Why? So if CP went to Chelsea with Sarri and US wanted to implement a Liverpool style system- CP suddenly can't be called in. BS. It's a false premise.
If your benchmark is doing better than last cycle, that's a fallacy there. Other than last cycle, we have won or come in 2nd in the Hex. That should be the minimum expectation and I'd say getting 7 points from Mex and CR is a good baseline. There are those here who think that the benchmark is making the KO rounds of the WC - I think it's making the WC and then playing well there - our success will be based upon the draw.
FFS - the QB position is probably the most important position on the field and you simply refuse to engage in any discussion over it. I've laid out why GB would choose certain players in order to "see why GB made his choices" as you've frequently stated. I get it - you're a fan boy of attractive attacking soccer and are excited that GB's systems promises that. You're willing to go with any of his choices and seem to be willing to lose game vs. better teams as long as we look good vs. Panama. It would be better if you just said that you support GB just because you support his goal of attractive soccer and nothing will dissuade you. Don't say that you're interested in actually analyzing or discussing the trade-offs - you're not, you just want to praise the attempt.
OK, so by discuss the formation and strategy, what is meant is.... tell us all how perfect this strategy is, disagreements about strategy, formation, or player selection is off limits. Sounds like a fun conversation.
Dude- I am happy to talk about the "qb" position. I have submitted numerous articles where I am trying to learn and share more about it. I will not engage in debates about WT and MB. They are numerous across this site. Go find them. Every thing for you keeps coming back to that. You can't seem to stop. I have said repeatedly- I don't care to discuss them. I don't know how I can be more clear. Tactics, systems, the larger player pool- individual roles. All fine. I do not and will not get into a meaningless debate about WT and MB- just so you can rant about how useless they are again. I can't say that any clearer.
no- I am happy to discuss flaws in it. Its just that the complaints you mentioned above- we've already talked about. I am also no interested in hyberbole. The rb coming into the middle seems no different in terms of defensive coverage than a rb that is overlapping and joining the attack. I think one poster had an interesting point about man marking and I wouldn't mind hearing more about that. But again- how is that different than a rb that is overlapping. The coverages are still (to an extent) zonal.
you're right. it's absolutely crazy to expect that if we are firmly instituting a possession based system to find players who actually play in that same style in their club. Is it hard and fast rule? of course not, but again, you're not interested in having a discussion or analysis with others with different opinions. My guess is you primarily spend time with people who think much like you and can't understand why anyone would think differently.
My benchmark is qualifying. I don't care what we did two generations ago. This particular generation has not qualified. Its doubtful we will have any World Cup vets able to participate if we qualify. I think fans have taken qualifying for granted and we shouldn't do that. AFTER we qualify, we can talk about WC goals.
How can you talk about GB's use of the QB role without talking about who he's using there? the point is that we don't have anyone who's tailor made so there are trade-offs. We don't know who he's going to put in although we both have our suspicions. This is the part where an analysis would be to say,"if he chose X, he must value Y more than Z". You refuse to discuss.
blah blah blah I love interesting discussions which has to include disagreements. I love to disagree and am kind of a disagreeable guy. (shocker). I like to debate. I don't care to spend time talking about boring things. I am not interested in talking about specific topics that have been discussed to death.. simply because they are boring. but I'm done explaining that...
JK actually tried to do something similar briefly when he started using Evans as a RB. Instead of having him overlap he’d push him into the midfield centrally. I want to say the Jamaica away game is one to look at. Klopp also did something similar around that time as well. Believe it was the first year he took over at Pool. He’d use Emre Can in that hybrid RB/CM role. Neither stuck to it long term. The experiences were brief if my memory is right.
I think Pep's done it and Brendan Rogers has tried it. Its not something that's never been tried. The idea of transitioning from a 4 back system to a 3 back system between possession and out of possession isn't new either. I would love if anyone had an insight or articles about how any of those went. What worked? What didn't? What were the biggest weaknesses?
Agree that if you have to choose one or the other,system coaches are probably worse. @Susaeta was pretty clear to say that coaches really aren't one or the other. Berhalter won't be either. It'll be interesting to see where along that spectrum Berhalter lays. The reality, I believe, is that any successful team has a "system" and must have players to make that system work. If the players are good enough, the team can get by with fairly good results by having a system that isn't so good. Even a fully optimized system, however, isn't going to hide inferior players. It may minimize weaknesses but "you still need the horses to pull the wagon" (John Madden I think) In my opinion, a third variable/factor/quality in a coach is far more important...flexibility. I think in many cases, people are taking a lack of flexibilty to indicate that a coach is a system coach but players first coaches can be inflexible too in their inability to change systems and or stick with a player beyond his sell by date (Arena anyone?). Regardless of the type of coach it is, he needs to accept the fact that things often need to be changed. If it is a "system" coach he needs to constantly evaluate the on-field results and make tweaks to the lineup and his system based upon his players and the opponents. (does this make him a players coach?) If it is a players coach, he needs to tweak his lineup and his system based upon his players and the opponents (does this make him a systems coach?)
