Photo by Mark J. Rebilas/USA Today Sports
By FRANCO PANIZO
It has not been a pretty picture for the U.S. Men’s National Team in terms of its results since the end of last year’s World Cup, but Jurgen Klinsmann is still pleased with the direction of the program.
That’s because, for right now, trying out new players and systems is more important than results.
The U.S. has compiled a 2-4-3 record in its friendlies since last summer, commonly conceding late goals during that stretch. The inability to close games out has drawn the ire and criticism from fans and pundits, who believe the team should be winning or at least performing better during the tail-end of matches, especially with the CONCACAF Gold Cup looming.
Still, Klinsmann remains largely unperturbed. He is chalking up the recent batch of results to experimentation, something he has done plenty of from both personnel and tactical standpoints since the fall in an effort to improve a U.S. team that is still trying to catch up to the world’s best nations.
“I’m happy with the direction we’re going,” Klinsmann told USSoccer.com. “We always said the year after the World Cup is a transition year, especially for us in CONCACAF because there is no competition until the Gold Cup in July, so it would be foolish not to use this one year of time to try out a lot of things, to integrate new players, to try out different systems, to move out of your comfort zone going to Europe, going to other places and risk some results.
“If we wouldn’t do that, there’d be no growth,” Klinsmann added. “If we would just be comfortable and play all of our games in the U.S. against teams that we’d most likely beat, there is no growth.”
Last month, the U.S. played a pair of friendlies in Europe. The Americans suffered a 3-2 loss to Denmark despite having a 2-1 lead when entering the final 10 minutes, and then tied Switzerland, 1-1, while playing with 10 men for much of the second half.
Late goals were surrendered in both matches, and while Klinsmann would have preferred to win them, he’s OK with the results since the games allowed him to further evaluate a talent pool that he continues to expand.
“I think it’s very important that we understand that we might do it at the expense of some results,” said Klinsmann. “But finding new, strong players, getting more dynamic competition within the inner circle of the national team, maybe finding some or helping some younger players to come through (is important).
“Then, we’ll decide by summer who’s matching more the Under-23s, the Olympic team, maybe some go even to (Under-20 head coach Tab Ramos) hopefully to the World Cup in New Zealand. These are all kinds of points that are far more important right now than results, even if you always want to get results.”
With the U.S. set to begin its Gold Cup title defense in three months and a win in that tournament guaranteeing the Americans a place in the 2017 Confederations Cup, Klinsmann knows that he is nearing crunch time. But do not expect him to stop experimenting just yet, as he plans to take full advantage of the luxury that is this friendly-heavy year.
Even if it means failing to winning a few more games.
“Overall, I think we go in the right direction and we’re going to be ready for the Gold Cup no matter what,” said Klinsmann. “Until then, you can still try things out.”
,,, This is such trash. He keeps harping on EUROPE, EUROPE, EUROPE …
if the US falls out of the top 50 in FIFA’s ranking, it will make it very difficult for players not “rooted” in the national team to get a shot in … EUROPE
RESULTS MATTER !!!!
Yes they do in meaningful games but the overreaction here is hilarious.
precisely. friendlies indirectly “matter” but not to the point of “we lost a few friendlies (right after the WC–the best window to experiment) so let’s fire the coach!”
again Hyperbole kills, folks.
Klinsmann will prove to be one of the most detrimental coaches in USMNT history. It’s very sad. This comes from a guy who was calling for his hiring.
This is the dumbest statement on here and that includes a statement about politics.
haha +1
The object of the game is to win the game by outscoring the opponent. Call me near-sighted if you want, call it experimentation, or transformation, or whatever. I watch the USMNT to watch them win. Put the people on the field in the right position to do that. That is your job as a coach.
In case you were wondering… I just dropped my mic and walked away.
Obviously, you did not.
Cravin, the truth has a certian ring. H-town speaks the truth. It hurts us all to be hustled, but sheep bah, and incompetence gets promoted (see Obama). Time to coalesce and get the train (expectations) on the right track. Wake up and demand American exceptionalism, or wallow in mediocrity! Quit making excuses and get results. That was/is the AMERICAN WAY. Bring on the wusses. Kiss off…
hahaha where to begin…
“incompetence gets promoted (see Obama).”
promoted? really? most would call it “elected” thus casting the “blame” to those who voted for him…..
for the record, i’m not saying him being elected was the right or wrong choice, just that it’s funny when someone tries to slight him but ends up (unknowingly) slighting the the general public instead (showing the incompetence of the slighter).
Oh dear…
What you are describing is not “American Exceptionalism” so much as “American Millennialism”… basically, this amounts to demanding we be the best at everything, without actually contributing to the success, or having any specific ideas about how to do it. “Gimme Gimme Gimme” is a nice way to describe it.
Go ahead and read about some of the people that made America great. Henry Ford, Teddy Roosevelt, Thomas Edison. You’ll find that they were not at all scared of experimentation or failure. They embraced it is an inevitable cousin of success.
And take your political nonsense back over to Yahoo! Nobody cares about that here.
Does Germany, Brazil, Holland, Spain, Belgium, Argentina, Columbia, et all…..the elite…., wash away the absence of results in friendlies, time and again. Germany loses to Azerbaijan, equal to US losing to El Salvador or Honduras IMO. Get some stones, act like the bigs, push youth and vets to play like the bigs. Experiment all you want but get results like THE BIGS…. State of mind… Managers are hired to GET RESULTS, short, medium and long term.
