Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: SoccerInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS

Bob Bradley: Year 3

As Bob Bradley enters the third and most important year of his USA national team coaching tenure, how do you think he has done so far?

Consider the overall record (21-8-3), tournament performance, World Cup qualifying results (7-1-0), introduction of new players, evolution of player pool, lineups.....

If you give him middling or low marks, what would you like to see him do differently?

By Steve Goff  |  January 8, 2009; 7:00 PM ET
Categories:  U.S. men's national team  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Jacobson Resurfaces
Next: Friday Kickaround


I believe he has done very well. I must admit to be one of the "haters" when I saw he was given the post. Yet, he has done everything we could expect as US National team fans. Qualifying has gone extremely well. Gold Cup was a great campaign.

Yet I am disappointed with the whole US click that has developed on the national team. Josh Wolf, Eddie Johnson, Eddie Gaven, etc. All these players are not up to the level of international football but continue to be called up because they have worked their way through the national youth "system."

I also wish Bob Bradley would move away from Onyewu and Bocanegra. They are certainly capably of getting us to the World Cup but they are not top level center backs. Bocanegra should play left back, as he does for club ball. Demerit and possible Berhalter, in my opinion, should be given a look there. I am not sure if they would do any better but I believe we need to improve in the back to be a top team.

Posted by: grubbsbl | January 8, 2009 7:23 PM | Report abuse

Don't you just love bell curves...

Posted by: PEddy | January 8, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

8 - I think he's won what he needed to and built solidly. I dock him points for the Copa America debacle (0-3 with a young team). Also dock him for being the most boring interview in the US Soccer universe.

Bob Bradley - the first "No Drama" leader...

Posted by: LookingDangerous | January 8, 2009 7:44 PM | Report abuse

The results have been good, aside from the Copa America debacle. There are no standout losses, we've won a Gold Cup, and qualification has been stress-free to this point. There's little to complain about there. The only non-positive thing here I can think of to say here is that getting to the Hex with ease and winning the Gold Cup are, at this point, minimum expectations. Now, there's nothing wrong with hitting the minimum standard when you've had little opportunity for anything else, but it also doesn't make you a brilliant manager.

Style of play is a strike against him. No one expects us to be Brazil, but there is often an overtly defensive air to this US team, even against teams we're entirely better than. In my opinion, this team is capable of more sophisticated play and more goals.

Squad selection is another problem. Bradley was entirely too patient before dropping Eddie Johnson, and has been reticent to use his better attacking players (see the style of play complaint above). I'd also have to say that Bradley's eye for talent, below the obvious guys like Donovan or Onyewu, is looking a touch questionable. I can't remember the last time a camp or squad roster came out and I wasn't disappointed in something. Often, it's more than one player left out and more than one undeserving player called in. I realize Bradley knows way more than I ever will about the game and these players in particular, but I'm not an idiot either, and some of his selections have baffled me.

Finally, there is the question of player use. We have seen some confusing selections, including Donovan playing right midfield at the same time as Dempsey is running up top (when they both obviously should have been switched). There is also the near-constant misuse of his own son, who is for the US an ultradefensive midfielder, despite showing in Europe that he's capable of doing real damage when given some attacking freedom. This, again, goes back to Bradley's conservative nature. On the other hand, he does seem to have a knack for getting good showings out of players that are not regularly seeing the field at their clubs, something that I hope he is doing everything he can to remedy (e.g. urging these players to move on ASAP).

With results weighing much heavier than these other more minor concerns, I give him a 7.

Posted by: Chest_Rockwell | January 8, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

I went with a 7 without thinking about it as much as Chesty:-)

I agree completely that this US team is too conservative. I'd love to see a more open game from the Nats, but perhaps the defense just can't handle the exposure (in Bradley's view).

Posted by: DrBeaker | January 8, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse

I gave him a 7 because the team has won games, and after all,that's the point. But I really worry about his keeping Eddie Johnson around so long and not developing a cadre of strikers. Who's going to score the goals against the better teams?

