Esquece Brasil: Resisting the temptation to see U.S. failure in Mexico’s success

Jun 4, 2012, 7:30 AM EDT

U.S. Men’s National Team fans better hope this doesn’t become an annual occurrence, because even though El Tri played 1,450 miles from Toronto on Sunday, they still found a way to upstage the United States.

It was the same last year, when Mexico stormed back in Pasadena to claim the Gold Cup. Two years ago, an experimental Mexico side routed a trial U.S. team in East Rutherford. Now the teams don’t even need to be in the same country for Mexico to trump the U.S.? This is getting ridiculous.

That’s part of the flotsam from the USMNT’s disappointment in Toronto, the 0-0 draw coming four hours after Mexico had defeated Brazil in Arlington. In front of 84,512 (a state record for soccer), Mexico got a fortunate opener when Giovanni dos Santos’s cross-turned-shot beat Rafael. Eleven minutes later, Juan gave away a penalty which, buried by Javier Hernandez, provided the final margin. An outstanding performance from El Tri’s defense kept Brazil off the scoresheet.

Given the difficulties the United States had against Brazil on Wednesday, the contrast couldn’t be more stark. Mexico, a team with an ascending young core, is moving on to bigger and better challenges. The United States, in transition, has its hands full against CONCACAFers struggling to qualify for World Cups.

That would be the most pro-Mexico way of looking at Sunday’s results, and unfortunately for USMNT backers, it’s probably not far from the truth. It would, however, be a mistake to assume the results mean the U.S. is somehow regressing. At least, it would be a mistake to assume the U.S. is regressing in a broad way (relative to countries other than Mexico).

U.S. (men’s) soccer culture often creates this ridiculous rhetorical gambit. It not only almost exclusively compares their national team to Mexico’s but also construes it as a zero-sum game. If the U.S. is ascending, Mexico must be struggling, and vice-versa. The countries can’t be improving at the same time because they define themselves in terms of each other. Right?

Of course not. As we’re reminded every time Mexico plays a Brazil or Argentina, El Tri have other teams in their world view. The United States is their biggest rival and a benchmark of sorts, but it’s not their only standard, a view that should serve them well as they prepare for 2014. With a collection of talent set to peak near-simultaneously, Mexico is positioning themselves to challenge for CONCACAF’s first World Cup semifinal spot since 1930. Were they merely content with besting the United States, Mexico would have little hope of meeting escalating expectations.

The U.S. can’t be expected to match those expectations. Anything can happen, but if USMNT fans want to compare the U.S.’s progress with what may prove to be an unprecedented time in Mexican soccer history, it will be hard to notice any progress Jurgen Klinsmann makes. The U.S. could make another World Cup quarterfinal, but if El Tri makes the final four, there’ll be naive detractors who dwell on the U.S. losing ground to Mexico.

As ludicrous as that sounds, that sentiment comes for the same place that spawns this weekend’s comparisons. Mexico did better in their friendly than the U.S. did in theirs, and if you feel the need to make a direct comparison, then yes, it doesn’t look good for the U.S. But that sure seems like a long way to go to make a comparison which, no matter how recently the teams played Brazil, is still dependent on friendlies contested with vastly different goals. The United States is still laying its foundation. Mexico, however, is testing out a near-finished product.

At some point, it might be easier to judge Mexico and the States on their own merits. It makes more sense than continuously comparing them to each other.

Skip to Comments (10)

« Newer Two important U.S. men talk about drawing with Canada

Older » ProSoccerTalk’s daily soccer re-set

More ProSoccerTalk

Back to Homepage

10 Comments (Feed for Comments)

arjanroghanchi - Jun 4, 2012 at 10:15 AM

“Mexico has lofty goals, ones the U.S. aren’t expected to match in Brazil. Anything can happen, but if USMNT fans want to compare the U.S.’s progress with what may prove to be an unprecedented time in Mexican soccer history, it will be hard to notice any progress Jurgen Klinsmann makes. The U.S. could make another World Cup quarterfinal, but if El Tri makes the final four, there’ll be naive detractors who say the U.S. is still losing ground to Mexico.”

Come on man, this is the big problem we have here. Why are you making excuses for the USMNT and by extension Klinsi, Gulati et al.

How can we possibly be expected to be take seriously globally if we can’t be dominant on our own continent?

If Mexico has an eye towards bigger fish and loftier goals than we do, than something is seriously wrong with the footballing culture here.

Your role as a soccer journo is to make sure we are holding these guys accountable. The USMNT is always in some kind of state of foundation building. Enough is enough.

