The Bradley to Klinsmann transition is complete. (r)

Their club forms have certainly improved. Does it seem like Klinsmann is more outwardly focused on players succeeding with their clubs?

Are people REALLY trying to down play this scotland result?

Take it for what it is worth.... but beathing ANY team 5-1 let alone a team from europe with a decent history.... I think is pretty damn good. So what if it was more of a 'B' team.....

I will admit, Brasil will be more of a test. I am hoping we can pull a positive result...

Michael Bradley is a box to box midfielder. He can do it all. I repeat he can do it all. 6 role...8 role....76 role doesn't matter where you put him the dude can ball

Eh? Should he mostly rely on the brief appearances at USMNT camps?

How does Boyd start...?

I'll play. He was a world class forward who now thinks he has the ability to recognize the qualities necessary to be one. Maybe his arrogance has deluded him?

Yes, he has an ideology on soccer management that is different from Bob Bradley, as he's told us constantly, as we've seen on the field, and has numerous minds around these parts have constantly laid out. Why is that what you're upset about?

Glad to hear you were such a fan of my signature that you remember it almost a year later. All credit to cleansheetbsc.

Yes.

One of the things I liked about our previous manager was his lack of interest in media games.

Klinsmann said a lot of disingenuous, self-serving stuff early in his tenure that (combined with the poor early results on the field) continues to make me question his character. Other people had different reactions to that stuff, free country.

It's only recently that "what he does" has been good enough for for these arguments to even happen. Until he's turned it around in the last few games, "what he does" was central to my and others' unfavorable opinions of Klinsi. Now that "what he does" has gotten much better (though Brazil on Wednesday could change that track) , negative opinions of him have been appropriately tempered. I don't see what you're so upset about.

I think there's a little more complication to playing the number 6 or d-mid role than this discussion has covered. Sam Hamwich was getting at it in some of his last posts, though. The point being that it's a lot different to play d-mid by yourself than it is to play d-mid alongside another d-mid. We call them d-mids in both situations, but the skill-sets required are significantly different. Edu is better than Bradley as a sole d-mid. In a formation with a sole d-mid, Bradley is better used in a more advanced role. However, in games in which the team is playing very compact, as tends to happen against high-level opponents like Italy, Bradley finds himself in a deeper role and can be effective as one of two d-mids. When the space is constricted, d-mids don't have to be as fast and rangy. Opposing players have to get close to them. Also, in that situation, it's much better if one (or even both) of the d-mids has the technical skill and passing ability to start counterattacks and spells of possession, rather than just to have two pure ballwinners. But don't confuse Bradley's ability to win the ball when the space is constricted with Edu's ability to win the ball when play is more open.

Beckerman really is a third center back when he plays d-mid, and I agree more or less than he is a placeholder/reserve and hope to see development from Danny Williams.

Sorry, not relevant in my case. I never criticized BB, Bruce, Steve, or Bora. I watched what they did, and tried very hard to understand why they were doing what they did. Sometimes I came to the conclusion that their choices weren't optimal, but I never deluded myself into thinking my perspective was better than theirs. And I certainly never "questioned their character." You, on the other hand, don't even let the hand play out before you spit on the floor.

I doubt it is, truthfully (although I do think the opposition made us look better than we are). The big difference is I think the style of play that JK is clearly emphasizing - the short pass to safety, the immediate off the ball movement, fast, methodical not frantic counters and breakouts, is likely to be a much more repeatable style than we had under Sampson. Jurgen could always lose the lockeroom too, I suppose, but his soccer pedigree likely gives him a bit more rope in that department - although I don't doubt that Jones could turn on the Pope himself in the right circumstances.

Would be awesome if people hell-bent on unearthing their hatchets to re-hash old Bradley threads would leave.

Good post and good points. I think we have 4 guys who can do a decent job being a sole #6: Edu (best pure ball-winner, best range, best in the air, stays home well); Jones (second best ball winner, second best range, a little reckless, usually a good passer, can sometimes get too far forward); Bradley (best passer of the bunch, best motor, can get too far forward and out of shape a bit, much like Jones); and Beckerman (not as good as range or motor as the others, but will stay home, and is good in close spaces). When Holden is healthy, he's a possibility as a dual CM/DM, but I don't think as a pure #6, or not against big, physical teams. Danny Williams is certainly a possibility, but JK seems inexplicable tied to the idea of him at RM.

Well, to be fair, the title of this thread pretty much begs for contrasting and comparing the two coaches. Hard to talk about where 'A' ends and 'B' begins without talking about the natures of 'A' and 'B'.

Williams is definitely a possibility. One of the great shocks of the Klinsmann era to me, at least since November when it became a possibility, has been Klinsmann not trying a Williams-Jones pairing at CM.

I feel Williams is slightly undervalued on this forum, since he's been played out of position in matches where the formations worked out more conventionally than Slovenia and Scotland. On the other hand, I'm sure Klinsmann has understood that he's given Williams difficult tasks and will give him a chance in a more natural position in the future.

Simple. This is Williams' 2nd full year in the BL1. In 2010-2011 he played mostly RB and some LB for Freiburg. He won a BL1 weekly best XI for Freiburg at RB! In 2011-2012 he moves to Hoffenheim and they convert him to a CM but he has also played CB, RB, and LM/RM in a 4-3-3.