Holland has lost to Iceland and the Czech Republic, and just drew to Turkey in Euro Qualifiers since the World Cup. Germany’s lost to Poland, drew with Ireland and Australia. Spain lost to Slovakia. Belgium’s drew to Whales and Bosnia. There’s been losts of weird results since the World Cup.
haha exactly yet i wonder if those countries are calling for their head coach to be fired, lol
So…. win everything against everyone at all times, or everything is a failure. Thanks, coach!
haha right? klinsi2015 has it all figured out. he should be the coach…
C. Frottage,
And look great while doing it.
That is what the English media expect of England.
You can see how that has been working out for them
+1 Yes I almost forgot…. “Stylish football” ranks co-first along with all of these other demands.
Boys, you have your marching orders!
Go get em Jurguen! Haha. Remember when some would rag on Bob because he didn’t talk enough? Ha ha.
Gotta say this is fun to watch. If nothing else, this is sure a spectacle.
Ian Woodville,
“But seriously, isn’t the real story here that Jurgen somehow thought it necessary to explain this to us Americans. (Perhaps he is just dodging blame for the recent woeful results.) and that the media thought it worth repeating.”
That is not the real story. JK was responding to questions not laying out a manifesto.
The real story is why Franco didn’t just write :
‘ JK. Experimentation:”
http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2015/04/06/15/56/150406-mnt-jk-feature-building-for-future
Gosh, this is fun. Unless you know more than the rest of us, certainly a possibility, there is nothing in the story to indicate whether Jurgen offered this pearl of wisdom on his own or whether he was simply indulging another lazy reporter who couldn’t think of an intelligent question.
I think my point remains valid regardless of whether the primary blame rests with Jurgen or the press. Friendlies = experimentation is about as basic as it gets.
What intelligent question would you have asked?
I would have thought that the basic mistake was thinking that talking to Jurgen was worthwhile. OK,if it is a slow day and you feel compelled to post something, you could ask Jurgen just about anything and he will prattle on, but announcing that friendlies are for experimentation is just about typical of what you will get.
Jurgen has some issues and sadly the press acts as his enabler. He is a gasbag and putting a microphone or the equivalent in front of him just makes his issues that much worse.
Ian Woodville,
Your issue then is with the reporters editor or whoever assigned them to this task..
Your determination to defend Jurgen is touching. Everyone should have such a determined advocate.
No, I see shared guilt here. Jurgen talks too much and says silly things, and in the process condescends to American fans. Being parasites, the media feed off this unfortunate behavior.
Ian Woodville,
JK is a big boy. He has faced far worse than you and his SBI fans and doesn’t need anyone to defend him. It was the same with Bob Bradley. I did not defend him either.
I don’t know enough about what is going in their worlds to comment intelligently on most of their decisions, at least in terms of what they may have been thinking, let alone defend them.
What I did notice was that a lot of people were attacking both of them by making statements, arguments and the like that were in many cases, inaccurate, wrong, outright lies or just poorly thought out.
For example recently, someone pointed out how horrible it was that JK was unjustly ignoring Benny F. the hero of the USMNT’s second half comeback vs Slovenia in the 2010 WC.
This was horse manure. Had Benny read it he might have been embarrassed.
I saw that game and Benny and Mo Edu did enter in the second half and did well but that game was all about Landon leading the comeback and having a hand in all three US goals (one disallowed). And if LD wasn’t MOTM, then Mikey certainly was.
When you post something like that your imperfections are out there for all to see. That is something people can get a real handle on and comment intelligently about unlike for example, what JK or BB were thinking when they dropped player x or started player y.
Most of my posts are comments on that sort of laziness.
I come on this site to read about soccer but you apparently do not. You come on to attack JK.
That is fine as far as it goes but it is boring because JK is interesting only because of the soccer and since that is not your focus, your attacks are pointless and somewhat flaccid . There is no there there.
So JK is a gasbag? So? I don’t care if he drinks human blood at night. What makes him matter is what he does with the team and with soccer not whether you finds him odious.
“Friendlies = experimentation is about as basic as it gets.”
for months now i’ve seen, read and heard the media and fans complain about this experimentation. So JK responding with a statement explaining this is quite obviously understandable.
Now i do agree that it’s odd how many US soccer fans haven’t learned this basic concept; but this is cause-and-effect rather than an out-of-the-blue manifesto
I would allow for the possibility that Jurgen was defending himself from actual or anticipated criticism — so the gasbag score for this interview is perhaps lower than for some. But I would also point out that playing to the internet galleries is a foolish waste of time.
sure but what about the sentiments expressed NOT over the internet…? That was my point. The experimentation topic has become a larger issue/debate so it’s only fitting that a coach would bring that up in an interview. how is this so hard to comprehend? now that fact that the topic is a debate is silly to me personally because, yes, friendlies equaling experimentation SHOULD be an understood fact. But the fact that it’s not does not reflect on JK, only the American public which is debating the topic. JK didn’t just wake up and say “let me do an interview where I’m going to explain my stance.” He rather witness a growing debate and felt impelled to speak on it. Cause and effect; not manifesto…
Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Simmer down big fellow. These upsets will do you no good at all. No indeed. Breathe deep, think positive thoughts, let yourself go a little.
Frankly, I don’t get your point at all. Jurgen rambled on about experimentation and friendlies. So much we can agree on. Beneath all your lather, you seem to be saying that it’s not all his fault because silly Americans don’t understand the basics and didn’t realize friendlies are for experiments. More than a few folks think me silly, of course in the nicest possible way, but I do understand about friendlies and I find Jurgen’s musings on the subject rather jejune and old hat. I would have thought a clever fellow like Jurgen (we are on a first name basis, you know) would simply ignore the unruly mob and get on with transforming American soccer or whatever he is doing. But if it pleases, perhaps this once, we can concede that, this one time, Jurgen was forced to act like a gasbag. Feel better now.
