fact, he’s swiped at a veritable who’s who of American Soccer . . .

• Bruce Arena:  “He can take a team to a certain level, but he has no idea where the next level is. How much does he know about playing in Europe, other than having a hot dog and a beer in the stands?”
• On Landon Donovan’s trial in Germany: “Last time, he gave up . . .  So let’s see how long this lasts. I’m just as curious as the rest of us.”
• The unloved (in soccer circles) Jim Rome . . . well, let’s just say Wynalda didn’t have kind words for him.  

Those words for Rome, and many other choice ones are found here – in the tirade that cost Wynalda his ESPN job.   The saga – which included some unfortunate comments about a supporter section flares looking like California (which had massive fires at the time) that led to his dismissal is here.

The thing is – aside from that unfortunate slip about California and the unfortunate dance about how it happened – I love it.   American soccer is a personality free zone most days – and Wynalda offers a brief respite from the boredom.

• Is Bruce Arena a great manager? Sure.   Is there proof of how he (or most American coaches) can handle the constant pressure, or have the tactical acumen, seen in Europe?
• Is Landon Donovan a great player?  Absolutely.   Were there reasons to question his commitment to a harder league that MLS . . . history would say yes.   (Hopefully his current great form at Everton is helping put that to rest.)
• And any true US Soccer fan grins thinking that Jim Rome has been lashed at.

So what’s my concern?   Aside from his commentary, he has a history of being argumentative, disruptive force that bickered with coaches, and the MLS big wigs.

Wynalda suggests he’s learned a lot about himself and how to handle adversity, something that would be clearly of value to the Under 20s.  But it also appears that he houses a deep bitterness toward MLS, calling his move potentially the “biggest mistake” of his career.  

While it will be helpful for young players to join any league with their eyes wide open . . . I hope that they are getting a balanced perspective.   MLS is a good option for much of our U20 player pool.

Eric, please remember, with great power comes great responsibility.   Let’s not poison young minds with negativity of ghosts MLS transgressions of the past.

It is easy to suggest that “child prodigy” Freddy Adu is simply an over-rated marketing project more than someone who has the potential to be a significant player on the world-scene.   I think that view is actually a convenient cop-out.

Clearly, I’m in the camp of Freddy supporters that hopes his career heads the right direction.  I like inventive, skillful, unpredictable soccer . . . and a confident Freddy Adu has the capabilities to deliver that.  I am also frustrated that (aside from Clint  Dempsey) we tend to only count “workers” in our successful international exports (keepers, defensemen, etc.) to the best leagues – as I’ve talked about before.  So I am willing to cut him some slack in the hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel.  But I do not underestimate the fact that he’s having trouble – for whatever reason – breaking into lineups that he should clearly have the talent to break into.

The one thing worth getting our arms around, is how much steak is there to go along with the Freddy sizzle?   There are those that assert (with evidence) that the handful of professional coaches who have not found ways to use Freddy cannot all be wrong.   It’s a powerful argument.   Yet, I’m not fully bought in.  

Coaches, and their continued disinterest in Freddy, are often seen as a rationale for the suggestion that Freddy’s attitude or training regimen are not up to professional standards.   I have no facts to dispute this, but I don’t recall coaches having called Freddy out for these transgressions . . . at least not since he was older than 17.   Peter Nowak, his first professional coach – who was long presumed to be glad to get rid of Freddy both called him back for the Olympics and leading blogger Ives Galarcep says that in conversations with Peter, there’s no apparent bad feelings or grudge.   Have I missed comments from the foreign contingent or Jason Kreis that suggest Freddy is some sort of lazy trainer or locker-room cancer?

My biggest point of confusion comes from the idea that he just doesn’t have what it takes.   Freddy has been (it appears) let go from Portuguese first-division club Belenenses where he was on loan from Benfica.   Belenenses might be a terrific club but that sure isn’t clear from what I see.   I’ve attended a game in the Portuguese first division before and watched a few on Television . . . it is a fine league.   There is little value in arguing the inarguable – where it sits relative to MLS, or even other leagues in Europe – but I’ll start with the position that it is a good (not great) league, where its few best teams (Benfica, Porto, etc.) can compete with (though certainly not dominate) other teams in Europe.   Much like many European leagues though, I strongly doubt the weaker teams offer anything approaching the quality soccer of the best in the league or other top European teams . . . or, as I walk out on a limb, those bottom dwellers are probably not significantly better than most MLS teams.

