- Ben McCormick

Juergen Klinsmann came to the US National Team with some big ideas. He preached patience, saying he was going to need time to experiment with several different kinds of lineups, formations and tactics. If given time, he justified, he would find the right combination of players to play an attacking style of soccer that was uniquely American.

Then what’s all this “we don’t want to shake up the core structure of the team too much” crap?

Three matches into his USMNT managerial tenure, Klinsi has already found the core of his squad. Through five matches, Klinsmann has capped a total of 26 players with only Danny Williams earning his first ever cap for the US national team. Bob Bradley capped 37 different players in just his first four matches.

For someone who seemed to be preaching sweeping changes, a lot seems to be staying the same. While we continue to see many of the same old faces, young guns like Mix Diskerud, and Josh Gatt can’t even get a sniff of camp.

Logically, all three fit the Klinsmann call-up criteria: starting every week for their clubs at a respectable level. Josh Gatt is first XI for the soon-to-be Norwegian champions and Diskerud has amassed 75 appearances for Stabek in Norway since his first team career started in 2008, becoming one of Stabek’s most important cogs. Diskerud and Gatt also are rumored to have clubs in the very best European leagues after them

So what gives, Juergen? These players play at positions with anything but certainty when it comes to the USMNT, so why aren’t they getting their chance?

At first instinct, you might say Klinsmann doesn’t value youth. Not true. To the contrary, Klinsmann loves youth in his squads. 11 of Klinsmann’s German 23 man roster for the 2006  World Cup were age 25 or younger.  Also, on his scouting trip to Germany last month, he took time out to observe and talk to Joe Gyau and Charles Renken, two American youth players at Hoffenheim. Simply, he certainly does not shy away from young players.

When Klisnmann was hired, he said he would establish a new soccer culture. He’s European-ized things about the national team like assigning the starters numbers 1-11 or putting his initials on his coaching clothing. Aside from the fashion changes, though, the biggest change Klinsmann is trying to hard wire into the new American soccer culture is the vitality of the youth national team system.

It’s no secret Klinsmann spearheaded the effort to streamline and invest in the German youth national teams during his time as the German manager. Such efforts on his part resulted in players like Thomas Muller making near-seamless transitions into the full national team. Based on these successes, I pose he’s making a similar effort in the United States.

Skeptical? Wondering why he would spend so much time on the youth teams when the senior team is reeling? You’re in good company. Here’s my best attempt at justifying investing in youth.

The obvious first question to ask is, “why is investing in the youth system important to the full national team?” Let’s take Spain for example. Within 14 months, Spain won the World Cup, the U-21 EURO and U-19 EURO tournaments.  Needless to say, they’re a shining example of what a youth program should be about.

Having said all that, try and guess how many members of Spain’s World Cup winning squad never made an appearance for a youth national team. Go on, guess.

I give up. Zero. Not a single member of their World Cup winning squad went without making an appearance for a youth national team. In fact, the average number of youth national team levels represented by a player on Spain’s World Cup team was 3.5.  Andres Iniesta represented a team-high seven levels followed by Iker Casillas and Fernando Torres with six. Gerard Pique, Xavi Hernandez, Juan Mata and David Silva follow up with 5 and three others have represented four levels.

What’s the largest number of levels a 2010 US World Cup player represented? Three. Landon Donovan, DaMarcus Beasley, Jonathan Spector and Jozy Altidore played at the U-17, U-20 and U-23 levels. A quarter of the US roster never appeared for any youth national team. Putting that in perspective, only a quarter of Spain’s World Cup roster appeared at less than three youth levels. Four players represented one level and two represented two levels.

There are many excuses for this disparity. The size of the United States makes identifying top talent at the U-15 and U-17 levels extremely difficult. Additionally, Spain has eight total youth levels players can represent whereas the US only has five. It’s unreasonable to expect Klinsmann to establish new youth national team levels, but he can do our YNT system a big favor by synchronizing those levels. This means, ideally, once a player ages out of or becomes too talented for one level, they can transfer into the next level seamlessly.

All of Spain’s youth teams play a similar style, making that transition easier for players. This concept is severely lacking in the US. Since Bob Bradley was hired as national team manger (and arguably before that during the Bruce Arena era), the United States have played a defensive 4-4-2 style with the full national team, attempted Dutch total football at the U-20 level and played a Latin-American 4-3-3 style at the U-17 level, all at the same time.

