 |
| Judgement day comes for Jurgen Klinsmann and the U.S. Wednesday in Mexico. |
Today marks the 1-year anniversary of Jürgen Klinsmann’s first game as National Team head coach. On this date last year, the U.S. salvaged a 1-1 draw against Mexico in Klinsmann’s debut, in a relatively uneventful affair in front of a relatively subdued Philadelphia crowd.
The game showed glimpses of Klinsmann’s proactive, attacking style, but the most noticeable change in pace from the Bradley era was seen in the personnel department. His starting lineup featured six players with 12 caps or fewer, and his substitutions were awarded to fresh faces Brek Shea, Robbie Rogers, and Juan Agudelo. (He also used Ricardo Clark in the 84th minute, but after Clark’s giveaway in the knockout round of the 2010 World Cup, which immediately resulted in a goal for Ghana, I vowed to never speak of him again. Unless in parentheses, which makes it forgivable.) Since then, Klinsmann has continued his experimentation within the American corps, searching for the right players at the right positions. Some, such as Jose Torres, Fabian Johnson, and Hercules Gomez, have been revelations under Klinsmann, while others, such as Edgar Castillo, Benny Feilhaber, and Oguchi Onyewu, have struggled to deliver the same dependability. It’s what happens under a new regime – what should happen: auditions are recalled, first impressions are remade, and tryouts start all over again. Change inevitably comes, though hopefully not just for the sake of change.
Klinsmann’s changes have not made the immediate impact some hoped they would. The National Team has continued to be only decent, amassing a 7-5-3 record under their new manager (.467 winning %), which actually regresses from the 43-25-12 (.537 winning %) mark that Bradley set during his 4-year, 8-month term as head coach. But Klinsmann’s reign is still young, his style still maturing, and if there was ever a new hire extended more time and patience than Klinsmann, I haven’t met him yet. Point is, U.S. soccer has unwavering – if not obstinate – faith in Klinsmann’s vision and is sticking by their guy for the long haul. After all, he wants to totally revamp the entire soccer system in America down to the U-10 level, so it would be unfair to expect radical improvement within one year.
But that doesn’t mean expectations have been lowered. Perhaps they have been modified and moderated, but we still want to win. We understand a rebranding of this scope is gradual and incremental, and slow to take effect, but that doesn’t justify losses in lifeless efforts. And what’s frustrating about the Klinsmann era to date is the erratic, inconsistent play the team has put forth. On a seismic monitor, their pulse would register as a magnitude-10 earthquake. Sometimes they’re brilliant, as in 1-0 and 5-1 wins over Italy and Scotland respectively, and other times they’re terribly pedestrian, as in the 4-1 shellacking against Brazil and scoreless draw against Canada. Canada!! Where we’d prefer to see a steadier pattern of improvement – one that suggests this team will be immeasurably better in Brazil 2014 – we instead see one giant step forward followed by one giant step back. If that’s the pace we continue to set, I fear how we’ll fair two summers from now.
This coming Wednesday, Klinsmann’s squad gets a chance to prove its as-yet-unseen progress. In their toughest matchup to date in the Klinsmann era – yes, tougher than Italy on the road, and yes, tougher than Brazil – the U.S. will invade Mexico City and take to the pitch in the not-so-friendly confines of Estadio Azteca. It is a monumental test for the Americans, and not simply because of Mexico’s current pedigree. The real challenge lies not in defending dos Santos and Chicharito and Guardado – three stars that el Tri has already announced will be in the lineup – but in playing in the most inhospitable of environments.
Estadio Azteca rests in the smog-ridden Cuidad de Mexico, at an unbearably high altitude were breaths are short, convulsive, and desperate .The fans are malicious in nature, and bloodthirsty when the Americans arrive. Police in riot gear populate the stadium like cotton candy venders at a Barnum and Baily Circus. There is nothing in our sporting landscape that rivals a U.S. – Mexico tilt in Estadio Azteca. Nothing. Yankees – Red Sox seems like a game of patty-cake in comparison.
Consider this: Azteca was built in 1968. Since then, Mexico has suffered defeat there once. The Americans were not the scripters of that defeat. In fact, in the 7 games we have played at Azteca, we own a record of 0-6-1. We have scored a paltry total of 3 goals. The woe goes deeper than that. In the 24 games we have played on Mexican soil – the first being in 1937 – we are 0-23-1. That game in Italy was a walk in the park compared to what the U.S. is up against on Wednesday.