Log in to Reply
- whordy - Jun 4, 2012 at 10:20 AM
  
  Because this is international soccer, champ. Changes happen on a timescale of years, even generations. We can’t frame success or failure in the same we we do our yearly club sports – were a big FA haul or a good draft can turn a team around.
  The National Team starts from the ground up, and in a lot of ways we will need to wait years for a noticeable change. To think ANY coach is capable of coming in here, waving his hands and starting a transformation within a year or two is a combination of both ignorance and arrogance Americans possess.
  
  Log in to Reply
  - arjanroghanchi - Jun 4, 2012 at 10:52 AM
    
    Your comment is a better example of the ignorance of American fans. The big rub against Bradley was that he had taken the team pretty far but lacked the edge to climb the next rung competitively.
    
    Klinsi was supposed to come in, change the attitude and tactics, make more inspired selections and create a more entertaining side; while also re-organizing the pyramid gradually (addressing youth team structure etc.)
    
    We have a vibrant soccer culture here, we have talented athletes, we have people playing in leagues all over the world.
    
    The problem here is that we are stuck in an infinite loop, a timescale that extends into perpetuity with no good milestones.
    
    This is the richest country in the world, with a massive and diverse population capable of creating highly talented soccer players.
    
    Your understanding of the game and how it is played on the international stage must not be very good, which is probably why you resorted to sarcasm (“champ”) and insult (ignorance and arrogance”).
    
    As long as the status quo is accepted, there won’t be any progress.
    
    When France crapped out of WC2010, Thierry Henry had to report to the President’s office to explain the Team’s infantile display.
    
    I am not suggesting Landycakes call the White House, but it is time for US fans and soccer media alike to start demanding a much higher level of competition.
- whordy - Jun 4, 2012 at 11:16 AM
  
  Exactly what is your complaint here? The whole reason Klinsmann wasn’t hired earlier was BECAUSE he wanted to change the status quo. There are changes going on, it is just at the international level they are hard to see after less than a year.
  
  And you also vastly overrated American soccer. 1) We have a soccer culture, but it is still at a grassroots level. When was the last time ESPN showed highlights of a MLS game? You can’t even call into a local sports talk radio station to talk soccer without getting laughed at. And 2) We can count on one hand (or two if you are picky) the number of Americans playing in the top leagues in the world. That is not good enough. We have talent, but no where near the amount needed to justify your high expectations.
  
  Log in to Reply
  - arjanroghanchi - Jun 4, 2012 at 1:32 PM
    
    Before I continue this with you, can you please confirm that you are an American soccer fan?
    
    I was at a town fair in a very upper middle class area with mostly white people. I remarked to my wife that I saw so many people wearing Man U, Barcelona, Milan and MLS shirts…but not a single Baseball, Basketball or Hockey shirt.
  - Southern Philly - Jun 4, 2012 at 4:31 PM
    
    ESPN highlights and sports talk radio are awful measuring sticks. By that standard hockey is still at a grassroots level.
- Richard Farley - Jun 4, 2012 at 1:24 PM
  
  “How can we possibly be expected to be take seriously globally if we can’t be dominant on our own continent?”
  
  By this measure, there could only be six serious soccer nations at any given time.
  
  “Your role as a soccer journo is to make sure we are holding these guys accountable.”
  
  It’s interesting, then, that this has never come up in a job interview. ‘You’re going to hold Jurgen and Sunil’s feet to the fire’ has never been on a job description.
  
  I’m more concerned with painting accurate pictures and providing viewpoints that further the dialog.
  
  “The USMNT is always in some kind of state of foundation building.”
  
  The Bob Bradley era as never truly described in this manner.
  
  Log in to Reply
  - arjanroghanchi - Jun 4, 2012 at 1:48 PM
    
    “How can we possibly be expected to be take seriously globally if we can’t be dominant on our own continent?”
    
    By this measure, there could only be six serious soccer nations at any given time.
    ** I should have stressed that we should strive to dominate this continent, not that continental domination should be the goal of all countries around the globe. Europe and South America are probably not comparable to the CONCACAF nations….
    
    “Your role as a soccer journo is to make sure we are holding these guys accountable.”
    
    It’s interesting, then, that this has never come up in a job interview. ‘You’re going to hold Jurgen and Sunil’s feet to the fire’ has never been on a job description.
    