You do sacrifice results because of constant experimentation with the lineups. With that being said, we have that guaranteed playoff for the confed cup if things don’t go our way in the Gold Cup (guessing Mexico or Costa Rica). By the by, looking forward to see us play against Mexico, Holland, and Germany!
Wow, the internet is wonderful: 50 or so commentators vigorously agreeing that friendlies are for experimentation. And so once again Jurgen has promoted interest in US soccer on a slow news day. But seriously, isn’t the real story here that Jurgen somehow thought it necessary to explain this to us Americans. (Perhaps he is just dodging blame for the recent woeful results.) and that the media thought it worth repeating. For my money he might have well announced that in Germany they have discovered that putting your socks on before your shoes works best. Instead of some half way intelligent discussion of soccer stuff, we again have the experienced foreigner explaining basics to ignorant Americans. Now I know that some internet comments reveal some lapses in American thinking about soccer, but overall I think we have moved way beyond: friendlies are for experimentation.
“Wow, the internet is wonderful: 50 or so commentators vigorously agreeing that friendlies are for experimentation.”
after reading all the above comments you’ve concluded that we all “vigorously [agree]” ???? not sure you’re reading comprehension is sufficing.
“Instead of some half way intelligent discussion of soccer stuff, we again have the experienced foreigner explaining basics to ignorant Americans.”
cause and effect…. if the aforementioned “ignorant Amercians” (as you so eloquently put it) weren’t “ignorant” then would the “experienced foreigner” need to explain basics?
Irony?!?
Specifically?…
Does Green get called into the Mexico friendly?
It’s not a FIFA date, so his team doesn’t have to release him. My guess is no. Klinsmann can afford to be patient with him since the target for Green is 2018 and he has been cap tied. I’m guessing that Green will play on the U-23’s to qualify for the Olympics and, if he develops,. go to the Confederations Cup in 2017.
The U-23 one, yes. Since he can’t really help the senior team out right now, he should start familiarizing himself with the players and coaches that could actually use him for Olympic qualifying. Same goes for Yedlin to a smaller degree.
The concept of experimentation during friendlies (Various formations, New players, Old players in new possitions) is to be commended. Having these Experiments against quality opponets is also to be commended as it will actually help assess what could potentially work with our player pool.
Somtimes Sacrificing results to gather this information is the cost. I have no issue with any of it (Results/experimentation) since the WC ended; except maybe the Ireland game.
All National Teams have a core group of players which the team is expected to be built around for the upcoming cycle. For the US that is Bradley, Fabian, Brooks, Guzan, & Jozy. JK needs to see the new players in relationship to these 5….How they compair (measuring stick), How they combine, How they interact. Hence these 5 players always being called into camp. Dempsey & Jones are benchmarks…Until someone can knock them off the top rung they are going to be called in as well.
The last worthless (experimental) friendly is the April Mach against Mexico. This is JK’s last chance to play with personnell and formation before he has to settle on his TOP 30 players for the Gold Cup Camp. There are 2 (maybe 3) friendlies in which to build the team chemistry and obtain the cohesion to make a run at back-to-back GC Titles.
Until Late May or Early June I won’t really care too much about the result or who got called in. Once June starts JK and his staff should be held accountible for the performance/results of the team.
couldn’t’ve said it better, sir. some people just need to relax. anyone calling for JK to be fired at this point is being silly.
After Mexico the next 2 “friendlies” are at Germany and Holland. I think we will see first teamers there and if we can play well in those games, the Gold Cup will seem much easier. It’s this arrangement of games that should indicate that Klinsmann has the team development pretty well planned out for the Gold Cup.
Experimentation is great: it is necessary to produce the best possible results.
However, the point has been amply and ably made that for experimentation to yield worthwhile results, it has to be carried out within a system/ structure. There have to be a governing rationale behind the tactics and formations.
I think there are many US spectators who don’t see that right now.
As both Marsch and Wahl have pointed out, there doesn’t seem to be an identifiable system in place. When the USMNT lines up on the field over the course of the last several months, they just look like a bunch of dudes somewhat haphazardly thrown together.
facepalm…
As far as I know, Wahl has never played professional soccer and never managed a team. Marsch was a so-so soccer player and managed one team and did no better than so-so, maybe worse. Maybe he will do better with NYRB, but he’s never managed a national team. I trust Klinsmann’s judgment more than theirs. He certainly has more experience than those two put together.
That kind of thinking is dangerous.
It’s just wrong-headed to assume that if a person hasn’t been a professional player, or the coach of a national team, they don’t know what they’re talking about.
A major component of a sports journalist’s job is to analyze and critique. The beauty of reading a piece by Wahl, or Ives, is that they are free to, and paid to speak their minds.
Klinsmann has a vested interest. He’s got to try and sell it as best he can.
I’ve never heard nor read where Klinsmann admitted that he made a mistake.
He doesn’t just drink the kool-aid; he serves it.
Onsides,
“It’s just wrong-headed to assume that if a person hasn’t been a professional player, or the coach of a national team, they don’t know what they’re talking about.”
What you are doing is called jumping to conclusions. Mr Page did not say you and Marsch and Wahl don’t know what y’all are talking about.
He said he values JK’s opinion on the matter more than yours, Wahl’s or Marsch.
