By Jared Launius
It's always important, I think, to point out the rather inescapable fact I don't really know anything. This is something one of my writing models,
Joe Posnanski, likes to often remind his readers, and it's a plan I think is worth shadowing. Because really, I don't know anything. I'd like to think I know things, but I really just, for the most part, have things I think.
Sure, there are some things I know. I
know Jurgen Klinsmann is the coach of the U.S. Men's National Team, for example. I
know he wants to play a more creative, expressive style than his predecessors. I
know he wants to change the culture of youth soccer in this country. I
know he's off to a 0-2-1 start in friendlies against Mexico, Costa Rica and Belgium. There are other things I know, too, like the fact the U.S.'s colors are red white and blue and that we have 50 states, but not a whole lot else relevant to this discussion.
I do
think, though, we're having a hard time wrapping our Yankee brains around exactly what is going to happen under Jurgen Klinsmann. Or, perhaps more accurately, what we
think should happen under Jurgen Klinsmann.
There's no real poll out there that says "78 percent of USMNT fans and pundits have unrealistic expectations of Jurgen Klinsmann, while 11 percent have realistic expectations, nine percent are too pessimistic and three percent abstained". But I have the idea, both from fans and media alike, there are already some unfair expectations being placed on the German.
* * *
Let's start with one thing: U.S. fans, I think, tend to overrate the national team. This is totally fair and totally understandable and I'm totally guilty of the same thing. One of the great things about being a fan is thinking your team is better than it is. But the problem, I think, is when that tendency clouds rational thought. Sure, when the U.S. plays against Spain, I'd LOVE to think we can stand toe-to-toe with them. But, when we ultimately and predictably don't, it's important to remember, oh yeah, it's Spain.
I was rather shocked by how many columns, blog posts, tweets and so on I read after Costa Rica and Belgium friendlies voicing frustration with the results. It sadly, I think, illustrated one of more negative aspects of this fan base: it's obsession with results.
The results of three friendlies a full year before ANY sort of meaningful competition should be about as important as a player's ability to do a backflip penalty. Sure, it's neat and would be fun to watch, but it's not in the least bit necessary. But, well, we have this obsession with winning no matter the contest.
That obsession with winning has long stunted the development of American players – favoring winning tactics at youth levels over developing the skills to play soccer the right way. Sometimes, soccer education and growth fly in the face of results. So does experimentation.
What's going on at the senior team level right now is not at all dissimilar. We clamored throughout Bradley's tenure for more attractive, attacking soccer. If that call is made, it's important to understand what it takes to get there – particularly for a footballing nation predicated on developing players who bunker defensively and counter/rely on set pieces offensively. It's not easy as simply saying, "Okay Landon, Clint and Jozy, play pretty now!" You can't just insert Jose Torres into midfield, remove Jonathan Bornstein from left back and POOFTA! expect to be Germany. Let's give Bob some credit: if it was that easy, he would have done it.
These aren't surface-level changes Klinsmann is trying to make. He's asking an entire player pool to consider the game a new way. He's bringing in players with negligible international experience and trotting them out for 90 minutes. He's trying guys in new positions alongside players with whom they've never played. These are things that take years – yes, plural – to develop. I wouldn't be surprised nor particularly offended if kinks are still being worked out when World Cup Qualifying begins next summer. I have little fear it will interfere with this side's ability to qualify, but there will be nervous moments, I think.
And that should be fine.
* * *
The term "exponential growth" is often attached with U.S. soccer from about 1990 to now. That's fair, I think. The national team has made it to every World Cup since 1990 after not qualifying for forty years. It's emerged as the second-best team in its region. American players have earned minutes in each of Europe's biggest leagues. The list goes on. You know it all, I'm sure.
But, well, here's the thing about exponential growth – it's got a ceiling. This isn't just some number on a graph. The U.S., I think, might be about as far as it's going to get from having a legitimate domestic league, putting more money into the national team and getting more kids to play soccer.
It's baby steps from here forward – no more jumping dozens of spots in the world rankings in a matter of a few years. The peers of the national team now aren't the minnow nations without the resources to match the States like they were 15 years ago. Up here, the competition is established nations with proven youth setups and an understanding of how to play the game at the highest levels. You don't pass them by being bigger, stronger, faster and running harder. Not with any sort of frequency, at least.
I think we're having a hard time grasping as much. We have, in some ways, been spoiled. Many of us grew up in a soccer culture wherein a palpable growth was present from cycle to cycle. Klinsmann isn't taking over the 2002 national team full of youth and the first generation of American players to have experienced national success. He's taking over a team perhaps deeper than it's ever been, but maybe not considerably more talented.
When Klinsmann was hired, it was interesting to read how many fans and pundits said the expectation should be World Cup quarterfinals in 2014. If that's the expectation, I fear Klinsmann may leave under more turmoil than his predecessor. Sure, anything can happen in a one-off, but the reputation of the U.S. internationally, I think, is a team that can get out of it's group if the situation is right.
My fear is that what Klinsmann brings won't be appreciated. I'm not saying results in the big competitions don't matter, because they do. If he fails to qualify for the World Cup, that's a big problem. But I'll judge Klinsmann on his ability to establish something resembling a national style that isn't bunker ball. I'm looking for a clear improvement in the philosophy structure of the youth system, not a run to the World Cup's final eight.
I'm reminded of something a motivational speaker who came to my high school said. I'm paraphrasing here, but he said something to the extent of "to reach something you've never attained, you have to try something you've never done." If, ultimately, the U.S. wants to stand toe-to-toe with Spain, it's going to mean trying things never attempted by this nation.
That, I think, is what Klinsmann intends to do. It's our job to understand there's going to be changes along the way.
