The 123rd Minute: That Canada Game, You Know The One

Posted on August 26, 2018 by RJ Allen

RJ and Charles talk about the 2012 USWNT Olympic semifinal against Canada. Questionable refereeing, frantic play, *that* goal, and not much defense.

Check us out on iTunes.

Backline Chat: Goodbye Go90, Hello Mexico, and the Tournament of Nations

Posted on August 1, 2018 by RJ Allen

Charles Olney (@olneyce): Hi everyone, and welcome to the Backline Soccer chat. Today we’re going to spend some time talking about international soccer, particularly the Tournament of Nations. But first, can we all pour one out for go90, which is officially shuffling off the stage today? Will anyone be lamenting its departure?

RJ Allen (@TheSoccerCritic): Do we know how the NWSL is handling who will be calling games? Because I can’t remember hearing about that.

Charles Olney: We can hope that they haven’t found anyone and we’ll just get crowd noise.

Becky Schoenecker(@Beckster20): That’s a pretty great take.

RJ Allen: Jon Lipsitz would do it really cheap, NWSL.

Allison Cary (@findingallison): I haven’t had to use the app in the last year, since I’ve been in the UK. But I can’t say I’ve seen anyone who is sad to see it go.

Charles Olney: I actually hope that they return to local broadcasters. I’ve been a pretty big critic of that approach in the past, but the more that I’ve soured on the current system, the more I’ve wondered if I was too harsh on the old approach. It would be nice to get some more perspective on the differences.

RJ Allen: I am a fan of local baseball broadcasters and that’s a lot of the feeling I got from the best of the local broadcasters from the NWSL in years past. So I’d be happy with that return.

Becky Schoenecker: Having announcers who are actually at the games is a huge positive if they’re able to swing it.

Allison Cary: It works well in other sports. I don’t see why it wouldn’t work for the NWSL.

RJ Allen: Some crews were not good. But there were some that were really fun. #BringBackAnnSchatz

Luis Hernandez: I guess I’ll take the opposite side here. I remember the broadcast team the Pride used year one. It wasn’t great. They sometimes didn’t know the player names or mispronounced them worse than the go90 team

Charles Olney: All that said, my guess is that they’ll retain the services of the same broadcasters we’ve been getting, since the actual production company is a separate institution, which was only sending the feed to go90.

RJ Allen: Way to be a downer, Charles.

Charles Olney: But in typical NWSL fashion, they probably won’t tell us anything one way or the other until 2 minutes before the games return.

RJ Allen: Likely you’re right though. But maybe next year we can either get the games on ESPN+ or another way where it’s more consistent.

Luis Hernandez: I like some of the broadcasters now. I just wish I had more of a tie with them as they called the game.

RJ Allen: Also on site would help. So much.

Luis Hernandez: Instead it’s like “who are you and why do I care about you calling the game?” I mean knowing Dan or Jen being the person who called games means something to me because I care/respect their opinions during the match.

Charles Olney: Alright, while we’re on the subject of the NWSL, I’ve got two other things I want to get some quick thoughts about. First: Sky Blue and Chicago had to cancel their game this weekend. Thoughts on that? Is this another example of the Mickey Mouse operation that Sky Blue is running, or just an unfortunate thing that will happen when you’re running a league on a small budget?

RJ Allen: I think it is showing that a lot of teams do not think long term ahead. Teams flay out less than 24 hours before a match in some cases which isn’t ideal for the players bodies. And when something goes wrong there isn’t enough time to sort it out either.

Luis Hernandez: It’s hard to be critical of an operation when the cause is weather, but part of me still kind of thinks that it was due to a Sky Blue screw up that just happened to be connected to the weather.

RJ Allen: Yes, was it bad luck. Sure. But bad luck keeps happening to them too.

Allison Cary: Yeah, it seems like it could have been avoided with better planning.

Luis Hernandez:Orlando learned about travel in the league the first year and now they give themselves two days in Portland and Seattle. What is Sky Blue’s excuse?

RJ Allen: The flights are cheaper. They take whatever flight is cheapest.

Luis Hernandez:The most recent West Coast swing saw the team stay out on the road instead of flying back to Florida. I assumed other teams did the same thing. Or did Sky Blue not have a west coast swing?

RJ Allen: They may have but this was a one off in terms of travel.

Charles Olney: Second NWSL-adjacent question: North Carolina just won the ICC, after winning matches against PSG and Lyon. How big a deal is this? I’ll start by noting that I literally did not know what ICC actually stood for, and just had to look it up. It’s the International Champions Cup. Not the International Criminal Court.

RJ Allen: I think it’s a 6/10. Yes, Lyon hasn’t played as a unit since May but their starts have played for NT since and it’s not like they are inexperienced players.

I really think it matters no matter if it is their preseason or not.

Allison Cary: I think beating Lyon is a statement. People often say Lyon is the best club in the world (myself included). Beating the best club in the world when you have players on NT duty? That’s impressive.

Luis Hernandez: I think it’s a huge deal that won’t get treated as such because those other teams are in preseason while the Courage are in midseason shape

If the script had been flipped I know the narrative would have been “Of course N.C. losses to OL, what did you expect?”

RJ Allen: I would also like to point out it wasn’t like every Courage player was in mid season form as a starter. Neil Morris has a great chart in one of his pieces that showed that a lot of the players hadn’t played or played much this year.

Charles Olney: I’d probably put it at a 5/10. It’s a preseason game, and it’s hard to overstate how unimportant results are in preseason games. But it’s still a cool result. And perhaps more important, I think it demonstrates just how seriously the North Carolina team buys into their message. To play that intensely, and to achieve that result, with a half-strength team shows just how committed they really are.

As we’ve discussed before, I would LOVE to see a full strength NC and Lyon facing off. This wasn’t that, but it was still cool.

Luis Hernandez: If anything I credit Paul Riley and this makes him a lock to me as coach of the year

RJ Allen: I would also like to point out it would be hard for these teams to both be at full power and play each other with how their seasons go. Possible, maybe but it would be at a very random or difficult time. It’s partly why I have issues with a club world cup.

Charles Olney: In the long term, I think a club world cup would be interesting and potentially could be taken more seriously than it ever could on the men’s side. The problem for the men is that all the best teams in the world play in Europe, so it’s a redundant event. But on the women’s side, there are GREAT teams that would otherwise never play. But I agree the logistics are tough.

Luis Hernandez: I’d rather see an Open Cup in the US before a club World Cup. Club World Cup is just a few steps below to me on priorities

RJ Allen: Oh lord. Pro teams should not play amateur teams.

Charles Olney: That’s an interesting topic, which we should cover soon here. But for now, let’s turn to the main topic at the moment: international soccer. In particular, the Tournament of Nations. I saw some folks saying that the US and Australia match this weekend was a potential preview of next year’s World Cup final. Do people agree that these are maybe the top two teams in the world right now?

RJ Allen: I think it could very well be a knock out game. But unless FIFA starts seeding teams better the Aussies and the US could play in the opening round for all we know.

Allison Cary: I think Australia and the US are two of the best teams in the world right now. But I agree with RJ’s point about seeding.

RJ Allen: I do think the Aussies are much higher than their 8th place FIFA ranking though. They have a lot of great players who work well together. And they were missing their starting outside back in this match.

Charles Olney: Personally, I don’t think it would be fair to set the US and Australia on a separate tier from some of the other competitors. But I wouldn’t argue if you wanted to call them 1A and 1B, with teams like England, France, etc. falling just a hair below them.

Allison Cary: For the record, I’m not saying they’re *the* best. But like RJ said, I think the Aussies are higher than 8th. I put them in a pretty elite class.

Charles Olney: For Australia, I think it was impressive how well the played in a game where Sam Kerr was very quiet. It can be tempting to think of them as primarily a vehicle for Kerr, but they absolutely aren’t. It’s a solid team from top to bottom.

RJ Allen: I was at the games in CT. There was a much, much different feeling watching the game between the US and Australia than there was for Japan and Brazil. The pace, what the players were doing, the way they were connecting and defending each other. All of it was just on another level for US v AUS.

Charles Olney: That’s a great point, RJ. And it provides some evidence that the Tournament of Nations matters, even if it’s fundamentally an imaginary, constructed event. By pitting these teams against each other twice in 12 months, it created an opportunity for a real rivalry.

Luis Hernandez: The main takeaway I get from ToN is that the USWNT has lost its mystique and intimidation factor. Other teams don’t fear the US anymore

RJ Allen: I don’t think that’s a bad thing though.

Luis Hernandez: I don’t think it is either. It should drive to make the team and players better.

Charles Olney: Regarding intimidation, when did the US really have that, though? Certainly not in the Olympics. Last World Cup? Didn’t feel like it. Before that? I’d maybe say that these games have been more about Australia showing that they’re ready to take on anyone.

RJ Allen: Maybe 2012?

I do think there is a pretty healthy respect between the teams in terms of knowing they have to go all out. You saw players working all 90+ minutes in a way the US rarely has to. The US doesn’t have to play 90 against many teams and the Aussies have quickly become one they do. And that is great to see.

Charles Olney: Agreed.

Luis Hernandez: I agree with RJ on this one too.

Charles Olney: Any other thoughts people have about the ToN? How is the US playing? Standouts or stars?

RJ Allen: Zerboni changed the way the US played when she came on. From the way Sauerbrunn lined up behind her to the way the midfield pushed up. I could see the change the second she came on in how players played.

Luis Hernandez: I thought Davidson bounced back nicely from her SheBelieves performance

Allison Cary: I’m really disappointed that Jill Ellis is only starting Naeher. I’d particularly love to see Franch get some playing time.

Luis Hernandez: And I’m here for Dunn on the back line.

RJ Allen: I am not. She got beat, a lot. In a lot of spots the camera might not have picked up. Seeing it was rough.

Luis Hernandez: With the level of talent of the team, I want all our good players on the pitch as we can, if it makes sense. I don’t think Press has had much of a ToN

Charles Olney: My lukewarm big picture take is that the US setup is basically working as intended, and while I don’t think it’s the best possible usage of the available talent, it’s a fairly user-proof, which is a nice feature. So while I’m not thrilled with their approach, I also am finding it a lot harder to get truly worked up about tactics and things. The US hasn’t lost in a year, playing all of the world’s best teams, and that’s not a total coincidence.

In particular, I’m ready to mostly stop complaining about the lack of buildup through the middle. That’s just not how this team is going to play, and while I wish they would do something different, it’s probably time to stop tilting at that windmill.

Luis Hernandez: It’s hard to screw up a 4-3-3

RJ Allen: I do think people get way, way, way too worked up about the “US being in a downfall and OMG everything is horrible”. They are playing well enough to beat pretty much every team in the top 10 or at least draw.

This is not the 2015 team and I’d really like to see people accept that.

Allison Cary: I think there is a section of US fans that want them to always be dominant, and that doesn’t really work well with the evolving nature of the sport. We want other countries to invest more and other teams to be better. Teams like Australia challenging the US is a good thing for women’s soccer. But it might mean the US not winning every game they play (although as RJ pointed out, they’re still winning most games).

