It's been more than two years since the U.S. men's national team failed to qualify for the 2018 World Cup. It's been little more than a year since Gregg Berhalter took charge of the national team for the first time. The Americans' first crack at redemption will come this fall, when they begin qualifying for the 2022 World Cup.

So with the failures of the 2018 cycle in the past and the hope of the 2022 cycle still on the horizon, where does the U.S. stand? Jeff Carlisle and Noah Davis answer that question by chronicling the state of the U.S. men's national team in four key areas as the Americans prepare to start on the path toward Qatar.

Jump to: Player pool | Talent identification | Berhalter's tactics | Is the development academy doing its job?

Is the player pool improving?

A thought experiment: How would the U.S. starting lineup fare against past editions? While there's no way to know for sure, using EA Sports' FIFA ratings can offer a bit of insight. Without further ado:

Today's starting XI: Zack Steffen (77); DeAndre Yedlin (76), John Brooks (79), Aaron Long (75), Tim Ream (72); Tyler Adams (76), Weston McKennie (81); Jordan Morris (78), Sebastian Lletget (71), Christian Pulisic (82); Jozy Altidore (76). Average rating: 77.

Starting XI vs. Ghana (June 16, 2014): Tim Howard (84); Fabian Johnson (73), Geoff Cameron (74), Matt Besler (69), DaMarcus Beasley (69); Alejandro Bedoya (72), Kyle Beckerman (74), Michael Bradley (81), Jermaine Jones (77); Jozy Altidore (77), Clint Dempsey (87). Average rating: 77.

Starting XI vs. England (June 12, 2010): Tim Howard (87); Steve Cherundolo (72), Jay DeMerit (73), Oguchi Onyewu (74), Carlos Bocanegra (74); Clint Dempsey (75), Michael Bradley (77), Ricardo Clark (70), Landon Donovan (85); Jozy Altidore (75), Robbie Findley (no rating). Average rating: 76.

That tells a story of consistency, although not one of outright improvement. Dig a little deeper and the story becomes more complicated. Christian Pulisic is the best American ever, full stop, end of discussion. If anything, he is perhaps underrated. According to AJ Swoboda at soccer consultancy 21st Club, the Chelsea winger's 2019 season was the only year during which he rated as a Champions League-level impact player. Furthermore, he's alone in that regard, at least in terms of American outfield players. (Tim Howard's 2012-13 campaign is the only other one approaching that elite level.)

More concerning, 21st Club's World Super League and player contribution models show the performance levels of American player might actually be dropping off.

Over the past half decade, the red, white and blue have boasted at least four players who produced Europa League-level quality:

• 2015: Tim Howard, Fabian Johnson, Geoff Cameron, John Brooks

• 2016: Johnson, Brooks, Christian Pulisic, Timothy Chandler

• 2017: Brooks, Pulisic, Chandler, DeAndre Yedlin

• 2018: Brooks, Pulisic, Chandler, Yedlin

In 2019, however, the number dropped to just two (Yedlin and Brooks), although of course Pulisic disappeared from this group because he moved up rather than down. And while the count of American players starts to pick up at the next level of quality, akin to the second divisions of England, Spain, Italy, Germany and France, the story of decreasing numbers remains the same. "U.S. has held steady with an average of 34 players at this band of talent from 2015 through 2018, but the 2019 calendar year saw this number drop to 24," Swoboda said.

Add this all up and it's cause for concern, although there's cause for hope in the younger generations. The current camp features a wide range of players who are 22 and under, including Reggie Cannon, Julian Araujo, Mark McKenzie, Jackson Yueill, Brenden Aaronson, Brandon Servania, Jesus Ferreira and Ulysses Llanez. Add that to already established or hopeful players such as Sergino Dest, Miles Robinson, Cameron Carter-Vickers, Paxton Pomykal, Weston McKennie, Djordje Mihailovic, Tyler Adams, Josh Sargent, Jonathan Amon and Tim Weah and a pretty picture starts to paint itself. Plus, the most recent U20 team featured emerging talents Chris Gloster, Chris Richards, Alex Mendez and Richard Ledezma, and 17-year-old Giovanni Reyna is just breaking through at Borussia Dortmund.

In the end, the U.S. doesn't need all of those players to reach their potential, but it does need a handful to do so, more than have made it in the past. The American program has more potential game-changing players than it ever has before. Right now, however, it remains to be seen whether anything will come of it or Berhalter will have to make do with a 77 average.

-- Noah Davis (@noahedavis)

Talent identification

Tab Ramos knows well that a successful manager is a product of his or her support system, even as he took the U.S. U20 national team to the quarterfinals of the FIFA U20 World Cup three times in a row.

"I'd like to fool myself into believing that the only reason we got results is because I'm a great coach," he told ESPN via telephone. "But the bottom line is that great players get results, so the identification is really the most important part of U.S. Soccer."

Yet Ramos is concerned over the direction the federation has taken. The USSF's talent identification program has undergone a restructuring in recent years. During much of Ramos' tenure, there were nine technical advisers spread out across the country covering club development, youth national team responsibilities and scouting. The scouting piece has now been broken off so that, under Tony Lepore, the USSF's director of boys talent ID, there are three full-time talent ID managers, one each in Los Angeles, Chicago and New York. There are plans to add a fourth.

Underneath the talent ID advisers are around 90 "per diem" scouts who are given individual assignments that include watching a specific player or players or attending showcases and scouting events. Then there are the informal networks that include coaches and staff from MLS and amateur academies, as well as coaches in the Olympic Development Program and id2, the talent identification program used by US Club Soccer. There are comparable numbers on the girls' side. Lepore estimates that the per diem scouts receive a total of about 3,000 assignments per year.

The talent ID program begins with identifying 13-year-olds and in some cases 12-year-olds for the U14 national team. It's an age where the number of variables is vast, so Lepore says the pool of U14 players is "much bigger" than the pool of U20 players. The ultimate question is whether this is enough personnel in a nation of more than 300 million people spread across 3.8 million square miles.

"I think up until three years ago, we were heading in the right direction in terms of putting people in place to have them on the ground all over the country, people that you can trust, people that know what we're looking for," Ramos said. "And then they started to have all these cutbacks."