Mexico will be bringing their A-team. Regardless of club commitments or travelling complications, you can bet their top guns will be there. Klinsmann and the U.S. on the other hand have made no such commitment, despite August 15th being a FIFA-sanctioned international friendly date. There is already speculation that Klinsmann, in an attempt to build good rapport with European club managers, might pluck only a few of his stars from overseas. This would be a disastrous decision for two reasons.
First of all, Klinsmann has yet to identify a go-to lineup in big games. And while Bradley certainly did his fair share of tinkering as well, frequently experimenting with different players in different situations, the men he counted on when it mattered the most were always the same. This security, this locked lineup, is crucial to the long-term success of a team. Its akin to having an ace at the top of a pitching rotation, a guy the manager can give the ball to anytime he needs a big win. And while its 11 guys on a soccer field, it needs to be the same 11 guys, or at least close to the same, when the stakes are highest. Familiarity breeds chemistry, and if you doubt that, take a look at what Spain has done in the last 4 years. Their starting 11, their A-team, has been essentially immutable since their run of dominance began in Euro 2008. After playing together for so long, they have become a well-oiled machine, each cog aware of its responsibilities, the unit operating smoothly and interdependently. It’s now almost robotic: same guys, same philosophy, same results. Wednesday’s upcoming game against Mexico presents Klinsmann with the opportunity to call on his A-Team, his Avengers, his Fantastic Four (plus seven): the guys he trusts. The happiness of a club-team manager should be at the bottom of his priority list.
Secondly, Klinsmann needs to prove that he is all-in. That the U.S. is all-in. It’s excusable to play without Dempsey against Panama or without Donovan against Barbados, but not so against Mexico. The rivalry means too much to stumble into Estadio Azteca with a cast of reserves and unproven starters. Not only would such a side get humiliated, but it would send the message that the U.S. isn’t totally committed to the cause. Mexico is bringing in their best because they are salivating over victory, drooling at the thought of toppling the Americans once more on their home turf. They are treating Wednesday’s friendly as a national crisis, as a homeland invasion, and they are unloading the heavy artillery to stomp out the threat. Words can’t express how much they want to win. Klinsmann needs to display this same kind of desperation, this same kind of mad passion, to prove the Americans take this pretty seriously too. Because until we invest ourselves in soccer the way Mexico has, our 15-33-12 all time record against our neighbors to the south is going to grow only more lopsided, only more embarrassing.
The U.S. lineup will be announced on Sunday. And we’ll find out, before the game even begins, whom Klinsmann has faith in and how much this all means to him. The team he assembles is as significant as Wednesday’s result.
The game showed glimpses of Klinsmann’s proactive, attacking style, but the most noticeable change in pace from the Bradley era was seen in the personnel department. His starting lineup featured six players with 12 caps or fewer, and his substitutions were awarded to fresh faces Brek Shea, Robbie Rogers, and Juan Agudelo. (He also used Ricardo Clark in the 84th minute, but after Clark’s giveaway in the knockout round of the 2010 World Cup, which immediately resulted in a goal for Ghana, I vowed to never speak of him again. Unless in parentheses, which makes it forgivable.) Since then, Klinsmann has continued his experimentation within the American corps, searching for the right players at the right positions. Some, such as Jose Torres, Fabian Johnson, and Hercules Gomez, have been revelations under Klinsmann, while others, such as Edgar Castillo, Benny Feilhaber, and Oguchi Onyewu, have struggled to deliver the same dependability. It’s what happens under a new regime – what should happen: auditions are recalled, first impressions are remade, and tryouts start all over again. Change inevitably comes, though hopefully not just for the sake of change.
Klinsmann’s changes have not made the immediate impact some hoped they would. The National Team has continued to be only decent, amassing a 7-5-3 record under their new manager (.467 winning %), which actually regresses from the 43-25-12 (.537 winning %) mark that Bradley set during his 4-year, 8-month term as head coach. But Klinsmann’s reign is still young, his style still maturing, and if there was ever a new hire extended more time and patience than Klinsmann, I haven’t met him yet. Point is, U.S. soccer has unwavering – if not obstinate – faith in Klinsmann’s vision and is sticking by their guy for the long haul. After all, he wants to totally revamp the entire soccer system in America down to the U-10 level, so it would be unfair to expect radical improvement within one year.
