World Cup Power Rankings: Evaluating the Draw

Posted on by RJ Allen

Last week I divided the World Cup competitors into five tiers. Now that we have the full draw, it’s worth taking a look to see how everyone is situated. Did anyone’s road get easier? Harder? Is there a ‘group of death’? 

For the most part, the answer to all the questions is ‘no.’ Given a strict seeding system, the pots were pretty evenly balanced. That said, some of the groups do look a bit more interesting, and maybe a bit tougher, than others. So let’s dig in.

Group A: France (tier 1), Norway (tier 3), South Korea (tier 3), Nigeria (tier 4)

This is probably the toughest group from top to bottom. Nigeria was one of the strongest teams in Pot 4, and the same is true of South Korea in Pot 3. Which means all four teams have a legitimate chance of advancing. That said, the overall strength of the group is probably good for France, who is a clear step ahead of the other three. If everyone plays to their level, I’d expect Norway, South Korea, and Nigeria to take points from one another, letting France escape fairly easily with a first place finish. That said, this is one of the groups with the highest variance in possible outcomes. If France does slip up in their opening match against South Korea, there’s a high possibility for chaos to ensue.

Group B: Germany (2), China (3), Spain (3), South Africa (4)

If Group A isn’t the strongest overall, it’s probably this one. Plus, Germany isn’t playing at France’s level right now–and won’t have the home field advantage–which makes the top spot far more open. I’d still expect Germany to have more than enough to handle the others, but it wouldn’t be especially surprising to see either China or Spain sneak into the top position. Then factor in that South Africa is no one’s idea of a pushover, and you have maybe an incredibly fascinating group. I like this Spain team a lot, and was considering adopting them as my dark horse team to follow. This group creates the highest range of possible outcomes they were likely to encounter. They could win the group or finish in last place, without a massive difference in performance.

Group C: Australia (1), Brazil (3), Italy (3), Jamaica (5)

The first group with a clear team at the bottom. Jamaica are probably the weakest team in the tournament, and the draw didn’t do them any huge favors. Italy and Brazil are vulnerable, but it would be a major shock if they dropped points against the Reggae Girlz. Meanwhile, although Australia will want to avoid getting overconfident, they should be able to manage first here without too much trouble, particularly since they play Jamaica last and will know precisely how many goals they’ll need to score to win the goal difference tiebreaker, should they find themselves in a position where that matters. Which means Italy v. Brazil on June 18 could be one of the key matchups in the group stage.

Group D: England (1), Japan (3), Scotland (4), Argentina (5)

This is probably my favorite group. Strictly going by tiers, it looks pretty straightforward. But Japan, Scotland, and Argentina are all among the strongest teams in their tier. If Japan plays like they did over the last 18 months, England should have no trouble with them, and the big question will be whether Scotland can overtake them. But it doesn’t pay to underestimate Japan in big tournaments, and I have a sneaking suspicion that their commitment to youth is going to pay off next summer with a team that looks closer to the dangerous Japan teams over the earlier part of the decade. Then consider the excitement of England v. Scotland, and you’ve got an opportunity for some serious fireworks.

One other thing worth noting: the winner of this group gets placed in probably the best spot in the bracket–facing a third place team in the round of 16 and then a relatively weak runner-up (probably Brazil or Norway) in the quarterfinals. Meanwhile, whoever finishes second will get thrown into a Round of 16 showdown with either Canada or the Netherlands, and would then probably have to play Australia in the quarterfinals. Ouch.

England and Japan play in the final match on June 19, which will probably determine who goes where. That’s definitely one worth marking down on your calendar.

Group E: Canada (2), Netherlands (2), New Zealand (4), Cameroon (5)

This is just about the best possible outcome for the Dutch, who were (pretty easily) the strongest team in Pot 2. They’ll face off against the weakest team from Pot 1, in the only group where there’s nothing close to a clear favorite to win the group. I’d bet on the Netherlands, but not by much. Meanwhile, New Zealand is good enough to play with the top two, but more realistically will have to hope to keep those games tight enough that a big win over Cameroon is enough to see them through.

Group F: USA (1), Sweden (3), Chile (4), Thailand (5)

Yawn. theoretically possible for the US to fail to advance from this group, but it would be the single most shocking result in the history of women’s soccer. In fact, it would be deeply surprising if they did anything other than win the group at a canter. Even if Sweden pulls another miracle out of their hat, their chances of beating the US are pretty low, and the Americans will probably score a dozen or so goals in the other two matches, putting their goal difference out of reach. Basically, the US almost literally couldn’t have been handed an easier group. That said, if they stroll into a quarterfinal match against France having barely been tested, they might end up wishing for a bit more pressure in the early stages.

In my initial framework, I identified 15 teams in the top three tiers. These are the ones that I believe should expect to advance to the knockout round, all things being equal. Now that we have the groups, though, it looks like the teams in Groups A, B, and C might have drawn a slightly shorter stick. They’ll each be competing with other similarly-situated squads for the two guaranteed slots. If they can’t manage that, they’ll have to cast their luck with the third-place chances. But precisely because they’re in tougher groups, they’re more likely to drop points compared to teams in the other groups that face some slightly easier competition.

Meanwhile, Group F looks like the place least likely to produce a third place advancer. Whoever finishes third in that group will probably have a battering from the US dragging down their goal difference, meaning they’ll almost certainly need four points if they want to get through. Which means they’ll need a draw against Sweden–possible, but unlikely.

All of that said, it’s still a long way from June, 2019. Some of these teams may show enough over that time to significantly affect our assessment of their chances. And, of course, soccer is a funny old game so you never want to bet too heavily on things going to form.

What are your thoughts? Who got the easiest draw? The toughest? Which matches are you most anticipating?

MLS Commissioner Don Garber Shares League Position on Growing Women’s Game

Posted on by RJ Allen

Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber gave his annual State of the League address and was asked specifically if teams in his league are interested in investing in the women’s game ahead of the 2019 FIFA Women’s World Cup. In year’s past, Garber has been coy when answering these questions but was far more talkative on Friday, perhaps due to the massive success of the host team Atlanta United FC. His answers didn’t necessarily strike at the heart of any issues but it did leave it in the hands of the clubs themselves.

“This is something we’re leaving to our individual clubs,” said Garber when asked about team investments in the women’s game. “It’s not something we’re looking at engaging at the league level through Mark at league operations on the competitive side or Gary on the commercial side. We made that decision a number of years ago to try to let the women’s league find their own way.”

Since MLS stepped away a number of years ago but several teams have still remained involved in varying levels. The Houston Dash, Portland Thorns, Seattle Reign and Utah Royals all have significant ownership stakes from MLS franchise owners. Even in the lower leagues of the men’s game, teams like North Carolina FC have worked towards bringing successful teams to the United states with the North Carolina Courage making the NWSL Championship last season. Despite the eagerness to engage in the women’s game, Don Garber and MLS seem reluctant.

Part of that may have to do with the United Soccer League. The USL which now controls the professional game below the first division with the USL Championship and USL League One, has shown an interest in potentially running the NWSL. First reported by Bob Williams of Sports Business Insider back in July, the ever-growing men’s league appeared ready to step in and take the reigns from USSF which has done a poor job by the judgement of many in running the only current women’s league in the country. Whether anything more comes of the rumors remains to be seen. However the rapid expansion of USL not just at the division 2 level but at the semi-pro level and their interest in controlling a division one league could find this a interesting proposition.

