I disagree that Bradley is mediocre at the international level. IMO he's proven himself to be more talented than any of the other holding mids other than Benny. Edu has an argument for being his equal, but no one else does.
I just listened to Bob's conference call on ussoccer.com about the game. Bob talked repeatedly about the importance of having an experienced core of players who show the younger guys how to act. Reporters also asked a lot of questions about younger players who are more peripheral to the team, such as Charlie Davies and Jose Torres. Michael Bradley is the player who stands out among the core players in that he lacks the experience of playing against Mexico in previous WCQers. No one seems to have the guts to ask Bob what he sees in Michael, why Michael has gotten so much time. Not that I don't like Mike, but I'd love to hear Bob answer that question.
Your point has been debated endlessly. That said the quick version is you have to have some consistency in midfield and while Bradley isn't perfect he was the #1 performer at CM since Reyna/O'brien/Armas retired. He simply played better and more consistently than older Mastro, Feilhaber, Clark, Edu etc. and is only beginning to have any real competition now from Klejestan. Now if Klejestan locks himself in to where he passes Bradley then it's reasonable to ask if Edu would pair better with him than Bradley does. Think of the utter chaos for the US team if one game you paired Edu/Clark in center mid and the next you went with Klejestan/Torres. Then for the third game we go with Adu/Bradley. How would the rest of the team have any cohesion in those situations? In the first the wings would have to do everything themselves offensively and we'd struggle mightily to score any goals. In the second the wings would spend all day on defense and we'd still probably have some holes. In the third you'd probably wind up with Adu way to high up the field, Bradley always having to hang back and you'd be left with a no man's land in the center of the field. Yes all of these problems could be sorted out given sufficient time, however time in camp/games is the most precious resource a national team has. Finally, there is no way in hell I experiment whatsoever against Mexico in a qualifier. Given who Bradley's played in the recent past as well as club status I easily start Klejestan/Bradley. I wouldn't even have to scratch my head on that one.
Bob's been showing him how to act since birth. He's only been showing the others how to act for a couple years.
if his name was Mike Whatsamatta this thread would not exist. Quit being biased against the kid because of his last name
Did I actually read that Michael Bradley would not start in place of Gerrard back on the first page? No sh!t? And who is this Torres we have? The blonde Spanish Striking Genius? He's class. I just hope Carragher plays well tonight alongside Boca, and that Benitez does not make stupid substitutions on the second half. There's always Robbie Fowler though! YNWA USA!!!! ALERT ALERT ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bob's answer "Mike is consistent on the field, whether for his club team or the US. He controls the defensive mid portion of the game such that he allows our other midfielders to attack often. When Mike first started playing for the national team, we generally needed another defensive mid with him however his game has now grown to the point where we can start a more offensive guy like Sacha alongside him, even against quality oposition like Mexico. Mike starts in one of the best leagues in the world and has a proven track record of consistent improvement throughout his pro career. He earned a starting job in MLS as a teenager, held onto it after a coaching change, was bought by an Eridevise team, worked his way up from reserves to become one of the leagues leading scorers, bought by a Bundesliga team and worked his way from the bench to a starting position. Given his obvious athletic talent, history of improvement and consistent time on the pitch it is obvious to myself and my staff that he has the capability to be one of our midfielders for 2010 and beyond." Other than Donovan, Dempsey, Boca, Gooch, Howard I couldn't write anything like that for the rest of our starters. After Mike it becomes a much tougher job to say why a certain player deserves a start. Klejestan and Beasley I could get there by ignoring some weaknesses. Ching, Pearce/Bornstein, and Hejduk/Wynne would be much tougher to write.
Well, in order to make it "not" circular, just take out everyone's USMNT appearances and only consider club soccer. Who are they guys that are in form and consistently play club soccer against a high level opposition?
Many people disagree on this point. Edu in particular always looked better, particularly on offense. Agree though that this is no time for experimenting.
The whole point of that post was that this is the exact opposite of the way we should do it. Adu is an example of someone who has played at a much higher level than Bradley internationally, but is struggling to find the same success for a club. International is a separate level. Club success doesn't translate. Match fitness is a real factor though, so there is that.
Edu's recent Nat appearances have been horrendous. And aside from a single pass to Cherundolo (v. South Africa I believe) he has added little to nothing to the offense. I like Edu but to say he has always looked better is inaccurate. That said, I will again repeat what the more sane posters on this thread have already stated: If Michael Bradley didn't have the coach's son stigma this tired argument wouldn't exist.
That's because he wouldn't be a lock to start, right? This is almost as pointless a thread as any of 10,000 on Claudio Reyna. Because the time in which actual opinions were shared passed long ago and its just the same tired arguments being shouted in the general direction of other people.