Given Klinsmann’s sweeping changes to the playing style of the full national team, it’s easy to understand the attraction of calling up a young player who has already gone through the growing pains his new system rather than bringing in a new player who is entirely unfamiliar with it, making a synchronized youth system all the more alluring.

On that same note, the common denominator between the 2010 Spain and US World Cup rosters is the players who represented the most YNT levels appear to be among the best the national team has to offer. Sure, some players are late bloomers (Maurice Edu) or come out of nowhere (Jay DeMerit). Heck, David Villa played at just one level of the Spanish YNT system, but the point remains largely the same, exposure to the same system from an early age produces the best players. Remember, Iker Casillas, Fernando Torres and Andres Iniesta lead Spain in levels represented and Landon Donovan, Jozy Altidore and DaMarcus Beasley lead the US.

With the rumors of Caleb Porter’s hiring as the U-23 manager and Tab Ramos as the U-20 manager with a possible U-18 appointment still on the way, Klinsmann appears to be starting the process of synchronizing the US Soccer system. Like Klinsmann, Ramos and Porter favor attacking styles with emphasis on possession.

Guys like Diskerud and Gatt may not be snubbed by Klinsmann at the full national team level because of lack of skill or whatever other excuse there is, but rather he wants talent at his youth levels. Give Gatt and Diskerud two or three camps at the U-23 level and watch them transition into the full national team like they’d been there the entire time.

With the full national team, Klinsmann is trying to teach an old dog new tricks, and he knows it. Trying to get players already in their mid-20s or early 30s to play a style unfamiliar to them is like pulling teeth. Where Klinsmann is likely to leave his indelible mark on US Soccer is in introducing the new system to players as early as possible in their careers through the youth national teams.

So instead of lumping Gatt and Diskerud in with the old guard, Klinsmann may well be saving them to learn the new system along with the other young, promising and talented Americans. Don’t be surprised to see guys like Juan Agudelo or in some cases Tim Chandler, Jozy Altidore and Brek Shea go to U-23 camps when there is a full national team camp going on. This way, he can bring the youth through all at once after the Olympics, all entrenched in the system and ready to contribute to his style.

All of this requires a tremendous amount of the patience Klinsmann asked for when he was named manager of the USMNT. Given the track record of success for those countries who commit to the youth national team system, I’ll grant him that patience.

--

By Jason Kuenle

Over the weekend, Jason Davis and Jared DuBois discussed the merits of having the Spain match three days before the start of the Gold Cup on The American Soccer Show. In doing so, they inspired my Devil’s Advocate side. In reflecting on what Spain brought to the table and what possible benefit it could have on for a US team in preparation for the Gold Cup, I was left with this thought; more than anything, playing Spain was a test of decision making. In that view, the match is much more than the throw away friendly or, more cynically, money grab that many have claimed it to be.

Taking stock of this World Cup is not a simple exercise for me. There are two strands of thought running through my head, and keeping them from tangling isn't easy. The direct obsession with the U.S. National Team and the disappointing end of their run means the rest of the tournament was an exercise in detached observation. Was I interested? Sure. But to say I was heartily enthusiastic about it would be wrong.


This leads to today, when empty kegs (because the World Cup is definitely kegger - Sepp does a mean keg stand), half-crushed Solo cups, floaters, cast aside vuvuzelas, and other sundry garbage litter the soccer landscape and everyone who gives a damn is casting their aspersions on the tournament itself (it sucked, clearly). If not a negative take on the World Cup itself, it's a negative take on the people who had a negative take on the World Cup. I almost feel obligated to give a negative take on the people with a negative take of the people with a negative take.


If I could keep all that straight on a Monday morning, I just might. I'm certainly turned off by all the hate, no matter who or what is the particular focus. There's an air of elitism to it all, as if by labeling this particular World Cup "poor" it proves the footy pallet of the hater is refined and sophisticated. I-have-a-blog-and-watch-a-lot-of-soccer-and-this-was-terrible-itis, or something less convoluted, exceeded only by the haughtiness of people intent on setting soccer above the "North American" fray by lecturing on how this tournament's value is above the heads of the casual sports fan. Spare me, on both counts.


