INTERVIEW BY SCOTT FRENCH The U.S. under-20 squad failed to advance beyond the second round of the World Youth Championship in Argentina, falling to a gifted Egypt team after going 1-1-1 in group play against China, Chile and Ukraine. It was a disappointing, although reasonable, conclusion to the Americans’ tournament, in which there was much to admire (D.J. Countess’ play in goal, Landon Donovan’s strong performance in midfield) and plenty to cause concern (troubles possessing the ball, inability to finish, defense constantly under siege). Coach Wolfgang Suhnholz discussed the tournament with Soccer America in a series of interviews after returning to his Austin, Texas, home from South America. Excerpts from the conversation follow. SOCCER AMERICA: What lessons can be gleaned from the U.S. performance in Argentina? WOLFGANG SUHNHOLZ: We can learn a lot of lessons, I think. Most of all, we have to make sure that in the future we get the opportunity to play on the same playing field [as the other competitors]. Which really means that I think we have to give our kids a chance to prepare as well as the other [countries]. [We need to] get everyone a little earlier, spend more time together. In general, in the future we also have to somehow make sure we have more professional players, and I think all this will come with time. Looking back, I think overall, with all the other things which went right or wrong, I think if we would have had the time to prepare with that team as much as the other [competitors] had, I think we would have had a good chance to do better. I’m not saying anything against MLS or the Federation. It’s just that eventually, in the future, we have to all get together and realize what we have to do. Everybody has to get together: MLS, in general, has to realize [the U-20 championships are] good for the kids as well as MLS. On the other hand, I do understand it is not to easy because [the players] belong to their clubs — they’re paying the bills. I’m aware of that. That’s just reality. We are, unfortunately, always going to be having a little problem because the league runs always through the World Cup. Others are in their summer break. We don’t have that opportunity. Somehow U.S. Soccer and MLS has to get together and really work something out. It’s in the best interests of youth soccer. SA: There was a distinct difference between the U.S. college players and the pros, both on the U.S. team and on the other teams. WS: I have to say one thing about it. I think college [soccer] is getting better and better, and that’s very good for us. But you have to compare: If we have in general the majority of our players playing on the college level [13 of 18 from this team],.they’re competing against people playing already on the pro level for one and a half years. These aren’t just [players who have signed contracts], and I’m not just talking about [Argentina’s Javier] Saviola and those guys. The Ukrainians and Chinese already are playing on their [clubs’] first team. There is a difference — everybody knows that — because they are tested week-in and week-out, tested on the level of having to play against older players. They have to make their marks. They have to already compete against guys who are in there for a long time and have to make a living, secure a living. The mental part of a player is coming out as a professional player, [when they] play for money. Of course, the mental part of [their] game gets a lot stronger than on our college level. That’s very obvious. SA: You could see it on the field, especially against Egypt. The Egyptians did things instinctually that the U.S. players would have to stop and think about. WS: There are so many situations in a game where a professional player who’s been playing on a higher level instinctually does things — in general. That’s just the way it is. [The college players] have not been through that. An example: When Egypt was under pressure — we put so much pressure on them — when we were all over them, they tried to slow down the game as much as they could, tried to disrupt our rhythm by going down, laying down for three minutes on a foul. They did it instinctively. We still have to talk all the time: ‘Guys, this is the situation, slow the game down.’ They’re just little, fine points, but those little, fine points decide games very often. I think that point is very crucial. For us to be a contender, a real contender, that’s where we have to go. We have to have, eventually, 18 professional players on the team, 18 players on that level. I think it’s a more crucial level, especially for us, for Americans. Face it, up to the U-17s, even the U-18s, we are as good as anybody in any which way — mentally, physically, technically, whatever. Or even better. The situation with the [u-17 residency in Bradenton, Fla.] — it’s unbelievable what we have for the 17s. And the 18s as well. Up to that point, even in other countries, there are players playing for professional clubs, but not playing for clubs on a consistent level, with the exception of Saviola, who was playing already [for River Plate] when he was 17. There are not so many Saviolas around. Others on [the professional] level are already pretty good. They’re getting time at 18, 19. They play once in a while. The majority plays about 50 percent