Filed under: 2026 World Cup expanded to 48 teams, Uncategorized | Tags: 1982 World Cup in Spain, 2014 World Cup in Brazil, 2018 World Cup in Russia, 2026 World Cup, Africa, Angola, Argentina, Asia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Canada, China, CONCACAF, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, England, Europe, FIFA, FIFA Executive Committee, FIFA governing council, France, Germany, Gianni Infantino, Hungary, Italy, Jordan, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, North Korea, Oceania, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Serbia & Montenegro, Slovenia, South America, Spain, Sunil Gulati, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad & Tobago, Tunisia, United States, Uruguay, Yugoslavia
The 2026 World Cup will have 48 teams.
The move from 32 teams to four dozen was approved unanimously by the FIFA governing council, an expansion of world soccer’s championship tournament that was welcomed by supporters as a victory for inclusion but criticized by others as another cynical, money-driven effort by an organization still in the throes of a financial and ethical scandal.
The percentage of the expansion will be the largest ever, from the original 16 (1930-78) to 24 (1982-94) to 32 (1998-2022). More teams mean more matches, in this case an increase from 64 games to 80. It also means greater revenue: the 2018 World Cup in Russia is expected to pull in $5.5 billion through television rights, sponsorships and tickets; the 48-nation ’26 cup will bring in an additional billion. Some of the expected increased profit–approximately $640 million–will find its way into the coffers of soccer’s six continental confederations and–presumably–on to FIFA’s 211 member national federations.
New FIFA boss Gianni Infantino had pushed for the change in 2016 when he ran for the presidency in an effort to include more nations and invigorate what was already the world’s most popular sporting event.
But critics contend that opening the World Cup doors to lesser soccer-playing nations will result in a weaker tournament, with nearly a quarter of FIFA’s membership reaching its most prestigious competition every four years and more matches crammed into an already crowded international calendar. Infantino was unconcerned. “We are in the 21st century, and we have to shape the football World Cup of the 21st century,” he said after the vote. “Football is more than just Europe and South America. Football is global.”
For Russia ’18, Europe, as usual, will have the lion’s share of berths, 13, plus the automatic slot that goes to the host nation. Ten-nation South America gets four berths, as does 47-nation Asia. Africa’s 56 members will battle for five slots. CONCACAF gets three. The 31st and 32nd berths will go to the winners of home-and-home playoffs between CONCACAF and Asian also-rans and between the Oceania winner and a South American also-ran. A decision on how the 2026 pie will be sliced will be made in May. [January 10]
Comment: No surprise here. A huge expansion of the World Cup field for 2026 became inevitable with Infantino’s early Christmas present to the likes of Asia, Africa, CONCACAF and Oceania: release of a 65-page analysis by a FIFA in-house group of five options in growing the World Cup. The 48-team concept was rated best (and most profitable), with 16–sixteen!–groups of three teams each playing round-robin to open the tournament. Another 48-team format called for a 32-team knockout round, followed by a group stage involving the 16 survivors and 16 seeded teams, for 80 total games. Then there was the idea of 40 teams divided into eight groups of five and, in the end, 88 games played. Or, 40 teams with 10 groups of four for a total of 76 games.
The opposition, not surprisingly, was led by the European Club Association, which represents 220 clubs on the Continent. It called the present 32-team format “the perfect formula from all perspectives.” The ECA added, “We understand that this decision has been taken based on political reasons rather than sporting ones and under considerable political pressure, something ECA believes is regrettable.”
The FIFA analysis indeed conceded the expansion would diminish the level of play at that World Cup, but it also explicitly stated that the FIFA governing council must make its decision purely for “sporting” reasons. But back to reality.
While Option No. 2 (an opening knockout round involving 32 teams, with the losers going home after one match), may seem ridiculous, what the governing council–the body created to replace the greedy, seedy and disgraced Executive Committee–settled on is only slightly better. Expansion itself is a bad idea. Despite three expansions since the late 1970s, the World Cup has remained a relatively compact monthlong festival of soccer. The approved 48-team formula would mean a reasonable increase by one or two days to 32; the two finalists would still play the customary seven games; and the usual 12 stadiums would be required of the host nation(s). But the addition of no-hopers only means an erosion in the level of play and a resulting decline in interest among the general public. If Brasil ’14 had been expanded to 48, the tournament might have included the likes Egypt, Tunisia, and Jordan–and the forgettable matches they were likely to contribute. As for inclusion, today’s 32-team format has already allowed otherwise outsiders Trinidad & Tobago, China, Slovenia, Angola, North Korea, New Zealand, Tunisia, Togo and Saudi Arabia to have their day in the sun, not to mention splinters from the former Yugoslavia–Serbia & Montenegro (2006), Serbia (’10) and Bosnia & Herzegovina (’14).
