OT: Boneyard "Other Football" World Cup Thread

[UCFBfan]

Anyway, Germany or Brazil today? I won’t be able to watch the game live myself as I will be on a train during most of the game heading to play a game myself unless Mother Nature lights up the sky again like she did last week.

I think Germany wins and Brazil citizens burn the country down.....it's not going to be pretty when/if they lose

 

[Waquoit]

By the way, Carl, you would have loved Bora Milutinovic (in my opinion, our greatest coach in the history of the national team). ...
Milutinović left no doubts about who ran the team, cutting two U.S. players, Peter Vermes and Desmond Armstrong, board members of the national federation, from his World Cup team. Milutinović further cut Bruce Murray, the all-time leading U.S. goal scorer.

How much crap did Bora get for cutting the all-time leading scorer as well as those other infuential players? I don't remember much, especially after getting through the group stage.

 

[Carl Spackler]

By the way, Carl, you would have loved Bora Milutinovic (in my opinion, our greatest coach in the history of the national team). And he had done some things that we are all arguing about today (although I'd be hard pressed to consider Vermes or Murray anywhere near Donovan's level). The best part was when he told Lalas to get a haircut or leave, which Lalas clearly didn't do (see pic below from 1994 WC):

Bora Milutinovic:
United States (1991-95)[edit]
Hank Steinbrecher, general secretary of the U.S. Soccer Federation, conducted the job interviews for the U.S. national team head coach position. American coaches had not proved their worth on the international stage, as the United States had lost all three games in the 1990 World Cup finals under Bob Gansler. When the USSF's search began in 1991, the emphasis was not so much on experience, but on finding a coach who could squeeze the last drop of potential out of a lightly regarded team, and Milutinović's name came up again and again.[4] He had coached first Mexico, then Costa Rica to surprising World Cup success.

Milutinović left no doubts about who ran the team, cutting two U.S. players, Peter Vermes and Desmond Armstrong, board members of the national federation, from his World Cup team. Milutinović further cut Bruce Murray, the all-time leading U.S. goal scorer. When Alexi Lalas first showed up at training camp, Milutinović told him to get a haircut or get off the team.[3]

Milutinović coached the United States national team at the 1994 World Cup, held in the U.S. In the 1994 WC, the U.S. team notched its first win in the World Cup since 1950, and progressed to the knockout round of the tournament for the first time since the 1930s.

The USSF fired Bora Milutinović on April 14, 1995, saying it wanted someone who could be both coach and administrator. Milutinović reportedly wanted no part of the administrative duties.[5]

USA soccer and UCONN football. Both have a very long history, and very few people know anything about it, other than the recent past, which involves the most successful periods. I'm hopeful that Bob Diaco can develop into the kind of face of a successful program that Klinsmann has done. Our 2014 season starts in 51 days.

 

[Carl Spackler]

How much crap did Bora get for cutting the all-time leading scorer as well as those other infuential players? I don't remember much, especially after getting through the group stage.

I don't know. I'm sure somebody complained loudly, but not many people heard.

 

[whaler11]

Constant repetition doesn't make something true. We get it, you just don't like Klinsmann on a personal level. Why else would you be riding this horse so long and so hard? In the past, you never seemed like much of a water carrier for soft players. Yet you've been answering every percieved slight to LD like upstater defending JoePa.

I don't really have a problem with JK. I think he's getting too much credit for what they did at this World Cup, and I think the actual accomplishment isn't as great as it's being made out to be.

Was it good to get out of the group? Yes, of course. Was the group as difficult as it was made going into the tournament? Nope.

If you read the conversation it's the strongest JK supporters who won't let the Donovan talk die.

 

[SubbaBub]

Your first point, I disagree with. Bradley, Arena,...even Milutinovic, they all believed that performance mattered above all else. This isn't something that is unique to Klinsmann as the USA coach.

Your second point, I agree with. USA soccer is, in my opinion, at the highest level that it has ever been. JK is definitely the right coach for us...

Hmmm..personally I think 2009 was the peak, before Davies car accident. It was the last time I recall the US "taking it" to a quality opponent. We didn't take it to anyone this year, outside of Yedlin's run v. Portgual. This young group has some interesting pieces, and the fact that most are defenders is an upgrade in skill we haven't seen before.

Problem is that at center midfielder (will Bradley and Mix be at international level in 4 years) is thin, and striker is non-existant.

We've always had wing players because we never ask them to do more than run, cross, and defend. But, goals come through the spine. We have no clear spine going forward. Couldn't really move through the middle in the WC, either.