of games in the first team. That’s right now where we kind of lack a little bit, where we drop a little bit. We’re going back to a different level. Again, one more time, I think college soccer is very good for what it is, [which is] college soccer, but you cannot compare that with the First Division in Argentina or France or Egypt or Ukraine or Chile or wherever. SA: How soon before the U-20s are completely professional? WS: Hopefully, as soon as possible. I want to be careful. To say we’ll have that in place two years from now, that would be nice, but one has to be a little bit realistic. I’m not sure how it’s all going to be worked out. It has to be worked out. MLS is doing a very good job, making an effort at signing those players. I think right now they’re putting a lot of effort into it. … Can MLS raise a little bit their minimum salary for young players? I don’t know. I can’t say that, I think, eventually, it has to be done, but I don’t know what MLS can afford. I’m not here to judge MLS. I know they’re trying very hard. Eventually, to [sway] those players [to turn pro rather than accept a college scholarship], they’ll probably have to raise it a little bit. SA: We’re a unique situation in that one is expected to get a college education in the United States, and, traditionally, athletes turn pro after college, not during or after high school. WS: I understand it. There’s nothing wrong with that. But until we somehow find a way for our kids … maybe another step has to be found … maybe, before signing into college, they have to stay out one year. Maybe try U-18s. Instead of going to college right away, maybe they [play with an advanced team] for a year, and after that they’re going to know [if they’re ready to be professionals]. What they’d be doing is taking a little bit of a chance, but not a big one. I’m not saying this is the way it has to be done. But, eventually, one way has to be found. We’re dealing with [the pro vs. college decision] all the time. I haven’t talked with the guys about that. I do not want to through my position influence the guys. It’s a decision that they have to make — we cannot influence them in that. They have to make the decision very cautiously on their own. But if anyone wants to become a player on the level as the other guys [in the tournament], I think they probably have to make a decision very early. SA: Has the early signings of players such as Landon Donovan, DaMarcus Beasley, Bobby Convey and the U-17s’ Santino Quaranta and Eddie Johnson opened the door for others to do likewise? WS: Especially with their success. They are younger players getting to play right away. … But even for those players to make it on the next level [as youngsters], they have to have an impact right away in some way. I’m not saying that if they’re sitting on the bench for the Dallas Burn or whomever constantly, if they’re not breaking in — just training with pros gets you better, but it also means you are not strong enough to make the push to play with the team. Some players [reach that point] earlier, some come a little later. It doesn’t mean that if [you turn pro early and aren’t playing immediately], you’re a bad soccer player. It means that maybe at that time you’re not strong enough to make it at the next level. It means you have to even try harder. Still, young players always have to make a decision. I’m not saying it’s a bad decision to go into college. I think for a lot of players it’s the right decision, a good decision. On the other hand, from my point of view, from a national team coach, naturally it would be better if we had younger pros right away coming out of the under-17s, under-18s. That’s what gets us there where the other [countries] are. Then we’re talking about the same level, the same playing field. Otherwise, it won’t be the same. There will always be a difference between college and professional soccer. There is a difference. If people don’t realize that, they’re very naive. It doesn’t mean college players are bad — they can reach a very high level — but there’s still going to be mentally a difference. I’m not saying physically too much [of a difference], not even technically too much, but definitely on the mental part there is a difference. SA: And the U-20s ouster is a product of that. WS: Yes, of course. it’s a product of that. Part also has to do as well with that we had to find ourselves for the first game [a 1-0 loss to China] because we didn’t really have a preparation. We made adjustments out of the first game for the Chile game [a 4-1 victory]. We had to change things around. Overall, I think we did as good a job as I expected. Even for our pros, there was a difference as well. We didn’t have to deal as much with this five years ago, [but now we have] two different environments coming together. It takes time [for the pros and collegians] to adjust to each other. If you talk to the professional players [Donovan, Beasley, Convey, Edson Buddle and Conor Casey], they’ll probably tell you the same thing — it was a hard adjustment for them, too. Overall, we did a pretty good job. I Have to say that. SA: Were the expectations, the hype, too much? WS: Of course, the hype was way too much. One has to be realistic. Somewhat realistic — I can dream and so forth. The way everything went, we have to be