Lepore admitted that the network used to be bigger but said the USSF is intent on focusing on quality. "I would say that this 90 [per diem scouts] helps us cover ground in all the right places, and then we're always replacing or adding where we need to," he said.

The extent to which these scouts are diving into minority communities remains a hot topic. A USSF spokesperson said that two of the three talent ID managers speak Spanish. Of the 90 per diem scouts, the USSF says around 20 are either Spanish speakers or of Latino origin. When asked how many were African American, the USSF said it didn't have such data available.

That ability to connect with minority communities is vital, especially given the impact dual nationals can have on a national team program. Lepore estimates that there are 100 dual nationals in the U.S. pipeline born between 2001 and 2005. The decisions by Dest and Ferreira to represent the U.S. internationally are positives. But the episode involving former U20 international Jonathan Gonzalez, who ultimately decided to represent Mexico, still rankles, the implication being that the USSF didn't do enough to make him feel included.

"These kids have not been unidentified," said Brad Rothenberg, the co-founder of Alianza de Futbol, which holds scouting events in minority communities throughout the U.S. "U.S. Soccer simply doesn't have the resources in the marketplace, in the Latino community, to give these kids a feeling of inclusion."

The Dest and Ferreira cases hint that the USSF has learned its lesson in that it was more aggressive, left nothing to chance and identified prospects early.

"We can't promise anything when it comes to a men's national team, and that's not something I'm going to do because that's a short-lived story that might backfire on you," said USSF sporting director Earnie Stewart. "The most important part to me is that we can look each other in the eye after the fact and say that we've done everything about it."

-- Jeff Carlisle (@JeffreyCarlisle)

Can Berhalter adjust his tactics?

From the beginning, Berhalter has had a plan. This was part of what piqued U.S. Soccer's interest, and one of the main reasons he got the job in the first place. The powers that be in Soccer House Chicago wanted the exact opposite of the "go out and play" Jurgen Klinsmann years. Berhalter's hiring was, in that sense, the right call, a way to reestablish coherence in a program that was rudderless and lost after the epic failure to qualify for the 2018 World Cup.

During Berhalter's initial phase, the focus was on playing a specific way. "That was a big part of what the first year was about: introduction of new ideas and how Gregg and U.S. Soccer wants to play," said Josh Wolff, who worked as an assistant to Berhalter at the Columbus Crew and with the U.S. before taking a head-coaching job at Austin FC. "Understanding that you're introducing a lot of new players and young players."

That resulted in some, shall we say, interesting performances. Most notable was the 3-0 loss to Mexico when American center-backs Walker Zimmerman, Miles Robinson and Aaron Long, and goalkeeper Zack Steffen, continued to play out of the back despite being overwhelmed and overmatched. The next match against a half-speed Uruguay was slightly better, all part of the learning process, yet the U.S. was too rigid and too inflexible too often in 2019.

A November match with Canada saw the Americans play differently in a 4-1 win. They played long when they needed to, resorting to that under pressure and keeping the quick passing out of the back for the appropriate time. It was, perhaps, a signal of progress and understanding. "[Berhalter] becomes very clear as to what's working and what's not working," Wolff said. "Now is about what direction do we need to go in to educate players and what will put us in the best position to go out and execute on game days?"

While American fans worried that Berhalter wouldn't adjust, the coach quietly showed flexibility. Look no further than his recent comments about Adams -- "We see him primarily as a central midfielder. We always have seen him as central midfielder." -- despite a promise last March that the New York Red Bulls product was a right-back. If 2020 and beyond is going to be a success, Berhalter will need to be more than willing to show he'll alter his plans.

-- Noah Davis

The January transfer window has closed but there are still some unhappy players who will have to wait five months before they can get their dream moves.

One of those is Paris Saint-Germain striker Edinson Cavani, who is set to join one lucky club (possibly Atletico Madrid) on a free transfer at the end of his contract, but we've left those players available for nothing for a different story.

And what of Neymar? Well, the Brazilian wants to pledge his future to PSG, sources have told ESPN, though any agreement could depend on the club's progress in the Champions League. A move back to Barcelona or a shock transfer to Real Madrid could be on the cards, but for our money this one could drag on for at least another year and beyond summer 2020, so we've left him out too.

That just leaves these guys...

*All transfer valuations estimated

PAUL POGBA
Position: Midfielder
Team: Manchester United
Value: £100m

This one could get ugly. United have signed his presumed replacement, Bruno Fernandes, already and Pogba will surely get his move in the summer. Real Madrid rejected Christian Eriksen to wait for the Frenchman, so expect a bid to happen, though Juventus will be making their case too. United won't get the £150m they want for Pogba, but he won't be at Old Trafford much longer.

Teams linked: Real Madrid, Juventus, Barcelona

PIERRE-EMERICK AUBAMEYANG
Position: Striker
Team: Arsenal
Value: £60m

Aubameyang is entering the final year of his contract this summer and at 30 years old, he'll be eyeing a move to a club where he can win a trophy before he retires. Barcelona will be interested as they look to replace Luis Suarez, but expect some competition from other top teams.

Teams linked: Barcelona, PSG, Real Madrid

- Transfer Grades: All the big moves rated
- When does the transfer window re-open?
- All major completed transfer deals

LEROY SANE
Position: Forward
Team: Bayern Munich
Value: £100m

Sane would already be a Bayern Munich player by now if it hadn't been for a knee injury that ruled him out for much of this season. The Germany international has grown tired of competition for his place at City; Bayern are really the only club he looks likely to join and they will reignite their interest in the summer.

Teams linked: Bayern Munich

DAYOT UPAMECANO
Position: Defender
Team: RB Leipzig
Value: £68m

One of the most highly-regarded defensive prospects in Europe, the 21-year-old has impressed in the Bundesliga and could be the latest Frenchman to land at Arsenal if the Gunners are willing to stump up to pay his reported £68m release clause in the summer. If they aren't, there will be plenty of other suitors.

Teams linked: Arsenal, Man City, Tottenham, AC Milan

TIMO WERNER
Position: Striker
Team: RB Leipzig
Value: £27m

The Germany striker only recently signed a new contract at Leipzig but with a reported £27m release clause included, the big clubs will circle. It's impossible to find a young striker of Werner's quality for that price, so he will have options: however, many of them will want him to play backup to an already established striker like Roberto Firmino, Tammy Abraham or Robert Lewandowski. Sources have told ESPN that Liverpool are favourites for his signature.

