Convey has only had one decent game with the US and it was an ugly loss. He was overpowered in the defensive side of the ball which is why he still needs to grow. Duece on the other hand has already gone thorugh thr aches and pain of international footy.
Me, I am amazed that people have seen Beasley on the right and want to go that way. Let me ask you a question: when has Convey shown that he is good enough to play against a "quality" team? In the Cocacola league? For the National Team? When?
I guess Norwegian B team and and a B team Japan has more "quality" than the 1st Team Germany side. In Germany.
No, I just think Dempsey played better against Poland than Convey did against Germany. And the Japan team was probably their entire defense plus a good part of their midifield.
That first line might be the most stunning thing you've ever said. why not start a poll and ask the masses? that Japan team sucked ass. It was thier first match in months. It continuously surprises me how people rate a player with street ball skills, but has shown little ability to create opportunities for other players, a starting player for an attacking midfield spot, who main function is to create for others. and this Dempsey thing has to be the biggest case of out of site out of mind in recorded history. He hasn't played anyone good yet and done well,, He was poor vs England, and average at best vs Poland, and outstanding vs Norway and Japan. And he looks average at best in MLS, and average vs the Costa Rican side in the CCC. yet this is the kid everyone wants to start? I think it's because people don't actually WATCH Beasley and Convey and Reyna on a weekly basis.
Convey and Beasley on the right vs Dempsey on the right. I'll take the Deuce. From the right, he's talented scorer and good passer.
Let's just tone it down abit. I don't think Convey played very well against Germany. My memory is that neither did Arena, at least defensively. Well that's always an option, but it's not going to change my opinion. Possibly, but it was a strong team in terms of what Japan's options are. Is Dempsey as good a passer as Convey? No. Is he as bad as you say? I don't think so, with Twellman's first goal against Norway a case-in-point. He did register 9 assists in MLS last year, which meant that he was invovled in passing combinations that led to 9 goals -- which means that he was involved in more plays that led chances. He also finishes, at least historically, more of the chances he creates and receives than Convey, which is a good thing in an attacking midfield spot. My opinion remains that Dempsey, if he peforms, is a better choice than Convey because (1) the open position is on the right, (2) he gives our midfield more size and (3) Dempsey is a scorer, which I think is very important given the lack of scoring punch the USMNT has up top. Well, poor is a little harsh on the England game since he did score and Arena has admitted he played him out of position there. But basically, this is a fair summary, where I differ is that I don't know what performances of Convey at the international level have impressed you so? For me, Germany didn't do much. "Average at best?" By whose view -- you do know he has made the AAXI two of the three weeks he has played? I thought he showed alot against the Costa Rican side, though on a very individual level given what a mess the Revs were in that game tactically. No, your description of Dempsey is not the guy I want to start. The guy I want to start is a guy who is playing well for his club team, would add some needed scoring punch and size to our midfield and who actually fits the opening that exists in our midfield. Mind you, the position is open, just as it is for Arena apparently, and let's try Convey on the right and see what it looks like. Reyna too. But right now, Dempsey makes the most sense for me, at least some of the times, as it apparently does for Arena.
This find was the Rosetta Stone for BA and BigSoccer. Unbelievable. Those potential lineups seem to me like a case of Bruce doing the best he can with the personnel he's got. What more can you reasonably ask for from a coach? It's clear that our success relies on McBride playing the tournament of his life, and it makes me real nervous to depend so entirely on one guy. On the other hand, he's in a class by himself on the Nats when it comes to effort, and if I had to put all my eggs in the one-guy basket, it be him or Keller. Tangentially, the episode of this show when they have the coach of Togo or Angola should be soccer comedy gold.
Just to recap: Dempsey vs. England = Goal scored Dempsey vs. Poland = Goal scored Dempsey vs. Japan = Goal scored Seems to me like he's three for three in his three biggest games. Admittedly, England was not a good game for him. But it was his first real taste of international competition, and he still managed to score. He's simply got a nose for goal, something you can't teach. And, in my view, he played very well against Poland. You've made the case several times that he was unable to beat the Polish players off the dribble. But that's only because they were scared of him and dragged him down every time he got the ball, almost immediately. He took lots of hard fouls in that game and I can only recall one time when he made a really silly pass to lose possession. Japan put out a good side (closer to their first XI than the one we trotted out) and Dempsey dominated them, but no one is disputing that one. Average at best in MLS? This is completely disingenuous. He was rookie of the year and clearly is one of the top players in MLS. Clearly. Are you honestly saying that he's a middle of the road player in MLS. Come on! We know that you like Convey over Dempsey, ok? I, for one, do not begrudge you that; there's a decent case to be made for either of them. But there's no reason to slag Dempsey so terribly and disingenuously in an attempt to make your case. The guy is good. Very good. And he's pushing hard for a place in the first XI. I'm betting that he gets it. Now back to the thread of the year... (P.S. This thread is the Holy Grail! Much rep.)
