Network News

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

Poll: Bob Bradley and U.S. Soccer

By Steve Goff  |  August 30, 2010; 8:22 PM ET
Categories:  Poll , U.S. men's national team , USSF  | Tags: Bob Bradley, USSF  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bob Bradley's contract as U.S. soccer coach extended through 2014
Next: Video: Atletico Madrid 4, Sporting Gijon 0

Comments

I voted no, but I don't believe the sky is falling. I just believe it was a potential missed opportunity. Some new blood and new tactics and new players could help US soccer. We'll be a better team in 2014 neither because of nor despite Bob. We may not get any farther in the WC depending on the draw and injuries, but we'll have a better player pool. You won't see Robbie Findley or Ricardo Clark for example.

Posted by: jake77 | August 30, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

This poll doesn't account for the urge to hold that no button down.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | August 30, 2010 8:36 PM | Report abuse

I thought I wanted a new face. But I was happy when I saw the news. I like BB 's style and presence. And let's not forget his son is our best player and captain in waiting. If we make it, it will be all the sweeter with the Bradley family taking us to the top.

Posted by: kevinhulten | August 30, 2010 8:54 PM | Report abuse

I`m all for American Soccer being coached by an American...its hard for me to justify any country hiring a foreigner to manage the team when the whole premise of the WC is for National Teams to compete against each other. With that said, BB is the best American choice.

Posted by: Samuraise | August 30, 2010 8:59 PM | Report abuse

I voted no and agree with jake77 that the rehiring is a missed opportunity and not an outright failure. Bradley has done a great job these past four years and I hope the program doesn't grow stale under his continued tenure (see: Arena, 2006).

Posted by: shmoozer | August 30, 2010 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Lovely - four more years of hockeysoccer. Dump and chase.

Posted by: dkorn | August 30, 2010 9:19 PM | Report abuse

I voted no. Bob is a good coach and did a good job during the 2010 cycle. If the US team is even capable of playing at "the next level," Bob is not the coach that will lead them there, IMHO.

BSer

Posted by: bs2004 | August 30, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse

I really can't believe there the YES is that high. C'mon people for Christ's sake. Watch this is the beginning of the stalling of the progress of US Soccer which will not only affect 2014, obviously, but whoever leads us to 2018 will feel the effect. Good grief, this news truly sucks!!

Posted by: silentbat | August 30, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

I voted no only because "absolutely not" wasn't a choice. A national team coach is given a contract to build toward the biggest tournament, the world cup. And while we finished first in our group, we were lucky. Lucky that England under performed and lucky we were in a weak group. If we had been in a tougher group, we'd have been blown out of the water.

Bradley built a defense first team that gave up early goals in 3 of 4 games. We played from behind most of the tournament. In tournament football, you actually have to win a game now and then. In 4 games, including the extra time against Ghana, the US team played 390 minutes of football, and had a lead for exactly THREE MINUTES.

I believe we have some talent on this team, and that we have even more talent moving up over the next 4 years. We need a coach who will build a team and a game plan around that talent. Bradley tries to force the talent of his players into his system, and thats not going to work for the US team. Our players are in leagues all over the world, and occaisional national team call ups dont allow enough time to do what Bradley wants.

And that's not to say all of this is at Bradley's feet. Gualti needs to go too. He's not a football man, he's an economist.

Posted by: harkes4ever | August 30, 2010 9:49 PM | Report abuse

So people, who's the magic coach out there who could have taken the US to the promised land in 2014?

Many people simply can't accept that the talent pool is basically that of a team that should make it out of group play in the WC, or maybe the quarters if everything goes just right and we catch a break.

It's where we are as a footballing nation.

I'm fine with Bradley getting another shot.

Posted by: PrinceBuster21 | August 30, 2010 9:53 PM | Report abuse

"...his son is our best player..."

Good lord, people, get a clue. Michael's a promising young player, and one of our better players, but statements like that are terribly stupid.

I'm not happy about this. Not happy at all. If Arena couldn't take us to greater heights in his second term, I have zero hope Bradley can do it. Arena's better. Period. But Bradley's competent and will hopefully be able to prevent any backsliding.

Just like this past summer, this is another missed opportunity. The inability to learn from mistakes seems to be contagious in US soccer. Very frustrating, even if it's not the end of the world.

Posted by: DEFPOTEC1 | August 30, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Worst. Choice. Ever.

