Was curious how people felt about this going forward. Coach Klinmann tried this against Mexico, and when they didn't swarm our backline it worked spectacularily well. When I saw the line up I thought it was a misguided experiment, as I felt that while Bradley had the technical ability to play it, lacked a bit of creativity. Outside of Holland, he'd always been used as a facilitator rather than a creator. Well I was wrong about that one. For 45 minutes he put on the best perfotmance from an American in that position for quite some time. It might be with considering as our full time system. When he plays there, he makes full use of his intelligence for getting into the box (that's how he was such a good goal scorer in Holland), continues to be a deft passer who makes good decisions, and can still put a longer ball on a dime. He's not that dribbling wizard that goes through a back line, but he can slice it open with his passing. And perhaps the one thing that seperates him from Donovan...he loves the spotlight. That's not meant to be a criticism of LD, but rather a compliment for Bradley. He wants to be the man, and he wants to be the man with the ball in the most important moment of the match. Its a rare mentality - one that j thick only he and Dempsey posses on our side. I think the best way to make this work is by putting a pair of midfielders behind him, one a full time defender, the other more 2 way. And then in front of him a striker in the box, and attacking outlets on the outside . you'd call either a 4-3-3 or a 4-5-1. Against world cup competition we don't have the DMid with enough range to use just one man behind a #10. The way I'd put is with Beckerman as fulltime DM, Jones the box to box, Donovan on the right, Dempsey on the left, and one of Jozy or Wondo as our #9
I like this because Bradley is a great passer has a heck of a shot and would still provide great defensive cover down the middle.
This would ask Donovan and Dempsey to be our fly boys up and down the wings and neither one has the pace of yesteryear (Dempsey as a deeper defensive option doesn't instill a whole lot of confidence in me). It also asks that Beckerman, Jones and Bradley learn to play together quickly and in complimentary fashion. I don't see Beckerman starting, and I'm not even sure if JK will start Donovan at this point (he's got to show he's worth the first 11 in the final camp leading to Brasil). On the real question of Michael Bradley as a number 10, this, too, takes a leap of faith in that JK would opt to move Dempsey to a flank midfield position to allow Bradley the more central play maker role. Mexico was arguably at their worst and weakest in that first half that saw Bradley dominate the pitch. They made a huge tactical shift the second half, kept the ball away from the center and did a better job of keeping the ball away from the US strengths. I am impressed with Bradley as a barnstorming attacking central force. Watching him with Toronto, as well, he is free to get to involved higher up the pitch, intercepting passes and anticipating the play in the opponents half. He seemed to be playing at higher tempo than the other 21 players, that first half versus Mexico. He has matured into a player with real finesse as well as physical presence. How JK decides to best employ Bradley remains open, but, IMHO, it won't be in the formation you have posited. Just my two cents.
Don't like it with the current roster that Klinsmann has to work with. Most people are already questioning who will start next to Bradley in the midfield. I don't see the need to create an additional problem in the midfield.
It might work, but we have to consider how much space Mexico was giving us in the first half. We always look great when that happens, and not so much when opponents press.
Last year while we were in our best form we (finally) looked pretty decent when we were getting pressed high, which is what was getting me so giddy about our chances this summer until the draw went and poured cold water on them. Look how Mike was used in those games. (It wasn't in a #10 role.)
While I'm a huge fan of Bradley's and think his passing is underrated, I think he was made to look a little better in the #10 role against Mexico because we really put them in their heels when we came out "guns blazing". When they repositioned themselves in the 2nd half and got their feet under them, I don't think he was quite as effective. I don't see us coming out full bore against anyone in our group at the WC so I'm not sure how successful he'd be in that role. My preference, at least at the WC, would be for him to remain as the #8 and be the metronome of the team. He'd need a dedicated DM behind him. With a flexible, amorphouse top 4, this team could be very dynamic.
