TITLE CONTENDERS
1 - MANCHESTER UNITED: A hungry ManU along with the strike force additions Sir Alex brought in bring the title back to Manchester.
2 - CHELSEA: A year older and a title later, the Blues fall just short, even with the addition of Michael Essien.
3 - ARSENAL: The Gunners close the gap between themselves and the Top Two, but don't have the defense to lift the trophy. Bet-hedging caveat - if Wenger signs a top-flight goalkeeper before the August transfer window closes, Arsenal wins the league.
4 - EVERTON: Without the Jolean Lescott distraction, David Moyes avoids the disastrous start from last year and snags the final Champions League spot.
EUROPEAN CONTENDERS
5 - LIVERPOOL: Roy Hodgson is the right guy for the job, but the uncertain ownership situation prevents him from finishing the job this year.
6 - MANCHESTER CITY: I'll believe Mancini can blend his All-Star team into a league-winning team when I see it, not before.
7 - FULHAM: Mark Hughes has something to prove, and the Cottagers don't have Europe to consider.
8 - TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR: An extended European adventure will pull Spurs away from their top four finish from last year.
SAFELY MID-TABLE
9 - STOKE CITY: The defense is just as stingy, and there's a little more offensive punch for the Potters.
10 - ASTON VILLA: If you're a Villa fan, and you're not incredibly angry at Martin O'Neill for leaving your boys in the lurch like this, there's something wrong with you.
11 - BIRMINGHAM CITY: Last year was no fluke, as Birmingham can play defense and has enough offensive threat to push for a top-half finish.
12 - SUNDERLAND: The Black Cats probably should be higher than this, but with the talent they have they won't be any lower.
13 - BOLTON WANDERERS: A full year of Owen Coyle will open up Bolton and add some goal-scoring to their tough defense.
RELEGATION SURVIVORS
14 - NEWCASTLE UNITED: Welcome back to the Toon Army.
15 - BLACKBURN ROVERS: Big Sam's anti-football is enough to keep Blackburn up, but there's not enough goals in the squad to push to the heights of last year.
16 - WEST HAM UNITED: Avram Grant is the most underrated and underappreciated manager currently in the Premier League. Now that he has an actual squad to deal with, the Hammers will be comfortably safe.
17 - WOLVERHAMPTON WANDERERS: Even with Mick McCarthey's fear of second season syndrome, Wolves set enough of a foundation last year to survive another season.
THE DOOMED
18 - WIGAN ATHLETIC: Too much talent has left and not enough has come in to keep the dream run alive for Wigan.
19 - WEST BROMWICH ALBION: No one wants to see the Baggies yo-yo again, but there's not enough steel in the side to stay up.
20 - BLACKPOOL: Wonderful story. Terrible team, by Premier League standards
Friday, August 13, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
YTG Re-View: USA 2-0 BRA
THE GOOD ...
- THE FIRST TEN MINUTES: No, that's not a typo. After cartoon-like disasters at the start of each game at the World Cup, the Americans actually came out swinging and looked the better team at the start. Landon Donovan had an awfully good case for a penalty kick in the third minute of the game, and if the US gets that early goal, who knows what the rest of the game would look like? Where was that opening fire in South Africa?
- DEBUT NIGHT: Young players like Omar Gonzales got their first sniff of international soccer in a great venue, in front of a great crowd, against a great (at times, REALLY great) team. Regardless of the outcome, that kind of experience is invaluable.
- THE AMERICAN GOALPOASTS: In the second half, as the Brazilians pretty much owned the ball and the game, it was the American woodwork that was the most effective defender for much of the period. Absent the doinks off the white bars, the score would have looked a lot worse than it ended up.
THE BAD ...
- THE REST OF THE GAME: Once Brazil got their legs underneath them, they pretty well ran the game. While the US had a few bright spots and a couple of chances, the game was pretty much all Brazil.
- DEFENSIVE INTENSITY: In an eerie flashback to the goals scored against the US in the World Cup, Brazil's goals came after a disturbing lack of pressure on the ball as Brazil was creating. The US, at least for one game, fixed the slow start issue, but has yet to address the not-playing-the-ball-tight issue.
- FECKLESS FORWARDS: In fairness, the US was playing a team a class above them and just about everyone else in the world. But it's just disheartening to see the US forwards offering nothing of any significant threat going forward. At some point, Jozy Altidore is going to stop being a young prospect and start having to produce.
... AND THE BRADLEY SWAN SONG?
US coach Bob Bradley is, at the time of writing, the leading candidate to replace Martin O'Neil at Aston Villa. Jurgen Klinsmann is still living in California, not managing a team. Both of those things could change in very short order. The uncertainty surrounding Bradley leaves the US national team stuck in limbo. Whether Bradley keeps the US gig, or whether Klinsmann takes the helm, the US needs to get a leader and a philosophy locked in.
THE BIG PICTURE.