Beyond concerns over the drop in level of play, the 16 x 3 format given FIFA’s blessing contains a serious flaw. Forty-eight teams divided into 16 groups of three might require penalty-kick tiebreakers after drawn matches in the first round to ensure there is a “winner.” After all, there has to be a brutally quick method to determine a group’s top two finishers and send the third-place team home. That radical change to how the opening round of a World Cup is run also would be necessary to prevent teams from conspiring to arrange a favorable result in the final group game.
Just what we need: More chances for PK tiebreakers to rear their ugly head before a global audience. And more of just what we need: A reprise of the three-team group, with each team playing just two games. That was tried at Espana ’82, the first go-round with a 24-team field, when four three-team groups followed the first round and those group winners advanced to the semifinals. Three teams playing two matches each promised nothing more than mostly defensive, nervy encounters that would please no one, and while there was Italy’s classic 3-2 win over favored Brazil, the 12 games averaged less than 2 1/2 goals–a half goal fewer than the tournament average–and included three scoreless draws. Happily, that format was jettisoned for Mexico ’86 in favor of the now-familiar 16-team knockout second round.
There’s also the matter of what the bigger field will mean to the qualifying competition for ’26. If Europe and South America gain only a couple of extra berths, the traditional powers there will have even less to fear. Even in CONCACAF, the U.S. and Mexico, which survived a mighty scare before slipping into the 2014 World Cup, have no worries. And with still less drama during what is an interminable qualifying process, the fans lose.
Finally, the expansion in ’26 also will mean a greater burden on the host, which will have to find accommodations and training facilities for an additional 16 teams, a new consideration that will hike the organizing nation’s bill from $2 billion to $2.3 billion. That’s why there has been talk of the job of hosting that first 48-team event going to the triumvirate of the United States, Mexico and Canada. Informal talks among the three have already begun. The decision will be made in May 2020, and FIFA’s World Cup rotation among the continents would put North America in line to host. Fueling the speculation is that Infantino owes U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati, who was instrumental in getting the Swiss-Italian elected FIFA boss in February. There’s also the matter of the now-disgraced FIFA Executive Committee having given the U.S. the shaft in 2010 when it chose to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, ignoring the stronger American bid. But beyond ’26, FIFA will have created a monster event that few potential hosts can handle. Potential hosts like . . . China, which, on the heels of its 2008 Beijing Olympics, is keen to play host to the world’s biggest single-sport event.
There can be no denying that the soccer-playing world is a much more level playing field today than it was back in the days when the World Cup was an exclusive club of 16. You could start with surprise packages like Costa Rica, which at Brasil ’14 stunned Uruguay and Italy and tied England before nipping Greece on penalty kicks in the second round and bowing in the quarterfinals to the Netherlands, 4-3 on PKs, after a brave scoreless draw. But the World Cup remains a competition won by only eight nations–Brazil, Germany, Italy, Uruguay, Argentina, Spain, England and France–and the list of worthy also-rans remains limited to the Dutch; Hungary of long ago; Czechoslovakia, which no longer exists; and, in a bit of a stretch, Sweden. That’s it. Infantino’s gambit does nothing more than give hope to the hopeless and directs those extra one billion bucks into FIFA’s coffers at the final accounting of the 2026 World Cup. And for the fans, if gives them countless more forgettable, hardly watchable matches between giants and minnows under the guise of FIFA World Cup soccer. And World Cup games, even those not so great, should be somewhat memorable.
In the end, the winner is Infantino. His act of patronage has placed dozens of soccer’s have-not nations in his debt, and when it comes to FIFA presidential elections, it’s a one-nation, one-vote world. His power base is assured.
Filed under: Bruce Arena, Juergen Klinsmann, Uncategorized | Tags: 2002 World Cup, 2018 World Cup, Apollo XI moon landing, Bob Bradley, Brasil '14, Bruce Arena, CONCACAF Champions Cup, CONCACAF Gold Cup, Copa America Centenario, Costa Rica, DaMarcus Beasley, Dan Flynn, DC United, Germany, Hertha Berlin, Honduras, Interamerica Cup, John Brooks, Juergen Klinsmann, Landon Donovan, Los Angeles Galaxy, Mexico, Montreal '76, Moscow '80, NCAA, New Zealand, Panama, Panama City, Paraguay, Portugal, Project 2010, Rafael Marquez, Russia, Salt Lake City, Sunil Gulati, U.S. Open Cup, Under-17 World Cup, University of Virginia
Bruce Arena was named coach of the U.S. National Team, replacing Juergen Klinsmann, who was fired a day earlier.