Posted by: manunot | January 8, 2009 8:44 PM | Report abuse

I gave him a "6". Here's my thinking:
--I don't think he's expanded the player pool significantly (certainly not as much as Arena did in either WC Qualifying cycle).
--I don't think he's shown much tactical flexibility. We play with certain players (Dempsey, Donovan) in a variety of positions. But we consistently go with 4 in the back, we consistently go with 2 holding mids: I know BB insists they're not supposed to both be defensive but it always works out that way.

It's unclear to me if he's had as much involvement as Arena had with overseas players (talking to guys about the need to get PT, suggesting some players do leave MLS for overseas or others that they needed to come home, negotiating long-term with some managers). Maybe he does but it doesn't seem that way.

I also question if he could have played more of a role with some of the players we lost (Somare, Subotic, etc.) in trying to persuade them over.

I also don't think he's had as much of a role as Arena took on with shaping the rest of the National program (influencing what was going on at Bradenton, with the U20 and Olympic sides--all of which are critical feeders for the senior side).

I don't criticize him for the copa deal. Given the schedules, the inability to call up Euro players, that's about what we could have expected.

I commend him for being organized and for dealing with the interim (keeping the chair warm for Jurgen), no, fulltime job mess--that is something other coaches (Arena for one) would have not handled well.

He has yet to show he can produce a team that has any offense against a good team. He has yet to show tactical sophistication will trouble a good side.

Posted by: JoeW1 | January 8, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse

He singlehandedly failed to cap Giuseppe Rossi, Nevin Subotic, the other guy with the Slavic name, Messi, and Kaka.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | January 8, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

JoeW1 wrote:
I also question if he could have played more of a role with some of the players we lost (Somare, Subotic, etc.) in trying to persuade them over.


Soumare doesn't have a U.S. passport and probably won't get one for at least another year or two. Are you saying Bradley didn't do enough to pressure the State Dept. into expediting the process?

Posted by: Figgy | January 8, 2009 10:05 PM | Report abuse

I gave him a "5." At this stage of US soccer development, qualifying for the World Cup should almost be automatic, so achieving that means very little in measuring the success of a coach. The next step is both success in playing "better" teams from SA and Europe and the style of play utilized in such matches. On that score, Bradley has had little success and the style of play he uses makes paint drying seem exciting. I know the US will never play to a level of Brazil or Argentina in my lifetime (unless I make 150), but Bradley's conservatism simply delays the needed steps to make US play more creative and interesting to watch. I used to look forward to US matches, but because of Bradley's dull tactical outlook, I don't anymore because I know that win or lose the US will play a dull, defensive game.

Posted by: griffin1108 | January 8, 2009 10:37 PM | Report abuse

What the hell happened to Pachuca?

Posted by: DadRyan | January 8, 2009 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Everyone must be watching the stupid "football" game:-)
I'm sure everyone has seen the little interviews with Tino and Kasper on BTB right?
If not here's the link:http: //
What strikes me and it's probably not much is Tino's quote:
" A bunch of guys went and played with a the guys from Maryland University who are going through the draft next week, including Benny, Devon, Burchy - you know, getting out there and playing soccer, because it's a whole different ball game than just running."
You'll just love what he's naming his son that's due in May...

Posted by: DadRyan | January 8, 2009 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Figgy, I'm not arguing that it's Bob Bradley's responsibility for getting citizenship. But here's my thinking about Soumare: he jumped at Mali now rather than wait 2 years. But in the long run, as a member of the USMNT, he's going to get more caps and more international exposure than he will with Mali. I think that's a very easy argument to make. Maybe Soumare would not have bought it. But my point is that I got the impression that Miluntonic, Sampson and Arena all spent more time either cajoling guys to "go American" or not choose another nation or working with managers of foreign clubs in long-term arrangements for US players (at least Arena did when it comes to this). Being a good NT coach for the US means more than being a team coach, you also have to set a direction for the program and provide some input on the youth/various U-teams and you need to help shape the talent base with recruiting. Maybe there's nothing he could have said for Subotic or Soumare. But I don't get the sense he was involved at all. It's very powerful when the NT coach approaches you and says "you're in my plans--keep the faith--declare for the US."

