I think we've all gotten over the initial shock of yesterday's selections but still, wow. I mean who saw that one coming? 24 years old, and your biggest dreams coming true? Captivating the hearts of a nation and swaying the opinions of some of the world's foremost judges of talent? Congratulations to Lee Dewyze, and a good ole "nice try" to Crystal.


Oh, and Robbie "Even his mother knows he has no chance" Findley is going to the World Cup. Whoops. Mea Culpa on that one, guys. But hey, thanks. Where would bloggers be if we didn't have readers to nitpick every single throwaway joke weeks after we've made them? I kid, I kid. I'm just happy someone besides Jason's mom is reading the site.


Speaking of soccer bloggers, I'm convinced that's how Bobby tracksuit (kudos for his ability to put on khakis to meet the three of the most influential men in the World) picked his World Cup squad.


"You know how everybody thinks Ching is a lock, EJ is my homeboy, Robbie Findley has about as much of a shot as I do when making my annual run at Amy Wynalda, and that I'm going to make Buddle and Gomez work a spot out Thunderdome style? Screw 'em. And I'm gonna take Feilhaber and Torres and leave out my pet project Bedoya. Ever see a blogosphere crap its pants out of shock? Well you will."


Speaking of crapping your pants, who else enjoyed watching the comedy of errors at left back Tuesday night? Jonathan Bornstein looked more lost out there than the tribe of Reuben. Aaron Lennon is already practicing signing a copy of The Sun with a terrible pun on the front page. Heath Pearce looked about as interested in defending as Marcus Hahnemann does at a performance of The Vagina Monologues. "But there's always Bocanegra!" cry the hilariously optimistic US fans. Yep, the same Bocanegra who just had a hernia operation and spent most of the evening filling his finely tuned body with burgers and buffalo wings.


At least it's American junk food. Wouldn't want his time at Rennes turning him into some frog-leg munching nancy boy, like some twisted continental version of Brad Friedel. Or John Harkes, when he tries to drop slang.


Speaking of of Mr. Amy Wynalda (I know! Two Amy Wynalda jokes in one post. I'm so cutting edge, like Vanilla Ice's heavy metal album.), he sounds like an idiot when paired with JP Dellacamera. Putting him in a booth with Martin Tyler is like playing co-op Halo 3 with your friend who spends 6 hours a day on X-Box Live. Either way, it's not pretty. Brad Guzan levels of not pretty.


Tyler and Harkes isn't so much Abbot and Costello as it is Abbot and Carlos Mencia. But hey, it could be worse. I mean, it's not like our three best central defenders have serious health issues and our most important striker couldn't get playing time at one of the most abominable teams in Premiership history, right? I mean, that would bum me out like Taylor Twellman after TMZ's over.


Well, crap.


Better start working your ass off, Landon.

Zach was missing due to a power outage in Texas, but I took to the UStream internet waves last night with a live 23-man roster review and warm-up friendly themed show.

I was joined by Ahmet Turgut of TurkishSoccer.com and Noah Davis of Goal.com and USA10Kit.com, plus Aaron Stollar of Fighting Talker fame called in as well.

Download it.

Inline player will go up at the AmSoc site shortly, but I'm not sure when this will make it to iTunes.

I didn't have time to get the standings up this week, so look for the updated standings next week. Here are this week's predictions:

Chicago Fire - 2
FC Dallas - 1

New England Revolution - 1
New York Red Bulls - 1

DC United - 2
Chivas USA - 2

Columbus Crew - 1
Los Angeles Galaxy - 1

Houston Dynamo - 2
Philadelphia Union - 0

Colorado Rapids - 3
Seattle Sounders FC - 2

Real Salt Lake - 2
Kansas City Wizards - 1

San Jose Earthquakes - 1
Toronto FC - 0

I'll admit it; I like athletes with chips on their shoulders. I can empathize with the pressure they must feel, the natural reaction being one of hurt feelings, raw nerves, and an desire to "prove people wrong".


It doesn't even really matter if there are too many of those "people", or if the athlete is erecting a straw man with the help of their own over-sensitivity. Sometimes, people under the microscope don't always respond the way they should. They're human, after all.