“Klinsmann has a vested interest. He’s got to try and sell it as best he can.”
Everyone has something to sell.
I don’t know what your interest is but Wahl is hardly unbiased and neither is Marsch. That does not mean that you and your posse have no case only that Mr. Page finds JK’s case more persuasive. I’m sure there are plenty of people you can sell your case to.
But Mr Page’s take is not unreasonable, for two reasons:
1. JK has about a ton more information on what is going on in this situation than you, Wahl or Marsch.
2. JK has a vested interest in this coming out as positively as possible. Whatever, you think of JK , the fact is he has the most on the line of anyone here, much more than Gary Page, you, Marsch or Wahl.
I trusted that BB knew what he was doing when he kept playing Mikey all those minutes even though he surely knew that he was going to take a ton of heat for it because it worked out for him and the team.
And so far , JK has gotten more right than wrong.
Therefore, Mr Page’s stance is about as sensible as is possible.
What you are saying is that Wahl, Marsch and you cannot discern “a system/ structure”.
That does not mean there isn’t one in place.
It just means you guys can’t discern it.
The experiments since the end of the World Cup have, at the very least, given the coaching staff some insight into a number of candidates such as Morris, Zardes, Birnbaum, Shea, Garza, Yarborough and Alvarado that they might not have had otherwise. And those are only the ones that I noticed.
The 2014 WC squad is going to be rebuilt. The turnover will probably be more than 50%. To me it is very hard to figure out your “system /structure” if you don’t know a lot about who your players will be. That’s what these games were for.
That is far more important than whether you go with three at the back or whatever. After all, Arena did that successfully in the 2002 WC without ever having had the team play that way before.
It’s always about the players.
I ain’t looking to get in a pissing match. I’ll just say that if there’s any system in place at present, then somebody needs to inform the USMNT player pool because they clearly are unaware of it.
Also, a system is not a divine mystery. It shouldn’t have to be “discerned”. It should be readily visible to not just the elite like your Bruce Arenas, Grant Wahls, Jesse Marschs et al. , but also to simpletons and rubbernecks like myself.
Under Bradley’s watch, the US was a defend-n-counter squad against decent competition. I didn’t always like it–in fact most of the time I hated it–but there was an identifiable system in practice.
Klinsmann promised a possession-oriented, creative attacking style when he was hired. Not for future generations decades hence, but now during his tenure.
I haven’t seen any system during his four years–much less one that will enable him to make good on his promise.
Onside,
JK never promised that attractive side during his tenure. He only promised that they would try to move to that. You can look that up.
BB played the way he did because that worked best with the players he had available. If he had had more skilled, attacking players, he probably would have played a more attractive style.
JK’s Brazil squad was an amalgam of what he is trying to get to and what he was left with from BB.
Now that Brazil is over, you are right there is no set system….yet.
What you will see in the Gold Cup may not be that far from what you might have seen in Brazil but it depends on what US players emerge between now and then
“JK’s Brazil squad was an amalgam of what he is trying to get to and what he was left with from BB.
Now that Brazil is over, you are right there is no set system….yet.”
spot on…
Yep, there hasn’t been any discernable system that JK has installed in the last 4 years. Maybe, now that Berti is in charge of tactics there might be one for the Gold Cup? Maybe not. I still saw experimenting at the freaking World Cup with Berti there.
I heard or read no one that was complaining that the US was playing quality teams. Good to hear answers to questions that werent asked/stated
At this point you might as well. Gold Cup 2015 starts July 7th and this late in the game we still haven’t found our fixed starting 11, players we have selected, fine tuning and testing against opposition. The USMNT has a bunch of issues, and at this point, all you can do as a coach is experiment.
1.Jermaine Jones, our best midfielder, is recovering
2.“Bradley and Altidore” partnership is seriously lacking the spark we need. If you can’t be productive against a no-name Chicago midfield/defense, with Benoit Cheyrou and Sebastian Giovinco around you, what do you plan to accomplish with Danny Williams and Alejandro Bedoya……up against Mexico or Costa Rica?
3.So far we have no attacking midfielder on the team
4.USMNT doesn’t have players with the talent necessary to quickly learn a new position. Moving players around makes that position the “weakest link” on the team.
…….but again maybe Klinsmann really does have a master plan.
See 2013. Same story. Best summer in US Soccer history by a mile. Calm down.
touché
2013 Gold Cup
Host USA (2015 USA and Canada)
Top goal scorer: Landon Donovan
Best Player: Landon Donovan
Current Addition: Altidore/Bradley =No Goals
Key USA attacking midfielder: Holden
No starting defensive Midfielders
Key wingers: Corona, Shea (midfield Shea)
Defenders Missing: Goodson, Parkhurst
Runners-Up: Panama (Not Mexico or Costa Rica)
I beg to differ……Totally different
interesting will be which of his experiments will stick through the gold cup. For instance will Brek Shea be the starting LB? Will Ibarra make the team. Julian Green Etc. Or, will he revert to the team/tactics in place at the end of the WC.
I’ve come realize that ppl will critique JK for what he does or doesn’t do simply because they don’t like him lol
I’m not a fan of his… but I’m okay with sacrificing friendlies.. I’m also okay with him playing players out of position in friendlies.
Knowing what players are versatile and which ones you move around to different positions if you lose a man in a game or if the team is plagued by injuries in a tournament…..its good info to know as a manager.