So, back to Belenenses . . . it sits dead last in the Portuguese first division with 10 points in 14 games.   That is one victory, one and seven ties in 14 attempts.    In those 14 games, Belenenses has managed to score six goals.   Freddy, meanwhile, could barely catch a moment of game time.

Now, Freddy Adu is no Pele – despite what advertisers may have attempted to show us.  But, a player that played over 6,300 minutes and scored 12 goals with 19 assists in MLS . . . all well before his 20^th birthday (no, I’m not entertaining the “real age” conspiracy here) . . . should be seeing the field for such a struggling Portuguese side which is desaparately in need of goals and attacking options.

One knock that detractors use against Freddy is that he cannot handle physicality of pro-ball.   MLS is no less physical than Liga Sagres, and while Freddy wasn’t leading the league in MLS he was a solid player.   I don’t see that argument having much to offer.

However, as I said . . . there’s weight to the idea that a number of coaches haven’t figured out what to do with Freddy.  While the situations and circumstances are not identical, there is an interesting comparison here to make between Freddy Adu and Jozy Altidore.   I realize they are not the same type of player . . . but there are similarities.

They both started professionally in MLS and are young, skillful attacking players.   In MLS Freddy had more minutes and assists, Jozy as an out-and-out forward had more goals.   They both were “bought” by big clubs and subsequently loaned out, which is not unusual for a young, new-to Europe player who needs experience. 

Freddy by bought by Benfica of Portugal and loaned to another French league club, Monaco and rarely saw the field.   The then was shipped to Belenenses and also didn’t see much action.  

 Jozy was bought by Villareal of Spain and was sent to a small club, Xerez in the second division and saw very little of the field.   However, he then went to Hull City, also not a huge club . . . though in a league with much more attention, and he’s been finding the field.   But, we are still all waiting for his first Premier League goal.

Hmmm . . .  No goals yet.  Been in trouble for Tweeting inappropriately after turning up late.   Didn’t see the field regularly for second Division Xerez. Etc.   I’ve heard nobody giving up on Jozy (and rightly not!) but aside from being played more at Premier League bottom-dweller Hull City, where is the drastic difference?

Freddy is dealing with the weight of his fanfare and “child prodigy” expectations more than a drastic failure which is drastically different from other players trying to seek fame in European soccer.

His next move will be interesting and important for his career.   I hope he has level-headed, open-minded and knowledgeable advisors that have his long-term best interests in mind.

Yanks-Abroad is a great site.  I read it near religiously.   You should too.

The name alone, however, suggests its latent bias – one toward a preference for US players that are playing abroad, and a (general) disinterest in MLS.    That made Brent Latham’s new Yanks Abroad piece “PHILLY..GO AMERICAN!” such a peculiar and interesting one.  It is a worthy read, so I won’t recap it here, but needless to say he makes an interesting argument that the Philadelphia Union has a unique opportunity to go 100% American with its roster – and that it might actually be a good idea.

A thought provoking idea, for sure, but I am struggling with some of the surrounding analysis. Here are some themes or points Brent made that trouble me a bit.

The fact that more US players leading the scoring charts would “…fight a trend that threatens to make it less relevant on the international soccer scene.” 

This depends on how you define international soccer “relevance.”    I could see a few ways to build “relevance”: 

A) MLS clubs start beating International club teams from top leagues in something that matters,

B) MLS clubs compete for or sign players who are respected/desired by European clubs or

C) MLS provides talent to International clubs that succeed in the best leagues.  

MLS Clubs do not do “A” very frequently.  Superliga – though entertaining – is a weak competition in terms of international respect – at least outside of Mexico.  Well, perhaps within Mexico too . . .   The MLS All Star Game?  Good fun.  But not “real” by any stretch of the imagination.

I would say that “B” almost REQUIRES the player to be an International, since any American player “coming home” provides a built-in excuse for the Euro’s to say he’s headed to MLS for “non-sporting reasons.”     And for relevance, to me it is hard to name four bigger things MLS has done lately than the additions of David Beckham, Freddie Ljungberg, Cuauhtemoc Blanco and perhaps Guillermo Barros Schelotto (Blanco might only add Mexican respect, and GBS may only add South American credibility, but still . . . )  These players came, played hard but they were not able to dominate the league.