It will be Arena’s second stint as U.S. coach. From 1998 to 2006 he compiled a 71-30-29 record, the most successful stretch in American history. A two-time winner of the CONCACAF Gold Cup (2002, 2005), he guided the Americans to an historic quarterfinal finish at the 2002 World Cup, beating Portugal in their opening match before advancing out of the group and earning a 2-0 victory over Mexico in the Round of 16. The run ended with a heartbreaking 1-0 loss to eventual finalist Germany in the last eight.
“When we considered the possible candidates to take over the Men’s National Team at this time, Bruce was at the top of the list,” said USSF President Sunil Gulati of Arena, who also led the U.S. to a three-and-out finish at the 2006 World Cup. “His experience at the international level, understanding of the requirements needed to lead a team through World Cup qualifying, and proven ability to build a successful team were all aspects we felt were vital for the next coach. We all know Bruce will be fully committed to preparing the players for the next eight qualifying games and earning a berth to an eighth straight FIFA World Cup in Russia.”
Since his first tour as U.S. boss, Arena served as general manager and coach of the Los Angeles Galaxy from 2008 through this past season, winning Major League Soccer titles in 2011, 2012 and 2014. He rose to prominence by winning five NCAA championships as coach of the University of Virginia, then led DC United to the first two MLS titles, in 1996 and ’97, as well as the ’96 U.S. Open Cup. He also helped United become the first-ever U.S. team to lift the CONCACAF Champions Cup and the now-defunct Interamerican Cup, winning each in 1998.
“Any time you get the opportunity to coach the national team, it’s an honor,” said Arena. “I’m looking forward to working with a strong group of players that understand the challenge in front of them after the first two games of the Hex. Working as a team, I’m confident that we’ll take the right steps forward to qualify for the 2018 World Cup in Russia.”
The U.S. in early November opened the final round of CONCACAF qualifying for the 2018 World Cup with losses to Mexico, 2-1, at home, and at Costa Rica, 4-0. The Mexico defeat was the first home loss in a World Cup qualifier in 15 years. Those results left the Americans in last place, four points off the pace for the last direct qualifying berth with eight games remaining on the schedule. [November 22]
Comment I: The timing for the change was obvious for more than one reason.
The next U.S. qualifiers, against Honduras in Salt Lake City and Panama in Panama City, aren’t until March 24 and March 28, respectively. Roughly four months. Preceded by a low-key camp in January that traditionally includes a couple of friendlies where hopefuls from MLS and youngsters get a look. There isn’t as big a window for the rest of the Hexagonal. Plenty of time for Klinsmann’s replacement to pull together a staff and execute a smooth transition. It’s the American way. The USSF doesn’t fire its coaches on airport tarmacs after a big loss.
Then there was Arena himself. On a personal level, he was the obvious choice, like him or not. Arena is not the coach he was a decade ago. He’s now 65, and a doting grandfather. He signed a two-year contract with the USSF, and this obviously is his final hurrah. He has an ego, and he’d like to go out with a signature accomplishment, like a successful World Cup run, which wasn’t going to happen if he stayed in Los Angeles. What’s one more MLS Cup to Arena at this point?
Comment II: Juergen Klinsmann made the fatal mistake of over-promising.
He was hired to replace Bob Bradley in 2011 on the promise that he would not only lead the U.S. to victory but remake American soccer culture from the top down. Gulati doubled down on that promise in 2013, on the heels of a U.S.-record 12-game winning streak and Gold Cup title, by extending Klinsmann’s contract (a reported $3.2 million a year, through 2018) and crowning him men’s technical director to boot, placing the fates of the Olympic and national youth teams in his hands.
But the ups and downs of the Klinsmann era turned mostly to downs by 2015. That year the national team failed to finish in the top three in the Gold Cup for the first time since 2000, part of a slide in which the Americans lost four consecutive games on U.S. soil for the first time in a half-century. Meanwhile, on his watch as technical director, the U.S. failed to qualify for consecutive Olympic tournaments, something that hadn’t happened since Montreal ’76-Moscow ’80. As for the U.S. youth teams, the kids haven’t been alright. The U.S. under-20 team is winless in its last eight games against European nations by a combined score of 27-7, including a humiliating 8-1 pounding by Germany. The U.S. went winless at the 2015 Under-17 World Cup, four years after failing to qualify for the first time ever. Remember how the U-17s reached the semifinals of the 1999 world championship in New Zealand and teens Landon Donovan and DaMarcus Beasley were named the tournament’s top two players?
