George Dohrmann - Switching Fields: Inside the Fight to Remake Mens Soccer in the United States

On October 10, 2017, the United States Mens National Team (USMNT) played the combined national team of Trinidad and Tobago in Couva, Trinidad. It was the final game of World Cup qualifying, and the U.S. needed only a tie to earn a spot in the 2018 World Cup in Russia.

It had been a rocky campaign for the U.S. men, marked by the dismissal of bombastic coach Jrgen Klinsmann as the team struggled to qualify, and the return of veteran Major League Soccer (MLS) and USMNT coach Bruce Arena to replace him. The U.S. was clearly a team in transition, relying on a generation of successful but older players (among them Tim Howard, Clint Dempsey, Michael Bradley, and Matt Besler). But it had won, 40, against Panama four days earliera resounding performance against a team more talented than Trinidad and Tobagowhich had already been eliminated from World Cup contention.

Going into the game, Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) ranked the USMNT 28th in the world, one spot above the powerhouse team of the Netherlands. Trinidad and Tobago was ranked 99th. The U.S. boasted a population of over 330 million people from which to draw players, and its ascending pro league, Major League Soccer, was among the top dozen leagues in the world at the time. The T&T squad, in contrast, was pulled from a pool of 1.3 million peopleabout the size of Dallasand one list ranked its Pro League behind more than 130 others.

The U.S. had also qualified for every World Cup since 1990. Its regionCONCACAF, the Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Footballis far less competitive than Europe or South America, where in every cycle a few good teams miss out on the World Cup. Three teams from CONCACAF would qualify for the 2018 event in Russia, and a fourth could as well, via an inter-confederation playoff. The U.S. didnt have to finish ahead of Mexico, its rival and the regions most consistent performer; it just had to finish in the top four.

For people who follow soccer, what occurred on a soggy field at Ato Boldon Stadium in Couva was incomprehensible. An own goal by U.S. defender Omar Gonzlez in the 17th minute. A shot in the 37th minute from about thirty-five yards out that a goalkeeper with Tim Howards experience and ability should have saved. Howard blundering a shot from even farther in the 44th minute that nearly gifted T&T a third goal. Christian Pulisic, who had turned nineteen only a month earlier, scored in the 47th minute to draw the U.S. to within one, 21, but his goal would be the only one of the day for the Americans. Other than Pulisic, the team had played with a striking lack of energy and urgency. After the final whistle, several U.S. players just stood in shock. Pulisic crouched down, pulled his jersey over his face, and began to cry, the indelible image from the worst loss in USMNT history.

For the first time in thirty years, the U.S. would miss the World Cup.

In the aftermath, discussions of the defeat tended to follow one of two tracks. One focused on what had happened on the field in Couva, and what might have been done differently. Arena had gone with the same attack-minded team that had defeated Panama days earlier. Should he have put fresher legs on the field and perhaps played more defensively? Why start Gonzlez over Geoff Cameron, a starter in Englands Premier League at the time? Most sports media and fans circled around those traditional what-ifs.

The second track took a wider view. At the time of the Couva disaster, there were about seven million kids between the ages of six and seventeen playing soccer in the United States. Yet much, much smaller countries, with millions fewer kids playing the game, were considerably better at cultivating talent. How is it that, say, Uruguay (with a total population of 3.4 million) could produce world-class playersfrom Luis Surez and Edinson Cavani to Ronald Arajo and Federico Valverdebut U.S. fans were reduced to debating whether Omar Gonzlez or Geoff Cameron was a better national team starter? To focus on lineup choices or tactics in one game was to miss that the system was failing, rendering a country that should be a shark into a minnow.

And the USMNT has long been a minnow, even if the sports power brokers in America and its most devoted fans have resisted acknowledging that fact.

After the loss at Couva, I dug up a study commissioned by the leaders of the United States Soccer Federation nearly twenty years earlier. Project 2010, as it was called, was meant to outline what it would take for the U.S. men to join the ranks of Brazil, Germany, Italy, and other global soccer powers by 2010. The cover page of the study included a photo of Neil Armstrong from the 1969 lunar landing, but with a World Cup trophy in his right hand, under the words we can fly . Throughout history, Americans have many times demonstrated a remarkable ability to accomplish extraordinary goals, read the introduction. While Americans do not own a monopoly on inventiveness or problem solving, one fact sets them apart from the rest of the world. Americas collective resources and creativity are the greatest on earth.

The 113-page report was written by Carlos Queiroz, who coached Portugals national team and the professional club Sporting CP in his native country and Real Madrid in Spain. He had experience at the sports highest level, and he had also coached the New York/New Jersey MetroStars in Major League Soccer, so he was familiar with the United States and spoke English and Spanish. Queiroz and his longtime assistant coach, Dan Gaspar, traveled the country talking with the sports stakeholders: federation officials, national team coaches, MLS coaches, youth and college coaches. The goal of the study was to review all levels of soccer in the United States, compare it to other successful soccer countries in the world and chart a course for the future of soccer in the United States, Queiroz wrote.

Once you get past the sanguine cover image of the moon landing, it is hard to view Project 2010 as anything other than a total takedown of Americas development system for male players. One page of the completed study features words in massive white type against a black background reading: Project 2010 is not about the business of soccer. Project 2010 is about the business of winning. It was a clear nod to the fact that so many of the sports leaders in the U.S. have long acted out of self-interest, protecting their income streams at the expense of what is good for young players and the broader development system.