[StanfordMatt]

Glad to see the dumping on coaches isn't limited to Dawkins for this board. Heaven forbid Cardboard had been around when Lombardi was coaching.

[StanfordMatt]

Glad to see the dumping on coaches isn't limited to Dawkins for this board. Heaven forbid Cardboard had been around when Lombardi was coaching.

[washingtonismoney]

Glad to see the dumping on coaches isn't limited to Dawkins for this board. Heaven forbid Cardboard had been around when Lombardi was coaching.

Well, sure, except for the critical difference that Vince Lombardi was one of the, if not the, best coaches in his profession. Ever...


... whereas Dawkins and Klinsmann are mediocre at best, in the context of their era -- let alone all the eras that were and will ever be. Other than that, exactly the same!

I never understand why people get so sensitive about criticism about coaches. Sometimes it's over-the-top -- the board was way too highly pitched on the subject of David Shaw in 2012 -- but in general I think we're pretty fair. And they're big boys, paid six or seven figures to tell other people how to put a ball in a net. I think they can handle it.

[washingtonismoney]

Glad to see the dumping on coaches isn't limited to Dawkins for this board. Heaven forbid Cardboard had been around when Lombardi was coaching.

Well, sure, except for the critical difference that Vince Lombardi was one of the, if not the, best coaches in his profession. Ever...


... whereas Dawkins and Klinsmann are mediocre at best, in the context of their era -- let alone all the eras that were and will ever be. Other than that, exactly the same!

I never understand why people get so sensitive about criticism about coaches. Sometimes it's over-the-top -- the board was way too highly pitched on the subject of David Shaw in 2012 -- but in general I think we're pretty fair. And they're big boys, paid six or seven figures to tell other people how to put a ball in a net. I think they can handle it.

[Extra Point]

I never understand why people get so sensitive about criticism about coaches.

I don't object to criticism. I object to irrational statements made in anger that can't be substantiated. When I come to this board I am always hoping to find reliable information and insight. Much of the coach criticism that pops up here immediately after a Stanford loss is neither. Unfortunately, some of the unwarranted criticism always seems to gain traction. A good example of this was the "Shaw is stubborn" campaign.

[Extra Point]

I never understand why people get so sensitive about criticism about coaches.

I don't object to criticism. I object to irrational statements made in anger that can't be substantiated. When I come to this board I am always hoping to find reliable information and insight. Much of the coach criticism that pops up here immediately after a Stanford loss is neither. Unfortunately, some of the unwarranted criticism always seems to gain traction. A good example of this was the "Shaw is stubborn" campaign.

[winflop]

Glad to see the dumping on coaches isn't limited to Dawkins for this board. Heaven forbid Cardboard had been around when Lombardi was coaching.

Yeah all Lombardi did in his first head coaching gig was win a conference title in his second season and won the NFL championship in his 3rd & 4th.  Just like Dawkins...

[winflop]

Glad to see the dumping on coaches isn't limited to Dawkins for this board. Heaven forbid Cardboard had been around when Lombardi was coaching.

Yeah all Lombardi did in his first head coaching gig was win a conference title in his second season and won the NFL championship in his 3rd & 4th.  Just like Dawkins...

[StanfordMatt]

Shaw has been to three Rose Bowls in five years yet he frequently gets dumped on here. My intent wasn't to hijack this thread from being about soccer. My point was simply to note that this board is notoriously harsh on coaches and so any criticism of Klinsmann should be taken with a grain of salt. Not to mention that right now, I'd say the USMNT is looking pretty good.

[StanfordMatt]

Shaw has been to three Rose Bowls in five years yet he frequently gets dumped on here. My intent wasn't to hijack this thread from being about soccer. My point was simply to note that this board is notoriously harsh on coaches and so any criticism of Klinsmann should be taken with a grain of salt. Not to mention that right now, I'd say the USMNT is looking pretty good.

[Leftcoast]

What's going on with the Mexico team? 

Mexico 0 - 7 Chile

That is not a typo.

[Leftcoast]

What's going on with the Mexico team? 

Mexico 0 - 7 Chile

That is not a typo.

[dabigv13]

Chile has several world class players, Mexico has none.

Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

[dabigv13]

Chile has several world class players, Mexico has none.

Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

[winflop]

Chile has several world class players, Mexico has none.

Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

Turning this thread back to its Stanford roots, wouldn't it have been great for Morris to experience that?  Such a shame that Klinsmann passed up an opportunity to give players who will likely be on the World Cup roster those kinds of experiences and instead kept players who won't be on the roster in two years.

[winflop]

Chile has several world class players, Mexico has none.

Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

Turning this thread back to its Stanford roots, wouldn't it have been great for Morris to experience that?  Such a shame that Klinsmann passed up an opportunity to give players who will likely be on the World Cup roster those kinds of experiences and instead kept players who won't be on the roster in two years.

[StanfordMatt]

Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

Actually there's no need to reserve judgment. We've already advanced out of what many considered to be the toughest group, knocked off the #13 team in the world, and reached the semifinals of a major international tournament featuring five of the top nine teams in the world. That's an impressive accomplishment regardless of what happens Tuesday night.

[StanfordMatt]

Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

Actually there's no need to reserve judgment. We've already advanced out of what many considered to be the toughest group, knocked off the #13 team in the world, and reached the semifinals of a major international tournament featuring five of the top nine teams in the world. That's an impressive accomplishment regardless of what happens Tuesday night.

[OutsiderFan]

I watched the Mexico - Chile slaughter until 4-0.  It was clear to even the most neophyte observer that Chile had much better skill and speed than Mexico.  Looked like Chile was playing with 12 guys.  Hard to believe Mexico had the longest unbeaten streak in international play until that humiliation.

As for Morris, can he be added to the roster to play against Argentina? Or must rosters be set before the tournament?

[OutsiderFan]

I watched the Mexico - Chile slaughter until 4-0.  It was clear to even the most neophyte observer that Chile had much better skill and speed than Mexico.  Looked like Chile was playing with 12 guys.  Hard to believe Mexico had the longest unbeaten streak in international play until that humiliation.

As for Morris, can he be added to the roster to play against Argentina? Or must rosters be set before the tournament?

[StanfordMatt]

Turning this thread back to its Stanford roots, wouldn't it have been great for Morris to experience that?  Such a shame that Klinsmann passed up an opportunity to give players who will likely be on the World Cup roster those kinds of experiences and instead kept players who won't be on the roster in two years.

Morris already has an impressive international resume for a player at his level. In fact, he's appeared in almost as many games for the USMNT (9) as he has for his club (13). He's also participated in some pretty pressure packed environments at the youth level such as Olympic qualifying and the Toulon Tournament in France. Considering he has a left foot that only a one-legged pirate would envy and that the player he was "snubbed" for hasn't even sniffed the pitch in the Copa, I'd say JK made the right call in letting Morris continue to get game experience in Seattle.

[StanfordMatt]

Turning this thread back to its Stanford roots, wouldn't it have been great for Morris to experience that?  Such a shame that Klinsmann passed up an opportunity to give players who will likely be on the World Cup roster those kinds of experiences and instead kept players who won't be on the roster in two years.

Morris already has an impressive international resume for a player at his level. In fact, he's appeared in almost as many games for the USMNT (9) as he has for his club (13). He's also participated in some pretty pressure packed environments at the youth level such as Olympic qualifying and the Toulon Tournament in France. Considering he has a left foot that only a one-legged pirate would envy and that the player he was "snubbed" for hasn't even sniffed the pitch in the Copa, I'd say JK made the right call in letting Morris continue to get game experience in Seattle.

[Stymie]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=15084.msg165251#msg165251 date=1466342525]
Turning this thread back to its Stanford roots, wouldn't it have been great for Morris to experience that?  Such a shame that Klinsmann passed up an opportunity to give players who will likely be on the World Cup roster those kinds of experiences and instead kept players who won't be on the roster in two years.

Morris already has an impressive international resume for a player at his level. In fact, he's appeared in almost as many games for the USMNT (9) as he has for his club (13). He's also participated in some pretty pressure packed environments at the youth level such as the Toulon Tournament in France. Considering he has a left foot that only a one-legged pirate would envy and that the player he was "snubbed" for hasn't even sniffed the pitch in the Copa, I'd say JK made the right call in letting Morris continue to get game experience in Seattle.
[/quote]

+1

[Stymie]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=15084.msg165251#msg165251 date=1466342525]
Turning this thread back to its Stanford roots, wouldn't it have been great for Morris to experience that?  Such a shame that Klinsmann passed up an opportunity to give players who will likely be on the World Cup roster those kinds of experiences and instead kept players who won't be on the roster in two years.

