The Real Reason the U.S. Women’s National Team Lost


It’s a fact as brutal as it is banal: The U.S. played well with the talent that they had and they lost anyways. Some of that comes down to tactical decisions, some comes down to substandard coaching—a reluctance on Andonovski’s part to make adjustments. Some of it comes down to luck. And some of it comes down to the fact that Sweden is a very good team, ranked third in the world by FIFA. That’s not satisfying, but that’s soccer. 

Change is undoubtedly coming. Fairly or not, Andonovski is almost certainly done; his contract expires soon and it’s highly unlikely that it will be renewed. This version of the U.S. team is also unique in that it’s caught between two generations of players. Rapinoe and Julie Ertz have played in their last World Cup; it’s likely that Emily Sonnett (who, like Ertz, was excellent in this competition), as well as Alex Morgan (who put in a shift but was far from her best) have as well. Meanwhile, a sensational core of young talent is on the way up: Sophia Smith, Trinity Rodman, Naomi Girma, Alyssa Thompson, Mallory Swanson, Ashley Sanchez, and Macario will all still be in their prime at the next World Cup. 

The biggest problem for the U.S. is a good and healthy one to have: Women’s soccer is experiencing a boom time and the rest of the world has caught up to the U.S. in terms of quality. The gulf between the U.S. and everyone else has shrunk dramatically. That’s great for everyone, even if it does mean the margin of error has shrunk considerably and the sport’s former titans may now make earlier exits than they’ve previously avoided. 





Source link