Setting The Tempo

[appoo]

So after watching all these matches for awhile and watching matches from around the world I think I've come to this conclusion. Whoever is succesful in setting their desired tempo will win 90% of the time. So what does this mean for USA? well let's look at some of our recent history.

go back to the portugal match. Portugal isn't an athetic team and they want to play a tepo which allows them to pass it all over the midfield and get our defenders to chase the ball and get out of position and allows them to max out their skill advantage. Unfortunatly for them we were succesful in pushing our desired tempo onto the match. We made it a fast, furiously paced game going back and forth. suddenly, Portugal was trying go 1v1 and simply trying to run past our defenders. Thats our game and thats the reason we won.

Goto the Poland game. Poland jumps out on a 2 - 0 lead and suddenly we're caught up in a slow paced game where we have to build up an attack against a buttoned down defense. We don't want that, we want to attack with speed. Poland wins. They were able to set their tempo upon the match.

Why do I REALLY like our current team? because of the versatility it presents. We are in the unique position of being able too push an opponent where its most vulnerable. Against TNT we were able to slow the match down and methodically destroy them. Agaist Columbia on Wednesday, and Mexico later on you'll see us heighten the tempo of the match and force our opponent into a track meet. Advantage USA.

[appoo]

Now my reasn for starting this thread is that I want to find out what kind of teams Arena should line up for different kind of tempos. Not formations mind you, but what players bring the proper syle of soccer?

[FirstStar]

Agaist Columbia on Wednesday, and Mexico later on you'll see us heighten the tempo of the match and force our opponent into a track meet. Advantage USA.

I counldn't agree more. When we go to Azteca, we should pin back out ears and Run Like Hell.

Play 4-4-2 and put Wolff and GAM up in front of DMB, LD, JOB and Pablo.

[Nutmeg]

Now my reasn for starting this thread is that I want to find out what kind of teams Arena should line up for different kind of tempos. Not formations mind you, but what players bring the proper syle of soccer?

My personal belief is that "tempo" - when it comes to a Bruce Arena coached team - is a synonym for pressure. Particularly pressure applied by the forwards and midfielders. When Arena's teams are playing well, his forwards and midfielders are working tirelessly to dog the other team. That requires nonstop running, good positioning, and good tackling - especially against the dribble.

That's why I think you still see Brian McBride starting up top for Arena. And I think you will continue to see Arena go to McBride until somebody else shows that they'll work as hard as Brian does - particularly on defense. Say what you want, but watch McBride make long hard runs all over the field to pressure defenders and establish the US style of play. Eddie Johnson works just as hard, and because he's a better athlete, he makes it that much tougher for opposing defenders.

So in terms of "tempo" right now, those two guys are your starting forwards.

In the midfield, you have Landon and Beasley who never, ever stop working. We all know about Beasley's defense, but I think Landon is still an underrated defender by most on these boards. Those two partner with the forwards to apply pressure the second the opposition gets the ball. In central midfield, Mastroeni and Zavagnin are also very good at getting to the ball and shutting the opponent down. Zavagnin isn't as physical as Mastroeni, but he's a damn smart player and puts himself in the right positions. Mastroeni is the midfield hard man for Arena.

I wouldn't be surprised if Arena went with those four in a box midfield not unlike the formation we saw in Dallas to establish the US's midfield presence.

I agree with Poo in that the team who takes ownership of the midfield by applying pressure and creating turnovers usually wins the game. I think we have the athletic young horses to cause problems against Mexico and Guatemala. It should be exciting to watch.

[TeamUSA]

Good topic and thread. The idea is on the mark. The team that sets the tempo controls and dictates how things will play. I expect to see a huge counter attack effort on our part to make Mexico run back quickly when pushing guys forward. As Mexico tries to come out with an attack and set the tempo our speed will scare the hell out of them on the counter. Then by doing so it should set the tempo for the US to control.

There is one issue and that is the match being played in Azteca, Mexico's home advantage. Not that this is the end all be all of things. However, the US should come out blazing and they can win in Azteca. The speed of the US will keep the Mexicans on their heels for the first half and based on some light statistics on the Mexican team it should be enough to throw the Mexicans off their game. From this link it shows how many goals they scored, times they scored etc., for both home and away in 2004. http://www.futbolmexicano.net/modules/sections/index.php?op=viewarticle&artid=3
It appears that Mexico tends to score early in the first half and then rest on the score for the win. Make them run more and tire them out (especially with Blanco on the pitch).

It also appears as Marquez might be out or back from an injury too. As Nutmeg said with McBride and Johnson at the top, Donovan and Beasley in the midfield, I would add Frankie Hejduk on the left or right side of defense and there is a lot of speed for the USA.