There's no doubt that Bradley has done an admirable job getting the team to where they are now. There's no doubt he's qualified and has earned the right to continue in the job. There's also no doubt that bringing in Klinsmann to replace him would be a clear signal that US Soccer is not satisfied with how things ended in South Africa and wants to move forward and advance. As much as Bradley has convinced me since last year's Confederations Cup run, hiring Klinsmann would move the US team ahead in ways that Bradley simply cannot do. The best-case scenario would be for Bradley to get the Aston Villa job. That way, the profile of US Soccer gets a boost from the first American manager to get a job in the Premier League. Then, US Soccer gets Klinsmann as the national coach, giving them a new voice with the credibility of Germany's 2006 success.
- THE FIRST TEN MINUTES: No, that's not a typo. After cartoon-like disasters at the start of each game at the World Cup, the Americans actually came out swinging and looked the better team at the start. Landon Donovan had an awfully good case for a penalty kick in the third minute of the game, and if the US gets that early goal, who knows what the rest of the game would look like? Where was that opening fire in South Africa?
- DEBUT NIGHT: Young players like Omar Gonzales got their first sniff of international soccer in a great venue, in front of a great crowd, against a great (at times, REALLY great) team. Regardless of the outcome, that kind of experience is invaluable.
- THE AMERICAN GOALPOASTS: In the second half, as the Brazilians pretty much owned the ball and the game, it was the American woodwork that was the most effective defender for much of the period. Absent the doinks off the white bars, the score would have looked a lot worse than it ended up.
THE BAD ...
- THE REST OF THE GAME: Once Brazil got their legs underneath them, they pretty well ran the game. While the US had a few bright spots and a couple of chances, the game was pretty much all Brazil.
- DEFENSIVE INTENSITY: In an eerie flashback to the goals scored against the US in the World Cup, Brazil's goals came after a disturbing lack of pressure on the ball as Brazil was creating. The US, at least for one game, fixed the slow start issue, but has yet to address the not-playing-the-ball-tight issue.
- FECKLESS FORWARDS: In fairness, the US was playing a team a class above them and just about everyone else in the world. But it's just disheartening to see the US forwards offering nothing of any significant threat going forward. At some point, Jozy Altidore is going to stop being a young prospect and start having to produce.
... AND THE BRADLEY SWAN SONG?
US coach Bob Bradley is, at the time of writing, the leading candidate to replace Martin O'Neil at Aston Villa. Jurgen Klinsmann is still living in California, not managing a team. Both of those things could change in very short order. The uncertainty surrounding Bradley leaves the US national team stuck in limbo. Whether Bradley keeps the US gig, or whether Klinsmann takes the helm, the US needs to get a leader and a philosophy locked in.
THE BIG PICTURE.
There's no doubt that Bradley has done an admirable job getting the team to where they are now. There's no doubt he's qualified and has earned the right to continue in the job. There's also no doubt that bringing in Klinsmann to replace him would be a clear signal that US Soccer is not satisfied with how things ended in South Africa and wants to move forward and advance. As much as Bradley has convinced me since last year's Confederations Cup run, hiring Klinsmann would move the US team ahead in ways that Bradley simply cannot do. The best-case scenario would be for Bradley to get the Aston Villa job. That way, the profile of US Soccer gets a boost from the first American manager to get a job in the Premier League. Then, US Soccer gets Klinsmann as the national coach, giving them a new voice with the credibility of Germany's 2006 success.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
What Americans learned from the World Cup
HEY! WE HAVE A SOCCER TEAM!
The World Cup has always been an event Americans were aware of, but 2010 was the first time the general American public had a personal stake in the tournament. A lot of things conspired to generate the unprecedented interest in the game. First, the US got a marquee matchup against England in the opening game, that just happened to fall in primetime on a weekend. The dramatic comeback against Slovenia further whetted the appetite, and the last-minute winner against Algeria to advance the US out of group play was straight out of a Hollywood script.
But the on-field achievements in South Africa can’t explain all of the success the World Cup had with the general American sports fan. The US-Slovenia game drew record ratings – and was on a Wednesday morning. The England game can explain some of the attention the US team drew, but some of it has to be explained by the growth of the game itself. International club soccer, from the Premier League to the Champions League, and the growth of Major League Soccer helped set the table for the unprecedented attention the US team received in South Africa.
HEY! SOCCER SHOULD HAVE INSTANT REPLAY!
While an injustice makes for great television, the goal taken away from the US against Slovenia for a phantom foul helped to galvanize the casual US fans in support of the team. But it also introduced American fans to an ugly truth soccer fans have known for years – that some kind of instant replay review is needed to make sure the right call gets made.
FIFA is listening, apparently. With the combination of American fans (and the massive American sports market) awakened to soccer, along with the “daylight robbery” of the English and the Mexicans in an 8-hour period, FIFA President Sepp Blatter has been forced to back off his “no technology ever” position he took just weeks before the World Cup started.
HEY! MAYBE SOCCER ISN’T JUST FOR WEIRDO EUROSNOBS!
