Mauricio Pochettino is a bold choice for U.S. Soccer, and that's a good thing

The moment screamed for a big swing rather than something "safe"

None of us can know how Mauricio Pochettino’s arrival into the high profile US men’s national team job will turn out. (OK, it’s “reported” arrival, since it’s not official yet. But it sure feels like we’re “standing” on 20 at the blackjack table here. That is, it’s a pretty safe bet.)

There are plenty of variables in play here: how he makes the transition from club boss to international manager; whether this U.S. “golden generation” has plateaued at a place where it wasn’t so glittering gold after all; whether the international cadence of matches (read: far fewer of them) affords the Argentine manager the time he needed time at other stops to align his preferred principles of play; and on and on …

But however all this turns out, we do already know this – and this is something to be appreciated:

This is a big swing from U.S. Soccer and Matt Crocker, who is now into his second year as U.S. Soccer technical director. And let’s all take a minute to applaud a move that needed to be a little more adventurous, a little more courageous. It needed to be a big home run swing, even if we don’t know where the ball will eventually land.

It may seem obvious that U.S. Soccer needed this kind of brave go, but it was far from a sure thing that it would happen. Simply put, safe choices are easier.

And truth be told, U.S. Soccer has a history of indulging safe choices. Bruce Arena’s experience at the helm made him the safe choice for the rescue mission when things went sideways under Jurgen Klinsmann. Klinsmann himself was a bold choice, but his retention for a second World Cup cycle certainly represented the more conservative play.

Gregg Berhalter was a pretty safe choice, even if it was complicated in other ways (namely, the understandable public concerns over nepotism.)   

Someone like Steve Cherundolo or Jim Curtin would have been a comfortable choice. (Although not all of us saw any possible sense in bringing on Cherundolo, who may never have even been a candidate so much as an example of wildass speculation from a media echo chamber that proved painfully off target on this one.)   

Thierry Henry might have somewhat checked the box under “bold,” but only to a point. He would also check it under “wild card” due to his relative inexperience and track record. He also would have been a safer choice in that he’s a recognized name among American soccer circles and therefore not as much of a threat to Crocker’s reputation if the decision went “kablooey.”  

Gareth Southgate? Not a terrible choice perhaps, but it would have felt pretty “safe,” especially as Crocker is a Welshman and therefore a fellow Brit.  

Joachim Löw? He was the bold choice of another day. Today, not so much.

This was a moment that screamed for being bold. This chance – the opportunity to play every World Cup match at home – will not come around again for perhaps 30 years, if then. (The gap between World Cup ‘94 and the one ahead is 32 years.) 

It also would have been easier to pay someone like Cherundolo or Curtin. (Perhaps Henry, too, as that aforementioned lack of track record may have put him into a discount category.) 

So perhaps Pochettino, with previous stops at high profile addresses (Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur, PSG and Chelsea), won’t prove the right choice. We really won’t know until July of ‘26, will we? But he certainly represents the more daring choice in a moment that required some daring — and that’s a pretty good place to start.