Morris already has an impressive international resume for a player at his level. In fact, he's appeared in almost as many games for the USMNT (9) as he has for his club (13). He's also participated in some pretty pressure packed environments at the youth level such as the Toulon Tournament in France. Considering he has a left foot that only a one-legged pirate would envy and that the player he was "snubbed" for hasn't even sniffed the pitch in the Copa, I'd say JK made the right call in letting Morris continue to get game experience in Seattle.
[/quote]

+1

[dabigv13]

[quote author=dabigv link=topic=15084.msg165249#msg165249 date=1466314461]
Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

Actually there's no need to reserve judgment. We've already advanced out of what many considered to be the toughest group, knocked off the #13 team in the world, and reached the semifinals of a major international tournament featuring five of the top nine teams in the world. That's an impressive accomplishment regardless of what happens Tuesday night.
[/quote]

The US lost 2-0 to the only good team they've played this tournament, Colombia. The 4-0 Costa Rica victory was the only game they've truly been the better team. Paraguay was pretty even, and Ecuador probably the better team in that match.

Hey, they've made it farther than Brazil, but this is the same limited USMNT as always. Nobody on this team is making the pass Vidal made last night, making defenders look silly like Alexis Sanchez, or ruthlessly putting away every chance like Vargas. And that's not really JK's fault btw.

For OF, at major tournaments the roster is set before the first game. Generally once it starts, not even injured players can be replaced.

[dabigv13]

[quote author=dabigv link=topic=15084.msg165249#msg165249 date=1466314461]
Also, I would reserve judgement on how good the USMNT looks until after the inevitable Argentina thrashing. They have been fortunate to make it this far.

Actually there's no need to reserve judgment. We've already advanced out of what many considered to be the toughest group, knocked off the #13 team in the world, and reached the semifinals of a major international tournament featuring five of the top nine teams in the world. That's an impressive accomplishment regardless of what happens Tuesday night.
[/quote]

The US lost 2-0 to the only good team they've played this tournament, Colombia. The 4-0 Costa Rica victory was the only game they've truly been the better team. Paraguay was pretty even, and Ecuador probably the better team in that match.

Hey, they've made it farther than Brazil, but this is the same limited USMNT as always. Nobody on this team is making the pass Vidal made last night, making defenders look silly like Alexis Sanchez, or ruthlessly putting away every chance like Vargas. And that's not really JK's fault btw.

For OF, at major tournaments the roster is set before the first game. Generally once it starts, not even injured players can be replaced.

[washingtonismoney]

Disagree here with both of you. Beating the #13 team in the world, at home, is no great accomplishment -- the U.S. generally ranks in the top 15-20 teams in the world; edging out the #13 team -- with a few kind bounces -- isn't really a super-fantastic accomplishment.

But I disagree that this is the same U.S. team as always. If it is, it's thanks to Klinsmann's efforts -- the U.S., in fact, has more talent than it's ever had in recent memory.

Take a gander, for example, at the 2011 Gold Cup final: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_CONCA..._Cup_Final

There are players who aren't even on the Copa America roster who'd be starting on that 2011 team.

[washingtonismoney]

Disagree here with both of you. Beating the #13 team in the world, at home, is no great accomplishment -- the U.S. generally ranks in the top 15-20 teams in the world; edging out the #13 team -- with a few kind bounces -- isn't really a super-fantastic accomplishment.

But I disagree that this is the same U.S. team as always. If it is, it's thanks to Klinsmann's efforts -- the U.S., in fact, has more talent than it's ever had in recent memory.

Take a gander, for example, at the 2011 Gold Cup final: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_CONCA..._Cup_Final

There are players who aren't even on the Copa America roster who'd be starting on that 2011 team.

[dabigv13]

I do think the talent is better than before, but I think instead of having mostly mediocre players, with a couple of pretty good players and a few bad players, now the team is mostly pretty good with a few mediocre players. No stars or superstars. Until that happens, I think the USMNT will continue to be an also-ran.

