4-5-1 Formation of the Future Redux

[Bob Morocco]

The reason GAM had limited opportunities last night was the supporting cast because with Ralston, Mathis, Noonan, and Albright on the field Colombia was able to shut down GAM without being eviscerated by the 3 midfielders directly behind him and Dempsey running from deep. If we fielded this A lineup:

---------HotHand---------
-Dolo--Pope--Gibbs--Boca-
----------Mastro----------
--Gaven-Dempsey-Beasley-
---------Donovan---------
---------Johnson----------


I have little doubt that a ChivasUSA like route would have ensued. Reports have GAM being disconected from the midfield and getting triple teamed whenever he got the ball, the buildup to Noonan's goal shows this. There is no way a team can triple team GAM when he could just first time it to an open Donovan who then sends it to a streaking unmarked Gaven/Dempsey/Beasley/Dolo. And if you don't triple team GAM we know what happens. This isn't a lineup to go up against Mexico today with, this is for maybe a friendly and an opponent in 2006 that it would work against and then in 2010 with Freddy, Spector, and Szetela pushing for spots.

[lmorin]

And, you know what? If Johnson is persistently triple-teamed every game, as in the last, we win every game by 2-3 goals. He may never touch the ball in a game, but the midfielders sure will make up for it with many more opportunities.

[FirstStar]

I have to say that it looks like we did a pretty decent job making Colombia pay for it's triple-teaming. 3-0 is a good result.

Still, our first-teamers would have netted many more. I promise you, though, that GAM will never draw a triple-team in a match with LD and DMB on the field.

[swedust]

As far as the 4-5-1, see AC Milan's "Christmas Tree" alignment, 4-3-2-1, which worked so well against Man U in the Champion's League. Now I know our players are different than Milan's, but the reason this works for them is their versatile type midfielders who aren't afraid to mix it up. Of course, having Shevchenko or Crespo as your lone striker makes it tempting as well.

Regardless, I think we have a number of players with some versatile skills (that include some willingness to defend) that could make this work: Gaven, Dempsy, Szetela, Spector, even Mathis. Add in our lack of a pure #10, our ability to get successful wing play from DMB, Lewis (and evidently Ralston in some situations...?), plus Bruce's preference to have the outside defenders contribute up the wings, and I really see this formation as viable given our strengths and weaknesses.


Dolo/Albright ---- Pope ------ Boca --- Gibbs (Spector?)

Gaven/Mathis/Szetela -- Maestro/KZ -- Dempsey/Lewis (Spector?)

-----Donovan (Mathis if no LD) ------ Beasley (Lewis if no DMB)-----

------ GAM/McBride (different styles but either work here)------

[JohnR]

How does one get width (or defend against width, for that matter), in the Christmas Tree formation?

[cpwilson80]

As far as the 4-5-1, see AC Milan's "Christmas Tree" alignment, 4-3-2-1, which worked so well against Man U in the Champion's League. Now I know our players are different than Milan's, but the reason this works for them is their versatile type midfielders who aren't afraid to mix it up. Of course, having Shevchenko or Crespo as your lone striker makes it tempting as well.



Milan only played the Christmas tree against Man U though -- when Sheva and Crespo are healthy, they revert back to a diamond 4-4-2.

The main reason Milan won was their mastery of possession -- Pirlo, Seedorf, Rui Costa and Kaka are all incredibly confident with the ball at their feet.

The reason I think we would play with a 3-5-2 before 4-5-1 is that the formation plays more to our strengths -- pressure the fullbacks and utilize quick-strike attacks.

Against T&T, we often looked more like a 3-5-2 than a 4-4-2 because of the space Cherundolo had on the outside. This may be a matter of semantics, but I think Donovan and Beasley can provide defensive help from an attacking position moreso than others, so why not have them play further up the field?

[cpwilson80]

How does one get width (or defend against width, for that matter), in the Christmas Tree formation?

Milan did it with Cafu and Maldini -- not only did they attack well, but they contained Ronaldo and Giggs. I don't think we have that luxury.

[superdave]

Milan did it with Cafu and Maldini -- not only did they attack well, but they contained Ronaldo and Giggs. I don't think we have that luxury.
Well, we won't be facing Ronaldo and Giggs, either. In this formation, we could play a very defensive minded left fullback like Gibbs, with Boca and Pope in the middle, and someone like Gooch on the right. Or, play Cherundolo out there, and have the DMs shade that way, with Steve having more license to get forward than Gibbs.

[appoo]

Well, we won't be facing Ronaldo and Giggs, either. In this formation, we could play a very defensive minded left fullback like Gibbs, with Boca and Pope in the middle, and someone like Gooch on the right. Or, play Cherundolo out there, and have the DMs shade that way, with Steve having more license to get forward than Gibbs.

