Network News

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

World Cup poll: Bob Bradley's future as U.S. coach

In your opinion, should the U.S. Soccer Federation offer Bob Bradley a new four-year contract to remain as the U.S. national team coach?

By Steve Goff  |  June 28, 2010; 10:24 AM ET
Categories:  2010 World Cup , Poll , U.S. men's national team , USSF  | Tags: Bob Bradley, U.S. soccer, World Cup  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Slovakia vs. Netherlands in World Cup round of 16
Next: Netherlands vs. Slovakia: Oranje are into the quarterfinals

Comments

reignking (from previous post), the PU stadium reminds you of Lisbon? How?

Posted by: troy6 | June 28, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Voted "Go" but I'll put a caveat on there - he should only go if we can get someone better. As in, we've got pen on paper for that Someone Better before we show Bob the door.

Posted by: VercengetorixII | June 28, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Schellotto handball was lame. I blame it on the Jabulani...

AS for the WaPo coverage, I thought Paul Tenorio was supposed to be working on it? Maybe without Goff around to crack the whip dude has gotten lazy. Then again, I think Goff did explain earlier this year that it wouldn't be possible to have someone on the story for every away game. Besides it's not like you couldn't watch the game, do you really need someone to write about it to validate it? I'm just happy the game was on period.

Posted by: DadRyan | June 27, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

I don't want to come down on a fellow United supporter but Dad you are wrong on this one. Do we need somebody to write about the USA, the Wizards, or the Nationals? While we are at it do we need a sports page to validate our support of anybody? I understand day to day shortcomings but the WP should have had somebody cover United's match. The others were correct. It's about respect for the team.

Posted by: blackandred777 | June 28, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

I wish Bob Bradley a nice job coaching a European club team.

Posted by: B_A_ | June 28, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

"It's about respect for the team."


That doesn't feed the bulldog...

Posted by: JkR- | June 28, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

I voted "Go" but only because I believe it is not a good strategy to keep the same coach for two cycles. I think Bradley coached US to its most successful four years ever (2007 Gold Cup Champs, 2009 Confederations Cup Finalist, and first time USA has ever finished atop the qualifying group since 1930).

I also think this team has some great potential. I think Edu and Bradley can grow into a top midfield tandem.

The only concern for the future is our backline. We need wingers and centerbacks to start coming through because our current squad may be too old in 2014.

Posted by: grubbsbl | June 28, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

I voted "go" but I wouldn't be so upset if he stayed. He's a good coach, I just generally think it's better for national teams to switch it up every cycle, even when successful. I agree with VercengetorixII: Gulati should have a good successor lined up before making a change (although the way these things work, it would probably be impossible to have any formal discussions with candidates before letting Bradley go).

I wish Bradley all the best- it would be great to see him get a shot in Europe.

Posted by: ricky_b | June 28, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I'm with grubbsbl and ricky_b: BB did great in my book, but very few national team coaches stay for two cycles, and the ones who do tend to regret it.

Posted by: garbageout | June 28, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

"It's about respect for the team."


That doesn't feed the bulldog...

Posted by: JkR- | June 28, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Maybe not right now but United supporters feed this bulldog 99% of the time. Something the Post may want to keep in mind.

Posted by: Gambrills4 | June 28, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

I voted "stay" for the same reason VercengetorixII voted "go", and thats because I don't think there is an obvious upgrade waiting to coach this team. Klinsmann might be that guy, but has anything changed for him since 2006 that will make him want the job now? The USMNT isnt at the stage yet where a Euro mercenary can just come in and manage the team to a WC. We still need to develop our own coaches, just as we do our players. If Bob Bradley is still the best and brightest American coach - and if Sunil thinks he has room to grow, based on the experience of this cycle - then the job should still be his.

Posted by: VTUnited | June 28, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

I voted "stay" but I don't necessarily mean through the 2014 Cup. Maybe one more year/into mid or late-2011? I think a new coach who will take us to Brazil needs a three year deal - one year of friendlies, 2 years of qualifying plus the WC.

Posted by: soccerman | June 28, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

The grass is always greener . . . eh?

