Open Competition

[Maximum Optimal]

There have been some heated threads here and in other forums (see Yanks Abroad) about Bob Bradley's player choices. I'm interested in having a less heated, more forward looking discussion here about which positions on the national team should be open (as in two or more players rotating as the matches come up) until we reach crunch time in the form of the qualifiers.

I will kick things off with my list of areas where it would be useful to continue experimenting. One reason I think we need to experiment is that we have players in different environments (MLS, European leagues of varying strengths) that make it difficult to form reliable inferences. Only by actually playing them with the senior team will we be able to overcome this situation.

I think there are three positions where Bradley needs to continue to rotate candidates:

1) Left back. The candidates here are Bornstein and Pearce, each bringing a distinct set of strengths and weaknesses. With Pearce being given the start against Brazil, I think Bradley has already taken the first step in setting up a genuine competition. Hopefully, in the upcoming matches against Switzerland and South Africa, each will be given a start.

2) Central mid. Bradley has moved to a system with two deep-lying central mids. I happen to think Benny Feilhaber brings something a bit different than the others and has separated himself from the pack with some of his performances (Mexico in the Gold Cup, Argentina in Copa). Of the deep-lying mids he gives us a bit more flair, vision and offensive spark. So I would play him whenever possible. I think the spot for his partner is pretty open between Michael Bradley, Clark and Mastroeni for now, and maybe some younger players later in the cycle. We all know what Mastroeni brings to the table and he will be 33 come the next WC. So in friendlies such as the next two, I would rotate Clark and MB.

3) Forwards. We need to find which pairings work best. When Ching has been available, the obvious chemistry between him and Donovan has made it logical to go with those two. When he hasn't been around, Bradley has tended to use Dempsey at forward, with different partners and configurations. We need to keep experimenting along those lines to figure out what works best. Obviously, the answer will often depend on form, availability, injuries. But more experimentation for its own sake is needed. I would continue to try different combinations among Ching, Donovan, Dempsey, EJ, and Altidore. Maybe even Adu at withdrawn forward.

Those three areas are the ones where I think a rotation system makes a great deal of sense in the runup to qualifiers. There are a couple other spots where an argument (but not quite as strong a one) can also be made:

A) Central defense. Occasionally break up the Onyewu-Boca pairing to see if things go a bit more smoothly with an organizer type: ie Conrad or Parkhurst.

B) Later in this cycle, we should open up the competition at the left mid spot. I think by WC2010 this will be mainly a question of DMB versus Adu. Very different types of players and we will need some experimentation to see how their strengths and weaknesses work with the rest of the team. Convey and Mapp may also have some say on how things play out there.

[flash1316]

I agree. Just a couple of points.

3. Their should be no favorites at forward. In addition to the names you have -- Cooper, Rolfe, and Noonan should get a complete look at forward. I'd put all three of them ahead of EJ IMO. All three are definetly more talented players. And if we're trying to put talent on the field and win games... Clint Mathis can still play. I don't think Bradley should forget about him b/c the previous coach dropped him. If Josh Wolff is gonna get caps - Cletus is past due. And Davy Arnaud deserves his shot.

The entire defense should be completely open. Period. Who's better Boca, Conrad, or Parkhurst? I think that's a legit question? Gooch is dropping off the map. Demerit, Boswell, Sturgis, E. Robinson all deserve equal chances too. A healthy Gibbs is an automatic starter in my mind. It's detrimental to the team to not look for quality in depth.

Same thing goes for the central midfield. We need a legitimate alternative to Feilhaber. Throwing out two dmids doesnt cut it. Clark is an option. Klejstan and Gravoboy also need to be given shots.

[sidefootsitter]

For the test purposes:

In goal, I want Guzan and Brown.

My left back competition would be between Pearce and Spector.

I would consider bringing in Boswell and Robinson in central defense and leaving Jimmy Conrad as the emergency replacement when the injury list is too long.

At right back, Cherundolo is a presumptive starter but it'd be interesting to see both Spector and Simek there.

In defensive/deep midfield, I'd want to see Spector, Cherundolo (when the other isn't playing at fullback), Clark, Bradley, Feilhaber and Kljestan.