Soccer has always been a favorite whipping boy of “real Amur’cun” sports fans. With its’ low scores, its’ embracing of ties, and its’ lack of a clock on the field – not to mention the fact that Americans in general weren’t very good at the sports – your average American sports fan felt comfortable in dismissing and making fun of the sport.
Not anymore. Landon Donovan has become a household name, showing up on cultural touchstones like the Tonight Show and the Daily Show. Heck, he might even show up on Dancing with the Stars! With the success the Americans achieved on the field and the attention the team drew from the public at large, soccer went a long way towards legitimizing itself with the average American sports fan.
No one is expecting that soccer will be replacing baseball or the NFL for the average American sports fan. But with the additional soccer availability for Americans on television and in person, and with the added legitimacy and popularity this year’s World Cup brought to the sport, it may just be that the foundations have been laid for soccer to become a vibrant part of the American sports landscape.
The World Cup has always been an event Americans were aware of, but 2010 was the first time the general American public had a personal stake in the tournament. A lot of things conspired to generate the unprecedented interest in the game. First, the US got a marquee matchup against England in the opening game, that just happened to fall in primetime on a weekend. The dramatic comeback against Slovenia further whetted the appetite, and the last-minute winner against Algeria to advance the US out of group play was straight out of a Hollywood script.
But the on-field achievements in South Africa can’t explain all of the success the World Cup had with the general American sports fan. The US-Slovenia game drew record ratings – and was on a Wednesday morning. The England game can explain some of the attention the US team drew, but some of it has to be explained by the growth of the game itself. International club soccer, from the Premier League to the Champions League, and the growth of Major League Soccer helped set the table for the unprecedented attention the US team received in South Africa.
HEY! SOCCER SHOULD HAVE INSTANT REPLAY!
While an injustice makes for great television, the goal taken away from the US against Slovenia for a phantom foul helped to galvanize the casual US fans in support of the team. But it also introduced American fans to an ugly truth soccer fans have known for years – that some kind of instant replay review is needed to make sure the right call gets made.
FIFA is listening, apparently. With the combination of American fans (and the massive American sports market) awakened to soccer, along with the “daylight robbery” of the English and the Mexicans in an 8-hour period, FIFA President Sepp Blatter has been forced to back off his “no technology ever” position he took just weeks before the World Cup started.
HEY! MAYBE SOCCER ISN’T JUST FOR WEIRDO EUROSNOBS!
Soccer has always been a favorite whipping boy of “real Amur’cun” sports fans. With its’ low scores, its’ embracing of ties, and its’ lack of a clock on the field – not to mention the fact that Americans in general weren’t very good at the sports – your average American sports fan felt comfortable in dismissing and making fun of the sport.
Not anymore. Landon Donovan has become a household name, showing up on cultural touchstones like the Tonight Show and the Daily Show. Heck, he might even show up on Dancing with the Stars! With the success the Americans achieved on the field and the attention the team drew from the public at large, soccer went a long way towards legitimizing itself with the average American sports fan.
No one is expecting that soccer will be replacing baseball or the NFL for the average American sports fan. But with the additional soccer availability for Americans on television and in person, and with the added legitimacy and popularity this year’s World Cup brought to the sport, it may just be that the foundations have been laid for soccer to become a vibrant part of the American sports landscape.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
The Rational Hand Ball
Uruguayan striker Luis Suarez is being demonized as a villain for his handball that denied Ghana a goal at the end of extra time. But his actions were perfectly rational.
For those of you returning from a weekend trip to Mars, here's the story. Ghana and Uruguay were tied 1-1 as extra time was ending. Ghana won a last free kick in the 120th minute of play. The free kick was curled in, and in the scrum the Uruguyan keeper attempted and failed to punch the ball clear. A shot was sent in and Suarez, the last man on the line, punched the ball away.
A red card was immediately shown to Suarez, and Ghana was given an penalty kick for the last kick of extra time. Asamoah Gyan stepped to the spot - and missed the penalty. The game went to a shootout, which Uruguay won 4-2.
Suarez is now being called a cheater, a thief, and immoral for his actions. And let's be clear - he did cheat and break the rules. But he was caught and the proper punishment was brought to bear. The laws of the game were executed and the offended team was given everything they were legally entitled to, in this case the spot kick and the red card.
That's why the Suarez handball his different from Thierry Henry's handball against Ireland. People were mad, not necessarily about the handball, but about the handball not being properly punished. If Ireland would have been given what was legally due to them - a disallowing of the French goal - the outcome of that game could have been very different.
Or, because it's Ireland, it could have ended in a different and even more heartbreaking way for Irish fans.
So the problem with the Henry handball wasn't the laws of the game, but FIFA's incomprehensible refusal to allow video replay in some circumstances. At least now FIFA President Sepp Blatter has been forced to announce that FIFA will have a meeting to discuss the possibility of forming a committee to analyze the need for a panel to study the issue in greater detail. For FIFA, that's progress.
But Suarez's handball is different. The foul was seen and the laws were properly applied. And that's the problem. The punishment simply doesn't fit the crime in a circumstance when an outfield player is the last man on the line to stop a goal. If Suarez doesn't punch the ball out, it's a goal. If he does, there's at least a possibility that the other team won't score - a very high possibility, it turns out.