While I think much of this post has merit, think it is important to note that there are steps/benchmarks etc that we need to meet enroute to our goal of WC 2022. 1. be ready for beginning of qualifying (where we don't have to compete against Mexico or Costa Rica 2. be ready for the Hex where we need to be able to compete with Mexico, Costa Rica and the usually one or two relatively decent squads from Jamaica, T&T, Panama that make up the rest. 3. Have all our ducks in a row for WC 2022. Is there anyone that really thinks we can't qualify for (for not from) the hex with Will Trapp? (especially if Weah,Sargent and maybe one or 3 others really break out? Not saying it is ideal but don't you think that we are pretty close to that first benchmark right now? In my opinion, the second benchmark is where Trapp and Bradley will begin to matter, Bradley is already showing a significant decline in some of the qualities that helped make him during his career....by the time the hex comes and he is older, he won't be any better. Trapp will probably improve somewhat but will it be enough to compete with Mexico and Costa Rica? not sure. Will he be our best option? He isn't going to gain ground on a quality younger player. My point, (which is pure speculation on my part), is that Berhalter will likely be searching for a way to upgrade that position by replacing the player or adjusting the requirements of the position. (similar to what he apparently is doing with the 10 position by using dual 10's....how can you get the same effect but divide the important responsibilities). 3. now we come to benchmark 3. The reality of benchmark #2 is that we just have to qualify. Obviously you don't try for 3rd because if you miss...your'e screwed. But it does give a certain amount of leeway. What needs to occur is that the major wrinkles at the position need to be ironed out during the hex so that going into the WC it will just be ironing out a few details. If we are looking for a key player in the time between the end of the hex and the world cup we are probably looking at first round exit. This means that the absolute deadline for dealing with and finalizing the "QB" position (in Berhalter's mind) might just be sometime during the hex. I'm not sure that the next two games will give us much more illumination into his thinking because he may need more time evaluating his personnel for the next two games (because he doesn't know the European talent as well as the MLS talent...by the way, having played with FJ, he probably feels he knows him pretty well as well and I don't know anything about the conversation with FJ so him not being on the list doesn't mean much one way or the other to me.)
This is why I would modify it to say that Berhalter is a “Concept-First” manager. The system is how a manger implements their concepts and it takes the right players in the right roles to do it. The system we have seen is not Berhalter’s normal/ideal system. The fullbacks are significantly more reserved in their positioning to prevent us from being punished by upfield mistakes. It was also built with our talent pool in mind (Pulisic and McKennie instead of Higuain and Artur, etc...).
So you’re seeking an analysis of history? Why don’t you provide a detailed example of the formation’s implementation? You’re not a TA leading a study discussion here.
Ha! I have posted several articles that I could find. I enjoy learning and discussing these systems. Except as I learn them and people challenge them, it starts to sound like all I am doing is defending it as a perfect system. All I intending to do is respond to questions about how it would work and handle different attacks. So I was recently accused of only wanting people to say how great the system was. I tried to mitigate that by asking for information rather than researching and providing it. Now I'm accused of trying to be a TA. ;-) When did talking about soccer on the internet get so complicated? lol
To stay with the gridiron analogy for a minute, there are the classic pocket QBs and the running QBs. There are always more than one way to play a particular position, even within a fairly rigid system.
On your first point, I think you are generally correct. However, with Adams and McKennie (who as a practical matter I think will play more like an 8 than a second 10 against stronger teams), we have a chance to make it work. Those two are exceptional in terms of what they bring to the table defensively and in terms of ability to press and cover ground. On your second point, I hope Adams is first given a look as the 6. I think he could be good in the other role, but having a strong defensive spine imo is the higher priority.
And to extend this, I think Berhalter is looking for a “pocket QB” who connects to the dual 10’s/free 8’s and then maintains shape as the deepest midfielder. This is roughly Weigel’s role when Tuchel had BVB play a 4-1-4-1. My long-standing preference has been to move towards a straight 3-4-X lineup with Adams and McKennie as roving 8’s backed by 3 CB’s, instead of neutering one by forcing them to sit. Then distribute the connecting pass duties to Brooks, Miazga, the 3rd CB, and the CM’s. This is more geared towards playing top 30 teams and trying to win transition moments but could be adapted to spreading the field and creating with the right attackers. I will admit that we’re in a little depth chart gap. We have a lot of CB depth but a clear 3rd starter has not emerged. We don’t have a ton at LWB. Then Bradley is still around.
It seems a lot (or maybe more accurately some) of these possession teams are preferring that 6 to sit deep or provide that "qb" role rather than those roving 8's. Pep and Sarri come to mind anyway. (Pep with Busquets at Barc and Javi, I think at Bayern; Sarri at both Chelsi and in the Series A). Why do you think that is? What's the calculus involved? It doesn't seem to be player depend as Sarri went out specifically to get that player when he came in. (I can't tell you exactly how Pep is doing it now.)
I think you're missing what some of these guys want. GB should have regular televised whiteboard sessions where he not only explains to all the fans the exact reasons for all his tactical decisions and call ups, but is willing to take their advice on the spot and change it appropriately if any disagree with any decision.