Klinsmann, 52, departs having compiled a fine 55-27-16 record. There have been two World Cups, including one in which his team won a so-called “Group of Death,” in 2014. There was the fourth-place finish at last summer’s Copa America Centenario. And startling friendly victories: 1-0 at Italy in 2012; 4-3 at home over Germany in 2013; 4-3 at Holland and 2-1 at Germany in 2015. But he also exits with the cupboard bare: the Klinsmann national team pool is overly reliant on German players with U.S. passports and his youth teams–based on results–are a shambles. Little was built, and the fallout is the minor chaos that’s now Arena’s problem.
Comment III: So who’s to blame? Sunil Gulati.
He was one of the driving forces behind the ill-fated Project 2010, a laughably optimistic $50 million development surge launched by the USSF that was supposed to make America a legitimate contender for a World Cup title. The title of the 1998 report that introduced the project, “Winning the World Cup by 2010: Soccer’s Equivalent to the Apollo XI Moon Landing,” is best forgotten.
Gulati’s first major decision as federation president, in the weeks after the 2006 World Cup, was to allow Arena’s contract to expire, saying the team needed to go in a “fresh direction.” He hired Arena’s assistant, Bradley, as new national team coach, then found him wanting in 2011 and hired Klinsmann, ultimately giving the German, as noted above, an extension and adding technical director to his titles. Now it’s Arena, back to direct the U.S. in a presumably fresh direction.
As he completes the final two years of his third four-year term as U.S. Soccer supremo, Gulati’s legacy, and that of USSF Chief Executive Dan Flynn, will be one of continued success on the part of the U.S. women and utter mediocrity–even retreat–by the U.S. men at all levels.
Comment IV: Had Klinsmann lost his team?
One can only wonder. But there’s Klinsmann’s track record of rarely owning up to a mistake, of throwing players under the bus. The latest victim was young Hertha Berlin center back John Brooks who, as Klinsmann pointed out, lost his mark, Rafael Marquez, on Marquez’s late winner off a corner kick in the 2-1 loss to Mexico. Four nights later down in San Jose, a demoralized Brooks turned in a disastrous performance against Costa Rica. This same 23-year-old came close to earning a near-perfect player rating in the USA’s 1-0 victory over Paraguay at last summer’s Copa America Centenario.
You don’t have to be embedded in the U.S. dressing room to draw the conclusion that Klinsmann, with his insistence on getting his players out of their “comfort zone,” his thinly veiled disdain for MLS players, his willingness to take chances on any and all European-based players, his infamous dropping of longtime U.S. captain Donovan on the eve of Brasil ’14 . . . was not a players’ coach. And players’ coaches tend to have some support among the people in uniform when they get into trouble. There was barely a peep from those wearing U.S. uniforms after Gulati dropped the hammer.
Comment V: Is Arena Mr. Fix-it?
His first stab at professional coaching, with DC United in 1996, was, initially, a disaster. A month into Major League Soccer’s first season, the team representing the nation’s capital was a laughingstock. Arena quickly fired several players and United went on to win the league championship. A year later, it won another.
Can Arena fix this with eight CONCACAF qualifiers remaining? Odds remain good that the U.S. will qualify for the 2018 World Cup regardless of who is coach. The top three finishers earn berths in Russia, and the fourth-place team remains alive through a home-and-home playoff with Asia’s fifth-place finisher.
But at this point, U.S. Soccer is in the position of merely hoping for an eighth straight World Cup appearance. Should the team reach Russia ’18, the U.S. will be back in the familiar position of hoping for little more than surviving its first-round group and a trip to the second round of a World Cup. Klinsmann’s promise of genuine progress remains a luxury . . . and an unfulfilled dream.