[sidefootsitter]

... Agaist Columbia on Wednesday, and Mexico later on you'll see us heighten the tempo of the match and force our opponent into a track meet. Advantage USA. Is it possible to wait a few days to see just what Arena has planned? At least until the line-up is announced.

[BigKris]

Good thread. I've been wanting to bring up this topic for a while now.

I have a similar but slightly different idea that I wanted to get others' perspective on: Going back to WC2002, part of the reason we were successful was our versatility -- we started five different lineups, we started LD in three different positions, and we played different tactics each time. I think NOT being locked down to one particular starting eleven or one particular formation ends up being a big advantage for us, in particular in a tournament where teams have little time to prepare for us. This then plays into the tempo/pressue idea, not only because we adapt to exploit our advantages, but also because we set the other team back on their heels as they spend the first few minutes trying to figure out what exactly we're doing.

[Adam Zebrowski]

another aspect of controlling tempo is to take the OTHER team OUT of their desired tempo....

get them playing a game they really don't want to play....

the killing of the game at T&T was such an instance....

I don't believe arena wants to run up and down the field at azteca, but turn the game into a defensive battle, disrupt the mexican possessin game....


arena would prefer a difficult midfield battle, where each side has difficulty running their offense....

I think arena prefers to control the tempo defensively, then pursue offensive chances....

I don't think he'll throw NUMBERS forward, and I suspect a double d-mid approach will clog the center of the pitch....

[cpwilson80]

My personal belief is that "tempo" - when it comes to a Bruce Arena coached team - is a synonym for pressure. Particularly pressure applied by the forwards and midfielders. When Arena's teams are playing well, his forwards and midfielders are working tirelessly to dog the other team. That requires nonstop running, good positioning, and good tackling - especially against the dribble.



This was the key to the domination of Mexico in the friendly last year -- Donovan, Beasley, Wolff, and Casey created two lines of immediate pressure for Mexico's backline. This created numerous turnovers, allowing our players to attack on a short field.

When Mexico did pass around these first two lines, Armas, Kay-Z and Mastroeni (who played more like a stopper than a second center back in the game) did a fantastic job of shutting down the attack.

Donovan and Beasley are two players who will always be in the lineup in the foreseeable future because of their ability to play this role (among other things.)


************

As our tempo aligns with a counter-attacking style (but not the classic bunker and counter), finishing becomes even more important. Why? This style is physically demanding. Go back to the away game with Panama and see what happens when we run out of gas and we haven't yet converted.

That's why Eddie Johnson will have a place in every match -- the man finishes, and works hard off the ball.

The "tempo" point also makes me think of how we must get better at set pieces. Take the Mexico game for example -- we clearly dominated, but squandered what seemed like 20 corner kicks and free kicks around the area. We won a 1-0 game where we CLEARLY outclassed the other team. That's why defenders who, in addition to being strong along the backline, can threaten on set pieces like Eddie Pope and Carlos Bocanegra also have an automatic role on the team.

[Adam Zebrowski]

I don't think arena would risk 90 minutes of pressure...

he'll want some walk it up passive possession at times, with a probing get behind the defense passing....

the big key is he won't push too many NUMBERS forward, but will live off the turnovers created....

[Colo-Colo]

I think Appoo's theory about "setting the tempo = wins" can be a bit of a chicken-or-the-egg debate. Sure, we asserted our tempo on Portugal, and Poland asserted theirs on us, but being down two goals early tends to force a team to play more direct than usual. And being up two goals tends to lead to wins.

I also think Kris makes a good point about how we have shown an ability to play at different tempos depending on the situation. We had a lot of success packing it in against Mexico in Korea, and I would be surprised if we abandoned that to play high-pressure in Mexico City. I feel that speed and fitness are our two primary advantages against Mexico, and I'm sure that they would be happy to watch us use up those advantages by chasing against their possession game until we are worn out in the altitude.

[appoo]

I think Appoo's theory about "setting the tempo = wins" can be a bit of a chicken-or-the-egg debate. Sure, we asserted our tempo on Portugal, and Poland asserted theirs on us, but being down two goals early tends to force a team to play more direct than usual. And being up two goals tends to lead to wins.

I also think Kris makes a good point about how we have shown an ability to play at different tempos depending on the situation. We had a lot of success packing it in against Mexico in Korea, and I would be surprised if we abandoned that to play high-pressure in Mexico City. I feel that speed and fitness are our two primary advantages against Mexico, and I'm sure that they would be happy to watch us use up those advantages by chasing against their possession game until we are worn out in the altitude.

who said anything about chasing them down? Don't pack it in, just hold your ground in the midfield - and I guarentee you Mexico will will try going throuogh you. They play one and only one style of soccer.