Posted by: doctortechie | August 30, 2010 9:58 PM | Report abuse

I don't think any coach can guide a national team through two world cup cycles and maintain focus while improving performance, so I voted "no." Just look at France as an object lesson on abject failure.

I also think we underperformed in South Africa given the opportunity we fell into. With the exception of the England match, was there any game we met our capability?

And regarding the Confederations Cup -- the highlight of our most recent 4-year cycle -- we were lucky to get out of group and we underperformed in almost every game except against Spain. (Maybe Brazil part two.)

Plus we underperformed during qualification. And underperformed during the Gold Cup. Given the talent on the field, as a rule, we underperform.

So. A solid, decisive "no." No question.

Posted by: Deffenbaugh | August 30, 2010 10:27 PM | Report abuse

I have a lot of respect for Bradley and my first instinct was to vote yes because there is only so much he could do with the lack of offensive talent which I think is largely born, not coached and only Donovan has it (and Donovan will be over the hill by 2014).

Then I thought of the defense he put on the field after having all those years to prepare and I had to vote no. Defense can be coached, built upon and Bradley is apparently unable to do it. Time and again they were confused, unprepared, nervous. This can only be due to bad coaching.

Unfortunately, who else, with any credentials, would want the job? Maybe Bradley could get an internship with Real Madrid this season and maybe learn something from whatsisname.

Posted by: glynnjp1 | August 30, 2010 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Defense can be coached, built upon and Bradley is apparently unable to do it. Time and again they were confused, unprepared, nervous. This can only be due to bad coaching.

----------------------------------------------------------

Really? In the couple of weeks of training camp he has every year, he's supposed to teach national team pool defenders how to play defense? Interesting.

Posted by: fischy | August 30, 2010 10:48 PM | Report abuse

The most interesting aspect of that comment may be how it reflects on what happened when the Swiss beat Spain in the World Cup. Their coaches gave full credit to Bradley for showing them how to play and beat Spain.

Posted by: fischy | August 30, 2010 10:51 PM | Report abuse

clearly klinnsman wasnt interested... disappointing, but I dont think we could have gotten anyone else of a higher quality.

Posted by: poparoni | August 30, 2010 11:23 PM | Report abuse

I am enjoying this. I really am. Life has an awesome sense of humor and every once in a while it shows. Some of these comments are entertaining - not well thought through but I guess that's the raw passion talking, but entertaining nonetheless. I'll chime in maybe tomorrow, I hope to have stopped laughing by then. The detractors will have many, many days to do their thing within the next cycle, but for now...LOL.

Posted by: Kosh2 | August 30, 2010 11:25 PM | Report abuse

I would have made him sweat it out longer - at least until just before Christmas - and then tell him that he has got to get more imaginative with strategy and player selection. Would it have killed him to try Altidore AND Buddle as strike partners? Especially given the obvious history between Donovan and Buddle? Come on dude, get rid of the tunnel vision. But then in the end, unless Klinsman was interested and a very good deal, I would have given him the contract. That's assuming I didn't hear awful feedback from private meetings with the players one on one.

Posted by: dsheon1 | August 30, 2010 11:36 PM | Report abuse

I am enjoying this. I really am. Life has an awesome sense of humor and every once in a while it shows. Some of these comments are entertaining - not well thought through but I guess that's the raw passion talking, but entertaining nonetheless. I'll chime in maybe tomorrow, I hope to have stopped laughing by then. The detractors will have many, many days to do their thing within the next cycle, but for now...LOL.

Posted by: Kosh2

+1 I have yet to hear ANY detractor on this board suggest an alternative not named Klinsi.

Posted by: VTUnited | August 30, 2010 11:48 PM | Report abuse

No.

Posted by: Ivanovich84 | August 30, 2010 11:56 PM | Report abuse

There are several games that Bradley mismanaged, but none other than the most important of all: USA v. Ghana match.

3 key mistakes:
-Started Clark (over Edu)
-Started Findley (over Buddle, Dempsey, etc)
-Did NOT Start Onyewu (Not injured)

This alone, I believe, should be enough to dismiss Bradley as USMNT coach.

