Klinsmann & Gulati Should Stop Dancing

While Jurgen Klinsmann was busy giving interviews on Sunday, I was home arranging the diapers underneath the changing table in our nursery.


That’s an appropriate juxtaposition as Klinsmann’s antics in the fallout of his inability–apparently– to reach an accord to be the next coach of the US Men’s Soccer team border on infantile.

Per my comments a few weeks ago, it was always “the process” to coach selection even more so than the candidates, that irked me after the World Cup. To this writer, revelations now–allegedly–about how the selection, negotiations, and confirmations went down are no surprise given the lead-up.

In simpleton’s language (See Dick Run.)

Gulati: Silence will have to be broken...

“Gulati says U.S. underperformed at World Cup” followed by “Gulati names Bob Bradley to second term without qualification.” is the mother of all non-sequiturs. Fans and media have every right to question.

Those questions are still outstanding, but let’s move forward with two more:

(1) How is it that Jurgen Klinsmann has only held two coaching roles since his official retirement in 1998 from the game. One that he walked away from and another that he was shoved away from?

Why is the United States job so special to Klinsmann? Is it merely for the lifestyle…a shorter amount of games and ability to “scout” all over the world. Here’s a question? If Klinsmann wants to coach Americans so bad, why not take a run at an MLS team to showcase his wares?

Something seems fishy here and Klinsmann’s continued comments this week smack of an immature child who couldn’t get what we wanted and he’s going to let everyone know about it.

Mark this statement: Unless some “promise” was made to Klinsmann by USSF about the US Coaching role post-World Cup 2010 and then reneged on, the comments are merely unprofessional and that’s it.

(2) Continually, why go on record here after failing–apparently–to reach an agreement with US Soccer. What good does it do?

Many writers suggest that Klinsmann is being allowed to “control the message.”

Here’s the thing: Who cares?

Why would US Soccer respond to Klinsmann at this point (and frankly only continue to tarnish and undermine Bob Bradley is his next turn?) What could would it do from a brand and media awareness standpoint? Nothing. Zero.

How precisely does Gulati “control the message” at this point if he is even invoking Klinsmann’s name?

And how do fans desire for a coach that comes off as more immature than my one-week old?

The reality is that Klinsmann and USSF didn’t reach agreement–that much is known and that this should be the end for Gulati’s and Klinsmann’s continued infatuation affair.

The damage from going public–and undermining the next coach–is irreparable. The issues of “Jurgen Klinsmann” and “the US Soccer coaching selection process” are mutually exclusive. The latter should be dropped while the former should still be investigated.

There are two things that fans should want from US Soccer just as soon as Sunil Gulati returns to the country. One, “Jurgen Klinsmann will no longer be a candidate for a US Soccer coaching role” and two, some, even if murky or gray, transparency, “Here’s how we went about the process….”

Adding commentary from TSG reader Ben here as it is succinct:

I think the entire USSF structure should be criticized. For now let’s just focus on the hiring process for a second.

It was totally botched. Looks like we agree on that. As far as I know, it was between BB and Klinsmann and that in itself is a little pathetic, no? There are only two people in the world capable of coaching this team? No wayyyy! No, these were the two candidates that USSF could see themselves working with (in the end, obviously, they could only work with/control one).

So my problem with USSF is deeper. As a fan – as an American! – my focus and wish is to become one of the best soccer countries in the world. Is that theirs? How does BB push that forward? He comes from the same system as everyone else. He promotes a conservative and measured approach not only to tactics (oy) but to youth policy. He happens to be a great guy in person, but he IS the status quo. All that’s very safe and suburban and good for Gulati and the fans who are too scared to try something new, who are pumped when we squeak through a piss group and lose in the round of 16 – but it doesn’t satisfy me at all. I’m not content, really, I’m sort of pissed!

