MARSEILLE, FRANCE – The United States men’s Olympic team dropped its opening game of the Paris 2024 tournament on Wednesday night when it fell to a strong French team by a 3-0 scoreline. The U.S. team played well for long stretches, but the big story of the game is that France, with its talent, made the big plays while the U.S. team failed to do so.

It was a result that will surely leave head coach Marko Mitrovic and the players frustrated as they were close at times. The first half was 0-0 in a gritty stalemate. Then in the second half, the U.S. team hit the post twice, had a close call called back, and was generally pushing the ball forward to aggressively go at France.

But what makes France and its youth teams so good is that they don’t need much to prevail. This game served as the perfect reminder that games are often won in brief moments with talent and not in things such as “balance of play.”

In the end, France made the big plays and punished the U.S. team for mistakes and an inability to finish. The U.S. team almost had the needed big plays, but the difference between almost pulling them off and actually doing it is huge. That is why France is France.

Not long after Djordje Mihailovic nearly opened the scoring with a rocked from 25 yards off the crossbar, France moved ahead via a shot from distance delivered by French captain Alexandre Lacazette that snuck inside the left post – which goalkeeper Patrick Schulte could have done.

La France réussit son entrée en lice dans le tournoi olympique ! ????????????https://t.co/p6h28rOjU5#Paris2024 #FRAUSA pic.twitter.com/7WIkHkqLh3

— L'ÉQUIPE (@lequipe) July 24, 2024

To its credit, the U.S. team showed some maturity with a nice response and nearly equalized when a cross from Kevin Paredes found John Tolkin at the far post. The left back was at close range from a tight angle but hit the post. Then shortly after that,  the U.S. team conceded yet another goal after another breakdown just outside the box left Michael Olise with an opening to hit an unstoppable ball past Schulte.

Then the final goal came and the backbreaker, was a corner that was poorly defended from multiple U.S. players and was headed in by Loic Bade.

Everyone should acknowledge that France was better. They delivered with their quality and the U.S. team did not. But the 3-0 scoreline doesn’t reflect that this U.S. team wasn’t overmatched or was just looking to bunker a result.

French coach Thierry Herny said it best afterward: “Unlike the match against Japan [a 1-1 draw in France’s last pre-Olympic friendly], where we had a lot of chances but scored a single goal, we had few chances but we scored three times."

For better or worse, this quote defined both teams in this game.

The problem, however, is that the goal differential is now another unwanted obstacle in its path as it looks to climb out of its early hole in this tournament.

Here are some thoughts on the game.

Too many missed chances

In the second half, the U.S. team had opportunities. None of them were easy, but when a team is trying to pull off an upset on a great team, someone needs to make a big and difficult play.

Djordje Mihailovic took a big shot from distance that beat French keeper Guillaume Restes but rattled off the crossbar. Then just after France scored the opener, Kevin Paredes hit a nice cross that found John Tolkin from close range but it also went off the post. Griffin Yow came off the bench and had a goal called back that would have helped in the goal differential issue. It was “close,” to say the least.

It would be far worse if the U.S. team wasn’t even creating these types of chances, but they did. They also had France on the backheel. But these chances have to be put away. Someone needs to send their shot from distance into the back of the net. Someone needs to smash home a tight angle cross from close range, and the goalkeeper needs to make a jaw-dropping save.

France did all that. The U.S. did not.

Balance of play was even, but France won the battle of moments.

Who played well, who didn’t?

Starting in the back, Schulte will surely feel that he had the ability to save France’s opening goal. The shot was far enough out where it wasn’t hit with so much pace that Schulte had no chance. It would have been a great save, but it was possible. That might open the door for a Gaga Slonina start in the next game against New Zealand.  

Tanner Tessmann and Gianluca Busio are important to this team in central midfield and Mitrovic is hoping that their club chemistry will translate from Venezia into the Olympic team. For the most part, both players had good games but Busio could have done much better tracking back on Lacazette’s goal.

Tolin and right back Nathan Harriel both did surprisingly well. Tolkin came into this game amid uncertainty whether he or Caleb Wiley would start at left back. Tolkin very much looked like he deserved to be starting while Harriel was competent on the right side.

In central defense, Walker Zimmerman had 11 clearance and won every dual (both aerials and ground duels). He looked like a smart overage pick. Miles Robinson struggled and he looked very much like a player who has never played with this team before (he was even late to joining where he apparently missed the team’s closed door scrimmages prior to this tournament). It’s fair to wonder whether Robinson should have been with the Copa America team if he was always going to the Olympics. If he was allowed to just focus on the Olympic team, he could have been in the June camp. Instead, he joined the team cold.

Paredes, Aaronson, and Mihailovic all had moments but not enough to beat France. Each was outperformed by their French counterparts. Paredes nearly had an assist on the cross to Tolkin. Mihailovic nearly had a goal. Aaronson also was active, especially in the first half. Aaronson drew three fouls and Paredes drew five. That’s good, but it wasn’t good enough.

But with the midfielders and wingers, no one combined well with McGuire. McGuire simply did not touch the ball enough in the attacking third. Part of that is on McGuire and part of that is on his team. It was a systematic disappointing that the U.S. team could not get their lone No. 9 involved enough.

Moving on

The U.S. team has a realistic chance to advance, but now they have no margin for error. The problem now is that New Zealand will be excited and confident after winning their opener against Guinea.

It’s unlikely that Mitrovic will make too many changes to his starting lineup as his roster is only 18 players. The areas he has the most ability to change are the wingers – where he has capable backups in Taylor Booth and Yow. The fact that Booth is now rested suggests that there could be an opening.

McGuire could be removed but taking him out would require a “false nine” formation. But New Zealand seems like an opponent where McGuire could thrive more and get more service. But no matter what, McGuire must get more dangerous touches. If not, the U.S. team will be in serious trouble.

Also, the U.S. team must get more from set pieces. Zimmerman, Robinson, Harriel, Tessmann, and McGuire are all significant threats on crosses. They should also be able to defend set pieces better. Against France, the U.S. team was not nearly as dangerous as they could or should be. It’s a big area of untapped potential.

Biggest question: confidence

More than anything skill or talented related, the biggest problem for the U.S. team is confidence and how well it can move on from this game. It’s going to take maturity typically not found in a youth team to not let this loss rattle them. We don’t know yet how draining this loss was to the U.S. team both physically and mentally.

It will come down to the overage players, leaders such as Tessmann, and Mitrovic to ensure this team is not rattled and is instead a combination of angry but focused and disciplined. The wild results of this opening day of the men’s soccer tournament show us youth soccer is wildly unpredictable.

That makes things only harder for the U.S. team as they are likely seen as the favorite against New Zealand. Can the U.S. team play as expected and live up to its potential?

The telling thing is that the quality of the U.S. team’s performance against France is likely good enough to win a lot of games, maybe not against top teams, but enough to win a lot of the games it should. But what is now different is the issue of confidence.

If the U.S. team responds well against New Zealand, it will tell us a lot of good things about this group of players. If it doesn’t it will reflect many of the problems we saw with the full USMNT at the Copa America where it struggled to respond in difficult situations.

The U.S. isn’t done yet, but the road is  now just a lot more difficult.