 

[whaler11]

Klinsmann is a German, even though he's been married to an American and living in the U.S. since retiring as a player, he hasn't shaken his German culture and I actually hope he doesn't. Explain that in a sec. He is a professional at the highest level in his field, and he brings a competitive attitude to sport that is undeniable. There is way too much pussification of American society and how sports culture evolves is a big part of it IMO. Klinsmann has remarkably been able to establish a clear attitude that winning and performance matters above all else. Never in a million years would I have thought that soccer could be the sport to make that kind of step in American culture, I hope that people continue to follow the USA national team after this world cup, and that they continue to win the way that they have won over the past few years. Klinsmann's record with the program since 2012 is 37-11-11, with the longest win streak in USA history, a Gold Cup win (whatever that is) and what appears to be a good argument to be the best ever performance in a World Cup for the USA. he's had teams perform and win internationally on the road in places they've never won before. He's assembled a roster that is deep and young. He's not infalliable, but from my outside perspective, it appears to me that in the few years he's been in charge, his record speaks for itself in that USA soccer doesn't appear to ever have been better. If the team continues to win regularly and 37 wins, 11 ties and 11 losses is a pretty good win percentage....and gets the ESPN media empire pushing it - there is no doubt that it will continue to grow in following, especially youth that actually play the sport. ANd that's why I don't want Klinsmann to ever change his attitude and approach in public when talking about players, performance, and competition. Becuase reality is that things aren't fair and equal all the time, and winners advance and losers don't.

Speaking directly and the truth, is part of German culture - especially business. It's often perceived as arrogance, and can be very annoying and abrasive to other cultures - Asians - Japanese in particular, can be very offended by how Germans speak and behave regarding speaking about people and products and evaluations. it's shown up here in the USA too, and I hope he doesn't change, because the way he approaches his comments and evaluations in the public, is representative of that competitive attitude that not all is equal and fair, all the time, and winning is important.

Klinsmann's comments about Kobe Bryant's contract - are direct, and the truth. There is no arguing what he said about Kobe, and his contract situation, only trying to rationalize why what he said, is so. Maybe it makes sense to some, maybe it doesn;t, but it's the truth. Klinsmann's comments about Donovan - same thing. Klinsmann's comments about Tim Howard's world cup saves record? Same thing. The team lost. He did his job. As noted, klinsmann has made it clear elsewhere, that he thinks Tim Howard is among the very best goalies in the world. Why should he fluff his record after getting eliminated from the World Cup?

That's the same attitude as the old saying among doctors that the surgery was a success but the patient died.

The USA is out, and I don't really care about the rest of the World Cup. I will look forward to when the next time the USA plays - hopefully it will be out front on national TV on ESPN in a good viewing slot.

Do you think Klinsmann is the first person to make the connection about American professional sports and overpaying veterans? Is there anyone who doesn't know this?

 

[whaler11]

Klinsmann is certainly not infallible. I never said he was. I don't watch much soccer other than on the International level (yet) and I only know what I see and what is said. I know that Donovan is the highest scoring player in US soccer history, but that is exactly that. When it comes to building a team, Klinsmann has a plan in mind and his players were apparently to have certain attributes. I defer to his expertise over my own (and frankly most other posters on this board) in fitting those pieces together.

At the end of the day, I do not believe that Donovan was not on the WC team mostly because of personal conflict just as you don't believe it was mostly because of fitness. The answer certainly lies somewhere in the middle but when the player himself says he may not be able to train as required, I'll tend to err toward fitness.

Regarding, his comment on Tim Howard, did you see the spot where Klinsmann named Howard one of the three best keepers in the premier league and one of the five best in the world? Perhaps Howard was "doing his job" because Klinsmann has those high expectations of him. Be that as it may, I tend to think Howard knows where he stands with Klinsmann.

Perhaps I'm not blown away by JK's performance because I had higher expectations for the team than getting bulldozed by a Belgium team that got taken apart in pieces by Argentina?

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

I'm not blaming him for doing it - where do you think his attitude towards Donovan comes from? Donovan is hanging around the U17 team?

He's a young human being. Where do any of their attitudes come from? Their endless sense of self-entitlement? Smugness? Naive invincibility? Have you ever talked to an 18 year old with a good attitude?

 

[ZooCougar]

Landycakes met his Waterloo when JK cut him. And it was kind of overdue.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

Perhaps I'm not blown away by JK's performance because I had higher expectations for the team than getting bulldozed by a Belgium team that got taken apart in pieces by Argentina?