At right wing, I want Wolff, White (Denmark has the winter break), Hill, Arnaud, Mapp, Adu and Alvarez.

At striker, I want Altidore, Ching, Donovan, Dempsey and Davies.

Of the formations, I want the US to experiment with 4-3-3/4-5-1, 4-4-2 Diamond with the strikers split, 4-4-2 Y/4-4-1-1 with the strikers stacked and 3-5-2.

And here's the catch - all these tests have to feature 7 A/A- players with 3 "newbies".

With six subs allowed in friendlies (this has to be written down for Bob), this is entirely doable.

[mcnaulty21]

2) Central mid. Bradley has moved to a system with two deep-lying central mids. I happen to think Benny Feilhaber brings something a bit different than the others and has separated himself from the pack with some of his performances (Mexico in the Gold Cup, Argentina in Copa). Of the deep-lying mids he gives us a bit more flair, vision and offensive spark. So I would play him whenever possible. I think the spot for his partner is pretty open between Michael Bradley, Clark and Mastroeni for now, and maybe some younger players later in the cycle. We all know what Mastroeni brings to the table and he will be 33 come the next WC. So in friendlies such as the next two, I would rotate Clark and MB.

3) Forwards. We need to find which pairings work best. When Ching has been available, the obvious chemistry between him and Donovan has made it logical to go with those two. When he hasn't been around, Bradley has tended to use Dempsey at forward, with different partners and configurations. We need to keep experimenting along those lines to figure out what works best. Obviously, the answer will often depend on form, availability, injuries. But more experimentation for its own sake is needed. I would continue to try different combinations among Ching, Donovan, Dempsey, EJ, and Altidore. Maybe even Adu at withdrawn forward.

B) Later in this cycle, we should open up the competition at the left mid spot. I think by WC2010 this will be mainly a question of DMB versus Adu. Very different types of players and we will need some experimentation to see how their strengths and weaknesses work with the rest of the team. Convey and Mapp may also have some say on how things play out there.>Don't forget about Szetela in the central mid. He looks promising.
>Forward is for sure the most questionable spot. I'm open to all suggestions at this point, but I think that Ching is the best proven option right now (too bad he's pushing 30). Altidore is the obvious heir to McBride, but one forward can't a national team make. Cooper, Smith, Davies, Hill, Zimmerman, Ferrari, Gomez, Rogers, C.Barrett, Rolfe, White, etc (I'm missing some of names, I know). Let them all get a run out. We can't just fall back on 30+ vets like Wolff.
> Adu isn't naturally a left mid, so I don't really want to put him there. Withdrawn forward / attack mid would be where I want to see him.

The entire defense should be completely open. Period. Who's better Boca, Conrad, or Parkhurst? I think that's a legit question? Gooch is dropping off the map. Demerit, Boswell, Sturgis, E. Robinson all deserve equal chances too. A healthy Gibbs is an automatic starter in my mind. It's detrimental to the team to not look for quality in depth.We can' be sure Gibbs will be his old self again. Look at Ben Olsen post ankle injury. He had to become a totally different player. We can only hope that Gibbs retains his pace when he comes back.

In goal, I want Guzan and Brown.

My left back competition would be between Pearce and Spector.

At right back, Cherundolo is a presumptive starter but it'd be interesting to see both Spector and Simek there.

In defensive/deep midfield, I'd want to see Spector, Cherundolo (when the other isn't playing at fullback), Clark, Bradley, Feilhaber and Kljestan.

With six subs allowed in friendlies (this has to be written down for Bob), this is entirely doable.>I don't know if Brown is really needed right now. He's also pushing 29. I know that's not too old for a 'keeper, but with Guzan, Seitz, Westberg, Perkins, Pickens, even Lambo and Perk all lining up for a chance, he's not really worth too much of a look. Sure, bring him in once in a while, but IMO he comes after all the guys I mentioned above (well, Lambo and Perk both need time, so he's ahead of them). Maybe at forward though :)
> Left back worries me, but is Spector suited for the left? I honestly don't know. Pearce looks like he can back up his "best left back" claim, but Bornstein shows promise too. Conrad and Boca also can fill that spot for the time being. I'd rather see Spector push for a spot on the right (Dolo for now, Simek/Spector for the future, with Wynne there as back up) or in the center (paired with Parkhurst? pretty skilled, probably too small).
>Yeah, Bob really needs to use more subs. Pretty simple there.

