The Official US Soccer thread

[Stout]

Decent roster. As long as we don't start the idiotic 'lone striker' strategy, I'll be happy...for now.

 

[cardfaninfl]

Decent roster. As long as we don't start the idiotic 'lone striker' strategy, I'll be happy...for now.

Jose Mourinho has often used this strategy, now he could be called a number of things, but "idiotic" is a stretch. I would not call the Italy 2006 MNT that either... I would call them World Cup champions.

 

[Mulli]

Jose Mourinho has often used this strategy, now he could be called a number of things, but "idiotic" is a stretch. I would not call the Italy 2006 MNT that either... I would call them World Cup champions.

I guess it depends on who the striker is.

 

[Zeno]

I'd love to see Adu & Altidore start I just don't see Bradley doing that. I think he is going to bring both players along slowly probably 60 minute or so subs.

Pearce is a natural left back--the only one on the roster(he has played left mid as well but he is a better back), Moor is the only right back on the roster(well Corrales can play there too but he stinks)...thats why I see them both starting at those respective positions. If Bocanegra is struggling in the center he'd be even worse on the outside where Bradley requires his backs to have speed and make offensive runs up the wing.

Bornstein and Ching are both recovering from injury thats why neither was available.

Only a couple of days away..Mexican players are dropping like flies right now due to injury...Nery Castillo and Andres Guardado are both out.

 

[Stout]

Jose Mourinho has often used this strategy, now he could be called a number of things, but "idiotic" is a stretch. I would not call the Italy 2006 MNT that either... I would call them World Cup champions.

Thanks, Mulli. We've had this discussion before. We don't have the team that Italy has, or that Mourinho has had. With the US squad, if we put up a lone striker, we're begging to be shut out. We simply don't have the quality to create enough opportunities for a lone striker. I mean, granted, we don't have the quality to create enough opportunities at all, but still.

 

[Zeno]

Thanks, Mulli. We've had this discussion before. We don't have the team that Italy has, or that Mourinho has had. With the US squad, if we put up a lone striker, we're begging to be shut out. We simply don't have the quality to create enough opportunities for a lone striker. I mean, granted, we don't have the quality to create enough opportunities at all, but still.

You are ignoring the fact that if we play with 2 strikers we are likely keeping a better player on the bench. Goals can be created and scored from out of the midfield.

Altidore up top with a MF of Donovan, Adu, Dempsey, Bradley and either Clark, Edu, Feilhaber, Convey or Beasley can create much more scoring chances than any lineup that includes Twellman, Noonan or Rolfe who would only be on the field because they are "strikers" by position. Positions on a soccer field are fluid anyway...in the attack you'd probably see Adu move up into a more traditional striker role as well as Donovan and Dempsey.

Here is Soccer By Ives guess at our lineup versus Mexico...

--------------------Dempsey---------------------

Convey------------Bradley-------------Donovan

---------------Edu---------Clark-----------------

Pearce------Bocanegra---Onyewu--------Moor

--------------------Howard----------------------

Here is what he'd like to see...

--------------------Altidore---------------------

Convey------------Dempsey-------------Donovan

---------------Edu---------Bradley-----------------

Pearce------Bocanegra---Onyewu--------Moor

--------------------Howard----------------------

I'd love that 2nd lineup, plays to the strength of every player. A healthy Beasley replacing Convey and a healthy Cherundolo replacing Moor would make that even more attractive. Bornstein available to compete with Pearce would be great as well (Pearce may be a better player but in Bradley's scheme Bornstein seems a better fit). You could very easily replace Edu with Clark in that second lineup and not lose anything either. In the attack that system fluidly could transition to a 4 - 3 - 3

 

[Stout]

A 4-2-3-1? Is that even a real soccer formation? I'm not joking--I don't know. Still, it seems gimmickey (sp?) at best. I mean, that's not only breaking the normal formations, but doing it multiple times, before the ball is even kicked. I can certainly understand something more along the lines of a 4-4-1-1, with Donovan playing an attacking midfielder ahead of the rest of the midfield. I've certainly heard of that, and IF that was his main mission, then I could understand it. IF, because if we put him there and he doesn't attack, then our offense is probably nil. I don't know about the kind of lineup you listed, but it sounds strange and outlandish. Tell me I'm wrong and explain the rationale, if you'd be so kind. I just don't know.