Charles Olney: Okay, any final thoughts on individuals players, positive or negative?

RJ Allen: I think the US has to move on from the “Becky Sauerbrunn will always save us” mentality because frankly she can’t anymore. She is still very much an 8.5/10 player. But she isn’t 9.5/10 anymore.

Charles Olney: I think that’s fair. She remains a fantastic player, and the US is much worse-off when she can’t play. But she isn’t unbeatable. It’s strange that after so long with the defense being the team’s main strength, it’s become a significant weakness in 2018.

RJ Allen: Not having O’Hara hurt them more than I expected. As Sauerbrunn said in the video they did together, O’Hara’s energy can change a match.

Charles Olney: Alright, final topic: the rest of CONCACAF. Last night Mexico and Costa Rica played, in a likely matchup of two teams that will be vying for an automatic WC bid in a few months. Did people get a chance to watch it? Thoughts on either team?

RJ Allen: I’m glad teams in the same range are playing each other. I think it is a much better test for them than either playing the US and getting beaten 5-0.

Charles Olney: I’ve been impressed with the progress of the Mexican team. As you say, they can’t really hang with the US, but I thought they played well in those April friendlies. And it looks like the trajectory is continuing to move in a positive direction. I wonder if the success of Liga MX Femenil might have a role to play in that?

Luis Hernandez: I didn’t watch it but I followed it on Twitter.

RJ Allen: I hope they open Liga MX Femenil up to anyone able to play for Mexico next season.

Charles Olney: I’m particularly excited because one half of the group stage for WC qualifying will be happening down in my neck of the woods. They haven’t officially announced locations apart from the US and Canada, but I’m hoping that Mexico ends up in that pod. I’d love to get a chance to see them live a few more times. (edited)

RJ Allen: It would make sense for them to put Mexico in that group.

Luis Hernandez: I thought it was great for Mexico. As I tweeted the other day, I think the Mexican federation had to do something since it wasn’t getting a ROI for NWSL

Luis Hernandez: I could see the change the second she came on in how players played. Creating Liga MX Femenil is a result of it and it’s improved he Mexican squad by leaps and bounds.

RJ Allen: I rather Mexico improve their league than send players into the NWSL and not. I think having Liga MX Femenil and the NWSL both in North America is better for soccer overall. And maybe one day open it up to players outside of Mexico.

Luis Hernandez: I don’t think Mexico has peaked yet either

RJ Allen: Mexico is 25 right now. I think by 2023 they could get near 15 or 14 if they keep investing.

Allison Cary: It’s definitely getting football fans in Mexico excited. At least female football fans.

Luis Hernandez: I think it’s just fans overall. This is what happens when both the men and women sides can use the same team crest

Luis Hernandez: Which I think would be a huge marketing win if teams in NWSL could do that

RJ Allen: I do not like that idea at all, whatsoever. They are not Orlando City Women. They are the Orlando Pride. They are not the Portland Timbers Women. They are the Portland Thorns. And so on. (edited)

Luis Hernandez: Doesn’t seem to hurt attendance in Mexico

Charles Olney: As with many things, I can see the arguments on both sides. I think in an environment where soccer teams already have huge, dedicated audiences, tapping in can be very helpful. The US doesn’t really have that, and charting out an independent identity seems to make a lot more sense. But I also completely get the concern about being designated as a secondary team making it hard to get out from the under that shadow.

Luis Hernandez: And you get clearly identifiable rivals. If you had Seattle Sounders women vs Portland Timbers women I think the crowd would be even bigger

RJ Allen: No. Fuck no. Hell no. All day, every day, no.

Allison Cary: I can’t get past the idea that Charles mentioned. The women will always be seen as secondary if they don’t have their own identity.

Luis Hernandez: You’re against LA Galaxy Orange County Women’s?

RJ Allen: I am out if the league starts doing that. I’ll go cover cornhole or something on ESPN.

Luis Hernandez: I’m just saying it’s a crest thing (representing the club) regardless of gender of the team

RJ Allen: Why on earth shouldn’t a different team have their own crest? Are fans not smart enough to understand they are under the same umbrella?

Luis Hernandez: In English football, I support the Blackburn Rovers. So I have a built-in interest in Rovers women’s side

RJ Allen: And if they were the Blackburn Bluejays how would that change the interest?

Luis Hernandez: Same club, different teams

RJ Allen: I don’t understand why they can’t have their own name and crest but under the same umbrella and that is the same.

Luis Hernandez: It would be easier for me to follow a women’s side at the top flight so I can track it better. I just have a natural interest for Blackburn.

RJ Allen: If your problem is people can’t remember the names of the women’s clubs then I can’t help you.

Luis Hernandez: That’s not it. It’s about the crest.

RJ Allen: They are not second-class citizens. They do not need to default to the men’s crest.

Luis Hernandez: But you’re missing my point, it isn’t a men’s crest to me at all. Just a club crest. I am not putting gender on a team symbol. Does that make sense?

Charles Olney: I think I’m on Team RJ here, but I think it’s to some extent a product of different naming conventions. In the US nicknames are part of the name, full stop. In Europe, they’re often informal or virtually nonexistent.

Allison Cary: In the UK, if I’m talking about Chelsea Women, they are absolutely seen as secondary. And up until recently they were still “Chelsea Ladies.” That might be able to change if clubs took the initiative, but so far they haven’t. And they have much bigger brand power than MLS. I don’t see how it would benefit a US women’s team to have a unified crest with a men’s side, all I can see is the NWSL becoming even more of an afterthought than it already is.

Luis Hernandez: I get what you are saying Allison and I don’t think you’re wrong at all. But I also see it work in Mexico and as far as I know France so maybe it can happen.

Allison Cary: I don’t think it really works well in France. I went to the Lyon-PSG match in Lyon in the city’s main stadium and attendance was pretty awful. And that was supposed to be one of their biggest games of the year.

RJ Allen: Just because something works in one market, doesn’t mean it works everywhere. See Portland.

Did US Soccer Call Up Jaelene Hinkle to Avoid Litigation?

Posted on July 26, 2018 by RJ Allen

Jaelene Hinkle was called back into a US Women’s National Team camp last week. Given that Hinkle refused to play last year because she couldn’t accept wearing a rainbow pride jersey, many have seen the decision to bring her back as a betrayal of the US team’s supposed commitment to inclusion and equality. That this all happened so soon after the most recent month of pride only drove the point home further.

The ongoing conversations about this process are very important, and I encourage everyone to read some of the excellent articles on the subject, which I endorse wholeheartedly. However, in this piece, I want to focus attention on a narrower question: what is the potential legal liability here? And if any exists, does that explain the bizarre chain of events in the past week, in which Hinkle was called up, only to be left out of the group that will actually continue to the Tournament of Nations?

Let’s start by looking at what we actually know:

Last June, Hinkle was called up—after a fairly long hiatus away from the team—for a set of friendlies in Scandinavia. But once the pride uniforms were announced, she withdrew. Then, earlier this summer, she gave an interview to the 700 Club confirming what was already assumed: she had done so because she believed that wearing the pride uniform would violate her religious principles.

The critical questions: was US Soccer obligated to make accommodations for her religious beliefs? And were they legally permitted to blacklist her from future camps, if that is in fact what happened?

Title VII creates an obligation to accommodate sincerely held religious belief

The controlling rule here is Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That law famously prohibits discrimination on the basis of race in employment, but also covers a number of protected categories. Specifically, it prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion.

Broadly, that means that an employee can’t be fired for their religious beliefs, but it also creates a wide range of narrower obligations on employers to provide reasonable accommodations for their religious employees. As with many such laws, the devil is in the details, and what counts as ‘reasonable’ is open to dispute. But over the decades since the law was passed, we’ve received a great deal of clarification by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and by federal courts.

Specifically, they’ve said that employers are obliged to accommodate religious beliefs “unless the accommodation would cause an undue hardship for the employer.”

In the athletic context, a general argument for uniform kits would likely constitute an insufficient defense against a claim for reasonable accommodation. For example, a devout Muslim player who wished to wear a hijab would likely have a strong case, absent decisive evidence that doing so would interfere with her ability to perform. Based on the same logic, Hinkle could argue that the pride uniform violated her religious beliefs and expect an alternative accommodation.

And while there are obvious differences between a hijab and a rainbow kit, the EEOC and the courts have both made clear that they don’t see policing the legitimacy of specific beliefs to be within their purview. So long as the belief is sincere, it receives this protection. In Hinkle’s case, while her belief may be misguided or even bigoted, there is no denying that it is sincerely held and religious in nature. Moreover, the courts have also been unwilling to litigate whether a given belief is an accurate reflection of their religious dogma. So the fact that other Christians on the team had no problem wearing the rainbow does not limit Hinkle’s rights of conscientious objection.

That said, there is extensive evidence supporting the right of employers to enforce uniform requirements over religious objections. For example, in Cooper v. Eugene School District, the Oregon Supreme Court found that the state could reasonably prevent a teacher from wearing religious dress while working, because the law served the purpose of promoting religious neutrality. In Goldman v. Weinberger, the US Supreme Court upheld the right of the military to impose uniform policies by prohibiting a Jewish Air Force officer from wearing a yarmulke. These cases dealt with exceptional circumstances—with public institutions striving to produce public goods—but courts have also found in favor of private employers simply looking to successfully promote their industry (see Cloutier v. Costco, Bhatia v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., etc.).

All of these cases suggest that Hinkle would face an uphill battle asking for a religious accommodation, but this does not mean there is no chance. Nor does it mean that US Soccer ought to feel safe from potential litigation. While Hinkle might not win a hypothetical case, it wouldn’t be a slam dunk either way, and US Soccer might well find themselves on the hook for some kind of reasonable accommodation to the pride uniform.

US Soccer isn’t a normal employer, but that may not matter

Things get even messier when you consider the nature of the employment here, with US Soccer differing from normal employers in several potentially significant ways.

First, as a subsidiary member of FIFA—the international body governing global soccer rules—the US team is constrained by a system of rules that limit its options. And FIFA’s equipment regulations state that “The Colours used for numbering and naming purposes shall be the same for all outfield players of the same team” (IV.5.4). Given this, US Soccer cannot simply accommodate Hinkle by permitting her to wear a non-pride variant. While it is possible that they could be persuaded to waive this requirement, FIFA is hardly known for its responsiveness, and it seems likely they would simply instruct the US to abandon the pride uniforms entirely rather than create an exception.

Given these facts, it is difficult to determine what would count as a ‘reasonable accommodation.’ It’s hard to credit the idea that they should abandon the pride uniforms entirely, since these constitute an important revenue stream, not to mention a form of political speech. If a company’s message is subject to veto by a single religious objection, speech is not free. It’s conceivable that the US would at least need to demonstrate a good-faith effort to consult with the appropriate FIFA body for a religious exemption, though even here the reputational costs would not be insignificant.