Which is fair enough. But when we do get pressed high, the only way to respond to it is by taking advantage of the space given to you on the counter. Last year, both Borussia Dortmund and Bayern Munich did that against their more fancied Spanish opponents. We don't have those kind of weapons but I believe all 3 of our opponents will high pressure our suspect looking back line and defensive midfield. I do think you raise a good point - Bradley is our best player equipped to handle that kind of pressure on the ball. Its at this point I wonder how a baseball analyst would handle it - which is to say, Wins Above Replacement. As a deeper lying midfield, I think his obvious replacement is JJ, who in turn would be replaced by Beckerman or Edu - which I'm OK with and would actually prefer. Both are more disciplined in positioning than Jones. Bradley's replacement as an attacking midfielder in the middle is probably Clint Dempsey - who has lost his pace basically, but is certainly more dynamic than Bradley in the attack. I guess the big issue is the point raised by someone else - can Donovan and Dempsey still fulfill the roles they filled in South America, as outside attackers? If you still need their attacking ability on the pitch, but don't think you can get 90 from them on the outside, well to the middle they go.
Not sure why anyone would want Bradley playing in front of two center-mids; he's not a Mezut Ozil type player but instead one whose game is more two-way. In Holland Bradley played in deep central midfield as part of a 442 with the wide players cutting in and pulling the strings. The ability to make surging runs without the ball into dangerous positions is the salient aspect of his attacking game that carries over from that period. His Italian period saw the addition of more sophisticated ball skills and tactical aspects. Which all adds up to more of an 8/10 type player rather than a 10/off-forward type. The diamond is a nice play 'B' with the 442/451 as a play 'A'. Plan 'A' which was used during the 'Hex' and during the team's lengthy unbeaten run: ---------------------------???? ------Feilhaber-----Jones----Deuce-----Zusi --------------------------Bradley with Dempsey dropping level to Jones when facing a top opponent. Bradley playing like Beckerman. Feilhaber is just my preference. Plan 'B' looks to be the diamond: --------------????-----Deuce ----------------Bradley ---------Jones-----------Zusi -----------------Edu
If we have him do that the challenge is who plays behind him. I'd be open to seeing it, but Beckerman for 90 during the World Cup isn't going to happen. If we know we are going to sub him out, there are circumstances where this could be interesting and feasible. His combination play with both LD/Deuce on the pitch is fun to watch - I hope we get to see it in the send off games at least once. That means yes, Beckerman getting some time at DM.
I thought he was #4..... --------- But seriously. After WC2010, I was of the opinion that Bradley would become our primary playmaker. He has the tools to be a #10. Even if he's not made from the same cloth as a traditional #10. In my opinion the closer to the goal he is, the more productive he will be. Hopefully Klinsy has finally come to that realization.
The closer to goal he is, the easier it is to pass behind him and take him out of the defense. At some stage you have to decide if you will have your cake or eat it.
I liked the idea for the Mexico game, but I don't see it as a permanent switch. It is a good look to be able to run out there, but it (potentially) solves one problem while creating two more. First, if Jozy is on the field, we need two forwards. He has always played better with a strike partner. He needs someone to help take away the double team on him and who will be higher up the field to play a quicker passing game with him on the counter. Second, pushing Mike farther up the field will require us to play a CM (Edu or Beckerman) with well below-average passing skills for an International. Perhaps moving GCam to DM (behind Jones) would solve this, but then who is our right back??? My opinion is that these problems, especially #2, would make moving Mike to the 10, on the whole, a net negative for the team. We need Mike to be able to play deeper, providing an outlet for out backline and helping maintain possession in the midfield (and starting counters from deeper in the field). My take still is that he should be the 8 (making the 6 a tough choice, but that's a different thread) and should be allowed more freedom to crash late into the box just like he did at Heerenveen.
First off, I'm not disagreeing with you. Just simply answering some of the questions/concerns you posed. He seemed to do okay last summer/fall. He pretty much was our entire offensive production to carry us to qualification. He also played great against Germany's B team and against a very good Bosnia side. While it's not the most popular opinion, I'd love to see Fabian Johnson at RB with Beasley at LB. That would potentially free up Cameron to play CDM. ------ Like I said, your points to the main topic here are logical. But there are certainly alternatives to make it happen. Especially if it puts our best player in the best position to succeed.
