Is qualifying for the World Cup enough?

The next question for the US team, is qualifying for the World Cup enough?

In England it’s expected that they will be playing deep into the tournament, making it to the last 8 and loosing on penalties is typically enough to keep the media at bay. Any worse than that and it’s a total failure, heads should roll and so on. Make it to the semi finals and years of sins will be forgiven (especially if they are drawn against the Germans) and the jingoistic press splash Churchill quotes across the sports headlines.

England is a team that supporters expect to beat anyone we play. Fans get some games are more difficult than others, but the expectation is clear. The US needs to have the same, they expect to beat Grenada and Panama, is that enough?

I was doing some reading last week and came across “Project 2010″. Just before the World Cup in 1998 (and before the failure of the US team to beat Iran) the US Soccer Federation unveiled “Project 2010″. A 12 year, $50 million project to pave the way for the US to win the World Cup in 2010, bizarrely I could find no mention of “Project 2010″ anywhere on the USSF site today.

I think the US should qualify for the finals every time. Looking at CONCACAF it should be US, Mexico (the only real rival for the US team in the confederation) plus one or two of whichever of the other Central American or Caribbean teams are having a good run of form. Four years ago it was Costa Rica and Trinidad and Tobago, this time it’s Honduras and Costa Rica looking like the best of the rest.

I get that me saying the “US should qualify… every time” is a bold statement, but with the resources they have to pull from and the opposition in CONCACAF I believe that should be a given. 16 years ago it was different and qualification was not a sure thing, and now it’s expected and that’s progress, but is that enough?

When “Project 2010″ was started consistent qualification was about where the US team was at, but today there seems little ambition beyond that. The US has a few players that are consistently playing their club football in Europe, but that one true world class player has yet to emerge from the very structured US Youth system.

While I think Landon Donovan is a good player whose direct style is very at home in the MLS, he is not world class and ongoing talk of Donovan’s ”potential” is ludicrous. Clubs don’t invest time to develop 27 year olds, that’s the prime of their career.

One of the few remnants from “Project 2010″ is the “Generation Adidas” program. Generation Adidas is a venture between MLS and USSF and has been very successful in identifying and helping younger players prepare for playing professionally. The first generation of players coming though the revamped system (led by Beasley and Donovan) made it to the last 8 in the 2002 World Cup, before loosing out to a good German side. This showed a lot of progress in a just 8 years, from happy to be there, to giving an established side a good run in the knock out phase.

So with all of this in place and a couple of generations of players coming through the revamped system, is just qualifying for the World cup every four years enough? If fans expect more than just being there, then the question becomes why does the US struggle against well drilled sides?

Clearly on the day the US can beat anyone, but the flip side of this, they can be beaten by anyone on their day. And that’s a problem.

The MLS produces some decent players, but not world beaters. Most of the US players in Europe are not playing week-in, week-out for their clubs. Unfortunately the US national side plays its competitive games within CONCACAF, a conference not nearly as competitive as Europe or South America. There is nothing like competitive games that mean something, against quality opposition to get a team to raise its game.

They US system clearly has money, but seems short on top level coaching (similar to England a few years ago) and is somehow falling short on producing players capable of standing against the best the world.

In England after the failure of Glen Hoddle and Kevin Keegan the FA (who run the England team) had to completely rethink the way the national team was put together. Clearly there was no English coach qualified to manage the side so the FA did the unthinkable and looked abroad for someone who had proven his ability at the very highest level. First was Erikson who made success of the senior side all important. Currently Capello is in charge and while he’s not English, maybe the best man for the job, and is perfect in World Cup qualifying to date.

The FA made the hard decision and look outside England for a manager was a seismic policy change from one of the most change adverse organisations. The US may need to do the same thing by getting the best coach available, ignoring the Gold Cup and playing more meaningful games against better sides.

The won-loss record may temporarily head south, the FIFA ranking may fall a little, but it would be worth it in the long term in an attempt to belatedly fulfill the idea behind ”Project 2010″.