Second, US Soccer is also an idiosyncratic entity in the manner of its employment. For the limited set of allocated players, the US national team is their employer. But for floaters like Hinkle, their employer remains their club team, while the national team effectively sub-contracts their services for specific engagements. For this reason, once Hinkle declined the invitation to camp last summer, one could argue that she ceased to be an employee of US Soccer. This would not end the legal question, however. Employers are bound by Title VII even for temporary or contracted workers, and if the triggering move for Hinkle’s initial departure was an illegal imposition on her religious beliefs, this would poison the entire process.

Even if Hinkle can’t force an exception, she may be able to win a claim of blacklisting

Given the facts described so far, Hinkle likely has no legal argument for eliminating pride kits, nor would she likely be able to force an exception to uniform policy when those pride kits are used. However, she may well have a cause of action if her conscientious refusal was treated as a reason to blacklist her entirely. Such action could credibly be interpreted as ‘retaliation’ for the expression of a religious belief.

Proving a blacklisting case would be difficult, but not impossible. A big part of the argument would rely on establishing that Hinkle’s omission is because of her religious objections, rather than simply being due to performance. Here, one might note that she was hardly a mainstay in the squad before all these events. Indeed, her callup last June which precipitated these events was her first in over a year. One could argue that the subsequent lack of call-ups was simply a return to normal–a question of form, not anything more complicated. This is, in fact, what Jill Ellis said last month:

I asked Jill Ellis if Jaelene Hinkle’s withdrawal from last year’s #USWNT camp is why she hasn’t been called back since. pic.twitter.com/U2NXaEJwYy

— John D. Halloran (@JohnDHalloran) June 7, 2018

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

But with all due respect to coach Ellis, this claim is hard to swallow. Hinkle is probably the best left back in the US pool at the moment, a point made clear by two consecutive excellent seasons in the NWSL. One could argue about how well club play translates to the national team environment, and it’s certainly plausible that she wouldn’t simply waltz into the starting XI. But considering the lack of depth at fullback and Hinkle’s excellent performances there for the last 18 months, it’s hard to believe that her exclusion has been driven by performance on the field.

One could argue that Hinkle turning down a call-up provides evidence of unreliability, which could discourage a coach from relying on her in the future. But if the basis for her refusal is a religious objection, the principles outlined above likely prohibit the national team from treating that as evidence of unreliability. Just as US Soccer is required to treat pregnancy as a legitimate reason for absence, and is obliged to give new consideration to any player post-pregnancy, they likely are required to treat Hinkle’s unwillingness to play in a rainbow kit as a justified sabbatical and evaluate her qualities independent of that knowledge.

Team chemistry does matter, but it’s not clear how much

However, this doesn’t settle the matter. Because soccer is a team game, and Hinkle’s presence might well affect team dynamics. After all, the national team squad contains several queer players (not to mention a queer coach), and plenty of others who have expressed strong sentiments in favor of equality. Introducing Hinkle into that environment could potentially be disruptive.

And this sort of ‘chemistry’ problem creates further legal wrinkles. Consider Wilson v. US West Communications, in which Christine Wilson “made a religious vow or promise to God that she would wear a particular anti-abortion button” featuring a picture of an aborted fetus. The court accepted her right to describe this vow as religious in nature, and acknowledged that her employer was not permitted to forbid the action entirely. However, because the pin was creating significant distress for her coworkers, the court found that her employer could demand that she cover it up while at work. In this instance, the case for a hospitable work environment for all employees was balanced against Wilson’s right of religious expression.

How would this apply in the case of the US Women’s National Team? It’s hard to know for sure. However, it seems highly unlikely that US Soccer could credibly argue that Hinkle’s presence would constitute a severe disruption without making any further investigation. On questions of chemistry, the coaching staff may be able to offer expert speculation, but mere speculation probably does not provide a sufficient shield.

Does fear of litigation explain why Hinkle was called back, and then left out again? Quite possibly

I went into this topic assuming that the legal case for Hinkle’s return to the fold was unlikely. It seemed to me that coaching decisions are generally inscrutable, and that even vague gestures toward the value of team chemistry would be sufficient to protect US Soccer. After digging into the issue, I no longer find that as persuasive.

I do not think Hinkle would win a lawsuit, necessarily, but given the facts, it seems quite plausible that she could at least initiate proceedings. Whether any such conversations took place, I can’t possibly say. But it would not be surprising, given the facts, if the administrative arm of US Soccer insisted on her return, at least into the mix if not into the full squad. This could have been worked out directly with Hinkle, but may well have simply been a preemptive act to buttress their legal shield should litigation ever be enjoined.

If one wonders why the US called Hinkle back into camp, only to leave her behind once the tournament began, fear of litigation certainly would go some way toward providing an explanation.

Why Is USWNT So Far Ahead of Their Male Counterparts?

Posted on July 19, 2018 by RJ Allen

The United States Women’s National Team are the crème de la crème of women’s soccer, placing no lower than third in all seven World Cups and winning the tournament three times. They are gunning for their eighth straight World Cup appearance next year, and with it, the chance to defend the championship they won in 2015 in Canada. The team currently sits top of the FIFA Women’s World Rankings as well, where they have been ranked at either first or second since 2003.

In contrast, the USWNT’s counterparts, the United States Men’s National Team, are conspicuously absent at this year’s World Cup in Russia. The USMNT failed to qualify for the quadrennial showcase after a sorry loss to Trinidad and Tobago in their final Hexagonal World Cup qualifier. As a result, the US missed their 11th World Cup overall and first since 1986.

The USMNT’s shock setback comes hot on the heels of a strong showing in the 2014 World Cup, where The Stars and Stripes, then managed by Germany’s Jürgen Klinsmann, managed to get into the round of 16, only to fall to Belgium, 2–1. Interestingly, Belgium have built considerable momentum off of their impressive performances in Brazil, looking mighty impressive in Russia. The first European side to qualify for the World Cup per Ladbrokes’s in-depth preview, Belgium went blemish-free in the qualifiers, scoring an astonishing 43 goals in the process. In contrast, USMNT have regressed since that strong showing four years ago, with things coming to a head against Trinidad and Tobago.

Given the struggles of the men’s team, it’s only natural to wonder: Why is the USWNT so far ahead of their male counterparts?

Talent, clearly, is the main difference. The women’s team have some of the game’s best players, including Alex Morgan, Carli Lloyd, Christen Press, Julie Ertz, and Becky Sauerbrunn, who can legitimately be considered among the finest on the planet. In years past, the team had Mia Hamm, Abby Wambach, Hope Solo, and Brandi Chastain. In short, the USWNT talent train is chugging along, routinely churning out elite soccer players. The NWSL, one of the most competitive women’s league in the world, is actually so full of world-class talent that some believe if North Carolina played in the next World Cup they would be one of the favorites to win.

The USMNT, on the other hand, have a dearth of world-class talent, especially now. Tim Howard and Clint Dempsey are towards the end of 30 and pretty much past their prime, while Christian Pulisic, the one player on the men’s team with legit A-level talent is still scratching the surface of his immense potential.

This talent disparity has caused another problem for the USMNT: they are caught between generations. Howard and Dempsey are 39 and 35, respectively, while squad regulars DaMarcus Beasley, Michael Orozco, Geoff Cameron, and Tim Ream are in their early 30s. The aforementioned Pulisic, meanwhile, is only 19 and is already burdened with being the best player the USMNT has by a mile. This means that the team is rolling with a mix of past-their-prime veterans and unproven youngsters with relatively no international experience. The USWNT, on the other hand, have no such problems, as they continuously parade talent-rich lineups fortified by veterans, in-their-prime superstars, and up-and-comers ready to make their mark on the sport. This means that every women’s team that the USWNT rolls out in international tournaments is well balanced, and neither too young to be overwhelmed by the bright lights of international play nor too old to get left behind.

The USWNT have also benefited from a stable, not to mention very capable, coaching staff. The fact that Jill Ellis and her assistants have steered clear from controversy certainly helps, too, as the players have been able to focus solely on football. Jürgen Klinsmann’s tenure with the USMNT, in contrast, was marred by controversial decisions that in many ways led to the German losing the confidence of the locker room. His replacement, Bruce Arena, was no better, with Yahoo! Sports sportswriter Nick Mendola ruing Arena’s clear preference for his favorite MLS players.

It helps, too, that the team has consistently won over a long period, which has allowed the USWNT to build a winning culture among a talented pool of players. A high standard has been set and this positive mentality has been passed down from team to team and is very prominent in the current USWNT.

Now, the women’s World Cup is still a year away, and with the men’s team not playing in the current tournament, the pressure is on for the USWNT to prevent a World Cup double whammy for the red, white, and blue. But given the sustained excellence of the USWNT, a trip to France in 2019 seems very likely, as does the chances of bringing the World Cup trophy home for the fourth time.

Route Two Soccer: Why the US Can’t Figure Out How to Break Down a Bunker

Posted on June 18, 2018 by RJ Allen

Why does the United States Women’s National Team struggle to break down compact, deep defensive teams?

In many ways, this has been the defining question of the two years since the US crashed out of the Olympics after failing to pick apart a very defensive Sweden. Hope Solo called them “a bunch of cowards” for playing that way. But Sweden weren’t cowards; they were just being practical.

Return to the question: why does the US struggle to break down a defensive block? Because everyone does. That’s why teams do it.

Soccer is a game of inches, of low margins and tiny probabilities. The default is for teams to not score, and it takes something special to upset that balance. Good teams still win because they possess the talent necessary to make the difference, but it’s hardly a certainty. We’ve all seen games where one team dominates but simply can’t break through, thanks to a goalkeeper standing on their head. Or games where the dominant team hits the crossbar three or four times. Just a few inches in one direction and they’d have cruised to victory.

This is frustrating, but if you’re the better team, the best you can do is expand the number of good shots you generate, and rely on your talented players to convert some of the chances.

Conversely, for weaker teams, it can make a lot of sense to play a defensive style. By reducing the chances available to both teams, you’ll hurt your own odds of scoring. But you’ll hurt the odds of the other team more. Playing defensively doesn’t change the basic structure of the match: the superior team is still superior and remains the favorite. But it can change the odds. By cutting down on the number of chances, you reduce their ability to exploit that superiority to the fullest extent.

Not every defensive approach is the same. At the extreme, teams can put all eleven players behind the ball, retreating deep into their defensive quadrant. In a more limited form, they can employ the classic ‘two banks of four.’ And there are plenty of ‘defensive’ setups that don’t necessarily rely on a lot of deep numbers but instead look to clog up the middle. The popular 4-2-3-1 setup can be quite defensive if both holding midfield players are more destructive than creative.

These all pose slightly different tactical problems. But when people talk about ‘bunkers,’ they usually mean teams who set up at least two lines of deep defense, conceding much of the midfield into order to shorten the space between their lines. The goal is to create two walls of bodies that close off the elusive ‘pockets of space’ that soccer commentators so love to talk about.

This generally makes for tactics that resemble nothing so much as the siege of a fortified Medieval castle. The superior team will unleash plenty of shots, but usually from distance, or from poor angles. They’ll have space to maneuver 30 yards from goal, but will have trouble getting any closer. They’ll have plenty of room on the wings to send in crosses, but will rarely get a clean head on the ball when it comes in.

When this sort of defensive play works, it’s usually down to a combination of three factors: good execution by the weaker team, poor execution by the stronger team, and luck.