Posted by: redskinsux | August 31, 2010 12:39 AM | Report abuse

The 'blueprint to beat Spain' thing is a little over the top, IMHO, regardless of what some Swiss guy said. It was a great win. There's no getting around that. But it's worth recognizing that Spain absolutely dominated us. We capitalized on two shocking gaffes (Casillas stops Jozy's shot 99 times out of a 100) and Ramos's idiotic play, and thankfully Howard stood on his head that game and our desperation defense kept them out. We didn't do anything particularly special tactically. We did what loads of other teams had tried to do for several years running. It's called 'be physical with Spain's playmakers, try to make your (few) chances at goal count, and hope to god they are misfiring and/or your keeper is playing out of his mind.' It'll beat Spain maybe 1 of 10 times. Thankfully that was our '1'.

Posted by: DEFPOTEC1 | August 31, 2010 1:02 AM | Report abuse

To those voting 'no' I'd just ask, as opposed to who else as head coach? I was always on the fence on this one: if Gulati could have snagged Klinsmann but chose Bradley instead, then yes, this was a dumb move IMO. But a yes vote assumes that there was someone else out there, better than Bradley, who wanted the job. That's quite an assumption.

Posted by: DouginCMH | August 31, 2010 6:11 AM | Report abuse

Great, the best argument I've read for keeping him is "Who else is there?".

Posted by: jahtez | August 31, 2010 6:22 AM | Report abuse

Will he ever sub out his son?

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 7:18 AM | Report abuse

Far from a disaster...but equally far from being the right decision. U.S. Soccer really needed another coach to take the MNT to the next level (one with a higher level of international playing and coaching experience). A coach like Klinsmann or Hiddink would not only have done a better job of taking the MNT to the next level; they would have also been able to help fix the major problem with U.S. Soccer: we have no legitimate developmental system for our players. OPD and college cannot compare to the systems used by every soccer power in the world (i.e., professionals clubs develop the players). Oh well...prepare for another frustrating four years.

Posted by: rbaggio94 | August 31, 2010 7:22 AM | Report abuse

OK, I voted "No", and jokingly I made mention of Bora Milutinovic.

Seriously, I'd say, why not Sigi Schmidt? Why not Preki?

Posted by: Ron16 | August 31, 2010 7:25 AM | Report abuse

NO,
US Soccer has not improved over the last four years, and the next four years don't look any better.
His roster choices and starting linups for the last word cup still do not make sense. Even during qualifying the team struggled. The team will continue to struggle under Bradley.

Posted by: o35_still_kicking | August 31, 2010 7:27 AM | Report abuse

NO,
US Soccer has not improved over the last four years, and the next four years don't look any better.
His roster choices and starting linups for the last word cup still do not make sense. Even during qualifying the team struggled. The team will continue to struggle under Bradley.

Posted by: o35_still_kicking | August 31, 2010 7:27 AM | Report abuse

Bob Bradley - the Greg Ryan of men's soccer when it comes time to chose the starting lineup

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 7:28 AM | Report abuse

I can't believe we're going to have 4 more years of idiots questioning why Michael Bradley doesn't get subbed out. He's the best central midfielder we have by a long way!

Posted by: jake77 | August 31, 2010 7:32 AM | Report abuse

I voted no. He had a good run, brought in new players. But I believe he has taken the men's team as far as he can. It is time for a new soccer mind to be in control of the team.

Posted by: Mig18 | August 31, 2010 7:43 AM | Report abuse

Interesting to note that, as of 8:14 AM, the percentages yes and no are the same as they were at 11:59 (as reported in this morning's print edition, with two-thirds the number of votes

Posted by: DCUSince96 | August 31, 2010 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Will he ever sub out his son?

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 7:18 AM | Report abuse

-------------------------------

Why would he? His son is one of our top players, and should always be on the field.

Posted by: qwerty652 | August 31, 2010 8:24 AM | Report abuse

What if he gets a yellow card? Are you going to say he is so special that he gets to play with a yellow card whereas players like Rico Clark do not?

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 8:32 AM | Report abuse


apparently jurgen was too expensive. too bad.

Posted by: george32 | August 31, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

You can get all blustery about it, or you can stop and think - How often do top level coaches coach their children or spouses. It is rare, and for good reason.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 8:39 AM | Report abuse

You can get all blustery about it, or you can stop and think - How often do top level coaches coach their children or spouses. It is rare, and for good reason.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

This is disappointing to say the least. I actually like Bradley and thought he did a decent job as a coach at first...the problem is that has not managed the team well in the last year or so. The US squad needs a clear vision and style and Bob Bradley does not provide either at this point.