I think Morris, or any player, getting a shot at playing time with European clubs is the best chance for changing that situation.

[dabigv13]

I do think the talent is better than before, but I think instead of having mostly mediocre players, with a couple of pretty good players and a few bad players, now the team is mostly pretty good with a few mediocre players. No stars or superstars. Until that happens, I think the USMNT will continue to be an also-ran.

I think Morris, or any player, getting a shot at playing time with European clubs is the best chance for changing that situation.

[indiancardinal]

WIM, Do you believe that the USMNT has the talent available to win the Cops America not factoring in coaching? Where do you rate the the US talent pool relative to the global superpowers of the game? Do you believe that this team has underachieved by getting to the semis of the Cops?

[indiancardinal]

WIM, Do you believe that the USMNT has the talent available to win the Cops America not factoring in coaching? Where do you rate the the US talent pool relative to the global superpowers of the game? Do you believe that this team has underachieved by getting to the semis of the Cops?

[washingtonismoney]

WIM, Do you believe that the USMNT has the talent available to win the Cops America not factoring in coaching? Where do you rate the the US talent pool relative to the global superpowers of the game? Do you believe that this team has underachieved by getting to the semis of the Cops?

1. Depends on what you mean here. Do you mean "favored"? If so, then no, I don't. "A contender"? I do think so, yes. Note that I mean "by performance" rather than merely by results, i.e. that I think the U.S. has the talent to actually have an edge against the opponents it faces, rather than play them more-or-less even.

2. Can't say I have immediate familiarity with, like, every single team out there. So if that caveat, I'd say that France, Spain, Germany, and Argentina have the clear-cut best talent pools out here. There's another tier -- of, say, Brazil, Chile, Belgium, and Italy. And then a vast third tier, from around 8 to, say, around 25ish that are all pretty similar. I'd put the U.S. in that group.

3. In the first question note the distinction between results and performance. By results, the team has fulfilled my expectations. But of course, part of the judgment is not just what you did but how you did it -- we've seen teams in every sport that momentarily overachieve despite so-so underlying talent or performance. (I think 2012 N.D. might be an example everyone on this board can agree upon.) Right now the U.S. are...that team exactly. Part of that, to be fair, isn't quite Klinsmann's fault; I don't blame him for the ref's decisions in the quarterfinals. But a good deal of that is his fault, particularly his insistence on playing good players out of position and his failure to position the team properly in the first place. (He could've selected a better roster, which would've been better-positioned to perform throughout the tournament. Contra StanfordMatt I don't see why taking a player so bad he doesn't play represents some sort of coaching achievement.)

[washingtonismoney]

WIM, Do you believe that the USMNT has the talent available to win the Cops America not factoring in coaching? Where do you rate the the US talent pool relative to the global superpowers of the game? Do you believe that this team has underachieved by getting to the semis of the Cops?

1. Depends on what you mean here. Do you mean "favored"? If so, then no, I don't. "A contender"? I do think so, yes. Note that I mean "by performance" rather than merely by results, i.e. that I think the U.S. has the talent to actually have an edge against the opponents it faces, rather than play them more-or-less even.

2. Can't say I have immediate familiarity with, like, every single team out there. So if that caveat, I'd say that France, Spain, Germany, and Argentina have the clear-cut best talent pools out here. There's another tier -- of, say, Brazil, Chile, Belgium, and Italy. And then a vast third tier, from around 8 to, say, around 25ish that are all pretty similar. I'd put the U.S. in that group.

3. In the first question note the distinction between results and performance. By results, the team has fulfilled my expectations. But of course, part of the judgment is not just what you did but how you did it -- we've seen teams in every sport that momentarily overachieve despite so-so underlying talent or performance. (I think 2012 N.D. might be an example everyone on this board can agree upon.) Right now the U.S. are...that team exactly. Part of that, to be fair, isn't quite Klinsmann's fault; I don't blame him for the ref's decisions in the quarterfinals. But a good deal of that is his fault, particularly his insistence on playing good players out of position and his failure to position the team properly in the first place. (He could've selected a better roster, which would've been better-positioned to perform throughout the tournament. Contra StanfordMatt I don't see why taking a player so bad he doesn't play represents some sort of coaching achievement.)