[dmike]

Well we know if Mexico gets a early score they will immediately become real defensive team just like their Argentina game or Costa Rica one. Something we NEED to avoid cause once they get into defensive form they are very hard to penetrate. I hope Bruce has a more aggressive scheme cause playing slow/passive/counter-attack style will benefit this current Mexican squad. This is not the WC Mexican team.

[nobody]

I think establishing tempo is very important in a game, but I also think it is a weakness in the current US team, especially when playing against top teams. In particular, where I see the US being weak is in terms of being able to change the tempo midstream, dictaded by the circumstance. A perfect example is the way we seem to be weak when it comes to killing off the game in the late going. We don't seem to be able to slow the tempo and let the game just die off. We either have to keep forcing the issue, or we defend to the death, ending up on our heels.

I would also point out that this may be hand in hand with the way we use multiple lineups and formations rather than a single lineup. We need to put different players out there to play different styles since we have very few players with a complete enough game to play in a variety of modes as the match allows.

So, yeah, establishing tempo is important, and if everything works out perfectly with your notions before the game, setting up to play a specific tempo and executing that tempo is going to work more often than not, but often games ebb and flow and top teams will be working just as hard to establish the pace they would like to use, which often changes throughout the game, dependant on a variety of issues. I hope to someday see the US be able to flow from high pressure offense into a more relaxed possession game, and change things up mid-stream. Right now, I don't think we're particularly adept at doing so.

[Mason16]

A track meet at altitude may not be such a good strategy for us. I think possession is the key to surviving and thriving at Azteca. So hopefully, we'll see BMB start with EJ. Keeping shape, controlling the tempo and maintaining possession will get us a point (or three). THis will probably be the toughest WCQ of the Hex for us. I think we can hang with Mexico and beat them at home or on nuetral grounds. But to run at them in the Azteca is a recipe for disaster. THey have too many skilled players to slice up an exposed defense.

[Adam Zebrowski]

I just see arena wanting to close down the game...

make it painful to watch, but rely on the quick transition offensively...

break up the mexican rhythm is the key....

I could see the game start out this way, then for the final 20-30 minutes open up...

I'd very shocked to see arena approach the game wanting it to be open end to end...

[RUUDVN]

maybe Bruce is a good coach .... some coaches in the world followed his coaching method, i can mention one, the Greece's coach who won the Euro championship recently.

[TAKK]

I just see arena wanting to close down the game...

make it painful to watch, but rely on the quick transition offensively...

break up the mexican rhythm is the key....

I could see the game start out this way, then for the final 20-30 minutes open up...

I'd very shocked to see arena approach the game wanting it to be open end to end...

He will do exactly what you said.

[TAKK]

maybe Bruce is a good coach .... some coaches in the world followed his coaching method, i can mention one, the Greece's coach who won the Euro championship recently.

When did BA develop this method that coaches like Rehagel follow? Wow, didn't know a guy like him followed the US Nats.

If you knew anything abut Rehagel you would also know that if he had the horses like we do, and a clear advantage like we do in this region, he certainly wouldn't have played like he did.

Like any good coach he did what was best, considering his team and talent, so that they would have a chance. In Azteca it makes all the sesnse in the world for BA to play conservatively.

Against the rest of CONCACRAP there is little excuse to play super ABMOD, rely on 8 30 year olds and guys who can't pass (never could), conservative ball anymore. Use the damn talent. The gap is widening yearly with CONCACRAP.

Mexico - again, like Adam said.

[purojogo]

When did BA develop this method that coaches like Rehagel follow? Wow, didn't know a guy like him followed the US Nats.

If you knew anything abut Rehagel you would also know that if he had the horses like we do, and a clear advantage like we do in this region, he certainly wouldn't have played like he did.

Like any good coach he did what was best, considering his team and talent, so that they would have a chance. In Azteca it makes all the sesnse in the world for BA to play conservatively.

Against the rest of CONCACRAP there is little excuse to play super ABMOD, rely on 8 30 year olds and guys who can't pass (never could), conservative ball anymore. Use the damn talent. The gap is widening yearly with CONCACRAP.

Mexico - again, like Adam said.
Yep, no doubt in my mind either.... And unlike other times, this approach will not elicit much criticism on my part, as it is perfectly understandable in high altitude and contamination (plus the 100 k people.... ) The faster we take out the crowd and their initial enthusiasm for their team, the better ...And this is more easily approached by preventing them from scoring early, by making them (fans and team) lose patience due to frustration......The key will be then, as the game develops, how BA adapts/challenges what Mexico will bring to the table while the game goes on and their coach also switches things.... I hope Arena not to dissapoint on this, but i am honestly 50/50 on this aspect of his abilities....