“We have been encouraging our owners to expand what they could offer to our fans,” said Garber, tactically pointing at the league’s interest without saying too much. “We have a 34 game schedule. 17 non-playoff games on a regular season. There’s no reason, if the market could support it, that we wouldn’t want our teams to have more inventory in those stadiums.

“We also believe that we need to drive the ‘Soccer Nation’ thing. While I am very proud of the fact that Major League Soccer has been a big driver of some of the successes that have gone on in the sport, whether it’s from a fan perspective and the supporter movement, growing the commercial aspect of the game or thinking about technology, social media and the like. I do think that we could use some of our collective wisdom to grow the women’s game.”

World Cup Power Rankings: Favorites, Dark Horses, and Longshots

Posted on by RJ Allen

After several years of qualifying tournaments, the guest list is finally set. We now know the official list of twenty-four teams who will be attending the World Cup in France next summer. The latest FIFA rankings will drop on December 7, allowing for the creation of four pots from which teams will be drawn on December 8.

In the meantime, this is an opportune moment to reflect on the teams who will be attending. Who are the favorites? Who are the dark horses? Who is expected to struggle?

For sake of categorization, I’ve divided the nations into five tiers. Not every team in each tier is equal, of course, but these seemed to be the logical places to draw rough lines of separation.

Tier 1: Favorites

USA, France, Australia, England

It’s very likely that one of these four teams will win the World Cup.

Based on current form, the US arguably deserves to be in their own category (call it Tier 1A), after racing through an undefeated 2018–a year in which they played all the other major competitors apart from the Dutch. But even if the US are clear favorites, it’s not by a huge margin. All four of these teams are stacked, and if they were to face off in the late stages of the Cup, it would be anyone’s game. France has the advantage of playing at home (which is a serious advantage), so they’re probably second-favorites. But England and Australia are filled with talent, and both look ready to step into the inner circle of world powers. And who wants to be the one to bet against Sam Kerr or Fran Kirby when it’s all on the line?

Tier 2: Challengers

Germany, Netherlands, Canada

Here we find three high quality teams, each with enough flaws and limitations to keep them out of the top tier, but each good enough to beat anyone.

Germany is probably the surprise here; we’ve grown accustomed to seeing them trading spots at the top of the rankings with the United States, and looking over the roster there doesn’t seem to be any massive holes. But the results simply haven’t been there for a long time, so clearly something is missing. The biggest banana skins for them are in the defense–which is nowhere near as resolute as it once was–but they’re also missing a true world-class striker. Still, there is a boatload of talent in the team, so it would be tough to really bet against them. If Dzsenifer Marozsán plays the way we know she’s capable of, if Alexadra Popp can find her way back to being a top striker, if some of their young players take that key step forward…the potential is all there.

Then there’s the Netherlands. The European champions have already demonstrated they have the capacity to win a major tournament. The Dutch chances will rise and fall with their world-class attacking talent: Lieke Martens and Vivianne Miedema. Together, they make a strike force as dangerous as any in the tournament. But there’s quality up and down this roster. While they had a difficult route to qualification—having to squeeze through a four-team playoff—they’re here now, and no one will fancy a knockout match against them.

Rounding out this tier is Canada, who lack the depth of the other top teams, but will hope to catch lightning in a bottle and finally give Christine Sinclair a major trophy. Their tournament will probably depend heavily on Jessie Fleming. Still quite young, she can sometimes drift out of games. But on her day, she’s about as unplayable as anyone in the world. They’ll need a top quality performance from her, Sinclair, and probably a few others if they hope to take home the cup. But if the chips fall right, it could absolutely happen.

Combined, these top two tiers contain seven teams. I’d estimate that chances are probably 90-95% that one of those seven lifts the cup on July 7 in Lyon. Of the set, only the US and Germany have won the competition before. For the other five, this would be a chance to enter the narrow ranks of World Cup winners.

Tier 3: If everything breaks right

Japan, Brazil, Sweden, China, Norway, Italy, Spain, South Korea

The teams in this group all have enough quality to at least theoretically fit into the conversation for title contenders. More realistically, they should treat a visit to the quarterfinals as a strong performance, with anything more being icing on top.

Most have some specific reasons to be hopeful, though all have serious areas of concern as well. Brazil will have Marta, of course, but while still a superb player, the days have passed when she could potentially win a tournament by herself. And the rest of the squad has simply never filled in the gaps behind her. This may be her last hurrah, and it would be exciting to see it conclude with a deep run.

Japan, meanwhile, have seen their golden generation pass without any signs of sufficient replacement. Still, the 2015 finalists overachieved to make it that far, so it would be a mistake to write this version off too quickly. Japan’s main advantage is a unified style of play—technical, precise, and fluid. They lack the sheer physical dominance of the top teams, and will likely struggle against fast, aggressive attacks. But there is much to be said for a team built around a shared system.

The rest of this tier is filled with fading giants of the women’s game—Norway and China in particular, Sweden to a lesser extent—and teams looking to take a step forward into the next rank. Spain, in particular, has taken major strides in recent years (with the recent success of the Spanish U17s only demonstrating their status as a team on the rise) and might be a dark horse here.

Norway have one potential wild card in the form of Ada Hegerberg. She stepped away from international soccer last summer and there have been no signs of a rapprochement. That’s unfortunate for Norway. Without her, they are a solid team, but one with narrow margins available in tight games. With her, their chances of scraping a win against a top team would grow significantly.

The first three tiers combine to include fifteen teams. If chalk held perfectly, there would be room for all fifteen to escape their groups. However, given the vagaries of the draw, and the obvious reality that some teams will outperform expectations while others fail to clear the bar, it would be quite surprising if all fifteen did in fact make the Round of 16. To see who is likely to beat out some of these teams, you’ll want to look at Tier 4.

Tier 4: Strivers

Scotland, New Zealand, Nigeria, South Africa, Chile

The teams in this group have fewer obvious strengths, and more glaring flaws, than those in the 3rd tier. But the gap is not enormous. I would certainly expect a few of this group to outperform some of those listed ahead of them. The question is which ones.

Scotland have the biggest single weapon here, in the form of Kim Little. Combine her with a defensively robust and well organized team, and you have a recipe for success. I couldn’t quite convince myself to move them up a tier, but I consider them the team in Tier 4 with the best chance to move up.

New Zealand offers some intriguing possibilities. The Kiwis made an excellent signing, bringing in former Orlando coach Tom Sermanni, which may do quite a bit for their chances. Sermanni would be a great addition under any circumstances, but he’s probably the best possible option for the particular case here, with recent serious allegations of misconduct and mistreatment by the former coaching staff. Bringing in someone universally liked and respected like Sermanni may go a long way toward healing those wounds.

The final three teams in this tier will face a tougher road, given their likely draws. Based on their current rankings, they will probably be stuck in Pot 4, giving them a tougher draw than the others in this group. Still, there are reasons for hope in each case.

South Africa have taken major strides in recent years. Their NWSL contingent surprised many (myself included) in 2018 with their quality, and they are emblematic of renaissance in the South African system. This is their first World Cup, and they’ll be hoping to make a splash. That compares to their CAF compatriots, Nigeria, who have attended every World Cup so far (one of only seven teams to do so). Both have enough talent to challenge the more favored teams, but they’ll probably have to ride their luck a bit as well.

The last team is Chile. When I did an initial draft of these rankings at the end of the summer, I put Chile in the 5th tier. But with their recent victory over Chile, I’ve decided to move them up a rung. I certainly wouldn’t bet on them to rack up another famous victory in the tournament itself, but they’ve demonstrated a level of performance that makes them worthy of a more serious look.