[olephill2]

One of the biggest personnel issues for Bob Bradley (or whomever is the coach) to sort out before 2010 is where to fit in all of our attackers. When you look at established regulars in the attack like Landon Donovan, DaMarcus Beasley & Clint Dempsey and then operate with the assumption that Benny Feilhaber is a given in central midfield, I wonder where we will find room for Freddy Adu if/when he really begins to hit his stride in the next couple years. Do you play him out on the left wing and sacrifice Beasley's minutes? Do you play him as a withdrawn forward and box out either Landon or Dempsey? Do you rearrange your midfield to go with a diamond set-up and put Adu at CAM? If so, then surely you're too vulnerable defensively, because I don't believe Feilhaber would be effective as a sole CDM. You probably need to insert Bradley/Clark/Mastroeni in this set-up, and then you're looking at removing your best deep-lying playmaker in Feilhaber.

Let's not forget about other skilled attackers like Bobby Convey & Justin Mapp. It's certainly going to be a crowded party in the years to come.

To address some particular positions of open competition, here's what I would like to see, in a nutshell:

1. Rotating Left Backs:
This position is probably our biggest trouble spot, for me. Johnny Bornstein has great fitness, goot foot speed and is pretty effective getting forward, but is he astute enough defensively to do his primary job? Heath Pearce still remains a bit of an unknown quantity to me, so I hope to see more of him. With Steve Cherundolo firmly holding down the RB spot (yes, he's got as much of a lock on his position as anyone when healthy sans Tim Howard), I'd really like to see Jonathan Spector learn how to play LB effectively. Spector is a great talent and seems to be fairly two-footed. If he can learn to make the LB position his baby at the NT level, I'd consider him a shoe-in to start in South Africa. See a bit below for info about the prospect of Cory Gibbs here as well should he ever return to full form & fitness.

Shake-up of Center Backs:
I think Carlos Bocanegra has been pretty good for us in 2007, and he's our de facto captain so dropping him wouldn't seem feasible. But I'd like to see a shake-up. I'd like to see Jay DeMerit get his due. I think DeMerit might be the most intelligent, well-positioned CB in our pool except for maybe Jimmy Conrad. Jay is a late-bloomer and is still young enough that he should theoretically be in his prime in 2010 (at age 30).

I also think Michael Parkhurst is an intriguing prospect who deserves more run-outs. And let's not forget about Conrad, who isn't the sexiest pick anymore because of his age, but to me was one of our top performers at the 2006 World Cup. Conrad plays smart, and we need that quality in a partner for Bocanegra, since Boca is prone to mental lapses where he gets caught out of position.

Onyewu? Of course I'm not done with him, but he hasn't been on his best form for the Nats this year, and I'd just like to explore our unknown quantities a bit more and see if we can't find a better match in the back. Cory Gibbs is the big wild card. If he ever returns to full form and fitness, he is a logical choice at center back OR a potential solution at left back with his speed.

What to do about Right Mid:
Looking at our pool of potential A-teamers, this discussion has to either revolve around Donovan or Dempsey. I personally like Dempsey better in this role and Donovan as the withdrawn striker, but I'm potentially open to either one. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have a lot of proven, quality depth at right mid, so my candidates to fill us out with depth at this position include Justin Mapp if he can make the conversion to the right side, Steve Ralston & Chris Klein (short term--like next 2 years max), Ben Olsen, Jeremiah White, Davy Arnaud, Sal Zizzo & Kamani Hill.

Sorting out our central midfield:
I talked a bit about this earlier, but if you're going to go with a pair of two-way mids, which I think is best, Benny Feilhaber needs to be one of them. Then the remaining pool is as follows:
1) Ricardo Clark
2) Michael Bradley
3) Pablo Mastroeni
4) Maurice Edu
5) Danny Szetela

I think all of these guys will be viable options by 2010, except maybe Pablo because of age considerations. Right now, I think Ricardo is best suited to partner with Feilhaber, and the Gold Cup Final serves as a perfect example of why. He has the defensive capabilities, he's big, he's athletic & covers acres of space, and he can get forward. Bradley may eventually overtake Clark. Edu is a very intriguing & exciting prospect, and Szetela is a wild card, a sleeper for me if you will. For now and for qualifiers for the next two years, Pablo Mastroeni will be a useful guy to have around.