+2…
I’ve come realize that ppl will critique JK for what he does or doesn’t do simply because they don’t like him lol
I’m not a fan of his… but I’m okay with sacrisacrificing friendlies.. I’m also okay with him playing players out of position in friendlies.
Knowing what players are versatile and which ones you move around to different positions if you lose a man in a game or if the team is plagued by injuries in a tournament…..its good info to know as a manager.
+1
-1
did u ” -1 ” my comment? lol, wow. who “-1″s a “+1”?
+2
Your theory suggests that certain fans not liking Klinsmann just magically appeared out of nowhere. As if they just looked at his face and said to themselves, “I don’t like this guy.” You are saying that fans criticize the things Klinsmann does simply because they don’t like him. That’s incorrect.
The dislike didn’t just magically appear, it was developed over time. Fans have had almost 4 years now to see him handle the USMNT and have developed a dislike for him because of his performance. His coaching and managing and comments to the media have made people dislike him. It is something he earned.
Now people can agree or disagree with his decision and criticize or defend him, that’s fine. It is all up for debate. But don’t say something like “people criticize him just because they don’t like him.” As if some of us were born with this “dislike Klinsmann” gene that has been manifested over the centuries through natural-selection. Hey wait a minute I kind of like that. NATURAL SELECTION; SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST! Those of us with the “dislike Klinsmann” gene will survive and thrive, and the others will become extinct! 😉
Good comment, though I’d say the suggestion that “it developed over time” is a bit of a generalization. I’d actually say that for 85% of the Klinsmann haters, it developed at exactly one moment. I think we know what that moment was….
It’s all good though. I like Klinsmann, I accept that others don’t He has given some good fuel for those who doubt him. He’s not perfect. He can be painful to listen to. I happen to think he’s exacly the sort of thing the program needed at the point he was hired. Eventually it will be time for somebody else– it’s always the case.
Unless we win World Cup (or fail to qualify), I don’t think anybody will ever be “proven right” about the guy.
+1.
“I’d actually say that for 85% of the Klinsmann haters, it developed at exactly one moment. I think we know what that moment was….”
lol, “Donovan-gate” was definitely polarizing.
Klinsmann Reviews Himself, Says He’s Doing Fine
The machine has become self-aware. No one is safe.
LOL
There is no greater idiocy than sports idiocy!
I think a lot of fans have been waiting for something like this to come from JK, and it does make sense.
This is the time to rake through the coals and find who can and can’t compete on the highest level. I like the importance put on the U-20 and U-23 teams as well.It’s not necessarily about winning the Olympics or U-20 WC, but getting the next generations playing on the big stage against the best in the world will prepare them better for the senior team.
any fan that has been waiting for this explanation most likely hasn’t been a soccer fan for long. experimenting in the first year of a WC cycle is a hugely common occurrence.
Makes sense as long as the “big stage” you’re referring to is the qualifying rounds for those tournaments against teams like Cuba.
Otherwise, I’d have to say that our youth teams have been under-performing, and failing to get our younger generation of players the exposure on the big stage that they need to prepare them for the senior team.
This is another area people don’t understand. While it is nice if the youth teams do well, their main purpose is to find players who will contribute to the senior team later on and to inculcate them with the style of play we want and the dedication and commitment necessary to be a successful international.
Yeah, nobody understands anything. Good thing Gary Page is here to explain it all.
if everyone understood everything then what would be the need for soccer blog debate?…..
+1 GP, quite frankly i could care less if the youth teams win every tournament but for the fact that it would generally mean we have good players coming up to the senior level in the future. the main purpose of the youth programs is to cultivate players, test them out prior to the senior level “experimenting” lol. it’s basically a glorified screening process
I just have a hard time believing anything he says anymore. If hes “experimenting” and “results dont Matter” then why would he bring in Jozy, Bradley, Dempsey all the way to Europe?
I think the true story here is more like… Since I didnt get results, lets pretend they don’t matter. How can I spin my way out of this one?
Lets see who he calls in for Mexico. Then we’ll see if he’s trying to win or still experimenting
Everyone knows I’m not a big JK fan, but if he is experimenting it makes sense to bring in key guys like the one you mention since they are our most important players and it’s important to see how any experiment goes with them on field. Also, for the Mexico friendly, JK will be limited to calling in MLS players because it’s not during a FIFA window, similar to last year’s April friendly against Mexico. In that game an all-MLS USMNT absolutely dominated the first half and took a 2-0 lead, then looked pretty bad in the second half and blew that lead.
What I don’t get is his insistence on playing guys out of position. The most glaring example is when he played Brek Shea at LB and many (including myself) though he was crazy. Turns out Brek was good enough at LB that his club plays him there now. Yet against Denmark, JK plays him in midfield.
Brek is naturally a LW, his move to LB allows him to play multiple positions, much like FJ is used in the back line and in the midfield depending on the situation more or less. kinda funny that you chose Brek as your example. a better example of this would be Morales as a LM when he’s naturally a CDM/CM
He did the same with DMB. There were a number of people, including myself, who thought DMB would not make it at LB. I thought he was wrong not to bring in Jozy during the first round of qualifiers and thought he was wrong to bring Brooks to the WC instead of Goodson. I also thought Yedlin was too raw and a wasted addition to the team. He was right in all those occasions. I thought he should bring EJ and Donovan instead of Wondo and Brad Davis to the WC. I think I was right on those. In sum, he was right more often than I was or more than a lot of people. He puts players out of position to increase versatility and flexibility in the team. Also, it allows him to maybe find the best spot for his players. Before this year, who would’ve thought Shea would be a decent LB? A lot of people are quick to slam him, but he obviously knows more than the fans do. After all, it’s his job.
