Nothing on the line except “BBQ joints,” unless your name is Sacha or Aron.
TSG will be back with a preview next week for Panama. Starting line-ups shortly.
Nothing on the line except “BBQ joints,” unless your name is Sacha or Aron.
TSG will be back with a preview next week for Panama. Starting line-ups shortly.
Author Steve Fenn seeks clarity on the MLS playoff mixture.
With mere weeks left, MLS clubs’ regular aims are gaining a clearer focus.
Right now the New York Red Bulls, Portland Timbers, Seattle Sounders, Sporting Kansas City, and Real Salt Lake all have a realistic shot at the Supporters Shield. They are so close with so little time left that whenever one of them loses they will essentially leave the race.
Meanwhile the San Jose Earthquakes, Vancouvers Whitecaps, New England Revolution, and Chicago Fire would be content sneaking into the play-in game between the 4th and 5th seeds. In between, the LA Galaxy, Colorado Rapids, Montreal Impact, Houston Dynamo, and Philadelphia Union are interesting in their own way. They certainly want to hold off the would-be playoff usurpers, and an immaculate run to the Shield is the ultimate goal, but mostly they should be jokeying to earn byes through top-3 seeding in their conference.
Seattle, Salt Lake, LA, Portland, and Colorado are all capable of landing with a bye or tumbling into the play-in game. Seattle still has pole position for the top spot, but Portland could take a commanding lead this weekend. RSL looks well-positioned for a bye, but overall these five clubs are way too close to call right now.
In the East, New York, Sporting KC, and Montreal are in good position for byes, but things can shift quickly, and Houston may well swoop in if one of them slips. This conference gets much more interesting with a focus on the bubble:
Philadelphia looks to be in solid position, but the Dynamo, Fire, and Revolution are locked in a dogfight for the fifth seed, and one or two of them could overtake the Union, too. Outside of the Supporters Shield, this is probably the most exciting race right now.
The Rapids’ loss in San Jose and the Whitecaps’ upset blowout in Seattle on Wednesday night reopened a Western playoff race that looked all but over. The main concern is still where RSL/PDX/LA/CO will finish relative to each other, but San Jose is now a legitimate threat and Colorado, and if the Whitecaps (tiny spec in the upper right of the graph) could crash the party if they win their last 2 fixtures.
Keep in mind that while each club’s position here is important, none of them are terribly stable for such a late date in the season. Looking over projections from Zach Slaton, Josh Y on Sounder at Heart and Sports Club Stats, it is striking that in the final month no one is locked into a particular playoff seed. Here is a visualization of Zach’s odds for each club to land in every possible table position:
The challenging part here is to resist the natural urge to seek out certainty in this graph.
While it certainly shows that some clubs are more likely to end up in a certain range of seeding, what’s most interesting is that no club is greater than 50% likely to land on a specific playoff seed. New York (still the only club to mathematically clinch a playoff spot!) and Kansas City will very likely be the top 2 in the East, but which will get the top spot is quite uncertain, and both could potentially tumble all the way to the play-in match. Every club with playoff possibility has a spread of at least 4 possible table positions in their conference. The lack of seeding certainty is driven by two factors:
1) Soccer results at any level are highly subject to randomness over 2-3 matches.
2) 1st through 5th place league-wide are only 0.05 PPG apart, while a still-tiny 0.11 PPG separates the 7th and 13th-best records in MLS.
One more illustration of just how difficult it is to predict this race. All 19 MLS teams have had more than 1 skid of 3-matches with 2 points or less. Oh, and the new US Open Cup champions, DC United, are the only side who hasn’t had a single 3-match stretch with 7-plus points. The table is closely pacsed and every team is capable of moving in either direction. Even the slightest upticks or slides driven by skill and luck, but mostly the later over 2-3 matches, will have major ramifications. Watching all these bubble teams sort things out should serve as a nicely dramatic preamble to the MLS Cup playoffs.
Per Slaton, there’s a 53.25% chance that at least 1 pair of Eastern clubs will finished tied on points for a playoff seed, while it’s 67.43% in the West. Keep the below tiebreakers in mind as the end of the season approaches quickly:
A shortened roster. Brad Evans Rightback rides again. Donovan’s heating up.
