Can't teach that - right back

[rollo]

I think that a very interesting situation has developed with the U23s at right back that is really a great test case for a number of fundamental concepts in development. I'm talking about comparing and contrasting Wynne and Hill.

In broad strokes Wynne came into the pool with very strong physical attributes (in particular speed) but subpar technical skills. The spin on Wynne is that you can't teach speed and he could become a great right back du jour who moves fluidly into the attack and recovers well down the line. Hill came into this position with better technique than any right back I have ever seen play for the USMNT. He is learning to be a defender and also has pretty good speed. He needs to learn to be a defender.

I have a personal bias on this comparison that puts Hill way ahead of Wynne potential wise and thats because I think the right back role (and all defenders) should be technically better on the ball that we have had traditionally and this has been a severe limitation of our teams. This is because the inability to play the ball out of the back has lead to our loss of possesion too much which leads to a lot of bad things including attacking opportunities and the need to defend a lot. Moving Hill to right back may yet become Novak's stroke of genius for a long time to come. Some may rightfully argue that we have been down this road before with trials of Eddie Lewis and Bobby Convey at left back and Richard Mulrooney at right back. Why is this different? I think it is different because Hill has better technique than all those other players, he is faster than all those other players, and he seems to be learning how to defend well.

So we are back at the beginning. You cant teach speed and perhaps realistically there is a cap on the development of touch of a player like Wynne and therefore a ceiling on his development into a high-class player. This is not to say that Wynne hasn't improved technically, its just that its not special, and may never be.

This brings me to the last examples, Frankie and right back. Frankie was our best option for may years at right back but he never really got completely comfortable technically despite getting a lot better and mastering the useless step-over. Frankie had speed and endurance but never matured into class right back. Finally, Cherundulo is our best right back because he is good technically and has some speed. I think that if Hill progresses even linearly in learning to be a defender he will pass Cherundulo and because he is already better technically and is faster, and that will be a good day for our team.

[IndividualEleven]

<sigh>.

Let's wait until Hill establishes himself with a club and for the two--especially Hill--to play against higher caliber competition.

Personally I prefer defenders who can above all defend and not make the big mistake.

[rollo]

<sigh>.

Let's wait until Hill establishes himself with a club and for the two--especially Hill--to play against higher caliber competition.

Personally I prefer defenders who can above all defend and not make the big mistake.

I understand your sigh and am not saying he WILL be all these things. Rather I thought it was interesting to think about reasonable expectations for improvement for any player given certain existing tools. Whether or not Hill becomes any of these is somewhat besides the point -the main point being that
its rare for any player to overcome some fundamental starting conditions. You cant teach speed is the usual mantra - but I would say that its not just speed. For most players there is a limit on their ability to become technically excellent if they are not close already at this age. Players who have overcome expectations have done so by making the most out of their existing talents (McBride Heydude) and not by learning new fundamental skills.

If this thread turns into a discussion about whether or not Hill will become our starting right back, then the point is lost.

[IndividualEleven]

the main point being that
its rare for any player to overcome some fundamental starting conditions. You cant teach speed is the usual mantra - but I would say that its not just speed. For most players there is a limit on their ability to become technically excellent if they are not close already at this age.

As a general statement this a just a truism. Applying truisms to actual players is the analytical part.

[Honore de Ballsac]

Trying to remember... Cherundolo wasn't always a right back, was he? I think he's a convert and a great example of what you're looking for. Paradoxically, he needs to be in the attack to be an effective defender. He's not best suited to sitting back and marking, but rather tries to keep his flank opponents in check by keeping them on their heels a bit.

[rollo]

Trying to remember... Cherundolo wasn't always a right back, was he? I think he's a convert and a great example of what you're looking for. Paradoxically, he needs to be in the attack to be an effective defender. He's not best suited to sitting back and marking, but rather tries to keep his flank opponents in check by keeping them on their heels a bit.