Arguably the most successful 4 years of any US soccer coach: 1st in Qualifying, 2nd in Confed. Cup, win the World Cup group . . .

Perhaps Capello @ $9 million/year would be better? Mr. Klinsman will deliver us to the promise land?

Posted by: delantero | June 28, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

I voted go. I think BB did a good job but I also believe the program could become stale if he is held over. I give you Italy as my textbook example.

Posted by: Gambrills4 | June 28, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Stale? Bob has opened this team up to new players across the spectrum--Bedoya?!. I would think he'd do the same over the next 4.

I agree that he does tend to stick with favorites (Clark), but I'm willing to see how he does.

I'm just ticked to see that we're not going to Copa America. Did we not get invited or are we just flopping out?

Posted by: delantero | June 28, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

uhhh my reply to your double post is in the last thread blackandred777.

Posted by: DadRyan | June 28, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

troy: the bridge going over the river as I sat and had a few drinks at the dock nearby. Belenenses' stadium is near, but not close enough to the river or bridge.

Posted by: Reignking | June 28, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Replace Bradley if we have someone better. Most teams don't have the same coach for two consecutive World Cups. I think Michael Bradley definitely belongs on the team but I think having his father as coach lead to people questioning Bob Bradley's judgement on lineups etc.

Posted by: GeneWells | June 28, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Maybe not right now but United supporters feed this bulldog 99% of the time. Something the Post may want to keep in mind.

Posted by: Gambrills4 | June 28, 2010 11:02 AM

++++++++++++++++++++++++

Check the number of game related posts. Seems to me it was low even by US Open cup standards.

The Post has 2 reporters in South Africa for 5+ weeks apiece. In the modern media world, I understand not covering a mid season MLS road game with a live reporter. In fact, I wonder how many MLS teams have a beat reporter assigned to them that covers road matches in person? Somehow I doubt it's 100%.

Posted by: JkR- | June 28, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Stale? Bob has opened this team up to new players across the spectrum--Bedoya?!. I would think he'd do the same over the next 4.

I agree that he does tend to stick with favorites (Clark), but I'm willing to see how he does.

I'm just ticked to see that we're not going to Copa America. Did we not get invited or are we just flopping out?

Posted by: delantero | June 28, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

So did Bruce, but look at what happened in 2006.

Posted by: Gambrills4 | June 28, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Stay until there's a better replacement (and at the moment I don't think there is), or unless Bob wants to leave. Bob has done a great job while coach. Sure, he made some decisions that make you scratch your head, but I think he's earned the right to decide whether he wants to stay or go. Again, I don't see anyone that would be leaps-and-bounds better for the U.S. game at the moment.

Posted by: nairbsod | June 28, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Dadryan, my bad. I meant to post it on the most recent thread initially but clicked on the wrong one.

Posted by: blackandred777 | June 28, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

No Copa America because we have the Copa Oro to worry about. We can't afford another C-level squad down south.

This isn't a yes or no question. I think Bradley should go if he can get a job in Europe.

Posted by: Reignking | June 28, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Jkr,

I don't think it was low due to lack of interest but due to a lack of a thread. Don't get me wrong I fully appreciate the Post's coverage of soccer but they couldn't have somebody turn on the TV and do a blog entry. Not exactly asking a lot for a local professional sports franchise.

Posted by: Gambrills4 | June 28, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Go. For numerous reasons, mostly because I think Bob has enmeshed himself so deeply into US soccer that he has fans scared whether we will be as talented without him. (laugh track).

It's true, he did bring in Feilhaber, Jozy, many others. But many of them were U-20 stars anyway, not exactly genius work. He helped to develop his son, and he helped Donovan take the next step. Someone mentioned Bedoya, but many were asking about him much earlier. And Davies, well, Ching had to get injured and we had to be a match from elimination to see him start. We will still have all these players. What we do not have is the qualities we lacked against Ghana, passing, support for attacking talent, relief of pressure from the back line, sound player selection.