Posted by: rockingordo | August 31, 2010 8:43 AM | Report abuse

While I know that I'm in the minority and will probably be flamed for this, I think that retaining BB is a good move. Yes, he made mistakes. Yes, I screamed at him for including RC on the roster, and then started him. Yes, I screamed at him when he started RF.

But, this is a coach that actually made our guys believe in themselves. He has gotten the most out of a group of perennial underachievers that anyone could expect, got LD to step up and take charge with all of his heart, and he recently challenged some young guys to prove their worth (i.e. Davies, Torres, Gomez) while keeping a good core group.

Let's face it, the problems with the MNT are much deeper than at coach and having continuity there may be a good thing. We are dealing with all of the "soccer parent" issues of the 90s right now where kids were taught to always pass and never want the ball. You can see that on the field from just about all of our US products. US Soccer is trying to fix that right now, but it's going to take another 8 years before we see the results. BB will not be the best coach for the future, but I do think that he's a good choice for today.

Note: I'm willing to eat my words if I ever see Clark on the field again for a competitive MNT game. I really hate the guy.

Posted by: figgy_va | August 31, 2010 8:43 AM | Report abuse

Same old same old for U.S. soccer.

Posted by: colel1 | August 31, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

If Klinsman was the coach he wouldn't sub out Mike Bradley. Wrap your knumbskull around that one Genie.

Posted by: DadRyan | August 31, 2010 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Nepotism rules apply everywhere in life except in soccer. Yer real bright Papa Ryan.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Bradley took us a far as he is able. We now need someone who has either played and/or coached at EPL, Seria A, etc. level. The talent is improving, organization/management is not.

Posted by: charlie-s | August 31, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

How can anybody that started a striker that cant score in not one, but 3 WORLD CUP games retain his job? Unbelievable disappointment. We would be better off today if Dempseys goal would not have gone in against England

Posted by: asnis715 | August 31, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

more mediocrity in u.s. soccer to continue. Nothing ever changes.

Posted by: Socialistic | August 31, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

The 'blueprint to beat Spain' thing is a little over the top, IMHO, regardless of what some Swiss guy said. It was a great

Posted by: DEFPOTEC1 | August 31, 2010 1:02 AM | Report abuse

it was not some "swiss guy" who made that comment. it was ottmar hitzfeld, who, among other accomplishments coached bayern munich to 5 bundesliga championships, and is considered one of the great coaches in europe. so, don't dismiss his opinion of BB's tactics so lightly.

Posted by: birdynumnum | August 31, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Gene - how many times have you ever been watching a USMNT game and said "jeez, Michael Bradley is having a terrible game, he really should be subbed out."

Posted by: VTUnited | August 31, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

The point is perceptions and the fact that soccer should not be different from the rest of society, which has rules against nepotisim. I want Michael Bradley on the field all game if he deserves it, which he does most of the time. I do not want Bob Bradley coaching his son. By the way, Michael Bradley has come off the field but it was from a foolish red card. It appears that he has put that stuff in the past. But has he proved that he can play more effectively than a sub in the second half on a yellow card? I don't think so and we will never know because his father will not sub him out in that situation.

I know - far too nuanced for you.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

4 MORE YEARS OF MISERY!! He is NOT a national team coach material. My heart is broken :-(

Posted by: riceldi | August 31, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Gene, no need to get condescending. You made my point for me anyway - when was the last time you felt that Michael Bradley didn't deserve to be on the field the whole game, OR that you felt there was someone on the bench who would be more effective? and nobody cares about perceptions so long as the team wins, and both Bradley's won a lot of games together this past cycle. also, Harkes did nail Waldo's wife.

Posted by: VTUnited | August 31, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Where is the choice of "get rid of Gulati?"

Gulati took way too much time to decide, and I think that at the end all top world coaches with NT and club experience were not available.

Maybe Schmidt from Seattle would've been a good replacement, but other than that, there is pretty much nothing out there.

Klinsmann, while popular, is simply NOT a good coach. If the guy wants a job, let him coach MLS and build up his resume. Yeah, 3rd place in 2006, Germany did the same this time around, not playing at home. And he got fired from his only other job. He ain't Beckenbauer.

Posted by: vmrg1974 | August 31, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

They say laughter is the best medicine, so thank you GeneWells for my daily dose!