realistic. The 17s had great success at the last World Cup [in New Zealand in November 1999], but how many semifinalists from that last under-17 World Cup make it to the under-20 semifinals. Nobody. And [the other U-17 semifinalists] were pretty good, too. Ghana [third at the U-17 finals, second at the U-20 finals] was only one. The hype was way too much. Naturally, the kids get into this as well, and it’s unrealistic. It’s a fine line not to discourage them, that they’re not good enough, but on the other hand you want to be realistic. They hype was incredible. How could anybody think in a normal frame of mind that we can go there, even despite the U-17s’ fourth place, with a third of the team professional, with the preparation where every team had five weeks ahead of us — how can anybody think we could just walk in there and win the World Cup? Were we happy to make it to the [second] round? We were very happy. Did I think or hope we had a chance against Egypt? Yes. A very good one. The game could have gone either which way. I’m not going to blame Brad Davis [whose handball was the critical play in the loss to Egypt], but it was a college mistake. It was very naive. He could have let the ball go. Those are moments when experience comes in. Especially on that level, especially in the World Cup. SA: What in your opinion worked for the U.S. team in Argentina? WS: Despite that a lot of people say our defense was shaky, overall, I was happy with the defense. It kept us in every game. D.J. [Countess, the goalkeeper] was part of it, but I expected [Countess to play well]. We gave up one goal against China, gave up one goal against Chile, gave up one goal in the last second by fluke against Ukraine. How could I not be happy with the defense? Against Egypt, we gave up a goal on a penalty in the 76th minute. Up to that point, did they have chances? Of course. Up to that point in the second half, I thought I very happy with the defense. We won almost every battle after the first half. Was I happy with our game going forward? No, not absolutely. But I could not expect anything more. China was a team that was very difficult to play going forward, doubling and tripling all the time. It’s very hard to get a rhythm going, but still we created some chances. Against Chile, we made some chances, some adjustments. We knew how we could hurt Chile, but it was tougher game than maybe it looked like. We played, I think, pretty effectively, but our game forward was still not there where it should have been. Against Ukraine was a different game. We knew we had to go forward, and we wanted to win, we needed to win. Overall, I thought we played a lot better than I expected us to play. We were better every game, even if just a little bit. Up to that point, I thought, yeah, we were on the right path. Against Ukraine, yeah, I think we were pretty much in control of the game. Were we perfect going forward? No, but we created a lot of chances. Against Egypt as well, I think we played openly a little better, felt our game going forward was stronger. We were pushing Landon up a little bit, and we played well in the second half. Was it perfect, the way I would have thought, brilliant? No. It still wasn’t brilliant. We didn’t have too much time [on the ball]. … SA: In the Egypt game, three of your pros were injured. Edson Buddle couldn’t play, and neither Bobby Convey nor DaMarcus Beasley were able to provide anything near their normal contribution. On a team in which the gap between pro players and everyone else is so pronounced, that’s a major obstacle to overcome. WS: True, but on the other hand, that’s part of the game. One thing when I look back, I had to make a [lineup] decision always in last second, which I really didn’t want to do. You want to make sure the kids know a day before if they’re playing. Because of the sickness level [the U.S. camp was ravaged by stomach flu] and injuries, sometimes I had to make decisions at the last minute. I had to deal with those situations constantly. Look at the situation with D.J. and [backup keeper] Dougie Warren. I saw D.J. coming down [to breakfast] the morning before the Ukraine game, I thought it’s impossible. Then I looked at Dougie. Dougie was even worse. For that, it was incredible what [Countess] did. He was so sick, it’s not even funny. Against Egypt, [the decisions on Beasley, Convey and Buddle) were a last-second thing. Not even a half-hour before we left for the stadium, all three of them were there in the trainer’s room. I told them the thing is I don’t want to get anybody hurt. I do not believe in heroes. I do not believe that a player when he’s 60 or 65 percent is better than a player at 100 percent. But they looked me in the eyes and said they were ready. Looking back, maybe I should have said I don’t know. Bobby was important for us. Maybe in that moment, maybe mentally he was ready, but physically he probably wasn’t. Later on, I talked to Beas, and he said, ‘I thought I was ready, I felt ready, then I was in the game and there was 15-20 percent missing. Especially a guy like Beas — with 15-20 percent missing, he misses a lot, especially going forward. Edson knew he couldn’t play. He was at 75 percent. He was sure he couldn’t play. Did it help us [to use Beasley and Convey]? Probably not. It’s kind of the unknown — you don’t know. When Bobby came off, I was pretty confident Brad [Davis] would come in and change the entire game. Overall, he did pretty well. Normally, when he comes off the bench, he scores a goal. This game, he made a mistake. But big deal. Many times before he did a lot of good things for us. Other people ask me [about] bringing in Alecko [Eskandarian]. The kid in every game created chances for himself. Maybe the pressure was too big being in the World Cup. Normally, he would put those things away. Can I blame him? Of course not. He’s a great kid. He’s going to have a great career. All little factors. Looking back, they all add up. If we’re lucky, we score the first goal [against Egypt], win, 1-0 or 2-0, and everything is beautiful. I think we had a good chance to make next round. Then [in the quarterfinals] we play Holland, and we’d probably have a good chance against them, too. Would that have changed what I’m saying right now? It would have been putting a beautiful film over your eyes because, eventually, for us to be consistent on that level, we have to again be on the same playing field, the same level. Hard as we can try, it ain’t going to change until we get there. It was probably a big eye-opener because at the last U-20 World Cup [where Suhnholz was Sigi Schmid’s assistant], we had two professionals. But one was Timmy Howard, the goalkeeper, and at the time he was our backup. The only other one had was Steve Cherundolo. It’s always easy to bring one in, be pretty well prepared, physically good and think you could play with anybody, but we were mentally up and down. Especially in the game against Japan, and then [in the second round] against Spain — and those were the two teams in the final. We played pretty well against them. Did we have a chance to probably beat them? Of course, you always have a chance. On the other hand, there was a difference between Spain and us. They were pros and we weren’t. It was the same with Japan. SA: What, in hindsight, would you have done differently? WS: When I look back, of course you question things you did. Yeah, I think maybe I should have seen the situation with Bobby, that he wasn’t maybe 100 percent the last game, and Beas. … Maybe I was thinking after Kenny [Arena] had a great game against Ukraine, and I don’t know if I ever lost a game with him — all those little things — I think, my God, if I’d had him in there [against Egypt]. … On the other hand, seeing Egypt before, I really didn’t feel they were up in the air a threat, I didn’t feel he would get in the game right away, make an impact right away. I thought the game would be played more on the ground. I don’t know, of course you think about those things. Did I think there were really big mistakes? I don’t know, maybe there were. Everything else worked as expected. SA: The critical thing then, in your eyes, was the lack of earlier preparation? WS: I didn’t want to make a big deal out of it. It’s just the way it was. I tried to swallow it, make it not a factor. But, naturally, it was a big factor, but there was no other way of doing it. … Something has to be worked out in some way where [more preparation time] is possible. Especially if the under-20s want to make a step up. Very necessary. Some way has to be found. SA: Francisco Marcos, the head of the U.S. delegation to Argentina, suggests a U-20 residency, perhaps in another country. WS: We really didn’t talk about it. Whatever. Something has to be done. It’s a matter of money. [Residency] would be the greatest thing — it’s possible, maybe after the under-17 age group. That maybe would fit in with what I said [about players taking a year off before deciding on college]. After the 17s, he has to go into U-18s as well. Adding on to [residency]. Something has to be done to bridge over after the under-17s, really prepare them for the next level. Or make the decision afterwards, maybe after that see who wants to go the direction of becoming a pro, who wants to go the direction of playing in college. SA: Is it possible there were other players out there that could have helped this team? WS: No. Absolutely not. How to be — no. We looked at, my God, over 100 players, evaluated [all of them]. The last 15 months, we had at least 70 in camp, one camp or another. We watched how many college camps. I don’t think so. Everybody had a one time or another a chance to make a point. There;s other talented players out there, sure, but [can they play] at the next level? We had Alecko in camp a few times, and a couple times he was not in. We never got him out of eyesight, but he wasn’t ready. He made his point during the college season [at Virginia], had a very good year. We invited him back in and [after not being chosen for the qualifying tournament] really kind of found his groove, knew what he had to do to make it to the World Cup. He’s one of the best college players out there, but he had to find it himself I’ve talked to so many college coaches. An others were unlucky, got hurt. I wish we had had [Duke midfielder] Trevor Perea. Last year he gave our team flair. We played a lot different without him. Can we dwell on that? He got hurt. He could have given us something. Various other ones maybe could have contributed. [Maryland forward] Abe Thompson — we brought him back in [in January]. He