The missing element here, often the most critical factor in other matches, is tactics. That’s because the whole point of deep defensive blocks is their capacity to severely limit the number of tactical issues in a game. There is no special sauce, no secret ingredient, no tactical innovation that will ‘solve’ this problem. A deep defensive block eliminates most of the spaces that players want to poke into. It jams up all the locks that smart tactics are trying to pick. The whole point is to reduce the number of unknowns in a game, to prevent superior teams from exploiting a wide range of game states.

This doesn’t mean defensive blocks are unbeatable. Far from it. Good teams can beat them, and more often than not they do. But not because of any particularly innovative techniques. The solution to beating this approach is to do the obvious things, execute them, and wait for the weight of probability to turn one of your half-chances into a goal.

So what are the obvious things?

First, play good crossers on the wings and good headers up front. This is where a ‘classic number 9’ can be useful—a big, bruising player who can out jump and outmuscle the opposing defenders. Think Abby Wambach. But while a strong #9 is important here, the bigger element is simply having wide players capable of posing a serious threat. Defensive blocks are strongest when they’re narrow. The more dangers you can create from wide spaces, the more stretched the defensive lines will have to be, and the more opportunities you’ll find in the middle.

Second, press aggressively when you lose possession. Defensive lines work because they’re tight and controlled. In a true bunker, the weaker team will treat this solidity as paramount, and won’t even try to counter for fear of losing their shape. But very few teams play that way. And the more that the opponent tries to attack, the harder it will be for them to recover. That can be exploited.

Third, shoot from distance. Deep defensive teams will generally offer plenty of space from 30-35 yards out. Coming out to pressure the ball is risky, because it creates holes that can be exploited. But if you have players willing and able to unleash dangerous shots from that range, it makes holding the defensive lines much more difficult.

Fourth, work the ball quickly through tight spaces. No block is impermeable. There will always still be space, just less than usual. A player with exceptional skill on the ball or with superb passing agility will often be able to exploit the tiniest of opportunity. This isn’t easy, and will often result in losing the ball, but that’s a cost that must be paid.

These are all simple ideas, and usually, they’ll get the job done. A defender will make a mistake, get caught out of position, miss a crucial tackle, or lunge in and concede a penalty. Or they’ll just get unlucky. A deflected shot will go in, or a cleared ball will fall right to the feet of an attacker. Moreover, even if they execute perfectly, there will still be half-chances. High-quality finishers aren’t guaranteed to convert those chances, but more often than not, one will eventually fall.

But probability isn’t certainty. Sometimes the chances just don’t fall. And when that happens, there can be a temptation to say that the coach needs to try something else. Unfortunately, the simple reality is that there aren’t really any other options. You just have to keep plugging away, putting the defensive team under pressure, and forcing them to execute.

None of this is to say that coaching has no role to play here. In a game of small margins, every opportunity to exploit an advantage needs to be taken. Good coaches will prepare for defensive teams by working on set pieces, by developing setups that will be capable of exploiting wide spaces, by emphasizing the importance of quick ball movement. They’ll be willing to adapt their approach. Perhaps they’ll bring on a big physical number 9 who normally wouldn’t start. Perhaps they’ll shift to a 442 which allows them to get four wide attackers involved without losing numbers in the middle. And so on.

Of course, it’s always worth looking for improvements in these margins. But marginal improvements are the best that can ever really be hoped for. At the end of the day, these games are usually determined by execution, not tactics.

Backline Chat: USWNT Friendlies, the Men’s World Cup, and Back to the NWSL

Posted on June 14, 2018 by RJ Allen

Charles Olney (@olneyce): Alright, welcome to our slack chat for this week. Today we’re going to start with the US national team, who just finished up a pair of friendlies against China. How do people think it went?

For what it’s worth, my general takeaway is: the US still isn’t playing great, but two more wins against solid competition sure sounds a lot better than two draws or two losses.

RJ Allen (@TheSoccerCritic): I think it’s harder to say than people might want it to be because of who was out for the US. Not having maybe 5 starters/starters coming back from being hurt really makes it muddy as to what are really issues. I will say it does show how poor Ellis can be at game planning though.

Allison Cary (@findingallison): Yeah, I thought they were lucky to get the win yesterday. But they did get the win, so I guess that counts for something.

Charles Olney: Why do you say lucky to get the win, Allison? Because of the save from Harris, or a more general comment?

Allison Cary: It wasn’t far off from being a draw. I guess that was more my point. Both with China equalizing in the second half and nearly equalizing again had Harris not made that save.

Charles Olney: To my eyes, they were totally dominant in the first half, and should have had a two-goal margin (I think Ertz’s goal was onside). They struggled more in the second half, for sure. I’d say it was a pretty classic USWNT performance–good enough for the win, but not a whole lot more.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I think they generally looked like the better side in the first half. But then not finishing those chances… I mean, it doesn’t mean much to say I thought they played better if they can’t score.

(This coming from a bitter France fan).

RJ Allen: How much is “totally dominant” worth when they weren’t on the scoreboard though? I agree the US was the better side – though maybe by not as much as you do – but for most of the time it was a 1 goal or draw game.

Charles Olney: Well, like I said I think they should have been up 2-0. But this does sort of get at the larger question I wanted to ask.

I spent some time on twitter this week hyping up the US. Now admittedly that’s partly just me making the argument for the sake of making the argument, but I do think that expectations are sometimes set a little too high. So let me ask it this way: who do you think are favorites to win the World Cup?

Allison Cary: I think England is in a good position to go far.

RJ Allen: Right now my top 4 are US, England, Aussies and France.

Allison Cary: I’m a bit surprised by France, but otherwise I agree.

RJ Allen: They are at home. That gives them a boost for me.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I think they’ve hurt me too many times for me to have faith. But I hope you’re right.

Charles Olney: I think that’s a fair top 4. And I’d have a hard time drawing a clear line between those, or to exclude Germany, the Netherlands, etc. Which I think really just shows that things are pretty close at the top of the game right now. But all things being equal, it’s hard for me to say that anyone is in a MORE favorable position than the US.

Which isn’t to say that there isn’t plenty of reasons for concern about the US. But I think people need to calibrate their expectations. This is a good team, quite possibly the favorite, even accounting for their limitations.

Luis Hernandez (@radioactivclown): I’m okay with the WNT performance. Championship caliber teams find ways to win. Was it ideal? Not even close but I think there’s a lot to take away and hopefully Jill improves the squad. I was also happy to see the team get tested in a friendly. I think the team is in good position heading into the World Cup. Favored but not a favorite.

RJ Allen: The US has a lot of champagne problems and one or two big ones. The problem is people confusing the two.

Charles Olney: So let’s dial in a little before we move on. What do you see as the big problems?

RJ Allen: Morgan vs Press vs (Insert forward of your choice here) is not a real problem.

Charles Olney: I agree that the forwards just aren’t a ‘problem’ in any meaningful sense of the term. Whoever is in form this time next year is going to be one of the best strikers in the world. If it’s Morgan, great. If it’s Press, awesome. If it’s Pugh and Rapinoe, wonderful. If it’s Amy Rodriguez, amazing.

Alanna Fairbairn (@jfhobbit): I see the lack of defensive depth as being the biggest problem.

RJ Allen: I think the outside back area and maybe center midfield are the biggest problems right now. The outside backs are all hurt so Ellis is using players there that she shouldn’t and not calling up those she should. And center midfield just feels like a lack of something. An ill-fitting connection might be the best way to put it.

Charles Olney: I’d say the US’s biggest problem over the past few years has been sorting out the midfield, but would say that the issues are starting to shift backward a bit. Mostly because I’ve decided to just accept that the US isn’t going to get the sort of midfield play that I really want from them. And in that case, the group of Mewis, Ertz, Brian, Zerboni, etc. is going to ensure that we make it difficult for the other team, even if we don’t necessarily generate a ton through the center either. But that puts a lot on the fullbacks, so that really feels like the crisis point

RJ Allen: I think it was Kim McCauley who said on Twitter – maybe joking – the US should lean in the being assholes on the pitch and I’m not sure she is wrong. The US has players who can dominate and sometimes I really think they shy away from that for some reason that doesn’t benefit the team. Horan, Zerboni, O’Hara and even Morgan – among others – have the talent and the style about them that can bend teams to their will a lot more than they sometimes do.

Charles Olney: It’s a strange place for the team, which was supposedly spending the past few years developing and improving technically. We haven’t really seen much in the way of results there. But I sometimes wonder if that was just a big waste of time to even discuss.

RJ Allen: You really want to throw a team off? Like Horan, Zerboni, O’Hara and Morgan make them pay – within the laws of the game – and a lot of teams would get rattled. They half do it anyway.

Charles Olney: One final comment I’ll throw out is that I thought the second game showed a (relatively rare) example of Ellis tweaking things slightly to get good results. The setup in the first half wasn’t all that different from the previous game, but the midfield pinching in aggressively forced China to stay compact, and then Dunn on the left and Press on the right had tons of space to work. And it was pretty successful!

I think that’s a big thing to watch going forward. Now that we’re actually getting close to real games, will Ellis the tinkerer be able to plug a few holes here and there, even if she’s never going to fundamentally outwit anyone tactically.

RJ Allen: Ellis is a fine coach. She is fine. Like dry toast. She isn’t your favorite and she isn’t horrible.

Charles Olney: I’d say that’s fair.

Allison Cary: “Like dry toast” is honestly just the best comparison.

Luis Hernandex: I’m not fond of the tactics the WNT employs at times and I put that on the coach. To me that’s the biggest problem. I’m just convinced Jill is gone after the World Cup. I’d also like the US to better develop fullbacks. I’d also like to see us develop a true number 10. So yeah youth development? Even though we just had the U-17 win the CONCACAF tournament.

Charles Olney: Alright, so we can set the national team aside for a bit. They won’t be back until the Tournament of Nations, and we can devote our attention elsewhere. Mostly to the NWSL, but there’s also another big event going on this summer that I think we should touch on at least for a moment here: the men’s World Cup.

It’s the biggest event in world sports, and while we focus on women’s soccer, obviously, I’m guessing that some of us will have at least an eye on it.

So: who will be watching?

Alanna Fairbairn: I will be, when I’m not out of town and easy streaming range. I’m nominally rooting for Iceland because I love a good underdog story

RJ Allen: I would like Iceland to win because their men’s and women’s coaches help each out during majors and I think that’s the coolest thing.

Allison Cary: I’m excited about it. Especially being in England, and London specifically. It’ll be really cool to see how the people here get into it.

Charles Olney: For myself, it’s going to be a strange experience. I think I watched 90% or more of the games in the last four cups, but I’m pretty much checking out of this one. I’m just beyond sick of FIFA’s corruption, and while the Qatar cup is the true moral travesty, Russia is hardly a great place to plant your flag, either. So I’m going to grudgingly watch a few matches here and there, but mostly trying to just let it slide past.

I’ll certainly watch the Mexico games, and root for them.

And I’ll be hoping for Messi to get the title he deserves, so we can finally put to rest all the ‘you can’t be the GOAT without a title’ talk.

