Jones isn't liked because sometimes he can lose his cool, much the same way people got on Bradley for his yellow cards in the past. Jones is a good player and very good by American standards. The prob is some people, like myself, think Jones and Bradley don't mesh well when they start together. To say it's because Klinsmann wants Jones to be a leader and that makes the "establishment" afraid is just nonsense. Klinsmann has mentioned BOTH Bradley and Jones when talking about leaders on the US team. That is some goal.com type stuff right there.
I appreciated this post much more and thanks for elaborating. I believe that Jones and Bradley haven't meshed well but I think it's worth continuing to figure out given the caliber that both these players posses. I think there's more to the story than Jones losing his cool though. Go through many of the "second viewing analysis" and you'll constantly see, "Jones didn't play as bad as I thought through the first viewing." It happens every single game. I wont go in a long winded debate about "white america" and entitlement and fears even though I think they belong in this conversation. I'll just say, Jones doesn't play "american soccer" and I think he gets far too much criticism for it rather than people adjusting their expectations and praising him for it.
I sort of hope Jones either loses his appeal or wins and knocks it down to 2 matches or less. Because a 3 match suspension could require him to make 3 trans-Atlantic trips in a 10 day period.
It's great you're thinking about what JK wants without bias. For me personally, I love JJs vigor, and I see most of his matches. Do you? I think a Bradley/Jones midfield can not only work but given time and instruction, be the best pairing the USMNT has ever seen.
I'm still on the fence about whether the Jones+Bradley central midfield can work or not. But I do think Klinsi has the better scheme for making it work than BB did. BB realy preferred the 4-4-2 with a "pulley" type of dual CM system. Jones and Bradley would alternate the CM role, each attacking or covering as needed. I once had high hopes that this would work. It had some adequate moments in the 2011 Gold Cup, but it also had poor moments, especially after BB over-used both players and they were worn down by the end of that tournament (but that's an old discussion I'm not getting into now). Both Jones and Bradley are really very strong transition players, who like to attack the ball and start fast counters, driving up the field. That both CMs preferrred to play like that sometimes left gaps when neither of them dropped back to cover, and that exposed the US's mediocre CBs too often. When BB did experiment with a 3-man central midfield during the friendlies between the 2010 World Cup and the 2011 Gold Cup, he seemed to try dual DMs with a single ACM in basically a 4-2-3-1. There was a prominent story during this period that indicated that BB was preparing Holden for the ACM role, with Jones and MB as the dual DMs. Unfortunately, Holden was injured before the test could be tried, and I think we saw one or two games with Edu as the mis-used forward-playing CM. The central midfield became a drab, jumbled mess and the US attack died. Plus, you still had both Bradley and Jones in that dual screening/attacking role where both really preferred to transition attack and would leave gaps when one or the other didn't cover. BB's brief experiment with the 4-2-3-1: ---------------------Striker--------------------- Dempsey-----------????------------Donovan -----------------Jones---Bradley-------------- Where ???? was supposed to be Holden, but ended up Edu for a bit. BB went back to more of a 4-4-2, or a 4-4-1-1 for the Gold Cup, with Jones and MB as the dual pulley style CMs. I think the best change JK has made is the dedicated #6 screening the CBs. Beckerman wasn't good enough for the role as a starter, but when JK finally shifted Williams there (September 11, 2012, at home vs Jamaica), it gave the system the proper combination of stability, skill, and athleticism the #6 role needed. And I think Edu is more than adequate as Williams' backup for the dedicated #6 role. That gives the Jones+MB pairing a reliable cover with the #6 role. If this 3-man central midfield has any chance to work with BOTH Jones and MB at the same time, I think JKs current scheme with a dedicated #6 is the better way than BB's experiments with an inverted CM trio that had Jones+MB as dual CMs at the back. It's more of a 4-1-4-1, or a 4-3-3 depending on your view: ----------------------------Striker--------------------------- Left attacker-------------------------------Right Attacker ------------------Jones------Bradley----------------------- -------------------------Williams--------------------------- With Donovan and Dempsey as the preferred left and right attackers, but we've rarely had the chance for that. Now, just because I think this version has a better chance of working for a Jones+MB pairing, doesn't mean I think it is the "best" way for the US to set up. Against top opponents, or very good opponents on the road, I'm fine with this. But in games where the US can or would like some more varied/creative attack, I'd remove one of Jones or Bradley for a more clear 4th attacker and either: a) Keep the 4-1-4-1 shape but slide Donovan inside next to Bradley (or Jones depending on form) and bring in a more attacking flank player like Pontius (or Gatt or Shea); or b) Keep the 4-1-4-1 but put a more attack-minded player like Kljestan in for Jones or Bradley; or c) Explicitly switch to a 4-4-1-1 with Dempsey moving to the second striker role, removing one of the dual #8s; or d) Explictly switch to a 4-4-2, removing one of the dual #8s and adding a second true striker, say Jozy and Gomez together up top. LASTLY, I still have a small hope that Jones could play the dedicated #6 role. But since neither BB nor JK has tried Jones in that role, and since Jones isn't playing that role for Schalke at this time, I've sort of given up on that hope. Whatever the reason may be -- Jones himself or the coaches -- this option just doesn't appear to be in the cards.
