No thank you. Lived it starting in 80s and 90s. Needed at the time, but we need to advance, not go back.
That's probably largely system dependent. I expect Berhalter to be the coach and his system generally calls for an organized distributor next to a more creative 8. That likely leaves out one of the two. Not sure which one.
I have the same concern as i am sure many do. I think giving it a shot, makes sense given they are clearly our top 2 CBs. The key will be identifying the situations that cause problems for them and figure out if other players around them can cover without further hurting the team. I think we know we have a problem if they have an inexperienced left back and the two in front of them last night, but does it change if WM & TX are in front and sold defender at LB? Do they work if they are supplemented with a 3rd CB? If not, who provides the best pairing.... Miazga and #3, 4, or 5 or Brooks and #3, 4, or 5?
I can't really disagree more. Acosta and Bradley were the 2 center midfielders in front of the backline. And they just played in a game in which their team gave up 4 goals … often with Bradley getting burned for pace and/or positioning, and quite frankly with Acosta nowhere to be found defensively. And between the 2, they committed a single foul (and yes, I know it was a friendly, but Colombia committed 50% more fouls than we did, trying to yanno … stop attacks). The notion that we could not ask for more out of Acosta and Bradley as players in last night's game is ludicrous. The positions that they played required a 2 way effort. They both completely failed at the defensive side of their duties. And hell, I am a guy who likes Acosta in a certain role, and thinks the Bradley hate is over-the-top. But we should hope and expect for better.
Bradley looked better for USMNT than he has for TFC recently. That's not high praise. I legitimately think he must be carrying a chronic underlying injury. It's not enough just to say his "legs are done" - I think maybe he never healed right from those surgeries. It was painful watching him try to sprint, and then have to pull up after a few steps. I liked what we saw from Weah. The assist was sublime - but more than that, he looked confident in the final third. Most of our guys seem to get hesitant when they reach the box. I actually have a lower rating for Robinson than most do. I like his speed and energy, but he was too easy on defense, and his crossing needs to be more accurate. On his "assist", the cross was headed for the near post, and it was a deflection off a CB that bounced it to Acosta. A couple times, I thought he crossed too early, knocking it in when no one was available. I thought Acosta was pretty good in attack. The goal was well-done, but he also pulled a few other good moves around the box to try to get an opportunity. Wood is Wood. His skill is speed on the counter. He's not so good when the box is defended and they need to break through. Lacks the vision. I hope we get to see an all-new roster against Peru - just to see what the fresh faces are capable of. Unless Sarachan is itching to get a win to close out his international managerial career.
Glass half-full take: before the subs, it was USA 2-1 Colombia. The subsequent lack of effort at closing down and tracking back was disappointing, however.
If the opponent is strong, it's OK to mention that. It's just reality. We don't get better by playing bad teams. This is a good thing we're playing strong teams. We lost the midfield, as expected, and the defense got flooded. When you don't have Pulisic, McKennie, and Adams to keep the ball, it makes for a long night. But ... we did have some excellent attacking play.
We were the top offense in CONCACAF last cycle, and the 4th best defense. You literally didn't learn anything Arena and Klinsi didn't know, except Robinson is a problem. Last cycle we could score goals and hand them away too. That's not really change. There is a big yawning gap between "great" and "bad" where we could learn something and make player distinctions without just getting smashed or winning 5-0. You're acting like if it's not Brazil it's Faroe or something. There are a lot of solid soccer teams that would play us tight but where we could see our people flex their muscles a little. SBI has an article saying the midfield is crowded. Know why? Barely anyone can produce under these conditions so you can judge setup work, finishing, possession, etc. You watch someone make a 2 second run to knock in a looping cross. Oh, he advanced his case. Really? So it all ends like mush. How is the new coach going to use this tape to separate out players to try first? Run the tape of the 10 minutes we played well? But how is that balanced with the other 80.
That’s assuming we can move forward with the current personnel. Not seeing it at either the coach or player level.
Nice try but no. (1) Many have pointed out he made no half time subs in a friendly, and waited a while to even start subbing. Plain English, first sub, '58. By that point it's 2-2. So your basic premise is wrong. Suggesting Fafa vs Saief decided it? (2) He then makes one sub before it's 3-2 (losing by just 2 subs), and one more sub before it's 4-2 (final score by 3 subs). That's a normal contingent. The next two come in at 80' after it's the final score. (3) More to the point, the starters got their clocks cleaned for 45 and then played well for maybe 8 minutes before Colombia got their crap together and won the rest of the half. You really want to hang your hat on 8 minutes? Separate grumble: (4) Dingbat didn't make 6 subs again??????????? I was doing my analysis and didn't need more than one hand to count the subs.
There would also be the dubious implication that players who stayed in the whole game and fell apart in the second half of a friendly and jogged should be somehow absolved by the fact people subbed off, and then relied upon as some starting unit or something. If Bradley continues to play unsubbed and screws up or runs out of gas doesn't that go to his usefulness in a fixture under real game rules?
