USSoccer

Maybe you don't realize that a prediction on an internet message board will have no bearing on how a team will react when lossing 100 games either. I prefer winning to retooling and cutting and slashing the current team. I guess other don't. I think we'd all prefer winning, which is why finishing at .500 isn't going to cut it. Not only is that, by definition, NOT winning, but it's ensuring that the current regime of excused mediocrity will be back, which in turn will lead to more not winning. I get the feeling you were not saying this in 2003 or 2004. Both winning seasons. You mean in 2003, when they had a totally healthy pitching staff, a much weaker division, and still only won by 1 game? Or in 2004 when an absolutely loaded team couldn't win 90 games and imploded thanks to mismanagement by the coaching staff? Or in 2005 when after a winter of doing nothing but demolishing Sosa's trade value a badly constructed team finished below .500 despite having one of the best 3-4 hitting tandems in the game? Over the last 3.5 seasons the current GM and coaching staff had 3 of the best pitchers in baseball, a rising star 3B, a breakout 1B, enough minor league talent to swing deals for impact players, and the best offensive C in the NL at one point or another and they have 1 playoff appearance and 0 90 win seasons to show for it. They are clearly not capable of putting together a successful team, or properly managing and coaching a team. Trotting out 2003 and 2004 just serves to highlight that this regime has done less with more than any group in the history of the Chicago Cubs. A rally in the 2nd half that gets them to the .500 mark doesn't get them any closer to winning a championship. All it does is serve to restore Baker's reputation, and ensures that the lack of progress made in 3.5 years will continue.

Maybe you don't realize that a prediction on an internet message board will have no bearing on how a team will react when lossing 100 games either. I prefer winning to retooling and cutting and slashing the current team. I guess other don't. I think we'd all prefer winning, which is why finishing at .500 isn't going to cut it. Not only is that, by definition, NOT winning, but it's ensuring that the current regime of excused mediocrity will be back, which in turn will lead to more not winning.

How about ARam for Abreu? So you'll trade a player who's much younger and in his prime for a guy who's older, and who's skills are in decline? That's a terrible idea.

It's a good thing that Hendry is only in charge of a baseball team. If he's waiting for a decline from 34-54 I think the earth is going to have to swallow the team for him to notice something is amiss. And FWIW, I see 93 losses.

I don't think it is totally absurd to think this could be a possiblilty as the fans BOO him.. If Hendry continues to make personnel decisions based on whether or not talk show hosts trash and fans boo players, then this organization will quickly become worse off that ever. Hendry needs to take a deep breath, realize that Aramis is a talented player stuck in a tough season, is a key building block, and not make a rash decision based on some goofs booing because he didn't sprint to 1B on a popup. I don't think anyone is saying to make a rash decision. I also think Aramis deserves to be criticized for not running out popups, getting thrown out at third in a close game, and several other examples of his lack of hustle. That is part of the problem, he needs to be held accountable for at least the things he can control, such as putting forth an honest amount of effort, and keeping his head in the game and recognizing what the situation in the game is. The Dusty approach is not working with him, whatever that might be. While some may be scapegoating Aramis I don't think it is a majority. I have seen others go the opposite way and not want to hold him accountable in any way for his lack of mental preparedness, and hustle, which is also no means a majority. To add, I wasn't talking about Aramis getting Booed, that quote is taken out of context. I was talking about ARod getting booed in New York. The problem I have is that it's not an Aramis-only issue on the team. I've seen just about every player have a mental lapse or not go all out at one point or another. Aramis is getting ripped because he struggled when Lee was out, and therefore everything he does is magnified. What really gets me, though, is that no noe would complain about having Miguel Cabrera on the Cubs, but he's a bigger slacker than Aramis ever was as far as consistent effort for efforts sake. Likewise, there was the Steve Stone trade proposal for Manny Ramirez, who also started the year slow, and if HE were in Chicago, sportswriters and idiot fans would be beside themselves whenever he only ran halfway to first on a grounder. Aramis's effort is sometimes lacking, but it's nowhere near as bad as other players in the league, and it's the LAST thing people should focus on right now. I am not trying to excuse it, because I'd rather he not loaf it, ever, but at the same time it's not even close to the big deal that Sullivan and others make it out to be. There are 22 other players on this team that I'd rip and want gone before Ramirez.

If he keeps getting irresponsibly scapegoated by fans and the media, he might.

I don't think it is totally absurd to think this could be a possiblilty as the fans BOO him.. If Hendry continues to make personnel decisions based on whether or not talk show hosts trash and fans boo players, then this organization will quickly become worse off that ever. Hendry needs to take a deep breath, realize that Aramis is a talented player stuck in a tough season, is a key building block, and not make a rash decision based on some goofs booing because he didn't sprint to 1B on a popup.

