U.S. Soccer's Mauricio Pochettino experiment officially ended Friday with the announcement that the Argentine manager is leaving his position with the U.S. men's national team to take up the reins with Manchester United.
Like most experiments, there is a judgement to be made as to whether the 26 months Pochettino spent at the helm of the USMNT was a success or failure. There is certainly a strong impulse to think it was the latter. U.S. Soccer spent millions of dollars in terms of Pochettino's salary -- and that of his staff -- to come up with the same FIFA World Cup finish it reached in 2010, 2014 and 2022.
Closer inspection requires a more nuanced assessment. To call Pochettino's tenure a failure assumes a linear path from 2022 to 2026. The reality was much different. Pochettino didn't take over the USMNT off the back of the round-of-16 performance at the 2022 World Cup. He took over in September 2024 at what was unquestionably a low ebb.
The debacle that was that summer's Copa América, which featured a group stage exit for the U.S. from a tournament it was hosting, set off alarm bells as to the possible performance at the World Cup on home soil. Too many players had become complacent, and it cost then-manager Gregg Berhalter his job. The following year's Concacaf Nations League, in which the USMNT lost to both Panama and Canada, revealed that there would be no quick fixes.
The USMNT eventually rebounded. The team's culture was repaired thanks to Pochettino's no-excuses, total-commitment approach. Young players such as Matt Freese, Alex Freeman, Sebastian Berhalter and Malik Tillman took on bigger roles. Tactically, Pochettino hit upon a high-pressing system that played to the team's strength in midfield with the triumvirate of Tillman, Tyler Adams and Weston McKennie. Given the team's inconsistency in the back, the internal logic of the approach was strong.
At the start of the World Cup, the U.S. played inspired soccer. Sure, it was expected to beat Paraguay and Australia, but it did so in impressive fashion with a style that was easy on the eyes. It later got past Bosnia-Herzegovina in a match that tested its ability to grind out a result, at times with 10 players.
And then it all fell apart in the round of 16 against Belgium.
The USMNT was outclassed and outworked against the Red Devils. It's why Pochettino deserves an overall grade of C-plus for the team's on-field performance. There were positives and negatives. On the one hand, some inspiring results meant there was certainly more enthusiasm for the USMNT than had been seen since perhaps 2014. On the other, expectations were ultimately met, but not exceeded.
Was that worth the $6 million or so in annual salary that Pochettino took home during his time with the USMNT? Given the stakes involved, and the direction the team was headed when he took over, I'd say yes. To hear U.S. Soccer CEO JT Batson tell it, sponsors are asking how they can become more involved. That is, in part, down to how Pochettino got the team to perform at the World Cup.
But Pochettino's legacy is one of unrealized potential. He made some valuable changes, but ultimately, the USMNT didn't do any better at a World Cup than his predecessors did save Bruce Arena in 2002.
What made his reappointment last August exciting was the opportunity to build on the foundation that has been laid since October 2024. This was especially true given the crop of young players that are coming through the ranks. There was a foundation. Additional scaffolding was being constructed. Now Pochettino walks away with the job half finished.
There remains the question of what Pochettino would've been able to achieve if he had been given more time. The initial progress this cycle was encouraging.
But that idea runs headlong into the reality that Pochettino's tenure with the USMNT was never destined to be long enough for him to complete a full cycle. This was a man whose focus seemed easily distracted by whatever big job might open up. That mercenary attitude can be looked at as a professional imperative for a high-level manager, a profession where job security is almost nonexistent. Opportunities such as the Manchester United job, even given the dysfunction that is rampant in the organization, only come around so often.
It's the kind of tradeoff U.S. Soccer knew it was making when it hired Pochettino, but such an approach by the Argentine still leaves a sour taste, especially given the steady stream of jobs to which he was linked. To be clear, Pochettino looked committed to the job when he was in camp. Outside of those confines, and in numerous interviews with media where he would wax poetic about the virtues of the Premier League, it appeared less so.
His occasional complaints about the nature of the soccer culture in the U.S., where it's not unusual for the home fans to be outnumbered, gave an impression that while there were aspects of the U.S. job Pochettino liked and had affection for, he didn't love it.
That's why U.S. Soccer might want to refine its approach when it comes to finding Pochettino's replacement. If it wants to take another big swing at a high-profile manager, it will behoove U.S. Soccer to focus on candidates who will take a longer-term view of the project. The timing of Pochettino's departure certainly helps it in this regard. The fact that there are 43 months until the start of the 2030 World Cup invites less short-term thinking on the part of any applicants.
Such concerns won't apply to an American candidate such as current U23 manager Steve Cherundolo and Nashville SC boss B.J. Callaghan. For them, the USMNT job is the pinnacle, or at least close to it. That is the part of the calculus in which the United States Soccer Federation will need to engage. Does it go with someone for whom the USMNT is its dream job, or the high-profile type for whom it's another stop on the coaching train?
It seems unlikely that U.S. Soccer can find both traits in one candidate. It will have to choose one or the other.