Teams linked: Liverpool, Chelsea, Manchester United, Bayern, Barcelona, Real Madrid

GARETH BALE
Position: Forward
Team: Real Madrid
Value: £60m

"Wales. Golf. Real Madrid. In that order." Bale's relationship with the Real fans has taken a hit, unsurprisingly, and it would be a shock if he doesn't move on in the summer. A lucrative move to China fell through last year, but Tottenham boss Jose Mourinho is a big fan of the Welsh winger and could yet bring him back to north London.

Teams linked: Tottenham, Bayern, PSG, Jiangsu Suning

JADON SANCHO
Position: Forward
Team: Dortmund
Value: £120m

Sancho left Man City in 2017 for a measly sum of £8m to get first-team football in Germany and boy, did it pay off. Now one of the most exciting attackers in the game, the 19-year-old can have his pick of clubs if they meet Dortmund's asking price of £120m. Though, with Erling Haaland impressing at Dortmund with seven goals in four matches since his January arrival, perhaps Sancho staying put isn't completely out of the question.

Teams linked: Man United, Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Bayern, PSG, Juventus

KALIDOU KOULIBALY
Position: Defender
Team: Napoli
Value: £90m

One of the best centre-backs in the world. it's easy to see why clubs are circling for Koulibaly's signature. Napoli president Aurelio De Laurentiis has already said he won't let the Senegal defender go without a massive offer but, although there will be plenty of clubs looking to strengthen in that position and with money to spend in the summer, he won't get the €150m release clause he desires and may have to settle for less.

Teams linked: Man United, Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Real Madrid, PSG

- Schoenfeld: Havertz is Germany's next big thing
- How VAR has affected every Premier League club
- When can Liverpool win the Premier League?

KAI HAVERTZ
Position: Midfielder
Team: Bayer Leverkusen
Value: £100m

The "new Mesut Ozil" won't stay at Leverkusen beyond the summer. At only 20, Havertz has the world at his feet and it's most likely that he'll head to Bayern or Barcelona, though he would fit perfectly at Liverpool too given his versatility and vision in the No. 10 role.

Teams linked: Bayern, Barcelona, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man City, Man United, Real Madrid

JAMES MADDISON
Position: Midfielder
Team: Leicester
Value: £85m

This season has been a revelation for the former Norwich midfielder and Leicester will want to get as much as Man United paid for Harry Maguire (£85m) if they sell him. Maddison, who only signed for £20m in 2018, is clearly well suited to the Premier League and has shown as much with six goals and three assists this season, so United or Chelsea would be getting proven quality. His Leicester teammate Ben Chilwell could also join him, with the left-back of interest to the same clubs.

Teams linked: Man United, Chelsea, Tottenham

DONNY VAN DE BEEK
Position: Midfielder
Team: Ajax
Value: £50m

When Matthijs de Ligt and Frenkie de Jong moved on from Ajax, everyone assumed that Van de Beek would be next. A skilful attacking midfielder, the 22-year-old has plenty of suitors but has reportedly agreed a €55m summer move to Real Madrid. Sorry, everyone else.

Teams linked: Real Madrid, Borussia Dortmund, Man United, Everton, Barcelona, Bayern Munich.

Virat Kohli looked dejected after India suffered only their fourth whitewash in a series of three or more ODIs.* It was a first for Kohli, too, as Indian captain. However, Kohli admitted that India did not deserve to win and New Zealand did because the hosts showed better "composure under pressure".

After losing T20 series 5-0, New Zealand bounced back strongly, winning the each of the three ODIs convincingly. In Hamilton, Ross Taylor and stand-in captain Tom Latham chased down a record target to surprise Kohli's men. In Auckland, chasing 274, India's batsmen struggled and fell short by 22 runs. And on Tuesday, New Zealand won with just under three overs to spare in a chase of 297. Poor fielding and bowling were two areas Kohli pointed at after the loss.

"The games are not as bad as the scoreline suggests," Kohli said to the host broadcaster during the post-match presentation. "The first game, we were pretty much in the contest. Again, it boils down to the chances we didn't grab. And all three games, I thought, the way we fielded and the composure with the ball - I don't think that was enough to win games of cricket at the international level.

"With the ball we were not able to make enough breakthroughs. And in the field as well, we were not good at all. So didn't deserve to be on the winning side at all in the series. Haven't played so badly, but if you don't grab your chances at this level then teams are going to hurt you."

With India's regular openers Rohit Sharma and Shikhar Dhawan injured, India brought in Mayank Agarwal and Prithvi Shaw to the top of the order. Although Shaw got starts in all the three matches, he could not convert them into bigger scores. Mayank got 32 in the first ODI, but followed up with single digit scores. Pressure mounted for India after Kohli failed in the last two ODIs with single digit scores.

"We played really well in the T20 series, a bit more experience there. Here in the ODIs a couple of new guys still finding their feet at the international level, so a good experience for them (Agarwal and Shaw).

"Obviously New Zealand was keen to come back and get few wins under their belt after the T20 series and they played with a lot more intensity than we did. And in the crunch moments they were better in the field, better with the ball and better with the bat as well. We didn't deserve to win because of the way we did not show enough composure under pressure and New Zealand did so. They deservedly won three-nil."

The results on this tour are an inversion of India's tour last year, when they won the five-match ODI series but lost in three match T20I series. This tour, however, will end with a Test series - something that will have as much significance as the ODI World Cup did last year and the T20 World Cup does this year, because it falls under the World Test Championship.

"Very, very excited," Kohli said about the upcoming series. "I think because of the Championship, every Test match has that much more importance. As I said, Test cricket, T20 cricket - there's so many things to look forward to this year and the next year as well. We're very excited for the Test series now. We have a really good and balanced team in Test cricket and we definitely feel that we can win the series here. We have that kind of team, but we obviously need to step onto the park in the right kind of mindset."

*13.00GMT, February 11: The piece had incorrectly stated that this was India's third whitewash in an ODI series of three games or more. This has been corrected.