Filed under: Jordan Morris, Uncategorized | Tags: Ante Razov, Aron Johannsson, Bastian Schweinsteiger, Bobby Wood, Brazil, Canada, Clint Dempsey, Colombia, CONCACAF, Costa Rica, DaMarcus Beasley, Darlington Nagbe, DeAndre Yedlin, FIFA Confederations Cup, FIFA Under-20 World Cup, Foxboro, German Bundesliga, Germany, Gyasi Zardes, Hermann Trophy, Hertha Berlin, Holland, Jermaine Jones, John Brooks, Jordan Morris, Juergen Klinsmann, Kyle Beckerman, Landon Donovan, Liberia, Los Angeles Galaxy, Lukas Podolski, Matt Miazga, Mercer Island, Mexico, MLS Cup, NCAA Division I championship, Nelson Valdez, New Jersey, New York Red Bulls, Obafemi Martins, Per Mertesacker, Philipp Lahm, Port of Spain, Portland Timbers, Rio de Janeiro Olympics, Rose Bowl, Seattle Sounders, Sigi Schmid, St. Louis, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Stanford University, Sunderland, Sunil Gulati, Tim Howard, Trinidad & Tobago, U.S. National Team, UCLA, Union Berlin, Werder Bremen, World Cup
Homegrown player Jordan Morris signed with the Seattle Sounders in a splashy ceremony at the team’s fan clubhouse in Pioneer Square, capping a whirlwind six weeks in which the 21-year-old striker led Stanford University to the 2015 NCAA Division I men’s national championship, was awarded the Hermann Trophy as the country’s top collegiate player and took part in a trial with Werder Bremen that left the German Bundesliga club poised to offer a contract.
Morris earned seven caps with the U.S. National Team last year, scoring in a 2-0 victory over Mexico in April and becoming the first college player to make an appearance with the full national team since UCLA forward Ante Razov in 1995. He also scored six goals and added four assists in 11 appearances in ’15 for the U.S. under-23 side, including two goals in a 3-1 victory over Canada in its opening qualifier for the ’16 Rio de Janeiro Olympics; that campaign will be decided in March with a home-and-home playoff with Colombia .
The signing of Morris reunites the Mercer Island, Wash., native with U.S. and Sounder striker Clint Dempsey. Sounder coach Sigi Schmid was delighted by Morris’ signing, saying he possesses “unteachable” qualities. The Sounder rookie, however, is expected to spend his first MLS season in a supporting role, watching Dempsey, Obafemi Martins and Nelson Valdez start ahead of him. [January 21]
Comment: Here comes Mr. Jordan, and possibly others. Can embattled U.S. National Team coach Juergen Klinsmann channel his inner 2006?
In recent months Klinsmann has been blessed by an interesting wave of fresh young talent. Before the broad-shouldered, baby-faced Morris there was another forward, Bobby Wood, 23, a promising poacher who scored late winners in friendlies against Holland and Germany last spring, plus equalizers against Mexico in the CONCACAF playoff and the World Cup qualifying opener against St. Vincent & the Grenadines. Wood continues to produce for his club, Union Berlin of the Bundesliga 2. There’s also midfielder Darlington Nagbe. Born in Liberia, raised in the U.S., the 25-year-old naturalized American made his U.S. debut against St. Vincent & the Grenadines and dazzled in leading the Portland Timbers to their first MLS Cup title. Finally, defender Matt Miazga, 6-foot-4 and a mere 20. He went from buried on the New York Red Bulls roster last spring to becoming one of MLS’s best central defenders in ’15. Before bowing in with the full national team in the St. Vincent match, Miaza helped the U.S. reach the quarterfinals of the FIFA Under-20 World Cup and became a starter on the U-23 team.
Then there are youngsters who appeared in the 2014 World Cup: defender John Brooks, 23, of Hertha Berlin, defender-midfielder DeAndre Yedlin, 22, of Sunderland, and forward Aron Johannsson, 25, of Werder Bremen. Johannsson battled injuries in 2015 but Yedlin and another attacking player, Gyasi Zardes, 24, of the Los Angeles Galaxy, appeared in 19 of the USA’s 20 matches in ’15.
Is this the cavalry thundering down the hill? Klinsmann can only hope so. Dempsey is 32. Defensive midfielders Jermaine Jones and Kyle Beckerman and left back DaMarcus Beasley are 33. Goalkeeper Tim Howard is 36.
Klinsmann, in his fifth year as national team coach, is on a hot seat, becoming the first national team coach in this soccer-averse country to experience a modicum of public scrutiny. In 2015, after historic wins against the Netherlands in Amsterdam and Germany in Cologne, the U.S. stumbled badly at the CONCACAF Gold Cup, finishing fourth, its worst showing in a Gold Cup in 15 years. A humiliating 4-1 loss to Brazil in Foxboro followed, which served as a warm-up (or down) to the lifeless 3-2 overtime defeat to Mexico in a CONCACAF playoff at the Rose Bowl that cost the Americans a berth in the 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup. Three days later the U.S. tumbled to Costa Rica, 1-0, in a friendly in New Jersey, but it salvaged the year by opening a new World Cup cycle by routing St. Vincent & the Grenadines, 6-1, in St. Louis and escaping Port of Spain with a scoreless draw and a point against Trinidad & Tobago.
