Note from JD: My reaction will be coming soon, but first up to the plate is MFUSA contributor Dan Barkley.



It has been a bit of an open debate here and on the American Soccer Show whether or not the USMNT coaching job is a high-profile position.I agree with a lot of people, it seems, when I say it is somewhere in the middle tier of the National Team positions, and probably at the lower end, behind such countries as Mexico, Russia, Turkey and so on. With the news of Bob Bradley getting another cycle, my opinion of the resigning has less to do with Bradley and more to do with that, in my opinion, the position itself is not desirable.


When I say not desirable, I have to emphasize that I think this is the case for this cycle, and will only improve. In the aftermath of the World Cup we talked about how big the response was in the States, the National Team is now fully in the public's mind. We can debate whether the fans will stay with the team during the Gold Cup, WC qualifying, or watch club soccer, but there's no reason to think we won't see similar viewership in 2014. Along with the fans comes expectations, which will be even higher after a good, if not great, performance in South Africa. So we have a large fan base, certainly used to winning in most sports, with high hopes making this a high pressure job.


Unfortunately, I'm not confident that the USMNT gives quite enough benefits to make up for that pressure. The most glaring weakness is the talent pool. We've noted that the MLS academies are starting to bear fruit, which is fantastic news. But that they are just beginning to produce puts the structure of US soccer so far behind other countries that might have comparable levels of pressure. The best news is that every year this situation should improve, and is one of my biggest sources of optimism for the future. For the very near future, however, we still have a weakness. It's been mentioned that one of the potential advantages of hiring Klinsmann would be his familiarity with the US soccer structure, it's reasonable to think that to most other (foreign) coaches, their unfamiliarity would be a big disadvantage.


There are also questions on the style of play, where the USMNT plays to their size, strength and speed, and trying to avoid exposing their perceived lack of skill on the ball. Would a coach from completely different style of soccer be willing to completely rework the USMNT's style? Certainly some would, but it would seem more desirable to take a team with skills more compatible with their philosophy. Unfortunately, this is exactly the reason I want to see a foreign coach running the national team soon, to change that philosophy.


There is also the question of money. Does the USSF have the money available to pay a competitive salary to the caliber of coach they want? I don't know enough about the finances of USSF in comparison to other Federations, but it seems that they don't have the financial might that others of a similar level might have.


All of this, to me, makes for an undesirable job. Sure, there is the opportunity to break the USMNT into that top tier of programs, but I think they're still a couple cycles away. Once the academies are all up and running, for long enough for a 'national' style can be cultivated on some level, then the US will have the talent that will make the position great. A few more years of MLS's slow, steady growth should provide a strong fan base and perhaps more financial clout for USSF.


What does this mean for the Bradley extension? Bradley exceeded expectations in his cycle, and except for those few mind-numbing line-up decisions, had a good World Cup. Along with a good showing in the Confederation's Cup, with his masterful strategy against Spain, I think he has done enough to warrant the extension. Clearly there are names we would all prefer. But at this point, what the USSF would have to give up, whether it be money or control, to get a big name would be overpaying. With an American coach like Bradley, there's a lot of value in the pick, both from the desire to represent country and familiarity with the system.


Personally, I might have been happier with another American (Kinnear), since I think two cycles is not easy on a coach. That being said, if this was the decision process, I applaud USSF for getting a good value in a coach, rather than overpaying for a coach who recognizes the current disadvantages of the position.