If anything is for certain for our national team it is a Michael Bradley designated starting position. Not only will he start but most likely waste a entire 90 minutes of experience. With this roster there is no doubt he will stay in the game unless injured. I predict either a sloppy punishing foul or ghost boy, meaning having no importance or relevant in the game. Why not a Torres Clark??? Or kljestan Clark??? The only opportunity we have seen without MB was the second half vs Argentina which was brilliant and most impressive! I write this before this match as insurance of my stance and prediction of the outcome of our midfield. I love our team but to stomach another 90 minutes of MB is insane!
You must be new around here. But guessing by your join date your not, so I'll just assume you've taken a long hiatus. Anyway, you're opinion is mis-guided but I won't even go into as to why because I'm tired and I've got to leave for my flight to Columbus in three hours.
I'll leave the other issues aside and focus on just this one. While an argument can be made that many USMNT may be about getting experience for players, this one isn't. It's about three points (or at least 1). The guys the coach think will perform best will play, nothing else matters for this one.
Don't agree. I see, play my son to gain experience and hope it results in improvement. MB would start over a Gerrard and Gattuso hypothetically.
I'm not a fan of MB. I don't think he deserves to play as much as he has and its obvious he wouldn't have played that much if his dad wasn't the coach. But right now, he has to be the top defensive/holding'ish midfielder simply because: Clark isn't as good; Maestro is out due to cards; Torres hasn't played for the team enough for any coach, let alone BB, to wan't to start him in a huge game; Edu isn't playing at all though he looked ok in his game against Milan. MB is the default starter for this game and it has nothing to do with him not being as good as others or nepotism. Its just the best option available right now.
Well said but who is to be blamed for Torres not playing enough??? Fact is only a injury would keep MB from a 90 min match which has created this situation of inexperienced players.
Just because I have to.... I think the over under for his yellow card is 75 min. Interesting fact and do with it what you will in his last 5 games he had 3 yellow cards.
the nepotism of this situation stinks, but until the Bradley's string together 3 or 4 losses or bad team performances he is stuck in there. I think he kills way too many attacks, has two club feet when shooting from distance (though getting better), is comically bad at defending at times leading to the famous Bradley Lunge, and in general produces neither the crunching fear or big match confidence of a Mastroeni, the defensive bite or off the ball runs of a Rico, the passing ability and 'magic' moment of Klejstan, the overall composure, scoring ability and passing of a dempsey, the creativity of a torres or the total skill of an Adu. But hey, he hustles and is tall and that's 90% of the US game anyway. I have a pretty bad feeling about this match. Hope the US dominates and Beez, Demps and Donovan each score, but something tells me BB will face a similar team/tactics that we saw at Wembley, by far our worst performance during the last 3 years.
We don't have anyone better, in my opinion of course. Bradley has been successful at this level and is actually playing well with his Bundesliga club, where he's locked down a starting position. Please name another Central Midfielder that is more accomplished at the club or national team level than Michael Bradley that is available for this match
It's so circular. Bradley plays all the games so he's the most accomplished national team midfielder, which means he should play all the games. Making him Mr. Reliable for the USMNT was a mistake, because he's going to be a liability in South Africa.
Who hasn't had had significant playing time in the middle of the field that you think is better than Bradley? And what about proving it at the club level?
Who hasn't had significant playing time? Two other players *at the same time.* What about proving it at the club level? Bradley has played poorly at the international level for quite awhile now. We should take a lesson from a little NT called Brazil. They don't give a damn if Elano isn't impressing his coach at Man City. They know how he plays for the NT, and that he's an Italy-beater. They didn't care that Afonso Alves tore up the Eredivisie. He got his shot, was found lacking, and others were called in his place. They're taking their sweet time calling up Amauri, who's "proven it" at one of the world's top teams. They're very clear about the separation between club and international levels. Bradley continues to be an international lock. He's not ready for that and it's going to kill us in South Africa.
This is so stupid. If any other midfielder not named Bradley was starting in the Bundesliga and not starting for our National Team we would have Bigsoccer posters with torches and pitchforks banging on Bob Bradley's door.
Could an experienced and reasonable fan please explain why Torres should be playing as dm ahead of Bradley? I'm utterly bewildered why this **** keeps coming up. Torres is a part time starter in Mexico who plays an attacking midfield role. He's shown some flashes of being good but certainly nothing consistent. Isn't this basically the same as calling for Adu to start? Did Torres establish himself as a clear starter at his club? Does he still get benched even when he does start? Did good teams in the mexican league suddenly become better than those large clubs in Portugal/France/Holland/Ireland? Did Torres do something for the USMNT that stood out? Or is it simply because he had the potential of playing for Mexico and chose us?
We're not Brazil. We've got mediocre at best talent behind Bradley. Same applies at most other positions.
ummm....ah....but they're Brazil...and have an abundance of riches at every position and can pretty much afford to do what they want. I don't think its an apt comparison. Havind said that, I take your point that there is often incongruity between the club and national team levels. I have mixed feelings about M Bradley. He is young and seasoned and has potential that he has not yet realized. He plays with fire and effort and seems to show flashes of being a complete box to box midfielder. He also has flaws and has yet to realize that potential. Paired properly in the center, I think he can be good. But who do we try at this point? No Pablo...so its either Rico, Edu, Torres.... The latter two could arguably displace Bradley down the road. I am really high on Edu's potential. He has looked great at times, seems more poised than bradley with the ball at his feet and passes well. But he has had some eh performances. Torres I am really high on and would not be upset if he started today at LM, pinched a little in..though I might worry abit about Bornstein/Pearce's ability to handle the left.
I guess you chose to ignore my point. People are always pointing at Bradley's club status to justify his NT locked starter status. Brazil doesn't equate the two. They look at how the player plays for the NT. Bradley himself is a mediocre at best talent at international level, so he shouldn't be the only constant in midfield.