As the mixed results mounted, Klinsmann came under increasing criticism for his often baffling player selections, his lineups (20 different lineups in 20 games), his tinkering with formations (a 3-5-2, a 4-2-3-1, a flat 4-4-2 and a diamond 4-4-2) and tactics. At one point, former U.S. star Landon Donovan said that Klinsmann should lose his job if Mexico won at the Rose Bowl. The U.S. lost, and Klinsmann got a half-hearted vote of confidence from USSF President Sunil Gulati.
This cavalry of young talent may yield a couple of riders or, in Klinsmann’s dreams, a full platoon. And what the U.S. coach does with it will determine the course of the national team for the near-term, although it figures to be closing in on a 2018 World Cup berth when 2017 dawns. He’s nurtured young talent before, steering a bunch of young Germans to third place at the 2006 World Cup, becoming a national hero in the bargain. Among his players were defenders Philipp Lahm, then 22, and Per Mertesacker, 21, midfielder Bastian Schweinsteiger, 21, and forward Lukas Podolski, 21. That was a generation of talent that would go on to win the 2014 World Cup.
Can Klinsmann do it again? He could succeed. He could fail. This new crop–and possibly others to emerge over the next 18 months–could win in spite of him. Or too many of them could prove to be all false promise. Time will tell. But for the U.S. to nail down a World Cup berth and go into Russia ’18 with any hope of a better showing than the last World Cup, Klinsmann is going to have to succeed, and once again engineer a successful changing of the guard.
Filed under: Klinsmann, Uncategorized | Tags: 2014 World Cup, Boca Raton, Clint Dempsey, commissioner, Don Garber, Florida, Honduras, Juergen Klinsmann, Landon Donovan, Major Soccer League, Michael Bradley, national team coach, national technical director, Sunil Gulati, Toronto FC, U.S. National Team, U.S. Soccer
Major League Soccer Commissioner Dan Garber fired a broadside at U.S. National Team coach Juergen Klinsmann, accusing him of comments damaging to his league and the sport in this country.
Garber summoned the media to rip Klinsmann for comments made two days earlier in which he said Clint Dempsey and Michael Bradley hurt their international careers by returning from Europe to play for MLS clubs. The commissioner also said Klinsmann’s decision to leave Landon Donovan, the face of MLS, off his 2014 World Cup squad was “inexcusable.”
Said Klinsmann on Monday, the day before the USA’s friendly with Honduras in Boca Raton: “I made clear with Clint’s move back and Michael’s move back that it’s going to be very difficult to keep the same level that they experienced at the places where they were. It’s just reality. It’s just being honest.”
Garber fired back the day after the 1-1 draw in Florida: “Juergen’s comments are very, very detrimental to the league, to the sport of soccer in North America, detrimental to everything we’re trying to do. Not only that, I think they’re wrong.
“To have a national team coach saying that signing with our league is not going to be good for their careers, and not good for their prospects with the national team, is incredibly damaging to our league.
“I will do anything and everything to defend our league, our players and our owners. I don’t believe anyone is above the sport, and I believe everyone has to be accountable for their behavior.” [October 15]
Comment: They both need to shut up.
But, of course, they can’t. Klinsmann will continue to be asked point-blank about this player and that, and Garber has to protect his product.
Klinsmann was only telling the truth. To grow, anyone in the U.S. player pool needs to play for a club at the highest level possible, and that’s in Europe, not MLS, provided it’s in the top division of a top soccer-playing nation. Garber’s reaction–writing angry letters to Klinsmann and U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati and publicly blasting the national team coach/national technical director in a hastily arranged press teleconference–made him look peevish and unprofessional.
However, Klinsmann has to face the fact that any U.S. player, no matter how talented, is taking a risk in signing with a European club. A player has to play, and if he’s shelved by injury or a drop in performance or a coach who thinks little of American players (there’s plenty of those), he’s regressing and probably should have remained in MLS, where he’d be considered a star. (That description fits a player like Bradley, who left Roma for Toronto FC and a healthy pay increase after the Italian club brought in several new players, threatening the midfielder’s playing time.) These guys have to think of their career as a whole, and they’re not on the level of Klinsmann, who in his day would have started, and starred, for any powerhouse club in Europe.