I disagree with your logic Gary Page on one specific thing. You bring up the Brooks over Goodson, and the Yedlin over whoever examples. To me, you have to judge the decisions in the moment they happened. Simply because after that moment, one guy gets to play and the other doesn’t.
To be more specific, lets go back to Brooks over Goodson. Like you, I also feel Brooks did well at the World Cup, but I still think its hard to say whether Klinsmann was right or not. We didn’t get to see how Goodson would have done. Maybe Goodson would have played even better than Brooks did. Maybe he would have scored two goals instead of Brooks one. We will never know.
And don’t remind me of the Wondo and Davis over Donovan and EJ/Boyd. How can you possibly consider someone that made that decision to be rational, or have an eye for talent, or be a good manager, or want to win- after he made that decision!? Brad freaking Davis STARTED a world cup game for us! This can never be forgotten. It should be in the first paragraph of his obituary or atleast his wikipedia page. “Jurgen Klinsmann, best known for actually starting Brad Davis in a World Cup game.”
“Brad freaking Davis STARTED a world cup game for us! This can never be forgotten.”
Big Deal. You get upset easily.
Robbie Findley started TWO World Cup games for the USMNT
Jonathan Bornstein started TWO World Cup games for the USMNT.
I’ll bet you forgot that.
No I didn’t forget about that and I was equally outraged about that.
Bringing up negative things other managers have done does not change or absolve anything that JK has done. Typical JK fan response. This is not the republicans vs the democrats. “Bush did this … well Obama did that … blah blah.” We had many years in the past to critique Bruce Arena and Bob Bradley.
That’s right GW. You are like a little sissy every time someone criticizes JK.
Grow a pair
Gee Maroon, what do testicles have to do with commenting on UCLAB’s rather poorly thought out post?
UCBG is an avowed JK hater . How is that morally superior to being an alleged defender of JK’s?
In order for me to absolve JK of the “sin” of starting Davis in a World Cup game, I would have to think that the start was a disaster. I don’t.
At worst it was a wash and it was no more outrageous than starting Bornstein ( who played well) or Findley ( who did not ).
I did not even mention the most disastrous start in recent memory which was Rico Clark.
Not every move good managers like BB made worked out you know?
Bornstein had good games in South Africa.
Findley and Clark were gabage. The problem: Bradley didn’t learn from his mistakes.
Zusi, Besler, Beckerman and Wondo were bad. Beckerman and Wondo are over 30 and were bad in the World, no reason to call them after the World Cup.
While I see what you’re saying, if we can’t judge a decision based on events after the decision was made, how can we ever evaluate anything? You’re right that we never got to see the various counterfactuals (Goodson in place of Brooks, Donovan in place of Davis) play out, but I think that at a certain point, you have to look at how things played out in reality, ask what went right versus wrong, and come to a conclusion (perhaps not one with 100% certainty, but a conclusion nonetheless).
Brooks scored a game-winning goal for us and didn’t really stand out in a bad way defensively. Ultimately, the CBs who made individual mistakes over the course of 4 games (Cameron and Besler) were guys who were guaranteed to be taken ahead of Goodson, and Besler had a tremendous tournament overall. So it’s not unreasonable to says that bringing Goodson wouldn’t have likely added much to the U.S.’s performance, since he would have displaced 2 out-and-out better defenders who were never going to be left home (Besler and Cameron), 1 defender who had 2 strong defensive performances in the final 2 games (Gonzalez), and the guy who scored the game-winning goal in a must-win game (Brooks).
The Donovan/EJ/Wondo/Davis debate is a little more complicated, although even there, I think we can probably draw at least a few conclusions. If I were in Klinsmann’s shoes going into the World Cup, I would likely have taken Donovan in place of Davis, and I would have tried to find a way of taking EJ too (not sure if I would have sacrificed Wondo — more likely that Yedlin would have never been on my radar and I would have ended up with an extra winger slot). But with the benefit of hindsight, I know that while Davis has obvious limitations and didn’t contribute much when he played, he also didn’t stand out in a negative way, which means that the decision to take him was hardly a disaster, even if it might have been wrong. Whether it was wrong or not depends largely on how you viewed Donovan and EJ’s performances over the course of the cycle (I tended to view Donovan’s more negatively and EJ’s more positively than most of the commenters here). But Davis’s unremarkable-but-not-disasterous performance does sort of set the outer boundary for how right or wrong Klinsmann might have been.
All this is to say that, while I agree that there’s an element of unfairness in using hindsight, I think that, at a certain point it becomes unavoidable.
while i agree Davis should not have made the roster (essentially just for being left footed), analyzing Davis’ selection as “not being a disaster” doesn’t necessarily mean that another player wouldn’t’ve or couldn’t’ve done better. so if someone feels a certain player could have done better than “not a disaster” then theres nothing wrong with that.
MHO
I understood his inclusion. He doesn’t have any speed – which got exposed against Germany – but his forte was set pieces and his left-footed delivery and you can imagine scenarios in which that might have proved telling. Unfortunately those scenarios ended up not appearing and Klinsmann basically had to get about 60 minutes out of him against Germany, whom he arguably matched up against the worst. When you’re going to guys 22 or 23 or your bench, you kind of look for specialists like that because who knows, you might end up needing ’em. Good thought, but it ended up not being the weapon the team needed.
If there’s a mistake Klinsmann made in his selection – and I’m sure he would admit this himself – it was not bringing cover for Altidore, either Eddie Johnson or Terrance Boyd. That sort of changed everything and left us sort of scrambling. Then again, hindsight is always 20/20.