The “C” option is likely where we have more chance and history of “relevance” in the international soccer community.  Providing talent to European or other top-tier international teams.  However, I think it matters little to the “international soccer scene” if the players we are growing, showcasing and/or selling come from the USA, New Zealand, Trinidad and Tobago or anywhere else.     

MLS will be relevant if it is successful as a feeder system to them, not for where those players come from.   There is a difference between US Soccer relevance and MLS relevance.

Another general theme is: while Europe is probably the best place for a young American creative talent to develop, they might be well served with more options in the USA.

I generally agree – the more options for American players, the better.   I think the evidence is out on if/when there is a right time to jump to Europe – especially for “creative” players.  So many of our promising US Players end up floundering post transfer (Eddie Johnson, Freddy Adu are easy examples.)  Would Landon Donovan be better if he stayed in (or went back to) to Europe?  Maybe.

The interesting thing I struggle with here though, isn’t that more MLS options for creative/offensive American players in MLS is a bad thing – surely not – but the suggestion that including international players alongside them stunts their growth.   Yes, there are only so many positions on the field, thus limiting overall chances when there’s an experienced foreign international player.  

However, I’d be curious to measure (impossible, of course) what difference Carlos Valderamma made on Steve Ralston’s game.   Or what effect Guillermo Barros Schelotto is having on Eddie Gaven or Robbie Rodgers?  Etc.  Etc.

Hey, there are other successful clubs that do this, why not in Philly?

Examples of Chivas Guadalajara and Athletic Bilbao are given to prove that an “all local” team can survive or even thrive.  The problem I see is that – that both Chivas and Athletic have a terrific feeder system and development capability (or at least, I suspect so) by which they can source (grow? groom?) local talent.   (Especially Athletic, since Chivas can “buy” good Mexican talent more easily than Athletic can “buy” good Basque talent.)    MLS clubs development and youth programs are nascent, to be kind, and far from reliable.   This presents a significant hurdle since one American-only club will have trouble out-bidding others for American talent in MLS.

So I’m against this “All American Team” thing, right?

No, not at all.  In fact, in “What is a ‘Chivas’ anyway?” I suggested that – in a very different direction than the go-America theme – maybe Chivas USA blew it when they gave up their ambitious All-Latino goal.   Why not have a themed team?

Brent rightly calls out some risks – but leans heavily on the “marketing value” associated with “Team USA” as a saving grace.   That however, might be the biggest risk.  Do US fans still need some convincing that American players are the headliners?   David Beckham isn’t here just because he hits good crosses and free-kicks, now is he?

Marketability – as well as capability – would be key to building such a team.   I suspect Freddy Adu (“Wunderkind comes Home”) is looking for playing time.     Maybe Jermaine Jones (“Loves the USA so much he Dumped Germany!”) is interested?

When writing about a game that involves a team I support I like to take the approach of looking at the cup as being both half full or half empty. As a (mostly) non-partisan observer for MLS Cup I didn’t want to pollute this blog with such thinking.  

(I am, however, surprised that I haven’t yet seen an overtime/penalty related headline somewhere about how “The Cup Runneth Over” . . . ) 

Instead, here are some largely unfiltered thoughts on yesterday’s MLS Cup.

It was a Cup Final – Last night’s game was not filled with particularly pretty soccer nor as many goal-mouth chances as I’d like to see, but this is what Cup finals are often like.   What was noticeable . . . players cared.   Players played sick.  Players tried to play hurt.  Fans watched.  (Actually I don’t know that anybody watched, but I can hope.)

Counter ‘this’ – I was lightly supporting RSL over LA last night, mostly because I like the approach Jason Kreis takes (“He’s making an offensive sub, so early, what about penalties?  Go Jason!”) and as a sentimental vote for ex-Rev Andy Williams who I always liked and whose personal/family story was so compelling this year.   What solidified my support for RSL was this . . . they held the ball, the tried to play on the ground, the wanted to play soccer.   LA never seemed quite capable of that despite Donovan and Beckham’s presence – and appeared to be content to try to win by striking on the quick counter.   While possibly effective, it is not my favorite style.

Penalties – Most people start their rant with “what a terrible way to end a game” . . . fine.  What’s the realistic alternative?   The players were dead tired and the soccer was beginning to suffer greatly.   Penalties are certainly dramatic, require some level of skill and provide a chance to feed the US fixation on goalkeepers (more on that below.)  I don’t know a better – reasonable – solution.

