Should The USA Stick With Bob Bradley After The World Cup?

Bob Bradley was a second choice candidate for U.S. Soccer in 2006, only getting the job after Jurgen Klinsmann rejected it. After winning the 2007 Gold Cup and guiding the United States to an unlikely second place in the 2009 Confederations Cup, the U.S. head coach is in the discussion to remain in charge of the team for another four-year stint.

With several nations, including Italy and France, having already announced new head coaches for after the World Cup, Goal.com associate editors Allen Ramsey and Zac Lee Rigg ponder what the United States should do from August 2010 onwards.

Zac Lee Rigg: U.S. Soccer president Sunil Gulati said recently that Bob Bradley's future depends on how well the United States does at the World Cup. Does that seem fair to you?

Allen Ramsey: Absolutely. If the USA gets out of the group then he probably gets to keep his job, and that seems fair enough to me. I know people will hate to hear that because calling for Bradley's head is the trendy thing to do, but unless a Fabio Capello type decides he wants the job, why not stick with what's working?

Rigg: That's the cutoff, making the Round of 16? I suppose I could see how it might be, especially given what the USA did in 2006. Think there's any chance he keeps his job if the USA crashes out in the group stages?

Ramsey: Not a single one. But that's the point isn't it?

Arena was canned because the showing was disappointing in 2006. Bradley will get the sack if it's disappointing in 2010. But if the team looks like they played up to potential - and a second round exit to Germany wouldn't look bad at all with this group - then he should get to keep working with them.




Here's my question, do you think he should be gone either way?