Argentina > Belgium (who btw hadn't lost a match in something crazy like 20 matches before Argentina) > US.

This is common knowledge.

 

[SAMCRO]

Hmmm..personally I think 2009 was the peak, before Davies car accident.

I forgot about that accident. So tragic (I believe a few lives were lost in it, if memory serves correct) and essentially ended his career while being a big blow to US soccer just before the 2010 WC. Very sad. That, along with Holden breaking his leg on that awful tackle by Evans in 2011 really impacted/ended the careers of two very promising and young US players. Holden was close to returning until reinjuring v. Paname last year.

 

[whaler11]

Argentina > Belgium (who btw hadn't lost a match in something crazy like 20 matches before Argentina) > US.

This is common knowledge.

Oh wow thanks for letting me know that Argentina is better than Belgium. Very handy I didn't possess that common knowledge.

 

[whaler11]

He's a young human being. Where do any of their attitudes come from? Their endless sense of self-entitlement? Smugness? Naive invincibility? Have you ever talked to an 18 year old with a good attitude?

LOL it was just a happy coincidence. You used the right word there (naive) but applied it to the wrong people.

 

[Husky25]

Perhaps I'm not blown away by JK's performance because I had higher expectations for the team than getting bulldozed by a Belgium team that got taken apart in pieces by Argentina?

So you were under the impression that the US should have won in a walk? If I remember correctly, the US was heavy underdogs and missing one of their major offensive weapons to injury; An unpredictable injury that occurred after the roster was set. The back four were a question mark defensively from well before the World Cup and Klinsmann didn't allow all those shots on goal vs. Belgium. The 1 goal in 3 tune up games was quite misleading. The US was not as good defensively as they let on were not (as neither are many other teams, quite frankly) set up to sit on a lead for 75 minutes, let alone 89. Though it was an early letdown. The best thing that could have happened vs. Portugal was to go down 1-0 early. That way, the defense was not as exposed.

I thought the US exceeded expectations, but I do not know how the team sets up going forward. The back line is young, but I'd like them to play a little more defensive. Altidore will certainly be back. He has 2, maybe 3, WCs left, as does Johannson. I expect Dempsey to play at least the first part of qualification and quite possibly be a late game sub in 2018. Boyd seems to be primed to advance. The larger questions I see for the US going forward is procuring a capable keeper (Howard will be 39) and in the midfield. I liked the more aggressive overall style, but this was not their best tournament. Particularly Michael Bradley, who I always thought looked like Calliou, but never did I think he would make as many mistakes (If you're not a parent or grandparent of a toddler, I fully understand if you don't get that joke).

 

[whaler11]

So you were under the impression that the US should have won in a walk? If I remember correctly, the US was heavy underdogs and missing one of their major offensive weapons to injury; An unpredictable injury that occurred after the roster was set. The back four were a question mark defensively from well before the World Cup and Klinsmann didn't allow all those shots on goal vs. Belgium. The 1 goal in 3 tune up games was quite misleading. The US was not as good defensively as they let on were not (as neither are many other teams, quite frankly) set up to sit on a lead for 75 minutes, let alone 89. Though it was an early letdown. The best thing that could have happened vs. Portugal was to go down 1-0 early. That way, the defense was not as exposed.

I thought the US exceeded expectations, but I do not know how the team sets up going forward. The back line is young, but I'd like them to play a little more defensive. Altidore will certainly be back. He has 2, maybe 3, WCs left, as does Johannson. I expect Dempsey to play at least the first part of qualification and quite possibly be a late game sub in 2018. Boyd seems to be primed to advance. The larger questions I see for the US going forward is procuring a capable keeper (Howard will be 39) and in the midfield. I liked the more aggressive overall style, but this was not their best tournament. Particularly Michael Bradley, who I always thought looked like Calliou, but never did I think he would make as many mistakes (If you're not a parent or grandparent of a toddler, I fully understand if you don't get that joke).

Yes because I didn't expect to be outshot 93-7 I thought the US should win in a walk. There is certainly nothing between what happened and the US winning in a walk.

 

[Husky25]

Yes because I didn't expect to be outshot 93-7 I thought the US should win in a walk. There is certainly nothing between what happened and the US winning in a walk.

Well it wasn't quite that bad and the US had multiple opportunities to win/tie late in the game. Given the nature of the sport, luck and fortune allow a team who has otherwise been outplayed to win the game.