Beckham – Frankly, I am glad his team lost.  This is not because I’m anti-Beckham, in fact, I think MLS is better with him in it than without him.    However, what I like is that this loss helps the MLS marketing department write the story line around Beckham’s “unfinished business” to create some drama after his Milan loan draws to a close.   (Too bad he doens’t have a deep evil voice – quite the opposite in fact – or he could have stormed off with an Arnold-esque “I’ll be back” snarl.)

Landon – The contrast of the first goal’s pin-point cross from the wing to his missed penalty and absentee performance post the 45 minute mark pretty much sums up the confusion MLS and US fans have about Landon Donovan.  It will certainly add fuel to the ‘Landycakes’ fire anyway.   Is he a World Class player whose absence from the US National Team shows us as bland and boring?  Is he a player how only really shows well in less-meaningful games and fades away when it matters most?     Like with my view on Becks, part of me was happy that Landon’s team lost.  I like the idea of a ticked-off Landon with something to prove taking the field in South Africa for the USA.  What I worry about is the reverse – some odd crisis of confidence that affects his decision making about his play and his next steps for his club future.

M.V.P. – I like Nick Rimando and both last night and the Chicago game show that he seems good at stopping penalties.  But I must admit it really bothers me when a goalkeeper – any goalkeeper - getts an MVP award.   There are suggest - especially for just PKs.   I much prefer a field player gets it, and this game I’d say Kyle Beckerman was probably worthy.   I doubt most “soccer experts” would really argue this anti-goalkeeper stance, but there’s a continual need to pretend a US soccer fan couldn’t notice a good performance that didn’t directly result in one or more goals. 

*Note: Beckerman’s hair may have removed him from eligibility for the MVP award.  Only the other Beck(ham) can be a super-star/sex symbol while having absolutely ridiculous hair.  And Beckham clearly wasn’t going to win anything last night . . .

Field Turf – I have mixed emotions on this.  The purist in me says a final should never be on turf.   Well, actually, the purist in me says a professional game should never be on turf.  (I may have turned off the TV if there were football lines, so at least that was addressed.)   However, there is a piece of me that also wants to say this.  SHUT UP.   “That injury only would happen on turf.” Maybe.  “You can see the affect of the turf on that play.”  Maybe.   Both teams played on the same pitch.  Both knew what type of surface they’d be on.   Both had some amount of time to practice.   Once the game starts, please just LET IT GO.   Alternatively we’d be hearing about the injury that only happened because of the divot in the grass or the pass that didn’t get completed due to the mud puddle.   PLAY THE GAME.   Let’s rid the game of turf if possible (thanks Toronto!) but let’s deal with it until that day.

So that wraps up MLS 2009 . . . time to start watching the Collective Bargaining Agreement hyperbole that we will all be bombarded with and seeing if we can cut through the malarkey that gets spewed from both sides.

A Slovakian team that was (apparently) good in European qualifying, but not well ranked by FIFA,  played a defensive, counter-attacking game against the USA in a partially filled stadium, on a pretty ugly field and won 1-0 on a weak penalty call.   Not what you call must-see-TV, so it is probably good that not many people saw it.   For us die-hards, let’s get right to it . . .

Glass Half Full View

• USA maintained possession for large stretches of the game, something they had failed to do against most other opponents recently.   That said, Slovakia seemed content to let the US keep possession, especially since so much happened in the middle of the field and did little to threaten their goal.
• With all the concern over Onyewu’s injury, the central defensive tandem of Bocanegra and Spector held firm and seemed composed.   Jonathan Spector is quickly turning into a key utility player for the US defense and (barring injury) seems like a lock for South Africa.
• The USA still has depth at goalkeeper.  Brad Guzan did little worthy of complaint and made some great saves to keep the US in the game.   While I prefer giving time to those that are getting extensive playing time for their professional sides, Guzan may prove the exception to my rule if Mr. Howard needs a stand-in for some reason in South Africa.
• Many seem to be praising the Bradley / Feilhaber midfield combination and I too thought they seemed more on the same page than we’ve seen in the past.   But while I think the tandem was solid, I would like to see Feilhaber closer to the forwards and Bradley playing more the stopper/destroyer role.   Bradley’s range and tackling are greater than his creativity and passing, with the opposite being true of Feilhaber. 