I was trying to acknowledge that, although I think my post ended up being so long it probably wasn’t clear. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying Klinsmann’s decision to take Davis over Donovan (or EJ, or Boyd, or someone else) was incorrect. I think, though, that Davis’s performance makes it hard to argue that it was wrong to the point of being irrational. Davis didn’t bring much to the table, but he didn’t take much off it either, so unless you believe that Donovan or EJ would have significantly overperformed compared to how they did over the course of the cycle (both were pretty inconsistent), I think saying there’s no way to consider the decision rational is overstating the case a little. It’s not so much that there’s anything wrong with saying “Donovan/EJ/Boyd” would have been better than Davis. Donovan certainly had more natural talent and EJ/Boyd would have filled a need (one that became incredibly obvious once Altidore went down and our offense basically fell apart). I’m really just objecting to the hyperbole.
“and the Yedlin over whoever ”
silly bruin, it would be “whomever” in this instance… lol
If you need me to explain why I surely can.
carry on…
this was a response to UCB, btw.
“he played Brek Shea at LB and many (including myself) though he was crazy. Turns out Brek was good enough at LB that his club plays him there now.”
again, just to set the record straight, brek had already played left back at multiple clubs (and exclusively at birmingham) before klinsmann came up with that ‘crazy’ idea.
A few additional reasons:
1. You like to see the veteran leadership in training
2. You want to have the ability to play certain players alongside others if possible. Ex: A mid partner for MB, or a forward with Jozy etc
3. When you get the chance on an official intl break (which doesn’t always align w MLS) you want to keep some semblance of order with a combo of vets and newbies
4. This is actually a loaded year, even though he says it’s transitional, because of the youth teams, in addition to the Gold Cup
And it’s about creating competition and having enough options to the point no player feels like they own a starting sport on the team.
Bac,
5. Also, as GW stated above, playing 11 new players does no good because you have no constant to compare it with.
I agree with what everyone is saying, but
It just seems a little late to say you were experimenting. Why didn’t he say that before ?
Because it wasn’t worth saying. Ok still true.
Realize that I have a bias. All of his whining about US soccer has him the QWASITUS dog house.
to me it seems like he’s saying it now because the media and fans have been criticizing him recently. JK probably thought it all went without saying but now that there’s flak he makes a statement. basically some US fans and media don’t fully understand how a cycle works.
…because no one in the rest of the world would you have to say it. When I lived outside the states, no one took them (friendlies) seriously. They are friendlies! They are meant for experimentation. Only in the US would he HAVE to explain it. It’s like dealing with 3rd graders. This is exactly when you experiment and learn. You look for takeaways: (1) different formations that work, (2) new players that look promising, and (3) growth/development of established players.
Listen to the English media after a poor performance by England in a friendly. Not that I’m advocating copying them but those results are taken seriously.
If you don’t advocate taking up the serially, mega negative English media’s stance then why bring it up?
You could say it is an excellent reason to NOT take friendlies seriously.
After all, considering the talent they have England have massively underachieved over the years since 1966.
Maybe the fact that if England don’t beat everyone 4-0 they will all be crucified in the media and in public is not the best thing.
+1
i believe sla was merely contending with anthony’s statement that Only In America do fans overreact about friendlies.
anthony’s also apparently never lived in mexico.
Point taken.
I shouldn’t have made it absolute. i lived in France and Germany and that was the case. They did not complete ignore it, but they also did not put much stock in them. I also had friends in London (still do). The media in maniacal, but it was also that the results don’t matter a great deal when I would watch Skysports news. They would look for takeaways: how did this guy look etc. The fans on the street were more obsessive, but it was widely accepted that they did know anything.
You listen Argentina’s media being harsh to Argentina’s poor performance vs El Salvador and Ecuador.
Note: Argentina won both games.
To me the determination is dependent upon how the team plays during the friendly more than the results itself. A defeat in which there are positive takeaways….good combinations passing, extended possession, good interchange, new player options, etc… than the friendly was a success.
However, if/when there is a demoralizing defeat without positives (Ireland Mach or Spain before the Gold Cup) than the friendly was a failure.
Not to sound pompous, but it was obvious to some people. Of course, it took me a year or two to figure out what he was doing and why. Seriously, what coach WANTS to lose? If all he wanted to do was pad the record and look good, he’d have the team playing El Salvador and Guatemala, Canada, and a lot of other minor teams. Also, pay attention to what he says over and over again and it all fits together. Everything he does is focused on the World Cup, and he probably viewed the 2014 World Cup as preparation for 2018 since he realizes it will take that long to bring about the development he wants. As I have written before, the only reason he views the Gold Cup as important is because a championship there guarantees a visit to the
Confederations Cup and that competition is a good training for the World Cup.
“As I have written before, the only reason he views the Gold Cup as important is because a championship there guarantees a visit to the Confederations Cup and that competition is a good training for the World Cup.”
True.
However, people seem to forget that should the US not win this Gold Cup they are still already qualified for a playoff with whoever does win it this year to get into the Confederations Cup.
Winning the Gold Cup this summer means, the US does not have to risk that playoff.
And when would the second match be played?