Tier 5: No expectations and nothing to lose

Thailand, Jamaica, Argentina, Cameroon

These four teams are going to be in for a tough ride. While all will certainly hope to advance to the knockout stages, more realistically they should be willing to regard even managing one or two results as a satisfactory tournament.

Cameroon fans may object to being placed in a tier below their CAF counterparts. After all, they did take Nigeria to penalties in the only direct match-up between those squads. Plus, Cameroon made the knockout stage in 2016, so they’ll certainly have reason to hope for a repeat of that performance. Still, they have less obvious talent than the teams in the 4th tier, and there is little about their record in recent years to suggest they are quite at that level.

Thailand’s qualification was heavily aided by the peculiar AFC seeding process, which put them in a group with China, the Philippines, and Jordan, while Australia, Japan, and South Korea all fought it ought in the other group. Furthermore, North Korea was actually eliminated at an earlier stage, clearing out even more space in the competition. Still, they did what was necessary to make the cut, and did manage to take Australia to penalties in the semifinal, showing that they will hardly be pushovers.

Argentina’s intercontinental qualifying match-up against Panama showcased both the strengths of weaknesses of the team. A resounding 4-0 win in the home leg illustrated the potential of the team. But they struggled badly for much of the return leg and could easily have found themselves in some trouble if Panama had been able to finish a bit more clinically.

Finally, there’s Jamaica, who qualified via two famous victories, one over Costa Rica to edge into the knockout rounds, and another on penalties over Panama. Led by the prodigious talents of Bunny Shaw, they have a solid team that was good enough to push past the traditional secondary teams of CONCACAF to take a place at the final. But their performances against the US and Canada in that tournament showed just how wide the gulf still is between them and the true world powers.

So that’s it. Twenty-four teams, who will be competing for sixteen places in the knockout stage.

We’ll certainly know more once the draw is announced next week, at which point I’ll return with an assessment of whose paths got easier or harder. Given a straight seeding system, there shouldn’t be any true ‘group of death,’ but these things can make a difference at the margins.

Backline Chat: World Cup Dark Horses and the NWSL Offseason

Posted on by RJ Allen

Photo by Lora Charles.

Charles Olney (@olneyce): Hi everyone, and welcome to our first slackchat of the offseason. We’re hoping to get back into a semi-regular conversations here are news starts to pick up. For today, we’ll mostly focus on international news, and do a little bit of assessment of where things stand with the NWSL offseason. To kick things off, how do people feel about the state of the US national team at the end of 2018?

RJ Allen (@TheSoccerCritic): I think the USWNT is playing as well as it has under Ellis. They are beating the teams they should beat, running good teams off the field at times and making adjustments for players being out or not playing to their peak.

Going in to 2019 I think they are in a really solid position. Even more so when you see a lot of the other teams you’d expect to compete in 2019 having missteps.

Allison Cary (@findingallison): I haven’t watched as many of the games recently, but to be honest, I’ve been surprised by some of the scorelines. Scotland and Portugal holding the U.S. to one goal shows improvement in their competition. I think that’s what it is though– the rest of the world catching up rather than the U.S. declining.

Charles Olney: For a long time, my take has been that Ellis wasn’t a very good coach for the experimental phase, but having gone through 2016-2017 without learning much, she’d be pretty solid for this part. I still feel pretty good about that. There’s still plenty I’m grumpy about with the team, but I think they’re playing very well overall. Even if the two recent games were pretty drab, as you note.

RJ Allen: I don’t think Ellis is a great coach. But I don’t think she *has* to be with the talent she has. I do think the US is just in another tier right now in terms of both play and expectations though. Think of the reaction if Chile beat the US like they just did Australia.

Charles Olney: That’s true. I do think it’s worth noting that this group of players seems to be much more settled, and much more capable of organizing themselves than some of the past versions of the team. I genuinely don’t know whether that’s entirely separate from Ellis, or if she gets some of the credit for keeping them on an even keel. Either way, it’s a good place to be.

Luis Hernandez (@radioactivclown): As a whole you can’t really say too much negative when the team goes undefeated for the calendar year. I like where we are talent-wise. I think if anything I’m still slightly unhappy with Ellis more than anything else. But then I’d expect the US to beat Chile 5-0 like the Matildas did

Charles Olney: But to RJ’s point, it’s worth noting just how badly almost every other major competitor has stumbled this year. Australia lost to Chile. England just lost to Sweden. Germany has been struggling badly. The Dutch had to go through the playoffs. And on and on. Meanwhile, the US is just churning through their opponents.

RJ Allen: A lot of the key players are also more mature in general. Alex Morgan isn’t a young gun coming up anymore. She’s a leader on the team and one of the most accomplished players they have. Rapinoe has matured in her role. So has Ertz and Dunn and a lot of players. It makes it more forgiving all the way around.

Luis Hernandez: there has to be a perfect storm for the US to lose, I don’t think they are going to roll everyone at the World Cup, but the right match up with a few key players not on the pitch and then it could be “Houston, we have a problem”

Allison Cary: I think their experience shows here too. England, Australia, etc. might be more prone to stumble because they haven’t been this good for this long. But that goes to support your point that the U.S. is a tier above the rest. I also don’t think that means a smooth road to another World Cup trophy. But it does help.

Charles Olney: It does feel notable how many of the veterans seem to be playing at a top level, well past the stage when some decline might have been expected. Two years ago Rapinoe felt like she was on the way out, Morgan looked like she might be slowing down, Sauerbrunn was starting to fade a bit. And it wasn’t clear the younger players could step in. But now…the vets are playing great, and even if some of the younger ones haven’t necessarily stepped up, it just doesn’t really matter.

It wouldn’t be that hard to imagine an alternate universe where they NEEDED Lavelle, Brian, Pugh, etc. to step up and were stumbling badly because there wasn’t anyone to fill in those critical roles. But it just hasn’t happened.

Luis Hernandez: There is something to be said for that USWNT trait that has the veterans on the team not to let up on the younger players when things go south. It appears like they will the team to a result. Just when I think why does the US need player X when things are going well, I see a Rose Lavelle and she reminds me why.

RJ Allen: If you made a list of the top 100 women’s soccer players in the world. The US would have their starting XI – Ellis’s preferred XI – on the list. All 11. I am not sure any other country would be able to say that. And that is a huge advantage.

Charles Olney: So it sounds like we’re in agreement that the US is looking like favorites, but that certainly doesn’t mean anything is certain. So who do y’all see as the other teams most likely to be in the mix next summer?

And are there any other teams where you think their stock has risen over the past 12 months?

RJ Allen: I think France has to be in the running.

Allison Cary: I want to say France but they always seem to disappoint me.

RJ Allen: In there is ever a time for France to get over the hump, it’s 2019 at home.

Charles Olney: Yeah, I’d make France second-favorites, though I understand why their fans would be worried.

Luis Hernandez: A healthy Australia who can get their defense right, could be a problem. They don’t fear the US anymore

Allison Cary: England and Australia I think are definitely in the mix. And the Netherlands?

RJ Allen: I think Scotland with a healthy Kim Little could be a dark house for the semis. I say this hoping that putting it into the universe will make it happen.

Allison Cary: I thought they looked pretty good today.

Luis Hernandez: I felt that as well until I realize how many first choice starters the US was missing

Charles Olney: I’ll probably write up a full piece on my sense of where teams fit into tiers, but I think Scotland is a neat pick for a dark horse. I wouldn’t really bet on them past the round of 16 but they could potentially beat just about anyone on their day.