Glass Half Empty View

• Yawn.   Is this how Slovakia plays most of their games?  Maybe we know why the stadium had so many open seats.  The only time we normally see a stadium that empty is well . . . when the US plays at home against someone other than Mexico.   Ugh.
• Conor Casey and Jozy Altidore didn’t shine and may simply be too similar to provide a dynamic one-two punch as our forwards.  Altidore has huge potential, but he lacks the edge that regular playing time would offer and was knocked off the ball too easily.
• Eddie Johnson was our first sub, but falls into my “lack of playing time” concern as he’s mostly been riding the pine at Fulham.  A forward without confidence never does well – and the US National Team shouldn’t be where we play someone back to confidence.  
• Am I really suggesting the starting forwards could have, should have been Conor Casey and Jeff Cunningham?   Well, as hard as that is to imagine, I suppose so.  Conor didn’t show much, but perhaps with a speedy, confident Cunningham running around and pulling the defense out of position he might have showed more.

The players are suggesting they will just put this game behind them and “move on” to focus on the upcoming Denmark game.   Frankly, it is probably best for the rest of us to “just move on” from this game as well.   The Denmark game may give us a sense if this was just a frustrating one-off performance against a defensive minded team, or if we have bigger concerns.

The US Under-17s are out of the Fifa U-17 World Cup after a tough loss to Italy.   I saw less of their World Cup play than I wanted, but a few thoughts remain hard to shake.

Maturity is over-rated – at least in soccer.   The game against the UAE reminded me most why watching the occasional youth game is so refreshing: even in a pressure situation the ‘kids’ tend to play with an offense-first mindset and a penchant for flair that will very likely (and sadly) be taught out of them in the pro ranks.   Our challenge is finding a way to add the professionalism, strength, speed of play/thought that is required to make the next step without squelching the joy of the game.   Not many countries have acheived this . . .

Possession soccer is not out of our reach.   Again, the UAE game was my primary taste of the U-17s this time around, but the way in which they controlled the ball – and thus the game – was impressive, even if the result was closer than it should have been with better finishing.   Luis Gil appears to be the real deal (as much as an almost 16 year old can be) and was able to add stability and an smart attacking mindset.   The full National team doesn’t have a pure center mid with those qualities – really Claudio Reyna (though often deeper sitting) was the last player that really was close to this at the senior level.    It will be interesting to see if we can add more of this to our game given our current roster.

Unfinished business.   At all levels, we seem to struggle to find a consistent list of “finishers.” If the amount of opportunities that could have  turn into goals – but didn’t – for the U-17s in this tournament show us anything – we may not have the answers coming soon.  At the Senior team level , Charlie Davies shows a nose for the goal (and is now facing a long recovery from his terrible accident) and Jozy Altidore has the potential, but not the playing time.   Most of our other talented forwards seem to be stuck in that perpetual midfield/forward dilemma – Landon, Dempsey, Adu, etc., or not making the mark we need them to make – Cooper, Johnson (who?), etc.   Given that, it’s not a surprise Conor Casey got time, maybe Robbie Findley is next?

What next for our talented youth?   Luis Gil is getting most of the attention, and (from my limited viewing) rightly so.   But for Luis and other talented players – the question becomes “what now?”   Luis had a trial with Arsenal, suggests MLS could be an option (what else would you say?) and has ignited a debate over what is best for helping a young star reach his potential.   While it’s hard to imagine there is a “right” answer . . .  the idea of playing at Arsenal’s youth development system sure is appealing.  The style they play, their tendency to throw youth in the mix and their strong youth development all make strong arguments.   The question revolves around the demand (especially for a creative midfielder) for those roles – which will feature some cut throat competition.   If you are to believe that an American has the odds stacked a bit against them going in in a European team – would a smaller club offer more opportunities for success?    For slightly older players coming into the pro-ranks (Dempsey, Parkhurst, etc.), I think MLS is a good option – but without a developmental league, and with minimal development of the youth teams, it just like an option for some of the U-17s but too early for the very best of these players.   We best start to get more creative . . .   could be a large Mexican (or other Latin) team play a role – Luis (as this example goes) has a Mexican heritage, and some teams have very well established development systems.   If only there was a Mexican team that also had an American connection . . .   hmmm.   We need to get over our fixation on just a few leagues being worth the attention of our youth.