And, as a side note, when are we going to actually start training strikers properly instead of breaking all individuality out of these kids? I honestly think that our training camps, from youth soccer on up, have broken these kids down so much with the focus on team work that they have trained away the killer instinct that strikers must have to score. Am I crazy in thinking that?

 

[cardfaninfl]

Every formation with four on the back line and 1 up top is a 4-5-1. The difference between a 4-2-3-1, 4-1-4-1 or the 4-4-1-1 is the role/priority given to each midfielder within the 4-5-1 formation.

Zeno has two mids with defense as their main priority. Both Bradley and Edu are currently being asked by their club team to perform this role, so I understand how this could fit the talent we have.

The key to any 4-5-1 (or its variations) does not depend on the striker but on the wings. They have to be able to create an attack and be able to finish on the far post equally as well. To be able to accomplish this they need pace and stamina because their responsibility will be to change the formation from a 4-5-1 to a 4-3-3, and then back again. With Demsey, Beasley, Adu and Donovan... the MNT has four quality W/AM that have speed/stamina/ability to create/finishing ability to pull this off. This is why IMO this strategy works well with the US talent AND lack of talent.

The main reason for the 4-5-1 is simply the absense of a real finisher. As Zeno mentioned, it would be foolish to have a weaker talent on the starting XI while one of your better players sits on the bench. Until we develope, or let a foreign club develope, more quility strikers... breaking from the traditional 4-4-2 may be necessity.

 

[Stout]

Thanks, Cardfan! That made a ton of sense. Sorry for questioning the formation, Zeno. It just looked really strange to me, but that was a good explanation. I'm still not enamored of the 4-5-1, but you guys make some good sense in defense of it.

 

[Mulli]

Every formation with four on the back line and 1 up top is a 4-5-1. The difference between a 4-2-3-1, 4-1-4-1 or the 4-4-1-1 is the role/priority given to each midfielder within the 4-5-1 formation.

Zeno has two mids with defense as their main priority. Both Bradley and Edu are currently being asked by their club team to perform this role, so I understand how this could fit the talent we have.

The key to any 4-5-1 (or its variations) does not depend on the striker but on the wings. They have to be able to create an attack and be able to finish on the far post equally as well. To be able to accomplish this they need pace and stamina because their responsibility will be to change the formation from a 4-5-1 to a 4-3-3, and then back again. With Demsey, Beasley, Adu and Donovan... the MNT has four quality W/AM that have speed/stamina/ability to create/finishing ability to pull this off. This is why IMO this strategy works well with the US talent AND lack of talent.

The main reason for the 4-5-1 is simply the absense of a real finisher. As Zeno mentioned, it would be foolish to have a weaker talent on the starting XI while one of your better players sits on the bench. Until we develope, or let a foreign club develope, more quility strikers... breaking from the traditional 4-4-2 may be necessity.

Yeah, that is a great post. thx.

 

[Milgod]

they need to try to get some sort of tradition.... notice Brazil and England don't change there jersey every friggin year....

i would go with this... too bad the nike symbol is so friggin big though...

You must be registered for see images

That is my all time fav still and I wear it often.

England do change their shirt a hell of a lot, pretty much all national teams do. It's not like the US is changing its colours or anything.

 

[Zeno]

Tonights lineup....

---------Altidore-----Dempsey-----------

Convey---------------------------Donovan

------------Bradley----Clark-----------------

Corrales------------------------------Moor

----------Bocanegra---Onyewu-------------

-----------------Howard--------------------

BENCH- Guzan, Parkhurst, Edu, Feilhaber, Lewis, Adu, Noonan

Corrales? blech...how does Lewis make the bench if his club says he is too injured to play this month?

 

[Zeno]

Mexico's lineup...

