Nations League A, Camp 2, Canada/Cuba, Nov. 15/19

LET ME HAVE MY DELUISIONS

 

I don't think assists are a very good way of ranking defensive mids or defensive 8s.

You do make a good point about Roldan here though. I don't feel like he's capable of playing in the advanced role we're playing him.

I wouldn't mind seeing him as a 6 or more to the point, a back up 6.

 

A properly coached attacking 4-3-3 v a properly coached 4-2-2-2 attacking magic rectangle is a classic battle.

If we really were a proactive attacking squad the question would be how does the box contend with our wide attackers which should flatten the box out into a 4-4-2 forcing their AMs to defend as wingers, negating their numerical advantage in the center of the park.

Unfortunately we are not really a proactive attacking squad and unlike France don't play with athletic, dominating CMs in the center of the park so...

Don't question The System tm!

 

From almost everyone's favorite poster:

1194496535746101249 is not a valid tweet id

 

No, but Berhalter puts them in positions to fail.

 

I'll tune in. I'll wait for the lineups. If we have Weston is in the hole, then I'll switch to Classical Masterpieces and continue with Updike.

 

Of course they do, if the players around them are elite....

 

What's crazy here is that I'm not arguing that Bradley and Roldan are trash MLS players but rather that they're around average (probably 2nd quartile or middle third) and certainly not elite MLS players.

@cyberthoth insists that they are elite because they're part of teams that made it to 3 of 4 finals and completely ignores that their teams are led by much better players than those two.

 

my outside of the box concept
Johnson
Cannon Long McKennie Lima
Morris Morales Zardes
Boyd Sargent Arriola
you can either color within his stupid lines and get destroyed or you can move some versatile people into mid slots and maximize talent on the field.

 

i generally agree that 6s should be picked first for defending, and only then after winnowed to the excellent or at least competent should we iteratively go back through and look at who trips least over the ball.

but since this debate comes up umpteen times i think it's a legit metric if but to kneecap most stupid "we're going to create from the 6" or "use a 6 as a 10" arguments. "OK, what are his numbers?" if their name is not pirlo and it's not 10-15 assists per season what you're really doing is trying to play without a 10 and hoping people are too dense or kool-aided to notice. bradley averaged an assist every 9 games. yueill averaged an assist every 6.4 games. trapp averaged an assist every 7 games. when you play 1-2 games at a time the odds of them doing anything in that short period, when they require 3-5x that long in league, are long. and that's indulging the false assumption league = international. there are people like roldan on the team who in theory should have 2-3 goals and assists by now on league pace but simply cannot seem to handle the level. one cannot assume any of this even translates. the primary metric should be does anything ever happen for the NT. some of the fashionable 6 theories have no US assists yet. and yet it's like when bradley goes slot this dude in.

plus, if you "had to do it," it provides some rigor. there are players out there like delgado who average an assist every 4 games. that is still just "OK" for someone you want to create, but headed in the right direction. the problem is nothing about what we do is rigorous right now. we don't care how many goals the keepers or backs ship. we pick backs for "ability going forward" but actually pick the ones with fewer actual NT assists (eg, Robinson has more than the ones in camp). we claim to be picking 6s who create deep but then pick some of the worst on paper. we don't care about goals per 90. and we seem confused whether we want wing forwards who create or score. we seem to do a lot of crossing but then pick for goals or something. last, i thought the idea to all of this was to elevate our winning to new levels and not make us worse than for decades.

and to get out of talking points and to performance you have to consistently apply the same metrics to your candidates. i don't know how many times i hear people talk down some player because x and then y and z that he proposes have less of that same thing. it's political arguments, not a goal of sincere rigorous maximization.

 

So, 1 mid???? Zardes and Morris aren't mids and we would get destroyed in the midfield with this lineup.

 

morris was playing very deep on his own end in the final to start.

zardes used to be used as a wide mid.

i am proposing something closer to how JK used to play a 433 at one point, spread it out, knock it around. think how curacao plays. nothing says your 433 needs to be CMs standing on top of each other narrow in the middle, at least on offense. they then have to decide whether to stay concentrated in the middle and give away the wings, or match our formation.

at some point US fans need to consider that our best defense might be an offense that makes the other team poop their pants and adjust their tactics to become more defensive. they might score on this unit -- though i think you underrate the mids' athleticism and tenacity here -- but we would also probably put up some numbers. i think that front 5 can more than match their big 2. i don't understand why a team that has more offense than defense seems scared to play more than 4 of them at a time.

people need to face the 3 DM bs hasn't worked since the big 3 (bradley jones beckerman) retired or fell apart. those were special players who had above average attacking and defending skill. this vogue now is like a xerox of a xerox of a xerox of that team and not gifted in either direction. we are down wins and goals. i would rather go down attacking than play some lame defensive stalemate with freaking canada hoping to squeak. and if we play the same basic team and concept down 3 players, that already lost once, you will be lucky to tie.

 

Edumacate me: Someone told me that McKennie was supposed to be good at the 6, and that having someone good at the 6 (generally, irrespective of formation) was a super-valuable thing to have.

 

Was just reading SBI. He mentions (twice) that Canada could bunker.

I do not see that happening. It is not in the DNA of this Canada group. They'll do what must be done to hold the result, like most teams, but they'll attack the USA straight out the gate.

I would be shocked if we played overly defensive in this one. David, Davies, Hoilett, Cavallini, Arfield, Osorio, Kaye...they are all ballers by nature.