Gloucestershire have signed West Indies quick Jerome Taylor on a three-year deal. The 35-year-old will be registered for the 2020 season as a Kolpak player, but will fill one of the overseas slots from next year if the regulations change, as expected, due to Brexit.

Taylor, who has previously played for Leicestershire, Sussex and Somerset, will be available in all formats. The Jamaican last played for his country in 2018, and has a wealth of experience in competitions around the world. He joins Gloucestershire after they won promotion to Division One of the County Championship for the first time since 2005.

"Jerome is an exciting player who will add some pace and international experience to the bowling attack," Gloucestershire's head coach, Richard Dawson, said. "He can contribute in all formats so he will be a valuable addition to the squad.

"We played some very good cricket last season to get us into Division One and Jerome can help us to set a high standard in the field against some talented opposition."

Last week, the ECB confirmed to counties that Kolpak registrations are set to become invalid from 2021, when the UK's transition arrangements with the EU come to an end. The Professional Cricketers' Association has backed proposals for clubs to be able to sign two overseas players, rather than one, as is currently the case in the Championship and List A tournaments.

Rapid on his day, Taylor left his mark on England on his home ground in 2009, taking 5 for 11 to skittle the tourists for 51 at Sabina Park. In 46 Tests, he claimed 130 wickets at 34.46; he was also capped more than 100 times in limited-overs internationals, collecting a World T20 winners' medal when West Indies lifted the trophy in 2016.

In T20, he has featured at the Big Bash, Caribbean Premier League and Bangladesh Premier League, as well as in the Blast. Over the last two seasons with Somerset, he bagged 36 wickets at 21.69 with an economy of 9.20.

"I am very excited to be joining Gloucestershire and I am looking forward to meeting up with the players and the staff and getting underway," Taylor said. "I am grateful for the opportunity as I really enjoy playing county cricket and I am hopeful that my experience can help the Club on and off the field."

England have recalled Ben Foakes and Keaton Jennings for next month's Test tour of Sri Lanka, with Jonny Bairstow omitted from the party that went to South Africa. Moeen Ali remains unavailable for Test selection, while James Anderson has been left at home to continue his rehabilitation from a rib injury ahead of the English summer.

Also missing from the 16-man squad were the injured Jofra Archer and Rory Burns, but England have included Mark Wood and Stuart Broad, despite some expectations the latter could be rested. Jack Leach is fit to assume the mantle of senior spinner, having left the South Africa tour early due to sickness, and he will be joined by Dom Bess and Matt Parkinson in conditions where slow-bowling will be key.

Foakes was Player of the Series as England won 3-0 in Sri Lanka two years ago, but lost his place as wicketkeeper on the subsequent tour of the Caribbean. He is considered one of the best glovemen in the world - as well as making a century on debut in Galle, he did not concede a single bye. However, it is understood that he will travel initially as back-up to Jos Buttler, the current incumbent. Buttler has averaged 17.55 this winter, after replacing Bairstow as keeper in New Zealand, but played a key role with the bat in Sri Lanka in 2018-19.

Bairstow, who was dropped for the New Zealand tour, then returned in South Africa and played in the first Test, after Ollie Pope was struck down by the sickness bug that ran through England during the build-up, has been given the opportunity to rest, according to Ed Smith, the ECB's national selector.

The return of Jennings, who also made a hundred in Galle, was signposted last year when he was sent on an England training camp to Mumbai. He has an excellent record against spin, averaging 44.44 on the subcontinent, and also impressed by taking a number of catches at short leg on the previous Sri Lanka tour. His last appearance came in St Lucia a year ago, since when his highest first-class score is 97 for Lancashire.

Moeen's continued absence, despite indications from Joe Root and Chris Silverwood that they were keen to have him involved, seems reflective of the breakdown in relations with the allrounder, who lost his central contract at the end of last summer. Moeen claimed 19 wickets in Sri Lanka last time out, forming an effective spin triumvirate alongside Leach and Adil Rashid, but has not been persuaded he is ready to return. Instead, he will fulfill his contract at the Pakistan Super League.

Rashid has not played first-class cricket since being dropped during the West Indies series a year ago, and said at the weekend it would be "unfair" to make himself available for Sri Lanka. That could lead to a Test debut for Parkinson, alongside the Somerset pair of Leach and Bess, if England stick with fielding three spinners. Parkinson has been with the Test set-up over the winter but saw himself overtaken in South Africa by Bess, who was initially called up on standby when Leach went down ill.

Smith said England had decided to stick with the "very exciting group of young players" who helped them to a 3-1 success in South Africa. Root's side will head out in early March for two warm-up games before Tests in Galle and Colombo, with 120 World Test Championship points at stake.

"The selection panel has supported continuity after a successful series victory in South Africa," Smith said. "The South Africa tour marked the emergence of a very exciting group of young players, creating a nice balance with an experienced core of senior players. That squad is mostly retained, with some tweaks to the squad relevant to injury, rest and the challenges of playing in subcontinent conditions.

"Somerset spinner Jack Leach has recovered from his illness he picked up in South Africa and is now healthy and keen to resume his Test career.

"Jonny Bairstow has been in England squads across the three formats without a significant break. This two-Test tour presents a good opportunity for Jonny to be rested. Jimmy Anderson will continue to work with Lancashire and the ECB so that he is ready for the start of the County Championship season leading into the Test series against the West Indies in June.

"Moeen Ali is still unavailable for Test selection. The selectors are in consistent dialogue with Moeen and he remains a valued player in England cricket."

England squad: Joe Root (capt), Dom Bess, Stuart Broad, Jos Buttler, Zak Crawley, Sam Curran, Joe Denly, Ben Foakes, Keaton Jennings, Jack Leach, Matthew Parkinson, Ollie Pope, Dom Sibley, Ben Stokes, Chris Woakes, Mark Wood

No Trent Boult. No Lockie Ferguson. No Matt Henry. New Zealand's second line of fast men - Adam Milne and Seth Rance are also recovering from injuries. To add to their troubles, Scott Kuggeleijn and Mitchell Santner were unavailable for the second ODI due to illness. Tim Southee, too, was sick at Eden Park, but still soldiered on to finish his ten overs and claim the prize scalp of India captain Virat Kohli.

