The Official US Soccer thread - Page 2

Compa · January 3rd, 2008, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gr000000vy

and keller can't even get a game for fulham..

I believe Keller would be the starting GK but has a long-term injury.

Also, as someone said, Dempsey looks to be consistently the most dangerous player on Fulham, and he looks a lot more effective/comfortable in the forward role than he did at the beginning of the season in the wing positions.

Stout · January 4th, 2008, 06:29 AM

If we start playing a 4-5-1, then we're giving up before we've even started. Really, really good teams can play that formation and still be a real threat to score, but not all the time even then. For a team like us, it tells the competition that we don't really think we can compete, so we'll take a defensive stance and pray for a goal.

gr000000vy · January 4th, 2008, 07:10 AM

when you have attacking players in the middle like we do.. Adu, Bradley, Dempsey, Donovan whoever else may play in the middle then i think a 4-5-1 could work because it gives you more options for different points of attack... England plays a 4-5-1 often as well.... Now if we were to play a 5-4-1 then i could definitely see us saying.. "Ok we are going to keep you out and pray for a counter and to win one nil"

I think we would be better off with a 4-4-2 though with Dempsey and Jozy up top with Adu playing a attacking mid position...

Zeno · January 4th, 2008, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gr000000vy

and what did Donovan do during the World Cup?

He was the best player on the field against Italy.

gr000000vy · January 4th, 2008, 12:07 PM

a striker's worth is measured by how many chances he can set up or score.. he did neither. the player of that match was easily Keller. playing with 10 men he is the one responsible for a pt.

plus i think mcbride was better that match as well.

Stout · January 4th, 2008, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gr000000vy

when you have attacking players in the middle like we do.. Adu, Bradley, Dempsey, Donovan whoever else may play in the middle then i think a 4-5-1 could work because it gives you more options for different points of attack... England plays a 4-5-1 often as well.... Now if we were to play a 5-4-1 then i could definitely see us saying.. "Ok we are going to keep you out and pray for a counter and to win one nil"

I think we would be better off with a 4-4-2 though with Dempsey and Jozy up top with Adu playing a attacking mid position...

Sorry, but I don't buy that. If we had players like Essien in the midfield, or players one tier down but who are completely in synch as a team, then yes, I agree. We have at best average midfield players who are nowhere near creative enough for us to score on a regular basis in a 4-5-1.

Zeno · January 4th, 2008, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gr000000vy

a striker's worth is measured by how many chances he can set up or score.. he did neither. the player of that match was easily Keller. playing with 10 men he is the one responsible for a pt.

plus i think mcbride was better that match as well.

Every publication had Donovan as the top rated US player in that match. Go back and watch it, he had the Italian defense on their heels. McBride did nothing during the entire WC aside from taking a blow to the face.

Keller did have a good match but he wasn't the one who gave the Italian MF and defense fits all night.

Zeno · January 4th, 2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stout

If we start playing a 4-5-1, then we're giving up before we've even started. Really, really good teams can play that formation and still be a real threat to score, but not all the time even then. For a team like us, it tells the competition that we don't really think we can compete, so we'll take a defensive stance and pray for a goal.

Good teams can generate their attack out of their midfield. You don't just throw players up front because you feel you need to throw players up front. Would you rather play Twellman or Eddie Johnson up front with Altidore and keep Bradley, Adu, Edu, Donovan or Dempsey on the bench?

While the US U20's were called a 4-3-3 they really played a 4-5-1 and were very succesful. Adu and Rogers played as MF behind Altidore..Rogers more out wide and Adu in the middle most of the time.

Stout · January 5th, 2008, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeno

Good teams can generate their attack out of their midfield. You don't just throw players up front because you feel you need to throw players up front. Would you rather play Twellman or Eddie Johnson up front with Altidore and keep Bradley, Adu, Edu, Donovan or Dempsey on the bench?

While the US U20's were called a 4-3-3 they really played a 4-5-1 and were very succesful. Adu and Rogers played as MF behind Altidore..Rogers more out wide and Adu in the middle most of the time.

Yeah, but let's face it: we're not a good team. Oh sure, we're at the top of CONCACAF, but that's not saying much. As far as the world is concerned, we're middle-tier. And middle-tier teams don't sit back on offense, counterstrike, and truly hope to score. Unless they're one of those teams that bunker down at the beginning and hope for a draw, they don't.

Yes, we have some up-and-coming youngsters in Midfield, but they aren't world-class yet. That covers Bradley, Adu, and Edu. And, lest you forget, Donovan and Dempsey are actually forwards. Why not let them play their true position rather than push them back into midfield?

gr000000vy · January 5th, 2008, 01:11 PM

yea i hear ya.. i'm not a fan of a 4-5-1 either. When england lined up that way against croatia it made me cringe and they paid for it...

up top has got to be dempsey and jozy though....

