[Beau Dure]

So last night I ask Curt Onalfo if the team will be changing up tactics with an out-an-out playmaker (Marinelli) coming into a team that has been going without a true No. 10 for a while. He told me if I'd watched the game, I would've noticed that Sasha Victorine was the playmaker in a diamond midfield formation. He didn't quite live up to his first name, but he did seem to think it was a rather stupid question.

Naturally, on the way home, I think of the follow-up I could've asked -- "So Marinelli is the same type of player as Victorine?"

So now I'm asking you guys. Was it really a stupid question? Has Victorine been playing as a typical No. 10?

During the game, a few of us were joking that KC was playing an 8-2 formation -- 8 guys lined up across the top of the box, with Johnson and Sealy hanging out at midfield. Once DC turned the ball over, everyone was off to the races. And Harrington dominated his wing.

[Revisionist Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Beau Dure

So last night I ask Curt Onalfo if the team will be changing up tactics with an out-an-out playmaker (Marinelli) coming into a team that has been going without a true No. 10 for a while. He told me if I'd watched the game, I would've noticed that Sasha Victorine was the playmaker in a diamond midfield formation. He didn't quite live up to his first name, but he did seem to think it was a rather stupid question.

Naturally, on the way home, I think of the follow-up I could've asked -- "So Marinelli is the same type of player as Victorine?"

So now I'm asking you guys. Was it really a stupid question? Has Victorine been playing as a typical No. 10?

During the game, a few of us were joking that KC was playing an 8-2 formation -- 8 guys lined up across the top of the box, with Johnson and Sealy hanging out at midfield. Once DC turned the ball over, everyone was off to the races. And Harrington dominated his wing.

Victorine was indeed playing in front of Zavagnin, but not in as advanced of a position as, say, Christian Gomez. I'd be more inclined to call it a 4-1-3-2 than an out-and-out diamond...but that's splitting hairs.

[Spoon]

Originally Posted by Beau Dure

Naturally, on the way home, I think of the follow-up I could've asked -- "So Marinelli is the same type of player as Victorine?"
So now I'm asking you guys. Was it really a stupid question? Has Victorine been playing as a typical No. 10?

No he is not a typical #10, they might play him and want him to be that kind of player but he is not. He is a tactically smart CM, who can play both ways and does the little things to put his team mates in good spots. Doesn't do anything flashy or uber creative. In the end he kinda reminds me of Mo.

[BenC1357]

Originally Posted by Beau Dure

So last night I ask Curt Onalfo if the team will be changing up tactics with an out-an-out playmaker (Marinelli) coming into a team that has been going without a true No. 10 for a while. He told me if I'd watched the game, I would've noticed that Sasha Victorine was the playmaker in a diamond midfield formation. He didn't quite live up to his first name, but he did seem to think it was a rather stupid question.

Naturally, on the way home, I think of the follow-up I could've asked -- "So Marinelli is the same type of player as Victorine?"

So now I'm asking you guys. Was it really a stupid question? Has Victorine been playing as a typical No. 10?

During the game, a few of us were joking that KC was playing an 8-2 formation -- 8 guys lined up across the top of the box, with Johnson and Sealy hanging out at midfield. Once DC turned the ball over, everyone was off to the races. And Harrington dominated his wing.

I don't think it's a stupid question at all. A true A-mid should be having the play funnel through him a lot more than Sasha did. The forwards took a lot of the balls and played them off to themselves. Instead, those balls should be going to Marinelli and then on to the wings or up top. But Sasha was very good last night. I'd disagree with Onalfo that Sasha was the top of a diamond formation.

[Beau Dure]

Originally Posted by Spoon

No he is not a typical #10, they might play him and want him to be that kind of player but he is not. He is a tactically smart CM, who can play both ways and does the little things to put his team mates in good spots. Doesn't do anything flashy or uber creative. In the end he kinda reminds me of Mo.

That seems about right. Zavagnin also has a bit of two-way skill, which is one reason why I didn't picture Victorine as the AM and Zavagnin as the DM.

Originally Posted by Quagmire

Victorine was indeed playing in front of Zavagnin, but not in as advanced of a position as, say, Christian Gomez. I'd be more inclined to call it a 4-1-3-2 than an out-and-out diamond...but that's splitting hairs.