I've said any number of times that I'd want Dempsey as a late game sub simply because against a tired backline and defensive midfield, his flair could be used best. But he's too much of a loose cannon to play extensivly. His stlye of play leads to a high number of 1v1 turnovers and we'll get hammeredif we give the ball away like he did vs Poland. Ifhe a good dribbler? hell yes. Does he have a knack for being the johnny on the spot? hell yes. Does he have that certain flair which makes him extremely dangerous? hell yes. Will he turn the ball over at a high rate? yes. Will he miss players runs and be unableto get them the ball like you'd want? Again, yes. Will he do as well in a track meet style match we want to play against the Czech and Italy? I'm not too sure of that. He doesn't play the ball quickly as you'd like (not a criticism mind you - just his way of playing, you see a lot of this in La Liga) as an attacking Mid.
Well, the lineup makes sense. And Bruce usually does make sense. On the other hand ... 6 weeks yet to go, Bruce had to figure that somebody somewhere would see this and had to be thinking about how this would play in the minds of the opposing coaches, plus injuries & new insights occur. So I'd say that a 4-5-1 for the first match is hardly a sure thing.
Folks- this Dempsey or Convey stuff is getting ridiculous if for no other reason then JOB is starting if fit. Also the important thing is that Arena is fashioning a formation type that his players can fit into fairly painlessly.
you're right. My apologies folks. I'll endeavour to keep my trap shut on this subject. at least until the send of series starts
To recap and clarify a little, this is how he wrote it on the paper that he showed the guy and the camera: --------------------Keller---------------------- Cherundolo----Pope-----Onyewu-------Lewis --------------Reyna------?----------------- ----?--------------Donovan--------------Beasley ----------------------McBride------------------- Reyna and the d-mid "?" were written tightly together in the middle. It really looked to me like a 4-2-3-1. 1. There were no "maybes" in goal or on the backline. 2. For the first question mark, he said "maybe mastroeni, maybe o'brien" 3. For the second question mark, he said "maybe Dempsey", offering no other name. 4. When he mentioned Beasley, he said "can play centrally or on the left." Make of that what you will. 5. Looking at the formation he had laid out, Bruce then said that this was it, but that "maybe Donovan up with McBride" 6. I heard no mention during the entire interview of EJ, Wolff, Convey, Gibbs, Boca, Hahnemann, Ching, Twellman, or anybody not on that piece of paper or mentioned above other than the couple of Tim Howard questions and the inevitable Adu question.
you could take that in a lot of different ways. Such as Mastro if JOB isn't fit, and maybe JOB is he is fit. Big question mark but I think the send of series will answer it.
Ursula -- I think you are wrong and I hope Arena doesn't think like you. My strong preference is that the US play at most two holding midfielders balanced by two attacking midfielders -- in general, as there may be games where scoring is not that important to us. For me, that means two out of three of JOB, Reyna and Mastro and two out of three of Donovan, Beasley, Convey or Dempsey. This, and the fact that Arena indicates he may start Dempsey (and his historical preference for a true right-sided player should make this not so surprising -- why else do you think Steve Ralston every got a game) and JOB's fraglie health and form, make Convey v. Dempsey a very relevant topic -- and I can't see why an analysis of players' strengths should be criticized as inappropriate for this board. As to apoo, his arguments that Dempsey gave the ball away too much over 90 minutes against Poland does not appear to me to be true. The comparision between Dempsey and Convey in this game is interesting to me -- adjusting statisictics to account for the fact that Convey didn't play 90: Clean Possessions: Dempsey - 27; Convey - 33. Percentage of passes completed: Dempsey - 73% Convey - 70%; Percentage of forward passes completed: Dempsey 23% Convey 20%. Basically, both played very similar games, active with decent possession statistics tempered by the fact that both are supposed to create penetration which accounts for the low forward passing percentages -- they both went for some dangerous passes and a low percentage is to be expected given their role on the team. See this thread for comparision to other US players in this game: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=322055&page=3&highlight=Poland
What I, for one, will make of that is that that middle line could read: -- Donovan ------- Beasley -------- Convey --- either to start or after a sub is made. Or that we could play a defensive 3: -- Reyna -------- Maestro ------- JOB ----- behind Beasely in a central AM if Donovan lines up as the second forward as was reported in Bruce's Example B line-up. Not necessarily what I'm advocating for, just "what I make of it." Very cool info: thanks so much for posting, Autogolazo.
I don't understand the relevance. Based on Auto's posts, even if JOB is healthy, in-form, and starting, there is still room in the starting XI for Dempsey as the right mid in a 5 man midfield. ----------McBride---------- DMB----Donovan---Dempsey ------JOB-------Reyna------ Lewis---Gooch---Pope---Dolo Incredible information in this interview. A couple of things that concern me about this formation: - I'm not sure if I like McBride up top as the lone forward - I rate Mastroeni's ball-winning presence higher than Arena, & think he needs to be on the field. - I don't rate Reyna nearly as highly as Arena, & think he can be a situational player - Pope starting should be just as much about form as it is about health