Posted by: OWNTF | August 31, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Bob's the right choice.

The deciding issue for Klinsi has never been a dollar amount of his salary--- he wants complete, top to bottom, control and structuring of the USA soccer pyramid. Sunil and the other USSF functionary hacks will not give that to him, period. Sunil seems to see himself as some soccer soothsayer able to predict where we SHOULD (in his mind) finish at the World Cup. Although what qualifies him to be in such a position of power, I'd like to know... Econ prof. at Columbia?? "Super Fan #1", as Bruce called him. The USSF will not (although it be nice if they did) give up enough control of the program to the Men's head coach.

Other than Hiddink (who has had success with S. Korea---a non-tradtional soccer nation like ourselves), I can't picture another foreign coach (other than Klinsmann, obviously) able to adapt to our quirky model.

So all things being equal an American coach is the best fit. Bob's the best American coach not named Bruce. He did a very good job with our mediocre players (all playing at BEST with mid table European clubs).

If we don't advance in '14 it won't because the team "got stale", what rubbish. It will be for any number of reasons, such as in '06 when we got placed in an incredibly difficult group. The USA lives by team spirit and hard work, nothing wrong with that. Our team doesn't have the kind of talent at this point for people to be thinking we are going to win the World Cup when our best players play at teams such as Hannover, Fulham, 'Gladbach, Everton, and the LA Galaxy. Please get real.

Posted by: harryfuchs | August 31, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

There are many legitimate reasons for not supporting a second Bradley term as coach. His policy of playing his son is not one of them.

Without M. Bradley we are three and out at the WC. Period.

Posted by: hihi222 | August 31, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

My secret hope is that Bradley will be out after two years and some fresh blood will be brought in for the final round of qualifying and 2014. The there is no one else out there arguement doesn't wash on any level. No person is irreplaceable and certainly not Bob Bradley. Our players never gave up in South Africa which was great to see, but our tactics were terrible. Bradley couldn't even do the fashionable thing and go with the 4-5-1 so he could get Holden on the field which was clear he should of been and play Altidore alone up top since he was the only "semi" effective forward we brought.

Posted by: restonhoops | August 31, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

I agree - without M Bradley we do much worse. But that is not my point - but in your black and white world you won't be able to understand that.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Gene Wells is a moron.

Posted by: sdb11281usa | August 31, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

sdb11281usa is a cretin

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I agree - without M Bradley we do much worse. But that is not my point - but in your black and white world you won't be able to understand that.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 11:45 AM |

your point was that the perception of nepotism somehow effected the team's performance. dont try to say you were misquoted there mr beck.

Posted by: VTUnited | August 31, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

The word is affected

And yes if the other players perceive that there is favoritism that can affect team chemistry

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Guess his son doesn't have to worry about losing his starting spot for another four years. Hopefully Bradley senior realizes the US has some pretty good central midfielders playing thruout europe.

Posted by: hacksaw | August 31, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

And yes if the other players perceive that there is favoritism that can affect team chemistry

Posted by: GeneWells

and if there was ONE thing the team was NOT lacking this past cylce, it was TEAM CHEMISTRY.

you are just being a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian. please just admit that.

Posted by: VTUnited | August 31, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Let's keep it classy, team.

Gene, interesting angle there. You disqualify BB because he coaches his son, who also happens to be our best player. So if one them must go then it has to be BB...interesting card played.

But doesn't it only become nepotism when BB selects his son in lieu of a "better, more qualified or talented" player, just beacuse Bradley Jr. is, well, Bradlet Jr. I cannot believe that you think that is the case here. I think MB sees the pitch because there is none "better, or more qualified, or more talented" at his position for us, right now.

It's a substance over form arguement, which destroys the "semblance of nepotism" arguement you are going for there. I say this because even agreed that MB is our best player at his position. So how does his father's agreement with this make it any less true?

Posted by: Kosh2 | August 31, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Smacks of Synder and Zorn ... Gulati announces that the new head coach is the only one around....a brilliant blunder!

Poor leadership starts with Gulati-led USSF, and trickles down to sub-world class coaching, which ensures USMNT results like 2006 and 2010. Gulati needs to go!

With all due respect to BB, he wasted his opportunity in June v. Ghana with a chance to take US fans for a great World Cup run. He's not the coach to move us forward and we're wasting alot of good young talent in this system.