Bob cannot provide any of these things, or he would have worked on them. Our weaknesses were side effects of a strategy as much as they were problems of depth and talent. It's time for a different one, a fresh face to deal with all the fresh faces we should be relying on.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | June 28, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

"The grass is always greener . . . (unless you are trashing Baltimore)...eh"
-delantero

You make some excellent points. Rico, Findley those don't undo everything that the man has accomplished.

Right now Bradley is about as popular with me as those junkies you like to talk about shooting up in Patterson Park.

Which is definitely not "fair". But life isn't "fair". If it was, you would still be living in Bmore and there would be peace and prosperity in the Land of Pleasant Living.

I'm with others who believe that it is a generally a good idea to change coaches with a new cycle.

I am all for looking at trying to get a deal done with Klinsmann. Sunil needs to put me on the exploratory panel.

Posted by: yankiboy | June 28, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

I'd agree that it has more to do with Bradley's own decision and as RK pointed out the availability of a legitimate challenge overseas.
Otherwise, I think he can stay on for now. He's done well, aside from the usual starting XI brain farts. There are plenty of coaches out there that have made bigger mistakes than Bob.

My only hope is that we NEVER see Rico in the stars and stripes again. Give me Edu, give me Torres, give me Kyle Beckerman for Cristman's sake, just no more Rico.

Say NO to Rico.

Posted by: DadRyan | June 28, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

I voted Go, because I think this would be the best thing for both Bradley and the team.

Bradley has done a great job (even it wasn't flawless). He's developed key players, moved the team forward in both tactics and mentality, and won a lot of games while he was at it. He's contributed a lot, but it's unclear he has more to add. But he has a lot to add at a club team, and I think it would be the best thing for his career.

The flip side of this is that while the team gained a lot from Bob, to take things further, they needs fresh blood, fresh ideas, and fresh drive. These are the things that a new coach can bring.

The bottom line is that it is in everyone's best interest to move on. (However, I do agree that we need to be pretty close to a deal with a new coach before deciding whether or not to offer Bradley a new position.)

Posted by: dcbird | June 28, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Our greatest problem lies not with the vintner, but with the vines . . .

Posted by: OWNTF | June 28, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

The Good:
Cohesive team
Players bought into system
Team better than the individual talent

The Bad:
Consistently poor starts. Just can't happen so frequently at this level.
Starting Findley
Not starting Feilhaber

Out of his control:
Altidore missing the net
Shallow forward pool
Howard not up to his best

Overall, I think the idea of his staying for 2 years is a good one, but may not be feasible. Why would he stay on with no guarantee of leading the team through the next qualifying cycle and World Cup?

Posted by: paj18 | June 28, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

i dont buy the "change for the sake of change" argument. I think that applies to countries with deeper pools, who are expected to compete for the WC every four years, but not necessarily for a country that is still developing its football identity. pointing to Italy and France this year as reason why not to allow a manager to repeat doesn't really apply to the US situation, in my opinion. I think most people would agree that any coach could step in and get out of the group stage with Italy or France's talent pool, but the same would not be said for the US.

Posted by: VTUnited | June 28, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

He should be considered for the job but other candidates should also be looked at seriously.

Bradley did an adequate job. He was obviously a good halftime motivator as the team finished the game with lots of spirit and determination in every World Cup game. But why all the early defensive lapses?

If Bradley is re-hired it will essentially be a continuation of the 12 year Arena-Bradley era. Continuity is not bad but few top soccer countries rely on the same coach for much more than a 4-year cycle.

I was for hiring Klinsmann when Bradley got the job but I don't even know whether Jurgen was seriously interested or whether he had impossible demands.

Rehiring Bradley won't be a catastrophe but I'd like other options to be considered. Who knows whether Coach Bradley will ever find an adequate midfield partner for his son in another 4 years?

Posted by: Joel_M_Lane | June 28, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

The Bad:
Consistently poor starts. Just can't happen so frequently at this level.
Starting Findley
Not starting Feilhaber


Posted by: paj18 | June 28, 2010 12:03 PM |

Feilhaber is not a 90 minute player for this team. His defensive abilities are not that great (see Confed Cup 2009). He looked great in the 2nd half of the WC games because he was sent out to be an offensive spark, not to play defense. If he were to start, who would you take off?