I think Edu is going to make the squad due to some of the points mentioned here. He is athletic and poised on the ball these days. If he'd been in MLS for last season as well, Beckerman might not even be an option. As it stands, both probably make it. I even think Edu might start a match in Brazil. Bradley could work as our Henderson/Coutinho balancing act, with Bedoya being the other component. Like everyone else says, we just need to chain someone back. If Gerrard can be disciplined enough to be the DM, surely JJ can swallow his pride a bit. He's no Stevie G. I'd put LD on the tip if he can go 90, with CD and ? up top. Some folks will say this leaves Zusi on the bench. To them, I reply "yeah."
Try this on for size? -----------Jozy----------- --Dempsey--------------- ---------------------Bedoya/Zusi ----------Bradley----------------- -------Edu-----Jones------------- FJ----Bes------Gonz---Cameron
That just looks so defensive. It might be okay if you're playing for a draw, but I just don't see Dempsey staying high enough to not isolate Jozy. It probably wouldn't play nearly as defensively as I envision it. You know, figuring out tactics for giving your team the best chance to win is hard. I'm surprised all of us here are so damn good at it.
Yes it is a very defensive lineup, but something like that might work for the first game against Ghana. We absolutely can not let up an early goal. Ghana is a team who loves to counter off your mistakes. The longer the game is scoreless, the more it favors us in my opinion. I would be down for that lineup and personnel. I just hope that Donovan can get back to real good form, and stick him in there for either Bedoya or Zusi. That would give us some real bite in the attack, and we would also be real stout defensively. Let Edu play right in front of the center backs. His athleticism will be vital in a game like this.
Exactly. It also allows Bradley to roam free throughout the field all. He can go as high as he likes and join the attack, or drop as deep as he wants without leaving anything exposed. Dempsey managed to stay high against Mexico, so he can Jozy could play off each other. It would also allow Zues to be an outlet and spread the field which he is so good at. On attacks JJ could also roam as the 8 like he loves to getting up field a little bit with Edu shielding the back four. FJ can bomb the left side and Cam can stay back allowing us a compact back three plus Edu
Its a trend spanning most of 3 games, but CD of late has been doing less and less of the dropping deep crap. My guess is that if Bradley's on the field, he's less apt to do so with the NT.
Agreed on Clint not dropping deep - this is something I keep an eye on because nothing frustrates me more than when I see him picking up the ball in his own defensive third. He did some of that in the Chivas game...but not as much as last year, that's for sure. He did not much of it at all in the game where he got his hat trick (in the 2nd half). He and Martins are sticking closer together - and Seattle's reaping the benefits. I think it has less to do with Bradley the person, and more to do with our ball circulation. The faster we keep the ball moving and working it's way forward, the less chance Clint has of dropping back for it. MB does help with that. Jermaine...not so much sometimes when he leaves his position.
Lots of good comments and opinions in this thread. Very nice to see, so thanks to all who are participating. My 2 cents are that Bradley, as IndividualEleven said before, is an 8/10 player. He's not either the 8 or the 10, but somewhere in between--maybe this is the new modern "10"? His play against Mexico, and the freedom he was given in the game plan, showed his BEST that I've ever seen with the Nats. He was phenomenal. But, for him to be able to stay so high up on the field (in the first half particularly), it required Beckerman doing his thing--playing the solid 6 role. That said, while I've really come to like and respect Beckerman over the last 2 years or so, I have always thought and still think that he doesn't have the speed of thought to play at the highest levels of international soccer. Maurice Edu is better suited to that. My basic point is that, for the US to do well, Bradley really needs to have some freedom to roam, and the guy right behind him is critical to that happening. Whoever is in that role needs to be able to STAY AT HOME and the team must feel confident that he can receive the first ball out of the back and move it forward successfully, without Bradley feeling like he must come back and retrieve. I could write pages more, but I'll leave it short enough that some of you might actually read it. Thanks
Totally agree and the guy to pair with Bradley in that role you mentioned is Edu. I do not think for a second that Jermaine Jones has the athletic ability anymore or the the lack of ego to play that role, it would be a trainwreck. Why? Because it has been in the past. I also really like Cameron in that role but he could be asked to play defense in a game or two where Edu will not.