Just fire him!!! Subs at 58, 68, 75, 80, 80, NA... It is an atrocious use of getting guys minutes in these games. All but just under 90 mins went to the starting XI. I guess he has been saving the fed the extra comp a player gets for getting on the field.
Stop worrying about tape. These players shouldnt be judged on these games. They are thrown with little organization and understandably dont look good. I just rewatched focusing on the defense and it was a mess, but most of it is easily fixable by a coach who has a clue. I know you dont like Robinson, but he is young and has potential in a position that we unfortunately dont have many real options. The issues wide were that were too easily letting defenders get into space behind them, not closing down the ball, and tracking in general. Centerally it was more a matter of marking and better communication on assignments and switches. All of those should be fixable things. That two goals came in transition with midfielders not tracking their men resulting in disaray that got exploited (plus an incredible finish) and the goalscorer being wide open. The first two were a result of allowing James to much space to kill us and Robinson letting a guy get behind him and be able to pick out the pass [Miazga did an ok job marking but needs to be closer]
What I mean is that we know what we are getting from them in the positions they were deployed. And frankly, it was a good effort for 50 minutes. Things definitely fell apart after conceding the second.
If you go to ASN starting xi site where you can post your lineups for USMNT games, http://americansoccernow.com/matches/200/starting_xis you will see that there were 32 users who posted their starting xi and 29 listed Robinson at lb. Only three - Excellency, Pete and Dave (who had Brooks at lb) - had other choices. There would be bucketful of tears and gnashing of teeth if Sarachan had not started Robinson.
Robinson's repeatedly getting taken to the woodshed and that doesn't really bother me right now. I'm still betting on him based on his tools and career trajectory, but that's subject to change the closer we get to competitive matches without improvement. Between Robinson getting repeatedly skinned and all sorts of untracked runners flooding the box, Brooks and Miazga had their hands full and didn't cover themselves in glory, but I haven't changed my outlook on them.
If Berhalter on any new coach designs any system that leaves out either McKennie or Adams who are 2 of our best, most influential difference-making players then he is a moron and should fired on the spot.
I've never understood the rationale that it is ok to make your teammates look like crap and destroy their reputations and careers because as a 19yr old kid you have plenty growing to do. It all seems so...…..unprofessional. You have lots of good company though. Warshaw and Doyle and Co. were all 'just fine" as well. Then there's the question of how many tickets we can sell for this show. I guess the Conmenbol guys are bringing their best cuz the CA is up for grabs in the summer. That puts a lot of Colombians in the seats. And Brazilians. That will be gone in the post CA period.
Adams is the best US DM in MLS and arguably the best DM in MLS period, playing in a double pivot. McKennie is one of the hottest box-to-box CM in European football. What have you seen that suggests that Mckennie would be less effective replacing Sean Davis next to Adams at NYRB or Adams would be less effective replacing Bentaleb next to McKennie at Schalke?
I’m not saying they don’t fit. It’s too early for that but it happens. Neither really fit into the Bradley or Trapp mold in terms of steady positioning, organization and possession passing. McKennie’d passing completion rate is horrible at Shalke. He’s more of a chaos maker player. He’d fit well with Marsch. If Berhalter wants one dm to sit back with the cb’s and another to get forward and connect passes - neither fit the calm possession dm. Both could fit the 8... we’ll see though
There is a maxim that coaches who listen to the fans to make decisions soon join them. There was already precedent for Robinson laying an egg two games ago. My bigger point is share the minutes out so that your eggs aren't all in one basket, and since any coach worth his salt has to find not just a lineup but a bench and not just a bench but another 10 or so players to call if anyone is hurt. You don't have to like or dislike players, and they can be great like Steffen or Pulisic or crap, doesn't matter, look at your options. It's like preseason football. There's a reason your team isn't giving their second or third string their first reps in some game that counts. They actually spend more time initially playing people who may be cut because the margin is usually the harder part to figure out. Any dingbat can write Pulisic and Steffen and for a couple games there Robinson on a sheet of paper. Takes a little snap to be, woah, what if Steffen ever gets hurt, would I even want to use Guzan or Horvath, and would I want to give whoever the 2 and 3 are some game reps. The time to settle on a team is closer to when the games count.
Brooks needs a baby sitter. Miazga aint a baby sitter. Parker is a good baby sitter. Parker isnt good in the box but he's good in midfield. If you want Brooks' passing and aerial game we will need a 3rd cb and I'm fine with that. A line of Miazga-Brooks-Parker is really strong because Brooks is good in the box and Parker is good in the midfield. I'm shocked to see people's verdict go from "that's what I wanted to see, finally establish the cb pairing going forward, now let's see them play together every game, not like Klinsmann's tenure...….." to "MIazga and Brooks don't pair well".
Fifa ratings are screwy, but how can the US be ranked #22? Peru is almost as good as Colombia right now. We won't find 21 players that can play them well now or in the near future. Hiring Berhalter instead of Sarachan won't change that. I feel we're in the '90s again. This sucks.