New Zealand were so depleted during the second game that they needed their assistant coach Luke Ronchi to fill in as a substitute on the field. They'd also called up local lad R Majitha as a reserve player.

Despite being struck down by multiple injuries and illness, New Zealand found a way to beat India 3-0 and hand them their first bilateral ODI series whitewash in 30 years. This, after losing the preceding T20I series 5-0 from winning positions.

New Zealand captain Kane Williamson, who had sat out the first two games in the ODI series because of injury, was particularly pleased with how the likes of Hamish Bennett and Kyle Jamieson stepped up in the absence of the seniors.

Bennett, who had been central to Wellington Firebirds clinching the 20-over Super Smash title earlier in the domestic season, changed up his pace and lengths smartly at Bay Oval. He also unveiled his knuckle ball at the death as his four strikes, including that of centurion KL Rahul, pinned India down to 296 for 7.

Jamieson, who had sparkled both with bat and ball on debut at Eden Park, his home ground, followed it with a fine spell with the new ball at Bay Oval, where he castled Mayank Agarwal with a beauty.

"As you know on some of these surfaces with some short boundaries, the job of the bowlers is so important," Williamson said at the post-match press conference. "They also operated nicely in partnerships and we were able to hold our nerve in key moments. Today, was a great example of [it]. Once again we were put under pressure by India, but we were able to have a really good death phase, which helped us keep India to about a par total. A lot of positives in different areas, so it's an opportunity to build on this series and keep moving forward as an ODI side.

"An outstanding start from Kyle. Obviously, he has been around the squad for a little period of time. To get the opportunity to bowl with the new ball today and bowl really nicely in the first [second] ODI […] he's an exciting prospect. Coming in with that height does bring a point of difference - a great attacking weapon."

New Zealand's batting had cracked under pressure in the T20I series - and they lost in two Super Over finishes - but they responded better in the ODIs. On Tuesday, Henry Nicholls and Martin Guptill forged a rapid 106-run opening stand, with both batsmen passing fifties. However, the hosts lost 4 for 61 after the opening stand ended and gave India a sniff.

Tom Latham, one of the stars of the first match, and Colin de Grandhomme, though, shut Kohli and co. down with a calculated, unbeaten 80-run partnership off 46 balls. While de Grandhomme was largely circumspect against the experienced Indian bowlers, he lined up Shardul Thakur's length balls and slower variations, taking him for 33 off nine balls at a strike rate of 366.66.

"I can't say one thing, but I think throughout the series the most pleasant thing could be the cricket smarts and the composure the guys had," Williamson said.

Gary Stead, who had taken a break and handed over the reins to bowling coach Shane Jurgensen for the ODIs, came in for heavy criticism over the past few days. But, Williamson opted not to read too much into his absence, and reiterated that the coach had taken his pre-planned leave.

"Yeah, we both have each others' numbers (laughs). We talk to each other," Williamson said. He's [Stead's] obviously thrilled with the performance and progression of the team and that's always the focus - for the side to keep developing and improving. And that's the message we have been speaking about for a long period of time ."

New Zealand are set to not only welcome back Stead for the two-match Test series, but also Ferguson and Boult. Ferguson had returned to action in the ongoing 50-over Ford Trophy for Auckland on Sunday. The bowler went wicketless but got through his ten overs, while Boult has been bowling in the New Zealand nets in the lead-up to the Test series, which begins with the first game at the Basin Reserve from February 21.

"Expecting all of those guys to be fit for the first Test and they're all tracking nicely," Williamson said. "So, yeah, it's an exciting opportunity, like I say, against one of the best sides in the world."

Dale Steyn is likely to call time on his international career after this year's T20 World Cup but remains committed to making himself available for South Africa in white-ball cricket until then.

Steyn, who retired from Tests in August last year and has not played for the national team in 11 months, will make his return with the upcoming T20I series against England, where he hopes to stake a claim for the T20 World Cup.

Asked if he would consider prolonging his limited-overs' run until the 2021 edition of the competition, Steyn was hesitant, once he realised the competitions run in successive years.

"Is there another T20 World Cup? Next year? Wow, that's short-lived. So if we win it, we only win for a year," Steyn said in East London. "This one would be a nice one to go to and then finish off and reassess after the end of this year and then I will kind of figure out what I want to do."

For now, the only thing Steyn wants to do is get on the park after missing out on South Africa's last T20I series, against India last September when the selectors deemed him unfit despite his own declaration of readiness. "I love playing cricket. I wake up every day and I can't see myself doing anything else right now. I am just putting my hand up and saying I'm available, pick me, don't pick me and then we'll see how it goes to the World Cup.

"As long as that drive is there to still play at the highest level, and get batters out and fox them and outsmart them and all that kind of stuff, if I can do that, I am going to continue to do that. And then once I can't do that anymore, well once I decide that I don't want to do it anymore, then I'll be done."

Recent evidence, in the Mzansi Super League and the Big Bash League, suggests that Steyn still has what it takes to get the better of some of the world's best batsmen. He was the third-highest wicket-taker in the MSL where he counted AB de Villiers, Dean Elgar and Alex Hales among his 15 victims and took five wickets at 16.20 in the BBL. Notably, Steyn did not get all his wickets with pace alone and was playing with cutters and slower balls, especially in the MSL.

"I decided to play a braver brand of cricket," Steyn said. "I tried one or two different things that I wouldn't necessarily do and I thought I would use that as a nice time to experiment and it worked out quite nicely. With Test cricket, it's very important that you are bowling at high speed but T20 cricket is a great way to be versatile. If you want to bowl 145kph, guys need to know that it's there, a 90-plus-miles-an-hour bouncer, yorker, whatever it is but you can also change it up and then it makes that 90-mile-an-hour bouncer so much more effective. If you are just constantly doing the same thing, good batters can adjust."

It's that kind of wisdom, gained through experience, which Steyn hopes to pass on to a young South Africa pack in the next few weeks. In Kagiso Rabada's absence, Steyn will bowl alongside Lungi Ngidi, who has also been working on pace off the ball, Andile Phehlukwayo and Sisanda Magala, who are death-bowling specialists and Beuran Hendricks, who adds variation to the attack with his left-arm seam.