Garber needs to rein it in, skate past this ongoing issue and resume talking up MLS’s strengths, which are a tremendous fan experience unique to American sports and a level of talent that will entertain all but the Euro-snobs. If he continues to have a beef with Klinsmann, Garber sits on the U.S. Soccer board, the body that serves as Klinsmann’s boss, and he can air his disagreements behind closed doors with the people who matter when it comes to the fellow at the helm of the men’s national teams program. As for Klinsmann, he needs to become a better diplomat without losing his credibility with a press and public that is growing increasingly sophisticated and demanding. Either that or hope that MLS both improves on the field and stops making itself an increasingly attractive choice for top American players faced with a difficult career decision.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: 2016 European Championship, 2016 Summer Olympics, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, CONCACAF Gold Cup, Confederacion Sudamericana de Futbol, CONMEBOL, Copa America, Costa Rica, Honduras, Major League Soccer, Mexico, Miami, Rio de Janeiro, South America, Sunil Gulati, U.S. National Team, United States, Venezuela
The long-rumored centennial Copa America in America became a reality when CONMEBOL announced in Miami that it would play its 2016 championship in the United States.
The tournament, to be held outside South America for the first time, is scheduled for June 3 through 26. In addition to CONMEBOL’s 10 members, the host U.S., Mexico and four other CONCACAF nations will round out a field of 16 teams.
Many questions remain, among them the cities that will host matches.
“One benefit we have in a country like the U.S. is that we have many, many venues that can host this,” said U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati. “A number of venues have been in contact with us in the last 48 hours that want to host it. Some [candidates] in person here in Miami have talked to us, and a number by e-mail.”
Also at issue is the timing of the tournament, which would be a special edition wedged between the regularly scheduled 2015 Copa America in Chile and 2019 Copa in Brazil. It would overlap with the 2016 European Championship, which kicks off June 10, and conflict with the same season as the 2016 Summer Olympics soccer tournament in Rio de Janeiro. It would mean the cancellation of that year’s CONCACAF Gold Cup, and CONCACAF clubs are not obligated to release players to play in an event that is a South American tournament. For the U.S., that issue becomes problematic because Major League Soccer will be in mid-season.
The Copa America is the world’s oldest continental soccer competition, first held in Argentina in 1916 to commemorate that nation’s founding as an independent nation; midway through the tournament, the four participants announced the formation of the first-ever continental soccer confederation, the Confederacion Sudamericana de Futbol. It’s 14 years older than the World Cup and 44 years older than the European Championship. [May 1]
Comment: For those who see this as a way for South American soccer to milk the U.S. of many millions of dollars, keep in mind that clubs and national teams from South America, CONCACAF and, especially, Mexico, have been coming here to feed at the trough not for years but for decades.
Of course, there are always the dollars. But when it comes to sense, the big winner here is the U.S. National Team.
The U.S., like Mexico, cannot progress living on a steady diet of regional competition–regardless of how hard it is to win a World Cup qualifier at Costa Rica or Honduras. Playing competitive, non-World Cup games against European opposition is an impossibility, which is unfortunate considering that U.S. internationals play for European, not South American, clubs. South America and its Copa America, then, makes perfect sense.
Unlike Mexico, a regular guest over the past 20 years at the Copa America and twice a finalist, the USA’s participation has been spotty. It crashed in the group stage in 1993, surprised all by reaching the semifinals against Brazil in 1995 and predictably crashed again in the first round after sending an experimental team to the 2007 Copa in Venezuela.
It is hoped that the Centennial Copa America is a rousing success and a good U.S. performance inspires–compels–the U.S. Soccer Federation to find a way to make its national team a regular guest participant in future South American championships. Otherwise, it’s a continuation of a dull treadmill involving the Gold Cup and friendlies against international opponents who, depending on the circumstances, may be under strength and/or under inspired.
Filed under: Uncategorized, World Cup tickets sold to U.S. | Tags: 125, 2007 Women's World Cup, 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup, 2010 World Cup, 2011 Women's World Cup, 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup, 2014 FIFA World Cup, 2018 World Cup, 2022 World Cup, 465 tickets sold to U.S., ABC, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, CONCACAF, England, ESPN, FIFA, Fox, France, Germany, Ghana, Group "G", Group of Death, Italia '90, Italy, Manaus, Mexico, Natal, Portugal, Recife, Royal Bafokeng Stadium, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sunil Gulati, Telemundo, U.S. National Team, U.S. Soccer, U.S. Soccer Supporters Club, United States, Univision
With nearly four months remaining before kickoff, the United States has the highest number of allocated tickets among visiting countries for the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil.
