Bob Bradley is Bad For America

I am, as many of you know, a soccer fan. In particular, over the past 6 years or so, I have pretty much watched every US men's national team game. Even when I have had to hunt the feed down on the internet because there was no coverage on cable. It's like being a hockey fan. ZING!

Which is why I am reflecting with sadness on yesterday's decision to extend coach Bob Bradley's contract through 2014. WARNING: This post is about to get really nerdy and detailed, so if you don't care about soccer or how the USA is perceived around the globe, then please quit reading now. Tomorrow, I'll be doing a post on processed foods that should not be--it'll be alot of fun, I promise.

Where was I? Oh yeah. The powers that be effed this decision up big time. Not because Bob Bradley isn't a nice guy--he seems pretty genuine and well liked by the players. And not because he isn't one of the better coaches the US team has ever had. He is. (shudder).

Mostly, this decision stinks because four more years of Bradley and his bland-as-vanilla tactics and his questionable lineup choices will not advance the progress US soccer has consistently made since 1990. Essentially, this decision says: "This is as good as the US will ever get at this sport."

Here, in a nutshell, is why Bob Bradley should have never been allowed near the US national team again:

• He is terrible at picking a team--You want two examples? Here ya go: Ricardo Clark starting against England (torched for the first goal), and Ricardo Clark starting against Ghana (got caught in possession, turnover led to first goal). And, let us not forget Demarcus Beasley. How he continued to get picked into the national side shows that Bradley doesn't know what he's doing, and is loyal to a fault.
  

• His match management skills are TERRIBLE--Listen, we're not fielding talent out there on par with the top 15 teams in the world, especially in terms of finishing and playmaking. Knowing this, Bradley would consistently roll out a defensive minded formation (see Ricardo Clark).
  

This formation would then promptly give up the first goal (3 times in the last WC--and don't get me started on the WC qualifiers). Bradley would then make changes (like subbing out Ricardo Clark for Edu) and implement more offensively minded formations. This would, more times than not, result in an equalizer. My question is: WHY NOT JUST PLAY THE FORMATION/SQUAD THAT HAS A CHANCE OF SCORING THE FIRST GOAL FROM THE BEGINNING? WHY WAIT UNTIL THE TEAM IS DOWN A GOAL TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE FROM THE BEGINNING? ARGGHH!

• It is time to pass the baton--This team needs fresh perspective. Bob Bradley is stuck in a rut in terms of tactics and team selection. In order for US soccer to grow, it needs a fresh look at things. New approach. New ideas. Maybe Jurgen Klinsmann was the guy to deliver that, maybe not. But, I do know that a more offensive minded approach from another head coach would have been interesting to watch. Instead, we get more of the same, grind-em-out results oriented footy. 2-1 over Honduras at home. 3-0 losses to Costa Rica away. Sigh. Pass.

So, the new boss is the same as the old boss. The only thing that has changed is my optimism for what this team can accomplish over the next four years.