– Ben

36 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by maxq on 2010/09/22 at 1:36 PM

    Thank you thank you thank you for writing this. I’ve been so annoyed with Klinnsman through this whole thing. If he really cared about US soccer he would just go away.


  2. Posted by Ben on 2010/09/22 at 1:41 PM

    This is shockingly poor analysis, considering how good most of this site is.

    Klinsmann’s value comes not from how many cups he’s won as a coach. It has to do with the reputation he has rightly assumed as a REFORMER. Klinsmann tried to reform Bayern and he got fired before he could instill anything major. For Germany, however, oh man what a difference he made. Given control, he transformed one of the most staid and entrenched football systems from one style (think 2002 WC, think long ball long ball long ball) to another (think South Africa, with incredible shape, pace, and style). Because he wasn’t actually in charge of the team this past summer, he doesn’t get credit for it, but he set up the youth systems that created this team!

    What US Soccer proved in the hiring process is that they are more satisfied with the status quo than change. Forever an organization that prefers to keep matters in-house, the extension of Bradley’s contract only continues the incestuous and borderline nepotistic processes of the rest of the organization. Why bring in a foreigner that can overhaul the whole system? Oh we’re satisfied with being a top 10 team in the world, even though the raw talent in this country is certainly better.

    Klismann’s recent comments make it clear that the issue was about control, and that makes sense. US Soccer was/is uncomfortable with cleaning house.

    Now, as a site that really does care about the progress of American soccer, it befuddles me why you would not want to overhaul the program. Why are American soccer fans afraid of change? Why are so many people I’ve talked to satisfied with World Cup round of 16 appearances?


    • Posted by jellenp on 2010/09/22 at 1:51 PM

      “even though the raw talent in this country is certainly better.”

      I think that is far from a universally-accepted assertion.


      • Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/09/22 at 5:56 PM

        Only 1 or 2 players would get into a top top international team. What do you base this on?


    • Posted by matthewsf on 2010/09/22 at 1:54 PM

      Completely appreciate your point of view Ben.

      First, I’m not sure my analysis centers on “American fans afraid of change….”

      Here’s the thing. I’m not against an overhaul of anything and per my closing comments here I suggested a vote for Bradley was a vote that the status quo is acceptable:


      But I certainly don’t believe that Jurgen Klinsmann is the only man for the job.

      Here’s my analogy. Let’s look at a coach like Bill Belichek…an excellent coach…who accepted a Jets job a few years ago and then turned around after negotiations broke down and went to the Patriots. He would be a good coach anywhere he went, but he’ll never be welcomed back by the Jets.

      Do I believe Bradley is the best “coach” for the job? No. Do I believe that Klinsmann is the only one that may be able to do a better job? No again.

      I have fault with the process which to me led to only two candidates from my vantage point. The incumbent with limited technical ability and the continual heir apparent who USSF wasn’t willing to cede certain things to it appears.

      Where were the other candidates?


      • Posted by Ben on 2010/09/22 at 2:18 PM

        First, it’s cool you let these discussions ride. It’s what I appreciate about TSG.

        Now, as much as I lauded Klinsmann in the first comment, I don’t want some kind of apotheosis as if he’s the second coming of Arsene Wenger (ha). My main beef is with USSF and I think you put too much blame on Klinsmann just because he spoke to the media. I don’t think he was bitching, I think he was just straight up. But that’s semantics. Really, I think the entire USSF structure should be criticized. For now let’s just focus on the hiring process for a second.

        It was totally botched. Looks like we agree on that. As far as I know, it was between BB and Klinsmann and that in itself is a little pathetic, no? There are only two people in the world capable of coaching this team? No wayyyy! No, these were the two candidates that USSF could see themselves working with (in the end, obviously, they could only work with/control one).

