Tom Galperin Carrboro, N.C. Do you think it is too late for Steve Sampson to be considering David Regis and Carlos Llamosa for the national team? Even if they do recieve citizenship in time, don’t you think the lack of time will inhibit their ability to get to know the system, the coaching style, and the other players? If they do make the squad, and actually play in France, will their inexperience be detrimental? Paul Kennedy: Is it too late? In all likelihood it is for Regis, though Llamosa has a shot at getting his papers. Both players could help, with some time with the team — especially Regis, who is a quality player. Regis is a solid French defender, a little on the high side as far as age, but he was eyed by half a dozen top foreign clubs last summer. Llamosa is probably better than any marking back the U.S. has except Pope, though his lack of international experience will hurt in the short term — i.e. if he plays against Germany. Bruce Arena said as much in our feature on Llamosa in the May 4 issue of SA. Ivan Rodriguez Tijuana, Mexico I have been very impressed by the bunch of rookies in MLS this year, particularly Johnny Torres. Do you think he has a future with the U.S. national team? Ridge Mahoney: Ivan, I think he will definitely receive opportunities to make the national team. Torres has quick feet and is blessed with a smooth first touch, can shoot and pass under pressure, and just as important, finds spaces and reads defenses extremely well. Few college players I’ve seen have his sense of positioning and timing. He has a very bright future. Mark Grassman Evansville, Ind. The 1999 Women’s World Cup will have 16 teams — Europe will have six teams qualify, Africa two, one or two from South America, and three from Asia. That leaves four spots. How many will CONCACAF and Oceania get? Do the host team and defending champion get automatic bids as well? Dean Caparaz: Mark, the berths for the 1999 Women’s World Cup break down this way:

Berths Confederation
6 Europe (UEFA)
3 Asia (AFC)
2.5 CONCACAF
2 Africa (CAF)
1.5 South America (CONMEBOL)
1 Oceania (OFC)
While the tournament’s host team — in this case, the United States — does receive an automatic bid, the defending champion — Norway — does not. The runner-up of this fall’s CONCACAF qualifying tournament (which the U.S. will not play in since it is automatically qualified) will play the South American runner-up (Argentina) for the final spot in USA ’99. Argentina lost to Brazil 7-1 in the South American qualifying final. Bob Buchanan Fargo, N.D. What do the individual player ratings shown in the Weekly Report mean and how are they determined? Paul Kennedy: Ratings are done on a scale of 1-10. 10 is high. 1 is low. Here’s the basic evaluation: 10 world class (rarely given — Kasey Keller got a 10 against Brazil) 9 extraordinary (again only a few a year) 8 excellent 7 very good 6 good 5 average 4 poor 3 very poor 2 horrible (rarely given) 1 no business showing face again (I can’t remember us having ever given anyone a 1). Ratings are done by writers covering the game. What goes into the evaluation: impact of player on team’s performance (players on winning team generally get better ratings than those on losing team, though a winning team could clobber another team and still not get high ratings if the score was the result of bad play on the opposition’s part), how he handles duties expected of him (marking, playmaking, getting chances, etc.). Are they perfect every week? No, but they do average themselves out over the course of a year. They generally make interesting statistical analysis and good discussion, which is the reason why we do them. Tony Toth Edgewater, Md. Is Clive Charles the right man to coach the US 2000 Olympic Soccer Team? I have two reservations about him as coach. One, the US team will probably be made up entirely of professionals, not college players. Can Charles, who is known for his women’s college team, relate to the current professional player? Isn’t his first-hand knowledge of the pro game from the 70’s and 80’s in England and the NASL? Is this the type of game the current team will play? Will he pick players he is familiar with (i.e. college players)? His January camp seemed to have a lot of college players. Second, after France ’98 many current national team players will be hanging up their shoes for international play because of age. Steve Sampson will probably also leave. A flood of new players are going to have to be found to man the US effort for 2002. It seems to me that a lot of these new players are going to come from the Olympics. Should not the Olympic coach be a close confederate of the national coach? The current relationship between Sampson and Charles would have been useful if Charles coached the Atlanta Olympics team. I would think a new coach wouls want his own man to develop the players with the skills he wants, not the skills Steve Sampson wants. Duncan Irving: Seems to me that you have more than two reservations! In short order: *Charles is also known for coaching the men’s team at Portland (they reached the final four in 1995), and he’s Steve Sampson’s assistant with the full national squad. Someone must rate him. *From what I’ve seen of him around the national team, since he has fairly extensive professional experience as a player, the U.S. squad responds very well to him. *He may be English but he has lived here for more than two decades and, as Steve Sampson’s assistant, I think he’s picked up a couple of things over the years. *U.S. Soccer is very structured in its coaching techniques, and I think he’s learned to prosper in that environment. *Some of his players will come from college, the majority from Pro-40, MLS and foreign clubs (e.g. John O’Brien). His January camp did have a lot of college players in it — so he could see what he had available. The games against Canada in the spring also had a lot of college players, but that was mainly because he felt a lot of his pro players (Olsen, etc.) were better off getting playing time with their MLS teams. *Who says Sampson’s leaving after World Cup? News to me, and probably to Steve Sampson as well. *Limited numbers of players come through any youth program. That includes the Olympics. The products of 1996 haven’t exactly flooded the national team. *Ideally, the U-23 coach should be a close confederate of the national team coach. It hasn’t been the case in the past (Bora/Osiander or Sampson/Arena). Given that you’re speculating about Sampson (who also heads the vertical integration program), Charles is a close pal. *I don’t see your logic. Osiander and Arena coached teams with 1-1-1 records and both teams failed to reach the medal round. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. *Like all assistant coaches, Charles has his own ideas of what he’d like his team to do, but they are probably not worlds apart from what goes on with the national team. This is the case with most countries’ coaches and U-21 coaches.