South Africa are looking at all of them as potential World Cup participants and Steyn, while still seeing himself as a strike bowler, wants to be their mentor. "I want to kind of orchestrate that bowling line-up a little bit. I want to be able to guide them," he said. "I want to stand at mid-off and really say, 'look what are you thinking, what ball are you going to bowl' and hopefully they can learn and get better every game while I'm there. My job is to make sure guys are making the right decisions on the field. That's what I want to achieve out of this."

Those are the words of a man whose mind is on legacy, which suggests that Steyn has already switched perspective. He is no longer a player interested in only his own performances or the team's success; he is now a player with the end in sight, interested in ensuring there is longevity in the system he is part of. It may even suggest Steyn sees a future in coaching, although he acknowledged he would need to learn the ropes first.

"If I wanted to do anything in the coaching world, I would probably need to upskill myself" he said. "It's very easy to say take a player, a world-class player out of the system of playing and just push him into a coaching role but coaching is a whole other thing. It's a skill. I'll probably have to take a little bit of time to spend some time with people that can teach me how to coach."

But that doesn't mean Steyn is ready to dive into a post-playing career as a coach just yet. While he didn't "want to tell you right now," what he may have up his sleeve post the T20 World Cup, he dropped a hint that it has nothing to do with cricket at all. "A good friend of mine has started a business and he really specialises in players that are retired athletes and we've had some great conversations about other players he has had in the football world and what they are doing and where they are going. It's exciting, some of the things that are lined up. And it doesn't have anything to do with commentary or coaching which is quite nice."

LOS ANGELES -- Vanessa Bryant expressed grief and anger in an Instagram post Monday as she copes with the deaths of her husband, Kobe Bryant, their 13-year-old daughter, Gianna, and seven other people in a helicopter crash last month.

"My brain refuses to accept that both Kobe and Gigi are gone," she wrote. "It's like I'm trying to process Kobe being gone but my body refuses to accept my Gigi will never come back to me. It feels wrong. Why should I be able to wake up another day when my baby girl isn't being able to have that opportunity?! I'm so mad. She had so much life to live."

Bryant said she realizes she has to remain strong for her three surviving daughters, Natalia, Bianka and Capri.

"I know what I'm feeling is normal. It's part of the grieving process. I just wanted to share in case there's anyone out there that's experienced a loss like this," Bryant wrote. "God I wish they were here and this nightmare would be over. Praying for all of the victims of this horrible tragedy. Please continue to pray for all."

The social media post included a video feature from Slam Magazine about Kobe coaching Gianna's basketball team. Kobe Bryant was killed when the helicopter carrying him, his daughter and seven others crashed into a mountainside in Calabasas, California, while flying to a girls' basketball tournament at his Mamba Sports Academy on Jan. 26.

A public memorial for Orange Coast College baseball coach John Altobelli, his wife, Keri, and their daughter Alyssa was held Monday. Also killed in the crash were pilot Ara Zobayan, Christina Mauser, Sarah Chester and her daughter, Payton Chester.

Vanessa Bryant announced last week that a "celebration of life" memorial will be held Feb. 24 at Staples Center to honor her husband and Gianna.

Major League Baseball is considering some huge changes to its postseason starting in 2022. Adding four more teams to expand the playoff slate to 14 of its 30 clubs might be a controversial enough idea by itself, but that's not the only part of the package of proposed tweaks to October baseball.

The team with the best record in each league would get a first-round bye, and then the other two division winners and the wild-card club with the best record could end up picking their opponents in a televised seeding showdown.

Does that sound dramatic? Terrible? Creative or bizarre? We asked our MLB experts for their reactions.

The new playoff proposal: Love it or hate it?

Sam Miller: There are a lot of moving pieces here, so there's room to love and hate different parts at the same time. I mean, "no more Game 163 tiebreakers" is offered here as a benefit. Imagine, as a fan, being against Game 163 tiebreakers. Imagine!

The "pick your opponent" part of it is a pretty low-stakes tweak -- you could do that now in the current format -- but it feels wacky and unpopular. I don't think playoff teams actually want to pick their opponents. They would like to face the worst opponents, to be sure. But actually picking them inevitably ends up looking like an act of hubris. You pick a team, fire them up, give them all the bulletin board material they could ever hope for, and then if they actually beat you (which -- it's baseball, so of course they will), you get taunted for your arrogance? Awful. Meanwhile, the notion that lots of fans are going to tune in for this picking ceremony feels wildly optimistic.

In a broad sense, I mostly agree with the idea that having more playoff teams and more playoff tiers would, as designed, cause more teams to compete hard for playoff spots -- yes, allowing mediocre teams to sometimes win the World Series, but that's the trade-off if you want to encourage mediocre teams to go for it. And more playoff teams mean more playoffs, which are of course very good. And longer wild-card series are more playoffs too. I feel a little bit like the Meat & Cheese Focus Group here, but if baseball is really willing to give me more playoff games, I don't think I'm opposed to that part of it. It's not going to fix baseball or anything. It would make me happy is all.

Bradford Doolittle: This is the worst concept since "Cop Rock." Hate is not a strong enough word for how I feel about this idea. Detest? Despise? Loathe? My soul is engulfed by flames just by the thought of it.

OK, I'm trying to steer clear of any reasoning here that will spur a rash of "OK, boomer" responses. But that's probably impossible. Baseball, as we know, is a sport in which the differences between players and teams are only born out over a large number of games. The worst teams in a season win 60 games, usually, the best lose 60, yada, yada. You play for six months to weed out the mediocrity, not reward it. (Baseball used to weed out all but the very best teams with its format, but those days aren't coming back.)

With this system, mediocrity WILL be rewarded. In 2017, only five teams in the American League had winning records. There would have been two teams in a seven-game postseason structure to play into October with sub-.500 regular-season records. Most years, if you're a game or two around the .500 mark, you're in it until the final week.

Some questions: Where is the evidence that teams building to mediocrity spend to get there? Where is the evidence that it drives fan support to see a mostly uninteresting team stumble into a seventh playoff slot? What would it do to the World Series to have an 80-win team play an 82-win team for something labeled as a "championship?" Where is the evidence that any significant percentage of baseball's fan base is remotely interested in this?