Posted by: JoeW1 | January 8, 2009 11:52 PM | Report abuse

How has this team improved since four years ago? Name me one way

Posted by: churtmah | January 9, 2009 12:49 AM | Report abuse

More potentially great players

Posted by: carmines757 | January 9, 2009 1:02 AM | Report abuse

He may not be preparing the U.S. to play the beautiful game, but he's preparing them to qualify and then advance in the Cup.

It would take a deaf, dumb and blind person to not realize that you need to build from the back up.

And given the fact that the U.S. lacks star quality on the offensive side, you might as well learn how to play to your strengths and use tactics that reinforce those strengths.


Posted by: delantero | January 9, 2009 1:30 AM | Report abuse

It doesn't take a genius to see that the Nats won't have the offensive talent to really make a run in 2010, but 2014, with Jozy, Freddy, et. al. being "vets" with substantial European play... watch out. I doubt Bradley will still be coaching then, but what country keeps the same coach for more than 5 years?

Posted by: alecw81 | January 9, 2009 2:42 AM | Report abuse

I rated him a 7, with an eye towards 7.5. I sometimes find it very difficult to read some comments, both professionally-written and from the wider, crazier internet, that he he is under the gun or should be fired.

OF COURSE he is under the gun, he is the national team coach. He has been a national team assistant and an MLS coach for years. Do you think he doesn't realize the limitations of our players? Do you think he and his team of US Soccer veterans haven't figured out, by now, that for the games they *must* win, i.e. World Cup (and to a lesser extent Gold Cup) are the ones to focus on, long-term?

Due to earlier failures with players like EJ, I believe he's taking a long, hard look at every position with an eye for upcoming matches, so as to determine which players will best fit into the roles needed to win the meaningful games. Who knows if it'll work for an actual tournament? He hasn't been spectacular so far, but he has gotten the job done. I am reserving final judgment until the Confederations Cup.

Posted by: anotherbodymurdered | January 9, 2009 2:42 AM | Report abuse

Are you saying Bradley didn't do enough to pressure the State Dept. into expediting the process?

Posted by: Figgy | January 8, 2009 10:05 PM
It's actually the Department of Homeland Security, but I agree with your broader point.

I agree with Chest's many points, but I think they add up to being less than a 7. Inappropriate style and inappropriate players? He has some results, but beating Mexico and drawing with Argentina are the best of them (you might add honorably losing to Spain, but I don't count moral victories). And frankly, the US was underwhelming for much of that Gold Cup campaign. WCQs? We've won the games we should win. Credit for that, undoubtedly, but I suppose this all adds up to about a 5 IMHO.

Geez, I'm a bit morose this morning. Must get coffee.

Posted by: troy6 | January 9, 2009 4:24 AM | Report abuse

I gave him a 7. He's done as well as anyone could expect. I certainly didn't think he'd do as well as he has done. There are a few things I'd like to comment on.

-Onyewu? The only thing I ever see him do is give up yellow cards for being an ogre. We definately have other choices for center back that deserve a shot. Boswell comes to mind. Demerit if he was still starting for Watford which doesn't seem to be the case.
-Dempsey as forward? Why is he trying to make are best player useless? He needs to be our attacking mid. He doesn't have any game in the air and his shot isn't good enough for a forward. He has good footwork and can pass, sounds like a midfielder to me.
-Adu and Altidore? I agree they are overhyped. However if we are ever going to have a great team it is youth players that will make it. We have no great 24 year olds at this time. It's only the 20 and youngers that are showing promise. Altidore especially should be given call ups regularely even if only on the bench.
-The veteran call ups need to stop. Albright, Ching, Keller, even Olsen before the injury, do not help us for the next World Cup. Everyone that plays at this point should be thought to have some chance of playing on the team in 2010. We should be developing talent not trying to win friendlies.
-Strikers? Who is going to be next to Donovan? Is Donovan going to be upfront? Twellman is too slow for top level. Ching's air game is only good enough for the MLS. Johnson is way too streaky and only scores against bad teams. I am not a fan of DOnovan but he is our only "good" striker. I think he only scores against bad teams as well but at least he scores. Kenny Cooper needs to be a permanent part of the team immediately and as said above so does Altidore. Cooper and Donovan should be the starters and work Altidore in off the bench. Move Dempsey back to midfield and stop trying to make something of him he isn't. Chris Rolfe is another possibility, he seems to score against DC a lot.