In terms of tactics here, what's the best method? I tend to think the Italian style used in 2006 was best--Gattuso the destroyer and Pirlo the pivot/playmaker. But if we decide to go with the pair of two-way central mids heading into 2010, where do you put Freddy Adu once he comes into his own?

Calling All Strikers:
Jozy Altidore is the big hope, but I want to try not to rush him. For now, I think Ching, Johnson, Twellman, a healthy Cooper, Wolff & Rolfe are the best options. However, it's hard to pair Wolff or Rolfe up top with Donovan or Dempsey because then you lack the target man. Both Josh & Chris need someone big who can hold possession while they make runs. Say what you want about Ching, Johnson & Twellman, but they really are the best we have right now--I'm sorry, but better than Charlie Davies at this point.

Certainly, looking ahead, Altidore, Davies, Johann Smith & Gabriel Ferrari will enter the mix, but I wouldn't say any of them are ready to light the world on fire right now. I do think it's fair to say that when South Africa roles around, we're ultimately only going to be talking about one guy to fill the out-and-out striker role, because whomever is picked will be partnering with a withdrawn Donovan, Dempsey or Adu.

[IndividualEleven]

As a practical matter 'experimentation' will be the norm with much of the pool being unavailable due to scheduling conflicts and the upcoming U-23 qualifiers and tourney.

[Maximum Optimal]

As a practical matter 'experimentation' will be the norm with much of the pool being unavailable due to scheduling conflicts and the upcoming U-23 qualifiers and tourney.

True enough. It might be more constructive to focus on the two upcoming friendlies with Switzerland and SA. I assume just about everyone will be available for those games, with possible exceptions of a couple MLS teams still battling it out for playoff spots for the Switzerland match and the MLS Cup finalists for the SA match. Which spots should be split between which players for those two matches. My short list:

1) Left back: Bornstein and Pearce
2) Central midfield: Clark and Bradley, with Feilhaber given both starts
3) Forward: Chosen from among Ching, Donovan, EJ, Altidore and Dempsey

[IndividualEleven]

hmmm, not sure how BB will play the Switzerland tilt w/re to MLS. But supposing everyone were available I would like to see:

Rotated at striker:

Ching, Dempsey, Altidore.

Guys like Davies need to get minutes with club teams first.

Twellman isn't an international level forward.

EJ doesn't fit BB's system.

Withdrawn forward:

Chris Rolfe, Donovan, Dempsey, Adu

Central midfield(the more creative spot): Kljestan and Feilhaber

Central midfield(the more defensive spot): Clark, Bradley, Mastro

central defense: Parkhurst, Gooch, Boca, Conrad, Spector

left back: Bornstein, Pearce

[CDM76]

I'll throw out a couple of more names (just to stir the pot).

Left Back:Very early to consider seriously but Mike Randolph is developing very nicely for the Galaxy. Good pace, strong body, good skills, adequate defensive positioning, haven't seen his strike and definitely has a ways to go with his crossing. He's a Dec '85. Maybe he can get an invite to Olympic camp.

Midfield:Think Beckerman and Kljestan definitely deserve to stay in the mix. Anybody able to watch Benfica play? Where are they using Adu? He looked awfully good in the withdrawn striker/pushed central mid role with the U20s.

[sidefootsitter]

1) Adu seemed to have played on either wing (he isn't replacing Rui Costa in the middle as of now) but would probably be used in a withdrawn central role with the Nats, which is why I wanted to experiement with both a 4-4-2 Diamond and a 4-4-1-1 Stack.

2) In defense of Brown, 29 is nothing for a GK and the guy is good at dealing with crosses. Current MLS GK's are pretty iffy in that department.

3) It is paramount to experiment with different formations. The "empty bucket" with the high offside trap and slow centerbacks will get the US whacked against serious competition.

