Compelling Soccer

Now that qualification is in the books, it seems like as good a time as any to look at the state of the US soccer team. And of course whenever you look at the state of a squad, it always starts with the head. In this case it is the much debated Bob Bradley, a man whom many didn't want to get the job, many still want fired but who also has picked up plenty of supporters along the way.

Your view on Bradley probably comes down to where you perception of the US Soccer team in the world spectrum. You can see it in the arguments on both sides. Critics decry his conservative style and boring defensive tactics. (Two defensive mids, hooray for bunker ball!) Supporters will tell you the US simply doesn't have the talent to get by consistently any other way. Meanwhile supporters will tell you Bradley's had more success than any other US coach, with the highest win percentage and qualifying for the World Cup at the top of CONCACAF. Critics will retort qualifying for the Cup is the bare minimum these days; anyone should do be able to do that with this group of players. The true test comes in South Africa, where Bradley's tactics will inevitably lead to a knock out in the group stage.

I fully admit to being a critic. I don't believe the US is a world power, capable of achieving even a 50/50 split with the likes of Brazil, Argentina, Spain, or England. But I do think this squad is firmly in the group below; the second tier sides that are in the mix for the knock out stages of the World Cup. They won't win their group, but they certainly can place second. Will they or won't they?

Right now, the Bradley supporters are in better shape than the critics. We don't know if a top reputed manager would have made this team better. We have seen in CONCACAF what a poor manager can do; see Sven Goran Ericksson and Mexico. So in some respects, even if your expectations are high, qualification for the World Cup is not necessarily something to be scoffed at. It also isn't something to be lauded either. Think of it this way; qualifying is a pass/fail test. No matter how you score, all that matters is whether you qualify (pass) or don't (fail). The US qualified, so Bradley passed. It's impossible to grade him on much more than that because even against other US squads, the talent level of it and the region is at different levels.

And it seems like as you try to work through Bradley's recent performance, you find a lot of ands or buts, no matter what side you take. He's featured a lot of head scratchers; sticking with Brian Ching as long as he did. Or going with Jonathan Bornstein. Or Conor Casey in Honduras. Or Charlie Davies sitting for as long as he did. Or Jose Francisco Torres. The Ching situation has not worked out well for Bradley, but many would argue Casey and Bornstein are proof Bradley knows what he is doing. And who says Davies and Torres were ready when the fans were ready for them? From my perspective, the truth falls somewhere in the middle.

Both Casey and Bornstein have value. Bradley appears to have correctly evaluated that aspect of the situation. But are they being used correctly? It's one thing to identify talent; it's another to deploy it properly. Seriously, ask Isiah Thomas all about that sometime. Great drafter and talent evaluator, lousy at team building.

In the case of Bornstein, his performance against Costa Rica gives you a summation of what he does great and what he struggles with. He's got offensive talent. He's certainly not a great wing player by international standards, but he may be good enough to play there for the US. He does enough to contribute to the flow of the offense and can get in there for goals, as he showed Wednesday.

The problem is his biggest deficiency is defense. Yes, he's a defender who can't defend well. The fact that he's good at moving upfield is almost irrelevant. Trying to say otherwise stinks of: "Well aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?" He's been abused on multiple occasions during qualification and while I'm not going to say he's the worst defender I've ever seen, he just is not good enough to play there in the World Cup. Costa Rica's midfield gave him trouble and he was lost on their second goal. Imagine what a midfielder on a top ten team would do to him.

So if you have a guy who has a decent offensive game, whose biggest problem is his defense, why are you trying to play him at left back? Shouldn't he be a guy you're looking at primarily as a midfielder? If he can't play there, and maybe he can't, then perhaps his role is best suited as a substitute; a guy who comes on when you have to sacrifice defense for offense.

With Casey, you also have a useful player, but someone lacking in certain aspects that make him starter quality. He doesn't the pace that you'd like to see, even from a target striker. He certainly can be strong in the area and has surprisingly good vision to pick out others. But he's not great off the ball because of that lack of footspeed and on nights when his touch is failing him, as it was Wednesday, things will look ugly. For all his positives, the negatives probably outweigh them when looking at the alternatives. However, unlike Bornstein, whom I still question his usage, Bradley deserves more credit here for seeing Casey's value when even the most ardent US supporters questioned him being anywhere near the 23.

Another example is Benny Feilhaber. I feel for Feilhaber; he was relegated to a holding role he isn't made for Wednesday and it showed. On the other hand, it appears Bradley had the player he needed for the role all along in Torres. But Torres hasn't seen much action since the first Costa Rica debacle until last night, when he was one of the key figures in their rally. Some will point out that it was a tired Costa Rican midfield that was sitting back, but he still exploited the opportunity and made some of the best one on one tackles of the night. (Along with excellent corners, which should be consistent regardless of the opposition's stamina)

That's what can be so frustrating. The Bradley supporters make a very fair point; if we think this squad is so talented, then Bradley deserves credit for picking it. Feilhaber, Torres, Bornstein, Casey, Charlie Davies before, Kenny Cooper; they're all there. But when you go months with Brian Ching and it takes desperation/injury to go to a Davies, it becomes a double edged sword. You picked the talent, but you didn't use it effectively either. Same with Feilhaber or Torres; these guys can play but their deployment appears to have been shoddy thus far. Even his usage of Altidore has been hit or miss. Certainly Jozy could have given the US more if he had started at the Azteca.

Some of it seems to be a familiarity with guys he knows. This is actually part of the reason why I wished the US went outside the American soccer system for a coach. Sometimes it's better to have someone who doesn't have a comfort level with the players; who doesn't have "his guys", or someone who knows half the players from his MLS days.

Right now, all of this translates too... a mediocre coach. When I started, I thought Bradley was a god awful one who didn't know what he was doing. Now, I'm backing off that a bit. He's got some skills that can translate to success. But he is definitely lacking the total package in my eyes. His strength as a talent evaluator is overshadowed by his at times poor deployment and poor in game adjustments. The good news is that improvement might be coming; the Costa Rica game was probably the best I've seen him manage.

Am I more optimistic than I was a month and a half ago? Yeah, I have to admit I am, even with the injuries. But that doesn't mean I'm confident. Not by a long shot. This squad and their coach have a long way to go before I start thinking the knockout stages of South Africa is a foregone conclusion.