-One way the team has improved? Keller is out. Time Howard is our only top level player. He is the only player that could be seen on an Arsenal or Man U and he should have been starting in the World Cup, not our thrid choice. I wish Perkins had gotten a call by now, but I don't know how well he has played in Valerenga. Guzan from what I have seen is overrated, but he is a couple years younger than Perkins and a little better.

Posted by: bighungry | January 9, 2009 6:49 AM | Report abuse

There was never any doubt that the US wouldn't qualify for the World Cup given our resources (personnel, financial, etc...) but to say that Bradley is progressing is a stretch. What did he improve from Arena? The blame lies not on Bradley; he's just a guy doing his job but on Sunil Gulati, who selected him without foresight into where US Soccer should be by now. What happened to 2010 program? Gulati should have selected someone with ambition to win the World Cup, and not just somebody to move the program along.
I'm pretty sure we won't get past 1st or 2nd round in 2010 with Bradley as coach.

Posted by: Charisma_Man | January 9, 2009 8:54 AM | Report abuse

What were the complaints people had of Arena?

-He didn't bring enough people into the fold
-He didn't schedule enough away games
-He didn't schedule any world class opponents

For every one of these, Bradley is a success. He has capped over 60 players this cycle, played away to South Africa, Poland, and others, and played Spain, England and Argentina. He won the competition he was supposed to and lost the one our federation and clubs hamstrung him on.

Style of play should be irrelevent; in the words of Al Davis, "Just win, baby." I could care less if we bunkered for 89.5 minutes and took the remaining 30s to score off a set piece. Far better countries than us have made this their MO for years and have quite a few pieces of shine to show for it.

International soccer has been moving for quite some time to a two dmid setup. The Dutch, French, and Germans do it so Bradley is not the aberration some here believe. However, the switch to such a formation requires wingers who can dribble, attack, and whip in a perfect cross, players who we don't have. Our best (Donovan and Dempsey) all have the same position of "attacker" but without the other requisite skills the formation demands.

Bradley has done all he has supposed to, shown almost anyone deserving of a call a chance (Buddle is the one who stands out most), and the style of play he has implemented will help us out of group play, jogo bonito or not.

Posted by: Josh8 | January 9, 2009 8:56 AM | Report abuse

I'm pretty sure we won't get past 1st or 2nd round in 2010 with Bradley as coach.

Posted by: Charisma_Man | January 9, 2009 8:54 AM


I'm pretty sure that if have the following draw, we will not get out of the group:

Ivory Coast

Whereas with this:


I very much like our chances. People who blindly dismiss Bradley and team's chances of advancement now show their ignorance. After the draw, yes, prognosticate away, but to arbitarily say we can't advance....I can't believe that.

Posted by: Josh8 | January 9, 2009 9:00 AM | Report abuse


He's gotten results consistently. But they're results he should be expected to get for the most part. I'd prefer to see Bradley go a loooong way toward opening up the team's offensive style.

I disagree that the style he's playing will generally allow the US team to get results in the WC. I think they guarantee a lot of 1-0 losses against elite teams.

Posted by: teo_68 | January 9, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Yet I am disappointed with the whole US click that has developed on the national team.

It would be tough for Bradley to put together a German clique or an Argentine one for the US national team . . . .

Posted by: OWNTF | January 9, 2009 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Bradley should call up Tim Tebow.

The Gator diaspora on I-270 is very happy this morning.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | January 9, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

I think Bob is fine and above average - I don't think he's been as progressive as Bruce Arena was in the 1998-2002 era, however, he hasn't set US Soccer back as far as Steve Sampson did.

Bob's player selection leaves me frustrated, but I'm willing to see that being as much of an issue of American soccer growing yet again. We are producing a number of players that fans seemingly want to get a shot at wearing the shirt and yet it's tough to say they've out-earned a veteran for that chance. I also think there are a number of players who have proven they get that right and have flat-lined on their development since then and their youth and potential upside is still limiting the slots to try and blood new guys.

I think Bob can achieve adequate results in South Africa, both this year and next and use this summer's Gold Cup to really examine some younger players who could contribute on an international level. Bob and Peter both need a chance to still prove that they can coach and manage the talent into a position to get results that we expect them to.