So I'm giving Oguchi Onyewu a pass on the chip he's cultivating during the run up to the World Cup. He seems to be feeding it indiscriminately, tweeting about "haters", bristling when the press questions his fitness, and just generally giving off an angry vibe. Everyone doubts him. No one believes he'll be fit. Hell, some were saying that leaving the big guy off the team might be a good idea.


Not the sane ones, but whatever.



I'm giving our man Gooch a pass not because I think his reaction is justified, but because I think it is truly motivating him that there is any doubt at all that he can be ready for England on June 12th. As a fan, this is all I care about; I get the media reacting in shock horror when they ask what is a reasonable question and Onyewu fires back with vitriol, but that doesn't affect me. If Gooch needs a chip to push himself, I'm all for it.


It's not like Onyewu is the only guy harboring a me-against-the-world grudge. Clint Dempsey's comments, specifically when asked about his inconsistent performances when wearing the U.S. jersey, were intriguing to say the least. Deuce seems like a guy with an internal fire constantly burning, one stoked by the fuel of external criticism, and it's hard to argue that it hasn't helped him. Dempsey got defensive, and probably rightfully so; American fans put a lot on the Texan's shoulders, and he considerable talents only serve to bring him harsh assessments when he doesn't seem to live up to them. Again, if this is what he need to spur him along, I say stoke away.


Athletes are human beings (in case you didn't know), susceptible to all of the same insecurities and personal demons we all face. There's a line they must be careful not to cross, but a hearty desire to "prove everyone wrong" can be beneficial. The motivation each player drums up to push them to new heights on the field is extremely personal, and varies from man to man. Donovan dealt with scathing criticism for years, internalized his processing of it, and claims it now has made him a better player. Dempsey seethes, and has only become an integral part of both his club and national team. Onyewu is new to this, with his recovering knee sowing seeds of doubt, giving both fans and media reason to question his ability to play on an high level in two weeks time.


If it pushes him, means he works just that much harder in training, or is able to push beyond the natural reluctance he might have to land on the knee (see Tuesday's non-jump), then it won't matter to me if he gets a little testy.


Oguchi Onyewu has haters? I hope he proves them all wrong.

Edson Buddle and Herculez Gomez scoring their way onto the U.S. National Team World Cup roster isn't quite a miracle, but it's damn close.


Two guys whom USMNT fans, and likely Bob Bradley himself, hadn't even considered a possibility just a few months ago are now two of the four strikers headed to South Africa. Putting aside what this means for the Americans and their chances in the tournament, the stories of Buddle and Gomez, and the out-of-nowhere nature of their making the team, are two amazing examples of hitting form at the perfect time.


Injuries and a dearth of proven talent at the forward position was enough to crack the door for Buddle and Gomez. Charlie Davies would certainly be there if healthy. Brian Ching's hamstring was apparently not as strong as Bob Bradley would like. Forwards Bradley ran through during the qualifying campaign, Connor Casey and Eddie Johnson among them, were of questionable quality at the international level. More accurately, their forays with the National Team did little to engender confidence in them.


So Bradley looks to what are essentially two unknowns. No, Buddle and Gomez are by no means kids, but they've been out of the picture for so long that they might as well be. Buddle's international career never got off the ground after a start-stop period that saw him make an off the field mistake and struggle to establish himself with a handful of teams. It wasn't until the arrival of Bruce Arena in LA that Buddle found a groove, living up to the talent many saw in him. Buddle's rampant form to start 2010 got him the headlines and a look for the World Cup, but he's actually played well over the course of the last three seasons. Buddle scored 15 times in 2008, and while he knocked in only 5 in 2009, much of his season was affected by injury. Whether it was playing with Donovan, under Arena, or just a sudden spark coming at the right time, Buddle's evolution into a better, more polished player has been in the works for some time. A dedicated effort to prepare for 2010 by staying in California and working through the winter, rather than heading back to his home in New York as had been his habit, certainly appears to have served him well.


Gomez' path has been even more rocky and fraught with dead ends than Buddle's. Gomez went from quality attacking MLS player to benchwarmer in Kansas City in the short span of a few years; moved out of his natural position and falling off as a goal scorer, Gomez' inclusion in the 2007 Copa America team failed to bring him additional opportunities with the National Team. Bob Bradley was auditioning a lot of players during the cycle, and Gomez' circumstance meant it was nearly impossible for him to get back into the mix. Only a renaissance in Mexico with Puebla, where he tied for the scoring title in the Clausura season with Puebla (usually coming off the bench), brought him back into the discussion.