It's like if the punishment for stealing $100 was a $75 fine - and you got to keep the $100.
It's also analagous to, in American football, a cornerback getting beaten by a wide receiver on a deep pass. If the receiver catches the ball, it's a sure touchdown, so the cornerback has every incentive to commit a pass interference penalty. Sure, the cornerback gets penalized, but at least the other team didn't score.
Rather than navel-gaze about whether Suarez was immoral for doing what he did, a simple rule change needs to be put into place. If a defender is in the six-yard box, commits an intentional handball, and that handball, in the referee's judgment, is the only thing that prevents the ball from going into the net, then the goal should be awarded AND the player should be shown a straight red card.
By making such a rule change, FIFA would remove the incentive for a player to take the action Suarez did. With that rule change, it would no longer be a rational decision to intentionally handle the ball in that circumstance - a result that would be good for the game as a whole.
Of course, controversy and navel-gazing is what's really good for the sport, so we should not make that rule change and keep video replay out of football. Right, Mr. Blatter?
For those of you returning from a weekend trip to Mars, here's the story. Ghana and Uruguay were tied 1-1 as extra time was ending. Ghana won a last free kick in the 120th minute of play. The free kick was curled in, and in the scrum the Uruguyan keeper attempted and failed to punch the ball clear. A shot was sent in and Suarez, the last man on the line, punched the ball away.
A red card was immediately shown to Suarez, and Ghana was given an penalty kick for the last kick of extra time. Asamoah Gyan stepped to the spot - and missed the penalty. The game went to a shootout, which Uruguay won 4-2.
Suarez is now being called a cheater, a thief, and immoral for his actions. And let's be clear - he did cheat and break the rules. But he was caught and the proper punishment was brought to bear. The laws of the game were executed and the offended team was given everything they were legally entitled to, in this case the spot kick and the red card.
That's why the Suarez handball his different from Thierry Henry's handball against Ireland. People were mad, not necessarily about the handball, but about the handball not being properly punished. If Ireland would have been given what was legally due to them - a disallowing of the French goal - the outcome of that game could have been very different.
Or, because it's Ireland, it could have ended in a different and even more heartbreaking way for Irish fans.
So the problem with the Henry handball wasn't the laws of the game, but FIFA's incomprehensible refusal to allow video replay in some circumstances. At least now FIFA President Sepp Blatter has been forced to announce that FIFA will have a meeting to discuss the possibility of forming a committee to analyze the need for a panel to study the issue in greater detail. For FIFA, that's progress.
But Suarez's handball is different. The foul was seen and the laws were properly applied. And that's the problem. The punishment simply doesn't fit the crime in a circumstance when an outfield player is the last man on the line to stop a goal. If Suarez doesn't punch the ball out, it's a goal. If he does, there's at least a possibility that the other team won't score - a very high possibility, it turns out.
It's like if the punishment for stealing $100 was a $75 fine - and you got to keep the $100.
It's also analagous to, in American football, a cornerback getting beaten by a wide receiver on a deep pass. If the receiver catches the ball, it's a sure touchdown, so the cornerback has every incentive to commit a pass interference penalty. Sure, the cornerback gets penalized, but at least the other team didn't score.
Rather than navel-gaze about whether Suarez was immoral for doing what he did, a simple rule change needs to be put into place. If a defender is in the six-yard box, commits an intentional handball, and that handball, in the referee's judgment, is the only thing that prevents the ball from going into the net, then the goal should be awarded AND the player should be shown a straight red card.
By making such a rule change, FIFA would remove the incentive for a player to take the action Suarez did. With that rule change, it would no longer be a rational decision to intentionally handle the ball in that circumstance - a result that would be good for the game as a whole.
Of course, controversy and navel-gazing is what's really good for the sport, so we should not make that rule change and keep video replay out of football. Right, Mr. Blatter?
The Moment I Knew
I've been following soccer for a long time, particularly for an American. I first began following the World Cup closely in 1998. I was recently divorced, and the spectacle and the games were something compelling to take my mind off my personal struggles. In 2002, I was mezmerized by the US run to the quarterfinals and was waking up at 2:00 a.m. to watch the quarterfinal game live. By then, I was a regular soccer watcher. I thought I was a fan.
I realized, though, that I hadn't made that transition until recently. It took a Saturday morning breakfast at the International House of Pancakes to make me see the light. I was having breakfast with my brother, who played soccer but isn't a particular fan. He did, however, watch the Ghana-Uruguay game, and we were discussing the game's dramatic end. He told me about how sad he was that Ghana lost, because they were carrying the banner of Africa in the first African World Cup, and how particularly bad he felt for Asamoah Gyan, who missed the decisive penalty kick at the end of extra time.
Of course he did, I thought to myself. Ghana was a great, heartwarming story, and all right-minded neutrals should have been pulling for Ghana's fairy-tale run to continue.