No, it wasn't an overly riveting tournament. There were uplifting moments, solid performances, dramatic goals and mild surprises, but those are mostly outweighed by officiating blunders, stars coming up dim when it counted most, cynical play and defensive postures carrying many a day, and a final that contained all of those negatives. In fact, in microcosm, Spain 1, Holland 0 with everything that happened over the course of 120 minutes seems just about right in light of what occurred over the past 30 days. Not that there's any comfort in that for those of us who had no rooting interest.


When the hopes accumulated over the course of four long years, both for the glory of our particular team and for a compeition that perfectly encapsulates everything we love about the sport, are thrust upon a short tournament, the potential for disappointment is massive. When the tournament happens during a period of strategic thinking dominated by negative tactics, the entertainment value is guaranteed to be lacking. We want the World Cup to be different from everything else going on in the footballing world; instead, it simply reflects it, compacts it, and parades it for the planet to see.


Spain are deserving champions. They scored less than we had hoped they would, but they resolutely played their style, made their own luck, and grittily soldiered through team after team (minus Switzerland, of course) determined to wall the Spaniards off with no regard for their own attack. The world was hating on Spain, and La Furia Roja played them all. That is what champions do.


It's unfortunate then, that Spain's first World Cup title is being buried under and avalanche of scathing reviews for the tournament as a whole. Spain's win is a setting right of the world after Inter ruined Barcelona's dream, a swing of the pendulum back toward good in the face of so much anti-soccer evil; as we examine the events in South Africa over the course of the past month, it's important to note that in the opinion of most connoisseurs, the right team won. If we want our World Cups to give us the most worthy champion, this one was a success.


In the end, the strands will tangle because my appreciation of South Africa 2010 will always rest on the good and bad it brought for the U.S. National Team. The tournament underwhelmed, but it's almost impossible to know how much of that is tied to my feelings of American disappointment; it's the end, and Spain have won. At least that part feels right.

by John Carlton

Most of the commentary surrounding Switzerland's shocking defeat of Spain has revolved around Spain's inability to get good chances on net. But where have we seen this before? The USA-Spain 2009 Confederations Cup Semi-final, that's where.

Critics of Bob Bradley should concede at least one point: his game plan for Spain was spot-on. If you're playing Spain, you have to concede that they will have the bulk of possession. The Spanish short passing game is second to none. At the same time, passing the ball around in midfield does not necessarily lead to goals. The Spanish have a glaring deficiency - they are a team of smurfs.

Just like the USA played Spain in South Africa last year, so too did the Swiss. Stay compact. Let Spain have the wings. Let them cross the ball into the box. Then clear the ball out and wait for a moment to counter-attack. It worked for the USA in the form of a 2-0 win last summer, and it worked for Switzerland on Wednesday. Spain simply has no aerial threat to turn their relentless crosses into goals. Whether it was Silva, Capdevila, Ramos or, later, Navas, every cross the Spanish players launched into the box was met by the head or feet of a Swiss defender. So easy the task, it looked as though the Swiss defense were enjoying themselves.

Spain themselves know about their aerial deficiency. That's why from the 78th minute on, central defender Gerard Pique spent all of his time in the Swiss penalty area, desperately trying to get on the end of a crossed ball.

Switzerland needs to publicly thank Bob Bradley and his staff for showing European squads how to cope with Spain's passing prowess. In football, it's mandatory that you take advantage of physical mis-matches. When the USA faced Spain in that Confederations Cup semi-final in 2009, the blueprint to victory necessitated that the American defense forced Spain out to the wings and used the height of Onyewu and the tenacity of Demerit to clear every cross from the penalty area, and in the process produce lethal counter-attacks. On Wednesday, the Swiss copied that blueprint and showed the world once again how to beat Spain.

Update: Here's the Swiss coach, Otto Hitzfeld, on the victory: “We saw how the Americans played against Spain with a lot of interest,” Hitzfeld said. “You know that if you are going to have a chance against [the Spanish] you need to do certain things very well.

“The USA did not try to do everything. They accepted the fact that Spain has pace and width and simply made sure they kept the center of defense as tight as they could. It is not a perfect system, but it was a very interesting tactic and it worked.”

Today's stunning American victory over the number one ranked team in the world deserves more than a piddly recantation of my earlier call for Bob Bradley to resign.

It deserves an opus, a glowing ode, a flowing, flowery, over-the-top missive extolling the virtues of every player that contributed, the direction of Bob Bradley, and the collective will of a team that refused to be cowed by conventional wisdom.

But that's not what I'm going to write today.

Instead, I'm going to attempt to frame today's victory in terms that might sometimes tilt towards hyperbole, but which will always be based on a desire to be level-headed. The win is being trumpeted as a seminal moment in the history of American soccer, and it certainly is; but what it means on the larger scale, the one that includes soccer as a relevant sport in the United States, is tough to determine. Americans always seem to struggle with fully embracing the beautiful game en masse, and there's no reason think that this victory, no matter how impressive, will change that in any noticeable way.

But onto to happier thoughts. Who cares about those people that don't get it anyway? What they missed today is not only what makes soccer such a great game, but what makes following your national team passionately such a worthwhile endeavor. We're all exultant today, one community of Americans who understand just what it means for a bunch of American players to beat a full-strength top-ranked team in the world. It's not just about rooting for the underdog, though that's certainly a component; it's also about supporting a team that represents what America is about. Varied and diverse in both background and origin, the United States National Soccer Team is a collection of men more like the makeup of our country than any other that wears the colors of our flag.

Bob Bradley, the man whose leadership abilities I questioned just a few days ago, masterfully positioned and inspired his team today. Questions about Bradley's ability to lead the US to success in the World Cup next year shouldn't stop based on only two games, and I think it healthy that they continue; but after today, there is little reason to believe that Bradley can't get the job done. Why his side played so poorly for two matches, then so well for two, is a mystery that may be beyond our abilities to solve. Give Bradley credit, however, for turning things around when they looked the most bleak. While so many of us were calling for his head, asking him to resign, or decrying his decisions, Bradley stuck to his guns and led his team to one of the more important wins in this nation's international soccer history.

Sunday's final against Brazil (probably, though today illustrates that nothing is a foregone conclusion) is almost an afterthought now, a game that if won, will bring the US its first ever senior international trophy of any real significance, but if lost (barring a completely and utterly embarrassing performance) won't really do any damage to the massive high that the program and the fans are on today. The team will end the Confederations Cup riding an incredible wave of confidence, something that can only serve them well when the "A" reassembles for the World Cup qualifying match against Mexico at Azteca in August. If that confidence can be leveraged into a first ever victory in smoggy Mexico City, then we might be able to say that the team has turned a corner, is headed in the right direction, and could realistically be called "dangerous" ahead of next year's World Cup.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Today's win redefines the word "big" for the USMNT, and perhaps we should leave it at that. Whether it helps the sport penetrate the stubborn American sports culture, or whether it means that the team is now reaching the potential we all believed they had, still remains to be seen. For now, and for at least the next few days, story after story and blog post after blog post will be written on the victory, with some perhaps even showing up in the "mainstream" non-soccer media. For me, that's enough. For now.

I'm exhausted. Wake me up for the final.

I'm ready for my crow. I've got my "I Was Wrong" bib on, my plate is set, and my fork is at the ready.

Let me show you how it's done.

I was wrong.

That's it, and that's everything. I thought Bob Bradley had lost his team. I thought they had tuned him out. I thought he was incapable of getting them to play to their full potential.

About all of that, I was wrong. My call for Bob to step down is officially rescinded. No matter my feelings on his ultimate ability to put together and direct a successful World Cup team, there's no chance that Bob is going anywhere now. He has a free pass through the summer of 2010, and rightly so.

I followed along at work the best I could, getting an assist by the live blog that Kevin McCauley ran here.

So I'm off to watch the game. I'll be loving every minute, and snacking on crow the whole time.

I'll be back as soon as I can with post-match thoughts, Bradley-thoughts, what-does-it-mean thoughts, and why-the-hell-didn't-we-play-like-that-in-the-first-two-matches thoughts.

Apparently I can't drum up enough interest to merit a dedicated live blog, so I'm putting up a post just for your comments on todays USA-Spain match.

As I've mentioned, it will be extremely difficult for me to see much of the match live, so I'll be depending on you that can see it to provide real-time updates.

I'm not quite sure how the Disqus comment system will handle this, but you know know unless you try, right?

Anything and everything goes in this thread, so go ahead and kick it off with score and lineup predictions.

*UPDATE*

Here's your lineup for the Americans:

---------------Howard------------------
Spector---Onyewu---DeMerit---Bocanegra (C)
Dempsey----Bradley---Clark----Donovan
----------Altidore---Davies------------

**UPDATE**

Kevin McCauley from All Things Footy is looking for a place to park his live blog, so I'm giving him MFUSA for the match.

As we creep towards zero hour, towards the United States National Team's biggest test in a somewhat meaningful competition in years, I'm getting that "hopeful yet scared shitless" feeling comes with supporting a massive underdog.

The sliver of hope that the Americans can pull off the gargantuan upset is just large enough that I'm a nervous wreck; I'm not so convinced of a Spanish victory that I can just let myself relax and simply hope for a encouraging performance from my team. Blame it on Egypt, blame it on Bob, or blame it on the players who showed so well on Sunday that we as fans have managed to work ourselves up to the belief that they can beat the unbeatable.

I'm fairly certain that we're the only ones that can even conceive, no matter how remote a possibility we recognize it to be, of a US victory today. In fact, I know we are.

A quick scan of odds for the US-Spain match today (and imagine my shock when the site wasn't blocked at my office) shows the Americans as 12/1 (I think; I'm not enough of a gambler to be comfortable with my understanding, but that's not stopping me from forging ahead) to win. Meanwhile, the Spanish are 1.28 to win, meaning they just a hair over even money. Those aren't encouraging odds, even as we keep in mind that they're set in such a way as to drive betting on each side, making money for the bookies either way, and that bettors outside of the United States are likely to have little respect for the Americans (hence the enticement of long odds).

Nevermind the actual odds, the simple way to put it is to say that the Americans have a snowball's chance in hell of beating the top ranked team in the world. It's going to take a perfectly played game, a herculean type of effort, and the match of a lifetime from more than one individual to keep the Spaniards from scoring more than the Yanks. Weapons abound for La Roja, and it's difficult to even pick out one Spanish player that is more dangerous than any other, simply because they are that talented.

But the Americans are dead in the water if they come out scared. If they play like massive underdogs, if they run and chase and do the football equivalent of curling into the fetal position, it will be over before it starts. If they're to have any chance, they have to assert themselves immediately, letting the Spanish know that it's not going to be a walkover, but a hard fought battle. Pushing up and pressuring Spain's back line while doing their best to defend away from their own goal seems somewhat counter-intuitive against a side as offensively adept as Spain; but if the Americans sit back and attempt to absorb attack after attack, they're likely to concede and find themselves without even that small sliver of hope we believe they have.

Don't play like underdogs, play like equals. Easier said than done, I know, but it's the only chance they have.

We'll know, within the first fifteen minutes, if our boys have a shot. If the Spanish feel no pressure, completely dominate, or score, there's not likely to be much to look forward to for the remaining seventy-five minutes.

If Bob Bradley is a better manager than I have given him credit for, if the victory of Egypt represents a turning point in the evolution of the USMNT, and if the quality of play is at a higher level than in the first two games of the tournament, then the Americans really do have a shot. But if that last match was just a blip, was just a aberration aided by hookers and Egyptian fatigue, then we have no shot. Determining which is real and which is a mirage is the difficult part; either way, I hope the players truly believe it's the former and not the latter.

Here's to hoping that I'm eating a healthy helping of crow served by Mr. Bradley come, 4:30 Eastern Time today.

I'm still trying to decide if I should run a liveblog today; since I'm unable to really watch the game and I am supposed to be working, I won't be able to run it properly. If you are a regular, would like to help, and will be able to watch the game, let me know if you want me to run a liveblog; you guys can run it yourselves while I attempt to follow the match and chime in when possible.

Leave your name and email in the comments, or send me an email directly.

matchfitusa at gmail dot com

I just can't help myself. The last time I pulled out the "Fun With Translation" post, I promised that it wouldn't come back until the Americans head to Azteca in August.

But tomorrow's Confederations Cup semi-final match with Spain provides a just-too-perfect opportunity to pull it out again; the Spanish press is bound to have stories on the match, and it's always fun to see what a foreign nation's media has to say about our cute little national team.

Most of the stories I've come across present it as a foregone conclusion that Spain will meet Brazil in the final if they are able to take out the Americans. This El País story is no exception, and it also includes a few interesting statements. Of interest is a comment on how the inclusion of European-based players has "strengthened" the American team, while at the same time the story notes that the US offense is improved but that the "defense is still weak".

I've seen this piece in several places, so it would appear that it's a wire story; "The Honor of Bradley" gives a bit of background on the American head man, while framing it with some of the typical filler on the condition of soccer in the United States. The final two sentences of the story echo the sentiments of our first translation: "Back are very vulnerable. A bargain for Villa and Torres".

El País also has a nice writeup of Jozy Altidore, calling him (among other things) "strong as a bull", "very American", and "contour of (her?!?!) neck reminiscent of a defense in the NFL rather than a soccer player". Also included in the article is a mention of the infamous poorly phrased Spanish text message Jozy sent to Joan Capdevila, something fairly ironic considering the poor translations I'm linking to here.

Another profile, this time of Michael Bradley, also from El País, notes the massive amount of ground covered by Bradley, Dempsey and Donovan. The followup to that note is the (mostly correct) statement that the Americans "have trouble controlling the game". I would point out to the El País writer that the Americans have faced two of the better possession teams in the world, but it doesn't subtract from the truth of his statement. The glowing review of Bradley is nice, and even includes a reference to the midfielder being compared to Michael Ballack.

Nothing really of note in this story, another that I believe to be a wire piece, except for the projected lineup; while Guzan started against Egypt, I think it's been fairly evident that Howard is the US number one keeper. The Spanish press seems not to have gotten that memo, and looks to have just rolled over the Egypt lineup to tomorrow's game.

Either I'm looking in the wrong places, or the Spanish press is entirely too nice when it comes to the USMNT. Color me just a little disappointed.

When the United States lines up against Spain tomorrow in the semi-finals of the Confederations Cup, American fans will be internally conflicted.

On the one hand, they'll want to believe that the Yanks have a shot against the Spanish, and that if the boys play well they just might squeak out an unlikely win. Victory, or even a full time tie that leads to extra soccer, is not expected; but it would be against their nature as fans not to have even a small belief that there's a chance.

The conflict arises from the realistic recognition that Spain is far and away the better team. More than likely, they will crush the American, remove their souls with crisp passing, intricate attacks, and superior skill, finishing the job as they've done so many times before. The Spaniards have not lost a match since 2006, and there is absolutely no reason to believe that an inconsistent American team will break that streak. The only questions that seem relevant are, how many will Spain score, because score they will, and will the Americans score, because that it's not a foregone conclusion that they will.

And so American fans will watch, in the middle of the day on a Wednesday and in numbers that would shock the anti-soccer crowd, hoping for the best but fearing the worst.

One-nil to the Americans, and the fans will lose their minds, become suddenly boisterous and exuberant, and lineup ready to crow about Yank chances at next year's World Cup. All of that criticism that Bob Bradley has taken, all of those calls for his head and for him to replaced immediately? Gone in a moment, as soon as the final whistle blows and the Americans have taken down the number one team in the world. It's a scenario we almost don't want to let ourselves conceive of, if only because it is so small a possibility. But it's out there, the idea that another miracle can happen, and fans would be fans, supporters wouldn't be supporters, if the notion didn't cross their mind.

Just imagine what it would mean.

Three-nil to the Spaniards, and life as a United States Men's National Team fan goes on as before. A loss to Spain would not only be predictable, it would be easily swept away, easily excused because there's really no reason to expect any other result. Losing to Spain isn't exactly the preferred outcome of Wednesday's match, but it will barely register on the disappointment radar. It would take a thumping of epic proportions, something on the order of four or five to nil to really get fans worked up; Bradley and his team essentially get a free pass, with Sunday's heroics still fresh.

"Just happy to be there" might be the wrong way to put it, but you can't really blame the Americans if that's the way they feel.

As for my prediction, I expect the Nats to play hard and give the Spanish a fight, but ultimately lose 2-0.

And we'll probably be happy with that.