Posted by: dayface | August 31, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Smacks of Synder and Zorn ... Gulati announces that the new head coach is the only one around....a brilliant blunder!

Poor leadership starts with Gulati-led USSF, and trickles down to sub-world class coaching, which ensures USMNT results like 2006 and 2010. Gulati needs to go!

With all due respect to BB, he wasted his opportunity in June v. Ghana with a chance to take US fans for a great World Cup run. He's not the coach to move us forward and we're wasting alot of good young talent in this system.

Posted by: dayface | August 31, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Find me a public company or government agency where a father supervises a son or spouse. Maybe I'm wrong about nepotism rules in society.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

In the end the question is, was there a better option available?

Certainly not from the US. If Klinsmann ain't interested, who else wanted the job?

It is what it is. An average team will remain average.

Posted by: keithrjackson | August 31, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

I don't know about the history up to now. Only those close to the situation would know if there has been favoritism towards his son. But I see potential in the future for a perception of or real favoritism. Say there is an injury, or Bradley has to play on a yellow card. There are many scenarios and that is why smart organizations avoid the potential for it happening.

Posted by: GeneWells | August 31, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

why is bradley a better choice than dominic kinnear? (just one example of a non-klinsmann candidate)

just do not understand not getting a fresh set of eyes on the program with a highly qualified alternative.

im baffled...

Posted by: rainORshine | August 31, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I hope this doesn't mean that WC'14 will be like WC'06 for US. Holding on to Arena after WC '02, wasn't a bad idea, but the team just stagnated, and possibly regressed. The emphasis has to be in developing younger players over the next 4 years. We are going to have a really solid core of experienced players (Donovan, Dempsey, Howard, etc.), but over the next 4 years, the US will need to develop at least 2-3 more dynamic playmakers, and one very solid defender. I am not sure if Bradley can do this.

Posted by: jro1 | August 31, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

I hope this doesn't mean that WC'14 will be like WC'06 for US. Holding on to Arena after WC '02, wasn't a bad idea, but the team just stagnated, and possibly regressed. The emphasis has to be in developing younger players over the next 4 years. We are going to have a really solid core of experienced players (Donovan, Dempsey, Howard, etc.), but over the next 4 years, the US will need to develop at least 2-3 more dynamic playmakers, and one very solid defender. I am not sure if Bradley can do this.

Posted by: jro1 | August 31, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

I don't know about the history up to now. Only those close to the situation would know if there has been favoritism towards his son. But I see potential in the future for a perception of or real favoritism. Say there is an injury, or Bradley has to play on a yellow card. There are many scenarios and that is why smart organizations avoid the potential for it happening.

Posted by: GeneWells

Have you ever seen Bob strategically remove Donovan? How about Bocanegra or Dolo? At the end of the day Gene, Bob is only allowed 3 substitutions, and there is hardly ever a reason to burn one of them on one of you best field players, which MB clearly is.

also, the USMNT is neither a public company, nor a government agency, so why would you try to compare them?

Posted by: VTUnited | August 31, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

We looked awful at the WC despite the band wagoners thinking it was fun...Our program does not seem to be growing well against the rest of the world...why would we keep this guy for another 4 years? Crazy and dumb.

Posted by: lylewimbledon | August 31, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

i voted no b/c klinsman would be the best option for not only the national team but development of soccer in the US. listening to him talk about what is wrong with soccer development in the US made him the only choice for me along with his success with the German team. i guess its money that kept that from happening. i dont believe there is a salary cap for coaching the national team so i dont see why money had to be the issue.

i dont hate bradley but after klinsman i dont have a second option. regarding bradley, i dont like his personell decisions. paticularly not starting buddle with jose in the WC. what was up with that? and lets give freddy a chance eh!

i just think this was a missed opportunity to get klinsman and take this thing to the next level.

Posted by: deadskin | August 31, 2010 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Here are three names I feel are better than Bob. Dominic Kinnear, Steve Nichol, & Dan Gaspar. Dominic played for the US, does a heck of job with Houston. Steve Nichol a legend at Liverpool, Scotland '86 and a miracle worker at NE with an owner who couldn't care less. Dan Gaspar? A legend here in CT. The only AMERICAN coach on the staff of another country. Portugal's Goalkeeper coach 2002-2003 & 2010. Currently head coach at The University of Hartford.

Posted by: anthonycarreras | August 31, 2010 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company