Regarding your specific points, to state that Klinsmann “wanted” the job without providince evidence to support that assumption is an example of an error that could be used when teaching Journalism 101. It’s as bad as Eric Wynalda prefacing statements with, “Right now he’s thinking…”. I would expect more from a site with the tagline, “Football News You Can Trust”.

You, Lomax, and everyone else who thinks that Klinsmann could have revolutionized US football are missing one very important point. The govering body (the USSF), is not separate from the league (MLS), or marketing (SUM). The 3-headed monster, as it is commonly refered to, is comprised of micromanagers, each with their own agenda, which makes it difficult for any coach, regardless of their qualifications, to do their job effectively.

This is a semtiment that was echoed by Bruce Arena shortly after his departure. What is widely known, and what Lomax should have mentioned in his article is that Arena and Klinsmann are friends. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that it is highly likely Arena and Klinsmann discussed the pros and cons associated with working in the USSF.

Gulati should have seen this train coming and kept the door open with other potential candidates. He didn’t, and apparently Klinsmann’s terms were unacceptable to the man we all know as the micromanaging “superfan”.

Personally I agree with Brian on the thought that Klinsmann wanted the US job. Some information doesn’t have to be made public – and with the behind-the-scenes politicking going on in football, a lot of what happens is never made public.

However, Klinsmann could have revolutionised US football. Don’t agree that Bradly wants to lose (just as Steve McClaren didn’t actually want to lose) but in that case Brian’s frustrated, and that’s understandable.

Yes, Gulati is a tool. We all know that. Anyone who listened to Gulati droul all over Klinsmann while he’s about to introduce Bradley as an “interim” coach because they were still talking to other candidates, must recognize that 1) He closed the door on other potential candidates by focusing soley on Klinsmann, 2) He doesn’t know squat about public relations, otherwise he would have issued a written statement thanking Klinsmann for participating in the selection process, waited a week, then introduced Bradley as the next coach, 3) he sent anyone else that was remotely interested in the position a clear message that you’re an also-ran compared to Klinsmann.

I’d like to know how Lomax came to the following conclusions:

“The thing that bothers me most about this situation is that Klinsmann wanted this job.” (At what point in time was this bit of imformation made public?)

“If we’re honest with ourselves, nobody in Europe respects US soccer.” (Ummm, I can think of 3 European teams off the top of my head that respect US soccer…Italy, Germany and Portugal).

“And Klinsmann wanted to change that attitude. Bob Bradley represents that attitude. The attitude that “It’s OK, we’re just here to give you guys a run out. We’re not actually looking to win.” (Really? Bob Bradley exemplifies that “We don’t mind losing” attitude? You’ve obviously never met the man)

What’s garbage is this article and I’m sick of reading crap like it.

When you say “you know the words they say” what part of the article are you referring too? I haven’t quoted anyone. Everything I’ve said is based off of what I see. Against England, the team came out scared. I said OK, Bradley will light a fire under them during halftime and they;ll come to play in the 2nd half. Never happened. Same against Spain.

I’m not knocking what Bruce Arena did, and perhaps I was a bit harsh on him in the article. Still, for a team that did so well in 2002, 2006 was an utter failure. Bringing in a declining Kasey Keller, not giving Clint Dempsey more games, playing Claudio Reyna, just no good all around. Bob Bradley has done a decent job…but when it counts, what’s he done? Gold Cup 2007, which we should win with anybody coaching.

Klinsmann wanted to direct our efforts towards getting a bigger talent pool. He wanted to revamp the whole youth system, but the USSF had other ideas. What can you do? I’m with you the whole way on that one bro. But its not happening.

Arena guided a team with inferior talent to the final eight in the world. Yet that’s not good enough for you. I think that says more about you. The ‘06 team played a man down and still outplayed eventual champion Italy in what was a truly inspirational performance. They got a bad break/call against Ghana. How many players on the US team would’ve cracked the lineup on any of the other three in the group? Not many.

You guys that think a coach can come in and magically turn water into wine are completely delusional. Bruce Arena accomplished more in his career than you have ever dreamed about. And he did it in a country where he does not get to pull from a pool of the very best athletes or get great support. Bob Bradley has done fine with what he has to work with.

You should direct your efforts towards finding a way to get a larger pool of young athletes in the US involved in the sport. Until that time, you can hire any coach you want and there won’t be any great improvement.

Bruce Arena is an incredible coach and a brilliant man. We go into nearly every WC match with a decided talent disadvantage. Just being competitive is an accomplishment.

Not only would we probably play better, but his guns blazing offensive style is something more casual American sports fans could get behind.

At least we can know that a lot of the young talent that is making US Soccer interesting right now will just be hitting their prime in 2014….

I am curious as to how he guides Bayern this year though.