Though its odds of getting out of the so-called “Group of Death” and winning Brasil ’14 are a daunting 100-to-1, the United States, on every level, has become a significant part of the planet’s most-watched sporting event. That’s a far cry from the beginning of its World Cup run at Italia ’90, when a U.S. team of current and former college standouts needed a miracle to qualify for the first time in four decades, then crashed out in three games, supported by a smattering of American fans, many of whom were already in Italy on vacation and decided, on a whim, to have a look.
Filed under: Klinsmann contract extension, Uncategorized | Tags: 2006 World Cup, 2013 Gold Cup, 2014 World Cup, Bob Bradley, Bora Milutinovic, Brasil '14, Canada, Clint Dempsey, CONCACAF, Felipe Scolari, France, Franz Beckenbauer, Juergen Klinsmann, Mexico, Michel Platini, Miguel Herrera, North America, Raymond Domenech, Ricardo LaVolpe, South America, Steve Cherundolo, Sunil Gulati, U.S. National Team, U.S. Soccer Federation
Juergen Klinsmann has agreed to a four-year contract extension that keeps him at the U.S. National Team helm through the next World Cup cycle and on until the end of 2018. As part of the agreement announced by the U.S. Soccer Federation, Klinsmann also becomes technical director.
Appointed U.S. coach in mid-2011 following the dismissal of Bob Bradley, Klinsmann guided an overhauled American squad to a 2014 World Cup berth. The U.S. finished first in the final round of the CONCACAF qualifiers (7-2-1) and went undefeated in winning the 2013 Gold Cup. The team ended the year 16-4-2 overall, setting single-year marks for wins, winning percentage (.761) and consecutive victories (12).
“One of the reasons we hired Juergen as our head coach was to advance the program, and we’ve seen the initial stages of that happening on the field and also off the field in various areas,” said U.S. Soccer Federation President Sunil Gulati. “In the past two years he has built a strong foundation from the senior team down to the youth teams and we want to continue to build on that success.”
Klinsmann reportedly is being paid $2.5 million a year on his current contract and can earn up to $10.5 million in bonuses depending on the USA’s performance at Brasil ’14. [December 12]
Comment: The comfortable throne reserved for the U.S. National Team coach just got a little more plush.
Since the Bora Milutinovic era, when the rest of the world started to pay attention to the Americans, the post has been derided by the international media and fellow coaches (some of them wishful suitors) as a job with none of the intense scrutiny and relentless criticism that hounds most every other national team boss.
Said soon-to-be fired Mexico coach Ricardo LaVolpe of the overall U.S. National Team atmosphere after losing a World Cup qualifier to the Yanks in 2005: “Here, everyone’s interested in baseball and American football and many people didn’t even know that a soccer match was being played today. So it’s easy for them, because they aren’t playing under any pressure. My mother, my grandmother, or my great-grandmother could play in a team like that.”
We’ll assume that LaVolpe’s grandmother is Clint Dempsey and his great-grandmother is a good deal older, like Steve Cherundolo.
Then, more recently–last December–there was disgraced former France coach Raymond Domenech, who guided Les Bleus to the 2006 World Cup final and then watched his team mutiny and implode in a disgraceful three-and-out showing four years later.
“There’s a job I’d rather have,” Domenech said in an interview with But! Lyon. “Besides, I know [Klinsmann], he knows and he doesn’t care. This post is the coach of the United States. I’d like to see this country. Add to that, the Americans always qualify [for the World Cup]. At the same time, it is easy in North America: there are only two games to qualify for the World Cup. South America is already a paradise, but the North is even better! You play Canada, Mexico. You’ll walk in the Islands.”
We’ll never understand what Domenech meant by Canada, which is ranked 112th in the world and crashed in CONCACAF’s 2014 World Cup qualifiers two months before his comments. That aside, he made his point. Here, there is the lack of the breathless, relentless pressure that has made life miserable for everyone from Franz Beckenbauer to Michel Platini to Brazil’s once and future genius, Felipe “Big Phil” Scolari. And it hasn’t done much for Miguel Herrera, the last in a string of four Mexico coaches run through the grinder from September to November.
While the U.S. National Team is years away from having the support–and scrutiny–of a majority of the country, the resulting atmosphere has spared the USSF the temptation to make panicky dismissals of its coaches and allowed those coaches to go about their business.
In Klinsmann’s case, time to test a large number of players, make mistakes, and, ultimately, over time, alter the culture of the team. Then watch the results at a World Cup. Or, perhaps, a second World Cup.
Not being a soccer nation has its advantages after all.