Zeno · January 6th, 2008, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stout

Yeah, but let's face it: we're not a good team. Oh sure, we're at the top of CONCACAF, but that's not saying much. As far as the world is concerned, we're middle-tier. And middle-tier teams don't sit back on offense, counterstrike, and truly hope to score. Unless they're one of those teams that bunker down at the beginning and hope for a draw, they don't.

Yes, we have some up-and-coming youngsters in Midfield, but they aren't world-class yet. That covers Bradley, Adu, and Edu. And, lest you forget, Donovan and Dempsey are actually forwards. Why not let them play their true position rather than push them back into midfield?

Middle tier teams certainly do pack the MF and play for the counter or did you forget Greece in Euro 2004? I'm not saying thats what the US should do but thats what they did. The Ukraine was succesful with that in the last WC too..of course they had a guy named Shevchenko up top.

Dempsey is NOT a forward...he plays much better as a MF, the vast majority of his goals and best play we've seen from him on the National team have come from the MF position. At Fulham it's felt he is playing out of position at forward too, he is seeing some success but its been acknowledged that its not his ideal position but due to injuries and really a lack of talent on Fulham he is forced to play up top.

Zeno · January 6th, 2008, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gr000000vy

yea i hear ya.. i'm not a fan of a 4-5-1 either. When england lined up that way against croatia it made me cringe and they paid for it...

up top has got to be dempsey and jozy though....

Play Dempsey up top and you'll see more of what you got from him against South Africa(which was a player lost playing out of position) versus what you saw from him during the Gold Cup or against Brazil (a guy who attacked defenders and scored goals as a MF).

Stout · January 6th, 2008, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeno

Middle tier teams certainly do pack the MF and play for the counter or did you forget Greece in Euro 2004? I'm not saying thats what the US should do but thats what they did. The Ukraine was succesful with that in the last WC too..of course they had a guy named Shevchenko up top.

Dempsey is NOT a forward...he plays much better as a MF, the vast majority of his goals and best play we've seen from him on the National team have come from the MF position. At Fulham it's felt he is playing out of position at forward too, he is seeing some success but its been acknowledged that its not his ideal position but due to injuries and really a lack of talent on Fulham he is forced to play up top.

Well, let's see. Greece is one example out of thousands. You immediatley discounted the Ukraine example, because we have no striker anywhere in the league of Schevchenko. And I didn't say that middle tier teams didn't do it at all. Of course they do. I said they don't do it with any true measure of success. And, for the most part, it usually fails, just like the prevent defense in American football. It's soft, it makes you sit back on your heals, and usually doesn't work for the middle-tier guys.

Everything I've seen of Dempsey has said that he's a forward. And if he isn't, Donovan certainly is. We have NO reason not to play Donovan up top. We have NO reason to play a 4-5-1. Our strength, such as it is, should be in attacking, because our defense remains suspect. To therefore revert to a formation which lessens our attack capabilities is bad futbol.

Zeno · January 6th, 2008, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stout

Everything I've seen of Dempsey has said that he's a forward. And if he isn't, Donovan certainly is. We have NO reason not to play Donovan up top. We have NO reason to play a 4-5-1. Our strength, such as it is, should be in attacking, because our defense remains suspect. To therefore revert to a formation which lessens our attack capabilities is bad futbol.

Dempsey was a MF with the U20's, a MF in college, a MF with the U23's, a MF with the Revolution, signed with Fulham as a MF and has scored all his goals with the US Nats as a MF...so what tells you he is a forward? I may concede Donovan but only when he has a big strong striker playing with him, otherwise he is much better off as a MF where he can play in space).

Again a 4-5-1 is not defenseive MF when it maintains 2 speedy outside MF(Beasley & Dempsey), an attacking MF(Donovan) and a withdrawn forward playing behind the striker(Adu).

Stout · January 6th, 2008, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeno

Dempsey was a MF with the U20's, a MF in college, a MF with the U23's, a MF with the Revolution, signed with Fulham as a MF and has scored all his goals with the US Nats as a MF...so what tells you he is a forward? I may concede Donovan but only when he has a big strong striker playing with him, otherwise he is much better off as a MF where he can play in space).

Again a 4-5-1 is not defenseive MF when it maintains 2 speedy outside MF(Beasley & Dempsey), an attacking MF(Donovan) and a withdrawn forward playing behind the striker(Adu).

I obviously haven't followed it as much as you; I just looked at Dempsey bios, which all said F, and remembered that he started with us as a F.

I agree about Donovan, but I think it's because he stunted his own progression; whenever things got tough, he withdrew back to the states and stayed soft. He can play gritty, but only in spots, and he hasn't shown the true push to be a great player.

Granted we have a ton of talent at midfield, and a 4-5-1 MAY work, but not the way we utilize it. As you say, if it is set up and used exclusively to allow our midfield to attack like crazy, then sure, it COULD work. Unfortunately, whenever our coaches have used it, they have not pushed like that. It just always seems to take away from our attack, rather than add to it.