RJ Allen: Is Messi the short one or the tall one?

Charles Olney: The short one.

RJ Allen: I am putting a moral pox on him until that federation gives anything approximating a damn about their women’s team. You shouldn’t be able to enter the men’s world cup if you don’t have or fund well your women’s team.

Alanna Fairbairn: That would be a interesting political squabble to watch, if FIFA started requiring that.

Charles Olney: I’d support it. It’s a drop in the bucket. They could all pay it.

Luis Hernandez: I’m going to watch every men’s World Cup match. I have my bracket filled out. Just looking forward to seeing good soccer. Not having a horse in the race, I have Germany winning it again going back to back. I can’t root for Mexico.

Charles Olney: Alright, one final question about the boys side of things: any thoughts about the announcement that the joint bid will be hosting the 2026 cup? Will that have any effect on the women’s side of things?

Alanna Fairbairn: I would hope the main effect is an uptick in good soccer stadiums to play in. As well as general sport visibility

Allison Cary: If it really grows support for the game in the U.S the way people think it will, it’s possible we could also carry some of those fans over into the women’s game. But that may be wishful thinking.

RJ Allen: I do think one thing that might change is a few teams that play in football/soccer places might end up getting new places to play.

Charles Olney: In general, I’m a proponent of ‘the rising tide lifts all boats’ theory, so more interest in the game overall will be good. But I’m also a believer in ‘people won’t put resources toward the women’s game unless you hold their feet to the fire, and maybe not even then’ so the effect might not be nearly as big as we’d hope.

Alanna Fairbairn: I would hope that USSF does some PR around the women’s team. Like when the did they One Nation, One Team bit around the 2015 Women’s World Cup to bring people in. Actively go for more fan crossover.

Charles Olney: I hope so, too, but wouldn’t hold my breath for it.

Luis Hernandez: I’m hoping to live to see the World Cup in 2026. Kidding. Kinda. I hope it grows the game even more for the nation and allow our host partners to give us a pass politically. Plus can we also host the Women’s World Cup now? Please.

RJ Allen: We’ve hosted it twice. I don’t think the US should until at least after 2027. I’d love England to get a WWC.

Alanna Fairbairn: That would be brilliant. Way better summer climate too

Allison Cary: That would be fun.

Charles Olney: Okay, final topic: the NWSL will be starting back up again this weekend. Any games that have people particularly excited? Any storylines you’re watching for?

Alanna Fairbairn: So for this weekend, I will be interested to see who of the internationals come back from their break hyped and ready to go, and who comes back exhausted and needing a rest

I noticed that even Megan Rapinoe on her Instagram story was mentioning how stinking long the US camp was this go around.

Charles Olney: I’d say the most important game of the weekend is Chicago-Portland. Both teams will REALLY want a win there, given their struggles so far.

Allison Cary: Yeah, that could be a really defining match if either team can walk away with three points (Portland and Chicago).

RJ Allen: I think Portland is the better team but that doesn’t mean they win.

Charles Olney: I’m certainly curious about when and if Chicago starts to get some of their players back. DiBernardo and Short are supposedly close. Morgan Brian is back in the States and they still have her rights. If they could add those three players in the next week or two, that could make a HUGE difference.

Or it could disrupt the things that were just starting to gel.

Either way, it should be very interesting to follow.

Alanna Fairbairn: I think if DiBernardo is still out, Brian could be an interesting addition to the midfield. She’s at least healthy and well rested now. But it depends on if she decides to stay or requests somewhere else.

Charles Olney: My read on her performance for the NT is that whatever ‘injuries’ she had in France were more a matter of minor setbacks than anything serious. She didn’t look more ready than she did back in April, but didn’t look worse, either. I wouldn’t want to count on her yet, but it could be a big addition if they work it carefully.

RJ Allen: Morgan Brian holds very little possibility for me until she proves she can be healthy long term. See also Lavelle, Rose.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I don’t know that I’d expect to see Brian right away. And I agree with RJ: the injuries thing is critical.

Alanna Fairbairn: And possibly Pugh on that list too, with the injury she picked up in camp

Charles Olney: On a similar note, Julie Ertz still doesn’t look 100% to me, and I’m curious how long it will taker her to get completely right. That could be another huge question for them. Basically: Chicago could be one of the best teams in the league or a continuing disaster over the next month. We have no idea!

Allison Cary: Yep.

Charles Olney: Thoughts about Orlando-Sky Blue? Obviously Orlando are favorites, but Sky Blue has looked a LITTLE bit better. And they have to win at some point. Is it this weekend? And what are they going to do with Carli Lloyd?

Alanna Fairbairn: Rest her and put her in as a super sub. It is time for Lloyd to go the way of Wambach; if she refuses to leave, cut her minutes and give her a chance at the end of the game to add a tally or two to her record.

RJ Allen: They will lose and Reddy will say it is bad luck.

Charles Olney: I have a sneaking suspicion that they pull this one out, but RJ’s clear-eyed cynicism is probably more accurate than my sneaking suspicion.

RJ Allen: You also thought North Carolina were going to get the L in Houston. And while it was a draw it was not a win for H-Town.

Charles Olney: They were so close though!

RJ Allen: Close only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes.

Allison Cary: To be fair, I thought there was a chance Houston might win that match. But I don’t think Sky Blue get the win here. Maybe a draw, if the Pride are having an off day (which is entirely possible).

Alanna Fairbairn: Thus why I’m excited that Houston got Polkinghorne, so she can hopefully help to plug up the defensive holes. And they can maybe defend for longer than 75 minutes a match

RJ Allen: With Polkinghorne in, Brooks to the midfield?

Alanna Fairbairn: Maybe? Or possibly Polkinghorne could be a partner for Chapman on the outside

Charles Olney: I’m certainly curious to see how that affects their backline. I’m a known Van Wyk critic (though I think she’s improved a lot of late), so I’d start to phase her out a bit. But I’ve learned to not try to anticipate what Vera Pauw will do.

Alanna Fairbairn: I do think Brooks to a holding midfield spot is also a possibility. Simply because they just lost Mewis, and they need someone to hold it down in the midfield so Daly and Ohai can do what they do

Charles Olney: I think whatever happens will be an interesting indicator of how Pauw ultimately sees the team. They could play all three of their center backs and get a more solid backline, but sacrifice some attacking potential. Is that a trade Pauw wants to make? Or move Brooks up? I have a hard time seeing them keep the juggling act alive without a stronger support structure in the central midfield, but I’ve been wrong so far.

Luis Hernandez: With the two year anniversary of the Pulse nightclub shooting on the 12th and the club having Pride night with a fundraiser to LGBT charities, I’ll be looking forward to the Orlando/SB match. It should boost everything for the Pride and hopefully the attendance number will not disappoint. I’m also looking forward to the first NWSL match on ESPN News.

Quick Kicks: North Carolina is Nuts

Posted on June 9, 2018 by RJ Allen

RJ and Luis talk all about the NWSL and the USWNT.

Backline Chat: NWSL Buy/Sell/Hold and the China Friendlies

Posted on June 6, 2018 by RJ Allen

Charles Olney (@olneyce): Let’s start things off with a quick round of discussion about the national team friendlies coming up against China. What do people expect from these games? Is there anything in particular you’ll be watching for?

RJ Allen (@TheSoccerCritic): I want Ellis to sit Morgan and Sauerbrunn and co. We know what they can do and we know what they are both good and bad at. I want to see what the other less experienced players are good and bad at. I am pretty sure I am not going to get what I want.

Allison Cary (@findingallison): Agreed. I’d like to see Crystal Dunn get some time, since she’s been great for the Courage so far this season. I’d also like to see some experimentation, particularly on defense. But like RJ said, I don’t really expect to get that. Also please don’t break Rose Lavelle.

Charles Olney: Given that Midge Purce is now out, do we think there’s any chance Dunn plays a more forward role? Or is she definitely going to stick at fullback for both games?

RJ Allen: No. I think they need her in the back or it is going to be basically giving up the wings. Mathias is a very good outside back. For Paul Riley. I don’t know if Ellis can bring that level out in her.

Charles Olney: I’m certainly skeptical of Mathias, though I don’t mind them giving her a look. We’ve seen a lot of players excel when surrounded by the rest of the NC lineup, who don’t necessarily translate that to other environments. But they’re playing a fairly weak China team, so this sure seems like a decent place to test her out.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I agree with both of those statements. I’d like to see her get a chance.

RJ Allen: I think the US is too scared to not win these matches by a few goals. I don’t like it, but that’s what it looks like and has for 20 years.

Allison Cary: Yeah. Ellis has shown in the past that she’s not really willing to use these games to try something new, so I’m not sure why we would expect more out of her now.

RJ Allen: The last coach who tried as fired for it.

Charles Olney: Speaking of Lavelle, my hot take when the news came that she’d joined the roster was: don’t worry, she won’t play, this is mostly just for assessment. Am I being overly optimistic? Do y’all think she actually sees more than a few minutes?

RJ Allen: Yes. Yes you are. I think she might start the second game or be a 45 minute sub.

Allison Cary: I honestly don’t know. So I’ll defer to RJ on this one.

Charles Olney: Let’s make it a mini-bet. If she plays under 30 minutes, you owe me a beer at the championship. Over 45, I owe you a cider. In between and we’ll call it a draw.

RJ Allen: I will take that bet. I do seriously wonder if Ellis thinks of a lot of the young players as just expendable though.

Becky Schoenecker(@Beckster20): I’m with @olneyce on that bet.

Charles Olney: Any final thoughts on this topic?

RJ Allen: I really hope Naeher doesn’t play all 180 minutes.

Allison Cary: I second that.

Charles Olney: Third. Even as someone who generally is more accepting of ‘give Naeher a lot of time.’

Allison Cary: I think Naeher is the best keeper in that group, but I also think its important for other players to get time. We know Naeher is good. Give someone else a chance.

Charles Olney: Alright, let’s turn to the main topic for today. A round of ‘buy/sell/hold’ for the NWSL teams. Basically: given where the team is sitting today, do you expect them to go up, stay about the same, or fade away by the end of the season.

Let’s start at the top with the North Carolina Courage. They’re in first place with a 12 point buffer. Can they possibly get better? Or will they inevitably fade a bit? Buy, sell, or hold?

RJ Allen: It has to be hold, right? They can’t go any higher than dropping just 6 points in 12 matches.

Becky Schoenecker: They’re going to be just as strong, I don’t see them fading unless you consider giving a player a bit of a break and using some usual subs as starters near the end.

Charles Olney: I’m tempted to offer a hot take that they’ll get even better, but…yeah, I think hold is probably fair. They’ll probably lose a game at some point, but I don’t see anyone making it competitive for the Shield

Allison Cary: Yeah. I don’t really see them fading.

Becky Schoenecker: Who do you see beating them?

RJ Allen: Themselves. That’s the only team good enough.

Charles Olney: I really thought Houston was going to get it done this weekend, but frankly the draw was probably fair. And that was with like 70% of the NC squad off the pitch. They’re very very good.

RJ Allen: Are they better than the 2014 Seattle Reign?