Jones is the type of player that is rarely developed in the US...he's an enforcer who is good at creating contact to defuse circumstances that might turn out to be direct threats at the US goal. Bradley is a true tackler with no emotional histrionics..he tackles and recovers. Jones tackles and often stays down as though he is the aggrieved one. His antics don't fit into the American mold, but that is not to say they aren't helpful (triple negative, you figure it out ). Jones and Bradley afford a physical/technical/tactical CM pairing that can motor the squad. Whenever Jones is caught too high up the field in a defensive recovery, he is apt to tackle rashly from behind. If we can provide a solid CB pairing behind Jones & Bradley, we might eliminate the need for harsh tackles in the defensive third, which will make Howard's job easier. Does Williams have the savvy to slot in between the CB's and CM's to make life easier, more predictable and easier to read for the defensive unit? It takes 9 or 10 players working in synch to play modern defensive soccer. If JJ can play within this unit and not be so much of a free-radical, his influence will be a positive and lasting one.
Jones is a hell of a lot more than an "enforcer." He is a skillfull player with a physical side to his game. Cle Kooiman was an enforcer.
I recognize Jones' skill set is more than simply that of an "enforcer." Its the way in which he seems to calculate the opportunity to make life hard for the referee by play acting through contact he initiated that is sometimes infuriating. I don't mind, among other things, watching him beat someone down the left side on the dribble; causing confusion for the opposition in their PK area one bit.
Excellent post. I wanted to add my two cents to the last bit. The last time I saw Jones play as the #6 for the US was against France in 2011: Beckerman started as the 6, then Jones came on after 65' as the US's first sub. 6 minutes later, at 71', France scored the only goal of the match, and in my opinion Jones was at least partially at fault. His instincts are to move up-field further than a 6, and doesn't hold the position. Thus, he was caught too far up-field from the defense, and left Marvin Martin time to play an (excellent) ball to Loic Remy: Obviously this is just my interpretation; equally it could be said that Bocanegra should have won his challenge, though I have a tough time faulting Goodson for not being as quick as an onrushing Loic Remy. What it says to me is that Jones isn't a great option as a #6 because he lacks positional discipline, and won't shield the defense properly. I also have held out hope for a long time that he could do it, but given Klinsmann doesn't seem to have tried Jones there since this goal, I'm inclined to think it won't happen.
There isn't any job description for "the #6". Let's agree that Jones isn't a natural shield for the CBs.
In a two man midfield in the US setup Jones would simply play the more attacking role. Any number of players---Beckerman, Bradley, Williams---could man the deep role. Klinsmann has at times used him as a winger, e.g., at Guatemala and at Russia(2nd half)--to mixed effect. In the end he isn't a great fit for the US despite his pedigree, but he'll no doubt continue to get minutes, so hopefully he gels with the team.
It's not unusual to reduce the "midfield" to the central players these days. One of Jogi Löw's tactical standard phrases is "I will always play with 3 midfielders with certain offensive and defensive qualities"; and most analysts call his system a 4-2-3-1. The wingers/outside forwards/whateveryoucallthem are regarded different from the core of the midfield.
I think Jones is an incredible player and am very happy he is ours. I feel that anyone who has seen him play a few games or more for Schalke would agree. With his club he is always involved in the action, roaming all over the field and making dynamic plays defensively and offensively. I think the positives from him being a bit of a hard man far outweigh the potential negatives of picking up some cards. On the other hand, I completely understand the tepid response from US fans thus far, he has not looked the same player for country that he does for club, outside of brief glimpses, like the amazing Panama pass. I am not sure whether it is gelling with MB, or the team in general, tactical problems or whatever else, but I refuse to believe that the central midfield can't accommodate two tremendous players like Jones and MB, who are head and shoulders better than any other options we have right now imo.
Maybe it just can't accommodate these two players only, without a third central offensive/defensive/whatever midfielder.
I think we have come pretty close to making the case that it will take more than a whatever midfielder. If we consider dwilliaims that whatever mid. I thought it was awesomeness against Russia. WOW, talk about defensive confusion Jozy altidore was tracking back and our btb midfielder is going down into the corner to send in crosses.