Parkhurst as a full-back option

One great play doesn't make up for the fact he was a clear weak link in the back four.

 

I like his experience in Europe playing some CL teams, as well as his ability to play both flanks. DMB is pretty one dimensional, so it may come down to the two of them for the LB spot on the field, but I think both make the final 23 at the expense of Castillo. His versatility is pretty well timed. Who knew he could play LB? And, who predicted he would do as well as he did against Mexico? I know he wasn't a revelation, or make anyone think of Leighton Baines, but he played solidly. I think that put him on the plane.

 

I used to think that as well, but with Dreds doing as well and playing with as much teeth as he did the other night (1st Meskin goal aside), I think we can keep GCam where he plays for Stoke and keep the central midfield pair as is. I like the idea of Dreds and MB, with flank attackers Zusi and Bedoya, with Demps underneath Aron or Jozy (my bent would be the former). Against Ghana I would think the central mids would be flatter across the middle and shading back to provide cover, staying at home more than pushing forward.

 

He is a damn good soccer player. I would take him ahead of Beaz or Castillo in a heart-beat. Can anyone remember a bad touch or bad judgement?

 

The one I can think of came just after he bombed out of the back, using a header to beat the FMF wing to the ball, setting himself off down the left flank. It could have been a great counter attack but his cross to center went by Dempsey and nothing came of the promise other than an FMF throw in. I do believe though he was expecting a more decisive run to that space in the center by Dempsey (ha!) and another runner to fill the space unguarded on the right, switching the point of attack as the defenders came at him and Wondolowski to his side.

 

ive never been a big fan, but against mexico was the first time i felt he had a really good game and didnt take away any negatives. based on only that match i feel comfortable with him as a backup. then again, bornstein probably had at least one game i didnt hate him in, so who knows?
at fullback i would have cameron/chandler and johnson/beasley. say parkhurst gets the bulk of the next three friendlies and has comparable performances? id put him ahead of beasley.
but we have the reality of klinsmann- jones is going to play every minute, johnson is going to play lm, lichaj never got a chance etc. i would take bornstein over castillo (and again- i really hate bornstein), and with chandler less than reliable (to, you know, show up) i guess i can get behind cameron/yedlin and beasley/parkhurst. worst case being evans and castillo in two of those spots.
anyways, good game for parkhurst.

 

You commented on Parkhurst's offensive presence and then said Beltran was useless. What Beltran offers on defense isn't close to World Cup quality, but useless just isn't true. His LWB had to stay honest for a decent chunk of that game and he directly contributed to a goal. That's a decent offensive performance from a FB. I still don't think he's anywhere near the starting lineup, but just calling it how I see it.

 

If I remember correctly, around the 10th minute he had a bad giveaway on a short pass that luckily Mexico wasn't able to counter on. I attribute that to nervous jitters more than anything though. That's really the only time I remember seeing him make a mistake. He looked comfortable playing out of the back as well.

 

Who's going to ask Berhalter not to jam us up before the World Cup? Scotty, can we count on you?

 

Me too. Apart from the Donovan cut, I think this is the next-most noteworthy.

 

Understand the Donovan decision, do not understand choosing Beasley over Parkhurst .

 

This seems like a good time to get in a dissenting opinion about Parkhurst. Parkhurst is slow and struggles against athletic attackers. He doesn't fit 4-4-2 diamond because he isn't good enough going forward. Parkhurst is a good player, but Bigsoccer has overrated him for a long time and has a penchant for zeroing in on the weaknesses of most players, but rarely remembers Parkhurst's mistakes and deficiencies.

 

Sure, there is not a player in the pool without their warts but no player gets a bigger grade on a curve than Damarcus Beasley.

 

It's always a good time for those on Big Soccer, right?

But anyway: I think you overstate the case that posters like me were making for his inclusion in the 23. I never saw him as a planned starter, but as a utility guy at spot #19 or #20 just in case injuries and cards pile up along the back.

 

Just wasn't good enough at the end of the day. Was the right call by Klinsmann.

 

Maybe. I think it was clear that Parkhurst wasn't good enough. He had previously failed at the highest level. Boyd is playing a low level, so I think we will have to see him move to a bigger club first before labeling that he isn't good enough for the highest level.