Is Continuity Best? Krikorian, Udovicic Re-up for Paris in 2024
In a move USA Water Polo signaled months ago when they promoted the American men’s sixth-place spot at the Tokyo Olympics as the program’s “second best finish in 25 years”, USMNT head coach Dejan Udovicic will return for a third Olympic Games.
The governing body for U.S. polo also announced that Adam Krikorian, who has led the American women to three consecutive Olympic gold medals (2012, 2016, 2020) will also return to coach in Paris in 2024.
Given a short-timeline to prepare—a result of the year-long COVID-19 delay of the Tokyo Games—these moves appear entirely logical. One coach (Krikorian) is on the cusp of history. Another (Udovicic) has a chance to live down ill-advised boasts early in his tenure.
Forward-thinking organizations, rather than focusing on short-term goals, plan meticulously for the future. They prioritize the development of talent throughout their ranks, rather than focus on the top of their competitive heap. And they’re ruthless in their personnel decision, avoiding sentimentality.
By choosing to maintain the status quo, USAWP risks sticking to a script that may ultimately cost polo dearly when the biggest American showcase for the sport in four decades—the 2028 Los Angeles Games—comes around.
Complacency has its downside
Despite criticism of his selection in 2013 to lead the men’s national team, it can be argued that Udovicic was a reasonable choice for the top job in American men’s polo. Detractors point out that his Serbian teams in 2008 and 2012 underachieved—given that virtually the same squads won gold in 2016 and 2020 under the leadership of Dejan Savic. That he developed the talent Savic wielded for gold is often glossed over.
Udovicic was brought in to replace Terry Schroeder, an American polo legend. After a stunning run to the finals of the 2008 Olympics, Schroeder and an aging men’s roster finished a disappointing eighth at the 2012 Games, while a generation of athletes were passed over, necessitating a major rebuild for 2016.
After the U.S. men’s failure in London, hiring a coach with extensive European experience was a priority. Interestingly, Croatian Elvis Fatovic, who ended up leading Australia’s men’s teams in 2016 and 2020, was also considered for the U.S. men’s job.
Terry Schroeder, three-time silver medalist (1984, 1988 as player, 2008 as coach)
With 10th and sixth place finishes in the last two Olympics, it’s hard to characterize Udovicic’s tenure as a success, no matter what USA Water Polo PR might suggest. Perhaps his greatest accomplishment was finding spots in Europe for his young players at the height of the coronavirus pandemic. This is no mean feat; a much-cited attribute of the American men’s run to the 2008 final was how many of them played professionally prior to the Beijing Games.
But it’s a stretch to say the Americans are on the cusp of a medal in Paris. By many measures, Tokyo was an aberration. The pandemic extended training by a year, with top national team programs, composed of experienced—and older—players, being impacted most. The delay certainly hurt Croatia, a silver medalist in 2016. After competing in Tokyo, Andro Buslje, Xavier Garcia, Maro Jokovic, Luka Loncar and Paulo Obradovic retired from the national team. Despite another golden performance, Serbia fielded the oldest roster at Tokyo.
Italy and Spain—favorites for a medal in 2020, had disappointing showings. In the case of the Italians, it was the worst Olympic polo finish since a ninth-place finish in 2008. Spain—seemingly a lock for a medal—finished fourth. It’s safe to assume they, Croatia and Montenegro will join Serbia, a young Greek squad that finished second and third-place Hungary in a run to the medal round.
With the youngest team at the 2020 Games, the Americans made a significant–and admirable—leap to sixth. But, is it realistic to expect a similar leap into the medal round in 2024? Apparently that is what the decision-makers at USAWP believe.
Udovicic has developed athletes who can succeed at the Olympic level. But there will be retirements before Paris. Jesse Smith has already announced he’s done; Luca Cupido, Johnny Hooper and Alex Obert are likely to leave, creating substantial holes in the U.S. roster.
Rather than hope for a change in fortunes, wouldn’t it have wiser to institute a new men’s program that looked to 2028 for a medal? The symmetry there is telling; in 1988 and 2008 American men claimed silver in polo. That, and showcasing U.S. polo in a new aquatics facility appears to be too great an opportunity to pass up.