One thing about this tournament is that there just aren’t that many teams who project to be rock solid. Scotland won’t light any fires, but they also aren’t going to implode. That could get them through a couple tight games.

RJ Allen: Canada is a team I’ll be keeping an eye on too. This is very likely the last chance Sinclair has for the World Cup title.

Luis Hernandez: Because of the expanding field there’s going to be some not great teams at the World Cup too.

RJ Allen: I think that’s wonderful though.

Allison Cary: Yeah. That’s the way people get better. What an opportunity for some of these programs.

Charles Olney: There’s a large group of teams that I have in the ‘shrug emoji’ part of the field (Japan, Brazil, Sweden, China, Norway, Italy, Spain, South Korea). All of those are arguably better than Scotland, but I could see several of them having disastrous tournaments, too.

RJ Allen: Has Norway figured out if one of the best players in the world is playing for them again?

Allison Cary: I don’t think so.

Charles Olney: If I had to bet, I still think she probably does play. But I haven’t actually seen anything suggesting that it’s in the mix.

Luis Hernandez: So I know the team hasn’t qualified for the World Cup yet, but if they do, are New Zealand going to get out of the group stage?

RJ Allen: I don’t know we can say that until we see the draws. A good draw might see them get out but a bad one and they are last in their group.

Allison Cary: I’ll be surprised if they make it out of the group. A good draw could help them, but my instinct is that they won’t go far.

Charles Olney: New Zealand is an interesting one. I think a lot depends on their draw, as you both have said. They’re probably one of the five or six weakest teams, but if they happened to get drawn with a Jamaica or someone, they could potentially pick up 4 points and go through.

RJ Allen: I do hope that Erceg pulls a Brett Farve and un-retires again.

Charles Olney: For New Zealand, bringing in Sermanni was a great move. I don’t think he’s a guy that can beat the odds all by himself, but I think they’re in a much stronger position now.

Luis Hernandez: the draw is 20ish days away, so that’s something to look forward to…and Christmas music.

Allison Cary: I think Erceg will, assuming she is satisfied with the federation.

Charles Olney: In many ways, that mid-to-bottom tier is the most interesting to me. It’s very likely that one or two of New Zealand, Nigeria, South Africa, Chile, etc. make the knockout rounds. But I certainly wouldn’t bet on any individually.

Allison Cary: Yeah. It will be fun to watch.

RJ Allen: This has been a wild year for women’s soccer. I really hope it stays that way in 2019 and we get an exciting World Cup. I want to see some upsets. Just no PKs in the knock outs.

Allison Cary: Agreed.

Luis Hernandez: if you had to put money on a non-front-runner team, who would it be? I’d hedge my bet on one of the Scandinavian teams

Allison Cary: Yeah, probably Sweden.

Charles Olney: If Germany counts as a non front runner, I think they’re a lot better than they’ve played recently. If you want to go down a full additional rung, I think Japan might pull it together. I wouldn’t bet on it, but I tend to trust teams that build with a system. Sweden is also a good call.

RJ Allen: Canada vs Australia in the final playing at their peaks would be fun.

Luis Hernandez: I have a weird feeling about Norway. Don’t know why

Allison Cary: I’m pretty sure in a previous chat, I promised that if France won the Women’s World Cup and the Men’s World Cup, I would be obligated to move to France. Not sure what I’m rooting for lol. Wouldn’t be opposed at this point.

RJ Allen: I do have a related topic I want to get some thoughts on. I think one of the things we’re seeing, maybe more than ever with the US, in the idea that good players are somewhat disposable.

Sofia Huerta was good but she wasn’t as good as Morgan, Press, Williams, so on so she got converted to an outside back. But she wasn’t an outside back and no one in their right mind plays her there for club so she’s out even if she got the US to change her status so she can only play for the US.

Chioma Ubogagu plays for us on a youth level but never really made it on the senior team and goes on to get some shots playing for England. Dropping quotes like:

“When I went into the [U.S.] senior camp last year, the environment wasn’t for me. I guess that’s the best way to put it,” Ubogagu admitted. “Then coming into this environment, it just felt right immediately. Some things in football, it’s just like an instinct, and it felt like this was the place I’m supposed to be.”

I think one of the issues is because the US is so deep if you don’t come in and fit in right away you have a limited shot overall. It sucks but I’m not sure what else the US can do having so many players they can pull from. (edited)

Charles Olney: Yeah, the Ubogagu quotes on the US team were pretty interesting. I do think the US is a friendlier place than it was historically, when it probably resembled a frat house in the middle of pledge week more than anything else. But I don’t think it’s necessarily that welcoming to the folks who are on the margins.

Which is to say: I think the individual players are generally very nice, but it is definitely a closed circle, and until someone proves that they are going to stick around for a long time, they don’t really get integrated that much.

RJ Allen: If you are Mal Pugh level break out star, you have a real shot. But if you’re a role player or in that grey area you have a hard time and might want to see what other options you have. It sucks but that seems to be the thought process.

Charles Olney: And as you say, there’s just so much talent at the top that it’s really hard for any of those 20-30ish players to do so well that they can get over that hurdle.

RJ Allen: And I am not sure I can blame it being the process, to be honest.

Luis Hernandez: I’ve heard it from Ubogagu and Kristen Edmonds when they were at camp that the speed of things there was very high, I’d imagine most new call ups get a lukewarm reception until they have been to multiple camps and there’s more of a friendly vibe, versus a professional vibe.

Charles Olney: I would love to see more honest commentary about what it feels like to be a bubble player. I remember a few quotes from Colaprico a while back which made it seem pretty grim. For Ubogagu, the circumstance of having dual nationality gave her the chance to speak her mind and not worry about repercussions. But I bet a lot of other folks feel the same way.

Luis Hernandez: It raised a question if speed was only an on the field thing, or it also meant film study and the like.

RJ Allen: I would think it is just all of it. We’ve all spoken to collage players who the step to pro is too much. I’d think it is like that just more so.

Luis Hernandez: Since the pool of players is so big, the chance of falling out of favor can happen quickly. Hello Jane Campbell and Taylor Smith. Casey Short to some extent…Ashley Hatch…

Charles Olney: One thing to look forward to over the next 5-10 years is the increasing professionalization of the NWSL. Right now, the difference between ‘just on the outside’ and ‘just on the inside’ for the national team is the difference between living with your parents and having a real stable professional life. But at some point the gap won’t be so extreme. That could make the transitional process much healthier.

RJ Allen: For as goofy and as much as a teenager as she is, on the field Mal Pugh knows the ins and outs of soccer and how to get her body to do things most 22 year olds who played 4 years of D1 can’t. That’s why she’s on the team.

I think outside of the living wage question – and I think it’s a huge question – I’m not sure it’s a problem that the US cycles so fast. Yes, good players get overlooked. But on some level if you can play to the level the NT plays on, you’ll likely find yourself on the team.

Charles Olney: Andi Sullivan is another interesting example there. Based on her NWSL season, she shouldn’t be anywhere near the national team right now. But they can see, quite reasonably, that she has potential above and beyond some other folks. So I get why they make exceptions for a player like that. And I also get why it would be so frustrating for other NWSL players who might think “but I outplayed her for an entire season!”

RJ Allen: I think “pedigree” feeds in to it a lot. Where did you play college, did you play for the U20s, did Ellis give you early camp calls. All of that feeds in to which horse they bet on.

And then there is McCall Zerboni.