Posted by: VirginiaBlueBlood | January 9, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

-Onyewu? The only thing I ever see him do is give up yellow cards for being an ogre. We definately have other choices for center back that deserve a shot. Boswell comes to mind. Posted by: bighungry | January 9, 2009 6:49 AM

You have officially taken my place in the " I don't know what the hell I'm talking about" category with this statement. Congratulations may be in order.
What the heck are you talking about Albright, Keller, and Olsen?!? for anyway?

Posted by: DadRyan | January 9, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

I gave him a 6. What JoeW1 said....

Posted by: CHICO13 | January 9, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

At this point, he is a "6" to me. It would be higher if he were more flexible and open-minded on player selection, and weren't so stubborn on retaining underachieving players. Also, his conservatism irks me. I would like to see a different look now and then. Instead, the style of play has become ultra-defensive. We saw how that worked out for Arena against the Czechs in 2006.

Posted by: b18bolo | January 9, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

I gave the man a seven, and it looks like I'm in good (or at least copious) company.

BB has done an excellent job of keeping the player pool fresh. And his results speak for themselves.

What I'd like to see change is the style of play. We play too defensively, and it's frustrating to see our attack continually snuffed out because we don't support our forwards or try to build the ball a little more patiently from the back.

Posted by: Matte | January 9, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

He's done what he can with what he has to work with. I think the idea of a magical coach coming in and making the US a superpower is silly until we have top players in the major european leagues who play consistently.

He seems to be a good manager and a realistic guy. While I have some serious issues with the fact that his son plays so much, he seems to be doing a good job looking at players in other positions. It would be nice, though, if he would be a little more open with fans as to why certain players seem to get overlooked while other seemingly-less talented players are called in every camp.

I gave him a six.

Posted by: hacksaw | January 9, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

He's done what he can with what he has to work with. I think the idea of a magical coach coming in and making the US a superpower is silly until we have top players in the major european leagues who play consistently...

Posted by: hacksaw | January 9, 2009 11:28 AM

Was Denmark in Euro'92 or Greece in Euro'04 considered silly afterthoughts too?
These teams don't have players who are better than us yet they managed to win the Euro championship, which is harder to qualify than the World Cup. It's not like the US has primitive players. Our players are of average and above average intl standards, and with the right coach, we can make a big impact. Bradley is not the answer for the World Cup finals. He can be the guy to lead us there, but once there it takes someone with experience and tactical acumen to progress.

Posted by: Charisma_Man | January 9, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

What I'd like to see change is the style of play. We play too defensively, and it's frustrating to see our attack continually snuffed out because we don't support our forwards or try to build the ball a little more patiently from the back.

Posted by: Matte | January 9, 2009 10:47 AM


Maybe Pia can coach both national teams.

Posted by: OWNTF | January 9, 2009 12:09 PM | Report abuse

The complaints against Bradley here crack me up. Why sometimes play Dempsey at forward and sometimes at midfield? Perhaps the same reasons that Fulham do. He was too patient with EJ? The guy had a lot of potential - cut him sooner, and the complaints would have been that he was not patient enough (and it's not like we have a ton of firepower up front). Don't like the style of game the US plays? As others have said, the style is dictated by the players you have, and our veteran players are not flair players. Most entertaining is to simultaneously complain about a negative style of play and giving kudos to Greece for winning Euros. The Greeks were pilloried for their negative style -- good grief!

I gave him a 9, simply because I couldn't imagine what he could have been expected to do better. Glad I'm not a national team coach! :-)

Posted by: glfrazier | January 9, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

I gave him a 9 because I think he did as well as could be done by anybody, given the players he had to work with at the various games. My only criticism up to this point is that he kept EJ in the squad for way, way too long.

Posted by: lmorin | January 9, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

I gave Bradley a 9 and instead of going into the details I'll illustrate with a story.

Until recently when my twins were born I was fencing. One of my clubmates is an older gent from Spain, with an English mother to boot. Needless to say, he takes his football very seriously (but no, he will never convince me Real Madrid and Man U are the most worthy teams on Earth no matter how hard he tries).