[augustus75]

There have been some heated threads here and in other forums (see Yanks Abroad) about Bob Bradley's player choices. I'm interested in having a less heated, more forward looking discussion here about which positions on the national team should be open (as in two or more players rotating as the matches come up) until we reach crunch time in the form of the qualifiers.

I will kick things off with my list of areas where it would be useful to continue experimenting. One reason I think we need to experiment is that we have players in different environments (MLS, European leagues of varying strengths) that make it difficult to form reliable inferences. Only by actually playing them with the senior team will we be able to overcome this situation.

I think there are three positions where Bradley needs to continue to rotate candidates:

1) Left back. The candidates here are Bornstein and Pearce, each bringing a distinct set of strengths and weaknesses. With Pearce being given the start against Brazil, I think Bradley has already taken the first step in setting up a genuine competition. Hopefully, in the upcoming matches against Switzerland and South Africa, each will be given a start.

2) Central mid. Bradley has moved to a system with two deep-lying central mids. I happen to think Benny Feilhaber brings something a bit different than the others and has separated himself from the pack with some of his performances (Mexico in the Gold Cup, Argentina in Copa). Of the deep-lying mids he gives us a bit more flair, vision and offensive spark. So I would play him whenever possible. I think the spot for his partner is pretty open between Michael Bradley, Clark and Mastroeni for now, and maybe some younger players later in the cycle. We all know what Mastroeni brings to the table and he will be 33 come the next WC. So in friendlies such as the next two, I would rotate Clark and MB.

3) Forwards. We need to find which pairings work best. When Ching has been available, the obvious chemistry between him and Donovan has made it logical to go with those two. When he hasn't been around, Bradley has tended to use Dempsey at forward, with different partners and configurations. We need to keep experimenting along those lines to figure out what works best. Obviously, the answer will often depend on form, availability, injuries. But more experimentation for its own sake is needed. I would continue to try different combinations among Ching, Donovan, Dempsey, EJ, and Altidore. Maybe even Adu at withdrawn forward.

Those three areas are the ones where I think a rotation system makes a great deal of sense in the runup to qualifiers. There are a couple other spots where an argument (but not quite as strong a one) can also be made:

A) Central defense. Occasionally break up the Onyewu-Boca pairing to see if things go a bit more smoothly with an organizer type: ie Conrad or Parkhurst.

B) Later in this cycle, we should open up the competition at the left mid spot. I think by WC2010 this will be mainly a question of DMB versus Adu. Very different types of players and we will need some experimentation to see how their strengths and weaknesses work with the rest of the team. Convey and Mapp may also have some say on how things play out there.

I agree with your premise, but especially as to the central mid question, the prospect of giving various guys looks seems all but a pipe dream. If the game is against decent competition, and Mike Bradley is availible, then he will start and play 90 minutes. Clark, Edu, Szetela, (and yes I'd love to see Spector or Cherundolo get a look there though Dolo might be a bit slight of frame for that spot) will continue to languish.

I think you have to give Adu a look at both left mid and a mid/ withdrawn striker. Start the kid off with 20 minutes, but get him some minutes.

If we're settling in with Clint up top, then lets bring in guys to essentially "interview" to be his strike partner, different one each friendly.

In the back, try actually mixing and matching our back line against different opponents. For instance, play a bigger back line when we play bigger teams (like Sweden) so we dont have Dolo trying to mark a man when he comes up to the striker's waist. Give Parkhurst some more time in the middle and see if his thinking/positional work will stand the test on the international level. If so, Gooch is in for a fight for the starting spot (or should be).

[Martin Fischer]

...3) It is paramount to experiment with different formations. The "empty bucket" with the high offside trap and slow centerbacks will get the US whacked against serious competition.

Really, I thought formations were just for the tactically illiterate?

I don't need to experiment to know that the 4-4-2 used by Bradley is superior to the 3-6-1 or the twin towers attacks you have posted here in the past. Thanks for playing.