And that's the moment when I realized I had really become a soccer fan. Because I watched that game too. But I didn't see it the way my brother saw it. All I saw was the team that knocked my beloved Yanks out of the 2010 World Cup 2-1 in the Round of 16, the same way they knocked them out of the 2006 World Cup 2-1 in the group stage. When I saw Gyan striding to the spot to win the game for Ghana, I didn't see a noble man carrying the hopes of a continent on his shoulders. I saw the man who, a few days earlier, hit a thunderbolt of a shot in the 93rd minute over the outstretched arms of Tim Howard to end my World Cup dreams.
And, God help me, I wanted him to miss.
I'm not at all convinced that what's happened to me is a good thing. As I reflected to my brother, I believe I am now a step or two closer from burning tires in the streets and throwing bags filled with things bags should not be filled with at a stadium.
But I'm also feeling, I think, the true passion of the Beautiful Game. I am feeling the ebb and flow, the life and death that occurs every ninety minutes in a meaningful match. I'm thinking that a Captain America costume might very well be an appropriate thing to wear in public (even more than I would before). And I can't wait for the start of the Premier League season, so I can see Tim Howard, Clint Dempsey, and Landon Donovan play in the most exciting league in the world.
Is it 2014 yet? Given the progress the US team is making, I can't wait to see them get beat 2-1 by Ghana in the quarterfinals.
I realized, though, that I hadn't made that transition until recently. It took a Saturday morning breakfast at the International House of Pancakes to make me see the light. I was having breakfast with my brother, who played soccer but isn't a particular fan. He did, however, watch the Ghana-Uruguay game, and we were discussing the game's dramatic end. He told me about how sad he was that Ghana lost, because they were carrying the banner of Africa in the first African World Cup, and how particularly bad he felt for Asamoah Gyan, who missed the decisive penalty kick at the end of extra time.
Of course he did, I thought to myself. Ghana was a great, heartwarming story, and all right-minded neutrals should have been pulling for Ghana's fairy-tale run to continue.
And that's the moment when I realized I had really become a soccer fan. Because I watched that game too. But I didn't see it the way my brother saw it. All I saw was the team that knocked my beloved Yanks out of the 2010 World Cup 2-1 in the Round of 16, the same way they knocked them out of the 2006 World Cup 2-1 in the group stage. When I saw Gyan striding to the spot to win the game for Ghana, I didn't see a noble man carrying the hopes of a continent on his shoulders. I saw the man who, a few days earlier, hit a thunderbolt of a shot in the 93rd minute over the outstretched arms of Tim Howard to end my World Cup dreams.
And, God help me, I wanted him to miss.
I'm not at all convinced that what's happened to me is a good thing. As I reflected to my brother, I believe I am now a step or two closer from burning tires in the streets and throwing bags filled with things bags should not be filled with at a stadium.
But I'm also feeling, I think, the true passion of the Beautiful Game. I am feeling the ebb and flow, the life and death that occurs every ninety minutes in a meaningful match. I'm thinking that a Captain America costume might very well be an appropriate thing to wear in public (even more than I would before). And I can't wait for the start of the Premier League season, so I can see Tim Howard, Clint Dempsey, and Landon Donovan play in the most exciting league in the world.
Is it 2014 yet? Given the progress the US team is making, I can't wait to see them get beat 2-1 by Ghana in the quarterfinals.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
So, Now What?
The final whistle has blown, and the US are all out of magic. The Americans rode their luck once too often, and have been knocked out of the World Cup as a result. There will be four long years to ponder what could have been, and what will be.
But where do we go from here? There's a lot of positive signs. First, and most obvious, is the young players that got a ton of playing time. Jozy Altidore was maddeningly inconsistent, but he's only 20 years old. By the time Rio rolls around in 2014, he'll be 24 and just starting to take off. Michael Bradley is 22, and is already showing signs of leadership at a young age.
And, of course, Charlie Davies is only 24. Remember Davies? How much different would this World Cup have looked had Davies been available instead of Bob Bradley having to rely on Edson Buddle, Robbie Findley, and Herculez Gomez? Davies is recovering and, if he stays healthy, will be in the prime of his career come 2014.
The US also has a youth academy setup that is just starting to put its' roots down. In 1999, the brass at the national team created Project 2010 with the intent of winning the world up in 2010. Obviously, that goal has fallen a little short. But by setting a target, movement towards it has been achieved. Part of project 2010 was the creation of a development academy which has produced players like Donovan and DaMarcus Beasley. The talent in that pipeline has been growing steadily since.
Another reason to be encouraged is the response to the US loss to Ghana. Yes, there's been a lot of attaboys thrown the way of the US team, and that's appropriate. But there's also disappointment and a little consternation that the US couldn't beat a team that hadn't scored a goal from open play in the tournament.
That is a good thing. We'll know the US has really arrived as a soccer nation when getting out of the group stage is something to be expected, not celebrated. There is a massive difference between hoping for success and expecting success. Right now the US public is somewhere in the middle, and that's probably appropriate given the maturity level of the US national soccer program. But if, as the program grows, the expectations of success for the program grow as well, then the two can feed off each other and push the team to greater heights.