Posted by: VTUnited | June 28, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Bradley's done great, but it's time for change for change sake. It'll be a (mostly) whole new squad in four years and you need a new manager -- National team manager should be a temp job.... especially if Klinsman is ready.

Posted by: bbarrie | June 28, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Depends on the alternative. If Klinsman signs on, then good. But, don't bring in some euro fool just to bring in a foreigner.

Still don't know why he starts clark over Edu. Just doesn't make sense.

Posted by: hacksaw | June 28, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Growing stale isn't a product of the talent pool but of the human condition. Therefore, any example is a valid one.

Posted by: Gambrills4 | June 28, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Stay. Let me begin with complimenting the quality of the thoughtful considerations even by those who say go.

I believe US soccer and the US soccer player is a completely different animal than you find in Europe or South America. Klinsman himself said it in his post mortem review. So if we believe it's key to know your players, know what drives them, I don't see a European coach coming in and doing that successfully. In Europe it's about finding better players, not making players better.

And let's be clear, when people talk about switching coaches they're talking about bringing someone from Europe and not another US or even a Latin national. Certainly we could find a European coach that can set up a strong bunker and wait out each game but that's putting off the inevitable at best. We still wouldn't have the goal scorers we need to win on the counter attack.

At this point I believe the coaching question is irrelevant. BB has found a way to maximize what he's got. Until the players improve (primarily the forwards) this is where we are.

Posted by: DCU-ATL | June 28, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Bob Bradley has done a good, not great, job. At Confederations Cup the team won 2 and lost 3. At the World Cup they won 1, lost 1, tied 2. And Bradley was still figuring out his players (guessing wrongly on Clark and Findley) right through the final game of the tournament. At what point is the coach supposed to have these things figured out?

Lineup aside, Bradley's tactics were all wrong for the Ghana game--I won't understand why he had Donovan pinch all the way into the middle instead of playing like a real winger. Watch the game again and count how many times Donovan stays on the flank; I remember only once, about the 50th minute, and it was the team's best opportunity. It's ok for Donovan to come inside sometimes, but doing it every time makes the team predictable, and Cherundolo wasn't throwing Ghana off balance with his runs forward because everyone knew he was coming. Bradley's mechanical tactics will not break down a beatable team like Ghana, and so the team's potential is limited.

More alarmingly, the WC qualification campaign was underwhelming. With Mexico in such disarray under SGE, the USA might have walked away with 1st place. Instead, USA came from far behind for a road tie at El Salvador and a home tie with Costa Rica. And the USA got trounced (notwithstanding Charlie Davies' memorable goal at Azteca) on the road against Mexico and Costa Rica. Put it this way: Bob Bradley's team made Christian Castillo look really, really good.

With dozens of guys playing in Europe, the USA talent pool is better than ever. The last 4 years have been fairly successful. But the team has already achieved everything it can achieve with Bob Bradley as coach. It's time for the USSF and Bradley to part ways, very respectfully.

Posted by: hungrypug | June 28, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Klinsmann!!

Posted by: beergorila | June 28, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

At this point I believe the coaching question is irrelevant. BB has found a way to maximize what he's got. Until the players improve (primarily the forwards) this is where we are.

Posted by: DCU-ATL | June 28, 2010 12:36 PM

This is what I was getting at in the Sunil Gulati interview thread, and I agree. (And well put, DCU-ATL.)

Our focus should be on youth and player development, as right now that's where we can get the greatest bang for our buck. Hiring a high-priced European coach for the 2014 cycle would be a misallocation of scarce USSF resources.

Posted by: Xill | June 28, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Since we're speculating on Bob's future in four years ... let's also speculate on what the USA team will look like in four years. Several people have commented that the team will be almost completely different.

Sure ... how so? What changes do you foresee?

Posted by: Cerealman | June 28, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I agree with you, DCU-ATL. The discourse here has been much more intelligent -- too many kneejerk reactions elsewhere.

I think that talent growth and evaluation will be the most important activities over the next few years, not coaching.

Posted by: Reignking | June 28, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I think Bradley did a great job but it's time to bring in a new, fresh perspective to the team.