Charles Olney: Yeah. I think that’s an important point RJ. I think I said this in a previous chat, but at the end of the day the identify of the 20-23 spots on the US roster just isn’t that important. Much as we all enjoy arguing about it. The US isn’t really losing a huge amount by not bringing in DiBernardo or Amber Brooks or something. Even if they could integrate perfectly, the US just doesn’t need them. So I do think it’s worth discussing the process, and I do wish it was more responsive to form. But I also don’t think it’s anything close to a crisis in terms of overall team performance.

Luis Hernandez: You know what solves this Charles, a general manger!

RJ Allen: I don’t know if I agree that solves anything. It has the power to do a lot but what power does a GM have to change the fact the US just has a ton of very good players and you can only put 23 on a roster?

Luis Hernandez: perhaps we can get the system to develop those players sooner. More Mal Pugh level of 18 year olds.

RJ Allen: The problem is the NCAA is a thing and has a ton of sway in all of that. And I can’t see that going away. Not with pay like it is. Mal Pugh could afford to go pro and be on the NT. If she was from a family with an income of $35,000 a year she’d be at UCLA right now.

Charles Olney: I think larger institutional reform would be good, but it’s a longer-term process for sure. I don’t think reorganizing the system would alter the basic inputs that much right now. If they were to get rid of Ellis and bring in someone who evaluates talent differently, that would obviously make a difference. But that ship has sailed.

And yes, the weight of the college game is also a big part of how young talent gets developed (or not developed).

Charles Olney: Alright, well, speaking of NWSL development, why don’t we take a moment to discuss the state of the league. We’re a couple months into the offseason and…we’ve had very little news. Sky Blue is still doing their Sky Blue thing, with no real evidence of progress. Three teams are still looking for coaches. The draft is still a couple months away. So what are people looking forward to once news starts moving again?

RJ Allen: I can’t wait to see the trades that Harvey, Vlatko and Riley pull off this offseason.

Charles Olney: Houston has been dropping hints about the hiring process being resolved soon, but I’m not sure if that means this week or just…in 2018. But I’d love to see all the teams get settled well before the draft.

Luis Hernandez: Frankly, I think that the teams without head coaches are already behind the power curve

Allison Cary: Me too.

Luis Hernandez: I don’t think we’ll get any ideas of which teams are going to be looking at trading if they don’t have a head coach in place. I also think that it is hard to figure if a team needs to bring in more players if we don’t have information on the expanded roster size

RJ Allen: I’d like to see more former players as coaches personally. I saw that Nadine Angerer got a contract extension in Portland and really highlights what former players of the league can bring to it.

Charles Olney: My impression from Duffy’s comments at the final was that we could expect roster sizes to expand by a couple slots. I hope that encourages coaches to think more seriously about filling out their rosters, and rotating a bit more to keep everyone fresh. I wonder if it just means a few more bench players that only get playing time when the national teamers head out for France.

Allison Cary: I will be hoping for the former, but I expect the latter.

RJ Allen: I am happy, very happy, for the idea of each team carrying three goalkeepers. I think that is a huge win for the league.

Charles Olney: I mean, let’s wait for the official announcement to call it a win, but yeah, I agree.

RJ Allen: Do we think USSF will give the NWSL a commish once they have a new CEO? Is that the hold up, do we think?

Luis Hernandez: I won’t consider it much of an advancement unless it’s a roster size of 26 or something along those lines

RJ Allen: It will not be 26. It will be 22 or 23. Jumping to 26 would crash the cap and minimum salary for players.

Luis Hernandez: Oh I get that it will only be a bump of two or three but it should be a raise of six players. Not fielding a full bench is bush-league

Charles Olney: Yeah, I’d expect 23. I do think that’s a big deal. If that were combined with another decent bump to the minimum wage, I’d call that a successful offseason

RJ Allen: I don’t think 26 is needed right now. I don’t know if I’d ever agree it would be. 23 is 11 vs 11 with an extra goalkeeper.

Luis Hernandez: well, (and I know RJ will love this) MLS roster size is 30

RJ Allen: And I care about that because?

Luis Hernandez: The NWSL needs to have more than a couple of spares. It’s a World Cup year, let’s also create some depth with teams

Charles Olney: I do think that men’s league provide a useful standard for comparison, of how things should run if the money is plentiful and capacity isn’t a constant danger. But I also think MLS rosters are a bit larger than many other teams around the world, which generally clock in around 23-24, and then have development teams.

RJ Allen: It would also be crazy to ask teams to jump up $100,000 in the salary cap to go to 26.

Luis Hernandez: I’m not even saying add more internationals, they can be domestic players. $100,000 more in payroll, welcome to higher standards

RJ Allen: That would be everyone on minimum pay. Not really want you want to encourage.

Charles Olney: Alright, kind of a dark question but: will Sky Blue be in the league in 2019? If yes, will they make any meaningful improvements to the problems they have been facing, or will it just be the bare minimum of window-dressing?

RJ Allen: The NWSL has shown a full dereliction of their duties when it comes to Sky Blue. They seem not to be pushing them to do anything. I don’t know if it’s because of how the owners are, because Duffy and co don’t have the power to force their hands, I don’t know.

Charles Olney: Yeah, I can’t really tell either. But if they were making any serious progress, it sure seems like they’re be talking it up. So the general radio silence feels bad.

Luis Hernandez: I’m not even remotely close to the Sky Blue situation, but I can’t believe that current ownership group can’t make it work

RJ Allen: Cloud 9 has been banging the drum trying to get people to pay attention as the attention has left them.

Allison Cary: Yeah, the silence is not good.

RJ Allen: But there is no more information. I don’t know what to make of it. The owners there have the money. That doesn’t seem the issue. The issue is caring about this as more than a pet project to show your daughter some form of “girl power”.

Allison Cary: But like Charles said, if there was serious progress, it seems like they would be talking about it.

Charles Olney: I wish I had something more intelligent to say. But I really don’t. It’s terrible, and a major stain on the league, and they just need to fix it. But I don’t think they will.

Allison Cary: Pretty much sums it up.

RJ Allen: Honestly it might be better for all involved for the team to fold. As heartbreaking as that might be for a group of very dedicated fans.

Charles Olney: That’s tough to say, especially in a year after we lost Boston and KC. But it’s also hard to disagree with. I’m going to hold out hope. But not very much.

Allison Cary: If the club is too toxic, better to fold than drag out a situation bad for everyone involved.

Luis Hernandez: I feel that it may be better to relocate the team a la Utah. Here’s to NWSL to Louisville City.

Charles Olney: Alright, my final question comes from a reader, who asks: “What will it take for Adi Franch to get a chance with the NT?!?!” To which I’ll add: what is it about Harris (or Franch) that I’m not seeing? Franch isn’t perfect, but I’d describe her as almost strictly superior to Harris, in that she’s good at all the stuff Harris is good at, while also being better at the other stuff.

RJ Allen: I almost don’t think it matters. Naeher is the number one and no one else will play in France or much at all in 2019. After 2019 there will be a chance. But Ellis has made it clear what she wants for goalkeeping.

Allison Cary: Unless Naeher gets injured.

Charles Olney: Yeah, it probably won’t matter. But if Naeher breaks her foot in the opening match next summer, Harris is (apparently) going to play it out from there. If we discussed the potential strange circumstances where the US loses up above, surely Harris making a major blunder is one of them, right?

Allison Cary: I think Franch is superior to Harris, but Harris has been around longer. I don’t think that should translate to playing time, but I think it does.

Charles Olney: It just feels like a weird own goal. Lots of things that Ellis does, even if I don’t agree, I understand the logic. I’m just kind of baffled here.

