From the Horse's Mouth

[Maximum Optimal]

There is a lot of discussion around here about what kind of player Michael Bradley is and how he should be used. So it was with some interest that I read a translation of his comments (thanks to Mitrita) on a thread in the Yanks Abroad section:


Mike: "At Hveen Í've complied to my role as an offensive midfielder. The club knew it wasn't my preffered position, but I've always kept a positive attitude towards the club. Therefore I was disappointed about the club's attiude towards a transfer. I've had several proposal from clubs all around Europe, inlcuding a couple of English clubs. But H'veen was pulling the strings.
I'm glad it's over now. The German Leugue is a lot bigger then the dutch league in all aspects: level of play, atmosphere and attendance. This was the best way to develop myself.
At BMG I'm able to play as an D-mid, which suits me best. H'veen knew it, but they gave a more attacking role. It didn't go that bad, but I prefer the defensive role. My debut at BMG wasn't to bad, but you can't be satisfied when you lose. We deserved a point but that's soccer. "

The article (in Dutch) can be found here: http://www.elfvoetbal.nl/?action=n&id=63312

[Prime Time]

So Michael comes out and openly admits he prefers the DM position. I'm sure some will say he should try and play a more attacking role for both club and country, but until he can work on his first touch and control, then DM is the right spot for him.

[FC Tallavana]

If he thinks he's a d-mid and his pops thinks he's a d-mid then when will people start judging him as a d-mid, where he has not really played much as a pro and has never really played outstanding as while a USMNT player.

Every time I would say I just don't get the love for Bradley, a zillion people would come to his defense, saying he's really a more attacking player and that his dad is not yet using him that way.

What I saw was a guy who was scopring a lot of goals as a product of a system.

But now we have it. He's a d-mid, and a rather ordinary one at that (to date).

[obewan]

...but until he can work on his first touch and control, then DM is the right spot for him.

Really? So you want your players with great touch and control in the attack, and your middies with average touch and questionable control at DM? I would want to have my two CMs have both a great first touch and good control. :rolleyes:

I don't disagree with what I think you're trying to say - Mike is more suited to be a two-way midfielder or a DM, not an AM. I would argue, though, that it's field vision that sets apart the good attacking players from the rest in soccer...and I don't think Mike has great field vision.

On a side note, I guess we should put Beasley at DM, too. :)

[Maximum Optimal]

Really? So you want your players with great touch and control in the attack, and your middies with average touch and questionable control at DM? I would want to have my two CMs have both a great first touch and good control. :rolleyes:

I don't disagree with what I think you're trying to say - Mike is more suited to be a two-way midfielder or a DM, not an AM. I would argue, though, that it's field vision that sets apart the good attacking players from the rest in soccer...and I don't think Mike has great field vision.

On a side note, I guess we should put Beasley at DM, too. :)

Agree very much with this. Even agree that as we develop better attacking players DMB should move to a more defensive role. Maybe not DM but left back.

[prowazekii]

Lil Bradley has apparently been getting bad advice. From nearly every USMNT game where he has played the DM role, he has been marginal at best. As a scoring threat (as the player he became at H'veen) he earned a spot on the roster. I have on many occasions disagreed with those who claim his position on the NT is due to nepotism; however, as a pure DM I see him as 3rd choice. I would never deem myself worthy of telling a pro where he is most suited to play, but IMO he should not start as pure DM for the USMNT until he has vastly improved.

[KALM]

What's odd about this is that Bradley's comments about the way he expects BMG to use him somewhat contradict his new manager's comments about Bradley and the way in which he was employed in his debut for them.

Even odder was that Bradley looked very average, from what I could tell, in the season and a half that he played as a defensive mid for Heerenveen. Apparently, throughout that time, his then manager was trying to force him to join in the attack more and Bradley was pushing back and complaining that he didn't think he could do it. Fast forward a year, and it turns out Bradley could do what his manager was asking of him and do it well, and that nearly all the success he had there was a result of his change of position. I truly hope that his new manager realizes all of this and pushes back if Bradley starts saying the same things he said at Heerenveen.