But there's reason to be concerned as well. This team rose and fell in South Africa on the backs of Landon Donovan (27) and Clint Dempsey (28). Four more years will put both of those guys on the wrong side of 30. The Italians tried to ride into South Africa with thirtysomethings leading the way. How'd that turn out for them?
So, it's awfully tough to look four years into the future to see what the squad will look like. But it's fair to say at this point that the 2010 plan (give it to Donovan and hope for the best) will be successful in 2014. While 2010 might have been the breakthrough in terms of attention from the country as a whole, 2014 might be the year that the US can demonstrate that it's a program and not just one standout player.
But the two are a bit synergetic. Greater attention from the fan base as a whole will translate into more talent in the pipeline and better players on the field. So the success of the US in 2014 is very much linked to the success of the 2010 team in capturing the minds of the American sports fan.
And, in that goal, the US were hugely successful. The group stage games drew monstrous ratings for games on cable - and these were games televised at nine in the morning on a weekday. Prior to this World Cup, soccer was the butt of any number of jokes from sports-talk hosts belittling the game for any number of reasons - but mainly because the US wasn't particularly good at the sport.
ESPN's blanket coverage of the World Cup was a big help. By getting coverage on a regular basis, American sports fans are starting to get the feel of soccer as a part of their sports landscape. Having a team in red, white, and blue to cheer it even more a part of the landscape, and having the team succeed in such dramatic fashion puts the icing on the cake. Donovan's stoppage-time winner against Algeria has been described as soccer's "man on the moon" moment. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen.
After all, the American sports fan's interest can be drawn every four years to sports that are otherwise inconsequential. Michael Phelps' mastery of the pool made everyone swimming fans for two weeks in Beijing, but no one is watching a swim meet three weeks after the Olympics ended. Is there any reason to think that soccer won't meet the same fate?
Indeed there is. ESPN has a lot to do with it, I think. When Setanta collapsed at the beginning of last year's Premier League season, ESPN snapped up their rights to Premier League coverage. The result was a season full of Saturday morning live Premier League matches on ESPN. It also meant, thanks to cross-promotion, that the result was a season of Premier League highlights and soccer discussion on SportsCenter. Those highlights get mixed in with ESPN's coverage of Major League Soccer, keeping soccer yet again somewhere in the highlight reel. Again, soccer gets into the mix for a sports fan's daily diet of sports consumption, and isn't something that disappears into the ether for another four years.
So, does that mean that potential success for the US in the 2014 World Cup could be due to the collapse of Setanta Sports? Well, you know what they say about a butterfly flapping its' wings ...
Soccer is sitting on the verge of unprecedented growth in the United States. No, it's never going to displace football (the American kind), baseball, or basketball. But soccer now has a toe-hold on the attention of the "average" American sports fan. Smart marketing from the professional leagues, including a successful reprise of the "summer of soccer" pre-season tour, along with continued interest in the Premier League and continued growth in Major League Soccer will push the game along to where it can be a regular part of the sports landscape in the US.
I happened to be staying in a hotel in rural Illinois with my mother and my wife on the day of the Ghana game. I had my US jersey on, and was in the lobby after the game. I was stopped more than once and asked about the result, and the nature of the questions made it pretty clear that they knew what happened before. As someone who has followed soccer for a while now, I can guarantee you that four years ago, no one in rural Illinois would have known about the US performance in group play. It's likely they wouldn't have known the World Cup was going on.
So there's reason to be hopeful. There's reason to expect the steady growth of soccer throughout the coming years. And there's reason to think that Project 2010 might not have been a pipe dream, but merely a bit premature.
Thank you to Landon Donovan, and the rest of the team for everything you've accomplished. It may have been a small step in the World Cup, but 2010 might well prove to be a giant leap for soccer in the United States.
But where do we go from here? There's a lot of positive signs. First, and most obvious, is the young players that got a ton of playing time. Jozy Altidore was maddeningly inconsistent, but he's only 20 years old. By the time Rio rolls around in 2014, he'll be 24 and just starting to take off. Michael Bradley is 22, and is already showing signs of leadership at a young age.
And, of course, Charlie Davies is only 24. Remember Davies? How much different would this World Cup have looked had Davies been available instead of Bob Bradley having to rely on Edson Buddle, Robbie Findley, and Herculez Gomez? Davies is recovering and, if he stays healthy, will be in the prime of his career come 2014.
The US also has a youth academy setup that is just starting to put its' roots down. In 1999, the brass at the national team created Project 2010 with the intent of winning the world up in 2010. Obviously, that goal has fallen a little short. But by setting a target, movement towards it has been achieved. Part of project 2010 was the creation of a development academy which has produced players like Donovan and DaMarcus Beasley. The talent in that pipeline has been growing steadily since.