I wonder if Steve can play on the left. I'd bet Mullan would be a fanatastic RB for USA

[Adam Zebrowski]

I'd rather go 3-5-2

pope bocanegra and gibbs in the back...

cherundolo and beasley as wingbacks...

mastroeni and dempsey as d-mid types, with dempsey venturing forward

donovan as amid

johnson and target guy du jour...mcbride noonan ching casey...someone any one...

[BigKris]

I like the 3-5-2 as well. I know Arena likes to have his outside backs get forward, but man if there's any one position where we still suffer from a lack of legitimate talent (and depth) its the outside backs. If we can substitute with midfielders instead (especially MFs who are good defenders like Mastro, KZ, Dempsey, and DMB) I think we're putting more talent on the field.

[lmorin]

How does one get width (or defend against width, for that matter), in the Christmas Tree formation?
It's not about the "formation," it's about the players. If Milan plays with 3 nominal defending midfielders who never push into the attack, it becomes very hard to score against them (effectively 7 defenders), but by the same token, they will also find it difficult to score. If we (or Milan) have players like Dempsey who can operate out of fairly deep positions and still get into attack, then we create scoring opportunity from the back while retaining a stronger emphasis on defending (i.e., the 3 guys will be defensive midfield specialists). Versatility of the players becomes increasingly important when adding midfielders. Width is not a particular problem if the players are adept at the transition to and from attacking or defending. The formation is a guideline suggesting, rather imposing, a particular strategy.

[voros]

How does one get width (or defend against width, for that matter), in the Christmas Tree formation?
Fullbacks, mostly (like Cafu as an example). The two A-mids also sweep out wide from time to time. The conceptual difference between that and PSV's 4-3-3 is pretty small.

Because of that, the formation might be a problem because our fullbacks are not generally very strong. Cherundolo is okay enough to get it done, but I have no idea what we'd do at left fullback.

I do think Dempsey in a van Bommel type role might be a good fit. I think if we were going to play both Donovan and Gaven, Gaven would be the better choice closer to goal because Donovan is the better possession player and Gaven is a more aggressive attacker.

I still prefer the two striker setup, myself, it's just a matter of getting the right personnel in the right spots.

Remember AC Milan scored a total of 2 goals in the two legs, one of which was a gift. These overloaded midfields tend to generate lots of possession, but very few breaks and quick strikes. I'd prefer we were ready to hit a team with whatever would work against them: whether that be the possession game or using our speed in a more direct fashion. Yes AC Milan beat Man Utd, but you also saw what Chelsea's counterattack did to Barcelona and they didn't even have their best attacker. Play to your strengths and your opponent's weaknesses, and to have that kind of flexibility, the 4-4-2 is still the best option IMO.

A whole bunch of midfield guys in the above 4-5-1 are perfectly capable of playing that 2nd forward role, so I see no reason not to use the 4-4-2 and let the game dictate whether it morphs into a 5 man midfield attack. If you line up Gaven, Dempsey or Donovan as the 2nd forward, if the situation calls for it they can quite easily drop into the midfield, and they could just as easily be frontrunners trying to get in behind the defense if the situation calls for that.

[swedust]

Agree with above post that opponent/available personnel/scenario dictate how to deploy the team. My X-mas Tree thought was based more on my giddiness that US now have so many options coming out of midfield these days (no more Bliss, Harkes, Jones, Stewart across the middle), plus I've always been fond of the withdrawn striker and have yet to see US develop a true strike tandem (sadly, no more Waldo & Moore). Against an opponent with a powerful ground attack (Holland, Brazil, 2002-version of South Korea), we'd likely need more pure DMs and this versatility would go out the window. Like I said, depth giddiness.

[Sanguine]

As far as the 4-5-1, see AC Milan's "Christmas Tree" alignment, 4-3-2-1, which worked so well against Man U in the Champion's League. Now I know our players are different than Milan's, but the reason this works for them is their versatile type midfielders who aren't afraid to mix it up. Of course, having Shevchenko or Crespo as your lone striker makes it tempting as well.


Dolo/Albright ---- Pope ------ Boca --- Gibbs (Spector?)

Gaven/Mathis/Szetela -- Maestro/KZ -- Dempsey/Lewis (Spector?)

-----Donovan (Mathis if no LD) ------ Beasley (Lewis if no DMB)-----

------ GAM/McBride (different styles but either work here)------

I prefer the 4-2-3-1 to the Christmas Tree for us as our young attacking players mature. Using your personnel, Here's how I'd set up the front 6:


---- Mastro ---- Dempsey
Gaven --- Donovan --- Beasley
---------- Johnson

It's becoming abundantly clear that we're developing a lot of excellent attacking midfielders who aren't quite forwards, aren't quite flank mids, and aren't quite central mids. We'll need to find a way to get these guys on the field together. Adu will fall into this category in a couple years if his development continues on schedule.