Here is Mexico's Lineup:

-------------Bautista----De Nigris-----------

Vela--------Pardo-----Torrado---------Arce

Castro------Marquez--Magallon----Salcido

------------------Ochoa----------------------

BENCH- Michel, Rojas, Pinto, Cacho, Dos Santos, Naelson, Villaluz

I'm glad to see Dos Santos start on the bench, his speed could give Onyewu & Bocanegra fits...Ochoa is an incredible GK, hopefully we can test him early and often and make the pressure pay off. Vela is going to cause problesm and to me is the most dangerous Mexican player tonight on offense.

 

[Zeno]

BS on the Dempsey goal being disallowed. It should be 3 - 1 at half....total garbage call.

Anyways it was great to see Altidore score. Convey & Corrales don't look very good IMO--Moor blew it on Mexico's goal but redeemed himself on that great cross to Altidore.

The US passing in the midfield is really bad right now...they can't string more than 2 passes together with any consistency. The bottom line right now is our defense is outplaying their offense and our players are making the most of limited opportunities.

 

[Zeno]

Oh and I hate ESPN's 30 on 30 sportscenter...if I wanted to hear about stinking basketball I'd flip channels. Don't subject me to highlights of that crap.

 

[Zeno]

Moor was responsible for goal #2 as well. Poor marking on 2 set pieces killed us.

I did think when Feilhaber came in the second half that the midfield looked much better--it really does surprise me he can't get on the field for a bad Derby side.

I never want to see Corrales or Moor back on the field for the US Nats. Pearce is either in Bradley's doghouse or he looks terrible in training--I can't understand why he wasn't even on the bench, especially considering he could play Left Back and Left MF. I read earlier Spector wasn't in camp because the US made a deal with West Ham not to call him in for this game so he could be available for the Olympic tourney. Spector has to be considered at one of the outside back positions.

 

[cardfaninfl]

Agree with everything. Moor made the same mistake... twice and both times were costly. With Cherandolo and Spector, Moor may never get another cap. Late in the game Corrales let the Mexican wing run free, then fouled him just outside the box. Pearce or Bornstein need to take that position.

Bradley played with his head up his... and Demsey look like he was late for the plane back to London. You can argue Clark did not play badly... because he hardly played at all. Maybe two touches in over 70 minutes and you are a mid... sheesh.

Jozy played well as did the others not mentioned by name. Great to see the youngters getting caps.

 

[gr000000vy]

and Demsey look like he was late for the plane back to London.

umm what? i think you could pose an argument that dempsey was one of the better players on the pitch, he was creative.. had some nice balls to the outside... as far as his goal being dis-allowed i can't see how a player being off side is a BS call.. it is what it is, sure you could argue that he came back on side, but he still received the ball from an off side position and you have to call that...

moor sent in some nice crosses and Jozy could have had a few more... his one finish was pretty..

donovan did ok... made some plays with his speed and switched up with dempsey a bit and i liked that... bradley played well...

howard is the freakin man... nobody else really stood out too much.. remember this is still a meaningless game and bradley screwed up imo by his subbing and his starting defense and how you could have clark, corralles start is beyond me...

I just love it when USA plays Mexico. Sure I enjoy it when USA actually pushes themselves and play outside the country vs quality teams, but you can't argue that Mexico vs USA isn't special.

 

[gr000000vy]

by the way.. i LOVED the instant replay system they had.. felt like the Matrix or something and you could really see the breakdowns in the defense which was typically moor... but i haven't seen that before...

announcers did OK... not great but they were solid... I think I may be the only one that actually enjoys it when Eric Wynalda calls a game, glad they kept Julie out of the play by play....

 

[cardfaninfl]

umm what? i think you could pose an argument that dempsey was one of the better players on the pitch, he was creative.. had some nice balls to the outside...

... bradley played well...

What I noticed was Dempsey collecting the ball, 25-30 yards out, with his back to the keeper... then immediately running 5-10 yards in the wrong direction and kicking it out wide. The one time he collected, turned and fired... the ball was in the onion bag. Of course it didn't count because he was caught just prior in an offside postition. I quess I'm quilty of focusing on reasons why he is not a striker but a great attacking mid.

