But, something changed around the turn of the century.  The Women’s game in the US became a game dominated by athleticism, and strength.  Conditioning was emphasized over technique.  And, more importantly, the success of the Women’s national team gave way to an exponential increase in the number of girls playing the game.  This resulted in more areas of the country having girls-specific teams, leagues and tournaments.  Gone were the players who grew up playing with and learning from playing with the boys.  With these girls’ leagues came the concept that the girls had to be coached differently.  That the girls had different physical and psychological needs that had to be addressed as opposed to the boys.  I can recall a colleague of mine who coached girls telling me that the way I trained my boy’s team would not yield the same success with his girl’s team.  He then began to mention the differences between the girls and the boys in terms of physical make up, psychological profiles, sociological stages of development.  And, while I was well aware of Piaget’s stages of development, I was also aware that Piaget primarily studied  his own children to define these stages.  How could anyone accept such an approach as an unbiased and scientific process?  From my perspective the game is the game whether it’s played by men or women.  The ball still needs to be manipulated masterfully.  A player still needs to receive it well, dribble it well and strike it well.  A poor touch is a poor touch whether you’re a man or a woman.  And, I think that is the point that is missing in all of this.

I finally had a chance to watch the opening round game for the US Women against the North Koreans.  They rebounded from a very shaky first half to put away the North Koreans in the 2nd half and win 2-0.  And, while I listened to the commentary of the match I couldn’t help but sense that the US media is trying to put as positive a spin on their performance as possible.  After all, they need to make sure they keep people interested in watching.  Gotta make the advertisers happy don’t we?  But, what I saw in the game were several key points that should have every US fan concerned about this current crop of US players.

First we have to consider the back drop.  In the last 18 months the Women’s national team has had a bad run of results with losses to Sweden, England, Mexico and Norway.  The final game before heading out to Germany was a very uninspiring 1-0 victory over Mexico.  And, what was evident in that game was the simple fact that the US Women had no ideas with regards to combination play in the final third.  The number of legitimate chances created were actually few, and the ability for them to finish off a movement was even less convincing.  So there I was watching this game and couldn’t help but notice that the ability for a player to consistently deliver a ball with accuracy was lacking.  The ability for a player to adequately receive a ball was lacking.  Attacking 1v1 on the flanks was relatively nonexistent.  We are supposed to have these dynamic players like Heather O’Reilly who have pace and can run at defenders.  The problem is that players like O’Reilly forget that you actually have to take the ball with you.  This is a game in which 1st touch is everything and this team fails to display competency in that department.

I will  agree that Greg Ryan pretty much single-handedly destroyed everything that Anson Dorrance and Tony DiCicco established with this program.  Furthermore, I like what Pia Sundhage is trying to do.  She is trying to make these players actually play the game with the ball at their feet: looking to link up all over the field, as opposed to the rockem-sockem robots style of play ushered in by Ryan and his staff in the past.  But, I’m afraid that is the women’s game in the states today.  Go out to watch club soccer on the girl’s side and you will see that it is the teams with the biggest, strongest, and most powerful girls that are winning the games.  And, if you’re looking for teams with technique and tactical savvy they are not out there.  These are the players that make up the pool for Pia Sundhage and the US Women’s national team staff.  It’s no wonder that Pia has been quoted as saying that the talented players simply aren’t there.  Even Anson Dorrance has said that the women’s game is flawed in that it doesn’t look to the men’s game as the gold standard.  He has gone on to say that the women players of this generation are simply not technical enough compared to the players in the 80′s and 90′s.

So what I saw in the North Korean game was the same stuff I saw in the games leading up to the World Cup.  The one glaring positive from this first game of group play was the play of Lauren Cheney.  Goal aside, her ability to possess the ball, break defenders down in the middle 1/3 and find attackers in the final 1/3 with pin-point passing is a huge plus for the squad and something that they have been lacking in the last several years.  Just how long she stays out wide is an entertaining question.  She was clearly better than either Carli Lloyd or Shannon Box and if I’m Sundhage, I’m wondering if and when Lloyd sits down and Cheney moves to the middle.

The more important question remains, however: how will the US deal with a much more superior technical side like the Brasilians or the Germans?  An answer might be provided when they take on the Swedes later in group play.  While the Swedes are nowhere near the technical level of the Brasilians or the Germans, they are much more organized and athletic than the North Koreans or the Colombians and should present the US with a formidable challenge.  Are the US Women our hope for glory in international soccer?  Based on what I have seen to date, I would have to say no.  Still, it will be interesting to see if they can prove me wrong.