Finally, to those saying that Bradley's skillset does not translate to the attacking mid position at the national team level, I suspect that you - A.) may not have watched too many Heerenveen matches, particularly against top Dutch opponents and B.) are conceiving of an attacking midfielder in the mold of a Freddy Adu or Landon Donovan, which Bradley certainly is not. When his new manager was asked to describe Bradley, the three attributes he highlighted were his combination play, his off the ball movement, and his goalscoring ability - the three attributes that stood out most to me also watching him at Heerenveen. He's an attacking midfielder in that mold, which is not how some people see the position, and that's understandable.

[KALM]

I guess ultimately, if he's very adamant about it, he's going to become the player he wants to be, and we're going to have to judge him by the standards of a defensive mid. I really do hope, though, for his sake, that he's not structuring his club play around what he believes are the needs or demands of the national team.

[Maximum Optimal]

When his new manager was asked to describe Bradley, the three attributes he highlighted were his combination play, his off the ball movement, and his goalscoring ability - the three attributes that stood out most to me also watching him at Heerenveen. He's an attacking midfielder in that mold, which is not how some people see the position, and that's understandable.

What do you make of the fact that his manager with the US national team claims that he does not play with two defensive mids, that he wants to see one of the two deep-lying mids to move forward and join the attack. It would seem that Michael has at least some of the same freedom to display the three attributes that his club coach cited when he plays for the national team.

It would seem there are several possible answers:
1) The US national team coach is misrepresenting how he wants his deep-lying mids to play.
2) Doing what he did in the Eredivisie is more difficult at the national team level and Michael hasn't been able to bridge the gap yet.
3) His US teammates are not rewarding his off-the-ball movement and not meshing with him in general.
4) Some (maybe much) of what he did in the Eredivisie last year was a fluke.
5) Other possibilities.

[KALM]

1) The US national team coach is misrepresenting how he wants his deep-lying mids to play.
Perhaps. No manager wants to be accused of playing too conservatively. My impression from what I've seen is that the central mids and fullbacks in Bradley's system bomb forward at opportune moments and pick their spots carefully and effectively, but that they do not venture into the final third as consistently as they do at the club level, even against similar quality opponents between both levels. That allows for some of the goalscoring opportunities and off-the-ball movement we see at the club level, but it changes the passing game significantly too, and puts a great deal of responsibility in breaking down the defense on our front four players. Cherundolo is another player who comes to mind that appears to fit the above description, judging by the few Hannover games I've watched of his. (The Trinidad & Tobago and 1st leg Barbados matches this year were big exceptions for both Cherundolo and Bradley, so maybe it does depend on the quality of opposition.)

2) Doing what he did in the Eredivisie is more difficult at the national team level and Michael hasn't been able to bridge the gap yet.
For the most part this is true, especially in regards to his goal scoring. Although, I've watched him play impressively against teams such as PSV and Ajax, whom I find to be at least as competitive as all but a few of the teams Bradley has faced at the national level. And, this is in reference to his all around play, not merely his goal scoring.

3) His US teammates are not rewarding his off-the-ball movement and not meshing with him in general.
His teammates generally reward his movement off the ball at the national team level, as he tends to make himself available for the outlet pass often and usually gets in close to the highest number of touches on the team. His problem is that most of that is done in very conservative positions, a problem that is exacerbated when his central midfield partner also takes up conservative positions, lateral to him.

4) Some (maybe much) of what he did in the Eredivisie last year was a fluke.
I'd say it's more a product of the system than a fluke. Again, if we're just talking goal scoring, you're probably right that he's never going to put up those numbers again. But, I did see certain skills (intelligent runs into the box and composure around goal) repeated enough times throughout the past season that I figure he could still put up respectable goal scoring numbers as a midfielder if given the opportunity.

5) Other possibilities.
One other possibility is that if he doesn't have someone constantly telling him to get forward, to the point of openly clashing with him, Bradley isn't going to put in the same commitment on the offensive end that he does at the club level, although again that goes back to the first possibility you mentioned.

[onefineesq]

So Michael comes out and openly admits he prefers the DM position. I'm sure some will say he should try and play a more attacking role for both club and country, but until he can work on his first touch and control, then DM is the right spot for him. This is no big surprise. He came out and admitted this a month PRIOR to his transfer. Yet people still insisted that he needed to be further forward because he scored a bunch of goals in Holland and also insisted that Mike didn't look special on the national team because his dad was holding him back by playing him further back.

[minya]

Mikey is ungrateful punk. Herenveen made a player out of him. Good luck on your way to playing DM off the bench in BL2.