        So my problem with USSF is deeper. As a fan – as an American! – my focus and wish is to become one of the best soccer countries in the world. Is that theirs? How does BB push that forward? He comes from the same system as everyone else. He promotes a conservative and measured approach not only to tactics (oy) but to youth policy. He happens to be a great guy in person, but he IS the status quo. All that’s very safe and suburban and good for Gulati and the fans who are too scared to try something new, who are pumped when we squeak through a piss group and lose in the round of 16 – but it doesn’t satisfy me at all. I’m not content, really, I’m sort of pissed!


        • Posted by sfshwebb on 2010/09/22 at 2:20 PM

          This i totally agree with…I think the US needs to shoot for the stars and dish out the control and money or whatever it takes to get the best.


        • Posted by matthewsf on 2010/09/22 at 2:32 PM

          Going to add this above. Great community debate as always here on TSG.


        • Posted by maxq on 2010/09/22 at 4:22 PM

          I’m not sure I agree with the “Klinnsman represents change, therefore Klinnsman is good for US Soccer” argument. That’s essentially change for change’s sake.

          Is US Soccer where we all want it to be? Of course not. But no soccer dynasty was built in a day (or one WC cycle).

          Personally, I think we’re better off in 2010 than we were in 2006, but reasonable souls can disagree about this. I just don’t think that we can assume that by hiring Bradley, US Soccer doesn’t have the same goal as the fans.


        • Posted by scweeb on 2010/09/22 at 6:37 PM

          I agree that a soccer dynasty isn’t built in day but its built in a cycle. And i think bob did great with his but i don’t think he can make us any better in his second cycle.


        • “I’m not sure I agree with the “Klinnsman represents change, therefore Klinnsman is good for US Soccer” argument. That’s essentially change for change’s sake.”

          That’s very much how American sports tend to operate though (and doesn’t sound that far off from leagues like the Premiership either). Your baseball team finishes last in the division? Fire the manager! It may have very little to do with him and more to do with injuries, player talent, etc., but the idea of bringing in fresh blood simply to change up the clubhouse is a pretty accepted methodology.

          Oversimplified, I realize, and I’m not arguing for the idea, just noting that it’s quite common.


    • Posted by Crow` on 2010/09/22 at 2:16 PM

      Thank you! I was disgusted and saddened when I read this article and many of the other comments in agreement with it. Actually, I don’t believe that I have EVER been angrier when reading an article about soccer. It reminds me of something I would read on that garbage soccer site goal.com (except there were no spelling, grammar, or factual errors). I never thought I would see the day that TSG sold out to Sunil and drank his kool-aid. We probably have no idea how evil Sunil really is. I don’t mind Bradley apologists, because he is a nice enough guy and a decent coach, but I refuse to listen to a Gulati apologist. The man is a fool. The Klinsmann interview enlightened me to the fact of how little power Bob really has. I feel bad for him. Many of “Bob’s stupid personnel decisions” and the like were probably forced on him by Sunil!!

      As for everyone criticizing Klinsmann- you are foolish. If Germany would have stunk it up in 2006 everyone would have been blaming him. Give credit where credit is due. He was the coach and took a defensive team and transformed it into one which played “beautiful attacking football.” And they were successful.

      As for him running Bayern into the ground- he barely had any time to prove himself, and he never had full support from the ownership and players from what I have heard. Plus, look at Bayern now!! They are mid-table and are doing worse that when Klinsmann was there! The Bundesliga is deeper than it was in years past and Bayern doesn’t have as much talent. Period.

      I like what Klinsmann has stated about the failings of the US development system- 90% of people agree with his comments from around the world (that I have talked to). I would like to see the changes that he would make, but know that they would never be allowed to happen if His Majesty Sunil has anything to do with it.

      My dream coach for the USA is Jose Mourinho. I hope in 2018 or 2022 we can get him to coach the team, based off his comments that he is “interested.” Can you imagine what Jose would say about the USSF when he would see up close their processes and decisions? It would be hilarious. He would rip them to shreds.

      I have enough trouble trying to live in a world where Sunil controls and hinders the development of my favorite team (USA soccer). I don’t need to hear people sticking up for him.


