If you were to describe in detail what exactly the "role" entails then we all could have a conversation about who could best fit it. What do you see as the top 3 to 5 attributes that a player in the "role" must provide? We could then look at each player in the pool and access and rank them on each specific attribute. For some reason you seem reluctant to provide those details. Your suggestion of Keaton Parks makes it clear to me that I have zero idea of the "role" you are describing.
How good defensively does a 6 need to be? I think WT and MB are clearly subpar and from the limited time I've seen Parks, they're way way better than him defensively.
I would say its a combination of an anchor and regista. It's the role of Jorginho and Busquets. Its not a pure regista like Pirlo or a central destoyer, but a player who is positionally consistent, who blocks space and covers lanes more than attacks and wins balls. Then when in possession, is hard to dispossess. In Pep's style, the ball generally stays on the floor. GB seems to have more of a dutch leaning and wants to maximize the space on the field with longer diagonal balls. https://www.thefalse9.com/2018/10/the-jorginho-effect.html The discussions we have been getting into about WT/MB vs Adams seem directly along the lines of Jorgiho and Kante. Where one dictates tempo, possession, closes down passing lanes, and starts the attacks and the other attacks, gets up field and wins duals aggressively. Busquets is probably the ideal example. He wins balls very well and intercepts passes but is also very technically gifted and hard to dispossess. If we assume Adams is more Kante for a minute and we eliminate the options of WT/MB - I was trying to think of highly technical players, excellent passers, who rarely lose the ball - but are also excellent positionally and defensively. Beckerman seems to fit that mold well in the past. Parks was a creative, forward player- more of a number 10 before he shot up in height. Then his club tried to make him into a dmid. So I was wondering if he could fit that role.
It depends on what type of 6 you are looking for. I think part of the disconnect is different people have different ideas in their head of what a 6 is. I am trying to anticipate what that particular 6 is in GB's system. From what I have read, watched, etc- my projection is that its more of an anchor role and less of a destroyer. I think 90% of people want a pure destroyer in that role. I think a lot of people are more unhappy with GB's possession first mentality and system than anything else. Even if we forget all the WT/MB drama- the role that I think GB wants in that #6 is not that of a destoyer. He wants an anchor/regista. Think Beckerman instead of Jones. Though I think, specific to GB- he wants that anchor to have a lot of range and accuracy to his passing so he can make the field large. GB talks about McKinnie as a dual 8/10. Adams is a ball winning 6. I think the LIMA role with Adams in mind Then he wants a more 10, creative player in there. I am guessing that is Pulsic. Now with Adams doing so well maybe he shifts that and makes Mckinnie that creative 10, adams the 8/10 and then moves pulisic to the wing. I just don't think so. I think Pulisic is our most dangerous player and he's going to want to get him in the most goal dangerous position that he can. That's probably one of the dual 10's. Regardless, that leaves an opening in that anchor/regista role that few in the US pool fit. So IF he wants Pulisic more central and IF he wants McKenniee in that 8/10- then it's about whether Adams fits better as destoyer in a 343 next to the anchor or as the anchor/regista. Adams has never been asked to be that anchor/regista role. Its a more restrictive role than he is used to but he may fit it. If we assume that he fits that Lima role or the 8/10 role better- then that still leaves a gap for that anchor/regista role. Its one that could be hard to fill. We have lots of players than can do part of that but not all of it.
Kante has excelled primarily as a defensively minded 8. Adams has a more varied game. It's a bit early to try to pigeonhole him into not being able to play certain central midfield roles.
Here's my summary of what you think an anchor is: positionally consistent, who blocks space and is hard to dispossess. I don't think that either Beckerman, WT or MB qualifies. When I think Beckerman, i think of a player who was good at ball-winning while being positionally sound. I don't think of him as someone who can shield the ball and then relieve pressure (Nagbe's defining skill). To note, we didn't have much possession in Brazil. When facing strong competition who provide quick pressure, WT and MB are neither "hard to dispossess" nor elite passers. In watching them play, they will quickly pass sidewards/backwards (this is not meant as a strong criticism). Brooks is better than both at passing.
Which is why it's f***ing stupid to use a system that requires a player that we don't have in the pool in one of the most important positions on the field.
I am going to pointedly not talk about either WT or MB- I am tired of differing evaluations of them. ;-) I was wondering about Nagbe- he was who I was thinking about when I said that we have players with some traits but not all. Beckerman was a pretty good anchor. He had most traits except the same talent on the ball. Nagbe is great at possession but lacks the defensive skills and range of passing. Adams and Mckennie just haven't been asked to do much of that role at all. They are excellent ball winning center midfielders who both play in very aggressive, pressure systems. It's hard to project what they can do in a system that is much more possession based. Its why Parks came to mind - he's mostly an unknown to me aside from some articles. It could be that role is filled by someone who is pretty much an unknown for us because someone who shines in that particular role could definitely struggle in other roles. They wouldn't quite be that ball winning destroyer. They would be great on the ball/ very technically skilled but not athletic enough or creative for the #10 role. They have to have excellent positional IQ- which generally means experience- and I can't think of really experienced USMNT players who it that well. It's an interesting problem to see how GB solves it. I do think its absolutely key to how GB wants to play.