Absolutely about the style of left back play. For a stay at home defender the attributes are somewhat different. Cherundulo also has a good cross. I actually remember many calling for Cherundulo as right mid as well, though my impression was that he wasn't quite the best there, but those were lean years when it came to having technical players on the USMNT.

Size is also another attribute that I did not comment above and Cherundulo was often doubted for his stature - no doubt someone like Hill will also be scrutinized in this way especially if it turns out that he is easily pushed off the ball by larger stronger attackers. You can't teach size either :D, though some smaller players have learned to play strong.

Another aspect is defensive heading, I think Hill has the height/jump to be ok in this respect.

Other candidates are Spector, Moor, Albright (a bit old in tooth), ....
Notice something else, both Spector and Albright use to be forwards. Albright is an interesting case, he has pace and size but never became a class right back. My impression is that his techique was never that good even though he use to be a forward and I believe his crossing was never that great either. But perhaps more than all these, he is just not a great defender. Could somewhat have predicted a ceiling on Albright as a right back? Your thoughts?

How about Spector, what are his attributes and how do they prognosticate his potential as a right back?

[rollo]

As a general statement this a just a truism. Applying truisms to actual players is the analytical part.

Feel free to partake
:)

[cpwilson80]

I think the other element here is that we don't teach that.

It seems to me that the US produces a disproportionate amount of players at the following positions: Keepers, centerbacks, defensive/holding mids, left mids, and attacking mid/withdrawn forward.

I think much of this is systemic. Keepers do well from the influence of other sports. Left mids appear because where else does one play the left-footed kid on the team? Finally, the best kids usually play in the middle or up top until competition catches up, in which case they move outside or back.

Extrapolate this across millions of kids, it seems to me that the outside back position (or right outside midfield) is the last place on the field a kid would play.

So, with Wynne, the question is how much instruction has he received at right back on how to play the position as an attacking one? That probably impacted how much time he spent on the ball, the level of his ball skills, and how much he could rely solely on his superior pace and strength to succeed.

[IndividualEleven]

Wynne played centerback in college so I've read.

Not sure about Cherundolo.

Not a big fan of the Cherundolo/Hill/Bornstein type fullback as I believe a Rongen(U-20) style of attack better plays to American strengths.

[rollo]

I think the other element here is that we don't teach that.

It seems to me that the US produces a disproportionate amount of players at the following positions: Keepers, centerbacks, defensive/holding mids, left mids, and attacking mid/withdrawn forward.

.......

So, with Wynne, the question is how much instruction has he received at right back on how to play the position as an attacking one? That probably impacted how much time he spent on the ball, the level of his ball skills, and how much he could rely solely on his superior pace and strength to succeed.

I agree with this completely but do not know first hand how this plays out developmentally in the US. I can tell you though at the youth levels the kids spend way too little time on the ball developing ball skills and the priority is too much on scoring goals, which favors the larger faster kids to some degree and the few kids with really good skill coming in.

I can see this continuing with the less skilled kids being put as defenders, which perpetuates that.

However, I've heard as a joke before that for example, in Brazil, the defenders are the mids and forwards who were not as good. I'm not sure if this is true, but it does beg the question if this is not a common course for defenders even in countries with great development systems?

[rollo]

Wynne played centerback in college so I've read.

Not sure about Cherundolo.

Not a big fan of the Cherundolo/Hill/Bornstein type fullback as I believe a Rongen(U-20) style of attack better plays to American strengths.

Can you expand on that since I'm not familar with the Rongen style.
You are right that I have funnelled the discussion for this one particular style of outside back and it need not be so - of course I did this because this has been the style of the USMNT for decade now and seems like it will continue to be that way.

I'm curious about the Rongen style......

[asdf2]

IIRC Cherundolo got started as a d-mid.

[IndividualEleven]

Rongen style in U-20 WC used 4-5-1 and 4-3-3 with Altidore at forward and Adu fronting Szetela and Bradley in central midfield. The fullback were stay at home defenders. The backline as a whole dribbled the ball out of the back smartly rather than booting it up the field. Defended like Italians. It was like watching a foreign team. Not a lot size or beef on that backline but they could at least control the ball under pressure.

