USMNT: When the process must deliver results

USMNT head coach Gregg Berhalter has repeatedly spoken about ‘the process’ he is instilling. But at some point, the process must deliver results, and at present, that is very much not the case.

When Gregg Berhalter was unveiled as the U.S. Men’s National Team head coach last January, there was a degree of disappointment among the fanbase. He is not the most inspiring of names. His Columbus Crew team were capable but not utterly superior and he had no prior experience in Europe or at the international level.

There was also the suggestion that the only reason he got the job was that his brother, Jay, was in management at the U.S. Soccer Federation. They are unfounded claims, of course, but their existence speaks to the overall doubt that many had in Berhalter’s coaching qualities.

Early on, and throughout the ensuing ten months of his tenure, Berhalter protested the importance of a process. He spoke about underlying tactical approaches that he was attempting to implement, heightened a long-term perspective regarding the development of young talent in the American game, and essentially stated that there would be some short-term pain as he and his team grew together.

Now, this process is nothing new. Organisations, business and sports teams the world over have looked to implement cultures and approaches that may not help them in the short term but will have a positive long-term impact. But Berhalter has spoken about it as if he some game-changing genius. All he is really saying, though, is that he needs time.

And that much, very few can disagree with. Any manager in any walk of life needs to time to enact the change they want to — and then to see the effect that change has made. This is even more pertinent in international football. You cannot just hire new staff. You cannot just overhaul your roster. You are not the regular investor in the players, their clubs are. And that is only intensified given the rotten atmosphere surrounding the USMNT after their failure to qualify for the 2018 World Cup.

However, while the process is a positive thing to aim for and a long-term perspective is a sensible one, there comes a point when the underlying philosophies that are implemented must yield very outward and positive results. Sport is about winning, after all, and the USMNT and Berhalter are not.

More from MLS Multiplex

Now, against the emphatically superior teams, this is acceptable. Mexico are just better than the U.S. It is okay to admit as much. And in these games, looking towards particular tactical aspects instead of the result is no bad move. But when the USMNT play teams that are considered worse than them, the processes that Berhalter and co. are putting in place should be coming up trumps. And if you are reading this, I am sure you are aware, on Tuesday night at BMO Field against an impassioned Canada, they did not.

The USMNT lost 2-0 to a team they have not been defeated by in 34 years. And the scoreline is kind. If not for some excellent Zack Steffen goalkeeping and wayward Canadian shooting, this would have been a whole lot worse.

This is not the type of result that Berhalter’s process should be yielding. The USMNT have superior talent, played fewer MLS-based players, are working from a far bigger population that has a far greater interest in football, and are a CONCACAF powerhouse — they might be a ‘powerhouse’ by default, but they are one nonetheless. This, then, was a catastrophic outcome.

Next. USMNT Vs Canada: 3 things we learned. dark

And at some point in time, the focus on the process must yield a positive outcome. For Gregg Berhalter, that time might be coming sooner than he would like.

Home/U.S. Soccer