Charles Olney: I think I’d take the Reign by a hair, but I do sort of think this NC team might be better at disrupting the Reign than the Reign would be at carving them up. If they can keep playing this well all season, I think they’ll have a strong case for the best single season performance in the league to date. They’re just so relentless and can rip you apart so quickly. Those six minutes or so against Portland last week were incredibly impressive.

Becky Schoenecker: I would take NC over 2014 Reign, but it would be a hell of a game.

Charles Olney: Speaking of the Reign, in second place are the Seattle Reign, sitting on 18 points, and with a game (or two) in hand over most other teams in the playoff hunt. Are they punching above their weight, or can they sustain as the #2 team in the league?

Becky Schoenecker: I see them dropping, but still making playoffs.

RJ Allen: I think Seattle ends up second or third. So mostly a hold.

Allison Cary: Admittedly, I’ve missed a lot of the Reign’s games due to the time difference. But I think they stay in #2. Maybe slip down to third. But I think they keep it close.

Charles Olney: I’m tempted to buy on Seattle, because I’m a big believer in Vlatko, and I think things will start to gel even more. But results so far have gone of gone in the opposite direction–with great performances right at the start, and uglier ones (though still with some solid results) in the last month. So I’ll stick with hold. If I had to bet, I’d stay with them to get a home playoff game. But I think it’ll be close either way.

Alright, third place: the Orlando Pride, on 16 points. In many ways it seems like they still haven’t quite found their feet. Are people optimistic that they’ll kick on the afterburners again like they did last year?

Allison Cary: The Pride are there own worst enemy. I honestly can’t predict what will happen to them this season. They could get better– there is a ton of room for improvement on that squad, considering the talent they have. But they could also fall off the deep end.

RJ Allen: I think sell. I really think things are going to come off the bus with a midfield that weak.

Charles Olney: I’ll say sell. Not because I think they’re bad, but just that they’re at the most risk of a minor injury disrupting their season, because they’re quite bare in a few spots. Basically: what RJ said.

Becky Schoenecker: They have some great moments and a pretty good roster, but I’m selling.

Allison Cary: I agree about the injury thing, especially on defense. They have big name players, but they’ve been completely unable to perform. I still stand by what I said at the beginning of the season: I think they’ll be right on the edge of the playoffs. Probably 4th or 5th, although I could see more of a range if the table stays this tight.

RJ Allen: I think 5th is where they end up. Krieger being out is a big blow.

Charles Olney: It would not surprise me in the least if they reel off four or five straight wins and race ahead of the competition. But I could also see things falling apart a bit. That said, I do think that Sermanni is a really underrated coach. Not that people think he’s bad, but a lot of the stuff he does goes under the radar. So I’m going to stick with ‘sell’ but I think I’d still bet on them to squeak over the line into the playoffs.

RJ Allen: He is good at some things for sure. But I do not trust that midfield.

Charles Olney: Fourth place are the defending champs: the Portland Thorns. It’s been a bit of a rocky road this year, but they’re currently in a playoff position, albeit by the skin of their teeth. Buy, sell, hold?

RJ Allen: Sell.

Charles Olney: Mmmm, I’ll say buy. What’s your argument?

RJ Allen: I don’t know what is going on in Thornland but I feel like something is going really wrong there. It’s like Parsons has lost the plot.

Charles Olney: Things have definitely felt a little scattered, but I think they’ve been coming together a lot. The game against North Carolina was a nightmare, but I thought Portland actually played pretty well. They just ran into a brick wall.

Becky Schoenecker: I think they make the playoffs, but just barely. In saying that I wouldn’t be surprised if they lost a lot of games they shouldn’t and just miss it. Overall though if they have to get a win in the end to get a spot I think they’ll pull it through, but only at the last minute.

RJ Allen: I don’t like Portland’s style of play so I might be more harsh on them for it.

Allison Cary: I think they have some really magical moments, but I don’t think it’s enough to lift them up. Like the Pride, I see them probably at either 4th or 5th. If they make the playoffs, I’d say just barely.

Becky Schoenecker: I think if it came down to the Thorns vs anyone else to get the playoff spot though they make it over almost anyone else.

RJ Allen: Points are a funny thing, though.

Charles Olney: To some extent, I look down the roster and find it hard to justify to myself why they wouldn’t make the playoffs. Then again, we’ve seen Portland struggle to put it all together even with a great roster before. In the end, I think talent wins and they find a way to grind out the results they need. But I find it hard to argue with any of the doubters here.

RJ Allen: One of their best rosters ever got them 5th. I can see it happening again.

Charles Olney: For all these teams in the 2-6 range, you kind of have to ask yourself: how are they going to respond in the final two weeks if they’re scrapping for a playoff spot? I see Portland as the best equipped to bulldoze through people if that’s what it takes.

Allison Cary: I agree with that. Especially over someone like Orlando. Or Utah, if they worked their way up.

Charles Olney: Fifth place are the Chicago Red Stars. I wrote a pretty long piece documenting some of their struggles, which also acknowledged some reasons to expect improvement. I’m curious where others fall. Will Chicago be in the playoffs in September?

RJ Allen: Sell. Any team that keeps Sam Kerr from doing what she does best and she has to break the plan to be Kerr, should be sold.

Becky Schoenecker: I want to believe they will be, but if it was between Thorns and Red Stars I’d have to go with Thorns pulling it out.

Charles Olney: I really want to convince myself to buy here. Kerr is coming into form, DiBernardo is coming back, and is going to be huge. Short is coming back and is going to solidify things. Ertz will round back into form. I could go on. But…I just can’t make myself believe it. I think they’ll hang around the whole season, but end up on the outside looking in. So I guess that’s a hold.

RJ Allen: I think Dames has not adapted to his new team in anyway. It’s like he still thinks it’s 2015 with what he is doing.

Allison Cary: Yeah. I don’t know. I mean, Kerr has three goals in her last two games. Like you said, DiBernardo and Short coming back, and Ertz getting back into form. But I’m not sure.

Charles Olney: I already said my piece about this on twitter so won’t belabor the point here, but Dames’s comments about wanting this team to play like Guardiola’s Man City are…worrisome. I really hope Chicago does find a way to ease into a more possession-oriented game, and gives Kerr the support she deserves. I’m just not sure I see it happening.

RJ Allen: Yeah that isn’t Chicago at all. Did Dames ever see Kerr play before he traded for her?

Charles Olney: Sixth place are the Utah Royals. They’re sitting just behind the three teams ahead of them, and have a couple games in hand. Do people see them moving up, or have they settled about where you’d expect?

Allison Cary: I don’t see them moving up.

RJ Allen: Buy, if they get Press. I think ARod finding her form, O’Hara coming back and that defense is going to help them. I think they squeeze in.

Becky Schoenecker: I’ll be optimistic and say they’ll move up – especially if they got Press, but I can see them moving up.

RJ Allen: Their defense is really, really good.

Charles Olney: I really like what Utah has done this year, and have been super impressed with Harvey. I think she’s made it clear that she really does know what she’s doing and it wasn’t just a one-time thing with that great Seattle team. That said, it’s felt to me all year like they were getting a little lucky about results. I think they could actually improve a bit and still not move up the table. So I’ll sell.

If they’re able to pick up HAO, or Press, or someone that can help them score some goals, that could be the difference-maker.

RJ Allen: They NEED someone else to help out that attack. They could really use Gibbons or Groom.

Allison Cary: I agree. But if they get Press or HAO or anyone else to help the attack, I’m still not sure I see them doing it this season. I think they could move up a slot or two, but probably not playoffs.

RJ Allen: Harvey is the trade master.

Becky Schoenecker: If the trade master can get another attacking threat I think they can make a playoff spot.

RJ Allen: Hegerberg to Utah. Either one of them.

Charles Olney: Seventh place is the Houston Dash. They were just a few minutes away from being the first team to beat North Carolina this weekend, and (astonishingly) would have moved up into the playoff spots if they’d managed it. They’ve defied pundits all season. Do you think it will continue?

RJ Allen: Hold. I don’t think they finish higher than 6. Not with Mewis out and Press refusing to play there. Unless Press is traded and they get a good deal for her.

Allison Cary: I think they’re getting better. But I also think they’re the type of team that could be devastated by one or two injuries. I think they’ll survive losing Kristie Mewis, but if Daly or Ohai gets injured, I think they’re done.

Charles Olney: I’m playing mostly to type here, but yeah I have to go with sell. The performances really have improved a ton, with three good games out of their last four. And the team spirit seems to be flying. That said, their roster is just so much weaker than everyone around them.

Allison Cary: I really like what they’re doing on both ends of the pitch right now. And I think they’ve got some good defenders, if they can find a bit more chemistry they could be really dangerous. But they have like no depth.

Charles Olney: I really hope I’m wrong. The Dash defying the odds has been my favorite story of the season so far.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I didn’t expect to find myself cheering for them at the beginning of the year. But, here I am.

Becky Schoenecker: I don’t see Houston making playoffs, but I do see them ruining some other teams days. They are a better team than I think a lot of people expected them to be and they have relentless work ethics. I’m absolutely cheering for them, but overall would say hold.

RJ Allen: They kind of bore me because of the style they have to play to win. But I get they have to play that style.

Charles Olney: I will say that, for all I have criticized Van Wyk, I think she’s been much more solid lately. That’s been helped by the formational shift giving her more protection when she steps up and misses a tackle. But she’s great in the air and is no longer a liability like I think she was at the start of the season.

RJ Allen: But is she worth the international spot?

Charles Olney: Probably not, but she’s a better use than they’re getting from some of the other spots, so…

Alright, eight place: the Washington Spirit. I don’t think anyone expected them to dominate this year, but I think many saw them being at least in the mix with the playoff teams. So far, we’ve seen very little of that. Do people think it will change? Sub-question: does Jim Gabarra last through the end of the season?

RJ Allen: I am selling them until Gabarra is gone. I think he is a bad coach.

Charles Olney: I’ve been a Gabarra-defender a lot over the years. I think he’s a strange coach, who makes a lot of indefensible decisions, but who also manages to get a lot of things right. But things really feel like they’re going off the rails at this point.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I don’t see them improving.

Charles Olney: I’ll still buy, because the roster is stacked with young talent. But I worry for them getting their heads on right.

Becky Schoenecker: They’re a much better team on paper than what they’re producing. They’re having the most shocking season to me. I keep waiting for them to connect things and they just aren’t.

RJ Allen: Church is just not a fast enough to be used the way he wants to use her. Sullivan has look bad at times. Pugh and Hatch can’t find the same page.

Charles Olney: It does astonish me that more teams don’t just sit back, wait for Washington to come at them, and then launch balls over the top. Easiest way in the league to get a one-on-one with the keeper.

Allison Cary: Kind of a separate note, but I was happy to see Tori Huster’s sister get signed as a national team replacement and I hope they get to play together on Friday.

Charles Olney: Agreed. Huster the younger feels like a victim of league contraction, so I’m glad to see her getting a spot.

So that brings us to last place: still sitting on just one point after nine games, Sky Blue. They have to improve. Right? Right?