GOALKEEPERS (3): Brad Guzan (Aston Villa), Tim Howard (Everton), Nick Rimando (Real Salt Lake)
DEFENDERS (6): DaMarcus Beasley (Puebla), Matt Besler (Sporting Kansas City) Geoff Cameron (Stoke City), Edgar Castillo (Club Tijuana), Brad Evans (Seattle Sounders FC), Omar Gonzalez (LA Galaxy)
MIDFIELDERS (6): Kyle Beckerman (Real Salt Lake), Alejandro Bedoya (Nantes), Mix Diskerud (Rosenborg), Jermaine Jones (Schalke), Sacha Kljestan (Anderlecht), Graham Zusi (Sporting Kansas City)
FORWARDS (5): Jozy Altidore (Sunderland), Terrence Boyd (Rapid Vienna), Landon Donovan (LA Galaxy), Aron Johannsson (AZ Alkmaar), Eddie Johnson (Seattle Sounders FC)
» How does the team play without Clint Dempsey. Will. be. interesting. A Michael Bradley absence already has an observation.
» Tim Howard was big again Mexico, but Brad Guzan’s play continues to suggest, “better current keeper.”
by Matt Biggerstaff
As we approach the two month mark and an international date, the English Premier League so far has been full of surprises.
This weekend’s matches will be in the minds of the players and fans for two weeks while many players go off to try and help their nation fight for a spot in the World Cup next summer. After match day one where a ‘crisis’ was brewing, you certainly wouldn’t imagine that Arsenal would be alone at the top of the table, and Real Madrid would be pondering another 100 million move to set up the daunting Bale – Ramsey Welsh connection.
Another beautiful piece from Miriti Murungi
Former USMNT coach Bob Bradley has moved on before. By my count he has moved on four times since 2005 when he was the MetroStars’ Leader of Men and Deflector of Soon-To-Be-Debunked Nepotism Claims (official titles). But his last move was different, not just because he moved to a place that requires you to dial 011 to alert the NSA that you’re dialing out of the United States; it was different because it shined a high-beam on the difficulty we have with reconciling coaches and context.
(CAIRO) On September 24, 2011, Bob Bradley stood to shake hands with his new federation bosses at his unveiling as Egypt’s men’s national team coach.
As the group exchanged grins and slapped palms for the cameras, behind them hovered the standard, massive advertising board.
But this one didn’t have the sponsors that American audiences had grown accustomed to seeing behind Bradley at USMNT pressers. There was no Nike, Gatorade, McDonald’s, or Jose Cuervo. Instead, the board displayed the sponsors of Bradley’s new employer: Etisalat, Juhayna, and, obviously, not Jose Cuervo.
Things were obviously changing for Bradley. But that moment was also the beginning of a shift in how Americans seemed to frame their former coach.
Over the course of a well-traveled career crisscrossing the U.S. soccer roadmap, Bob Bradley has wavered between being characterized as a square gym teacher in sweatpants and a pragmatic gym teacher in sweatpants. Everything about him was presented as measured and methodical, as if being measured and methodical are characteristics unbecoming of an experienced, high-level coach.
But then a funny thing happened.
The gym teacher got fired and went rogue. He bought a used, black ’78 Chevy Camaro with poorly tinted windows, threw two duffel bags and a box of ammo into the Camaro’s quasi-trunk, and focused his thoughts on experiencing something different, something far, far away, something that would leave many scratching their heads and thinking, “Whoa, I never saw that coming. I hope he’s OK.”
And then Bob flicked the shades perched atop his clean-shaven head onto the bridge of his nose, picked up a map with the entire continent of Africa circled, mumbled something about respect, and sped off toward the horizon.
Somewhere, Dave Chappelle smiled.
At least that’s how it played in my head.
Suddenly, Bob Bradley, Egyptian resident, was a man of intrigue, American soccer’s cross between Walter White and the Dos Equis man. Bob Bradley seemed to transform into the most interesting man in the world, right before our very eyes.
Bradley was now a man who walked with the people and possessed the calm, cool, measured, public temperament of man raised by Mother Teresa and Deepak Chopra. But the profile of this new, man-of-the-people Bradley was certainly enhanced by his job performance. Bradley was now also the man who had led Egypt through the group stages of African qualifying with maximum points. Six games. Six wins. Eighteen points.
Egypt (along with New Zealand) is the only team from the World Cup qualifying group stages still unscathed, still perfect. Worldwide, that’s out of a pool of 122 teams that participated in the last round of their respective regions’ group play. And Egypt did it in a climate that, to outsiders, might look like a rough cut of an Oscar-nominated action/drama set in the Middle East/North Africa, if somehow Ben Affleck was involved.
