We have players playing in top leagues. We could almost field a BuLi Starting XI Wood Sargent Pulisic Morales Adams McKennie Johnson Brooks Richards* Chandler Klinsmann.
I’d like to meet the coach who declares” I don’t want players who can pass and I hate breaking lines”.
So I see a player 40yds away and I have a clear passing channel to him that bypasses a bunch of guys and I pass to him but he is surrounded immediately by 3 players and loses the ball.
Wood too, so that's two. Started to respond but then I thought maybe was sarcasm. Anyway, we aren't top 16. That's a good goal to try to get to by 2022 (unlikely).
Sarcasm for... what? I forgot that Wood was in, I just remember his scrappy goal in Honduras. My point was, it wasn't a Euro-based squad that lost in Cuova, which was Excellency's implication. He said "what happened to the above XI in Cuova?". Well, we don't know because there were 2 Euro starters (CP, Wood), and "bad egg" Geoff Cameron on the bench. The other 20 guys were MLS-based players. Not looking to get into the weeds about Euro v MLS players, but we sure as hell didn't lose in Cuova because of our European based players.
I think Berhalter will use the European based players appropriately, or at least, I hope he does. JK used them a lot, perhaps too much, and Arena failed to use them. Of course Jan Camp is important, because at least part of our team will come from MLS, just like how part of the team will come from Europe, so any European-based or A-team camps will be crucial so that the European guys get integrated.
Some confusion over this post; is it a joke? Fun to go through it: Wood: Was there, one of a few that played great in the prior game and seemed tired in this one. Sargent: Not considered, and shouldn't have been Pulisic: There, scored. Morales: Not considered, probably should have been at some point Adams: Should have been there. Should have played RB instead of Zusi in Honduras and maybe against CR. McKennie: Should have been there. Was hurt, but doubt Arena would've brought him much less played him. Johnson: Dropped, hurt. Brooks: Hurt Richards: in High School. Miazga should have been there. Cameron should have started. Chandler: Un-American Klinsmann: He was in school too. But someone younger than Howard should have been there and starting.
GB has said he is not looking to "play everyone in camp" and is going to play consistent rosters between the two games. I think there will be some changes, but not many. Subs will be different. This CR team is in transition and they haven't been playing their older players. It has 5 starters from their recent November friendly wins over Chile and someone else good. This is a much better team than what Panama sent out. Ebobisse---------Zardes------------Arriola -------Lletget----------------Roldan---------- --------------------Bradley--------------------- Lima------Long----Zimmerman---Cannon --------------------Steffan---------------------- Ebobisse was better than people think and did exactly what GB asked of him probably. Zardes is a terrible finisher, but makes the runs GB wants. Baird was pretty ineffective with the ball, but not bad off of it but I think Arriola and Lletget come in against the much better opposition. Bradley might be tired, if not he will be in there. Unless they are not going to use inverted fullbacks at all. That would simplify things and you might see Trapp and more of the fullbacks overlapping. With that personnel, it could be 4-2-3-1 with Trapp/Roldan/Lletget as the 6/8/10. Trusty, Johnson, Ramirez, Lovitz, Delgado, and Canouse will sub in.
I just think the Gold Cup is going to show what Berhalter can do and who is chooses to do it with. You know we’ll have a friendly before the tournament. You’re looking at 3-4 weeks of integration. It’s important everybody’s healthy. That was the most tactically clear and comfortable any US team has get has been since I don’t know when.
I totally agree and the only thing we should take away from this camp. Given time, GB can get a sophisticated tactical plan in place and even mediocre players can execute it. I wonder if the inverted fullback thing is a real tactic going forward or GB was showing off. Maybe showing off is too negative. But a shout out that the "run hard, try faster" days are behind us.
This sentiment is naive IMO. Compared to the leading teams in the world, we are the Panama B/C team and not the USMNT in the latest match.
Our coach, you know the one that BS said was a tactical, man manager, player selector, game manager wizard forgot to call them.
I know that is a joke but is is very close to the thoughts of a segment of our fanbase. Chandler had an outstanding BuLi season. He got injured and despite the protests of his club made the transatlantic flight and came to Arena's camp simply because he did not want any doubt that he wanted to play. He was sent home because well, he was hurt. Arena never called him again.
I find it interesting that so many only consider the T&T match and not the entire cycle when considering the failures of the last cycle.
We took a total of 4 points in the last 4 matches of the HEX, CR=0, @ HON=1, PAN=3, @T&T=0. In the most important stretch of the most important tournament of the cycle. What else do you really want to think about?
I think the inverted fullback thing, yes. The fact we have John Brooks as a passer back there too, but moreover the combinations wide in the attacking third when we have 3 players against their 2, wide midfielder and fullback. We can pull their center backs out and create running lanes and space for the striker. That seems tactically clear from Berhalter, to get a central midfielder, a winger and a high fullback/wingback combining at width to get the ball behind the opponents back line, or pressure it and then switch the field. That’s what attacking with 3 at the back does.