RJ Allen: Harris is not a great goalkeeper. She is not in my top three for the US. But NT wide, is she less than average? I mean, I can’t believe I’m the one to ask. But it feels like post Scurry and Solo we just have the goalkeeping bar too high sometimes.

Charles Olney: Yeah, I suppose I should default back to my ‘goalkeepers are overrated’ prior here. And restore the normal balance of our conversations.

RJ Allen: I don’t think goalkeepers are over rated. I do think the US is judged on an unfair curve that Scurry and Solo set. If we were going from 15 years of Barnie to Naeher and Harris, it would not be seen the same way.

Luis Hernandez: I’m just going to hold on the keepers we have until the end of the World Cup then I’ll be clamoring about who the next group should be.

RJ Allen: Jordan Small 2023.

Charles Olney: Alright, well that’s as good a place to end as anywhere. Thanks for chatting everyone.

Sky Blue is a Moral Failure for the NWSL

Posted on by RJ Allen

If Sky Blue FC was owned by a Republican member of New Jersey politics, Governor Phil Murphy may have already called for a special session to ask how someone could own a team and run it so poorly. If Steven Temares, the Chief Executive Officer of Bed Bath & Beyond, had someone interview for a position at his company who ran things as poorly as Sky Blue has been run, they’d be laughed out of the room. And yet these men are the owners of Sky Blue FC, a club that has offered little to no outward sign of change since a run of articles at Deadspin (written by Erica L Ayala and myself), Once A Merto and The Equalizer all reported on the conditions.

Conditions that should have 1) been known to the NWSL and been corrected years ago and 2) set managing director of operations, Amanda Duffy’s hair on fire when they finally got some of the publicity they deserve.

And yet, a few months later and no one is still really talking about Sky Blue FC and its failures of leadership. No one except for Cloud 9, the team’s supporters group, a collection of people who are as dedicated to the players as any you’re ever likely to find.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The media, myself included, have largely moved onto new subjects, and stopped talking about the lack of showers or the shabby conditions. This isn’t surprising, exactly. Media sites generally have a hard time sticking with a story for an extended period of time. Other issues draw our attention, and without any real news–thanks to a lack of comments from players and the team–there’s a limit to how much you want to keep bashing your head against the wall of the same old story. But maybe we should have bashed a bit harder.

The team says they’re changing. But where’s the evidence? They’re still employing Tony Novo, they still think it’s acceptable to have used a trailer as the team’s shower, and playing on the Rutgers field. And there’s no proof they plan to actually do anything but wait until this all blows over and hope everyone forgets. They haven’t responded to critics or supporters, not even when fans have stated directly that they won’t buy season tickets until change is made.

The fault is with the Sky Blue organization. But the buck doesn’t stop there. The NWSL itself has also failed the players and fans of Sky Blue FC by not pushing the ownership to make real changes or pushing for the sale of the team when they didn’t. They have failed every player who steps in to the jail cell of a visitor’s locker room with no access to a shower. They have chosen obfuscation, presumably in the hopes that “wait and see if the blow back dies down” will be a winning strategy.

The current owners have the money to turn Sky Blue in to one of the top teams in the NWSL. They know how to run an organization. They’re in one of the biggest media markets in the country. But the path to success requires responsiveness to these issues. It means accepting the legitimacy of criticism, and making real efforts to meet the rising standards for a professional sports team. Failure to live up to any of that has all but sealed the club’s fate.

Sky Blue FC needs to be sold to owners who are willing to devote the time, money and energy to make the team successful. And if that can’t happen then maybe a quick death is better than the laborious, suffocating death the team is currently sentenced to.

Scotland Won’t Win the World Cup

Posted on by RJ Allen

The probability that Scotland is going to win the 2019 Women’s World Cup isn’t very high. But it is a possibility.

Scotland will play in the Women’s World Cup for the first time when they take the field for their opening match. And that game will open up a possibility that has never existed for the program before.

It is almost silly to say but you can’t win a World Cup unless you qualify for it. Which makes qualifying itself an important part of the process. Only 23 teams win their fights for a spot in the tournament (along with the host). And those few newcomers who manage it will be joining a club that’s mostly filled with repeat players.

34 teams have qualified for the Women’s World Cup in the last 27 years. 10 of those countries, including Scotland, Chile, and Jamaica from this round of qualifying, have only made it once. And when FIFA is going to 48 teams for the Men’s World Cup in 2026, to increase the chance for countries like India and their billion strong population to add new viewers, I have to wonder why the Women’s World Cup has just 24 teams.

As of right now the break down for the Women’s World Cup is as follows:

UEFA: 8 slots
AFC: 5 slots
CAF: 3 slots
CONCACAF: 3 slots
CONMEBOL: 2 slots
OFC: 1 slot
CONCACAF–CONMEBOL play-off: 1 slot
Host Nation: 1 slot

This is a much needed boost from the original 12 countries that started in 1991, or the 16 from 1999 until 2011, but it frankly just isn’t good enough anymore.

You can’t ensure that every country who ‘should’ make it is able to qualify. There will always be some of those. But there are more and more countries in the world of women’s soccer that deserve a chance to play for a World Cup. And right now there just aren’t the spots for them.

Of the four teams that made the UEFA play offs – Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium, and Denmark – only one team will be able to head to France in 2019. There will be no Mexico or Costa Rico from CONCACAF.

So how would I get the women’s side to 32 teams for the 2023 Women’s World Cup? Glad you asked.

UEFA: 12 slots
AFC: 6 slots
CAF: 4 slots
CONCACAF: 4 slots
CONMEBOL: 3 slots
OFC: 1 slot
OFC–CONMEBOL play-off: 1 slot
Host Nation: 1 slot

It isn’t a major tweak to the make up of the tournament from a confederation stand point but it would give more chances to get more Scotlands or Chiles in the future. More first time teams and more of a chance to get those cinderella runs that sports fans all over the world love.

I would shifted to a OFC–CONMEBOL play off instead of the current CONCACAF–CONMEBOL playoff instead of giving OFC a second automatic slot. It gives teams not named New Zealand a shot to get to a Women’s World Cup.

FIFA has often been negligent in it’s duty to grow women’s soccer in a meaningful way. Between the amount of prize money to turf fields to just a general ambivalence to the women’s side of the sport in general. But growing the tournament? Giving teams the possibility of the chance to put their country on their backs? That could go a long way to making a change for the better.

I am excited to watch Scotland play in France. The idea that Kim Little, Rachel Corsie, Jane Ross and company get to show the world what they can do is something I wouldn’t have bet on being possible four years ago. Now they get to show the world what they can do with the possibility of a chance to win. Other countries should get the same chance.

A Sociological View on Selling Women’s Soccer: A Conversation with Dr. Rachel Allison

Posted on by RJ Allen

Most of the media that cover women’s sports have made themselves experts in the field – and often times using expert feels a bit dicy – through years of following the teams and players. We get there by writing about the on-the-field play and the off-the-field drama of whatever is going on.

But let’s face it. Most of us, when you come right down to it, are not experts in gender studies or sports in any sort of academic sense. There are a surprising number of lawyers in the women’s soccer media ranks, a lot of former players, a few academics from other areas. But most of us come to the media from a place of passion to fill a gap we see.

That’s where Dr. Rachel Allison enters the picture. Dr. Allison recently wrote a book called Kicking Center: Gender and the Selling of Women’s Professional Soccer that addresses a lot of issues that have faced women’s soccer. She is what many of us would call a honest-to-goodness expert in what a lot of the women’s soccer media writes about. In 2014 she received a PhD in Sociology from the University of Illinois at Chicago. Currently she is an Assistant Professor of Sociology and affiliate of Gender Studies at Mississippi State University.