I’m buying. This team just isn’t that bad.

Allison Cary: I feel like they’ve got too much talent on that roster NOT to get better.

RJ Allen: I am selling (to Mia Hamm).

Charles Olney: Strong move.

RJ Allen: It feels like a death of 1000 cuts. The ownership group having people in charge who don’t get it and hiring a coach without giving her support and then bringing in Lloyd and players that don’t fit together.

Becky Schoenecker: I’ve enjoyed seeing McCaskill play with them, I think she brings a lot to the table as a player

Charles Olney: Denise Reddy seems, by all accounts, to have a pretty good eye for talent, and to be a solid tactical coach. Nothing we’ve seen so far this year really confirms that but I still think she’ll turn things around.

RJ Allen: I have no faith in this team to turn it around right now. I feel for the players and the fans. But even if they win two games they are worst than even the worst Boston had to offer. With better players. (edited)

Charles Olney: But I think the example of Houston is pretty telling. It’s not like the Dash have any holding midfielders, either, but they’ve managed to at least get things stabilized in spite of that. Sky Blue are making some progress (they’ve been better in the last couple games), but it’s still a long ways off.

RJ Allen: 0-8-1 should get you fired.

Becky Schoenecker: Their backline is hard to watch, they just seem so much slower than other teams. So even with good moments one on the other end and they’re down and I don’t see them as a team that can come back, maybe have a chance of holding onto a lead, but not making up goals.

Allison Cary: I agree, RJ.

Tyler Nguyen (@tdn_): If I can just pop in here for a second: the difference between Sky Blue and Houston is that Houston has people in midfield who at least in theory can be dangerous on the ball. Sky Blue has a completely dysfunctional midfield right now. Sky Blue won’t improve until they roll the dice and put McCaskill in the middle.

RJ Allen: Which they won’t do over Lloyd.

Charles Olney: It’s worth noting, on that point, that they looked a lot more coherent this weekend. Not necessarily better, but more coherent. Janine Beckie isn’t even really a major change over Lloyd in that attacking midfield role, but at least her speed created another set of problems for the defense to think about

RJ Allen: Lloyd looks like she has given up most of the time.

Charles Olney: The big question for me about Sky Blue is whether they start making some significant changes. Whether or not Reddy’s initial plans made sense, at a certain point resignation sets in and even good ideas just aren’t going to work. You’ve got to be willing to make a change.

RJ Allen: In real sports the GM and the coach would be sacked – at the latest – at the end of the season. But it doesn’t seam like anyone wants to do that in women’s soccer, at least in the US.

Charles Olney: If this were Serie A, Sky Blue would be on the fourth manager by now.

Alright, with all that said, one final question that we’ve already talked a bit around: name the eventual playoff teams.

I’ll say North Carolina, Seattle, Portland, Orlando. With Chicago juuuust barely missing out.

Allison Cary: Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. Not entirely sure of the order, but I see the current top four as the final top four.

RJ Allen: North Carolina. Seattle. Portland. Utah. Y’all convinced me to move Portland higher.

Becky Schoenecker: I’ll say North Carolina, Portland, Seattle, Utah.

Charles Olney: Well, none of us picked Chicago, so that pretty much guarantees they make it, right?

Route Two Soccer: There’s No Such Thing as an ‘International Level’ Player

Posted on June 1, 2018 by RJ Allen

Today I want to challenge one of the most durable, and least well-founded, myths in women’s soccer: the idea that there is an “international level,” where play is more difficult than the domestic leagues.

This belief is so widespread that, according to a piece this week from Jeff Kassouf which detailed the US Women’s National Team selection process, it’s apparently taken seriously by key principals within US Soccer itself.

[media-credit name=”Jonathan Tannenwald” align=”aligncenter” width=”628″][/media-credit]

But if one applies even some casual scrutiny, the whole idea falls apart like cotton candy in a pool.

The argument here is pretty straightforward. The world contains four top-level international leagues—the NWSL in the US, the Frauen Bundesliga in Germany, the D1F in France, the WSL in England—along with five or six other weaker but still relatively high quality leagues (in Sweden, Spain, Denmark, etc.). But the reality is that the vast majority of the world’s top players are concentrated in those four big leagues.

For a league without much competitive balance, that produces a top tier which is absolutely stacked. In France, for example, Lyon effectively has a version of the French national team, supplemented with a few more of the best players from other countries. In leagues that are more balanced—like the NWSL—there is no single team that can compare with the top international sides, but the distribution of talent means that there are no gimmes. The worst team in the league would probably be a top 20 international side.

Don’t believe me? Take a look at the roster.

Sky Blue has been anchored to the bottom of the NWSL table all season. This is a team with Carli Lloyd, Janine Beckie, Savannah McCaskill, Kailen Sheridan, and Thaisa Moreno—all of whom have received recent call-ups for teams in the world top 10. Then you have Raquel Rodriguez, one of the best players on the world’s #32 team. And Rebekah Stott, a regular for the world’s #20 team. Then there are players like Shea Groom, Christina Gibbons, Erica Skroski, and Sarah Killion—who would be regular internationals if they were playing for virtually any country in the world besides the United States.

Put Sky Blue into the next Women’s World Cup, and I think they’d be even money to make it out of the group stage. And this is the roster of the team with one point through eight games in the NWSL.

Then look at some of the teams higher up the table. North Carolina’s first XI is packed with key players for the #1 team in the world, and supplemented with a few key contributors from other top international sides. Put North Carolina into the next World Cup and they’d be among the favorites to win the whole thing.

No one would deny that there are differences between club and international competitions. Some players flourish in a stable club environment, but find it difficult to turn in the same performance when playing for their country. Conversely, some players are at their best in international duty, while only being average for club. There’s a variety of potential factors in play here: the individual psychology of the player, their adaptability and flexibility, the support system around them in different environments. And some of it may simply be random. Normal distribution of chance means some players will always be outliers, but this doesn’t necessarily carry any predictive meaning.

All of which is to say: even if there are some players whose performance levels vary between club and country, there’s certainly no reason to think the imbalance goes only in one direction.

In some cases, the talent pool for a given country will be clogged enough to close out a top-quality player. One could make this argument for the forward position in the US national team, where players like Christen Press and Lynn Williams—arguably among the top dozen strikers in the world—have struggled to find minutes. But that’s very different from saying that a player outperforming their competition at the club level lacks some undefined ‘international quality’ and therefore can’t be expected to transfer her performance between levels.

Long story short: a top player in the NWSL is a top player in world soccer, and there’s absolutely no reason to think that they wouldn’t be able to hang at the international level. A player who can dominate in a league that contains North Carolina, Portland, Orlando, Seattle, Chicago, etc. is one of the world’s best players, full stop.

One can only hope that the decision-makers in US Soccer understand this, and aren’t really taking their ‘5 point’ system seriously.

Backline Chat: USWNT Roster, Lyon, and Where Will Press Go?

Posted on May 29, 2018 by RJ Allen

Welcome to a new feature here at Backline: our weekly soccer chat. This week, we discussed the new USWNT roster, Lyon’s victory in the Champions League, and the continuing saga of Christen Press’s club situation.

The transcript below has been lightly edited.

Charles Olney (@olneyce) : Welcome everyone, to our first edition of the Backline Soccer chat. To kick things off, let’s start with the most recent piece of news: the roster for the US Women’s National Team, which just dropped an hour or two ago. What from this roster strikes people as worth discussing? McCall Zerboni getting a callup? Christen Press coming back in after missing the last set of friendlies? The lack of a single natural fullback in the squad?

Alanna Fairbairn (@jfhobbit): I was a little surprised to see Campbell left off the GK list, honestly. The Dash has been the Dash for most of the season, but she’s kept them in striking distance in a lot of games.

Charles Olney: Campbell does feel like a big omission. It’s hard to look at her and Harris, for example, and explain the difference. I’m certainly excited to see Casey Murphy on the list, though, given the issues that all the other big names have been having.

RJ Allen (@TheSoccerCritic): I think the lack of experienced outside backs worries me most. The center backs are all real center backs. The outside backs are not.

Alanna Fairbairn: Yeah, the defense list was a head-scratcher

Tyler Nguyen (@tdn_): Do we think that Ellis just sees no fullbacks in the NWSL for her to choose from? Is anyone an obvious miss?

Alanna Fairbairn: I think all the fullbacks in the NWSL that have seen looks for the National Team have been exiled from the lists for one reason or another; Hinkle, Krieger, etc

RJ Allen: With Short and O’Hara out I think Ellis is less picking real replacements and more just shrugging her shoulders.

Charles Olney: I do think that the fullback pool is pretty weak right now. Looking at other options, Hinkle and Krieger are the two names that certainly leap out for me. Obviously, there are reasons why both might not get the call, but if you’re not going to take them, I’m not sure who else is really making a case for themselves.

Tyler Nguyen: Last season I would have said Gilliland is the obvious miss, but something’s up with her form this year. Good to see Purce get called up but she’s not really the finished product yet.

RJ Allen: I see no reason to call Krieger in at this point. Ellis has made it clear that Krieger’s time moving forward with the national team is done. Calling her up now to be a stopgap just takes the slot away from a player she might more likely take to the WWC in 2019.

Alanna Fairbairn: I see some reason to call Klingenberg, even with the fitness issues that she has. At least she’s experienced and would work well with Heath on the left side.

Charles Olney: Gilliland would be an interesting pick. Ellis has never seemed too enthusiastic about her, and her performances this year have been a little hit or miss. But when on, she’s been very good.

RJ Allen: Do we think Kristie Mewis would have gotten a look at outside back later in the year?

Tyler Nguyen: Oof. Too soon.

Alanna Fairbairn: I don’t think her play at outside back was anything to write home about. She didn’t really blossom until she was put up in the attacking formation

RJ Allen: Mewis was better than Huerta at outside back. (edited)

Charles Olney: Mewis (and Gilliland, et al) does raise the larger question of where this team stands in terms of depth. Ellis very clearly has strong opinions about a lot of players, and while we’ve seen a lot more movement in and out of the marginal slots recently, there do seem to be a batch of players that she simply thinks of as B/B+ players, and no matter how good their form, she just doesn’t buy them as national teamers. Do people think that’s a fair characterization? If so, is that a problem? Or just a quirk?

Tyler Nguyen: It does seem like Ellis hasn’t really ever accepted that players on the national team could just be role players.

RJ Allen: I really think Ellis is holding out hope that O’Hara and Short recover and are fine by next year. She doesn’t seem to really be testing out reasonable people for any new position, much less outside back.

Alanna Fairbairn: I think it’s a problem if they get zero looks at all on the international level. If they get called up and can’t hang, that’s one thing. If they’re prejudged without a call-up that’s an issue. But I also agree with RJ. She seems set on her lineup and these call-ups are just stopgaps until her Chosen Ones recover.

RJ Allen: Talent scouting is part of the job though. As much as I don’t always agree with the ones who are called up you can’t call up everyone in the set up the USWNT has.

Charles Olney: Let’s put this another way. Imagine that Ellis had to step away and you were put in charge of the team. What would you be doing differently in terms of personnel right now?