[Adam Zebrowski]

lloking towards qualifying, that's late spring i believe, we need to look at the schedule, and what it'll take to get ready for wcq...

swiss and south africa...

january, couple home based matches against some one...here's the time some back-ups get their shot...

then fifa dates in feb or march 2008....

you use the A team in those, you're done experimenting, now its chemistry and fine tuning time...

pearce gets used when you want more defense, or the opponent is more physical....

central defense, gooch and bocanegra get used until cards or injury intervene..

picking two of feilhaber/clark/mastroeni/bradley is why BB gets the big bucks...

forward...well ching with donovan OR ching with dempsey...

when USA cliches in the semis, and has MATCHES remaining, then THOSE who haven't played get their time....

adu, altidore...the back-up mids, the back-up central defenders....PT for them then...

same rule applies in the hex....

[Nutmeg]

I'm interested in having a less heated, more forward looking discussion here about which positions on the national team should be open (as in two or more players rotating as the matches come up) until we reach crunch time in the form of the qualifiers.

I think I'd back off the premise here a little bit and ask what is maybe a couple of preceding questions: Do the positions as they are currently spelled out in Bradley's system always make sense? Does it even make sense to have "a system" that you plug different parts into - but each of those parts has a set role to play?

The answer to both questions in my mind is no. I do not like the systematic approach BradWak is taking. We are not flexible enough and do not adjust our system and style based on the opponent.

Some things about the system I would like to see changed:

- Two forwards: Tough to sell to me when we don't even have one that's proven.

- Two (and sometimes three) deep midfielders: Appropriate at times, overkill at others.

- No central playmaker: Understand the concept of not running everything through one player, but it would be great to have a more creative force in the middle.

But, going back to the premise, where do I think competition needs to open up?

- Forward: Jozy needs to be given a look. Dempsey is looking more and more like a solid option.

- Attacking Midfield: Adu is going to be knocking more prevalently on the door in 6-8 months time. Will Bradley (and more importantly, Nowak) be receptive to the unpredictability he brings? Beasley and Donovan are key to this team, and I don't see a huge need to groom people to replace them, but probably need to invest some time on backups for the "just in case" scenarios that we all know will pop up along the way.

But I want to see the system be flexible enough for Adu, Donovan, and Beasley to all be on the field at the same time.

- Defensive Midfield: I'm fine with who is in the mix. Benny is the frontrunner, but I'd like to see Edu groomed and added to the mix. I strongly disagree that Bradley is ahead of other options, including Clark and Mastroeni.

- Outside Defense: Keep working Bornstein and Pearce on the left. Either look like solid options. Cherundolo is doing well on the right, and I am probably in a small minority that is very comfortable with Hejduk playing a role as long as he's physically able to.

- Central Defense: I hate, hate, hate the Gooch and Boca pairing. No problems with one or the other, but I want either one of them paired with a more cerebral partner, like Conrad or Parkhurst.

- Goalkeeper: Play Howard. Nuff said.

[Maximum Optimal]

I think I'd back off the premise here a little bit and ask what is maybe a couple of preceding questions: Do the positions as they are currently spelled out in Bradley's system always make sense? Does it even make sense to have "a system" that you plug different parts into - but each of those parts has a set role to play?

The answer to both questions in my mind is no. I do not like the systematic approach BradWak is taking. We are not flexible enough and do not adjust our system and style based on the opponent.

Some things about the system I would like to see changed:

- Two forwards: Tough to sell to me when we don't even have one that's proven.

- Two (and sometimes three) deep midfielders: Appropriate at times, overkill at others.

- No central playmaker: Understand the concept of not running everything through one player, but it would be great to have a more creative force in the middle.



These are good questions. In terms of whether we need to tinker with the system or not, I think it is good to be unpredictable from game to game on offense. Defensively, I think it is more important to be well drilled in a basic approach that doesn't change much from game to game. Experimenting with formations/approach on defense is a recipe for breakdowns and confusion. So on defense I would stick with the basic approach of four in the back and two deep-lying mids (one of whom needs to be skillful and a good passer a la Feilhaber).

Where I would want to vary things tactically is with respect to the front-running four. Some games we can go with two forwards and two attacking mids. Going further, the way the attacking mids play--wide or centrally--can be varied from game to game or even within a game. I think as part of the toolkit we should sometimes play with 1 forward, 1 attacking mid (or alternatively withdrawn forward, there is a not entirely semantic distinction here), and two wide players who mainly attack. We have been playing the latter a bit lately.