 

[UConnDan97]

How much crap did Bora get for cutting the all-time leading scorer as well as those other infuential players? I don't remember much, especially after getting through the group stage.

I don't think he caught any crap at the time, but consider how the environment has changed since then.

1) Neither player was a star player, even by reduced US standards. Vermes was perhaps more of a shock, but not much of one.
2) Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, was expecting us to do anything in '94, especially after we did so little in '90. Bora literally squeezed blood from a stone, and we were inches away from knocking off the world champs, Brazil.
3) The media coverage in '94, even on our own home soil, didn't quite have the buildup to the tournament like this one had. I feel like we have been talking about the Group of Death for a decade now. Back then, the audience wasn't quite there either.

Still, I'll never forget what Bora did for the growth of the national team. Growth that Sampson almost single-handedly un-did...

 

[UConnDan97]

Hmmm..personally I think 2009 was the peak, before Davies car accident. It was the last time I recall the US "taking it" to a quality opponent. We didn't take it to anyone this year, outside of Yedlin's run v. Portgual. This young group has some interesting pieces, and the fact that most are defenders is an upgrade in skill we haven't seen before.

Problem is that at center midfielder (will Bradley and Mix be at international level in 4 years) is thin, and striker is non-existant.

We've always had wing players because we never ask them to do more than run, cross, and defend. But, goals come through the spine. We have no clear spine going forward. Couldn't really move through the middle in the WC, either.

It's a good point. You had Donovan and Dempsey at the prime of their careers. Bradley wasn't as good as he is today, but still good. I still think that the back line then was not better than today, even with names like Spector, DeMerit, and Onyewu. Bocanegra was on the downslide by that point. And we were forced to use lesser players like Ricardo Clark and Sasha Kljestan.

But...that WAS the team that beat Spain 2-0 in the Confed Cup, at the height of Spanish dominance, so the point is still valid...

 

[ZooCougar]

The value (in Euros) of Belgium's best 11:

http://www.givemesport.com/338772-belgium-most-valuable-xi

Anyone care to tally up the value of the US's best 11?

 

[ZooCougar]

It's a good point. You had Donovan and Dempsey at the prime of their careers. Bradley wasn't as good as he is today, but still good. I still think that the back line then was not better than today, even with names like Spector, DeMerit, and Onyewu. Bocanegra was on the downslide by that point. And we were forced to use lesser players like Ricardo Clark and Sasha Kljestan.

But...that WAS the team that beat Spain 2-0 in the Confed Cup, at the height of Spanish dominance, so the point is still valid...

Back line is the best it has ever been, even without Gooch and Bocanegra. Beasley had a huge World Cup for us, it seems like he has been on the squad for 20 years.

 

[UConnDan97]

Back line is the best it has ever been, even without Gooch and Bocanegra. Beasley had a huge World Cup for us, it seems like he has been on the squad for 20 years.

That's what I was arguing. I didn't like the backline in 2009. I thought that Gooch was severely overrated (which I believe time has shown to be true). I couldn't stand watching Bornstein at left back, as it would cause my left eye to hemorrhage at the sheer sight of it! Spector was a guy that had promise but never really turned out. DeMerit was what he was, which was just serviceable.

I love Beasley in that position. I've argued for him to be there for three coaches worth! (I always imagined him playing like a poor-man's Cafu, which is not a slight, by the way). I'm glad JK had the sense to make that move, where Bradley and Arena didn't. Jonathan Bornstein, for !!!

 

[Carl Spackler]

It's a good point. You had Donovan and Dempsey at the prime of their careers. Bradley wasn't as good as he is today, but still good. I still think that the back line then was not better than today, even with names like Spector, DeMerit, and Onyewu. Bocanegra was on the downslide by that point. And we were forced to use lesser players like Ricardo Clark and Sasha Kljestan.

But...that WAS the team that beat Spain 2-0 in the Confed Cup, at the height of Spanish dominance, so the point is still valid...

Peaks and ceilings and stuff - interesting to me. I found this - not sure if it's accurate, I think the 2014 numbers for Klinsmann aren't accurate up to date, I read earlier today that he is 37-11-11 as coach, but I'm too lazy to look for that source again, this one is fine for my point - assuming the numbers are at least close to reality. There are clear trends here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_men's_national_soccer_team_managers

First thing to glare at me, is that from 1916-1976, there was no single coach for the USA national team that went more than 10 games as head coach. Others around here I'm sure are better versed, but my gut tells me, that similar to oval football, round football success is closely related to consistency in direction and leadership. Not surprising in the least that there was no world cup for USA soccer all that time.