He is a young player and we don't know yet what his best position will be. I would not be surprised if he ends up at RB! Remember Timmy Chandler was a forward until he went to Nurnburg in 2010-2011 then they converted him to RB.

At this point in time based on this year's Hoffenheim matches, IMO Williams overall is behind our big 3/4 at CM.

Yeah, well, maybe. I watched him all year at Hoffenheim, and as I said earlier in this thread, I'm penciling him in to the dedicated DM slot for '14, provided he plays first team ball the next two years. He doesn't seem inclined to go forward. I might be wrong, but his preference seems to be stopping attacks rather than participating in them.

No he wasn't he was developed as a RM.

I'll just use friendlies, because real games are a different animal. But A Team friendlies.

This one wasn't bad. A few missed sitters away from being 5-1.



This one was decisive, away to Poland.



And, I know this was a loss, but I remember it as a good performance.



Obviously, I'm defending my brother and take objection with some of the rumor and innuendo mentioned in the initial post here. In his five years, he treated different friendlies with different plans, evaluated a lot of players, etc. Bob's record with his A Team was pretty damn good, not only in friendlies but in real competitions.

If you read my post they clearly call for Bradley at a role further up and not as dmid as it wastes his potential. To put it terms most of the dogmatic element can understand, after you finish building the statue for him in honor of his play as dmid, go ahead and start in on a second one for his play as CM.

The Bradley bullies are always around. You cannot mention his play without people circling wagons. I don't get it exactly, must every word on him as a *player* be completely uncritical? Must all commentary of Bob Bradley *coaching* gloss over his mistakes? What is the purpose of having analysis if the focus must always be narrow and flattering? As Michael played virtually every important game for his father for the last 5 years and Bob was the coach, how can you avoid mentioning his role and how he was coached?

And vice versa. Trust me. I await Michael's next clunker game and the reaction it will elicit. It was only a year ago that the "transition" was all about moving on without Michael on the field at all. Maybe that's how it will play out in the run-up to 2014. But for now, it seems the "important" results under Jurgen (Slovenia, Italy, Scotland) have a common denominator. And hell yeah I'm biased.

Boca and his gun show right?

Hi, I thought I'd quote Susaeta's initial thoughtful post again, imho a 'fair and balanced' (but not in a Fox(y) way) initiation of this thread. My own observation is that the mid-cycle insertion of Klinsmann was of course disruptive, and a tad traumatic, which also explains some of the lingering defensiveness and bitterness on the part of those who did not wish for a transition. Which is perfectly understandable. And Jeff's 100% right, his brother's winning percentage was quite good.

My only surprise is not at the poor results of Klinsmann's initial tenure in 2011, but that Klinsmann righted the ship this quickly. Klinsmann on the fly taught the player pool what he expected in the first x months, and learned what he could and could not do with that pool. I was expecting more abysmal results right up to the start of qualifying, before I went out on a limb and forecast us to blast some CONACAF minnows like Antigua. USMNT is on a 5 game winning streak right? That includes a win in Italy. Ok if Brazil blows us out Wednesday we can all change sides again, but I don;t expect that to happen.

And while lots of folks have been saying 'it was only Scotland' - Scotland while not a UEFA Cup qualifier, also does not tend to get blown out by the European big dogs, or Brazil, like the USMNT just did. Going up against Brazil may be a truer test of the quality of the current squad and the effectiveness of Klinsmann tactics, but honestly I will be surprised if Brazil can overwhelm the USMNT midfield as it is now structured, as Brazil often does against - pretty much any opponent.

Finally....if we can all forget about 2011 like it was a bad dream, as the end of the BB era was not as glorious as earlier phases, and the start of the Klinsmann era with its series of defeats was far from glorious.....then we can say thanks for the memories for BB and his friends, and brother, and move on to look at what Klinsmann is doing to build upon the foundation, and spine, of the national team BB built. Which of course, clearly for the next x years, has a prominent place for MB. How's that for being fair and balanced? : )

History is full of friendlies where one team doesn't turn up and teams look like world-beaters. Whether this is one or not, who knows. I think the type of pressure the USMNT applied is particularly effective against unmotivated opponents.

When JK gets a performance as good as the first half of the Confed Cup against a quality team like Brazil in a match that means something to both sides, then I will be excited that JK has taken us to a new level. Until then, an encouraging start that will hopefully lead to more.

This may be hard to believe but I am completely disinterested in clunker games or comments. I am interested in learning from mistakes. My definition of stupidity is not learning from mistakes. Playing MB as a sole #6 is a mistake given his talent, the other players on the team and his shortcomings.

With Michael it seems there is no opportunity to grow and learn with the player as people are far too sensitive about the topic. And virtually no one wanted to move on without Michael we just wanted to focus of the team to be on learning to be a better team.

JK has been pretty consistent about allowing players to sort their professional careers before bringing them into the mix. His final months with MG and move to Chievo coincides with his rather short stint away from the USMNT. As JK mentioned, every position is open for competition. I might be the only one who thinks as a pure #6 playing in front of the CB's I would bench him for other options. Does that mean I hate him, think he is talentless, has no value, etc? No, I just dont rate him as a stay at home dmid above others.

Agreed, it wasn't just that it was Scotland--it was Scotland starting their vacation with a trip to Florida.

The new level in a meaningful match against a high level team will be more apparent in changing the second half CC performance. But we don't get the opportunity to play that game for 2 more years. So I think we'll get an idea of our new level in comparing our qualification games to previous years.