    I’m more concerned with painting accurate pictures and providing viewpoints that future the dialog.
    **How would you define painting an accurate picture? I would think that falls under the auspices of holding people accountable for their actions and the results they get. By presenting a realistic account of what is happening, you are preventing the subject from being able to claim otherwise.
    
    “The USMNT is always in some kind of state of foundation building.”
    
    Nobody saw the Bob Bradley era as never truly described in this manner.
    **I’m not sure what you mean by this. I think there were several times over the course of his tenure when the idea that a new leaf was being turned, a new era dawning, a new foundation built was prevalent.”
slxc - Jun 4, 2012 at 11:48 AM

If the U.S. works with patience they will achieve, remember that the U.S. soccer is still young compared to other countries, that their leagues are between 50.70 and 100 years of existence, it is true that the years have changed and before the technology can reach more corners of the country, a situation that previously was not so, U.Ssoccer and MLS needs to continue working hard, I know they will achieve, I’d rather see the United States as the Giant CONCACAF to Mexico, but I still think it is more likely to win the world Cup USA rather than Mexico.

Log in to Reply
schmutzdeck - Jun 6, 2012 at 1:25 PM

“arjanroghanchi – How would you define painting an accurate picture? I would think that falls under the auspices of holding people accountable for their actions and the results they get. By presenting a realistic account of what is happening, you are preventing the subject from being able to claim otherwise. “

Mr. hanchi,

You paint with a very broad brush.

The so-called soccer journalist community in this country spans a wide range of people. It ranges from full time professional sports writers to bloggers who are basically enthusiastic fans with credentials that may be impossible to verify and may well be non-existent.

I did not research Mr. Farley’s credentials preferring to go by whether what he writes makes sense. As far as I can tell Mr. Farley makes perfect sense.

You seem angry because he does not subscribe to your point of view or your personal agenda.

Forgive me but it is not your place to set the agenda for Mr. Farley or any of his ilk, unless you are doing the hiring. If you do not like his work, move on. No one is forcing you to read it. Not everyone subscribes to your views on the topic. Why should Mr. Farley campaign on your behalf?

What I notice about USMNT fans is the extreme polarization of views, a reflection of current political realities no doubt.

“Your understanding of the game and how it is played on the international stage must not be very good, which is probably why you resorted to sarcasm (“champ”) and insult (ignorance and arrogance”).”

Since this person does not agree with you it seems you believe he must be treated poorly and you feel compelled to question his knowledge on the topic. It seems that when your ability to make a reasoned argument fails you, you turn to insults. This is sadly typical of many soccer boards.

“As long as the status quo is accepted, there won’t be any progress.
Klinsi was supposed to come in, change the attitude and tactics, make more inspired selections and create a more entertaining side; while also re-organizing the pyramid gradually (addressing youth team structure etc.)”

It has been a little less than a year since the USSF fired Bradley and replaced him with JK.
Whatever the degree, this is NOT an acceptance of the status quo. Did you expect instantaneous changes in less than a year? To do seems unrealistic.

“We have a vibrant soccer culture here, we have talented athletes, we have people playing in leagues all over the world.”

All those things and a dollar gets you one mega millions ticket. Many countries have these things and their national teams are not even as competitive as the USMNT.

“The problem here is that we are stuck in an infinite loop, a timescale that extends into perpetuity with no good milestones.”

I read that as meaning you think we are not making progress due to a lack of focus. Again, these things take time, usually more than ten months.

“This is the richest country in the world, with a massive and diverse population capable of creating highly talented soccer players.”

That does not guarantee success. Just because you CAN does not mean you WILL. At the height of its powers, the Soviet Union was never able to put together a dominant national team. How far away is China from doing that? The oil rich Arab countries certainly have the money and the desire but how good are those teams? Not that long ago Scotland was a legitimate big time soccer nation, with terrific clubs teams, a great World Cup contending national team and producing fine players at a rate comparable to what you now see from countries like Holland or France.

Today they are just awful at pretty much all levels. I’m not sure I understand all the reasons for the decline but shows you that being a major soccer power not that easy to achieve or maintain.

At the end of the day, JK has the same problem, though to a lesser extent, that Bradley did. There just are not enough US eligible players of the necessary quality.

The highest possible level today is the Champions League. We have one player, Jones, who is a regular for a Champions league team, Schalke. And with all due respect, I would not call them a legitimate contender. We have a number of others who might soon be on such clubs or could play for them but contrast that to the big boy teams that have lineups full of such players. Until that improves, getting as far as a World Cup semifinal, while not impossible, will remain an unlikely feat for the USMNT.

Log in to Reply