Fullbacks under Bradley/Arena are responsible for a much larger part of the attack. I don't think we produce fullbacks good enough for this style.

[asdf2]

Seems to me one can often be successful having one stay at home fullback and one more attack oriented fullback.

[rollo]

Rongen style in U-20 WC used 4-5-1 and 4-3-3 with Altidore at forward and Adu fronting Szetela and Bradley in central midfield. The fullback were stay at home defenders. The backline as a whole dribbled the ball out of the back smartly rather than booting it up the field. Defended like Italians. It was like watching a foreign team. Not a lot size or beef on that backline but they could at least control the ball under pressure.

Fullbacks under Bradley/Arena are responsible for a much larger part of the attack. I don't think we produce fullbacks good enough for this style.

I guess the common ground regardless of the style is that he defender is composed enough on the ball to make good passes under pressure. It seems right now that we mostly move the ball with possesion play that includes one of the wide backs. This player needs to be able to play the 2 or 3 player touches in small spaces under pressure to get past the first level of pressure from the opposing forwards/mids.

Cherundulo is decent at this, while Wynne and Moor are not. Spector is ok but I would say great. Do we have a wide back that has the skills and understanding to consistently play this way?

Do you agree that this is still important even for a stay at home outside back?

[IndividualEleven]

I guess the common ground regardless of the style is that he defender is composed enough on the ball to make good passes under pressure. It seems right now that we mostly move the ball with possesion play that includes one of the wide backs. This player needs to be able to play the 2 or 3 player touches in small spaces under pressure to get past the first level of pressure from the opposing forwards/mids.

Cherundulo is decent at this, while Wynne and Moor are not. Spector is ok but I would say great. Do we have a wide back that has the skills and understanding to consistently play this way?

Do you agree that this is still important even for a stay at home outside back?

Common ground is that a defender should be able to defend. Having a defender who can control the ball is next. Carrying the attack is third.

Do you agree that this is still important even for a stay at home outside back?

This is just another truism.

[IndividualEleven]

It's important for a forward to be able to score, win the ball in the air, make runs to stretch the offense, pass the ball around the box, and beat players 1 v 1.

OK. Cool. What's the talent pool like? Do we have forwards who can do all of that? If not, then tactics have to be developed to take advantage of what we do have.

[cpwilson80]

Looking back at some of the outside backs for the US over the past decade or so, it seems like very few of them planned on being a professional outside back.

I pulled the defenders off of Sam's Army site, and here are the ones I remember as at least an option at outside back. This is in order of caps:

Agoos - better in the middle, decent ball skills
Caligiuri - converted from the attack, then midfield (I think)
Hejduk - excellent stamina, poor balls skills
Bocanegra - better in the middle
Cherundolo - best outside back we've had
Sanneh - converted forward
Vanney - decent ball skills, lacked pace to be an effective outside back
Regis - decent ball skills, prone to mental mistakes
Albright - converted forward
Gibbs - see Bocanegra
Bornstein - converted midfielder
Spector - jack of all trades, master of none?
Corrales - lacks the pace for an outside back
Simek - don't know, might be a natural outside back

When I look over this list, I see few guys who started their professional career on the outside. Most were central defenders placed outside to be a "stay-at-home" type guy, or they were attackers paced further back with the intent of adding to the offense.

[Untroubled by Reason]

I'm not trying to thread-jack this toward a coaching-forum-type thing, but the NSCAA is telling its youth coaches to use a 3-4-3. Among other reasons, they are telling coaches this to emphasize the formation of better 1-v-1 or pure defenders. In a 4-back set-up, there is too much help to rely on (particularly when opposing a 4-4-2), and defending skills are not developed properly because they aren't needed as much.

[IHateDC]

My impression--and it's only that, correct me if I'm wrong--is that Eddie Lewis improved his crossing immensely in England. So there is one skill at least that can be improved. But we don't seem to be improving it, generally (Wynn comes to mind).