Next thing that jumps to me, is that since we've started having head coaches that have lasted for any significant amount of time, we have been qualified for the World Cup tournament in every 4 year period since 1990. Seven times.

That tells me, that the USA can produce rosters that are capable of competiting at the World Cup level, as long as they have a leadership in place that has a plan and sticks with it. I've thought all along that the USA should ahve no difficulty really with producing athletes that can compete, even with the diversity in sport and skill level problems. The sheer numbers are enough, among the millions of potential athletes, to be able to get 23 players that can compete.

Elsewhere Jimmy S was lamenting our foreign players. It seems to me, that Klinsmann has just come in with a very specific recruiting plan, to get a competitive team now, to build on for the future. that involves targeting US citizenship players that have grown up playing the game overseas, primarily in european countries. makes sense, since that's where he's from. Bob Diaco seems to have a pretty good plan of targeting and specific player profile, to recruit in a region of the world where he is familiar with the game. Nothing surprising there. My guess is that if we had an African-American coach, or a South American coach, that coach might very well follow the same kind of plan. I know literally nothing about the prior the coaches, and what they did to build and develop rosters, but it makes sense that there would be a peak in performance around 2009-2010.

At that point in time, the USA had played approximately 210 games under only 2 coaches, had won approximately 105 games to 55 losses and competed in consecutive world cups for several years under those two coaches. Arena and Bradley - by contrast from 1916 until Dan's favorite Bora - the USA apparently has played approximately the same number of games with about 30 different coaches.

Consistency alone, in coaching seems to be enough to make the USA competitive enough in building a roster that can qualify for the World Cup. I bet there are other countries around the world, that don't have the same ability. It's sheer numbers of population in the USA I think.

The question I have, is if these numbers are accuarte, it seems that scheduling games is something weird happening. Why are there so many more games scheduled under Arena and Bradly and now with Klinsmann as compared to teh past? Who sets up the national team schedule? Seems to me, that with more opportunity to play, which means more time to practice, means more time to recruit and evaluate players, and makes a team better.

Anyhoo, its certainly argueable that USA soccer is at the highest point now it's ever been, or if it did peak before. Perhaps it did hit a peak before, I don't know. I do know that the farthest the team has advanced in the WC was in 2002 right? 2014 seems argueably more difficult of a tournament based on matchups, but that's all subjective. It would seem that the best the USA has done to date internationally was 12 years ago.

The clear thing I see, is that with 7 consecutive world cups now, the expectations to be there at the world cup, should be starting to get ingrained - like UCONN in basketball tournament.

It's got to become a thing about advancing and winning now, that's where things need to shift - and I think it's pretty clear that under Klinsmann's direction, the expectations to not just be there, but advance have been established. You even got Whaler talking about the team failed to meet his expectations, after getting past the group stage and facing that Belgium team.

had the USA beat Belgium and advanced, that level of expectation change, to have been there in the first place and advancing, would not be affected.

What remains now, is what happens with the program moving forward, toward the next tournament. Qualifying - and getting out of the group stage, isn't, and shouldn't be good enough anymore. I don't see how that can happen if they are only playing 5-7 games a year which seems to be the case up through the early 1990s. Which brings me back around again, to scheduling? Under Arena and Bradley, we seem to have been playing 16-17 games a year on average. If the USA team is playing regularly every few weeks, and is on TV and being pushed by ESPN, with a leader like Klinsmann, I can see the thing exploding - but they got to playing and winning and have the media coverage.

 

[ZooCougar]

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mlh45eidf/10-russia/

Top 10 most valuable WC teams. The US played three of them in the WC. Ghana wasn't one of them.

 

[ZooCougar]

That's what I was arguing. I didn't like the backline in 2009. I thought that Gooch was severely overrated (which I believe time has shown to be true). I couldn't stand watching Bornstein at left back, as it would cause my left eye to hemorrhage at the sheer sight of it! Spector was a guy that had promise but never really turned out. DeMerit was what he was, which was just serviceable.

I love Beasley in that position. I've argued for him to be there for three coaches worth! (I always imagined him playing like a poor-man's Cafu, which is not a slight, by the way). I'm glad JK had the sense to make that move, where Bradley and Arena didn't. Jonathan Bornstein, for !!!

Manchester United was high on Spector. But he's playing somewhere in the NASL now.