Another reason to be encouraged is the response to the US loss to Ghana. Yes, there's been a lot of attaboys thrown the way of the US team, and that's appropriate. But there's also disappointment and a little consternation that the US couldn't beat a team that hadn't scored a goal from open play in the tournament.
That is a good thing. We'll know the US has really arrived as a soccer nation when getting out of the group stage is something to be expected, not celebrated. There is a massive difference between hoping for success and expecting success. Right now the US public is somewhere in the middle, and that's probably appropriate given the maturity level of the US national soccer program. But if, as the program grows, the expectations of success for the program grow as well, then the two can feed off each other and push the team to greater heights.
But there's reason to be concerned as well. This team rose and fell in South Africa on the backs of Landon Donovan (27) and Clint Dempsey (28). Four more years will put both of those guys on the wrong side of 30. The Italians tried to ride into South Africa with thirtysomethings leading the way. How'd that turn out for them?
So, it's awfully tough to look four years into the future to see what the squad will look like. But it's fair to say at this point that the 2010 plan (give it to Donovan and hope for the best) will be successful in 2014. While 2010 might have been the breakthrough in terms of attention from the country as a whole, 2014 might be the year that the US can demonstrate that it's a program and not just one standout player.
But the two are a bit synergetic. Greater attention from the fan base as a whole will translate into more talent in the pipeline and better players on the field. So the success of the US in 2014 is very much linked to the success of the 2010 team in capturing the minds of the American sports fan.
And, in that goal, the US were hugely successful. The group stage games drew monstrous ratings for games on cable - and these were games televised at nine in the morning on a weekday. Prior to this World Cup, soccer was the butt of any number of jokes from sports-talk hosts belittling the game for any number of reasons - but mainly because the US wasn't particularly good at the sport.
ESPN's blanket coverage of the World Cup was a big help. By getting coverage on a regular basis, American sports fans are starting to get the feel of soccer as a part of their sports landscape. Having a team in red, white, and blue to cheer it even more a part of the landscape, and having the team succeed in such dramatic fashion puts the icing on the cake. Donovan's stoppage-time winner against Algeria has been described as soccer's "man on the moon" moment. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen.
After all, the American sports fan's interest can be drawn every four years to sports that are otherwise inconsequential. Michael Phelps' mastery of the pool made everyone swimming fans for two weeks in Beijing, but no one is watching a swim meet three weeks after the Olympics ended. Is there any reason to think that soccer won't meet the same fate?
Indeed there is. ESPN has a lot to do with it, I think. When Setanta collapsed at the beginning of last year's Premier League season, ESPN snapped up their rights to Premier League coverage. The result was a season full of Saturday morning live Premier League matches on ESPN. It also meant, thanks to cross-promotion, that the result was a season of Premier League highlights and soccer discussion on SportsCenter. Those highlights get mixed in with ESPN's coverage of Major League Soccer, keeping soccer yet again somewhere in the highlight reel. Again, soccer gets into the mix for a sports fan's daily diet of sports consumption, and isn't something that disappears into the ether for another four years.
So, does that mean that potential success for the US in the 2014 World Cup could be due to the collapse of Setanta Sports? Well, you know what they say about a butterfly flapping its' wings ...
Soccer is sitting on the verge of unprecedented growth in the United States. No, it's never going to displace football (the American kind), baseball, or basketball. But soccer now has a toe-hold on the attention of the "average" American sports fan. Smart marketing from the professional leagues, including a successful reprise of the "summer of soccer" pre-season tour, along with continued interest in the Premier League and continued growth in Major League Soccer will push the game along to where it can be a regular part of the sports landscape in the US.
I happened to be staying in a hotel in rural Illinois with my mother and my wife on the day of the Ghana game. I had my US jersey on, and was in the lobby after the game. I was stopped more than once and asked about the result, and the nature of the questions made it pretty clear that they knew what happened before. As someone who has followed soccer for a while now, I can guarantee you that four years ago, no one in rural Illinois would have known about the US performance in group play. It's likely they wouldn't have known the World Cup was going on.
So there's reason to be hopeful. There's reason to expect the steady growth of soccer throughout the coming years. And there's reason to think that Project 2010 might not have been a pipe dream, but merely a bit premature.
Thank you to Landon Donovan, and the rest of the team for everything you've accomplished. It may have been a small step in the World Cup, but 2010 might well prove to be a giant leap for soccer in the United States.
YTG Re-View: USA 1-2 Ghana
THE GOOD ...
- RESILIENCE: Well, if nothing else, we know this team can take a punch. After conceding yet another early goal, the US dug in and gave as good as they got, particularly in the second half.
- MIDFIELD MAESTROS: Sure, we knew Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan were world-class players. But Michael Bradley, with his energy, vision, and desire, has put himself into the discussion of the must-have players from the US squad. He's got a nice gig in Germany, but don't be surprised if he gets a little attention.
- THE IMPACT SUB: Once again, Benny Feilhaber comes on at halftime and changes the game for the US. Much of the American resurgence in the second half came from Feilhaber's quickness and passing, as well as being able to stretch the field. One wonders what the game would have looked like if he started ...
