Yes. Bradley started Kljestan over Clark in the last two meaningful qualifiers (rounds 3 and 4 of the semi-finals). I see no reason to expect Bradley to change what seems to be working just fine.
Except, arguably, Mexico's short passing game requires somebody with Clark's range and physical abilities to disrupt. Of course, Clark usually winds up disrupting our passing game as well...
Kljestan also gets stuck in, and offers a lot more going forward. USA are at home, and MEX are struggling to find their form right now. I would be willing to sacrifice a bit of midfield bite in exchange for reducing the probability of a 0-0 draw.
Kljestan is a willing defender, but more in the sense that he can run all day. He defends up and down the pitch. However, his tackling doesn't have Clark's bite. I'm okay with that as long as Kljestan is paired up with Bradley. Bradley tackles with purpose, has good positioning, and isn't afraid to commit a professional foul. You can definitely tell he's the coach's son by the way he plays CM.
Bradley is a lock to start this match. The only positions even open for debate in my opinion are Kljestan/Clark and Pearce/Bornstein.
What we have here is a failure to communicate. Actually, I agree that Pearce will start. But given that Bornstein was the starter in 2007 and has just completed a month long camp, while Pearce has been on winter break/not in the 18, I think a reasonable argument could be made for Bornstein.
Pearce hasn't even been making the bench consistently for Rostock, at eam in the relegation zone of the 2. Bundesliga. No way he is a lock for anything. I never thought he was a better player than Bornstein, not that the latter is a world-beater either. It is unquestionably the weakest position on our team, but most teams in the world would have to say the same. There just aren't enough lefties to go around.
bradley is a lock to start each match until his dad gets sacked. bradley is a lock to be named captain, awarded mvp (even if he does not play well or score) and choose the rest of the squad if he likes.
He also has first dibs on the massage table, and gets 10 extra tickets for family and friends. He gets to take home one teammate's girlfriend after each game, and if he scores a goal that puts wives and mothers in play. US Soccer has recently commissioned a bronze statue of him to be made, which sit in front of the Soccer House in Chicago. If Bradley is injured and cannot be with the team, the statue will travel in his stead.
Agreed, and the Clark vs. Kljestan choice will tell me a great deal about Bob's mentality going into the game. One is more comfortable going forward, the other more of a true defender. Start Ricardo and it's a defensive-oriented, counter-attack approach. Put Sacha out there and we're far more likely to attack the net through the run of play. Clark would allow Michael Bradley to get forward a bit more, but I'd rather have Sacha making those runs right now from the center-mid slot. It's an interesting choice for Bob. How much do we respect Mexico's attack vs. how vulnerable to we think they are right now?! Hmmm......
The beauty is that the dilemma could be resolved by playing Clark and Klejstan, while sitting Bradley.
Why would you sit the better player? Bradley has proven himself at both club and country level to be better than Clark, imo.
Only surprising thing about the roster is Rogers, who really was poor against Sweden. It's not really credible that he could make the gameday 18, so why bring him in? Experience? This is WCQ v. Mexico, man! Bring in someone that has the chance of showing you something in preparations that you think you can use. That could be anyone from Adu to Thorrington -- but don't think it's Rogers.
He's already in Columbus, right? I'm assuming if anyone in the midfield gets hurt in the next 24 hours, he can be penciled in for the last spot on the bench. Having Adu fly in from Monaco to sit around for a couple days on the miniscule chance that he can make the bench seems a bit insulting.
NO, I don't feel bad at all. This is actually great for Adu. I want BB to continue leaving him off the roster until he get his *ss to a club that's willing to put him on the pitch regularly. Warming the bench of a mediocre club does not earn you spot with the Nat.
This pretty much sums up what I guess is BB's thinking. I don't disagree with your assessment of Adu's passing ability, but the problem I see is "who's going to be on the end of those passes ?" Certainly Donovan, but if you play Donovan and Adu as your striker pair, neither might see the ball if our backs are pressured. You need someone who can play back-to-goal and hold the ball up since our back line tends to boom it when pressured. As you go through the line up, I think you realize that the player who sits if Adu plays is Beasley.
Because soccer isn't about getting your best 11 players on the pitch. If Clark/Klejstan is a more effective pairing than either Bradley/Clark or Bradley/Klejstan, then Bradley should sit. And aside from his brilliant season in the highest scoring league in Europe, I'm not sure I agree with your assessment either. Time will tell.
And you know that Clark/Kljestan is the best pairing, because they had a good match against Sweden's C-squad.