Comments on: The Case for Jimmy Conrad

By: Russell Adams

Russell Adams — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 21:47:02 +0000

I played with Jimmy at SDSU before he up and left for a better program with no more than just a promise of a walk on try out at UCLA… He left SDSU because our program was lacking and at the time he was playing sweeper and was continually and incorrectly blamed for every one of the teams loses… the next season he was on the field when UCLA won the national championship. SDSU continued to lose… sometimes coaches just can’t see the forest through the trees.

Hardest working guy I ever met… the national team coach has a lot to choose form and has his biases too, like we do… I for one think Conrad is needed in our back four and brings badly needed tactical defending and leadership. People who say he is too old are wrong, age is nothing to do with it, it about fitness and knowledge… I say put him on the field… I will feel better knowing he’s there…

By: soccer goals

soccer goals — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:47:03 +0000

You made some great points. IS he the fourth best central defender on the team? I am not sure but in case of injury, he would be the best option.

By: Merk

Merk — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:30:12 +0000

Rafael – “but I was at the game versus Haiti and he was far and away one of the worst players on the pitch.”

-proof its hard to really to evaulate the game and all the players in it live. every media outlet disagrees with with you Rafae which very likely points to you being wrong.

By: Tony Felich

Tony Felich — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:45:50 +0000

Excellent post.

Anyone who has watched Jimmy Conrad for the past several years in KC knows his value. Unlike Marshall and Conde (and others), Conrad consistently plays with practical rookies on his backline. This year he has a pure rookie (Besler), a converted halfback (Watson), and a very young first year starter (Holbein) in the middle, yet the Wizards D holds well. The same was essentially true last year.

Selfishly I’m glad Jimmy hasn’t been called up more. We love watching him play virtually every minute in KC. On the other hand, he deserves more caps and the USMNT would be better served with him playing as much as possible.

By: Rafael

Rafael — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:13:06 +0000

While Conrad is better than Parkhurst, he might not be able to beat out Califf in that position. I would like to see Califf actually play more games to have a better comparison.

The problem is that Conrad has seen better days. He is just a bit too old for another WC cycle. After Onyewu, Bocanegra, and Demerit, the best option is Chad Marshall.
Marshall has been great so far and is younger. Between a Marshall and a Conrad, Marshall wins out.

By: Brandon

Brandon — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:07:47 +0000

I haven’t follew Conrad’s career so I can’t comment on most of this article, but I was at the game versus Haiti and he was far and away one of the worst players on the pitch. He kept making boneheaded mistakes that luckily did not lead to the U.S. being blown out. The entire backline looked a mess, says a lot for his great leadership. If I were Bradley, none of those four guys on the backline impressed me enough to make another U.S. squand any time in the near future.

By: Earl

Earl — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:14:15 +0000

K- good article on Conrad. Well put though I wish you’d explain why Bradley keeps omitting him for the likes of Califf and Parkhurst.

On your commentary, well done. You sounded like a pro with one very serious exception. You wanted to gloss over Jeff Parke’s drug issues by saying he had “issues” with Red Bull that led to his release and then never elaborating. Alot of USL fans even Whitecaps ones don’t know that he’s a druggie. You kept praising the guy as a professional and top class defender in MLS and USL without telling the audience what exactly this guy did. Maybe you know Parke personally and didn’t want to offend him, but to me it was a black mark on an otherwise solid broadcasting debut.

By: Larry O

Larry O — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:56:08 +0000

BTW, you were excellent in the commentary for that game, but if you didn’t have a sound system connected to your computer you couldn’t hear it. The audio production was downright dreadful. I personally think you should send that demo tape to the networks. You had more knowledge of the opposing team than just about anyone I have seen all year do a USL Live broadcast, which made the whole thing worthwhile bad audio and such.

By: Larry O

Larry O — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:54:36 +0000

Good one! Not only was Conrad ignored for years when he was the linchpin of those Quake back lines but has been ignored now by Bradley for too long also. But I do think anytime he’s called in he brings a tactical sense or positioning that quite frankly most American defenders lack. Also Bradley likes to pick guys in Europe and that part of the reason he doesn’t pick Conrad for “A” matches which is flat out wrong.

By: Laughing

Laughing — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:57:40 +0000

Your revisionist history is laughable. Jimmy was not a classic case of someone discriminated against because of how he came through the system. He just didn’t mature until later. Believe it or not, it’s possible to analyze a player without putting some negative light on the USSF or MLS.

You’re a joke. I weep for the people who had to listen to your insipid commentary for that match.