Or we find that player or we develop that player. Its how the US want to play and I am excited to see it. Its why they got a GM- so that they could develop a consistent style of play across multiple managers and so that US soccer could develop and find the right talent to play that style. Those are all good ideas. They just now have to pull them off. ;-)
I agree with your point about a lot of my criticism being around being a "possession" team. We are not going to possess the ball a majority of the time vs. elite teams. Putting an offensive player in a defensively important position is a huge huge mistake that I'm giving GB the benefit of the doubt that he'll avoid it. I know you're avoiding the MB/WT discussion.....but they're not elite either positionally on defense or passing-wise.
Against strong competition you also want a 6 who can defend like a banshee. Armas in his prime. My ideal is Armas in his prime with a bit better distribution. From the current crop there is no perfect candidate for the spot. Adams comes the closest. Triple G is going to have to adapt to the talent he has in hand. Can't be too wedded to a particular concept for any position. There are ways to play this that allows the team to exploit Adams ability to cover a ton of ground. It doesn't make sense to give up on that. I would try Adams/McKennie as a tandem. Hopefully the Jones/Bradley and Lampard/Gerrard issues don't afflict them.
Tyler covers so much ground and is such a quick player, the notion of him playing a more conservative "shielding the back line" type of 6 seems to be wasteful. In this regard, the comparison with and description of Kante as a defensively minded 8 feels more apt.
If we are playing a total football 4-3-3 which seems to be what GB played and certainly what Pep plays, then the attributes of a #6 in order of importance are: 1) Protect your CB and stop the opponent. You don't have to necessarily win the ball but you must be a ball stopper. You need to cover zone 14 and range enough to stop counter attacks and cover for both FBs. Current benchmarks; Kante, Casemiro, and our own JJ. Makelele set the standard. Xabi Alonso and Busquets were underrated as ball stoppers. 2) Be an active outlet to receive the ball and maintain control in the defensive and middle 3rd. The 6 has to be able to aggressively move and be available to play combinations in tight spaces in order to maintain possession. Thiago and Busquets are the current standards. Prime Khedira was excellent. 3) Play simple positive forward passes to start the attack 4) Accurate long balls to switch the point of attack. Xabi Alonso was the master. Prime Jones at Schalke was excellent with both feet. This attribute is more useful if you also have excellent wide 1v1 attackers. Yes, the most important attribute of a #6 ids to play defense by stopping the ball.
I think the problem with your analysis is that it is based on club play. This thread is about Adams whose boss says that what Tyler is really good at is knowing when to press. I don't see that in your list. In the international game at this point we are much better off with Trapp because he has played the position at youth level and u23's and lately senior team and he can distribute long diagonal balls to wide areas, etc. Bear in mind that the 6 will be asked to circulate the ball to a constantly changing pool of players, not a club gameday "18". Adams should play the free 8 at this stage for USA because it will give him the opportunity to experiment and succeed/fail in friendlies and GC's against a variety of opposition which he will not see in Bundesliga. That can only be good both for Adams, USA and Leipzig. Falling into a comfort zone at the 6 for a one week visit to USA and passing to his buddies while he lives out his Kante fantasy doesn't do anything for me.
The requirements of a #6 in a modern 4-3-3 is exactly the same at youth, club, and international levels. The only differences you are likely to see in the international game is that the schemes are much simpler because there is not enough time to grove complex, morphing, multi-formation systems. International schemes also tend to be much more defensive.
We know that Trapp is TERRIBLE defensively. Let’s see if there’s a way we can progress without him until Adams/McKennie/Morales/Canouse prove otherwise. I think Bradley is clearly better than Trapp at the regista and we’ll be in trouble if we have Bradley out there against decent opposition from 2020 forward.
I think Adam's is better than MB/WTF90 at the first three and by a large margin on the first two. Number four is the only place I can see an argument for the other two players. I think people underestimate Adam's ability in this area and when you combine that with how others break down when unded pressure, they aren't much of an upgrade. I find this debate as confusing as playing our best attacking player out wide.
In that case, Bradley wins out on experience. I would have thought the experience argument wouldn't be used for quite a while after 2017. Yes, Trapp didnt play well and was overwhelmed physically while he led us to not qualifying for the Olympics. To put context to the lack of physicality, Hyndman dealt with it better being played out of position vs Colombia. Trapp has had moments, but has overall shown he isnt up to international level. You can go to WTF90 thread and see video of how little of an impact he had against Brazil and was a huge defensive liability against Brazil. You can also find him getting embarrassed when isolated out wide against Mexico and his double teaming a player is useless against England.
I wouldn't say Trapp is terrible defensively. I think that is too broad a statement. What I would say is that at mid-range and above international level, he does not have the physicality to defend at a reasonable level. And yes, that manifests in him being atrocious defensively against better teams (see Italy and Brazil in which he was completely lost). I think Trapp is a reasonable little player. But I just disagree with the thinking that he is a long-term answer at the level this team needs against better opponents.