By J Hutcherson – WASHINGTON, DC (June 30, 2011) US Soccer Players — There’s a television show where a celebrity chef quickly revamps a failing restaurant. There are lots of tweaks, tears, and yelling before the place is magically transformed overnight and reopened to shocked looks from the owners, staff, and customers. Yet it’s earlier in the proceedings that something regularly happens that should be of interest for those of us following American soccer.
With the restaurant in the same state it was when our hero arrives, they show him how they operate with paying customers. Now, one would assume even if they’re grabbing people off the street that any restaurant is likely to have regulars. We can also assume that at least some of these very same people probably don’t have a lot of complaints about the quality of the food, service, or experience.
Obviously, that’s not good television but stick with me while we work this towards a convenient conclusion. By entering the restaurant, at least some of these very same diners are suddenly transformed. They’re no longer the customers who probably don’t even need to look at the menu to know they’re ordering the same burger they got last week. No, they’ve become the most critical critics in the history of criticism. Items will be scrutinized, food will be sent back, and disappointment will be palpable. After all, they have expectations.
That those expectations are dependent on what amounts to an artificial situation they’re never likely to experience again – who regularly goes into a restaurant that’s about to be revamped on national television – matters not. For these gourmets this evening, only the best will do regardless of what they had for lunch.
Returning to the world of American soccer, we have a similar scenario and sometimes that even includes television camera. In the moment when expectations are highest and not met, the result is criticism. The problem for soccer and our struggling restaurateurs is the same. What’s valid criticism of a troubled product and what’s just people acting out?
US Soccer has done itself no favors by extending the opportunity for criticism to sometime “later this week.” That was USSF president Sunil Gulati’s response when asked about the future of USA coach Bob Bradley, that “we’ll have something to say later this week.” Fine, but all that does is add more days of disappointing meals for an audience that expects change.
And like our TV show example, we’ve already seen the extremes of criticism. Anybody would be better as head coach of the US National Team, the crisis is that dire (convert the whole place from American casual to tapas by tomorrow night). Gulati and the top of the USSF administration should’ve never given Bradley a second four years in charge (go back in time and hire the other chef). The player pool is the issue (change the ingredient supplier). The strategy is stale (change the menu). The US Soccer leadership isn’t decisive enough (the restaurant owner should’ve sacked the whole staff years ago).
On and on it goes, with perfectly reasonable and supportable criticisms lumped in with hard to defend shots at the program, personal animosity directed at the current coach and Federation leadership, and the same leaps that turn someone at least satisfied with what’s on offer to an angry consumer.
Again, fair enough all the way around but what does it really mean? For some, the only solution for the US National Team is new leadership, a new coach, and new players. It’s the old scenario where you might get one of the three and eventually all of them, but it’s not likely to happen on your schedule. That’s the problem here, it’s one of timing.
US Soccer extending the reflection period is the equivalent of opening the doors to that restaurant when we all know it’s going to undergo an overnight revamp. The expectation is never going to be met. The service staff isn’t going to suddenly snap too. The food isn’t going to satisfy. The results are going to disappoint. Except US Soccer was already in this period of open criticism before the start of the Gold Cup. The Spain friendly already had those with an interest ready to go.
The National Team has had days turning into weeks of disappointment. Nothing has been good enough in the moment or in retrospect, and this is the end result. Unfortunately for those wanting that overnight revamp, it’s not likely to happen.
Should Gulati decide on a new coach within a week of losing to Mexico in that Gold Cup final, what does it really show?
For some, it’s proof that Gulati can be decisive. But we know that already and we have a clear example. Two actually. He didn’t rehire Bruce Arena for a third World Cup cycle and he also didn’t hire Jurgen Klinsmann reportedly over control issues. Though you can argue against both decisions, they can’t easily be dismissed as indecisiveness.
For others, it’s at least a tacit admission that things have gone badly wrong. That’s also tough, with the USA on a lengthy run of salvaging tournaments where they’ve underperformed. That’s the story of the Gold Cup for a lot of people, and fair enough. Yet it’s nothing new, nothing we haven’t seen, and nothing this team hasn’t shown itself capable of handling. After all, they slipped in the group stage and still made the final.
That might be the biggest item on a troubled menu, the status quo sticking put through another World Cup cycle. Again though, it’s at least worth considering what that means in practice rather than theory. For most, it’s the slight embarrassment at last Summer’s euphoria on getting into, and ultimately losing, a knockout World Cup game against Ghana. But that’s the whole point of the World Cup and soccer at that level. The national media has once again realized the US loses competitive soccer games to countries with smaller populations than some US states. Yes, and? They don’t go ahead and award the trophy based on population and China and India don’t dominate world soccer.
Ah, but I’m playing with expectations here. Those countries don’t have the resources of the United States, even when they’re rarely focused on turning elite youth athletes into professional soccer players. Were that to change, it’s still a generational shift that will take longer than the tenure of most National Team coaches to have much of an impact.
Returning to where we started, if the US National Team is our troubled restaurant in dire need of a revamp, it can’t and won’t be everything. It probably won’t even be most things. Player identification at this level is so easy most of us could do it. Aside from established professionals with dual citizenship, there are very rarely players completely out of the picture who can come in and have a mid-to-long-term impact at National Team level. The pool isn’t that wide and certainly not that deep.
Should Gulati decide that there needs to be a coaching change, the next guy isn’t going to suddenly discover the answers were already in that pool. Tweaks? Probably. Adapting a setup to highlight the positions the elite players play at club level? One would hope so. A completely new menu with all involved able to produce it on demand? Maybe, but it’s not going to happen overnight.
Comments, questions, solutions to problems that have yet to present themselves. Please, tell me all about it.