+1 GP and GW. great points
QWASUS,
Actually, if you care to look it up, while JK might not have used the E word, he clearly laid out last October what he was trying to do in this cycle of post WC friendlies. Basically, find out about the new guys while using a few vets to add structure and show the newbies the way.
http://www.starsandstripesfc.com/usmnt-friendlies/2014/10/6/6922209/jurgen-klinsmann-usmnt-roster-vs-ecuador-honduras-mls
I think JK shud follow BA and not experiment at all and play like crap in the next Cup just like 2006
BA?
nvm, bruce arena. haha sorry
There’s no problem with experiment system/formation, but using over something 30’s player that failed at Internationally is another issue, or keeping using senior “A” players for meaningless friendlies.
some 30 somethings some times are reborn in new cycles see DMB
DMB have no future with current cycle. DMB has always among better players with USNT, I can’t complain DMB in South Africa, my complain players in 30’s that failed under Arena’s cycle or Bradley’s cycle, yet get called this cycle or 2014 cycle.
Scott,
The re is no such thing as a “meaningless ” friendly.
Fielding a team of 11 newbies would get you what? Chaos, a bunch of guys who have never played together. .
Ideally, you try out new guys one at a time with the first team. That way you know how they will perform with the big boys.
Since this is impractical then you do the best you can by bringing in the main man Bradley and a few of the others like Clint, Jozy Fabian and so on.
For example we need to see how Zardes plays with Mikey, Clint and Jozy since that is who he will be paired up with if he makes the Gold Cup team.
Reason why we need more friendlies against C level for the Rookies. Especially in begin of the year without MLS games, players regain their rhymth and fitness, and develop understanding with system/formation with the coach and each other. JAN-FEB have three to four games like El Salvador or weaker Euro like Azeris first for the Rookies, then call some Seniors for Chile.
There’s no reason risk Dempsey or Altidore against weaker teams or abroad games start of MLS season, where Klinsmann could test-out players abroad.
scott, who exactly are these over 30 players that failed internationally? just curious
Wondo & Davis both come to mind.
neither of which are still being called up. sooooo…..?
Wondo, Davis and Rimando.
again, davis and wondo seemingly aren’t being called up anymore (the jan mlx camp appeared to be won do’s send off playing the “veteran role”) and rimando is quite solidly Guzan’s back up. Guzan was not called up for the most recent two friendlies due to the birth of his kid.
…….so still waiting to here this list of aforementioned players.
If Jurgen told a reporter that the sun rises in the east, would it make the news? I suspect so. Seriously, guys, is there any national team coach on the face of the earth who doesn’t use friendlies for experimentation of some sort?
you are correct yet some of the fans and media do not get this point. there have been a few articles and fan comments criticizing JK calling for his replacement. most knowledgable soccer fans understand that this is the best time for experimentation. perhaps this article and others like it are an attempt to clarify this point to casual fans? idk
As someone placing himself above “casual fans” I’d hope you could distinguish between “experimentation” and “desperately throwing things against the wall will no discernible plan.”
Can you? None of us are actually behind the scenes. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt until the Gold Cup.
Nordy, I never placed myself above anyone. you’re reading to much into my comment. If I say i know the square root of pi does that automatically mean that i think I’m better than those who don’t? factually differentiating is not the same as placing myself above others. just because i said “knowledgable soccer fans” doesn’t mean those not included in that group are “dumb” just that they perhaps haven’t followed the sport or culture long enough to know certain things; and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.
relax…. it’ll be ok
He has the right to experiment all he wants and lose every friendly if necessary. The’s what they’re for.
As long as they bring home the gold cup, I can care less about these friendlies.
My guess is that the first team doesn’t need warm ups to advance to the second round of the Gold Cup and once there they will have gelled in group play. So if JK wants to experiment more, now is the time to do it.
Pretty much. If we suck in the Gold Cup we can replace him. No need to worry about it with friendies so far from the WC.
The only issue I have with constantly changing personnel is that turn-over on any squad takes a while to recover from. In professional clubs, that have large turnover (even when upgrading to better players), underperform for about 3 games (not counting friendly scrimmages), but the defense in particular underperforms for about 9 games.
That argues that the defense needs to become more stable 2-3 games before the Gold Cup so that it will be fully organized by the final games of the Gold Cup (if only just barely).
Good defense is a team effort that relies upon good organization to avoid those embarrassing moments when the star striker is left un-marked and scores, or when the player who is clever with the ball gets 1v1 chances with no defensive help.
That does not mean all 4 of the back line and a couple midifielders must be the same every game, but the games where only 2 of the 4 backs and only 1 midfielder have played more than a game or two together in the last couple years should be at an end.
It is time for JK to choose from among the defenders he has already seen in camp who will be the back 4 and defensive mid (or 2) .
Sure there must be some changes to allow for injury and suspensions so not rigidly the same 5 or 6 players, but surely 4 of them should be pretty constant.
Nice made up statistics. Very impressive.
Agreed. And the whole conceding late goals issue I think is silly as well. In a friendly, that’s largely garbage time. When you substitute in 6 new players, many of whom would never have come in if it was a competitive match, you can’t obsess over the results.
Like back last year when USMNT played Bosnia and got smoked in the first half, then in the second half, Altidore went nuts and scored a hat trick and people seemed so happy about that team performance/comeback. I thought it was a pretty rough/worrying performance masked by a dominant second half played against Bosnia’s subs.
So it works both ways in friendlies.
Except that when you look at the trend of conceding late goals, it also includes the World Cup.
Hmm yes and no. Really only happened in Portugal. Extra time goals dont count toward this in my mind.
Err, no. Ghana scored in the 82nd minute. So even going by your bizarre notion that extra time goals don’t count, the U.S. gave up late goals in half their World Cup matches. For the rest of us, they did it 75% of them.