“I typically teach undergraduate and graduate classes in research methods, sociology of sport, and sociology of gender and sexuality,” Dr. Allison explained when I asked her about her work at Mississippi State University.

I was lucky enough to be able to speak with Dr. Allison and ask some questions about why she decided on this topic and why she went in some of the directions she did.

The story of why this book was written is one that most women’s soccer fans can get behind. Dr. Allison was, like so many in women’s soccer, a fan of the 1999 team and all that was born out of their World Cup winning side.

Like most of us that cover or write about women’s soccer at all, there is a confluence of the personal and professional love for this game and those who play it.

“I came to this topic for both personal and academic reasons. Personally, I grew up playing soccer and continued through college. I love the sport and it has been a big part of my life and my own physical and social development. I’m also the right age (34) to remember events like the 1996 Olympics, 1999 Women’s World Cup, and birth of the WUSA – as a fan, of course. My students call me old! But I have very clear memories of watching the Women’s World Cup and feeling so excited to see women playing my favorite sport on TV. It would have been hard at the time to avoid seeing clips or images from the ’99 championship! I knew about the WUSA, although I lived too far from any team at the time to attend a game. And when that league folded in 2003, I was leaving home for college. It was a huge disappointment to me that at the time it was becoming more possible for me to travel to a game as I became more independent, it wasn’t an option anymore.”

“In graduate school, I did a lot of research on women’s sports and I realized that multiple other women’s pro sports leagues had failed through the 1990’s and 2000’s. While the WUSA’s story was, of course, unique, it was also part of a pattern. And there just wasn’t much research that looked at that pattern. A lot of scholars have examined the experiences or identities of women athletes, but not so much the operations of the teams or the leagues that they play for. My personal and academic interests came together with WPS in 2009. I was in Chicago for graduate school and bought a season ticket right away for that first season. I enjoyed the games enormously (Megan Rapinoe was still brunette!) but was also aware of a lot of the struggles to gain fans, sponsorships, etc. the league faced early on. Over time, I became convinced that better understanding women’s soccer could shed light on both the challenges and opportunities for women in professional sport in the U.S.”

“I wanted to write this book to present a sociological analysis of the development and operation of women’s pro soccer, with the goal of understanding how the landscape in pro sports has changed for women in some ways and yet remained the same in others. It’s an academic book, but I hope that others can and will read it!”

The book opens with the 1999 World Cup. A place that is alive in most of our minds even if we somehow weren’t glued to the TV that day almost 20 years ago.

“I start with 1999 for a few reasons,” Dr. Allison explained, “for one, it’s an event that many people remember, even if they don’t typically follow women’s soccer or know much about it. So it’s a familiar place to start. And it’s also interesting for exactly that reason, that lots of people who recognize the players from that tournament or the now-iconic image of Chastain don’t know much else about women’s soccer. That tournament really did capture national attention in a way that has had lasting impact on our culture and that brought people “in” who hadn’t closely followed soccer before. I think this is a case of the right group at the right time with the right buy in. These women were an easy sell – they were attractive, talented, charismatic, and had clear group chemistry. 1999 marked two decades of incredible growth in girls’ and women’s sports participation, especially in soccer, and especially among affluent and predominantly white girls. Companies like Adidas and Nike perceived that women were a somewhat untapped market and had increasingly used women athletes in their advertisements and commercials. The idealized body for women had shifted away from thinness and towards athleticism. And there was buy in from corporate and media organizations that made this tournament available to watch, and in its timing, the tournament did not directly compete against other highly popular sports events.”

“The success of this tournament, like other Women’s World Cup and Olympic tournaments, fundamentally challenges the idea that there is little interest in women’s sports in the U.S. One of my arguments in the book is that interest and buy in are a two-way street: investors often want to see a quantifiable ROI to their investment, but we can’t always fully know this in advance, in part because an ROI requires that investment in the first place! Support from sponsors and media give women’s leagues legitimacy and make them available for fans. When there is buy in, even in a climate of uncertainty like that around the 1999 Women’s World Cup, interest often follows.”

When the topic shifted to what the WPS/NWSL has done well, Dr. Allison was quick to point out one major area of benefit.

“On the positive side, women’s pro soccer adopted social media early and did a great job using it to communicate with fans. This probably seems completely commonsense now, but I studied WPS in a slightly earlier era in the social media landscape, and this has allowed me to appreciate just how quick they were to get on Facebook and Twitter and how impactful social media has been, especially without being on TV. One of the results has been the creation of really vibrant and active social media fan and follower communities.”

We do often take for granted how much social media has been a boon for women’s soccer and the teams to market themselves. From the days before the internet was a thing most of us spent our time on to the days of six hours a day on Twitter, things have changed and women’s soccer has been great at using this tool to market.

Dr. Allison noted another less ethereal benefit. “I also think that women’s pro soccer changed quickly over time towards the greater acceptance of lesbian and gay sexualities and this has been a positive change. In large part, this change mirrors trends towards greater acceptance in U.S. society more generally.”

Though it seems from fans to amateur writers to PhDs the one thing we can all agree on is sometimes the leagues just don’t know who to market to.

“On a more ambivalent note, I think that women’s pro soccer has historically defined their “market” as soccer-playing girls and their parents.” Dr. Allison noted. “And while there are good reasons to go after these fans, there are also good reasons to go after other groups of fans, and these groups, particularly adult fans without kids, sometimes feel less welcomed when game day spaces are set up entirely for kids. One of the things I find in the book is that while families with soccer playing kids may be interested in women’s pro soccer, they are also not the most consistent in their fandom, often pulled in multiple directions by other of their kids’ activities and sometimes just burned out on soccer altogether.”

Women’s soccer has had an interesting journey since the early days of the internet and how it has been marketed. People like Dr. Allison and books like Kicking Center: Gender and the Selling of Women’s Professional Soccer help to remind us of where we’ve come from and how to make the future a little easier to sell. 

Kicking Center: Gender and the Selling of Women’s Professional Soccer is now available on Amazon and where other books are sold. 

Predicting The Pride: Head Coach Edition

Posted on by RJ Allen

It is the lot in life for most head coaches to be let go of the team they are leading. This came to be true for Tom Sermanni, as the Orlando Pride wilted down the stretch losing the final four matches of the season, and were winless in the last six fixtures.

While most fans of the league focused on the NWSL championship between the Portland Thorns and North Carolina Courage, Orlando Pride supporters look to find answers on who the next gaffer of the team may be. 

Pro Soccer USA reported early this month the team was already interviewing potential replacements. Looking at who the club may target, I came up with this list of prospects. If you follow the tendencies of the organization, it makes it seem unlikely the team would replace Sermanni with a coach from the college ranks due to his coaching pedigree, and his history as U.S. women’s national team coach.

The club will target a higher profile manager, so in no particular order, these are some possible dream candidates that would be interviewed if I were the general manager for the Orlando Pride.

Steffi Jones, Former German Women’s National Team Head Coach

Steffi Jones rose to prominence through the German Federation, first by being appointed the Director of Women’s and Girls’ Soccer in 2011. She transitioned to the coaching staff of the German women’s national team as an assistant to Silvia Neid on April 2016 then taking over for her when she stepped down September of that year. Jones run of form as manager ended after 22 matches with a poor showing in the SheBelieves Cup back in March of this year finishing with an overall record of 13 wins, 4 losses, and 5 draws.

