Photo: Earl Gardner

The long-awaited news finally arrived from U.S. Soccer high command yesterday.

Earnie Stewart had been appointed as the men’s national team’s first-ever general manager.

With Stewart’s time as Philadelphia Union’s sporting director coming to a close, it seems fitting to look backwards — and forwards.

Dan Walsh already gave us the retrospective yesterday, examining Stewart’s Union tenure now that we see it reaching completion.

This piece, then, is the prospective. U.S. Soccer has entrusted Stewart with management of the men’s national team, with the mandate of returning the team to the World Cup.

Given what we’ve learned from Stewart’s time in Philadelphia, we can start to ponder how he’ll attempt to fulfill that mandate.

The importance of being Earnie

If there’s a single takeaway from Earnie Stewart’s time in Philadelphia, it’s his belief in and commitment to making a plan and following it through.

From the first day Stewart took the role, the Union’s plan has been clear. Create an organizational philosophy of football, and commit to it at every level of the club. Invest in the “developmental pipeline” — the Academy, the Steel, the facilities — and produce quality homegrown talent. And, when the time is right, augment that talent with purchases and acquisitions to build a competitive team.

Though the jury is out on whether this plan will produce an MLS Cup for Philadelphia, it’s tough to argue that the club’s health isn’t much better now than when Stewart began implementing his approach. One thing is for sure — the Union have committed to the plan, to an almost frustrating degree at times.

We’ll get to some of the downsides of that approach a little bit later in this piece. But for a federation too often lacking a top-to-bottom plan and an organizational commitment to following through, Stewart’s approach will be a breath of fresh air.

Of course, implementing a plan like that requires organizational buy-in. It’s not enough to come in and dictate how you want something done — you have to develop relationships and convince people to work with you. That, too, seems to be another strength of Stewart’s.

Stewart inherited some staff from the previous regime in Jim Curtin and Chris Albright. But, rather than pushing them out the door to make way for his people, Stewart developed a seemingly productive working relationship with both men. That strong relationship extends to Steel head coach Brendan Burke and those involved in leading the Union academy. Stewart’s time in Philadelphia shows the capability to get an organization on the right track — something U.S. Soccer sorely needs.

An interesting question surrounding the general manager position is whether the youth teams will come under his orbit. The U.S., after all, has missed two consecutive Olympics — failures that have resulted in a talent pool short of major-tournament experience. Whether Stewart will have full control over the youth teams, including choosing the various coaches, remains to be seen.

But it seems likely that Stewart will insist on working young talent into the senior national team early in the World Cup cycle. We’ve seen the Union’s commitment to that pathway through the development of players like Auston Trusty, Mark McKenzie, Anthony Fontana, and Derrick Jones this season and last. Expect that to continue with the national team, with talented yet unproven players like Weston McKennie, Timothy Weah, and Cameron Carter-Vickers given the chance to stake their place in the national side.

Finally, Stewart’s Union tenure should benefit the national team in one more major way. Though Stewart is a former national team stalwart, his career as an executive began in Europe. Before 2015, little could be known about Stewart’s current knowledge of the domestic game.

After two and a half years leading an MLS franchise, that doubt should be gone. He is now intimately familiar with the intricacies of MLS and USL, has contacts across the country, and enjoys the full support of the Federation. Even if he doesn’t have a glittering resume of success with the Union, he should have sufficient experience to navigate the political world of U.S. soccer.

Not all sunshine and roses

Though Stewart has the tools to succeed in his new position, some aspects of his Union tenure do give cause for concern.

While Stewart may be heralded as a strong communicator within the club itself, his messaging with fans and media has been questionable. Stewart imposed a previously-lacking message discipline across the Union, nearly eliminating all leaks about any Union player movement. One wonders whether this buttoned-up approach has contributed to a club culture that is too skeptical of any criticism from the outside.

At town hall meetings, Stewart often came across as defensive or unsympathetic to fans. In one memorable statement documented by Kevin Kinkead, Stewart criticized fans for booing Jim Curtin, observing that “Monday through Friday, I don’t see anyone out there [watching practice].” Never mind the fact that first-team practice is always closed to the public — Stewart’s comments had a tendency to be tone-deaf in the face of a fan base hungry for anything resembling competitive soccer.

That won’t do with U.S. soccer. The fans are up in arms over the squad’s failure to qualify for the World Cup, their fury forcing changes in the federation that led directly to Stewart’s appointment. What Stewart won’t be able to do is to talk down to them, or to dismiss their desire for competitive soccer as irrelevant. Part of his job is to detoxify the conversation around U.S. soccer, and his approach with the Union won’t solve that problem if he brings it to the national team.

On a similar theme, Stewart’s Union tenure has been marked by inflexibility.

The Union have committed to a rigid tactical system for the last three seasons, even when certain necessary pieces were lacking. Last season’s campaign may have been sabotaged from the beginning by Stewart’s failure to replace Tranquillo Barnetta with a similarly competent No. 10. And whether the blame for sticking with the 4-2-3-1 even without that player should be assigned to Stewart or Curtin, it indicates a worrying lack of short-term pragmatism.

At the national team level, that could prove costly. Unlike at club level, a national team’s talent pool is largely set, with minimal ability to bring in new players. If the top talent in the player pool is a poor match for Stewart’s and the new manager’s preferred style, will flexibility win the day?

Or will the United States, like the Union before it, get stuck trying to fit Roland Alberg-shaped pegs into Tranquillo Barnetta-shaped holes?

What’s in a title?

The most important question with Stewart’s new role, however, is one where we can’t draw a good parallel to his time with the Union.

With the Union, Stewart had near-total control over the club’s soccer operations. Stewart reported to no one except Jay Sugarman, who afforded total deference to Stewart’s judgement on soccer-related matters.

Stewart had seemingly unilateral authority to, for example, remove the Union’s manager — though he never chose to exercise that authority. In other words, Stewart’s powers were clear, and his role was well-defined.

That may not be the case with U.S. soccer.

The federation’s internal political tensions are well-documented. With hindsight, Sunil Gulati’s unilateral power over hiring and firing the national team manager seems ill-advised, and the idea of appointing someone with soccer executive experience as a “general manager” makes sense.

However, it’s not clear at the moment how much power Stewart will actually have.

Will he have full authority to hire and fire the manager? It’s unclear, as any recommendation Stewart makes will need to be approved by the federation’s board of directors. That could be simply a rubber-stamp, or it could represent significant executive interference that Stewart never experienced with the Union.

It’s also unclear how much authority the general manager will have to oversee the youth sides. If Stewart doesn’t have much say in the pipeline of talent to the first team, how effective will he really be in building the senior national team program?

These questions will likely only be answered by time and experience. Maybe Stewart will make it work, and these concerns will seem silly four years down the road.

But — for now — there’s some danger in Stewart’s taking on such a poorly defined role.