Based on what evidence has Adu "played at a much higher level" internationally? Adu, a second striker or attacking mid has scored 1 goal in 12 Caps. Bradley, a defensive mid or 2-way mid has scored 3 goals in 25 Caps. Sam's Army ratings give Adu an average of 5.8 out of 10 maximum. Bradley has an average of 5.0 out of 10. I just don't see how anyone can say that either of these two very young players has been superior to the other internationally. Bradley's advantages are that he plays a position undergoing a major transition for the US, where nobody has performed consistently well internationally. But Bradley has the clearly superior club career to his positional rivals. Adu's disadvantage is that his best position is second-striker-withdrawn-forward-free-attacking-mid, the same position as Landon Donovan, the best US player today, and arguably the best ever. Adu's second disadvantage is that his club career has been a struggle so far and he has hardly started a competitive League game in close to 2 years.
All right, here it is, ignoring the fact that this has been discussed here ad nauseam many times before. 1) Has any other US CM scored 19 goals in a season, in any league? 2) Has any other US CM scored 190 goals in a season, in a European league, or foreign league as prestigious as the Eredivisie? 3) Is any other US CM starting in a top 4 Euro League? The answer to all 3 is no. And that's why he is starting. And if you'd think about it for a second, you'd probably realize those are all pretty good indicators of a good player. He's proven far more than Torres at this point, or Kljestan, and at a higher level. Though I'd think either of those players would be more likely to pair with Bradley rather than take his spot. His real competition on this roster is Clark. Pablo is suspended and Edu is coming off an injury and hasn't been playing as much (and Scotland is inferior to Germany anyway). And if you are worried about Bradley fouling, well, he's a CM, they foul people, that's part of their job. But I've never seen him do anything as boneheaded as kicking someone in the head while they are lying on the ground (Clark) or getting sent off in the first half of a WC game where we had a man advantage (Pablo).
It's funny that having the opinion that Bradley's play has been mediocre so far is either borderline insanity or dishonesty. And that this is so true that it bears repeating. C'mon. Replace the coach and watch his detractors swoon over Mike. Sure.
I know we love to get statistical, but we don't have the detailed, relevant statistics to compare their abilities to win or save games at the highest level. Adu has shown over and over again that he can break a game at the highest level with his dribbling, passes, free kicks, or finishing. Even at Monaco he gets a minute against Juventus and embarrasses them for a penalty. Mike has shown very little except determination, IMO. If he repeats his famous performance against Brazil, we will get the same result. Obviously regular club playing time makes a difference in match fitness and sharpness for must win games.
Spot on brother. This was the tactic from the beginning. It's the old "Stay the course" strategy! Now that he has far more experience he deserves the position. The years leading up we heard " give him a chance, he's young, WORK ETHIC" and now its " he has the most experience". LOL!!!
If Pablo wasn't suspended would Bradley be guaranteed a spot? In all likelihood, yes. Cautious Bradley would have no problem sending Mike & Pablo out to screen the back line. Certainly Pablo's role this cycle is different than years past but Pablo is sure to make the XI in >3 qualifiers.
You are kidding right? Have you forgotten how Mexico sliced through our midfield like butter last year? Your destroyer was beaten and abused all night but the victory made it irrelevant. Oh and when we finally get a new coach MB's jersey will immediately be confiscated.
If (and it's a big IF) you accept those ratings as an accurate representation, do either deserve to be a 90 minute lock while the other is not included in the team?
Of course, Bob has played Mexico four times. And has NEVER LOST. Criticize if you must.......... Which midfielder has played in every match against Mexico in the Bob era? (Hint: It's not Michael)
Borussia Mönchengladbach SUCKS!!! THEY REALLY REALLY SUCK!!! How in any logical way could this attribute to 90 minutes every game?
being a regular starter in europe for a few seasons means some one thinks well of him... i do recollect for 2006 wc camp, MB was brought in just as training fodder, reyna got hurt in a match, and MB showed very well... people might complain about how BB uses MB, but if you're saying the kid can't play, there are two euro clubs who beg to differ... for me, it's bradley, edu and szetela going into the future, with clark being an immediate option...personally, i say more on beyond mastroeni, because rthe more he plays, the more he prevents the development of an other guy... mastro can be an emergency guy, but only on last resort... on the road against a good squad, say mexico, costa rica, honduras, he might be the right option then...
Borussia Mönchengladbach would beat Houston Dynamo 9 out of 10. Same for Colorado Rapids, Chivas USA and wherever Feilhaber sits these days. Celtic would probably beat BM regularly, but again Edu doesn't actually play for them.