got unlucky, got hurt at the beginning of the year. We brought him [back] in after qualifying. He broke something in his foot. Came back in, got hurt. Out again. What are you going to do? Could he have helped? Maybe. We’d still have other questions, have to decide maybe between Abe Thompson, Edson Buddle, Conor Casey. [Clemson midfielder] Kenny Cutler — he was with us a long time. Could he have maybe had an impact? I think Kenny had plenty of time to show us he can make it. He was unlucky, too. Got hurt, too. Especially [unlucky] at the end, before Toulon [the pre-World Cup tournament in France], he got hurt. We [checked out] almost everybody possible — everybody who got recommended at one time or other. Some recommendations we checked out through other people — you can’t see every player in the country. You have to rely on other people, rely a little bit on [your] history [with various scouts]. I believe every good player has made it up to that level where we’re going to take a look at him. When we started, we looked at every regional player, every national player, who had been with the U-17s and U-18s. That’s a pretty good group. Some people had to, naturally, make a point. Look at [Wake Forest midfielder] Brian Carroll. He didn’t really make it [at first], we felt he wasn’t good enough. He didn’t show us anything. We saw him play, had conversations with his coach over long periods of time and felt he should get another look. So we looked at him again. At the ACC tournament, we got another look at him. That guy made it. Through hard work, he hit all the right buttons. Honestly, I was thinking at that time, I was questioning if he can make it. But you know what, he did. Other players — [Clemson defender] Ricky Lewis came on later, last year. Eskandarian, Carroll. [Portland forward] Kelly Gray was out at one time because we looked at him as a forward, and he wasn’t good enough as a forward. Let me rephrase that: Kelly is a good forward, but looking ahead to Conor, to Edson … Kelly would have been maybe No. 6 [on our depth chart] at forward. After looking at Kelly over and over, we felt he wouldn’t be able to make it as a forward. I told him that. Honestly, Kelly was not on our list anymore. Somehow through Clive [Charles, the Portland coach], he had good season [last fall], and we had to look at him again. We knew he could be a versatile player, so we used him in camp when we needed players in the back, and he did pretty good. We knew we would need players who were very versatile, and at the beginning of this year he realized his only way to make it was to be this kind of player. To be there when he was needed, play almost any position possible. He did, and he played so well overall no matter where we put him that we had to find a place for him on the field. He’d score goals, win balls in the air, put the ball 50 yards right on the spot. My point is that kid made a point. It was basically the same for everybody else, everybody in general. If you want to play at that level, at any level, you have to make a point. If you’re good, you make it, but you have to make points. You have to make people believe in you. SA: This team seemed to suffer from not having players — leaders — like Nick Garcia or Steve Cherundolo, who were key players on the ’99 U-20 squad. WS: I felt we did not have that kind of player, like [Carlos] Bocanegra or Garcia. We did not have that kind of leadership on the team, and that really was the difference between this team and the last team. Talent-wise, we were better [than the ’99 group]. And I think, for example, Nelson Akwari was a great leader, but not the type of Nick Garcia or Bocanegra or [Danny] Califf or Steve Cherundolo, who did it in a different way. There was more oomph to it [with the ’99 leaders]. When you see a Nick Garcia, he had incredible fire in his belly. That’s just the person he was. He’s proven it on every level. He’s all business. That’s the type of player he was, and it’s what made him a good combination player. He was a pro as a college player, his whole demeanor, everything., Garcia, Bocanegra — those types of players don’t grow on trees. But, honestly, I have to say, we had a very good group. Working together was great, and I think they responded very well. … Did everybody get everything out of it? It’s up to the players. They have to realize [they are] the one who must learn. … I get a lot of satisfaction out of that, [out of having] helped a lot of players to be ready for the future. Did I help everybody? I don’t know. It’s up to the player. They definitely got better. Overall, I think we did pretty good with what we had. We had a pretty good record, even before [Argentina]. It’s always very hard to plan, knowing that, eventually, you’ll have to change five or six players [when the pros arrive]. Handling that situation, I think we did pretty good. Overall, defensively I think we did pretty good. Created-wise, we could have been little bit better. Last year I think we played very good soccer. A big part of it was Trevor Perea. Offensively, I was not too happy overall. We did OK. With the exception of qualifying, a couple games [in which] I thought we played pretty well, .every other game, even when most of time we were in charge, we didn’t have a quality output offensively. Trevor was the