The knock against her, like former Houston Dash coach Vera Pauw coming into the 2018 season, is a lack of experience coaching at the club level. Additionally, she would also have to get up to speed quickly on the inner workings of the league she would be unfamiliar with. However, perhaps Jones could also find the similar success Pauw found in Houston on her lone season, it would take the veterans on the Pride squad buying into a potential new system going into a World Cup year.  

Chance of Hire: Another time might work.

Pia Sundhage, Sweden U-17, U-15 Women’s National Team Head Coach

The name of Pia Sundhage should be very familiar with women’s soccer fans either with her tenure as coach for the United States women’s national team from 2007 until 2012 winning Olympic gold in 2008 and 2012. She departed to become the coach for the women’s team in her home country of Sweden. During her time there, she is best known for leading Sweden to a silver medal at the 2016 Olympics where Sundhage’s team was able to knockout the U.S. team in penalty shoot-out. The defensive style of play was called out by Hope Solo after the match, and things got weird. Sweden was able to take out the Brazilian team next in the same manner. Interestingly, against Sweden in the penalty shoot-out both Alex Morgan and Marta missed their kick.

After she stepped down as manager of the senior team in 2017, she’s been coaching the Swedish U-15 and U-17 teams. In addition to coaching, Pia performs public speaking, and seems to be settled in her life. However, last year there was a report in the now defunct Excelle Sports stating Sundhage was courted to come back to the United States to coach in the NWSL. Now this didn’t happen, but could the Orlando front office entice her to the Sunshine State?

Chance of Hire: More hope and a prayer than wait and see.

Emma Hayes, Chelsea F.C. Women Head Coach

Emma Hayes has been in charge of Chelsea F.C. Women since 2012 where she lead her club to two Women’s Super League titles, and two Women’s FA Cups achieving a club double each time in 2015 then in the 2017-18 season. Prior to her time with Chelsea, Hayes lived in the States where she coached the Chicago Red Stars for two season in Women’s Professional Soccer (WPS), the league at the time which preceded the NWSL, in 2009 and 2010. Prior to Phil Neville’s appointment as manager of English women’s national team, she had been a name rumored to be high on the Football Association wish list.

Hayes established herself as a highly desirable coach with her stellar reputation, and proven results has also allowed her to set down firm roots in London. She operates a business outside of soccer, and also had a child. Chelsea has been accommodating to her needs, and schedule. She would make an excellent coach to any NWSL side; however, with her life so well formed in England, is there much of a draw to coach in America?

Chance of Hire: Apologies, but I can’t make it.

Emily Lima, Santos F.C Head Coach

Emily Lima, the current head coach for Brazilian side Santos F.C., made history when she was the first female appointed coach of the Brazilian women’s national team in 2016 taking over for Vadão; however, her 7-5-1 record lead to her dismissal less than a year from her appointment. When Lima was let go, several of the players retired from the national team, and protested the level of support from the Brazilian soccer federation. Coach Lima afterward joined Santos F.C. where just after one year she lead the team to the Paulista Feminino championship and a quarterfinal appearance in the women’s Brazilian Championship.

For anyone familiar with the Orlando Pride front office, Coach Lima checks a lot of boxes. She would be familiar with several of the players on the roster, her recent success at the club level is also appealing, and the style of play she would bring to the City Beautiful could be the answer to the poor performance from the roster in 2018. Could a limited English speaking ability hamper what could be a promising prospect?

Chance of Hire: Could the stars align?

Lisa Cole, Washington Spirit Academy Coach & pro team scout

Lisa Cole had an eventful 2018 NWSL season. She started by joining the coaching staff of Vera Pauw at the Houston Dash from the Papua New Guinea U-20 Women’s National Team in January, but on April 26, Cole would tweet she was no longer a part of the Dash coaching staff. A month later, the Washington Spirit would announce her in a dual role as a coach for their academy; as well as, a pro team scout.

Being a scout for the Spirit, Coach Cole is knowledgeable on both the college game and within the league on the level of talent with players. She would also have some familiarity with players on the Pride roster; as well as, the opponents the team would face in the upcoming season. The question would be if Lisa Cole is a name the front office and fanbase would get excited over. The club tends to like to make a big splashy acquisitions, so not sure if Cole would be on the club’s radar, and if she is if they would prefer a flashier name.

Chance of Hire: Never tell me the odds.

The Orlando Pride have yet to announce who will lead the team going into the 2019 season, but the fan base is certainly hoping to return to the playoffs after the dismal tailspin resulted in the seventh place finish in the standings. Here’s hoping the club provides an opportunity to a highly-qualified coach with experience in the women’s game, expertise handling big name players; as well as, player development. We’ll be knowing something shortly if the hints prove to be right.

The High Price of CONCACAF’s Low Investment in Women’s Soccer

Posted on by RJ Allen

The 2018 CONCACAF Women’s Championship has been strange. Both Jamaica and Panama have made the semifinals while Costa Rico and Mexico–two teams that were expected to make the cut–are now out of the tournament. The only really expected result that has held is both Canada and the US making the semifinals.

Well that and CONCACAF federations sending teams that are ill-prepared due to a lack of resources.

As Charles Olney wrote in Cuba, CONCACAF, and the Future of Women’s Soccer,

“Cuba, meanwhile, hadn’t played in three years since the start of this year’s campaign, which means significant portion of their roster had never played a single international game before this year. Nor do they have a meaningful domestic league in which to hone their skills during these significant gaps. And given Cuba’s isolated status, it would be quite difficult for players to play internationally, even for those few with sufficient talent to potentially make the case.”

CONCACAF and the 41 federations that make up the confederation, have a long history of not doing much to promote women’s soccer. The Panamas, Cubas, Jamaicas of the world have seen limited support over the years.

Which is a shame, because there’s a lot of opportunity out there. Look at Panama, who no one would accuse of over preparation, but who nevertheless have featured one of the tournament’s break out stars in Yenith Bailey. The 17 year old Panamanian goalkeeper has launched a thousand tweets with some of her show stopping saves. She has been rock steady on a team that surprised much of the world by advancing to the semifinals.

Both fans and media alike have been captivated by her the way that her performances have defied the odds, keeping her team in games that no one thought they would be in.

Jeff Kassouf of Equalizer Soccer wrote about the young goalkeeper in,Yenith Bailey is the hero Concacaf needs right now, even if not the one it deserves.

Men In Blazers tweeted about how great she was.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

FIFA.com quoted Carli Lloyd as saying, “Very, very impressive,” said Lloyd after the final whistle. “I think I went up to her a couple of times to tell her how well she was doing. She played a fantastic game and I hope that gives her lots of self-confidence.”

Twitter has been awash in tweets that she should play in the NWSL, or that colleges should be offering her scholarships to play in the US. And while I watched the tweets fill up my timeline I started to think about how unfair all this feels. How tournaments like this always serve as a showing of the haves – mostly the US and Canada – and the have nots.

Because players like Yenith Bailey are out there in the confederation. And tournaments like this serve as a reminder that if the federations of CONCACAF wanted to – if they cared even a fraction as much as they do about the men’s national teams – they could make true investments in the women’s national teams. It wouldn’t take much, but it would mean that players like Bailey wouldn’t just shine once in a blue moon but year after year.

Watching this tournament, it’s clear that there’s a cost to spending no money. If you have no camps, and spend most of every four year cycle forgetting that you even have a women’s program, it puts everything on the players when the event finally does roll around. You might get a miracle here and there, but we should expect so much more.