      • Posted by Crow` on 2010/09/22 at 2:19 PM

        Just to add- Sorry, but I don’t view JK’s behavior as immature. I like anyone who sticks up to the USSF. Actually, I like the fact that JK actually gives us some insight on the whole situation, because all that Sunil will do is hide and say: “No comment.”


        • Posted by matthewsf on 2010/09/22 at 3:06 PM

          Klinsmann’s behavior is unprofessional because it undermines someone (Bob Bradley) who is in the same fraternity at him.

          If the US didn’t have a coach in place, then his comments would be fine.

          Follow-up: Why cast the USSF in a negative light if it is such your desire to coach for them.

          Though honest and frank (which is good)…it is extremely tactless timing.


        • Posted by Crow` on 2010/09/22 at 3:28 PM

          I can agree with that reasoning. I can see how his comments undermine Bob. I guess I am just such a passionate supporter and am so frustrated at the USSF (and the seemingly inability to do anything about it) that I enjoy any shots taken at it (and especially by a figure like Klinsmann).

          Here’s my idea- TSG for US Soccer Prez!!!!! Seriously. I would sleep much better knowing that some people that actually know and care about soccer are running things.


      • Posted by sfshwebb on 2010/09/22 at 2:23 PM

        Bayern had just won the double when Klinsmann took over. They were knocked out of the domestic cup and in third when he was let go.


        • Posted by sfshwebb on 2010/09/22 at 2:27 PM

          Also, After Klinsmann left, they ended up finishing second (he was released in march), and then went on to win the double in 09-10 as well as get to the champions league final. Are you trying to tell me that this is a team that is doing worse????

          They have only played 5 games this season. Early days!


        • Posted by Crow` on 2010/09/22 at 2:59 PM

          I wasn’t saying that they were worse without him, but I was trying to make the point that he wasn’t “the worst coach ever” like some people were making him out to be. Do I think he is a “better” coach than Bob? Yes. Do I think he is a better fit for the USA than Bob? I’m not sure. The main reason I was excited about Klinsmann, was because of his ideas of changing up the youth development and also because he is a more attack-oriented coach. The USA usually does better when they try to dictate the pace instead of playing bunker-ball.

          I wish Klinsmann could get a spot in the USSF where he could really do some good, and that we could lure “The Special One” to America. Here is the pitch Jose- turn a sleeping giant into a world superpower. Only you have the ability to do it! That will appeal to his ego!


    • Posted by sfshwebb on 2010/09/22 at 2:19 PM

      Ben – The German team of 2002 made it to the finals. Not too bad.

      When Klinsmann was appointed head coach of Germany, Loew was appointed his assistant at the same time. One could say they made the team of 2006 together, and then Loew took it further. I would venture to say that most of the credit goes to Loew, as Klinsmann took over a far easier job with Bayern and failed to impress, where as the assistant continued with the program and made the national team better.

      I think what i’m concerned about, is that Klinsmann is a big name (why he was hired by Germany in 2004) and that excites people. Germany, after a disastrous 04 Euros, hired one of their most successful strikers (with no coaching credentials whatsoever), but backed it up by putting him with the proven Loew as his assistant. The public was appeased and the team flourished with the tactics of Loew with the leadership of Klinsmann.

      The US needs someone who can get the best out of decent to good players. Someone who has worked with all types, knows formations, knows how to cover up weaknesses etc… I just don’t think Klinsmann is that guy.


      • Posted by Ben on 2010/09/22 at 2:43 PM

        Hell yeah, now we got a debate going. This is fun.

        First of all, the 2002 Germany team is not a good point to make. Yes they went far. They probably could have gone as far playing that terrible Stoke City way in Euro 04, 06, Euro 08, and this summer, but they didn’t. Whoever was responsible for their transformation, surely we can agree that this German team is more exciting and more reflective of the national demographics and i would even say national style now, yes? It’s tough to say, oh look they made it to finals so the coach/system was amazing, or oh crap they never got out of the group the coach/system sucks.