That's just the playoff format. The idea of a gimmicky, reality show event in which teams draft their opponents is repugnant. I mean, people would probably watch it. People will watch anything. But how about throwing a bone to baseball's core fan base that wants to see its favorite sport retain a shred of dignity?

Many other sinkholes open in my head as I type this. Would we retain divisions? Because there is no earthly reason for them any longer. The concept of "pennant race" will finally be formatted out of existence, as teams slog for a favorable seed in a postseason tournament no one can really plan for because, you know, we have to wait for the big Selection Night.

Look, this is obviously a touchy subject with me. But at some point, we have to keep in mind that the purpose of a postseason format is to determine a worthy champion. I'm just gonna stop now ...

Maybe this is one of those unfounded rumors that just goes away -- a trial balloon being floated to see just how mad people get about it.

David Schoenfield: Look, I don't really think there is much of a crossover audience between fans of "The Bachelor" and fans of baseball -- or at least enough who would care to watch some goofy rose ceremony on a Sunday night in late September or early October to see Brian Cashman pick his playoff opponent. That's a gimmick. Some fans like gimmicks. Some still like watching pitchers hit too. This just feels like a gimmick with no actual payoff, other than forcing the best teams to go on the record and disrespect an opponent by "choosing" them. Which makes it the opposite of the rose ceremony, actually. Given the current situation with the Astros' cheating scandal, I think we will have enough bad blood in baseball for the time being. Why create fake bad blood headlines? Pass.

Otherwise, I do like the idea of getting rid of the one-game wild card -- another gimmick (although I don't totally hate it) -- and expanding the playoffs isn't a bad idea. I get that the beauty of baseball's regular season is rewarding season-long excellence, but you can argue that this format still does that by giving the team with the best record a first-round bye and a chance to rest up. The biggest problem with the wild-card game is it never really did incentivize teams to compete harder; indeed, we've seen more tanking than ever since the creation of the second wild card in 2012.

Eliminating the one-game format might push teams a little harder to get into the low 80s in wins for a chance at a best-of-three series to move on. The obvious downfall to this format, as Brad pointed out, is that it might reward mediocrity. In 2018, for example, the seventh playoff team in the National League would have been the 82-win Nationals or 82-win Diamondbacks or 82-win Pirates -- how would that tie have been resolved? In the American League in 2017, there would have been TWO playoffs teams that finished under .500 -- the Rays, Royals and Angels tied for sixth at 80-82. At least that might have put Mike Trout in the postseason. So maybe it is a good idea.

Joon Lee: It feels like in the past few seasons we've gotten a couple of out-of-left proposals from (commissioner) Rob Manfred. While I don't like the entirety of this proposal, expanding the playoff field could be a very good idea, though I do have some caveats.

There has been a lot of discussion about the potential expansion of MLB to 32 teams, 16 in each league. Perhaps it might make sense to add an additional round of playoff games if the league were to grow down the road. Bits and pieces of this radical idea seem like they could add some fun and drama to the MLB playoff experience, but I'd like to see more teams chasing playoff spots and not strategically tanking before expanding the playoffs and thus risk devaluing what it means to be a playoff team in baseball.

One aspect of the proposal that I actually do find interesting is the three-game series. That could really ratchet up the drama of every pitch and game, with Game 2 automatically serving as an elimination game. I'm a big fan of the wild-card game and the totally irrational, always exciting winner-take-all format, and I would love to keep that. I do appreciate Manfred's willingness to propose outside-the-box ideas that could shake up the status quo of baseball, even if it does risk inflaming takes that might warrant an "OK, boomer" response.

I heard recently from someone at the commissioner's office that Manfred spends a lot of time thinking about baseball through the lens of what his 20- and 30-something kids would want out of baseball today. This entire proposal feels like it falls into that category, especially with the reality show aspect of the best teams choosing their playoff opponents.

Alden Gonzalez: My initial reaction? Oh, my god, baseball's in big trouble! This seems to be the type of thing one does out of desperation, not unlike all those zany ideas the original XFL had nearly 20 years ago.

The one I still can't wrap my head around is the concept of teams choosing their opponents. Yeah, in theory, I'm sure it would make for great TV. But teams are going to hate this. Players hardly ever say anything negative about their opponents because they don't want their words coming back around on them (and probably because there's a fair chance they'll join that team eventually). Now you're asking them to disrespect a team by choosing to play against it, creating bulletin board material for the ages and leaving them subject to endless ridicule on social media if they lose? Good luck with that.

I'm not a huge fan of expanding the playoff field, but I get the desire to create more meaningful regular-season games and accrue more lucrative rights deals. I've always considered it an inevitability. But keep these two words in mind: load management. The NBA, which has eight playoff teams in each conference, has devalued its regular season by making it too easy to reach the postseason, which has prompted teams to frequently rest star players. This would be a serious problem for Major League Baseball and its broadcast partners.

What's your perfect playoff format?

Miller: I'm already on the record here: Every team should make the playoffs. But let's get slightly more realistically weird:

All three division winners make the playoffs and go straight to the division series round. The best nondivision winner is Wild Card 1. The second-best nondivision winner is Wild Card 2. If the third-best nondivision winner is within five games of the second wild card, then it qualifies as Wild Card 3 and plays Wild Card 2 in a one-game playoff immediately after the season. The winner of that one-game playoff then faces Wild Card 1 in a three-game series over the course of just two days, with every game in Wild Card 1's home park. (The second day would be a doubleheader, if necessary.) The winner goes on to the division series round, where it is reseeded according to its regular-season record.

Meanwhile, if the fourth-best nondivision winner is within five games of Wild Card 1, then it qualifies too, as Wild Card 4, and plays Wild Card 1 in a one-game playoff to advance to the three-game playoff round.

And then the winner of the three-game playoff moves on to the five-game league division series against one of the division champs, and then the seven-game league championship series, and, what the heck, if the weather's nice, we might as well make it a nine-game World Series.

Doolittle: I'm fine with where we're at now, until expansion comes along. I would prefer four divisions and no wild cards. Heck, I'd prefer two leagues and no divisions. But I'm somewhat realistic.