The U.S. needs a manager who can coach this team to be more disciplined on the pitch and better organized in the defense.

I like Klinsmann but my dream manager would be Felipe Scolari, the manager that got Brazil's 5th title in 2002 and got Portugal to be the runner-up in the Euro 2005 and to the semis in the WC2006.

Posted by: felipe55 | June 28, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I voted "stay." I don't see an immediate need to replace Bob Bradley. The team exceeded my expectations in South Africa.

I'm curious what the "go" voters mean by "someone better." Please offer examples other than Jurgen Klinsmann, who has already said "no."

Posted by: Brokenbil | June 28, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Are we having a coaching discussion here or what? Shouldn't somebody mention Bob Stoops, Tom Izzo, or John Calipari? What about Bill Cowher?

Posted by: FutbolCoachPicker | June 28, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I googled for the 2014 team, and all I got were Freddy Adu links.

Posted by: Reignking | June 28, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

I voted "go" because the Coach manifested two recurring flaws. FIRST: Our attacking scheme was rigid, predictable and not creative. Apparently Coach went to a USSF Soccer Camp and was told that it is best to take the ball wide, cross the ball to the center and try to head the ball into the goal. While that is true, it is not an inflexible concept, and SOMETIMES you have to vary the attack to keep defenses honest. Otherwise the defenders just park themselves in the middle and shut down the scoring (which is why we could not score!!) Look at how Donovan scored from the flank, at a bad angle, because nobody expected it. The SECOND error is one coaches make with frustrating regularity: Playing players based upon their reputation rather than performance. Altidore and Findley were NOT PRODUCING, so why start them? Altidore was constantly avoiding contact and yielding possession. Findley was non-existent. In fact, in the Ghana match the only guys actually PLAYING were Donovan, Dempsy, Feilhaber, Bradley and the keeper. Everybody else was essentially a tourist who played in spurts but mostly stood around. By the way, maybe our soccer coaches ought to watch a few NHL games and learn something about forechecking. They might also benefit from learning some defensive skills (one cannot defend by staying 5 yards away from the guy with the ball).

Posted by: MARKM2 | June 28, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Since we're speculating on Bob's future in four years ... let's also speculate on what the USA team will look like in four years. Several people have commented that the team will be almost completely different.

Sure ... how so? What changes do you foresee?

Posted by: Cerealman | June 28, 2010 1:00 PM |

I cant figure out why everyone says it will look "completely different". The only starters who will almost certainly be considered too old in 4 years are Boca, Demerit, and Dolo. Donovan, Dempsey, and Onyewu will all be under 32, and the rest of the midfield is in their early 20s, along with Altidore. GKs don't age, so Howard should be back. That sounds to me like a pretty intact team for another cycle, especially considering that the parts being replaced were the weakest link.

Posted by: VTUnited | June 28, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

VTUnited:

I'd start Benny and push Landon or Dempsey, more likely Dempsey, just behind, or up with, Altidore. I wouldn't have said this before the WC, but after the last few games he proved that he was rising to the challenge of playing at higher level.

Posted by: paj18 | June 28, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Here's a post on BS that may provoke 2014 discussion.

Posted by: Reignking | June 28, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Well in Reignking.

Posted by: OWNTF | June 28, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

@VTUnited: I agree. Oh, it's so far away, but I don't think this team will be completely redone. Maybe half the team ... but there's guys here who will definitely contend for 2014WC.

Howard, Donovan, Dempsey, Altidore and Bradley are locks. Davies might be back too.

Posted by: Cerealman | June 28, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Only 8 out of 23 2006 players returned.

Posted by: Reignking | June 28, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Reignking - while that is an interesting stat, if you look at the 15 who did not return, I think its safe to say that only 5 of those players realisically had a shot age-wise, but did not make it due to skill or injury (EJ, Ching, Convey, Albright, Wolff - Gibbs doesn't count because it was Berhalter on the final roster). Would you honestly have expected Berhalter, Mastro, JO'B, Lewis, Reyna, McBride, Keller, Benny, Pope, or Conrad to have been around this cycle? The team was younger this cycle, so it would seem much more likely that we would see the inverse this time (ie, 15 return, 8 dont).