        Two examples: Domenech’s Les Bleus squad made it to the 2006 World Cup final. Domenech is a bad coach. He was a terrible coach then, too (taking Henry out of the Final, holy hell), but I want to make the point that almost anyone can get results in something so flitting as a tournament as long as you have some good players.

        Also look at Avram Grant at Chelsea. He took over a team that he didn’t build, took them to the CL final and then left claiming a bunch of credit. Now that we know more about him, it turns out he is inept at communicating with or providing any kind of managerial assistance to his players. We didn’t know that in his short stint with Chelsea.

        All I’m saying is that it is as much in the progression of a team’s style and system as it is in their results that you can tell a coach’s impact.

        So I’m a little hesitant to say that Klinsmann is totally responsible for this or that success or failure when he was around for such a short time. I think we’d have to talk to the players, the assistant coaches, and everyone around them (I mean, just look at players talking about Domenech and Grant). Jogi Loew may indeed deserve more credit for Germany’s revival than Klinsmann. But Loew hasn’t been living in the US the past few years. He isn’t – or maybe now I should say wasn’t – as chummy with USSF as Klinsmann. That familiarity should count for something. And anyway, even if Klinsmann was even, say, 30-40% responsible for Germany’s transformation, that’s enough for me! That’s more than anyone in USSF know about turning a national team around.

        Ok to bring this round let me say that I’m not sure that Klinsmann is the PERFECT guy for the US, either. I don’t think I even ever said that. But between him and BB (and, again, it’s pathetic that they were our only two options) oh man. I wanted so bad for the USSF to show some passion, some risk, some selflessness and go with Klinsmann. They failed, and we’ll suffer.


        • Posted by matthewsf on 2010/09/22 at 3:02 PM

          Here’s the thing from all this. It appears that Gulati was willing to concede *nearly to all of Klinnsman’s demands….if in fact Klinsmann is to be believed.

          I’m not defending Gulati–I’m just saying that if he got that far with Klinsmann than he obviously wanted him as a coach.

          The question after that is…if Klinsmann’s demands were just a tad too stringent. Who knows, maybe we wouldn’t commit to 8 years and USSF felt that they would change the program for him and he would just walk away as he did to Germany….or maybe he insisted–as Grant Wahl astractly suggests–that he would disrupt critical revenue flow with demands of friendlies.

          The question then is….if Klinsmann was your ideal…your mold….and he didn’t work why weren’t any other candidates (“safe schools”) in place?

          And further, if Klinsmann *is your ideal than that it refutes that the US players (as I’ve said) is any sort of unique soccer player that needs unique motivation.

          That means the breadth of coaching options it global.

          If Bradley was not satisfactory at World Cup 2010….what made him the 2nd choice to Klinsmann?


        • Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/09/22 at 6:27 PM

          If people are going to criticise Grant at Chelsea, what about Mourinho at Milan – he took over a team that had won back-to-back Serie A titles, and his CL success was luckier than Terry being unlucky with his slip.

          Mourinho is a great coach but he doesn’t develop a team, he *buys* them. What makes you think he would excel as a national team coach? And people want attacking attractive football, well Mourinho is hardly the definition of this: see Porto, Chelsea and Inter.


      • Shaun – your knocks on Klinsy’s tactical nous may be spot on but there’s two types of successful coaches in all of sports:
        A) Scotty Bowman/Bill Belicheck/Jose Mourinho/John Wooden types that are so damn smart about the game they don’t really need assistants.

        B) Lou Holtz/Vince Lombardi/Bill Parcels/Mike Ditka/Sir Alex Ferguson types who may or may not have the tactical knowledge of some of their counterparts, but they act as a figurehead for the team and organization and are smart enough to surround themselves with assistant coaches who are smarter than they are as well as play the mind games to get the best out of their players and inspire them (sometimes inspiring only the fear of God).