It was the perfect conclusion to the tale being spread across America about Bob Bradley: Father, Coach, Ambassador, Hero. Here was a dynamic icon succeeding at an exceptional challenge in a place where pyramids instead of massive metal structures are the main tourist attraction. Everything about the story was new and dynamic. So for American scriptwriters, it was the obvious time to write the long-running role of the pragmatic, sweatpants-wearing gym teacher out of the script. The old Bob Bradley was dead, which wasn’t really an issue because audiences had already fallen head-over-heels in love with his new, sophisticated, nuanced twin brother, Bob Bradley.
On September 24, 2013, eight days after the Confederation of African Football announced that Egypt will meet Ghana for a trip to the World Cup, Bradley celebrated his two-year anniversary as coach of the Egyptian national team, marking the near-end of an emotional and eventful qualifying run for both Egyptians and Bradley.
But for Americans, who have been at arms-length from Bradley for a little over two years now, a slightly different narrative is unfolding. What began as the tale of a pragmatic alum seeking a fresh challenge abroad has transformed into a context-heavy story of a rugged renaissance man, with a slightly uncomfortable “messiah saving a foreign land” subplot. The shift represents a significant swing from a domestic reality, where little meaningful context is applied to coaching, to a new one, where context (BOB DOING BIG THINGS IN CRAZY EGYPT! IT’S CRAZY!) is almost the entire story.
We generally assess coaches under the standards set forth in the Convention for the Treatment of Active Coaches (CTAC).
The gist is, we methodically count wins and losses, home wins and losses, away wins and losses, losses compared to previous coaches, losses with new call-ups/signings, and loss of self-esteem (which we quantify in overall losses), until the #CoachOut momentum picks up and we start banging pots and screaming for #AnyoneElseIn. Then there’s a firing, a recycled club/federation statement and, at some point, the press conference, where someone in a suit inevitably gives us boilerplate about appreciation, mutual respect, and moving in a new direction. And then everyone on Twitter LOLs because, aside from directly related parties, no one really cares about extenuating circumstances.
But under the new Bradley paradigm, things are different.
The game is incidental.
Context is king.
Stateside Bradley conversations, that were once exclusively about Xs and Os and whether to play four, seven or twelve holding midfielders, have broadened, and now account for non-soccer-related realities, like politics, protest and struggle; we now wonder about Bradley’s psychological well-being (albeit not as much as we did right after the events in Port Said) and say thoughtful, measured things like, “If he loses, don’t worry, he’s in a difficult situation. This job is bigger than results; it’s more meaningful.” From a storytelling perspective, the added layers of context are a refreshing change of pace from our standard, formulaic characterizations of coaches. Suddenly, everyone’s reactions are more holistic, reasonable, and considered.
This new context-friendly paradigm, however, wouldn’t be possible without America’s decision to treat Bradley like a retiree.
In America (and this is true elsewhere), context, outside of a death, a TMZ-related episode, or a national tragedy, is something we generally only offer coaches at the end of a career. And ever since Bradley stood in front of that massive advertising board on September 24, 2011 in Cairo, we have showered him in context and treated him with respect and understanding, as a Coach Emeritus of sorts. This shift to de facto retirement (coaching out of shouting distance) at least partially explains why he’s getting the benefit of context.
But something else about Bradley’s transition from USMNT coach to Egypt’s coach allowed him to regain his humanity in the eyes of storytellers and fans. The calculus isn’t very complicated: He’s in a country that’s received wide, mainstream coverage due to social and political instability; he’s an American in North Africa during a volatile time when Americans are viewed with more suspicion than normal; and the team he is managing is one of Africa’s traditional powerhouses on the cusp of World Cup qualification for the first time in 24 years. Every aspect of his experience has a powerful, human interest angle. All things considered, it’s hardly context one could ignore without coming off as an incompetent storyteller.
However, the disparity in our treatment of pre-Egypt Bradley vs. Egypt Bradley raises two obvious, context-related questions: What is the threshold beyond which we find context relevant to active coaches? And what context is relevant to a narrative?
The issue becomes clearer when you start fiddling with the dials.
Start by imagining giving the same contextual latitude now afforded to Bradley to an active USMNT coach. If the USMNT under Klinsmann had a nice run but was in Mexico’s place and ultimately failed to qualify for Brazil, would you reach into your bag of context? I imagine most people would probably throw their bag of context in front of an oncoming bus and then sink into a deep depression while friends and family whisper behind your back about your anger issues. That’s because, at home, results always trump context. Our tolerance for shortcomings has never been very high, which is a reality we often see after losses, or even a series of not winning or drawing games well enough.