For one thing, instead of having a manager trying to win games to save his reputation, and as a result not playing players that are in the team's long term plans, you could actually have a guy who is willing to develop some of these players.

I refuse to give up on an entire half of the season. I would love to see Dusty and Hendry gone, but I would love it even more if the Cubs had a miraculous turn around and by some miracle got back into contention. If I thought there was any chance of that happening I'd be all for it. But it's not going to happen with the current mismanagement. Given how awful the NL is, I wouldn't doubt that Hendry thinks that they're one torrid hot streak away from getting back in the race.

Augie Ojeda. The average fan loved that guy. The average fan loved Doug Dacsenzo. The average fan loved Ozzie Guillen as a player. I could go on and on. Chicago has some syndrome where they can't wrap their minds around the fact that just because you're a scrappy hustler doesn't mean you're any good, and just because you don't treat every grounder to short like it's the 7th game of the WS doesn't mean you need to be run out of town because you don't "play the game the right way".

Hearing the Ramirez scapegoating and watching the Paul Sullivan's of the world hop on the "Ramirez is the problem" train makes me ill. This whole issue with his effort is being magnified about 1000x because the Cubs are 20 games under. Ramirez is a very good player who is going to be very productive for the next 4 years or so. Is it a bad thing that he doesn't run all out? Yeah, I'd rather he did, but it's not the reason we're losing, and it is not reason at all to dump him on the first taker. Has he had a rough season thus far? Yeah, and so has the rest of the offense. Losing Lee affected Ramirez in a big way. I'll echo what Goony said, though. The Cubs are the kind of knee jerk club that would put more stock in the last 3 months than in the previous 3 years. I swear, people in Chicago would worship mediocrity if it played like David Eckstein.

Depending on what Philly would want, I'd be all over dealing for Burrell. He's better than anything on the FA market this winter, and he would fill a need.

Swung by Joey Cora, eh? Nice. Watch him have a broken elbow.

Ohhhhhhh boy! Klinsi quit as Germany's coach today. http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=373764&cc=5901 Sunil Gulati had best be on the phone getting a deal done.

That doesn't make any sense to me. It was a friendly, and not a closed door one like we had with Angola in Germany. The rule says "appearance". It doesn't specify friendly, qualifier, tournament, or whatever. http://www.ussoccer.com/articles/viewArticle.jsp_280665.html So either he's gravely mistaken, or I guess there's a gray area that he can use, since it seems that he and others think there's a way for him to play for Ghana. The USSF and he would be absolutely insane to allow it to happen, though. Maybe that's another reason Gulati won't bring Arena back. He has been pretty caustic about Adu in the past, albeit mostly in response to idiotic questions from the foreign press.

I didn't know Materazzi was a cheap shot artist. That's great and all, but it still doesn't excuse what Zidane did. I don't care if Materazzi claimed he had sex with Zidane's sister before the match, there is no excuse for what Zidane did. None. So basically, you're OK with players uttering racial slurs or family insults on the pitch? Sounds great. Truff, when you're the captain of your team in OT of the final, you don't lose your composure like that, no matter what was said or done. You have to rise above. I think even Zidane would say he should have kept his head about it.

That was probably before the roster deadline for the World Cup, which wasn't all that long after the US v Canada game that Adu appeared in. Timing, in that case, may have had more to do with it than anything. EDIT: Adu appeared January 22nd. The roster deadline was late April or early May. Maybe Ghana offered after it became clear Adu would be left off the US roster, but after the Canada game?

http://wc2006.telegraph.co.uk/Document.aspx?id=4303F6BB-B5E7-4D1F-8AD4-43A250D36904 According to the FIFA rule I posted last page, Gulati is wrong. He appeared for the senior National Team against Canada. Friendlies count as caps in FIFA's eyes, so this appearance makes him ineligible to play for Ghana. At least that's how I'm reading it.

Found this explanation from the FA's website: It seems to indicate that Adu could have switched prior to the appearance against Canada.

What is capped? He appeared in a game. Games appeared in is measured in caps. I have no idea of the entomology of that word. Regardless, once that happened, he can pine all he wants to play for his native Ghana, but he's stuck with us. There's no system set up to deal with players who change citizenship? I *might* be mistaken but if you've appeared in a game for your country and it was a FIFA sanctioned game or friendly, you can't appear for another country, even if you do change citizenship. FIFA has that set up to prevent player recruiting. And IIRC it has to be for the national team. U-21 games don't count.