Wilmer Cabrera deserves some credit.    Coaches can help build confidence (we made it to the second round and won twice in a row when we needed it, and were within a missed penalty of a better Italian result) and style (see possession commentary) . . . but cannot take the field and put many of those wasted opportunities in the net.  Perhaps the refrain we hear so frequently that “American coaches” are needed for our US teams is true.  Maybe they don’t always have to be just North American.

Well, Wilmer’s (and my) team is out . . . but his home country (Colombia) is still there.  I know who I am rooting for.

Kudos are clearly warranted for Clint Dempsey as he hits his second goal in as many weeks for Fulham FC.      While his first professional coach and likely mentor, ex-Liverpool great Steve Nicol, might not immediately love that Clint helped Fulham take down Liverpool, it was clearly a significant achievement following a goal the prior week against wanna-be powerhouse Manchester City.

As a Revs fan, I was on the Dempsey bandwagon early . . . he brought swagger, skill, attitude and the honest work-rate of a rookie who was both earning his keep while still making waves.   That same set of values transferred to the US National team as well, and has held down a steady starting role.  

All is not perfect, in fact, I’ve been critical of Clint’s recent US National Team performances, where he seemed almost disinterested with his midfield role and only came alive when moved to forward.   Funny thing though, even in games where that criticism is leveled on him . . . he often scores important goals.    In some ways he’s turned into the USA’s Thierry Henry, a player who we always expect to do more than what is reasonable for our national side.  (Ask a Frenchman if they think Henry is as good for France as he was for Arsenal or even is for Barcelona.)

More troubling for the US isn’t the ascendency of Clint into a stand-out professional but the fact that there are too few of his ilk.     Now, to be fair . . . there are MANY proven US professionals making a difference both for MLS clubs and abroad.  But, I’ll submit there what is lacking is any true “skill player” right now that is making an impact on the international scene.

There are many good summaries of US Players and their progress abroad and Steven Goff does an easy to digest version for the Washington Post here.   Skim that list for a second, and it’s hard to suggest US players aren’t playing solid roles for their professional teams in international leagues.    

Could we have a more impressive list of clubs?    Sure.   Could more of the players be in “better” leagues?  Yup.  

But that’s not my primary concern right now.   My primary concern is that of that long list of players, most of those seeing solid time are “workers” not “skill players.”

What’s my definition of a “skill player” – I cannot suggest it’s nailed down, in fact it’s a bit like pornography, I know it when I see it.    When Dempsey does a feint, a back heel or whatever slick trick he has lined up, he brings that special something that is worth notice.  He brings the kind of game that makes a kid go to the backyard and try to do the same thing – something we have far too little of.   (Yes, as a US fan, I prefer he does these things well past the midway line and not leave us exposed – which has happened a number of times . . . but he’s young and still improving.)

While hard to define, I can offer some “skill player” boundaries though.  

One easy place to start? Goalkeepers are clearly not in the list, they are their own animals.  

Of the defenders in Goff’s list . . . maybe Michael Parkhurst counts, at least he’s not a destroyer in the classic sense – but he is no Maradona.  (But as a self-revealed Revs fan, I am a bit biased.)   Edgar Castillo is on the wait and see list.   And let’s be honest, even skillful defenders are not going to represent the crème de la crème of skill for the majority of the playing world.

Let’s skip to the forwards . . . only two are listed as having seen time this weekend. Jozy Altidore and Kenny Cooper.   Both have skills, but neither are magicians.   Jozy only saw 30 minutes for a bad Premiership club (though he’s had a number of unrelated club issues) and Kenny only saw 15 minutes in the second division of Germany.   Not setting the world on fire, either of them.  

Freddy Adu is in that list – though he’s just as easily deployed as a midfielder or forward.  A “skill player” if there ever was one – and one I really hope finds success.  But, put plainly, he has not found success, consistency or playing time in any recent league or team.  A real let down for US fans that want skillful creative soccer from our team.

(I’m saddened not to mention Charlie Davies, due to his very frightening and fatal car accident.   I wish him a speedy recovery and acknowledge he was making a mark in Sochaux.  He brings the attitude and workrate  that Dempsey shows.  However, in fairness, he was a speed-demon with a nose for goal, not a “skill player” in the sense I am searching for here.   As many are, I am hopeful to see him back on the field to make that impact his recent run of form had promised.)