Posted by: VTUnited | June 28, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

If the World Cup is demonstrating anything it is that players over 30 need to be super scrutinized. The game is just too fast today for older more tired legs so I would be very careful about bringing 2/3 of the roster back if I was the next coach.

Posted by: Gambrills4 | June 28, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Let's be honest,

If Donovan didn't score that goal against Algeria, and that resulted in a 0-0 final with the US not qualifying this is an obvious go situation.

Bradley didn't have the right players, and they have had way too many poor starts in the last two years.

The US led for only the final 2 mins of the Algeria match, otherwise they were always in a hole.

With the exception of the England match (and even then they needed a keeper gaffe to manage the draw), this team way underperfomed at the WC and failed to take advantage of the the best draw they've had since this qualification streak began in 1990.

It turns out all Donovan did was prolong our dissapointment 4 extra days. I don't think Bradley's the guy, and I think more "European mercenaries" may be interested after the excitment, yet failure of the team this World Cup.

Posted by: gr8nylacbiz | June 28, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

This is a really good discussion even by our usually high standards.

I said "go," but I am now thinking: 1) Can't beat a horse without a horse. So who the alternative is is a very good question. 2) The points about getting the maximum out of the available players are on target. The team factor here was awesome, and that was Bradley. 3) What you have to work with by way of a player pool is a very good point. We are lacking in goal-scoring forwards, period. We need to develop more. 4) Maybe we should have an American coach.

Still: Clark? Findley? The early goals given away/slow starts? But I won't be upset if Skeletor, as Mrs. Dccal likes to call BB, gets another campaign.

Posted by: dccal | June 28, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Dccal - hindsight is of course 20/20, but I think it was clear that BB thought he needed fresh legs and speed against Ghana (the fastet team at the WC). I am no Rico fan, but he is probably a little faster than Edu, and was more fresh. Findley meets those criteria over his counterparts. I hated both decisions, but I understand what BB was going for. In the end both players let him down (while surprising Bornstein did decently).

Posted by: VTUnited | June 28, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

If Bob doesn't get rehired by Sunil, don't be surprised to see him with DCU. He's one of Bruce's guys, and KP loves him.

Back in '98 qualifying, after the US was shockingly drawn at home (RFK) in early fall 1997 against Jamaica on that beautiful ball that Goose played to a Jamaican right in front of his own goal (think Freddy Brown to James Worthy), the USSF considered firing Sampson. KP offered to loan Bruce to US Soccer and was prepared to make Bob the DCU coach, largely driven by the liklihood at that time that DCU would lose Bob to the team-to-be in Chicago, something KP was not looking forward to. Dr. Contiguglia declined the offer, and the US went in the dumper in 1998.


Posted by: lgm6986 | June 28, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm in between on this one: voted to offer Bob a contract, but don't necessarily believe it's the best choice for either party. Unlike Arena eight years ago, I think that Bob might actually have a shot at being offered a decent European coaching position; so he may well get an opportunity to take on a new challenge, which is something he makes very clear he's interested in pursuing. I think, too, that, for the Federation, Bob's been a success. And one wonders how much luck Sunil will have in finding someone better than Bob, especially if they remain unwilling to give a new head coach control over more than just the senior team (as Klinsmann wanted). I mean, when Sunil failed to get his man four years ago, the Federation was left, as it were, standing at the altar, and the national team lost about six months of prep time in this cycle. In the end, we had few other (any?) serious options other than Bradley. I was one of many who referred to Bob as "Arena Lite." Well, I was wrong. I think Bob has Arena's tactical skills, has nurtured new talent for the team, motivates players to want to play for him, and doesn't have the downside of Bruce's ego. We could do far worse than Bob Bradley. In theory, we could do better, as well. If Sunil can bag a top flight coach - not just someone with a great CV, but who "gets" the US system, understands the player pool - then I'd be excited to see what that kind of a coach could do with this program. If not - if the US job just isn't something that appears to that level of coach, or if the Federation is unwilling to loosen its grip on the program's reigns - then I say we lock in Bob for another four years.