What is capped? He appeared in a game. Games appeared in is measured in caps. I have no idea of the entomology of that word. Regardless, once that happened, he can pine all he wants to play for his native Ghana, but he's stuck with us.

And will he play for the US? Screw Ghana. He is a US citizen is he not? He hasn't been forced to choose yet, although I don't see why he wouldn't choose the US. It's not like he was born and raised in Ghana and just came over here to play soccer. He was on PTI a couple weeks ago, and seemed honestly undecided. He (Adu) was capped for the US in March against Canada. From that moment on he cannot appear for another country in international play, so his mind is made up. He can have mixed feelings all he wants, but he's a US player.

Absolutely. You're absolutely correct. You have to cash in on those opportunities. Donovan in particular was abysmal on set pieces. If we're not going to develop a striker like Henry or Rooney, then we need to make sure we're set up to take advantage of free kicks.

Looking ahead to 2010, the US is going to need to overhaul it's roster. Of the defenders on the roster for the 2006 WC, only Onyewu is a lock to be back; he's only 23. Cherundolo and Bocanegra will both be 30 by the time 2010 is here. Conrad will be 32. That's a little long in the tooth. Cory Gibbs will be 30, but will he be healthy enough? Of our keepers, Howard will be 30, Hahnneman will be 38, and Keller 43. Our mids look the best: Dempsey and Convey will be 27. Donovan and Beasley will be 28. That's still young enough for all 4 to be playing at a high level. On the other hand, Mastroeni will be 33, and that's probably too old for a player of his role, which is too bad. The US will need a defensive mid to emerge. O'Brein and Olson will both be 33, and in O'Brien's case, he'll likely have no legs, so he won't be an option. Thankfully, Claudio Reyna already retired. Our forwards are almost as big of a worry as our defense. Of the strikers on the 2006 roster, only Eddie Johnson will still be in his prime. He'll be 26 in 2010. Brian Ching will be 31, and he isn't very good anyway. Wolff and McBride will both be gone. Guess which one we'll miss the most. So, basically, we can count on 7 players from the 2006 roster to still be in prime age by 2010. Howard, Gooch, Demspey, Convey, Beasley, Donovan and Johnson. 'Dolo and Bocanegra being 30 puts them as a question mark, although 'Dolo's skillset should hold him for another 4 years. So, basically, you have to fill 15 spots or so in the next 4 years. It gets worse, though. Of the players in the USMNT pool with meaningful experience that weren't on the WC roster, only a few are still going to be around at that level come 2010. Pat Noonan and Santino Quaranta will be 29 and 25 come 2010, so one of them will likely have to contribute. Taylor Twellman will be 30. He might be a candidate to replace McBride, but he'll have to elevate his game rapidly and prove to be reliable going into qualifying. Of these up and coming players-Zak Whitbread (D), Eddie Gaven (M), Michael Bradley (M), Jonathan Spector (D), Lee Nguyen (M), and Freddy Adu (M)-at least 3 have to emerge as regulars for the US to contend in South Africa. So yeah, the future of the USMNT is actually a little in flux. You have a bunch of guys on the way out (Reyna, Keller, McBride, Lewis, Hejduk, Pope, and Mastroeni) that played very key roles and have between them probably more than 400 caps. That's a lot of experience to replace. The next USMNT coach is going to have his hands full. He'll need to bring in a system that plays to our strengths, and be able to rapidly develop our younger players and get them ready for qualifying.

I'll echo that. I thought Tommy was nuts when he made that prediction. Zidane must have been drunk or had his brain otherwise affected by his injury. No matter what the Italian said, you don't lose your composure in OT like that, when you're the captain AND three of your best players (Henry, Viera and Ribery) have all been subbed out. What a terrible way for him to go out. I feel badly for Trezuguet. And Henry, for that matter. 2 straight World Cups where Henry has played with his hands wrapped around his neck. Congrats to Italy. Now half their theam can enjoy playing in Serie C or the Italian 3rd division or wherever they are getting relegated to now that the match fixing scandal is being prosecuted. There is a lesson to be learned here for the USSF and the USMNT. Italy won by having a lockdown defense and a standout keeper. Offensively, Toni and Totti were nonfactors for most of the entire tournament, but by playing lockdown defense and having a sweeper like Cannavaro, they were able to control games and counter effectively. Buffon was awesome the entire time, only giving up an own goal and a PK. If the US continues to struggle developing finishers and creative mids, they should at the least focus on developing a defensive system that can sustain them at high levels. What a great month of soccer, though. Too bad it's over.