Is U.S. Still Technically Behind Mexico?

The readers are split on what should be taken from the recent friendly against Mexico with half saying the Red, White and Blue should have done better and the other half telling Snowden to hold back as we did not lose and were evaluating new players.

By Richard Snowden

Greg F. wrote:

Richard Snowden, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. How could you say that a team that never trailed and was only scored on from poor marking on set pieces (from a third string defender trying to get experience at national team level) was lucky to escape with a tie.

Even when the US plays poorly starting 4 dismal players Convey, Clark, Corrales, and Moor (the left side of the field and both outside backs) how many goals did the skillful forwards or even midfielders of Mexico put in? Jonny Magallón is a defender that with Chivas de Guadalajara. HE is no more skilled than any of us players and he put in both goals because Drew Moor is terrible and will never play again.

Mexico was lucky to escape with a tie and if Bradley would have pulled the outside backs rather than Dempsey there would have been a different outcome. Oh and Bradley was dead on. He was referring to the center midfielders and defense relieving the pressure of Mexico, namely his son who tried to dribble in the middle too much and got it stolen several times. Pretty much the only part of that uninspired rant worth listening to was that Donovan played bad but regardless he had an assist. Did you even watch the game??

Can anyone say 8-0-2 in 8 years?

Snowden Says:

How nice – I get the chance to put my vow to treat others with respect even when they don't necessarily deserve it into practice right off the bat this year!

Yeah, Greg, I watched the game. So did plenty of other people, and you're the only one among the many I've had contact with so far who actually claims the Yanks outplayed Mexico. As far as I could tell, pretty much every other pundit out there said a lot of the same things I did as well. But hey, I suppose none of those folks have any idea what they're talking about, either, right?

I find it difficult to understand how anyone could make claims like yours when Mexico clearly dominated the game in most significant respects, but it's a free country and you're entitled to your opinion. As for your personal abuse, frankly I feel sorry for you, given that you seem to feel it necessary to put others down in order to feel better about yourself. 

Can anyone say three and out at the 2006 World Cup? How about miraculous upset in another game required to help the Yanks survive the first round at Japan/Korea 2002? Bottom line: Until we start developing players with top-class technical skills, we'll continue to languish in the also-rans column in world soccer.    

R. Tan of Las Vegas, Nev., wrote:

I completely AGREE with Snowden's assessment of the US v Mexico game.

US Players' were abysmal – being outplayed just about in every position.

What is Bradley thinking? Players like Convey, Moore [sic] and even Donovan do NOT belong on the field whatsoever – PULL them out when you see that they're Outclassed!!!

There are plenty of younger players that need the experience to play against quality opponents.

I think Bradley should be replaced sooner than later – his emphasis on fielding players and not adjusting in a timely manner is just not acceptable.

Snowden Says:

You're very kind, R. However, I'm afraid I cannot agree with the notion that Bob Bradley should be replaced. I think Bradley is doing a fine job on the whole, especially where blooding the younger talent is concerned. I'll gladly let him slide on the odd flop (e.g., Drew Moor) given his overall success at bringing along new faces; it's the bizarre experiment with an aging guy like Ramiro Corrales that I find disconcerting.

Nevertheless, I'd like to think that our national team is heading in the right direction under Bradley, and I'm pretty comfortable with what I'm seeing so far. To be sure, he's doing pretty well with the talent currently at his disposal. It's the youth/developmental levels in this country that really need an overhaul, and a major one at that.

Robert of Raleigh, N.C., wrote:

All of what Snowden says might be true, but the bottom line is the result, and so far, the US has Mexico's number when playing in the USA. I don't really care if Mexico has the ball for 89 minutes – if the US has the ball for 1 minute, scores and wins 1-0 … THAT'S ALL THAT COUNTS!

Snowden Says:

I like it just as much as you do when the Yanks win, Robert, but focusing strictly on results is the kind of myopia that got us into this mess in the first place. Are results important? Sure, but not half as important as setting the stage for future successes.