 

Some of the debate is how do you define, what roles do you give, the 6. Do you feel like they should be a specialist defense oriented player, or do you cutely redefine the position as a creative location. Personally I think team defense in most games should be well constructed and stocked with people who can stop others. And when I say stop others I mean like do it over and over. That to me is what a good 6 does, is basically sweep the midfield like a backline sweeper. I think we used to have that in Mastro, Armas, Jones. I think we have, good or ill, started to wander towards this regista nonsense. I think if you watch how the games go we have trouble stopping other teams' mids. I also think we systematically overrate the anticipated contributions of 6s and backs who are counter intuitively chosen for "ability in the attack." we act like they create but it doesn't show up much (or at all for some) in the scoresheet. so have i traded a defensive specialist for someone less proficient at that job with nebulous offensive contribution? to me to make that tradeoff i need pirlo ie a pile of tangible assists. not just the theory that yedlin dest bradley yueill etc. will help the team. because i can watch them get beat on defense. net out the pluses and minuses. this is a poor team but people don't seem to want to look at weak links. a player not skilled at his position but useful for other tasks may very well be your weak link.

In terms of McKennie specifically, to me he is still a man without a position. he can defend very well and track back on specific plays. i don't see sustained 90 minute efforts where he looks like Jones with his hair on fire. he can score, but often to me more akin to a forward crashing the box. he can go anonymous for long stretches in terms of normal, get it give it midfield combination. i think he could develop into a 6 or he could end up jack of all trades master of none. some of that is on schalke to leave him be someplace. some of that is on him in terms of growing from playing well in spurts to 90 minute effort.

I think McKennie is better than Morales but Morales has more of the energy level I want in the 6, that I don't think you see from McKennie yet.

 

The problem vs Canada is we did not switch play fast enough and the 4-2-2-2 of Canada had plenty of time react we were to slow of thought.

 

taking this at face value, I don't see any decent team looking at

Morris Morales Zardes
Boyd Sargent Arriola

as a front six and having any fear at all, let alone gastro-intestinal issues. None of those guys is a game breaker offensively.

 

i could see people saying that is hypocritical vis a vis my lineup. my lineup is based on two things. no wins and no goals and we are done for the tournament. a well played but unproductive 0-0 tie does us no good. nor do i trust a conventional GB approach to milk a win just because we're home now.

also, i have just a general belief the whole project has gotten too conservative and toothless. there need to be more attackers out there who put the fear of god in the opponent, such that we are more potent on offense, and instead of us adjusting to them, they adjust to us. part of the reason they can press is our mids suck so hard at attacking they pose little threat and are ripe for the picking. i cannot redo the selection but i can put out retasked forwards. we seem to have conveniently forgotten some of our Fs have also been Ms along the way. it's not just CP or Arriola.

you get back to balance when we face a better opponent and a non-elimination game.

 

it's all relative. this is not who i would pick. this is the closest GB's roster gets to fear mongering. maybe put dest or yedlin in a more advanced role. there is only so much to work with. if you play within his cubbyholes it only gets worse. you will then be starting a bunch of lame registas just to play Ms as Ms and Ds as Ds and Fs as Fs. i want to find a way to get more talent and offense on the field otherwise we're screwed. the same lineup that lost 0-2 minus keeper and key attacker is in trouble before it even begins. and absorbing and replicating GB's idea of how to line up a team only makes you dumber. one must resist his concepts and not just his results.***

***we are still fighting JK's stupid "where do you play club" war and he's gone 3 years in ribbons of shame.

 

We could ask the Canadian posters whom they worry about but I can only think of Morris and Dest right now (I do think they'd try to take account of yedlin's speed as well). I'd almost rather bring unknowns with either a high level of skill (Uly's deadball, Reyna's one-on-one abilities) or very high speed/athleticism (don't know who falls into that category nowadays) just to force our opponents to reckon the potential.

I understand what you're trying to do but it only works if the other team really has to game plan around our attackers.

 

who we could call is not what i am getting at, i too would have my own list

it's a question of how could you create something more interesting from the parts currently lying around the shop for the game in 2 days.

you seem resistant but then like well canada might not like facing those two guys. any one such substitution is an upgrade from going down in a dull formation with dumb rote player choices.

 

From the Canadian perspective, there is no one player we are worried about, but if we were forced to chose it would be Morris.

He was one of your few bright spots last match and he is in good form. He had a good play offs and just won MLS cup. He has the speed and power to create problems and he can finish off plays. Even though he is just 25 years old, he is a veteran attacker in this group and my hunch is that he'll be the player others look to in this match. Someone has to fill the void left by Pulisic and Morris is my best guess.

Another player I can see playing a role is Tyler Boyd. Yes, he has had a difficult start at Besiktas, but he recently made the most of his chance against Braga. Perhaps he comes in with a chip on his shoulder. I would start him over Arriola, who has not looked good for a while, not to mention he hasn't been playing.

Josh Sargent is someone we will want to keep a close eye on, but he's not going to create something out of nothing. What he will do is link the play up well for you guys and finish off chances, if you guys can create them.

I don't think Mckennie will have much of a say offensively, even though he is probably the best all-around player in the group you have called. That may be me hoping more than anything though. We'll soon see.

 

thanks, very helpful

 

Michael Bradley withdrew from #USMNT camp due to an ankle injury sustained in #MLSCup. Roman Torres kicked him in 32’ which lead to an injection at halftime. Most likely a 4 to 6 week injury as he will get a MRI today.

— Taylor Twellman (@TaylorTwellman) November 13, 2019

Good news...?

 

worth noting that coach's kid is inherently invested in the current regime in a way the other injured players are not. though i have some questions about whether steffen is The Answer or where CP should play, they would be in the 23 no matter who runs the place. every incentive though for MB to show up if healthy and lodge himself in there.