I don't want to re-fight all the old USMNT fan wars about Michael Bradley, but I have to say this-when he was first started getting caps for the nats I thought he was clearly the beneficiary of nepotism/favoritism (I think Bruce gave him his first caps, since Bob was his long-time assistant), because you could see potential, but he also clearly didn't belong on the field in the beginning. To his credit, he made the most of his opportunity, and translated those early, undeserved starts into the foundation of a very solid career, showing his comfort on the field at an age where his peers were just breaking in to the team; I was quite happy to see him as a "lock" starter, because he deserved it at that point. And then I think he started buying in to the hype that the US Soccer press made about him (or perhaps got lazy?), and his play on the field started to decline much earlier than a top-tier player's really should, he stopped pushing himself, and came back to MLS and Toronto FC for the payday (which I can't begrudge at all), and his play started declining further, to the point where towards the end of his USMNT career he was often the worst player on the field and I hated seeing his name in the lineup.
TL;DR Michael Bradley didn't deserve his early or late USMNT starts during his career, but his peak years were excellent, though still overrated by the US press.