THE BAD ...
- ISN'T IT OBVIOUS? A goal inside five minutes of the start of the game. A goal inside three minutes of the start of extra time. At this point, I think Bob Bradley's best option is just to have the US kick the ball into their own net at the start of each game. That way, we all get it over with and the players don't have to wait to "turn it on."
- THE GOAT: I know, it's harsh, but the facts are the facts. Ricardo Clark gave up the goal against England. Clark gave up the goal against Ghana. Bradley said that Clark's substitution was only because of the yellow card, but exactly no one believes him. There's a lot of reasons why the US got beat by Ghana, and a lot of blame to go around. But, unfortunately, you have to start with Clark.
- ROSTER CALLS: For much of this tournament, Bradley's squad selection has been right on the money. But by choosing Clark over Edu or Feilhaber, and by choosing Findley over Buddle or Gomez (or just starting Edu and Feilhaber and putting Dempsey up front), Bradley left the US vulnerable to the type of devastatingly slow starts they'd fell victim to throughout the tournament. I think Bradley, overall, did a good job, but this was a strike against him.
... AND THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
Ghana won this game, and as such deserve to go on in the tournament. But this was much more a US loss than a Ghana win. Both Ghana goals were gifts from defensive gaffes - if you allow a team who hadn't scored from open play the entire tournament to put two past you, you're doing something wrong. A better game against Ghana and the US moves on to the quarterfinals against a team that's not Argentina, and a chance to let the magic run. The Americans accomplished what they were supposed to accomplish in South Africa - get out of the group stage, and likely get knocked out in the first round. To meet your expectations is definitely a good thing - just ask Italy. But the opportunity was there to do more, and the US got in their own way of taking advantage of it.
THE BIG PICTURE.
That's worthy of another 'blog post. Check out "So, Now What?" soon to follow.
THE FINAL WORD.
While the Ghana loss is disappointing, ultimately you have to be proud as an American for how the team gutted out their group stage performances, got the results they needed, and accomplished what they set out to accomplish. Hopefully, between the success they achieved and the unprecedented support from the American sports fan they received, this will be the building block of the Beautiful Game's growth in the Land of the Free.
Is it 2014 yet?
- RESILIENCE: Well, if nothing else, we know this team can take a punch. After conceding yet another early goal, the US dug in and gave as good as they got, particularly in the second half.
- MIDFIELD MAESTROS: Sure, we knew Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan were world-class players. But Michael Bradley, with his energy, vision, and desire, has put himself into the discussion of the must-have players from the US squad. He's got a nice gig in Germany, but don't be surprised if he gets a little attention.
- THE IMPACT SUB: Once again, Benny Feilhaber comes on at halftime and changes the game for the US. Much of the American resurgence in the second half came from Feilhaber's quickness and passing, as well as being able to stretch the field. One wonders what the game would have looked like if he started ...
THE BAD ...
- ISN'T IT OBVIOUS? A goal inside five minutes of the start of the game. A goal inside three minutes of the start of extra time. At this point, I think Bob Bradley's best option is just to have the US kick the ball into their own net at the start of each game. That way, we all get it over with and the players don't have to wait to "turn it on."
- THE GOAT: I know, it's harsh, but the facts are the facts. Ricardo Clark gave up the goal against England. Clark gave up the goal against Ghana. Bradley said that Clark's substitution was only because of the yellow card, but exactly no one believes him. There's a lot of reasons why the US got beat by Ghana, and a lot of blame to go around. But, unfortunately, you have to start with Clark.
- ROSTER CALLS: For much of this tournament, Bradley's squad selection has been right on the money. But by choosing Clark over Edu or Feilhaber, and by choosing Findley over Buddle or Gomez (or just starting Edu and Feilhaber and putting Dempsey up front), Bradley left the US vulnerable to the type of devastatingly slow starts they'd fell victim to throughout the tournament. I think Bradley, overall, did a good job, but this was a strike against him.
... AND THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
Ghana won this game, and as such deserve to go on in the tournament. But this was much more a US loss than a Ghana win. Both Ghana goals were gifts from defensive gaffes - if you allow a team who hadn't scored from open play the entire tournament to put two past you, you're doing something wrong. A better game against Ghana and the US moves on to the quarterfinals against a team that's not Argentina, and a chance to let the magic run. The Americans accomplished what they were supposed to accomplish in South Africa - get out of the group stage, and likely get knocked out in the first round. To meet your expectations is definitely a good thing - just ask Italy. But the opportunity was there to do more, and the US got in their own way of taking advantage of it.
THE BIG PICTURE.
That's worthy of another 'blog post. Check out "So, Now What?" soon to follow.
THE FINAL WORD.
While the Ghana loss is disappointing, ultimately you have to be proud as an American for how the team gutted out their group stage performances, got the results they needed, and accomplished what they set out to accomplish. Hopefully, between the success they achieved and the unprecedented support from the American sports fan they received, this will be the building block of the Beautiful Game's growth in the Land of the Free.
Is it 2014 yet?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