[Future is Now For US Olympic Water Polo Program; Irvine Approves New Aquatics Center]
This is not to say that Udovicic can’t succeed. After a disastrous performance at the 2017 FINA World Championships—finishing 13th, the worst-ever result in program history—he pulled out his Rolodex of European clubs and found spots for 18 USNT athletes. But why not consider handing the keys of the program to another coach—ideally an American with extensive collegiate experience—who could spend the next seven years building a medal-contending squad for 2028?
Krikorian should get another shot but…
As the maestro behind the American women’s run to three Olympic water polo golds—tied with Denes Kemeny, head coach for the Hungarian men’s team that won in 2000, 2004 and 2008—Krikorian deserves an opportunity for an unprecedented fourth Olympic gold. Shouldn’t “WaterPoloCoachK” and Maggie Stephens—his extraordinary partner in the water—extend the amazing run they started in 2012 in London?
There are a couple of reasons why not.
First, it can be said that Krikorian has done more for American women’s water polo than anyone else in our nation’s history. More than Sandy Nitta, Guy Baker, Maureen O’Toole, Lynn (Comer) Kachmarik and many others. If you ask any coach, athlete or club manager anywhere, it’s likely they will agree that NCAA women’s water polo is the world’s best league. This is the ripple effect of having the top women’s Olympic program for a decade.
Sydney’s Silver Linings by Kyle Utsumi chronicles the rise of U.S. women’s water polo.
That’s due to the tremendous talent pipeline (one that also supplies the U.S. men’s program) and Krikorian, who molds these athletes into the world’s best. Young American girls aspire to play polo because of the successful role models they see on TV at the Olympics.
The U.S. women may be so good that another coach could take over and not miss a beat. A precedent is American men’s basketball. If you think the U.S. polo women aren’t as dominant as U.S. male basketballers, look at their records in Olympic play over a select period of three Games:
• 1972, 1976, 1984 U.S. men’s basketball team (in Olympic competition): two golds, one silver; 33-1; three different coaches (Hank Iba, ’72, Dean Smith, ’76, Bob Knight, ’84)
• 2012, 2016, 2020 U.S. women’s water polo team (in Olympic competition) three golds; 17-1-1; Krikorian coach.
It would be dramatic to switch out one of the most successful Olympic coaches in American history. But if one believes in the talent on this squad (one that in the years between the 2016 and 2020 Games complied an astounding record of 91-3) with an average age of 26, is it implausible that another coach couldn’t lead this veteran group to another gold? Wouldn’t that coach also be in line to lead the American women in the 2028 Los Angeles Games? Or will Krikorian come back for a fifth Olympics?
There’s also the risk of failure. Kemeny returned in 2012 seeking a fourth gold, only to finish fifth. He retired soon after that.
If the American collegiate and USNT men’s programs were thriving, this wouldn’t matter. But, the US men likely need a leadership change to contend for a medal. NCAA polo, following a year where COVID impacted the season and caused women’s programs to be cut, needs help.
Who besides the gold-minted coach could impact these problems? If Coach K were to lobby university ADs for more women’s programs, who would say no? If he were to talk about organizing opportunities for girls to develop on the East Coast—keep in mind that Ashleigh Johnson is the ONLY Olympian from the East, the nation’s most populous region, to play in the six Games since women’s water polo was introduce at the 2000 Olympics—wouldn’t everyone fall in line? And, if Krikorian were to ascend to be executive director of USA Water Polo, does anyone imagine there would be petitions to have him ousted?
He might even be able to transform The National League, a mix of collegians and masters athletes, into the professional league many in the American polo community believe is key to developing our men’s team.
This is in contrast to the “no brainer” decision to bring both these coaches back. Yes, there could be better results in 2024 for the U.S. men, and the American women will again be favored for gold. BUT, if that does not happen, we’ve lost another Olympics to rebuilding and Krikorian’s legacy, sterling as it is, will be questioned (just ask the 2007-08 New England Patriots about that).
Why not plan now and make the difficult, long-term changes that will enable America to be the world’s leading polo country.