In the midfield – where for me the skill and magic lives – there are hopes outside of Dempsey.   But nothing that makes the world stop and take notice.  I like Michael Bradley, but he doesn’t fit my vague “skill player” definition, sorry.   Feilhaber is undeniably skilled – but Aarhus isn’t a club anyone I know has as a poster on their wall – so international impact is not something we cam claim here.      Torres has the skills . . . at least, I think (time will tell.)  But as much as respect as I have for the Mexican league (I do) there is still a gulf between it and the top European leagues. 

Then there is the odd case of Landon Donovan.   Who knows what to say? He is clearly an impact midfielder with skill – perhaps the most of any US player – who makes an impact.   In MLS.   How do we rate that?   I am hardly a Euro-Snob and generally have no problem with our best players playing at home.   But I’m the first to admit, scoring against Chivas USA isn’t the same as scoring against Liverpool, let alone Chivas Guadalajara.   (If you doubt this, please watch this weekend’s playoff “LA Derby” good fun, hilarious defending.)

That leaves Clint.   I’m happy we have an exceptional American to point to right now. 

I’m sad he’s the American exception.

The bad thing about having a “real job” is that I don’t blog about the beautiful game as much as I’d like. There is a silver lining though, I get to ignore lots of topics that are only marginally interesting to me and rather focus on some more interesting theories.

I decided to sit down for a few minutes and think about an article that for blogger standards is ancient (August 26) but that struck a chord for me. That article is Jeff Carlisle’s piece at ESPN about what many suggest is a key factor holding US Soccer back on the world stage, the idea that our “best” athletes are siphoned away from soccer by the more lucrative (and loved) basketball, football, etc. Seeing that there are over 300 comments on this article, I’m clearly not alone in finding the topic of interest.  I recommend you give Jeff’s piece a read, and as such I won’t recount all  of the interesting ideas posted there.

I admit that I’ve long held the easy to grab belief that if our best athletes were soccer players we’d be in a much better place than we are today. However I was glad someone added to that discussion by at least asking some tough questions about the other factors that play into success.

I too realize that I am somewhat of a hypocrite with this view, in that I yearn for the beautiful game and find as much – or more – value in a visionary pass or incredible first touch as I do a break-away sprint. Carlos Valderamma could orchestrate more beautiful soccer standing still for a full game than most of the young mobile athletes of today. Xavi of Barcelona could probably fit inside Oguchi Onyewu’s shoe, yet pulls the strings for one of today’s best clubs. Does anyone remember Arshavin’s Euro Campaign? And without needing to qualify this . . . College Soccer. Clearly, it’s not so simple that better, bigger, stronger athletes would equal success.

That admission is where many leave the debate, as they figure this disqualifies the “better athletes” view of what “could have been.” They suggest that without the proper soccer “culture” the overall level of athletes added to the pool does not drastically change anything. While I agree what is clearly lacking in this country is a soccer mentality a soccer “culture” – as many would describe it – I am not sure that this disqualifies the idea that if the best US athletes chose soccer it would lead to success.

First there’s the simple numbers game.  The more talented athletes that play soccer the more likely you are to find some stars among them.

Second there’s the idea that skills matter MORE than size and strength. However, what if that wasn’t a tradeoff? What if there was size AND skill. Anyone watch Didier Drogba recently?

That leaves us with the culture conversation – and our inability to “create” skillful soccer players in abundance. I think we need to simply understand that our sports culture will never be the same as that of other nations, meaning whatever “soccer culture” we could create would be equally different.

One thing that the US always responds to is something perceived to be the “best” – which can be seen when comparing the interest “World Football Challenge” (pre-season Euro teams selling tickets and jerseys) versus MLS games (our domestic league) or why it appears more people excited to see ESPN showing Premier League games than MLS games. I’d submit it also plays in the lagging interest in MLS (at least as attendances go) this year . . . as fans refocus their recession-affected wallets only on the “best” sports, athletes and experiences that they can.

If we lived in some parallel universe where soccer WAS the premier sport in the US (which I think would have happened if all the best athletes were historically playing it) in the country (as it is in many – if not most – other countries), it would be the place where people turned to see the crème de la crème. It would get the front-page arguments about lineups, about style, about what makes a good soccer team great. Today, those arguments are found in a corner of a major sports outlet’s site, a blog or 100 comments deep on someone’s article. Meanwhile, page one talks about how many times the same quarterback can retire.