Posted by: DouginCMH | June 28, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Bradley has done a great job getting the team to their current position. What we need to ask ourselves is - can he get our team to the next level. If the answer is no then we need someone to get us to the next level. Personally I think he cannot get us to that next level. Maybe we need to give Jurgen Klinsmann a chance to take us to that next level.

Posted by: SECFan | June 28, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

I can see Party Boy Pontius in the running for 2014 if he can work on his finishing a bit. He's extremely fit, and can look extremely dangerous. It's not like Altidore is known for his finishing....;)

Posted by: DadRyan | June 28, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

I think it might be interesting to have Klinsy, sure. but let's not go overboard here. the man coached Germany to it's least successful World Cup EVER. sure, they won third, but when you take into account the fact that they were hosting the thing, that's hardly an acceptable result.

quick: what is the only host nation to do worse in their hosted cup than in the previous world cup? if you said Klinsy's Germany team in 06, buy yourself a knockwurst. he's not known for his tactical acumen, with that team or Bayern. he's known for getting his players in shape and playing as a team. oh wait, just what Bob Bradley is known for. so why do we think he'd do better? cause he's German? if we're bringing a foreign mercenary in, can we at least find one who's won something? anything?

Posted by: joshuaostevens | June 28, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

I would love coach bradley to get a job in europe. I would love for some new blood at the top of the USMNT. I think both parties need to grow on their own. Maybe he can come back for 2018?

Coach Bradley did a great job for us, but I think it's time for something new...

Posted by: wordup1 | June 28, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I'm curious what the "go" voters mean by "someone better." Please offer examples other than Jurgen Klinsmann, who has already said "no."

Posted by: Brokenbil | June 28, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

So far I have only seen one name that is not Klinsmann brought forward; interestingly enough, in the post before this one: Scolari.

Still waiting to hear something other than crickets (or Klinsmann) as to who should REALISTICALLY replace Bradley.

Posted by: SportzNut21 | June 28, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Hiring a new manager/coach and expecting him both to lead the team to victories while also repairing/improving/overhauling the way the USA discovers and develops soccer players (and youth coaches)is too much for one person. We need both jobs to be addressed skilfully and soon. Klinsmann may be better as "development czar" than as coach. So I'm looking forward to two hires, and they had better be able to work together.

Posted by: b18bolo | June 28, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

He is a good coach that helped us become a solid team. That is it.

If we want to take that next step, we need to find an elite coach

Our talent is not GREAT so we wont consistently take that next step unless we can use our talent to the MAX and Bradley will not do that

Posted by: Bious | June 28, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Onalfo! ;)

Posted by: alan19 | June 28, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

IMO, all this coach talk is missing the boat. What the USMNT needs begins at the youth levels. Most importantly, we need to get more minority and inner city involvement in the sport. Some of the greatest athletes in our country never have picked up a soccer ball in their lifetime. Only recently has the youth game moved from predominantly full sided games to predominantly small sided games. This change alone will have positive ramifications in the next ten years or so.

Posted by: croftonpost | June 28, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Only 2 countries brought back their 2006 coaches, Italy and France.
Klinsmann sounded like he was interviewing for the job when he summarized the US performance.
I believe I heard that Capello was paid $6M per year to coach England, Bradley $600K?

Posted by: srose13 | June 28, 2010 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Caleb Porter.

Posted by: dccal | June 28, 2010 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Only 2 countries brought back their 2006 coaches, Italy and France.
Klinsmann sounded like he was interviewing for the job when he summarized the US performance.
I believe I heard that Capello was paid $6M per year to coach England, Bradley $600K?

Posted by: srose13 | June 28, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Can't imagine why it is the responsibilty of posters to name a replacement. That is Gulati's job.
Bradley did a decent job however, his team constantly underperformed, fell behind and wasted energy on comebacks.
His daytime picks and tactics were sometimes mystiying. And failed.
Granted his pool of players isn't Germany's but his team usually played down to other teams not up to their own level.
Thanks for your service Bob.
Good luck.

