Our player pool just isnt that good. This shouldnt be that surprising. None of our players have the qualities and class of many of these belgium players. MANY of them. And Belgium is no where near the best team in the tournament. we have a long long long long long long way to go.
I appreciate Beckerman's performance, as you say it's the best decision concerning the World Cup squad. I don't know if we even have to worry about Beckerman playing in a more open formation, because if the US is down early and has to push for goals I would expect him to be sacrificed by halftime or the 60th minute.
Interesting. My initial though is that while this move has helped Jermaine Jones, has that made our midfield better. We have won a game, should have won another and didn't get blown out in a third. But looking at our stats and watching the game, I am not convinced that our midfield has been solved. They are competing, getting the job done, but with what appears to me to be a negative impact on Michael Bradley, I am not sure this solution is anything more than a pragmatic stopgap (hope it lasts for another few games).
Absolutely, 100% pragmatic. Against the strong group we were in, and then even more so once Altidore went down in the middle of the 1st half of the 1st game, pragmatism was the word of the month. The Beckerman choice has proven to be pragmatic and successful. The US was not expected to advance. I figured we would get 2 or 3 points and go home. We got 4 points and are playing today. Had Altidore stayed healthy, JK would surely have continued with the hybrid 4-3-2-1 from the Nigeria match and the Ghana match. Becks at DM, Jones at LM, and alternating Bedoya and Zusi at RM. Bradley as the CM feeding Jozy and Clint. The Beckerman decision is the cornerstone for that plan, and the even more pragmatic plan used after Jozy went down. It's a Cup tournament. Results matter. Pragmatism wins. We saw JK play pragmatically at Italy and at Azteca twice to get results. Those were the models for the Cup. I have plenty of criticisms, too. Donovan's cut is #1. Edu is #2. Both interconnected with several redundant and largely useless players on the bench. The Gonzo sub and pressing late in the Portugal match were other mistakes. And some of those decisions may still bite the USA today vs Belgium. But in spite of the mistakes I believe Klinsi has made, and also considering the Jozy injury, the US survived and advanced. It wasn't pretty, but it was pragmatic and effective. There had to be some good decisions in order to advance, and the Beckerman decision was #1 in my book, both for how Beckerman performed and how it impacted Jones.
The team advanced despite the midfield. The midfielders got owned against Ghana, went with toe-to-toe with Portugal, and then got owned again by Germany. That's two whuppings out of three. Bailed out by excellent play on the back line (aside from Cameron's two glitches) and clinical finishing against Ghana. Am hoping/expecting/praying for a Portugal-like performance today. I don't expect our midfield to win the battle. Just stay close and give the rest of the squad the chance to do its thing.
The US was expected to advance, really. Especially after it became clear Ronaldo was in poor shape and Ghana fell victim to its own federation's antics. Second of all, you can't argue the choice for Beckerman became 'even more pragmatic due to an accidental injury'. You know that It's not like Klinsi already knew Jozy was going to get injured. Taking a more suitable backup for Jozy would have been better proof of pragmatism on Klinsi's part. Adding a backup for Beckerman would have also been better proof op pragmatism. One could argue 'erratic' might be a better label than 'pragmatic'. EDIT: Erratic but effective.
Others have made far bigger mistakes than Beckerman has. Have to say I don't understand the concept of the use of a 'd-mid' being a sign of weakness. Elite club and international teams around the world use d-mids. Beckerman isn't even like the other d-mids listed in the article. He's not a stopper or destroyer. Shhheeeesh.
How many pre-tourney statisticians and mainstream commentators had the US advancing? Beckerman excels at what he does. There is nothing especially 'pragmatic' about bringing a player who fits the system being used. Plenty of elite teams at club and international level win games with low possession numbers. Real defeated Pep's Bayern 4-0 in UCL on 31% possession.
Yep. Just look at the articles around the world about this group. Very very few had the US getting out.
Will the USA advance out of group? * Finish 1st in Group 13 vote(s) 15.5% Finish 2nd in Group 37 vote(s) 44.0% Win vs Ghana but do not advance 11 vote(s) 13.1% Dead Last- Utter disappear across the BS Forums 23 vote(s) 27.4% http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/poll-will-the-usa-advance-out-of-group.2006154/
So in a super scientific internet poll of ~75 US Soccer fanatics, only ~60% thought we would advance? But well played.
Takes one. Pundits and observors from aroudn the world that are not american (even many that are american) said we would not advance. Many had us as the fourth place team. Big soccer is not a microcosm of the soccer world. It is a very biased and small view of football. You are wrong on this completely. the vast majority of people had us not to go through. At this point we are playing with house money. We just dont have very good players. We have some decent players. We just have to be a team. Thats all we have.
Didn't fivethirtyeight have the USA as second favorites to advance after Germany? I remember the USA and Portugal close to a toss up but that wasn't considering the injury of Ronaldo and other Portuguese players and the all the discord with the Ghana team.
I do not believe so. It changed after every match though. Right now we are the next team to go out. We are the most likely to lose next.
At a club level these questions have already been answered. On an international level we've already seen Beckerman capable of playing the bottom of the diamond midfield against Mexico. I think your judgments are misconstrued.
Shit, even our own analysts and former USMNT players had us not advancing from the group. This is idea that we were predicted to advance from the group is pure hogwash and limited to only the hopeful USMNT fans on the BS forums.
Mexico vs. the Netherlands 1-2, the players who featured in the 2-2 draw you're referring to: MEX: 23-Moisés Muñoz (1-Alfredo Talavera, 46); 28-Rogelio Chávez (22-Paúl Aguilar, 63), 6-Juan Carlos Valenzuela, 4-Rafael Márquez (capt.), 2-Francisco Javier Rodríguez; 27-Carlos Peña (9-Raúl Jiménez, 46), 17-Jesús Zavala, 7-Miguel Layun (16-Miguel Ángel Ponce, 68); 11-Alán Pulido, 18-Isaac Brizuela (10-Luis Montes, 57), 8-Marco Fabián
We basically play crap defense right around the top of the box to the center circle if we don't field a defensive midfielder. To me, this mostly seems due to our tendency to overcommit and tackle too early in the midfield. I tend to think our playing culture overemphasizes being aggressive in the tackle, which is actually very risky in the open field. So, if we're gonna rush the ball we need someone back to cover.