        ***About the SAF comment: a few years ago there were detractors out there that claimed Qurioz was the brains behind United’s success and SAF was merely the puppeteer, regardless of whether you think SAF is a tactical genious or not, he’s certainly a figure head and does surround himself with assistants that raise him up instead of bringing him down.

        As for Jurgen, for him to be successful it appears he would fall into bucket #2, and right now as long as he got a good right-hand man, I think he would do well with the US. In fact, Bradley’s neutorticism would compliment Jurgen’s figurehead style quite well, but that’s a big ask for a coach who’s done what Bob has.

        To conclude my rambling, Shaun you closed with this:
        “The US needs someone who can get the best out of decent to good players. Someone who has worked with all types, knows formations, knows how to cover up weaknesses etc… I just don’t think Klinsmann is that guy.”

        I don’t know if Klinsmann is the guy or not, but what I do know is that we don’t need someone who has all of this knowledge, we need a whole coaching staff that together has all of this knowledge, which frees up the head coach to be more of a figurehead and a leader instead of the Xs and Os guy. Does that mean Klinsy? I don’t think he’s the only option, but of the two he is the devil we don’t know…


        • Posted by sfshwebb on 2010/09/22 at 5:05 PM

          Nick – you bring up a great point. Most of what Klinsmann wants is control. Typically coaches bring their own backroom staff, assistants with them (in Germany’s case since Klinsmann didn’t have any credentials they smartly appointed him some).

          Maybe he does recognize that he is in your level two bucket and if appointed would bring some very smart, tactical people that will mask all his weaknesses and he gets the credit, but in reality he was just the charismatic figurehead who knew how to motivate etc…

          So if he had these people, brilliant right-hand man etc…then i agree, he could be great for the US. I’m only assuming its him on his own for now.


  3. Posted by Alex on 2010/09/22 at 1:47 PM

    Gulati should be fired for even considering Klinsmann for this role. I am not sure what exactly he brings to this position. As you said he had two coaching positions in the past 12 years. The first one in ’06 was CLEARLY due to Loew, who as we saw in this World Cup, is a superior tactical coach (which is what Jen Chang wants). At Bayern, Klinsmann’s teams were a JOKE. A complete joke, and he had to run out of town.

    The only person in the world who even wants Klinsmann is Gulati. I don’t know why. I think it is nuts that he would even think of turning over the whole USSF to this unqualified fool.

    Maybe Bradley shouldn’t be the coach. I think it would have been better to start fresh. But he’s definitely a better choice than Klinsmann.


  4. Posted by Ryan R. on 2010/09/22 at 5:23 PM

    Two things:

    1) How is Klinsmann the only candidate. As you mentioned, how can it come down to him and Bradley, that’s it? Klinsmann isn’t even in the upper echelon or coaches. Look at all the quality coaches out there we could have taken a look at, at least with an interview: Pekerman, Dunga, Bielsa, O’Neil, Houllier. The list goes on and on and let’s be frank now, all of them have accomplished a lot more than Klinsman.. Making it the incumbent vs. one candidate is ridiculous, but it’s even more ridiculous that Klinsmann is the lone candidate.

    2) When people talk about “controlling the message,” I don’t think they mean it so much now. At this point, it is done. When I wrote something on Gulati’s botched management, the question I raised was why hasn’t he spoken in the last two months. The fact is that Gulati should have been in control of the situation from day one and kept the media and fans where he wanted them instead of allowing a situation like this to come about where he and the USSF are left out in the cold, but most of all, Bradley is hung out to dry.


  5. Posted by scweeb on 2010/09/22 at 6:45 PM

    So how do we as fans get the word out that we are not happy with what sunil is doing and that we demand answers !
    PS i love coming on here and reading the debates it makes my day!