[CTcard]

I don't follow world soccer enough to really contribute much here, but a couple of broader things that just might be of some interest.

3. In the first question note the distinction between results and performance. By results, the team has fulfilled my expectations. But of course, part of the judgment is not just what you did but how you did it -- we've seen teams in every sport that momentarily overachieve despite so-so underlying talent or performance. (I think 2012 N.D. might be an example everyone on this board can agree upon.) Right now the U.S. are...that team exactly.

That is an interesting issue generally on judging teams and coaching performances, but much more subtle that often expressed.

Another team that had excellent achievements while not generally looking very good while doing so was 2012 Stanford football. My own evaluation is that in a "how well they played/underlying performance" basis, this was probably the worst Stanford team since Stanford became good in 2009. [Though indeed a close call with 2009 and 2014.] However, that team managed to go 8-2 in one score games - which is remarkable both for how many close games they played and the fraction they won.
What is less clear to me is whether that is a feather in the coaching cap of David Shaw [because he managed to lead his team to victories and a great season even when they weren't inherently so great] or a demerit for Shaw [because he didn't get the team to handily beat weak-sisters such as WSU, OSU etc.].

Beating the #13 team in the world, at home, is no great accomplishment -- the U.S. generally ranks in the top 15-20 teams in the world;

Just for point of reference, the current official FIFA rankings of the teams in the Copa America are:
#1 Argentina
#3 Coluombia
#5 Chile
#7 Brazil
#9 Uruguay
#13 Ecuador
#16 Mexico
#23 Costa Rica
#31 USA
#44 Paraguay
#46 Jamaica
#48 Peru
#56 Panama
#74 Haiti
#77 Venezuela
#82 Bolivia

[CTcard]

I don't follow world soccer enough to really contribute much here, but a couple of broader things that just might be of some interest.

3. In the first question note the distinction between results and performance. By results, the team has fulfilled my expectations. But of course, part of the judgment is not just what you did but how you did it -- we've seen teams in every sport that momentarily overachieve despite so-so underlying talent or performance. (I think 2012 N.D. might be an example everyone on this board can agree upon.) Right now the U.S. are...that team exactly.

That is an interesting issue generally on judging teams and coaching performances, but much more subtle that often expressed.

Another team that had excellent achievements while not generally looking very good while doing so was 2012 Stanford football. My own evaluation is that in a "how well they played/underlying performance" basis, this was probably the worst Stanford team since Stanford became good in 2009. [Though indeed a close call with 2009 and 2014.] However, that team managed to go 8-2 in one score games - which is remarkable both for how many close games they played and the fraction they won.
What is less clear to me is whether that is a feather in the coaching cap of David Shaw [because he managed to lead his team to victories and a great season even when they weren't inherently so great] or a demerit for Shaw [because he didn't get the team to handily beat weak-sisters such as WSU, OSU etc.].

Beating the #13 team in the world, at home, is no great accomplishment -- the U.S. generally ranks in the top 15-20 teams in the world;

Just for point of reference, the current official FIFA rankings of the teams in the Copa America are:
#1 Argentina
#3 Coluombia
#5 Chile
#7 Brazil
#9 Uruguay
#13 Ecuador
#16 Mexico
#23 Costa Rica
#31 USA
#44 Paraguay
#46 Jamaica
#48 Peru
#56 Panama
#74 Haiti
#77 Venezuela
#82 Bolivia

[BostonCard]

Just for point of reference, the current official FIFA rankings of the teams in the Copa America are:
#3 Columbia

Taking cues from Adidas now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/earl...erica-ads/

BC

[BostonCard]

Just for point of reference, the current official FIFA rankings of the teams in the Copa America are:
#3 Columbia

Taking cues from Adidas now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/earl...erica-ads/

BC

[fullmetal]

That tidbit of knowledge lives in the same place in my head as the fact that Hawai'i is technically spelled with that apostrophe and pronounced thusly.  I got a double take from a fellow student from Honolulu when I pronounced Hawai'i correctly in front of her and have never strayed. 

[fullmetal]

That tidbit of knowledge lives in the same place in my head as the fact that Hawai'i is technically spelled with that apostrophe and pronounced thusly.  I got a double take from a fellow student from Honolulu when I pronounced Hawai'i correctly in front of her and have never strayed.