Analysis: USMNT's checklist to be ready for 2030

SEATTLE — Four years from now, the world will gather on the Iberian Peninsula and northern Africa for a FIFA Men’s World Cup that will span multiple continents and could be in line for another round of expansion.

The United States should be there. Nothing is certain — see, Italy — but the baseline expectation is the U.S. will find its way through qualifying and get its way to Portugal, Spain and Morocco for the 2030 version of the event.

But will the results be any different?

That is one of the big questions that comes out of this World Cup, that concluded for the Americans on Monday night in a humbling 4-1 loss to Belgium in Seattle that again showed the gulf that still remains between the elite teams in the world and where the U.S. sits on the global landscape.

There were positives to take from this tournament. For the fourth straight World Cup where the U.S. participated — 2018 being the outlier when the Americans failed to qualify — the team made its way out of the group stage. Thanks to the expanded field and an extra round, the U.S. won a knockout round game for the first time in 24 years beating Bosnia-Herzegovina in the round of 32.

But, yet again, the run of the Americans ended in the round of 16. Just like 2010 in South Africa. Just like 2014 in Brazil. Just like four years ago in Qatar.

“When the emotions settle, I think I'll be able to just look back on what has been a fantastic summer, individually and collectively,” striker Folarin Balogun said. “I know it hasn't ended the way we wanted it to, but I think you guys have all seen in the process, we've definitely united the nation, and we've introduced a lot of people to the beautiful game. So that's a huge positive to not be overlooked.”

There will be plenty of autopsy done in the weeks and months to come about why a home World Cup ended on a such a deflating note that overshadowed much of what the U.S. accomplished in capturing the attention of fans — casual and hardcore.

The answer that needs to be found, though, is how can the U.S. take the necessary steps forward so that in 2030 we’re not again talking about the run of the Stars and Stripes ending in the round of 16. The roster could end up looking similar with the majority of the key contributors from this team still in their late 20s or early 30s when 2030 rolls around.

Here’s a few things we learned from this World Cup and some thoughts on how the next four years could go:

Make Seattle a home

Somehow, someway, Seattle needs to become part of the rotation of venues used by the national team — for the men and the women. The grass technology has advanced to the point where installing a temporary grass field — or maybe someday it's a permanent grass field — is increasingly easier. The World Cup proved that if given the opportunity to come to the Northwest, the support will be there.

This won’t work for every match. But everyone needs to figure out a way to make it happen that Seattle and Lumen Field — we can call it that again — stay in the mix.

Find the stars

There has never felt like there was a World Cup where all the pieces were there for the Americans. When there were anchor stars such as Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan, the supporting pieces weren’t quite up to the level they needed to be for the U.S. to be a true threat on the world stage.

For this World Cup, those supporting pieces — the players who take a good side to great — seemed to be in place. Who wouldn’t be thrilled with a roster that included the likes of Malik Tillman, Tyler Adams, Chris Richards and Jedi Robinson as complementary parts?

It was the stars who felt like they were missing this time around. There was no Tim Howard in goal. There was no Dempsey or Donovan who changed the attack. It was a mostly quiet tournament for Christian Pulisic after flashing in the opener. Weston McKennie was rather quiet. Balogun has the makings of becoming a star but needed some help.

Keeping the complementary pieces strong is important. But the U.S. needs more game-changers.

Goalkeeper generation

Goalkeeper was always one area that on the global soccer landscape where the U.S. regularly produced players with international pedigree.

Beginning with the Washington guys Kasey Keller and Marcus Hahnemann up through Howard, goalkeeping always felt like the position where the U.S. could stack up globally. Keller, Hahnemann, Tony Meola, Brad Friedel, Brad Guzan and Howard all had their moments domestically, internationally and in the World Cup.

That the U.S. turned to Matt Freese as its No. 1 option for the World Cup spoke to where the position is at currently. That’s not an indictment on Freese as much the lack of depth options currently. Freese looked perfectly fine during his first four matches, although he was rarely tested. But his miscue in the second half against Belgium will be the lasting memory anyone has of Freese from this tournament.

The position needs an upgrade at some point before 2030 arrives.

The Pochettino decision

Do U.S. Soccer and Mauricio Pochettino extend their marriage beyond the World Cup? Of all the questions, this is the one in need of an answer sooner rather than later. The problem is that even if Pochettino remains, he’s still likely to be in demand at the club level by some of the top organizations in the world. He was rumored to be possibly leaving for AC Milan after the tournament before those talks eventually turned elsewhere.

After the match on Monday, Pochettino wasn’t interested in immediately addressing the future. But it will remain a lingering question on how the U.S. tries to move ahead over the next four years.

In that sense, Pochettino tried to leave fans with an optimistic tone for the future, whether he’s the one in charge or not.

I think this team showed that we can play football, we can play soccer, we can compete," Pochettino said after the match. "A lot of young players with a lot of potential and future, and I think a generation of young kids that are coming behind. I think only [that you should] keep believing in that process."