Sorry–this is a little late, but I think it’s an important discussion to have…
We’ve all read plenty of articles praising the Nats for their improbably run to the Cup finals, so we’ll spare you the discussion of their “grit” and “heart.” (Funny–I was always led to believe that Frankie Hejduk was our sole source of these invaluable commodities.) This is not to diminish the accomplishments of our team, but the Confederations Cup is ultimately a learning experience and we are going to treat it as such. Here is a look at the lessons learned from South Africa:
POSITIVES
-Landon Donovan seems more comfortable in his role as playmaker than ever before. He looked fantastic throughout the tournament, even in the games where the rest of the team didn’t.
-Tim Howard is looking better than ever. His back-up Brad Guzan looked good against Egypt. The steadiest position in American soccer looks to stay just that going into 2010.
-The defense is really beginning to take shape. Oguchi Onyewu, Jay DeMerit, and Jonathan Spector all had fantastic tournaments. Our worries about left back have been eased since Bradley has finally given Bocanegra a shot at his natural position. With a healthy Cherundolo, the US will also have the option to move Spector to the left and Bocanegra to the center. Hopefully this means the end of Hejduk for the national team–even his strongest supporters have to admit he’s no higher than third-best at right back at the moment.
-Central midfield is looking good. Michael Bradley enjoyed a good tournament. Ricardo Clark looked good defensively and more comfortable on the ball than in past appearances. Benny Feilhaber is starting to look like his old self. With a healthy Maurice Edu and Jermaine Jones in the mix, this might be our deepest position.
-Clint Dempsey recovered from a slow start to bag three goals and Bronze Ball honors. Fantastic turnaround.
-We’ve found a formation that allows us to score goals from the run of play. In our first seven halves using this formation, we beat Egypt, Spain, and Brazil by a total of 7-0. Yes, we gave up three in the eighth half, but we looked far more productive and dangerous than we ever did in the 4-5-1 (in which we were outscored 1-6, by the way).
-Altidore looked a little rusty and Davies has a ways to go, but our forwards actually looked dangerous when paired together. Give these two another year to develop and we could have a very good striking tandem going into the World Cup.
NEGATIVES
-Bob Bradley should be credited for turning this team around. But the man still manages the game as if it were Football Manager 2009. Is no one else disturbed that he tends to make similar subs at the same time every game, regardless of what’s happening? If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. But if we just surrendered a 2-goal lead to Brazil, why are we bringing on an out-of-form Kljestan and Bornstein for Altidore and Feilhaber? His in-game management and negative style continue to frustrate me.
-Three red cards. As much as we love to claim the ref is out to get us, we can only blame ourselves for getting into these situations. When it comes down to it, as a team, we tackle too hard and too late. We’re going to continue to have discipline problems if we don’t address this soon.
-Michael Bradley is too aggressive for his own good. Not only is he a yellow-card machine, destined to receive at least one ban per tournament, but he’s starting to carry it off the pitch. He went on an angry rant about USMNT critics. He confronted the referee who issued his red card against Spain after the game. In the end, he left the tournament with an additional four-game ban.
-The 4-5-1 continues to be a nightmare and, even with the success of our two-striker formation, I worry that it will still be Bradley’s go-to formation for important matches against top competition (especially when we have a healthy Brian Ching back). I hope I’m wrong.
-When our players are in front of goal, too often they are looking to lay it off for a teammate instead of taking their chance. There are times for that, and there are times to take the shot. A lot of golden opportunities we blown because of this timid play.
-Bornstein is not the answer at left back. He’s just not good enough defensively.
-Kljestan looks horrible. He has become a liability. He can’t pass. He can’t hold. He shouldn’t play again until he gets things in order.
-Beasley. This one is just depressing.
-How the two previously mentioned players have found the field as much as they have while Torres and Adu sat on the bench is a little frustrating. Yes, they’re young. No, they don’t have much experience. But age and experience weren’t helping DaMarcus and Sacha–you have to draw the line at some point. Let the youngsters have their opportunities.
-Vuvuzelas. My proposal: let South African fans bring the monotone horns to their team’s matches, but ban them from all others. I’d hate to have to watch next summer’s tournament on mute.
OVERALL
A good showing for our boys. We played our best soccer in the end. Even though we finished 2-0-3, if you break that down into halves, we were 6-0-4–not bad considering who we played. There are a lot of lessons to take away–both positive and negative–and if our coach and team are willing to learn from this experience, we could set ourselves up for a successful campaign in next summer’s World Cup.
L’Equipe reports that Charlie Davies is moving to Ligue 1 side Sochaux. Sounds like a good move to me.
LANDON DONOVAN [MoM (2)]- Over the years, Landon has developed a reputation for disappearing in important matches. He hasn’t always seemed willing to take control of our offense, distribute the ball, and run at the oppoing team. This was not the case in the Confederations Cup. Landon was a true leader. He made the team click. Even in the games where the US was outplayed, Donovan managed to look good. American fans rejoice–Landon Donovan is starting to look like the player we all thought he could be; Landon Donovan is starting to look like a player who can lead us to success in the World Cup. No offense to Clint Dempsey, but this should have been the guy receiving the honors after the cup final.