  6. Posted by Paul on 2010/09/22 at 7:20 PM

    Oy, too much to reply to when there is so much else for me to read (papers, Singer, Strawson–lots of interesting philosophy stuff on the docket).

    Agree with much that has been said: USSF dropped the ball in several ways;J.K.’s response probably isn’t the most mature or best though out (at least he did say something); the behavior of J.K. and USSF is probably much Matt is experiencing first hand (hope J.K. and Sunil are potty trained! Congrats on the new addition, Matt!)

    It is strange to see Klinsi’s obession with the post, and why he didn’t try to get a job in MLS, or anywhere, to improve his CV is beyond me. His continued interest, evidenced by this second extentened, fugly dance with the USSF, makes me think he is willing to possibly go for a third visit to Sunil and company after Bob leaves town. Klisnmann’s drive to be the coach of the United States is so strong that a first helping of bullsh*t from the USSF wasn’t enough; a second dance, one that came extremely close to him getting the job, might just push him after the post a third time.

    As an American, I appreciate Bob Bradley’s loyalty to our national team, his impeachable tenacity to coach our men despite the USSF’s poor operation, and his reserve to not strike back against those who are making his tenure difficult. The US fanbase has criminally underappreciated Bradley–this incident is provides another mark of valor for a silent warrior. Bob, you may not be the best person to coach the US for another cycle, but your honor, integrity, and grit are incredible. You are an undervalued, underappreciated American.

    What are the Vegas odds for the Special One to be coach of the US when the Cup comes home in 2022?


  7. Posted by Chad on 2010/09/23 at 7:14 AM

    Klinsmann defintely spoke out of school in doing that interview with Victorine. But the controvery he has created may be the beginning of change at the USSF IF!!! enough fans get involved. Also, anyone else see Frank Del Appa’s article in the Boston Globe on the Klinsmann debacle? There are still a lot of smart people who care about soccer in this country that want(ed) Klinsmann to coach the Nats.

    I gotta agree with Ben on Klinsmann as a reformer and would have preferred him as a coach. But the other guy, the one under the bus right now with the son who plays in the team, is so competitive, tough, and focused I really think he’s going to surprise us over the next 4 years. If we can see his weaknesses, don’t you think he has an inkling of what they are? Looking forward, the real problem I see is that Mexico seems to be in the ascendancy and the next Gold Cup, which we’ll all use to evaluate BB, is going to be very tough to win. Just like when he was the interim coach, BB has too much incentive to play experience over youth in order to get results when this time calls for some experimentation.


    • Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/09/23 at 8:37 AM

      I feel people have to be careful in calling Klinsmann a reformer. I am not saying that he did not have a massive input to the way Germany plays today, but the DFB have been spending a lot of money on youth development in each of the last 10 years. Similar situation in Spain and Netherlandsand they are reaping the benefits of the previous 10 or 15 years investment in young player development. Even giving Klinsmann the benefit of the doubt and saying he is a guru, comparing Germany’s young player development to the USA’s is very blinkered IMHO.

      Remember Project 2010? What’s going on with that? How many graduates from Bradenton are good enough to go on to the USMNT?

      It’s OK to say that you want to do this or do that, but if you haven’t got the tools…


  8. Posted by John on 2010/09/23 at 7:57 AM

    Er, something interesting I just found.


    Notably this line (which was probably taken out of context?)

    “You will have to wait until Saturday for the full hit but, among other things, Klinsmann talked about his time at Tottenham being the highlight of his career, defended the morals of the modern-day footballer, confirmed he was never approached about the Aston Villa job, batted away questions about Chelsea and Liverpool but did claim he thought the job of coaching the United States was his when Bob Bradley was suddenly reappointed.”

    if that is true… then… uh… wow.


  9. Posted by Tim on 2010/09/23 at 8:34 AM

    Well said Ben! Agree 100%


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 257 other followers

%d bloggers like this: