With J Hutcherson -- There's enough cliches about the relative merits of failure in building success in general, without the need to go sports specific. A better question is what actually counts as failure. If you're a professional sports coach, the quick response is not much. That trend isn't bucked by the gentlemen running the squads in Major League Soccer.
Part of that is simple enough. Even with expansion, this remains a League with a floating concept of success. Yesterday's Daily covered the relative merits of not losing. Quick verdict, it's also not enough. Add to that making the playoffs, though right now that would take a winning record. That's also one, breaking .500 and making the case that you're getting the result most of the time.
You can go ahead and add in the rebuilding year, injuries, and whatever else a person can fabricate to explain away disappointment. After all, there's a job on the line.
So far this season, we've seen a coach fire himself while putting the weight on a League that doesn't get the sport they run, another take the hit for a lopsided loss, and the coach with the worst record opt out on his own. Short of just winning, none of these give a clear look at what it takes to keep a job.
Instead, it's business as usual. Good enough might not be. There are no excuses. All part of another list of cliches that exist in sports where the point is one winner.
Major League Soccer's version of the sack race might be over for the 2009 regular season edition, but there are still questions. Teams that lean too heavily on the multiple competitions and limited squad excuse could find themselves disappointing across Cups. That has to count for something. There are a group of teams riding it out with the same leadership that won't make the playoffs. Does that force a move? There's one that hasn't taken full advantage of an easy schedule. Another that has a solid record, but is also giving off every indication in big games that they'll be exiting the postseason at the earliest opportunity.
Are any of those enough to follow our British friends in ringing the changes? With MLS, it's simply too tough to call. There are - relative to this strange scale - successful MLS coaches that never got another look. There are lifers, who keep cycling back through or manage to stick with their club during down cycles. There's a new generation of technical directors as qualified to coach.
End result? The same confusion that has always existed in the MLS coaching ranks. Some might take it as a sign of commitment that a list of the top five MLS coaches include people that have been fired by MLS teams. Others might ask a simple question. Given time and understanding, how better off would some of those teams be had they stuck with their choice?
Comments, questions, solutions to problems that have yet to present themselves. Please, tell me all about it.
