Uncertainty and Experimentation: Why USMNT fans are worried ahead of the 2026 World Cup

With the 2026 World Cup less than a year away, and set to be hosted on home soil, one might expect the U.S. Men’s National Team (USMNT) to be steadily sharpening its best lineup, fine-tuning tactics, and solidifying chemistry. Instead, fans and analysts are watching with growing concern as head coach Mauricio Pochettino continues to roll out experimental rosters, lean on unproven talent, and sideline established stars.

Pochettino, brought in to lead the team into what should be a historic tournament for the United States, has taken a bold and unconventional approach to roster building. In recent camps and tournaments, including the 2025 Gold Cup and key friendlies, the team’s lineup has looked more like a developmental project than a World Cup contender. Bonafide stars such as Christian Pulisic, Weston McKennie, Gio Reyna, and Tim Weah have missed recent call-ups due to various factors, ranging from club fatigue to minor injuries to extended rest periods. But their absences, even if justifiable, have come at the cost of vital match experience and team cohesion.

In his latest squad selection ahead September friendlies agains South Korea and Japan, Pochettino has called up a mix of key stars and unproven domestic talent.

This has created a growing sense of unease. With limited time remaining, each match window is a crucial opportunity to build chemistry between the core players who will likely take the field next summer. Instead, Pochettino has filled rosters with uncapped or fringe players — many from MLS — who have little international experience and limited time to adapt to the team’s system. While the idea of building depth and fostering internal competition is not inherently flawed, the timing feels dangerously late in the cycle.

The results haven’t helped. The U.S. fell in the final of the Gold Cup, struggled through the latter stages of the CONCACAF Nations League, and recently lost three consecutive friendlies to European sides. It’s the kind of form that, even in the name of experimentation, raises questions about preparedness. Are these setbacks necessary growing pains in a longer-term strategy? Or are they signs that the team is losing its way when it should be peaking?

Compounding the issue is the missed opportunity that recent competitions could have provided. Pundits like Tim Howard and Alexi Lalas have criticized Pochettino’s decision not to use the 2025 Gold Cup as a “dress rehearsal” for the World Cup.

With a massive audience and high expectations coming next summer, many expected the team to use every available platform to rehearse with its strongest XI. Instead, Pochettino has emphasized character, culture, and mentality; building a team defined not by star power, but by commitment and grit.

This cultural reset may pay dividends down the line. Pochettino has made clear that no player is guaranteed a spot, and that hunger and professionalism are as important as talent. In theory, it’s a strategy designed to avoid complacency and entitlement within the squad. But in practice, it has led to instability.

Of course, much can change in the final year of preparation. If the core group returns healthy and motivated, and if the newcomers prove capable of contributing in meaningful roles, the U.S. could emerge as a dark horse contender. But right now, the prevailing mood is one of anxiety.

In the end, Pochettino is taking a calculated risk. Whether his methods are those of a visionary or a manager out of sync with the urgency of the moment remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: with the spotlight of the world about to descend on U.S. soccer, the time for experimentation is nearly over — and the time for answers is now.