A confluence of factors meant Bob Bradley could hardly ignore the amazing things these two players were doing. Credit him for ignoring their meager national team resumes and giving them a shot. Credit each of them more for performing well enough to make the dream come true.


Three months ago, none of us, let alone Herculez Gomez and Edson Buddle themselves, would have though it possible they'd be representing the United States at the World Cup.

Bradley pulls the old okey-doke on my and picks Robbie Findley even though the kid didn't get on the field against the Czech's last night. By my "Dirty Dozen" theory, any player that wasn't a sure thing and didn't play was probably in major trouble; apparently that didn't apply to the speedy RSL striker. And it's also a bit of a surprise that both Buddle and Gomez made the team.


Here's the rest of the roster, with most of it fairly predictable. World Cup teams made is in parentheses:

GOALKEEPERS (3): Brad Guzan (2010), Marcus Hahnemann (2006, 2010), Tim Howard (2006, 2010)

DEFENDERS (7): Carlos Bocanegra (2006, 2010), Jonathan Bornstein (2010), Steve Cherundolo (2002, 2006, 2010), Jay DeMerit (2010), Clarence Goodson (2010), Oguchi Onyewu (2006, 2010), Jonathan Spector (2010)

MIDFIELDERS (9): DaMarcus Beasley (2002, 2006, 2010), Michael Bradley (2010), Ricardo Clark (2010), Clint Dempsey (2006, 2010), Landon Donovan (2002, 2006, 2010), Maurice Edu (2010), Benny Feilhaber (2010), Stuart Holden (2010), José Torres (2010)

FORWARDS (4): Jozy Altidore (2010), Edson Buddle (2010), Robbie Findley (2010), Herculez Gomez (2010)


Zach and I will be live tonight over at The American Soccer Show website to take Skype calls and get the impressions of Goal.com's Noah Davis. We'll also have a short chat with Turkish Soccer's Ahmet Bob Turgut about what to expect this weekend against Turkey.


I expect much of the furor will be over the exclusion of Brian Ching and the inclusion of Robbie Findley; rather than give my take today in written form, I'm going to save it for the show tonight. I'll likely have a closer look at things tomorrow.


Feel free to work out any angst you're feeling in the comments below.


I'm also going to include the show player and chat room in this post for tonight's show, just to make things as easy as possible. If you miss the show, it will be available for download tomorrow.



Live video by Ustream

The USMNT's 23-man roster is due out shortly, but I'd like to take a quick minute to talk about what concerned me most last night against the Czechs. And that, dear reader, is the position of left back. At most positions, we at least have one or two players who if, unspectacular, are at least solidly reliable against good opposition. At left back, we've got Jonathan Bornstein and Heath Pearce. A lot of people have noticed that this is a problem area, and you can bet that Fabio Capello is aware of it, too.


I've never really been a fan of Bornstein's. He seems to have graduated cum laude from the Marvell Wynne School of Defense (If you get beat, be fast enough to get back and foul him), and that was painfully evident last night. The main weapon in his defensive arsenal seems to be hurling himself in the general direction of the attacker's feet. As far as I'm concerned, the Hondurans can have him. He's one of a select group of USMNT players whose presence on the field genuinely frightens me.


Heath Pearce, on the other hand, frustrates me because I think he has a lot more to offer than he's currently putting out. I remember his debut, a friendly against Scotland. He came on as a sub and immediately impressed me. He wanted the ball at his feet, was dribbling at the opposition, making incisive runs off the ball, and tracking back on defense. None of that was on display last night, and to be honest, I haven't seen him play well in a while. I was in the press box for Goal.com during the FC Dallas v. Philadelphia Union game last week, and at times, I forgot he was even playing. After the game, I was asked to write a paragraph on him, as part of a collaborative piece on MLS players on the 30-man roster. I went back and re-watched the game, specifically him, and my initial suspicions were confirmed. He seemed content to jog and watch play, rather than get involved. I'm convinced that it's only the dearth of talent at that position that he's even involved.