Posted by: marksman37 | June 28, 2010 10:04 PM | Report abuse

I voted go, but on one condition. If Jurgen Klinsmann signs on for the job, I'd be fine with Bob leaving. He's the best man for the job, and if the USSF can't get a hold of him, I'm fine with sticking with Bob for another 4 years (although it didn't work too well with Bruce Arena).

Posted by: ASchumacher | June 29, 2010 1:43 AM | Report abuse

Bradley should go, and his replacement should be Dunga, and he should be given the authority to set the programs for the developement acadamies as well. Forget everyone else, it should be Dunga.

There is a reason the better teams left look extremely similar, and it is time we start developing players in the Brazilian mode. Developement is the key, and we're just not doing it.

Posted by: Ireland2 | June 29, 2010 8:11 AM | Report abuse

I think Bob Bradley did nice a job but a change is needed to take another step forward.
The U.S team needs a leader w/significant international experience to build on the last 4 years of work-experience that team has experienced.
Re-focusing the entire Nat.Team after the Algeria win was obviously a major action item/challenge-but we came out flat, unorganized,uninspired&unprepared for the initial (predictable)push that Ghana unleashed.
For the 4th match in a row we had the same breakdwon/issues in the middle of the defense. Why no Gooch to simply man-mark and add another defender in the middle to help Demerit & C. Boca? They looked tired and over matched from the get go.
We had no plan in the middle of the midfield + R. Clark inclusion was a major mistake as he has been so inconsistent
And then R. Findley up top-why not Buddle who at least created chances and was dangerous in his brief opportunity. More so showing more creativity and game mgt. was needed.
Knowing the U.S. would potentially be tired/mentally slow to start why did BB not play w/5 in the back for 20 minutes to stabilize the match?
Donovan in the middle of the park w/support while inserting Beasley who was fresh and speedy enough to disrupt Ghana on the flank.
I do like BB and I think overall he has done an excellent job and fulfilled his contract - change though is needed and will be good for all.
Opportunity lost but the Alegeria win was huge and BB deserves credit for that victory - there are NO easy wins in the WC group stage.
Already excited for Brazil 2014!


Posted by: Zipfutbol | June 29, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Yes, it hurts. And our guys are hurting right now, because it SUCKS, and they don't care about consolation or pats on the back. They wanted to WIN, and it's going to sting for a while. So many hearts, so many dreams ride on this tournament, and none as much as mine. Yes, be proud of our boys, for giving it all they had. But unfortunately, what you saw in this tournament, while at times seeming magical, WAS all they really had. We can go on blaming Bradley, the defense, the referees, etc. But I believe the real issue, as has been for many years, lies in our development of the sport itself in this country. I'm 43 years old, one of six children of Ukrainian immigrant parents who came over to this country some 60 years ago. Soccer (Futbol) was what we grew up with here. I grew up playing club soccer, through my youth up until recently, which gave me the opportunity to play with some of the most talented, home grown players I'd ever seen. Unfortunately, for every great player that makes it to the World stage, hundreds more, some with even greater talent, go unnoticed. It's a real shame. It seems we have our development pyramid up-side down compared to the rest of the world. We really have no true, "grass roots" developmental league, and whatever developmental teams/leagues do exist, it's seems to be more about the politics of who knows who, and who has money to give for support to have their (obviously talented) kid picked to play for "The Team". And it starts in the Pee-Wee League, and runs all the way up to the college and pro levels. Now that's not to say that the Bradley's and the Altidore's don't deserve their places on the team. They absolutely do. But until we really take a good look at the rest of the world's soccer powers, study their philosophies, developmental programs and successes, and model our philosophies and programs around what works, we'll be back here in four years with these same empty consolations for our guys, and again, no trophy. Yeah, I know, it's not about winning or losing, blah, blah, blah...... But losing is a great teacher, and eventually, if you lose enough, it should serve as a lesson on how to win.

Posted by: Markeedee | June 29, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

I voted stay, but only because I have no idea who would replace him.

What I thought the US team lacked the ability to finish a play and score. For the number of good opportunities that occurred, there were way too few goals. That is not something you can blame on Bradley, he gave them a scheme that helped get them into position, but then the players could not put it into the net.

Posted by: cbm1 | June 29, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company