I do feel within these systems, at least one of the forwards needs to have above average speed. This is something Bradley has gone away from lately by playing Donovan wide and keeping EJ on the bench. I think it is a mistake not to have one of those two playing forward, although Donovan can be used more flexibly as an attacking mid or withdrawn forward.

I should elaborate a little on why I think it is important to have a fast forward. The most obvious reason to start with is when we go without that kind of player we are giving up playing counters right up the middle, either over the top of the defense or on the ground. In any given game that might not be a big deal. But over time other teams will adjust to the fact that this is not part of our arsenal and move up their defensive line and compress the field on us. The threat of the kind of counter a speedy forward gives a team really opens up the middle of the field for the midfielders. Which ties in with a point that some others have made. You don't really want a totally empty bucket sort of setup where the central mids don't give you much offense. It is very important to have a guy like Feilhaber who gives you some creativity from the middle.

[Nutmeg]

Defensively, I think it is more important to be well drilled in a basic approach that doesn't change much from game to game. Experimenting with formations/approach on defense is a recipe for breakdowns and confusion. So on defense I would stick with the basic approach of four in the back and two deep-lying mids.

I need to be sold that two deep midfielders is a requirement to keep from breaking down defensively. I'm not opposed to the idea. I just need to be sold that against every opponent in any game situation, 2 deep midfielders are a defensive requirement.

[Maximum Optimal]

It's not a necessity against all opponents. But I think it is best approach against any team ranked in the top 20 in the world.

[CDM76]

But I want to see the system be flexible enough for Adu, Donovan, and Beasley to all be on the field at the same time.

I like the concept but that's a tough one.

With Altidore at CF we might be able to pull off a 4-3-3 (I think Rongen tried it with the U20s) but while DMB and LD could effectively work as wingers in a Dutch-style front line, Adu as part of the triangle in the midfield doesn't leave me feeling especially confident.

Adu as a CF? Ohhhhhhhkaaaaaaaay?!?????

What's your proposition? 4-5-1? I thought that was anathema on all BS boards unless you are willing to invoke the spirit of Il Bruce (here in Socal, I think that requires multiple Tommy Burgers).

Not opposed, just skeptical (my official BS stance :D).

[Dr.Phil]

What's your proposition? 4-5-1?

-----------Altidore------------
Beasley-----Adu-------Donovan
-------Benny-----DM----------
Pearce--Boca-----CB-------Dolo
-----------Howard--------------

My WC 2010 lineup

[CDM76]

I need to be sold that two deep midfielders is a requirement to keep from breaking down defensively. I'm not opposed to the idea. I just need to be sold that against every opponent in any game situation, 2 deep midfielders are a defensive requirement.

It's not a necessity against all opponents. But I think it is best approach against any team ranked in the top 20 in the world.This is where I'd like to see us migrate from the two deep-lying mids to a Y midfield.

The question is do we have someone tactically and technically skilled enough to play the pivot?

I disagree that you need a lot of 'bite' for that spot (ok, Pirlo can chop'em down when he wants to). It's the sweet passing and brilliant positioning that really make a pivot.

Seems as though MB or Clark are well on their way to being able to take the primary defensive role. Both read the game well and make good passes. I like Clark's speed and ball skills over MB's occassionally incisive passing and periodic Mastroeniesque card acquisitions but...that's what make BS boards rattle. Oh yeah...almost forgot about Ricardo's total lobotomy against Ruiz. Call in Mastro.

Is Benny the answer at pivot?

I think his ability to break in the first eleven for the Rams will determine that question.

If Feilhaber can hold down a central midfield position even with pathetic, bottom-dwelling Derby in the BARCLAY's (gotta plug the primary sponsor), he's earned a lot of opportunities in my book.

My other question in determining the need for two deep-lying mids is our central defenders.

How much cover is required?

I just don't see Gooch as a first choice central defender right now. Seems as though form supports Conrad, Parkhurst, DeMerit over Gooch.

Doesn't mean I've given up on the pride of Standard Liege but he's playing tentatively (for the USMNT) and that's not a good quality in a central defender.