But that doesn’t mean expectations have been lowered. Perhaps they have been modified and moderated, but we still want to win. We understand a rebranding of this scope is gradual and incremental, and slow to take effect, but that doesn’t justify losses in lifeless efforts. And what’s frustrating about the Klinsmann era to date is the erratic, inconsistent play the team has put forth. On a seismic monitor, their pulse would register as a magnitude-10 earthquake. Sometimes they’re brilliant, as in 1-0 and 5-1 wins over Italy and Scotland respectively, and other times they’re terribly pedestrian, as in the 4-1 shellacking against Brazil and scoreless draw against Canada. Canada!! Where we’d prefer to see a steadier pattern of improvement – one that suggests this team will be immeasurably better in Brazil 2014 – we instead see one giant step forward followed by one giant step back. If that’s the pace we continue to set, I fear how we’ll fair two summers from now.
This coming Wednesday, Klinsmann’s squad gets a chance to prove its as-yet-unseen progress. In their toughest matchup to date in the Klinsmann era – yes, tougher than Italy on the road, and yes, tougher than Brazil – the U.S. will invade Mexico City and take to the pitch in the not-so-friendly confines of Estadio Azteca. It is a monumental test for the Americans, and not simply because of Mexico’s current pedigree. The real challenge lies not in defending dos Santos and Chicharito and Guardado – three stars that el Tri has already announced will be in the lineup – but in playing in the most inhospitable of environments.
Estadio Azteca rests in the smog-ridden Cuidad de Mexico, at an unbearably high altitude were breaths are short, convulsive, and desperate .The fans are malicious in nature, and bloodthirsty when the Americans arrive. Police in riot gear populate the stadium like cotton candy venders at a Barnum and Baily Circus. There is nothing in our sporting landscape that rivals a U.S. – Mexico tilt in Estadio Azteca. Nothing. Yankees – Red Sox seems like a game of patty-cake in comparison.
Consider this: Azteca was built in 1968. Since then, Mexico has suffered defeat there once. The Americans were not the scripters of that defeat. In fact, in the 7 games we have played at Azteca, we own a record of 0-6-1. We have scored a paltry total of 3 goals. The woe goes deeper than that. In the 24 games we have played on Mexican soil – the first being in 1937 – we are 0-23-1. That game in Italy was a walk in the park compared to what the U.S. is up against on Wednesday.
Mexico will be bringing their A-team. Regardless of club commitments or travelling complications, you can bet their top guns will be there. Klinsmann and the U.S. on the other hand have made no such commitment, despite August 15th being a FIFA-sanctioned international friendly date. There is already speculation that Klinsmann, in an attempt to build good rapport with European club managers, might pluck only a few of his stars from overseas. This would be a disastrous decision for two reasons.
First of all, Klinsmann has yet to identify a go-to lineup in big games. And while Bradley certainly did his fair share of tinkering as well, frequently experimenting with different players in different situations, the men he counted on when it mattered the most were always the same. This security, this locked lineup, is crucial to the long-term success of a team. Its akin to having an ace at the top of a pitching rotation, a guy the manager can give the ball to anytime he needs a big win. And while its 11 guys on a soccer field, it needs to be the same 11 guys, or at least close to the same, when the stakes are highest. Familiarity breeds chemistry, and if you doubt that, take a look at what Spain has done in the last 4 years. Their starting 11, their A-team, has been essentially immutable since their run of dominance began in Euro 2008. After playing together for so long, they have become a well-oiled machine, each cog aware of its responsibilities, the unit operating smoothly and interdependently. It’s now almost robotic: same guys, same philosophy, same results. Wednesday’s upcoming game against Mexico presents Klinsmann with the opportunity to call on his A-Team, his Avengers, his Fantastic Four (plus seven): the guys he trusts. The happiness of a club-team manager should be at the bottom of his priority list.
Secondly, Klinsmann needs to prove that he is all-in. That the U.S. is all-in. It’s excusable to play without Dempsey against Panama or without Donovan against Barbados, but not so against Mexico. The rivalry means too much to stumble into Estadio Azteca with a cast of reserves and unproven starters. Not only would such a side get humiliated, but it would send the message that the U.S. isn’t totally committed to the cause. Mexico is bringing in their best because they are salivating over victory, drooling at the thought of toppling the Americans once more on their home turf. They are treating Wednesday’s friendly as a national crisis, as a homeland invasion, and they are unloading the heavy artillery to stomp out the threat. Words can’t express how much they want to win. Klinsmann needs to display this same kind of desperation, this same kind of mad passion, to prove the Americans take this pretty seriously too. Because until we invest ourselves in soccer the way Mexico has, our 15-33-12 all time record against our neighbors to the south is going to grow only more lopsided, only more embarrassing.
The U.S. lineup will be announced on Sunday. And we’ll find out, before the game even begins, whom Klinsmann has faith in and how much this all means to him. The team he assembles is as significant as Wednesday’s result.
0 comments:
Post a Comment