Would success come if the “best” athletes weren’t pulled away to more “tier one” sports? Yes. Just not for pure athleticism’s sake (though I hardly see how it could hurt.) Instead, having the best athletes playing the sport would – I submit – build a soccer culture based on totally different values (quest for fame/wealth, need to be the best) than what makes Brazilian soccer (need to escape Favelas?) or any other leading nation successful.

If the MLS Cup was the Super Bowl? The College National Championship referred to “futbol” not football? If March Madness had ‘extra time?’ If our Olympic “Dream Team” fielded 11, not five?

Kids in inner cities that turn to basketball and bring creative playing and a deep desire to the NBA would instead be kicking a ball instead of shooting hoops in hope of getting out of their current situations.   Latino fans and players would find it easier to jump allegiances to US teams as they jump North of the border.   We’d have a player pool that would be difficult for any other country to match – soccer power or otherwise.

In that pretend world we’d be the best I think, and maybe the most skillful as well.

The problem is, I don’t see a simple path to that place from where we are today.

It’s hard to feel bad about winning three points on the road in CONCACAF, since that seems to be a rarity nowadays.   Yet, it’s hard to feel totally good about this result either.  

It is another perfect example of the half-full, half-empty conundrum.  

I said after the El Salvador game that this match would tell us a lot about the team . . . and it did . . . sadly what it told us was pretty hard to interpret, as if spoken in some dialect I’ll never quite decipher.  Here’s what I did take away. . .

Glass Half Full View

• USA won a critical three points, and while not a lock for the next round, it just got a lot more likely (big thanks to El Salvador for squeaking past Costa Rica.)
• No yellow cards issued to the USA . . . considering our penchant for red-cards in recent tournaments, that’s quite an improvement.
• Landon Donovan.   No offense to Carlos, but how is Landon not the captain of this team?
• Howard made some big saves, Spector is coming into his own, and Holden has serious potential.
• Relative to what was going on around him . . . I think the Bornstein haters should take a deep breath and pick on a few others for a while.    I’m certainly not his biggest cheerleader, and maybe Castillo or someone else might not usurp him, but he’s far from our only question mark.
• A different ref, a different day, a different view . . . and that sliding hand-ball off Charlie D’s centering pass right at the start makes this a whole different game.
• Apparently Bob Bradley can give a decent half-time talk.

Glass Half Empty View

• The US midfield at times appeared like they had just met.  Passes too hard, passes to soft, passes to nobody in particular, passes directly to T&T . . . we tried it all.    Just a thought . . . how might Torres, Feilhaber and even Holden done in those key midfield roles at the start?
• Hard for me to figure out Gooch . . . his towering headers in the second half will have some rate him highly . . . I thought he started slow and was indecisive at first (rusty, no doubt) and those towering headers (admittedly some important stops mixed in) typically went right back to T&T.    I wonder if A.C. Milan is thinking “loan candidate” yet . . .
• If not for that cross-bar, what would this story line have been?  
• Dear Coach Bradley . . . why can’t you give your half-time pep talk 45 minutes or so earlier?
• Clint Dempsey.  I’m a long time Dempsey fan and think he could be a real difference maker.    However, does someone know if the rest of the US team have all done something to annoy him?  He just seems like he’d rather be somewhere else for long stretches of recent games.   That’s not the Clint I remember . . .
• Jump suit.   Could some US Supporters group chip in to by Bob B a sport coat?  Maybe a tie?  I realize there is no standard for coach attire . . . but he looks like he was running late from a workout and just said, “screw it, I’ll go the game like this.”  If he cannot get the team’s play to respect the “beautiful game” . . . maybe his attire could?

While I know that a bad three points tonight was better than a well played tie or loss in our quest to be in South Africa next year, I just cannot get too excited about this one.

I found Bob Bradley’s quote that started “As the game wore on, our fitness was key . . . “ a stark reminder of how we still win – conditioning, running, fighting.    Or, positively spun, we “earn” our victories through “hard work” . . .

Effort, heart, determination and “finding a way to win” are all commendable traits that we can see in this team.    I just wish it came with a larger dose of smart, poised, cohesive, and yes, “attractive” soccer.

That would be something to get excited about.