Bradley played well...??? On that, I think we watched a different game. His tackles were off and going to ground a few times gave Mexico numbers on the attack. The midfield could not maintain posession because a number of his passes were just pitiful. I agree that pairing him with the "invisible man" did not help, but I expected more from him. Quite a bit more.

 

[gr000000vy]

Well the first rule for a striker is to play the way you face, and that's pretty much what he did... If a back on was on his tail then you need to kick it out wide and change the point of attack... he had numerous great passes outside to Landon and was very creative on the ball and had a bit of an edge to his game.. i like that..

bradley is bradley.. he was solid, had a few good hard tackles... wasn't overly great but i don't think he ever really is..

i think he played some of the european players way too long and i hope it doesn't effect them come this weekend because fulham needs Dempsey when they play boro this weekend..

 

[Zeno]

Dempsey was by no way one of the better players in last nights match. He didn't look comfortable and aside from one turn and shot (that should have been a goal--stupid ref) he was constantly giving the ball away or trying to dribble through defenders. He had a below average game. The 3 best US players were Bocanegra, Onyewu, Altidore with Feilhaber being the 4th best when he got on the field.

I did like seeing Bradley being aggresive in breaking up Mexican attacks but his passing was horrible.

Moor didn't put in "some" good crosses--he put in one good cross. The other good crosses were put in there by Donovan and there weren't enough from him either.

Coach Bradley can't be particularly happy with the way the US played.

 

[gr000000vy]

hah stupid ref? you should say stupid off side law because that is what stopped the goal...

granted with this game being nothing more than a friendly i didn't seem to study each player as closely as you may have... but dempsey did a heck of alot more than have one good turn and shot... hopefully you tivo'd it so you could watch it again..

moor didn't really impress me and i don't see him being on the cup qualifying roster, but he had more than one good cross and if it wasn't for his mistakes on the goals would have gotten a better rating imo.

I did like what Benny brought to the squad when he was subbed on.. including Adu, the one play that really stood out was when he deked a couple guys and than earned a free kick late in the game.. we need more of that...

i would have liked to see what the game would have been like had mexico not gone so conservative .. we gave up so many counter attacks santos would have scorched us early on....

 

[Zeno]

hah stupid ref? you should say stupid off side law because that is what stopped the goal...

The late whistle was the problem, had he been whistled initially offside and not allowed to take 3 dribbles turn and shoot before a whistle was blown I'd agree with you. The way it looked live the call wasn't on him, replays showed different and the call was correct.

Looking at player ratings on various sites the one consistent thing is Corrales, Moor and Convey are the lowest rated players from the match. Opinions vary quite a bit on other ratings though.

One thing is nobody put out a consistent game aside from Tim Howard, everyone showed a flash of brilliance at some point (except maybe Corrales & Convey) but nobody maintained a high level of play for the entire match. Thats whats missing, thats whats so frustrating about players like Donovan & Dempsey in particular, neither one strings great matches back to back or rarely strings a great 90 together. If this team played at the level they were capable of consistently we would be a legitimate top 10 team in the world.

 

[Compa]

The offside call on Dempsey was correct. One of the replays showed that the linesman had his flag up at least by the time Dempsey pulled the ball down. The commentators frequently mentioned the noise in the stadium was loud enough to drown out a whistle.

I was disappointed in the fullbacks and Convey, as others have said. I also was disappointed in Bradley, simply because I keep reading reports about how well he is playing. Maybe he just feels more comfortable with Feilhaber instead of Clark.

I was really impressed with Feilhaber. Until he came on, nobody on the US showed any true dribbling/possession skills.

I also hate the 30 at 30 updates and even the ticker at the bottom. I would bet that almost everybody who has their TV tuned to a soccer game on ESPN2 has the game on for a reason, and is not as interested in receiving continuous updates to college basketball or Roger Clemens news at the expense of televising the game. I do like that broadcasting duo, though...much better than Dave O'Brien.

And even though it was mostly Mexico fans at the stadium, it is really cool to see the US in a packed high-capacity stadium (as opposed to a sparsely filled place like Toyota Park).