Last year after the Spain friendly he came into the club speaking well about the US showing. After Euro 08 he agreed the US was key in exposing the failure of putting Torres alone up top which turned out to be a crucial strategic change.

But the day after the Argentina friendly in NY he came in absolutely glowing with praise, saying he never before thought football would take hold in the US but after seeing that match he believed. He went on about the team and the crowd and how in that kind of atmosphere, with communication impossible, the US smothered the superior Argentinians.

So has Bradley got us ready to win the Cup? Clearly not. I don't think we can go all the way on a series of draws. What he has done is everything I expect him to do and more, taking the team straight to the top talent in the world, and performing respectably. I see the US on the verge of becoming a true threat and that is all I could ask for.

Posted by: DCU-ATL | January 9, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

9? Are you kidding? 9 is Klinnsman taking a German squad expected to exit in the round of 16 to the semi-finals in 06. 9 is Hidink taking Korea, who were lucky to get out of the first round, to the semi-finals in 02.

Bob Bradley, in no way shape or form, has performed on that level.

I'd have to agree with Charisma_man. We've got players who should put us into another level. No Ronaldo's or Kaka's, but enough quality all over the field that we should not be playing afraid.

Which begs the question, if you're not expecting/demanding a more sophisticated and incisive style of play from your players, how on earth do you ever expect them to rise to that level? If you don't expect them to excel, they will not excel.

Posted by: Matte | January 9, 2009 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Who gave him the 3? LOL

Posted by: Matte | January 9, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

I gave him an 11.
Nigel Tufnel

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | January 9, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

I gave him an 8, actually.

by the way, the 'advanced tactics' that teams use to advance in tournaments? it's called massive defense and counter-attacks. Look at Greece in 04, they scored 7 goals in 6 matches, and conceded 4. all of their knockout round games were 1-0. one goal was a penalty, four were from set pieces. yes, they scored TWO goals from the run of play. exciting football there. that's how you take a mediocre team on a cup run. which, not coincidentally, is how the US needs to play in the World Cup. you think Italy plays attacking ball in the Cup? not a chance. you know who does? the Dutch. how's their record in the Cup these days? as good as you'd expect it to be? Defense wins championships (unless you are insane, or well, Brazil) Winning is what matters, this grade may be adjusted on Feb. 12.

Posted by: joshuaostevens | January 9, 2009 5:54 PM | Report abuse

The team has shown a complete lack of ability to create scoring chances in the run of play, or control the middle of the field. There is a complete lack of playmaking creativity, and a paucity of ideas that is staggering. There are times when you win, and yet you know you're a fraud, considering this site, just think of the '96 redskins when they opened the year 7-2, even w/that record, there still seemed to be something rotten in Denmark, it just hadnt settled in yet. Sure enough, 7 weeks later, we were 9-7, and had gone from conference contenders, to divisional jokes.

Bradley's Nats register ugly wins, but the details that matter when you watch his teams play, suggest they will not be able to spring a surprise on anyone, defend against better international sides (instead will rely on Howard's agility in goal to pull them out of the fire)or attack any side of quality w/any degree of effectiveness. This team will embarrass itself at the Confed Cup, but it won't be enough to get a coach who never had a resume that could justify coaching an MLS all star team, let alone the full senior nats from '01-'06. His hiring was, and is a disaster for U.S. Soccer and its development in this country.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | January 10, 2009 12:58 AM | Report abuse

Wow. The impression I got was that US fans, at least the hard core ones like those typicaly reading this blog, were really down on Bradley. Perhaps they are just a vocal minority, as this poll seems to indicate otherwise.

Posted by: Wendell_Gee | January 10, 2009 2:19 AM | Report abuse

I agree with those who say that he's not focused enough on developing players for 2010. We should be bleeding new talent more than turning to the Eddie Lewis Frankie Hejduk's of the world.
And it's not just that he plays a boring game. He plays a dangerous game. Failure to take the game to the opponent through dangerous waves of attacks with an aggressive offense results in bunkering on defense. Americans don't win at that game, we get burned too often in the big tournaments.
And, I get a rather unenthusiastic "he's ok" from players when I've had the chance to ask them for their view of Bradley. I give him a 4.

Posted by: dsheon | January 10, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company