I know Johnson says he doesn't prefer to play as the lone forward, but when you're supported by 3 very attack-minded midfielders (who are all sort of pseudo-strikers), it becomes a lot less lonely up front.

This formation provides width in attack more naturally than the Christmas Tree, so we can support it with less offensive-minded Fullbacks since we seem to have an overabundance of them. Having Gaven (who tends to drift centrally more than Beasley) in front of Cherundolo will give Dolo room to get forward and send in crosses.

[lmorin]

....I've always been fond of the withdrawn striker and have yet to see US develop a true strike tandem (sadly, no more Waldo & Moore). ....
That's what I'd like to see, too. Sooner or later....

[cpwilson80]

Agree with above post that opponent/available personnel/scenario dictate how to deploy the team. My X-mas Tree thought was based more on my giddiness that US now have so many options coming out of midfield these days (no more Bliss, Harkes, Jones, Stewart across the middle), plus I've always been fond of the withdrawn striker and have yet to see US develop a true strike tandem (sadly, no more Waldo & Moore). Against an opponent with a powerful ground attack (Holland, Brazil, 2002-version of South Korea), we'd likely need more pure DMs and this versatility would go out the window. Like I said, depth giddiness.

I hear you on the strike tandem -- in addition to their immediate success, it's probably why we were all so enthusiastic when Mathis and Wolff burst on the scene in 2001...it had the makings of a great partnerships.

Hopefully, Johnson cements his place as a starting striker this cycle. That means we just need to find him a partner instead of a a new tandem :)

[bigtimebuck4]

admitadly, I have never played soccer, so maybe this only works well in Winning Eleven, lol, but would a 3-5-2 be suicidal? would three centerbacks and two d-mids not be enough to consistantly fend off attacks??

if its not, you can keep your two strikers up front, allow landon to still play the a-mid like he would in the 4-4-2, and still let beas and whoever (dollo??) play wide. seems like a good idea on paper, but im interested to see what others who know a lil more about this stuff than i do have to say.

[Geneva]

My favorite formation for this team is the 4-4-2 with a box midfield. I think the US is rich in good defensive midfielders, and Dempsey, O'Brien, Clark, Masteoeni (or even Convey or Lewis against the right kind of opponent) can mix it up in the attack too. With LD and Beas in the front of the box, and with a stong attacking left fullback like Cherundolo, the formation has good structure, and strong, versatile attacking possibilities, but doesn't sacrifice defense.

After watching Ed Johnson this week, I don't think he's ready to be the "1" in a 4-5-1. He needs a better touch, better passing ability, and a better ability to get the foul call. I don't like him spending most of the game with his back to the goal.

[Bob Morocco]

My favorite formation for this team is the 4-4-2 with a box midfield. I think the US is rich in good defensive midfielders, and Dempsey, O'Brien, Clark, Masteoeni (or even Convey or Lewis against the right kind of opponent) can mix it up in the attack too. With LD and Beas in the front of the box, and with a stong attacking left fullback like Cherundolo, the formation has good structure, and strong, versatile attacking possibilities, but doesn't sacrifice defense.

After watching Ed Johnson this week, I don't think he's ready to be the "1" in a 4-5-1. He needs a better touch, better passing ability, and a better ability to get the foul call. I don't like him spending most of the game with his back to the goal.

The box is ok now and would be optimal with all our players fit. But in the next cycle we'll have in midfield Landon, Freddy, DMB, Dempsey, Gaven, Philapakos, Clark, Szetela and who pairs GAM? If Gaven continues developing at the pace he is and Freddy turns into a Real/ManU/Chelsea starter at 21 how are we going to fit all this attacking midfield talent on the field at once? To play a real 4-4-2 we need that second forward to emerge and it looks like Buddle is off somewhere in the wilderness, Twellman hasn't claimed a starting spot, Ching is a clear backup at this level, Jemal Johnson has one first team goal under his belt, Kenny Cooper is playing in the English third tier, Rossi is going to choose Italy, Weah Jr. has political considerations, Preston Zimmerman will be too young. If you look at Eto'o for Barcelona and Eddie Johnson you say the two aren't that far off in playing styles. And again we won 3-0 playing a 4-5-1 where Colombia triple teamed GAM but couldn't contain Steve Ralston, imagine if that's Landon and DMB and one of the grown pair of Freddy or Gaven. A 3-5-2 is basically Steve Cherundolo or maybe Marvell Wynne attacking a lot more on the right with the same question mark at forward. If a second forward Develops by 2010 who is better than both Freddy and Gaven then go with a 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 but from the looks of things that is a longshot, but hey who predicted DMB would start in the last world cup (me but I'm a Fire fan).