Sure -- and they'd probably switch to an out-and-out diamond with Marinelli, I'd think.

The Wizards might want to be careful not to give up their defensive cover. The back line isn't quite there yet -- Hohlbein's a rookie, and Jewsbury doesn't have a lot of experience in that position. Granted, D.C. is a tough test for that defense because they have a lot of flair in attack, defensive shortcomings of their own notwithstanding.

[kcscsupporter]

Originally Posted by Beau Dure

The back line isn't quite there yet -- Hohlbein's a rookie, and Jewsbury doesn't have a lot of experience in that position.

holbein only started because nick garcia was suspended from last year.

[AndyMead]

Originally Posted by Beau Dure

That seems about right. Zavagnin also has a bit of two-way skill, which is one reason why I didn't picture Victorine as the AM and Zavagnin as the DM.

I definitely noticed from my vantage point last night that Victorine was playing in front of Zavagnin. Under Gansler there were basically dual d-mids.

The Wizards might want to be careful not to give up their defensive cover. The back line isn't quite there yet -- Hohlbein's a rookie, and Jewsbury doesn't have a lot of experience in that position.

You're overlooking the lynchpin of KC's defense: Nick Garcia who was playing the role of pregame waterboy last night. Jack Jewsbury is not a defender - at all. And on the back line, he was the weakest link.

After watching Hohlbein man up Emilio much of the night, color me impressed. I can see why the Wizards shipped Shavar Thomas off to Los Angeles.

The real question with the back line is who is going to play right back? Nick can play anywhere on the back line. If Hohlbein can play right back, then Nick can pair up with Conrad.

Of course this summer gets interesting assuming that Conrad is gone for a chunk of it, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Burciaga finally get his call.

Our back line looks good (at least better than DC's), but it's not particularly deep right now.

[Revisionist Quagmire]

Originally Posted by AndyMead

You're overlooking the lynchpin of KC's defense: Nick Garcia who was playing the role of pregame waterboy last night. Jack Jewsbury is not a defender - at all. And on the back line, he was the weakest link.

After watching Hohlbein man up Emilio much of the night, color me impressed. I can see why the Wizards shipped Shavar Thomas off to Los Angeles.

The real question with the back line is who is going to play right back? Nick can play anywhere on the back line. If Hohlbein can play right back, then Nick can pair up with Conrad.

Of course this summer gets interesting assuming that Conrad is gone for a chunk of it, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Burciaga finally get his call.

Our back line looks good (at least better than DC's), but it's not particularly deep right now.

I've heard that Tyson Wahl is just as liked, if not even more so, by the coaching staff than Hohlbein, and that only his injury a few weeks ago knowcked him out of the spot last night.

You are correct, Nick Garcia is the linchpin of our defense...which is different than being our best player who plays defender, or the player best suited to playing on the National Team. I'm the biggest Conrad fan in the world, but there's a reason Nick gets voted Defender of the Year by local media.

I'm headed off to look at the tape, but I missed the elements of Jack's performance last night that would make you see he's not a defender "at all".

I would also say that we are quite deep along the backline. Harrington can step right in at left back, with Will John or Sasha moving to the left mid slot. Wahl, Hohlbein and Garcia can probably all pass for right backs.

[AndyMead]

Fair enough about Wahl - who was dressed and on the bench.

As for Jewsbury, I spent the first forty five minutes a few years behind the edge of the 18' behind Hohlbein and Jewsbury.

That was my perspective on Jack's performance. I'd be much happier with him further up the field. But it is good to know he can fill in when there's an emergency.

[Revisionist Quagmire]

Originally Posted by AndyMead

Fair enough about Wahl - who was dressed and on the bench.

As for Jewsbury, I spent the first forty five minutes a few years behind the edge of the 18' behind Hohlbein and Jewsbury.

That was my perspective on Jack's performance. I'd be much happier with him further up the field. But it is good to know he can fill in when there's an emergency.

Wahl also hasn't played in 6 weeks.

Jack's the starter at right back for a variety of reasons, among them his ability to hit long balls...witness the numerous balls he hit out of the back to find teammates along the touchline. Against a team that attacks as much as DC does, everybody's going to have bad moments under pressure, but Jack acquitted himself admirably.