Assuming baseball adds two teams in the coming years, I'm torn about what would be the better layout. Given all the data we've learned about how much of a baseball franchise's popularity is based on local factors, it probably makes sense to bite the bullet and do a full-on geographic realignment. I would hate the loss of continuity with league histories, but there just might be too much benefit to ignore.

So we go to 32 teams with more of a geography-based alignment. From there, I'm torn. My strong preference would be for four eight-team divisions with no wild cards. I feel like subdividing into those smaller groups would do as much to keep the greatest number of teams relevant through a typical season as a playoff expansion. And you'd get maximum benefit from regional rivalries. Sure, a couple of teams would run away with divisions every year, but that's fine.

However, I think baseball will invariably want to add playoff teams if we go to 32. If today's report is accurate, then we know that's the case.

If so, then I'd favor just having two eight-team divisions in each league, rather than four micro-divisions. With that format, you'd be able to retain the prestige of winning a division title. The four division winners would get byes. Then you'd have four wild cards play in some quick-hitting format, probably a best-of-three, to see who survives to play in the league championship series. You wouldn't want it to drag, as you don't want the favored teams to atrophy waiting around for an opponent. Which, by the way, is another issue with this proposal.

Schoenfield: My quick plan:

• Expand to 32 teams.

• Split each league into two divisions of eight teams. Why do we need three divisions of five teams? That format never made a lot of sense given the potential inequities within divisions. (The AL Central has historically been much weaker than the AL East, for example.)

• Cut the regular season to 154 games. Or even 150 games and cut two weeks off the calendar. (I know, good luck with this idea.)

• Six teams make the playoffs in each league -- the two division winners and four wild cards.

• Division winners get a bye, and the other four teams play a best-of-three series (no days off).

• The division series is a best-of-seven with only one day off instead of two.

• The league championship series and World Series remain the same as now.

Too simple?

Lee: Honestly, I'm pretty fine with what the baseball playoffs look like right now. Between the three major American sports, baseball is the only one that routinely surprises in the postseason, where the favorites don't always raise the trophy. For years, the Golden State Warriors and Cleveland Cavaliers ended up in the NBA Finals. Being a Super Bowl favorite often requires having an elite quarterback, which makes picking and choosing NFL games more predictable than the MLB postseason, where few expected the Nationals to raise the trophy. The addition of the wild-card games has been an amazing, incredibly exhilarating bonus to the postseason every year.

Should expansion to 32 teams eventually happen, it would be interesting to see MLB get rid of divisions and start seeding the playoffs in a manner similar to that of the NBA. Since the explosion of social media, baseball has become a much more regional sport, and getting rid of the divisions would force teams to compete with everyone else in the American League than just in the division. A potential hurdle of getting rid of divisions would be general realignment of the schedule and the potential traveling hurdles without regions in each league.

I'd be curious to see the effects on roster construction that getting rid of the divisions would have, forcing teams to look even further beyond their region for teams competing for a playoff spot, and how that could potentially inspire fans to follow baseball through a more national lens.

Gonzalez: You didn't ask for all of this, but I'm going to give it to you anyway. I would first shorten the regular season to 150 games, giving teams an extra couple of days off each month, because playing almost every day for half the calendar year seems cruel. I would implement a universal designated hitter, because watching pitchers hit is embarrassing and degrading. And I would copy the model of the NHL and the NBA, splitting up leagues and divisions based on geography.

For the playoffs, I'm going to steal from the current alignment and the proposed future. I like the idea of three division winners and two wild-card teams making it, but I don't like the idea of a one-game elimination. Let's allow the wild-card teams to play a best-of-three series, the entirety of which is hosted by the team with the better record (the tiebreaker is run differential).

Let's make regular-season games more meaningful by playing fewer of them; let's keep star players in the lineup by keeping postseason spots limited; let's give those wild-card teams a fair shake; and for God's sake, let's wrap this whole thing up before Halloween.

METAIRIE, La. -- New Orleans Pelicans rookie Zion Williamson expects his absence from an ankle injury to last just one game.

After missing Saturday night's win over the Indiana Pacers, Williamson said he's "ready to go" for Tuesday's game against the Portland Trail Blazers. The Pelicans listed the star rookie as probable for Tuesday.

Williamson sprained his left ankle Thursday against Chicago in the second quarter but managed to finish that game and lead the Pelicans with 21 points. But on Saturday, he popped up on the injury report after shootaround and ultimately missed the game at the team's discretion.

"They just told me longevity, the bigger picture, more long term," Williamson said. "They've been doing this for a long time and I'm just learning. I'm just following their guidance."

Without Williamson or Brandon Ingram, New Orleans defeated Indiana 124-117. Jrue Holiday led the Pelicans with 31 points and 10 assists as he led a season sweep over the Pacers and his brothers Justin and Aaron.

"We're a great team even without me or Brandon," Williamson said. "Did y'all see that shot Jrue hit? That stepback. Man, I know he was texting his brothers in the group messages after that one. But we played great. They were real disciplined that game. They executed when we needed and hit big shots to give us the win."

Williamson was a full participant in practice Monday, according to Alvin Gentry.

The Pelicans have been cautious with Williamson throughout the season. When he was recovering from his meniscus surgery, the Pelicans held him out 13½ weeks in order to make sure his was completely ready to go.

Williamson has scored at least 20 points in four consecutive games -- the only rookie to do so this season. He is averaging 19.8 points and 7.5 rebounds in eight games while shooting 57.4 percent from the field.

While Williamson seems to be on track to play Tuesday, Ingram's status seems to be up in the air.

Ingram was also held out of the Pacers game after he sprained his ankle against the Bulls and New Orleans listed him as questionable vs. Portland on Tuesday.

"I'm just taking it day by day and doing whatever I can on the basketball floor and off the basketball floor for the healing process," Ingram said.

Gentry said Ingram did not practice, but Ingram was working with his player development coaches following practice, getting shots up with teammate Lonzo Ball.

Ingram is expected to play in his first All-Star Game on Sunday and said he hopes to be healthy by then.

"If all goes well, I'm pretty confident I'll be playing on Sunday," Ingram said. "Hopefully I can play before I go to play in the All-Star Game, too."