Fast forward to present and what we see is that we as a nation have progressed on the world stage.  Consistent World Cup qualification, Gold Cup Finals, a Confederations Cup run that resulted in a runners-up finish to Brasil.  Throughout the course of the last 12 years we’ve seen some pretty remarkable victories for the USMNT against England, Brasil, and Spain.  However, is the progression significant enough to meet the expectations that US Soccer set following the U17′s performance at the 1999 Youth World Cup?  If you look at the USMNT’s performances at this year’s Gold Cup, I think that answer is no.  Forget the Mexico game.  Simply put, Mexico is better than us.  We have to look at the Panama games and the Guadeloupe fiasco to see that we are by no means a power within CONCACAF let alone the rest of the World.  While we show flashes of brilliance for brief spells in games, we also see a level of immaturity in our play that existed in 1999.  And, I would argue that we have not discovered a way that will truly address this issue of naivety in American soccer.

One only need to look at the play of the current U17′s and ask where are the creative players?  Other than Alfred Koroma, who is coming up that can actually run at a defense and either create for himself or a teammate?  I see a midfield that lacks the technical foundation and tactical arsenal to solve problems in the final 1/3.  I see a strike force that is clueless as to how to get into proper channels to create and finish scoring chances.  I see wide players that lack the ability to provide consistent, quality service from the flanks.  And, I see backs who fail to provide stability in possession, and fail to work together to provide proper pressure, balance and coverage.  In fact, these are the same traits that our senior team possesses.  We have average players who are trying to take on monumental tasks.  And, frankly that’s not good enough.  From the recent U17 stocks in the last 6 years, can you name any players who have gone on to play professionally?  How many have gone on to represent the US Men’s national team?

The U17s have advanced into the next round in Mexico, but they face the Germans who seem to be doing okay with 3 wins out of 3 and a goal differential of +10.  Regardless, the time has come for US Soccer to admit that the U17 residency program is a bust that needs to be scrapped. Surely the resources wasted on this program could be put to better use.  Surely something so extensive and so elaborate was not designed to create a product that is so trite and commonplace.  Surely this was not the intended product when they began this journey back in 1999.  But, then again we seem to be okay with Bob Bradley running the show, so I could be wrong.

One of the memorable moments was when we lost to Chicago Sockers in the Semi-Final 1-0. After giving up an early goal on a set piece (a goal in which the goal scorer was in an offsides position no less) we had them under constant pressure and just didn’t have luck on our side. Opportunities that we normally put away went begging and we couldn’t equalize. After the game, I handed out the medals to the guys and they were visibly upset. They felt that they should have won that game and rightly so, but that’s the way the things go. It was as if they didn’t want the consolation medals. Given that we had driven 8 hours to Des Moines, Ia., I felt the need to bring home something. But, I couldn’t help but feel a tremendous amount of pride as my players looked at the medals with dissatisfaction.

Several years ago someone asked me why I coach. I told them because I want to be around players who want to maximize their potential; players who want to be successful and have the drive and determination to get it done. Teaching the game to someone who is indifferent to the process is a waste of time. But, teaching the game to someone who truly has a passion for it is where it’s at.

So to all my Dynamo 93 Reds out there, I want to say “Thank You” for being such a great team. As you move forward I wish you the best in whatever your endeavors may be.

Donovan demonstrated a level of maturity that I did not witness in his previous stints overseas.  His first touch, his pace, his willingness to link up with others and his desire to run at defenders in the wide right role were great traits that he demonstrated.  Honestly it was much more than I expected from someone who hasn’t played a competitive match in over 6 weeks.  Truly, I think that the Premier League is a good fit for him, and Everton in particular is the place for him.  One can only wonder what his form will be in March when it is time to return to the LA Galaxy.

No one can deny that his performance at the recent Confederations’ Cup was stellar.  However, we would be short-sided in our evaluation of him as a player if we did not look at his inability to demonstrate his talent at the highest level on a consistent basis.  Now he has another opportunity to put his talents on display, and what better place than Everton FC.  They are a squad that based on Premier League standards are a small squad with limited finances.  They have various injuries and they have an attacking player, in Jo, who has been suspended indefinitely by David Moyes for disciplinary reasons.  He has everything in its right place, so to speak, and if he fails this go round I think it is safe to say that he may never find club success outside of the continental US. Whether he plays well enough to silence his many critics remains to be seen.  Personally, as a fan of the game, I hope that he has success he deserves.