RJ Allen: Does cutting Carli Lloyd count?

Charles Olney: Sure does

RJ Allen: I really think Ellis is holding on to players that she shouldn’t. Lloyd being one of them. They don’t have the hold on her that someone like a Wambach, Boxx or Pearce had. But I think some of her thoughts are stuck in 2015.

Charles Olney: My approach would be to pretty radically shift things. My feeling is: China at this point isn’t dangerous enough to pose a serious threat to the best US squad, and we’re nowhere close to the World Cup yet. I’d take the chance to blood a bunch of new folks, try out young players that could fill in depth positions, or who might still grow into realistic first choice players a year from now. The Tournament of Nations is coming up and will give us plenty of time to see the first XI play together. Right now, let’s see the kids play, and give the vets a little bit of rest.

RJ Allen: I think this far in to the cycle is not the idea time to try out a bunch of people. I wouldn’t do that until after 2020 but I get why you would want to now. I agree some vets need the rest though.

Becky Schoenecker (@Beckster20): I would start with goalkeeping and shake that up a bit. I would have also called in different players, but I would use this time to like Charles said radically switch things up, but specifically with the keepers.

Alanna Fairbairn: I would kick Allie Long to the curb. I feel like she’s proved that while she’s spectacular in the league, she doesn’t provide much in any position for the NT except *maybe* forward, and we already have tons of those.

RJ Allen: I think Zerboni can do all Long can and a bunch of things she can’t. Long I think has the benefit of being willing to do whatever she is asked. She seems to have no problem playing wherever Ellis wants her.

Charles Olney: I’ve been a Long-skeptic for quite a while, and I generally agree with Alanna. But it would be pretty strange to cut her right now, when she’s playing about as well as I think she’s ever played. I’m not convinced it will last, but at least for the moment, Long is pretty clearly one of the best US midfielders.

RJ Allen: At a club level. Not at a USWNT level.

Charles Olney: I’m not convinced there’s a difference

RJ Allen: Not against China, no. Against England it is.

Becky Schoenecker: Long won’t lose a game for the US, I think she’s a safe roster position until some others step up.

Tyler Nguyen: Midfield for me is not a huge concern area at the moment. I think that US Soccer needs to better decide what they want from their fullbacks. It seems like the main objective is for them to be able to run the line all game, but they’re also expected to contribute to attack and there just isn’t talent out there to do both of those things on both sides of the field. The turnover at fullback in the past year or so has been pretty absurd

Charles Olney: Agree, Tyler.

RJ Allen: The only spots where I am pretty worry-free is centerback and forward. I think the three centerbacks are perfect and we have enough forward talent to make up for a lot of the midfield issues.

Charles Olney: Alright, I think there’s still plenty of national team conversation for us to have, but we’ll certainly have time to cover some of those issues over the next few weeks. For now, why don’t we turn to a different topic: the Champions League.

Lyon defeated Wolfsburg last week in a pretty peculiar game that saw very little action for 90 minutes and then all hell breaking loose as soon as extra time hit. Let’s talk for a bit about the game. How do people feel about the result?

Tyler Nguyen: Lyon are so stacked. Van De Sanden was the best player on the field and OL only brought her on after extra time started.

RJ Allen: I think the Champions League shows why most of the clubs don’t care about their regular club season.

Charles Olney: I get what you’re saying RJ, but I think that’s an exaggeration. Lyon is the exception who doesn’t have to worry about their domestic league. Most of the other big teams have serious competition.

RJ Allen: I am going to be called out for this – I’ll owe it – but I think the CL really contributes to the European leagues being so weak.

Charles Olney: We’ll need to bring on Chloe for a conversation soon, but I think there’s more depth in most of the European leagues than is often credited. Certainly, the attitude and structure of the leagues (and focus on Champions League as the height of competition) creates a system with less parity, but the mid-tier teams in England are still pretty good. The French league strikes me as the huge exception, and I wonder how much of that is driven by peculiarities of the French developmental system.

RJ Allen: I don’t see the English league as very strong. Though they just did a reshuffle on it.

Tyler Nguyen: Lots of players in the NWSL also go to the English leagues and vice versa so it should be pretty easy to compare the two. Look at Crystal Dunn and Nadia Nadim, two players who both swapped the two leagues recently. Both look like they’re more or less the same player.

Charles Olney: If anything, Dunn has been better on both sides of her time in England.

RJ Allen: I think a lot of the top teams might get a win against an NWSL side but over a 24 game season I don’t think any would beat the likes of Orlando, NCC, Portland, Seattle, Utah, Houston week in and week out the way they win games over there.

Charles Olney: Okay, so let’s take that back to Lyon for a second. I think it’s generally accepted that they’re the best in the world. But let’s have fun speculating a bit. How would they do if they were in the NWSL? I think it’s safe to say that they’d win the Shield, but by how much? Would it be close? What percentage chance would you give them to win the title?

RJ Allen: At best they would be maybe 3rd. At worst 6th. I don’t think they win the shield or get close.

Tyler Nguyen: I think the hardest part for Lyon would be cutting their roster down to 20. But I’d back them to get a home playoff spot and then crush the playoffs.

Alanna Fairbairn: I would say the same as Tyler. They just have so much pure talent and I don’t think most of the NWSL has the defensive lines needed to contain them

RJ Allen: Look, maybe I am crazy and maybe I’m not. But super teams don’t often do well in this league. It is really hard to play week in and week out against the other teams in the league and 1) keep everyone healthy 2) keep everyone happy and 3) not get complacent.

Charles Olney: I think those are all fair points. But I also think that Lyon’s second XI would be a playoff team in the NWSL. They’re just ridiculously stacked

RJ Allen: I am unimpressed with them as a team. They have a lot of great parts but I think the sum is weaker than the parts. But would I take Ada Hegerberg to play on any team in the league? Yes.

Charles Olney: I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on that point. But maybe another way to think about things would be to reverse the question. What if some of the top NWSL teams were in Europe? How would North Carolina and Portland do if they were in the Champions League this year? Would North Carolina win the WSL in England?

RJ Allen: I think Orlando, Seattle or NCC would do very well over in Europe. And without the same salary cap I think a lot of the coaches would have a blast pulling in a few more key players.

Alanna Fairbairn: I think Portland would strive to match Lyon for a stacked roster if they didn’t have the salary cap, which would definitely help them compete

Charles Olney: I think the point about roster limits and salary caps is important. But, of course, this is the whole reason why the NWSL is as balanced as it is. A Portland that didn’t have to deal with roster restrictions would really just be Lyon 2.0, wouldn’t it?

RJ Allen: Which would make the league weaker as a whole because it would create an imbalance that a lot of teams, money or not, wouldn’t be able to overcome. This is why I am a strong advocate for the leagues being more balanced and having tighter rules in place to keep it that way.

Charles Olney: Alright. One final topic for this week: Where in the world is Christen Press going to end up? Some news came out today suggesting that Göteborg might not be willing, or able, to cover the cost of her contract when it’s up in a few weeks. She has been good in Sweden—unsurprisingly—but the team is doing poorly, and it seems like they might be wondering whether the investment is worth it. That said, it doesn’t seem like any of the issues that led to her going to Sweden in the first place have really been resolved. Houston still owns her rights and doesn’t appear particularly inclined to negotiate.

So, the question: where do people think Press is in September? Back in the NWSL? Still in Sweden? Signed with a big European team in one of the top leagues?

RJ Allen: I think Mewis being hurt is going to force Houston’s hand. They need help and she is their biggest chip right now.

Alanna Fairbairn: I think it’s a matter of how stupid Houston’s front office is going to be about it. Or how stubborn, maybe is a better way to put it. I do not think she’s going to end up in Houston, no matter how much they may want her. They need to understand that, and get some serious value for her

Becky Schoenecker: I doubt she’ll end up in Houston, but I would like her to. I think they have a chance to get to the playoffs, which was a bit unthinkable at the beginning of the year. With Mewis out they need a Press to have any chance now I think.

Alanna Fairbairn: Houston already dealt with Carli Lloyd not really wanting to play there, I don’t really want them to have another unhappy star. It’s not a good look, and it doesn’t do anyone really any good.

Tyler Nguyen: Houston definitely feels like they need some value right now but I still don’t really see a trade out there that they’d be willing to accept. I don’t actually think Houston should play Press since their forward line looks so good at the moment. You want to bench Prince or Daly right now?

Charles Olney: If Press wanted to play for Houston, I think she’d actually slot in fairly well. She and Daly would play off each other well, and Press would alleviate some of the problems they have holding possession through the middle. But I agree: she’s almost certainly never kicking a ball for the Dash, so there’s not much point in speculating.

Becky Schoenecker: Which team could use her the most/would be willing to trade for her?

RJ Allen: I’d really like Press to go to Utah. I think she and ARod could make some magic happen and it would even things out. But I don’t know what Utah could give up for her. Seattle has pieces the Dash could use but they want a NT player, or they did, so unless they want to give up Long I don’t see it.

Charles Olney: I agree with RJ that Press would fit extremely well into the Utah system, but it’s hard to see what deal Houston would be willing to accept. One consideration: Heather O’Reilly is finished in England and Utah has her rights. It’s hard to see her being willing to go to Houston, either, but I have wondered whether a three-way deal could be possible that would send O’Reilly somewhere else.

RJ Allen: To be fair HAO doesn’t have to be willing. Houston just has to think she is.

Alanna Fairbairn: If O’Reilly were hypothetically willing to play in Houston, I would cry with happiness. I don’t know that they would be able to woo her, but she would help so much.

RJ Allen: Draft picks I would think. Or an extra international slot.

Charles Olney: If you were Houston, would you do a straight swap of Press for HAO (assuming you got some confirmation that she’d actually be willing to play for you)? I would.

Alanna Fairbairn: In a heartbeat.

Becky Schoenecker: Absolutely. I think HAO would fit in to their team much better as well.

RJ Allen: Assuming she was willing I think they would want HAO and a draft pick or something.

Alanna Fairbairn: I think it’s not just a talent thing either. HAO strikes me as the type of person who would fit in well with the ethos Pauw is trying to implement

Charles Olney: So it’s settled. HAO for Press. Both teams get better, and the we all get to watch some great players come back to the league. It’s a win for everyone.

RJ Allen: The other thing is that if Houston doesn’t trade her I’m not sure they get anything. The NWSL might have offered them something if LA gets a team and she’s moved there but there is no guarantee they will.

Charles Olney: That’s the other big question mark. If they expect to get decent value there, then it really might make sense to just hold her rights and wait for the payout. If all they’ll get is a draft pick or something, then it’s a pretty bad idea to give up a good trade chit when you could extract real value from Seattle/Utah/etc.

Tyler Nguyen: Last from me: I really want Houston to lean into their role of scrappy underdog team where players who just haven’t worked out on other teams prove their value. But it doesn’t seem like their front office really knows what their identity as a team is.

Charles Olney: Absolutely. Given how well the team has managed to do in terms of results, there’s a real chance to wipe away a lot of the bad taste from previous bungling. It’s just a matter of actually getting it done.

Backline Soccer Archive

Tag: USWNT