type of player for us, he’s almost like a true playmaker. He could set the pace of a game, and he’s a good penetrator as well. He had a feeling for that, combining the game for us. The translation from defense to offense. Defensively, he’s not the greatest player in the world, but he did so much offensively — missing him changes somewhat our game. I would have liked to see him play. SA: His injury … WS: It was his pelvis muscle, and it needed surgery. Almost the same injury as Brad Davis [before qualifying], but worse than Brad’s. He needed surgery. He’ll start playing pretty soon again. It was very hard for him. SA: You say you were happy with your defense, but they seemed to be under siege almost the entire tournament. They did a good job clearing things from danger, but they seemed to always have to be clearing things from danger. WS: At times, that had a lot to do with … it was not just a defensive thing. Sometimes, the whole team had to do with that. In certain situations, we’d give the ball away too quickly, then, of course, the defense is under pressure again. Sometimes, we had a problem with giving the ball away too quickly. Sometimes in midfield, sometimes up front. I’m not saying all the time, but at times that had something to do with it. On the other hand, overall, we were in general a young defense. [All four back-line starters, and Countess, were 82s rather than 81s.] People cannot forget that. Do they still have to do better? Is there room for getting better? Of course. But, again, I was not so worried about the defense. In general, they always pulled through. Did they make mistakes at times? Yes, they did. But I don’t think it was so crucial that it was our problem. SA: The problem was more in midfield, linking from defense to attack. Too often, the ball was lost in midfield and the attack never got going. WS: As I said, in midfield, we had one particular player missing, our playmaker, to hold onto the ball under pressure a little bit more. A specific guy who sometimes helps you, takes the pressure off the defense. SA: How crucial was it that Landon Donovan step into central midfield, sacrifice his attacking game to provide midfield organization? WS: It was very, very important for us because the problem was — again it goes back [to preparation] — we hadn’t played together. We needed in certain situations, we needed someone in there who could hold on ball, change the rhythm of the game. He was very crucial for us in a midfield role. It showed. He helped us a lot with that. SA: It meant he often wasn’t involved in the attack. WS: That was the other side. That was my thing as well. If Landon had played on top, up front, we wouldn’t have gotten into the game. Because we really needed him [in midfield] very badly. The midfielders we had, let’s face it, in general were more ball-winners, very good at closing people down, but they were not the types of players to hold onto the ball or who are extremely creative. We didn’t have that. If he was on his game, Kyle Martino is capable of doing it. … I would say he really wasn’t on. In the World Cup, you have to be capable of defending as well. Which Landon did. He played a double role in there. Especially in the first game, against China. They looked like they had a million players in midfield. That’s a very critical point. We had to see, especially in the first game, how are we set, how can we handle it right now. Because we had some new players in there. How are [the newcomers] going to gel with us? How is the whole thing going to work out? That really was a question. How are we going to connect during the game? It was something we had to find out, that we didn’t know. We were hoping, but we did not know. You can’t know until you play. SA: Do you believe the U.S. is progressing to where it can truly compete at the highest levels? WS: I’ve been seeing that all along. I’m a true believer. We’ve come a long way and we have so many talented players, so many talented players to choose from. We have to get the talented players as quickly as possible to the next level. That’s the time where they learn the most and the quickest, when they become young professionals. By young, I’m talking 17, 18, 19 years old. It doesn’t mean that a 22- or 23-year-old can’t become a professional player, but if you get them younger, the more time they have to develop as players, the quicker they’re going to do that. SA: What are your thoughts on the next U-20 team? WS: We’ve got two very good groups [current U-17s and U-18s], two very talented groups. I think they’re going to be good. I think they’re going to be very good. How good will depend on what we can provide for them and what they can provide for themselves. There’s a difference between professional players and the so-called college player, whatever you want to call them, [so if we have a mostly college-based team], then we’re still going to face the same issues. They’re going to be then not competing on same playing field as all the other countries. We have to get, eventually, to that point where we have 18 young professionals competing against 18 young professionals fm the other country, then we’re going to be ready to make it further. Then our chances will be a lot better. SA: Do you want to continue on as U-20 coach? What are your plans? WS: Event