[Rainer24]

Bradley already has one of the best touches of anyone in our player pool. I don't really understand the griping about that. He has his problems, but that should be considered one of the smaller ones.


Minya, what exactly has Bradley said that would lead to that sort of condemnation?

[AngryMobRun]

Danmit, this coach's son thing is just too much for me and ive been tolerating it for awhile b/c M Bradley is a young player getting experience. I know we all like the 4-4-2 diamond b/c of Arena's awesome 2004 and 2005 run. But Edu is a better DM and Adu is a better AM.

One of the things that hurt us in 2006 is that we were found out by the Czechs.
Hopefully a little before the Confederations Cup we switch to a 4-3-3 b/c I can definitely see Michael and Maurice playing behind Adu/Donovan (depending on who plays FW) as the trio in mid. Think about it, they're both perfectly suited.

[Mr Martin]

Bradley did quite well in the Olympics as the primary DM. He wasn't a DM in the Armas/Mastro mold, but he clearly wasn't paired with a second DM. What Nowak did was have a somewhat more offensive CM like Kljestan in the midfield with Bradley. Kljestan will take more risks with his forward distribution, but he also has the ability to cover for any occasional Bradley attacking runs.

Also, with the Olympic team, Bradley had two more skilled ball-handling CB's in Edu and Parkhurst. I think the confidence that the CB's would remain composed on the ball allowed Nowak to play with Bradley as a solo DM.

The Senior team has two less skilled CB's and it may simply be that the CM's play more conservatively because of that, so it looks like dual DM's much of the time.

Certainly the home T&T Qualifier was most interesting in that the team replicated the Bradley/Kljestan CM pairing we saw at the Olympics. Fans really need to keep in mind how central the Olympic team was to the long-term planning for the Senior team. I think Bob Bradley has been struggling all year to find a replacement for Feilhaber, since Benny's form melt-down killed what was going to be a Bradley/Feilhaber CM pairing.

DM is a VERY demanding position, and Mike Bradley simply wasn't ready as a 20/21 year old newbie professional to hold down a solo DM spot for the Senior team. I suspect it is a very rare 20/21 year old who can hold down that linchpin role for a Senior National team. But the Olympics suggest that this is the plan, and by 2010 Bradley will be a much more experienced 23 year old who might just be ready to take on this role.

[moytoy12]

Bradley already has one of the best touches of anyone in our player pool.

LOL. That's just a ridiculous statement. If Bradley's touch is one of the best in our player pool, we're in deep trouble in 2010.

[Clint Eastwood]

Minya, what exactly has Bradley said that would lead to that sort of condemnation?

As far as I know, Minya has never said anything positive about any US player........

We've got a 21 year old playing in the Bundesliga, and people continue to attack him. The kid's going to continue to develop, and it's pretty exciting that we have these young players in top European leagues. That's not to say I think he should be in the US squad right now, but he's still young and learning his craft.

[kokoplus10]

Kudos to almost everyone posting on this thread. For the most part this entire thread has been an intelligent and well informed discussion/debate/whatever. I have nothing to add at this point. I'd rep you all if I could.

[KALM]

LOL. That's just a ridiculous statement. If Bradley's touch is one of the best in our player pool, we're in deep trouble in 2010.
I don't think it is. I'd rate Donovan, Dempsey, Adu, Edu, Feilhaber, Lewis, and Kljestan above him there. But, during the Olympics, he did show a remarkable ability to consistently settle, under some pressure, some hard and awkward balls played out of the back, and quickly turn and distribute. That is a very important skill for a lone defensive mid to have, and one of the reasons (along with good passing from Parkhurst and Edu) we were able to work the ball out of the back so often, without bypassing the midfield. A good touch is crucial for that.

[onefineesq]

Bradley already has one of the best touches of anyone in our player pool. I don't really understand the griping about that. He has his problems, but that should be considered one of the smaller ones.


Minya, what exactly has Bradley said that would lead to that sort of condemnation? I like Bradley. I said back when he was a Metrostar that he was a player for the future, and his success in Holland bears that out, despite the fact that I still think he has been thrust as a fixture into the National Team sooner than he should. With all that being said, when I saw Bradley's earlier comments about Holland and with these, it does seem like Mike has been extremely ungrateful about the opportunity that they afforded him and what they meant to his development as a player and the development of his wallet.