In creating a future world champion, the French set up a developmental system that rewarded technical staff based on the number of their players who made it to the pros rather than wins or losses. In America, it's the exact opposite; most youth coaches are under immense pressure to get results at all times. The difference is obvious: The French develop gifted prodigies, and we develop one-dimensional athletes.

After all, at youth levels, it's the big, strong kids who are most likely to deliver quick results; as such, our system typically develops prospects who are long on athleticism and short on skill. In places like France, they watch kids carefully and bring along the ones who show technical potential instead. One need only compare France's player pool to ours to see the end results of the two different approaches to player development.

So, results are not always the most important thing. They're nice, but it is teams that dominate play that get results most of the time; therefore, developing dominant players (i.e., players with world-class skills) should be our priority, not playing to our existing strengths (i.e., ugly) and hoping to nick a win. That mentality is so 20 years ago!

Victor V. wrote:

I did not like at all how the US played last night!! We didn’t have the ball at all, I couldn’t figure out if Landon Donovan was playing or not because he never got the ball. It seemed like he was afraid. The only one who seemed that wanted to play was Dempsey, I don’t know why in the world bob Bradley took him out!!! I was so pissed.  He should have subbed Donovan out instead of Dempsey. I don’t know why Corrales and moor started and played the whole game!!! Benny Feilhaber should have been on the starting eleven. I think Adu and Edu should have gone in a little earlier and Tim Howard had an excellent game. If it wasn’t for him, we would of lost very very bad.

Snowden Says:

Sounds like you identified several of the same problems I did, Victor. Possession was certainly a serious problem area, and while part of that can probably be put down to several players being relatively new to each other, a lot of it derived from players' discomfort on the ball and under pressure.

If we can start developing players with plenty of technical skill, we won't have such problems in the future. As I noted in the column, the Mexican players rarely seemed harried or ruffled because they've been raised to handle it. American players have certainly improved, but they're still mistake-prone under pressure due to their technical deficits. If we can address that end of things, it'll make a world of difference.

Juke of West Mifflin, Pa., wrote:

BRAVO, Rich Snowdens recent article nails it. Instead of looking at developing players from the point of comfort on the ball, decision-making, and field vision as the most important raw criteria for development, it's the same old view, the kid is not big enough. Case in point, the ODP program never selected Edgar Castillo, Mexican American born in NM, for any selection teams because he was not big enough and his attitude was questionable. Hark, today this 19 year old is playing on a first division Mexian squad and is a full member of the Mexican National Team. Too small indeed. Here is a bonifide player who is American born and never given a look in American soccer circles. IMO, there are many more Castillos in American soccer. The question is whether size will preculde them from being given a chance to reach the next levels.

Snowden Says:

Nice to hear from you again, Juke. You have chosen an excellent example in Edgar Castillo, a native-born American who has nailed down the number one left-back spot at Santos Laguna and earned some calls from Hugo Sanchez in the process. He's a prime example of the sort of player we're letting slip away far too often in this country – a technically gifted smaller prospect who gets overlooked by our youth coaches.

Given the problems we're having filling the left-back position, it goes without saying that we really can't afford to let such talent slip away. If you watch Castillo play for Santos, he's a skillful kid who's quick and reads the game well. Not to say Jonny Bornstein and Heath Pearce are poor players (far from it), but neither of them has Castillo's skill set. I for one certainly regret that the U.S. national team didn't give him a shot. 

We've got a few other players down in Mexico – including Castillo's younger brother Noel and Sonny Guadarrama at Santos, and Michael Orozco at San Luis – who fall into the same category. It is precisely these types of players that we must hang onto in order to help make the U.S. game better. I'm all for them plying their trade in Mexico, but we need to be integrating them into our national team setup.

U.S. Soccer president Sunil Gulati has said that he wants to start identifying more young Latinos and bring them through the ranks, but so far we're still pretty lax in that department. Here's hoping that the increasing Hispanic representation in key roles, like former Colombian World Cup player Wilmer Cabrera taking the reins with the U.S. U-17s, will make a positive difference on this front.

As always, thanks to everyone for their feedback. Until the next time, best wishes to everyone and take care!