But the problem still exists of who should play in that position. Carlos Bocanegra has been an option there, and I wouldn't be surprised if he is used there in some World Cup games. But in the England game, we'll probably be facing Aaron Lennon, who has enough speed to negate Boca's defensive capabilities and cause a lot of problems on the back line, or Theo Walcott, who has even more pace with less of an end product. Another option would be moving one of our two right backs, Steve Cherundolo and Jonathan Spector, to the left. Frankly, at this short notice, I'd lump for Dolo. He has enough pace that he won't be completely marginalized, and is a seasoned international defender with a lot of games under his belt.


Whoever Bob Bradley decides to take, I'm not envious of the responsibility facing him. This is, in my eyes, the most problematic and potentially disastrous area for the Yanks, and may be the most difficult decision he has to make before June 12.

Losing 4-2 at home to a "B" Czech side isn't good. There's plenty to be concerned about from what was a fairly abject defensive performance.


But really, what has changed? What's different now, after Bob Bradley put out an experimental lineup full of guys either coming back from injury or making a last gasp effort to make the team?


The three themes I heard most last night, in order of relative importance, and my visceral reaction to the angst:


1. Onyewu didn't look good

No, no he didn't. He's obviously still stiff, far from one hundred percent, and potentially a liability at the back if he doesn't get any better. I mistakenly thought he would go a full ninety, and the fact that he didn't is a concern. But to think that a player pushing the timeline on a what was a fairly unusual knee injury would look any better than he did is nonsense; doubly so if there's no allowances made for Gooch improving over the course of the next two weeks. He has to be able to play, of course, but an ice pack on his knee wasn't unexpected, nor is it necessarily a sign of major problems.


Gooch's health and form was worry before and it's still a worry now. But the degree of that worry hasn't gone up, at least not for me, and I'm not ready to say Clarence Goodson should start because of it.


2. The defense look bad/unorganized/terrible/abysmal

Second (or possibly third choice keeper). Makeshift backline that included one assumed starter, and he was getting his first game action since October. Essentially, there are too many variables for me to be overly concerned about how a team that looks nothing like the one Bradley will start against England played. Are there endemic issues with the American defense? Maybe. But it was always going to take the first choice guys having a very good to great game for the U.S. to make it out of the group and go further in South Africa. Last night's performance changes nothing, and it certainly shouldn't be seen as an indication that goals will be flying into Howards net next month.


Besides, the two guys most critical as backups had solid individual nights in Steve Cherundolo and Clarence Goodson.


3. DEPTH!?!&!&*@! (as in, there is none)

Again, this isn't new. The U.S. isn't churning out enough high-quality players to have the luxury of a fully prepared and international-class second choice lineup. This is particularly notable in defense, as it was last night. Guzan isn't ready for prime time, Maurice Edu is only an emergency option at centerback, and Jonathan Bornstein is, well, Jonathan Bornstein. Hearth Pearce didn't do himself any favors either, but none of that was terribly surprising. Goodson's strong performance, and what appears to be his growing confidence, is a silver lining that cannot be discounted; if Onyewu is unable to play, Goodson is a reasonably solid backup. There's a drop off certainly, and it may damage American chances in South Africa if Goodson is starting, but we already knew that, didn't we?


I get it. Whenever the evidence of the shallowness of the American squad is exhibited for us all to see, conniptions follow.


The roster announcement is today at 1 PM ET on ESPN, at which point there will be plenty of time to pick over Bradley's squad, finding holes and points of weakness.


Speaking of which, the American Soccer Show will be live tonight to give you an outlet to praise/bitch about the roster at 8 PM ET. Check the website for details.


On the positive side, there's reason to believe that Herculez Gomez' amazing path to the National Team will continue with him going on to the World Cup.


Since it's required, here's my roster prediction:


KEEPERS: Howard, Guzan, Hahnemann

DEFENDERS: Bocanegra, Cherundolo, DeMerit, Onyewu, Goodson, Bornstein, Spector,

MIDFIELDERS: Donovan, Dempsey, Bradley, Edu, Clark, Holden, Beasley, Torres, Feilhaber, Bedoya

FORWARDS: Altidore, Ching, Gomez

*Yes, I changed this one already.


Saturday should tell us a lot. If things go poorly then, if Onyewu hasn't made any progress or can't play, or if the full first team lays a complete egg, panic mode is understandable. It's just a little too early.

I'll admit it. I have no idea who will play for the U.S. against the Czechs tonight at Rentschler Field in East Hartford. Speculation, and the general feeling out of camp last week in Princeton, is that Bradley will use the game to evaluate players fighting for the last few spot on his roster for South Africa, as well as get critical field time for players in desperate need of live game action. After telling reporters that "17 to 19" spots are locked up, it sounds like he still has a bit of work to do in the former regard.


Around the interwebberbloggernets people are making their best guesses, putting forth what they hope to see, and just generally shooting spitballs at a houseflies. They might connect on a shot out of pure luck, but more likely they're as clueless as the rest of us.


All I'm really certain of is that Oguchi Onyewu will get ninety minutes because he needs it, that twenty-three guys will dress, and that only seventeen will play.


Six substitutions means thirteen guys, those that don't make the roster plus unused subs, won't see the field tonight. Subtracting the one keeper who is unlikely to play, it's actually this group of twelve that intrigues me the most. It stands to reason that the twelve will be made up of players in two categories: locks who don't need to play for whatever reason (or for whom rest is more important), and bubble players whose World Cup dream is about to come to an end.


If you're Eddie Johnson, Alejandro Bedoya, Chad Marshall, Sacha Kljestan, Robbie Rogers, Edson Buddle, Herculez Gomez, Robbie Findley, or one of a handful of others and you're not part of tonight's roster, it might be time to settle those vacation plans or get ready to head back to your MLS team. Hell, even Brian Ching could be on this list, though his status might be more "lock" than "bubble". These are the questions we still don't have the answers to, and why we'll be anxiously waiting for tomorrow morning (or whenever it might) and Bradley's final twenty-three for South Africa.


The fun will be in guessing which of those left out are locks not playing or bubble guys on the way to the cut list. I'm not sure we'll all agree.


We'll know soon enough who will represent the U.S.A. in South Africa. But tonight will give us our first clue as to which of the camp thirty has hit the end of the road.

The Guardian's Jonathan Wilson posited something interesting a few weeks back when looking at Inter's stunning victory over Barcelona: How important is possession?


The tactical implications of the question, and the likely hyperbolic statements Jose Mourinho made on Inter's ridiculous 16% possession number (that the Italians gave away the ball on purpose) prompted me to conceive of a tangential question of my own, related directly to our own U.S. National Team.


What of intent?


It's no secret that the U.S. struggles to maintain possession when faced with technically superior opposition. It seems they're destined to defend, take their chances on the break, and hope the other team fails to make them pay for their negative tactics. On the surface, it seems defeatist, almost as if they're conceding before the game ever starts. Possession is the barometer: Good teams have it, lesser (or poor) teams don't.


Intent is key here. The relative quality of the U.S. leads to assumptions that losing the possession battle the way they so often do is a byproduct of their lack of quality. Where Mourinho and Inter are playing to their strengths, rejecting the notion that an edge in possession is crucial to victory, overwhelming Barcelona and Bayern Munich with their superior organization, the U.S. is simply getting beat.


Generally, the assessment isn't incorrect. The U.S., when playing Spain, Brazil, and soon England, does suffer from a lack of relative quality. This inevitably leads to a lack of possession. Whether it's inherently bad, however, is not as clear as it might seem. Wilson's question, and the performance by Inter that prompted it, muddies the waters.


Jose Mourinho gets the benefit of the doubt, Bob Bradley does not. Rightly so, but there is a commonality in their approaches: each is actively choosing to play in such a manner, even if their reasons for doing so might differ significantly.


If the U.S., meaning Bob Bradley specifically, recognizes that they'll see less of the ball than their opponents no matter how they attempt to play, common sense dictates that they sit back, break whenever possible, and use organization and defensive commitment to give themselves the best chance at victory. There's even an argument to be made that by choosing passes with high risk but high reward, they're working towards this same end. Keeping the ball just to keep the ball isn't in the Americans best interest because they're at their best attacking a stretched defense; if they overly commit to attempting to break down an opponent with a slower buildup, they may find themselves caught out and open to the counter, unable to support the back line by slowing up play with their midfield.


It's obviously much simpler to say the other team is just better, and that the U.S. can't hold possession because they're not good enough to. Again, this is ultimately true in many cases. The question, however, is if the Americans exasperate appearances by their own strategic decisions. It's almost inconceivable that they would intentionally give the ball away; but if movement forward is regularly highlighted by passes that are "dangerous" in the sense that they risk giving the ball away, it might be evidence of overarching direction from Bradley.


Back to the original issue, the one of intent. Intent, or rather the one we assume teams and coaches hold, colors our perceptions of performance as it relates to the issue of possession. Possession's place as the indicator of the superior side is sacrosanct, provided a team does something with it; as long as there are reasonable chances on goal, it seems clear that the team with the ball more of the time is better. It's there in front of us, clear and easily identified. A team that refuses the ball, or chooses to be more cavalier with it than their opposition (long balls being the most obvious example) is playing what is labeled "negative" or "anti-football".


Inter's performance in the Champions League flipped this perception on its ear, at least to some extent. Mourinho was generally lauded for doing what most thought was impossible - shutting down the Barcelona machine. Reduced to sideways passing, the Catalans were frustrated by an opponent dedicated to stopping Barcelona rather than emphasizing their own offensive efforts. Of course, without Inter capitalizing on a few of their own scant chances, the tactics employed by Mourinho would be worthless; scoring is necessary to win, after all.


To a lesser extent, this is what the U.S. sets out to do anytime they play a team superior to them. It's how they beat Spain, how they almost beat Brazil, and how they attempted to play Holland more recently. Bradley's appreciation for what his team can and cannot do forces his hand; but it's the extra steps he takes, doing his best to turn a distinct weakness into as much of a strength as is possible, that will ultimately give the U.S. its best chance to win.


So are we to suppose that Bradley, and the men who came before him, hold to the theory that possession isn't all that important? Probably not. It's almost certain that if he could have it, he would; while an advantage in possession doesn't guarantee victory, it does improve the chances considerably. Bradley knows this. Whereas Mourinho and Inter's decision to play "anti-football" is one made by a coaching genius with world class players at his disposal, the Americans do it out of necessity. This is an important distinction that overshadows smaller adjustments made by Bradley within the constraints of his team. Inter's choice is dramatic, an obvious movement visible to everyone, while the United States' attempts to spin their disadvantage is much harder to see and appreciate.


This difference in visible intent imposes on the U.S. the perception that they are a reactive team only in these underdog situations. The favorite dictates play and the Americans simply respond, doing their best to muddle through with counterattacks and sell-out defending. There's little room for gray in the world of black-and-white, so the viewpoint will naturally persist. Besides, it's impossible to know how much of each possibility is true; if we were assign a percentage to it, what would it be? Can we quantify how many of the decisions made by American players can be chalked up to simple failure and how much are part of a plan in which possession is lightly valued?


Perhaps there's a clue to Bradley's intent, be it forced upon him or not, in something Grant Wahl highlighted on his World Cup blog. As a student at Princeton thirty years ago, Bradley extolled the brilliance of Tigers basketball coach Pete Carril in his senior thesis:


"Carril is not able to recruit the top-notch city talent. In fact, many of his players are barely recruited by other schools. But Carril is able to take these players and teach them his patient, intelligent style. Carril’s teams are noted for their tough defense, patient, often deliberate offense, taking only the good shot, and team play. To me, there is nothing better than to watch a Princeton basketball team frustrate and beat a ‘bigger and better’ team. Yes, the coaching staff is definitely very important." (emphasis mine)


Before he ever had reason or need to conceive of a philosophy like the one he currently employs, Bradley was already lauding something eerily similar. Yes, he doesn't have the players to stand toe-to-toe with the likes of Spain, England, and Brazil; nevertheless, his intent is clear.


It's how we appreciate that intent that makes Bob Bradley the oft-criticized coach of a weak team doing what he has to rather than the tactical adept navigating his side into the best position to win.

New show. MLS, USMNT, Henry, various other topics.

Download directly

Subscribe in iTunes

Go to the AmSoc website to listen

Friend of MFUSA Ted Meyer (@futbolhooligan) created a "Beat England" T-Shirt with proceeds from sales of the shirt going to Soccer in the Streets, a charitable organization that uses soccer to teach kids life skills in Atlanta.

I think both are ideas we can all get behind. Get one.