Man of the Match: While we saw several good performances against Grenada–Stuart Holden, Freddy Adu, and Chad Marshall, to name a few–Robbie Rogers was the clear winner of this match’s honor. He ran at the Grenadan defense, provided great service, set up two goals, and scored one himself. His performance is sure to ease some worries about our depth on the left wing.
Another quick post to get the Man of the Match illustration project up to date..
Recap: Gold Cup first round
I headed over to Nevada Smith’s on Saturday night to watch the USA take on Haiti. I’ve always been a little reluctant to watch games there because it tends to attract this brand of American soccer fan that I find particularly annoying–the fan who wishes he were born English. Symptoms of this condition include: the desire to argue with anyone who uses the word “soccer”; the inability to watch an MLS game in its entirety (usually coupled with the desire to make fun of the low quality of play to anyone who will listen); the necessity to call the referee “wanker” at least once per match; etc. It took me about five minutes to realize that not only was I standing by one of these guys, but I was standing by the king of them all. Most leave it at, “Aw, dude, the ref is a total wanker!” This guy went well beyond that mere child’s play. “FAWKEEN’ELL!!” “FAHFUCKSAKE!” “FUCK OFF, MAN!!!” “FAWKEEN CUNT!” “FAWKEEN WANKAH!” His accent was so convincing, in fact, that I thought there was a chance he might even be British. Not the case. At halftime, I overheard him talking to an Englishman wearing a West Ham polo. “Aw, man, we may hate each other in six months from now [writer's note: ???], but tonight we can agree to pull for the stars and stripes.”
“Uh huh.”
“Aw, man, West Ham?! Let’s sing some West Ham songs. I know a few!”
“That wouldn’t make sense. We’re watching a USA game.”
Shot down. But our drunken compatriot didn’t leave it there. Later on in the second half, the Englishman tried (unsuccessfully) to start a “Come on you Eagles!” chant:
“Come on you Eagles! Come on you Eagles!”
[American footie fan gets within an inch of Mr. West Ham's face, sticks arms out and sings screams:]
“STEPHEN GERRARD-GERRARD!!”
This guy was amazing. He was screaming so loud, I was astonished he could muster a whisper, let alone another “FAWKEEN CUNT WANKAH!” by the end of the game. Most would have buckled, but this guy was a champ.
I know what you’re probably thinking at this point. I’m deep into a tournament recap and I’ve failed to mention a single player’s name, result, or anything of the sort. But that’s just it: after watching the last game of the group stage, the most entertaining thing I’ve seen so far were the antics of that guy at the bar.
Enough with the nonsense. Here’s the one real lesson we’ve learned from the first round: there is a monumental gulf in class between our first team and our B team. There have been some promising performances–Robbie Rogers, Stu Holden, and Chad Marshall, come to mind–but most have been totally forgettable. I know I was probably expecting too much going in, but I really thought Jay Heaps and Colin Clark could at least hold their own against Haiti. The fact that Kyle “Battlefield Earth” Beckerman–a player who has no business playing in any meaningful games for the United States–could step into that game and look decent shows just how weak this team is.
I am a fan of MLS. I appreciate everything it has done for American soccer and what it will continue to do for us in the future. But any player who is a career MLS-er is faced with a huge problem–they’ve been playing a game for their entire lives that takes place at about half the speed of international soccer. While Jay Heaps, Colin Clark, and Logan Pause struggled to keep up with the competition in the first round, even the more viable options for future call-ups–Kyle Beckerman, Luis Robles, and Michael Parkhurst (yes, the latter two are playing abroad)–were mediocre at best. (Some will point out that the first team contains MLS-based players. I would counter that these players are the few exceptions who are capable of playing in bigger leagues. Ching might be the exception to this exception, but I see him as a place-holder between the McBride and Altidore generations.)
Perhaps the gulf in class is best demonstrated by our second game against a less-than-full-strength Honduras team. What was a neutral game, arguably favoring Honduras for the first 60 minutes, was completely turned around by Benny Feilhaber (soon to be our fifth-choice center mid after the arrival of Jermaine Jones) and Charlie Davies (arguably our third-best striker). These two were clearly in another class and were able to tilt the game in our favor.
The point of this analysis is not to be alarmist. The USA has enough depth (just barely) to remain competitive, even when faced with some injuries. The point is also not to make fun of the MLS. But at the end of this competition, what we’re really looking for is a group of players who can step up and challenge for 2010 roster spots. Unfortunately, not many people have shown the ability to do that. I could see Chad Marshall displacing Danny Califf. I could see Robbie Rogers making it in as a back-up winger. Maybe–just maybe–if Adu goes another year without significant playing time, Stu Holden could sneak his way into the field of 23. Beyond that, none of the non-Confederations Cup participants (with the obvious exceptions of Cherundolo and Ching who were both injured) have shown that they’d be able to compete at the international level. I’m happy for career MLS-ers–those who have dedicated their careers to growing soccer in America–getting the chance to represent their country, but I cringe thinking of a scenario in which we’d actually have to rely on them.
Filed under: Post-Match Commentary | Tagged: gold cup, US Soccer, World Cup 2010 | 4 Comments »