And then turn the dial up a bit.
Few were going to ask Bradley what he thought of the financial meltdown (or write about it) when he was in charge of the USMNT during economic armageddon. No one was saying, “Bob, how are leagues and your players and their families coping with the economic collapse?” probably because the question has nothing to do with serious issues that impact CTAC provisions, like game analysis, injury updates, the opposition, the schedule, formations, or incoming players.
And therein lies the dilemma: between the various degrees of drama that can surround a coach and a team, deciding where to draw the context line can be a challenge.
We already know that both extremes on the context spectrum raise concerns. On one end, the danger is the compelling story of a national team coach-messiah reducing a nation and its recent hardships into props to accent a bold, personal, American narrative. Over-focusing on Bradley can run the risk of marginalizing Egypt’s already rich soccer culture and wealth of fascinating characters, effectively making them extras in their own movie.
Author Steve Fenn is just as perplexed as you…and Bob.
On Monday, the Confederation of African Football (CAF) held the draw for their final round of World Cup Qualification. In the preceding 26 months, the CAF had presided over 144 matches in which these 10 nations had outlasted their 42 continental rivals. Actually, in Tunisia’s case they didn’t entirely outlast them all, because they had apparently been eliminated by Cape Verde days before. But Cape Verde was found guilty of using an ineligible player in that decisive group stage match, so the Tunisians advanced, but without the coach who quit after losing to Cape Verde.
Welcome to Africa, the continent whose World Cup Qualification format makes the FIFA general assembly seem as organized as a German auto factory, and whose qualifying trials make CONCACAF’s guantlet look like a red carpet.
It bears repeating: 144 matches to eliminate 42 countries, and now 5 of the best 10 will emerge from randomness-heavy head-to-heads for a spot in Brazil next June. CAF…might as well stand for Crazy As F…..
Not even Nelson Mandela could broker this.
Along with the chaos of the coming matches themselves, the draw matching up these teams had an enormous impact on many of these squads World Cup probabilities. ESPNFC maintains a visualization of World Cup Qualification odds driven by their Soccer Power Index (SPI), which was developed by Nate Silver. Based on the difference between their published odds pre-draw and post-draw, here’s a ranking of the difference that “draw luck,” alone, played in each country’s World Cup odds (with their fantasic nicknames included as an added bonus):
Those 20% swings based on only the draw are larger than you would usually see from the results of an actual qualifying match. Draws often have a great deal of power, but only in Africa are even the best teams subject to their whims at the end of qualification.
The pairings that led to this, with the top seeds on the left:
Ivory Coast – Senegal
Nigeria – Ethiopa
Ghana – Egypt
Algeria – Burkina Faso
Tunisia – Cameroon
Essentially, SPI is saying that Algeria and Tunisia were weak top seeds, and Ethiopia is the weakest of them all, so all of their opponents were lucky. Meanwhile, no one wanted to draw the strongest in their respective pots: Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Ghana, and Egypt.
The Ghana-Egypt matchup is the deepest cut.
Bob Bradley’s Pharaohs deserved to be a top seed after a perfect 6-0-0 record in qualifying matches under the stoic former United States boss. Their FIFA ranking couldn’t bounce back from the sins of Bradley’s predecessor, though.
Now Bradley gets a shot at… redemption or merely a re-do. If you know Bradley, history is not crossing his mind. That said, it was Ghana who denied Bradley’s US Men’s National Team a trip to the last World Cup’s quarterfinals. Four years earlier, of course, Ghana dealt the final blow also; the Black Stars denying passage out of group play to a US team coached by Bradley’s mentor, Bruce Arena.
Per SPI this matchup is the most even pairing of the 5 CAF head-to-heads. The odds are basically 55/45 favoring Ghana, but Egypt is more than capable of taking it to the Black Stars.
Specific dates have not been announced for any of these CAF matches, yet. US broadcast rights are TBA, too.
The odds for all 10 teams to advance:
Notice that once you get past Nigeria-Ethiopia, every team has a respectable chance here. Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso, and Cameroon are favorites in their matchups but, given these SPI odds, there is a 71.9% chance that at least one of them will not make it to Brazil next June. And of course there is a 100% chance that either Egypt or Ghana will miss out on the 2014 World Cup.