Pre-match: International Friendly: USA vs Paraguay March 27th, 2018

A few points that I believe are important.
a captain is not the leader of the team. A captain is a leader but has a limited amount of power and often is more of a go between. The ultimate leader is the coach. There are certainly multiple accounts of issues inside the locker room going back to the famous article before the snow game. Who's to say that Bradley wasn't instrumental in helping to keep the team together against Costa Rica and during the games in the hex? Isn't it possible that the situation began much earlier and finally got to the point that he could no longer be effective in keeping it together?

I am not saying that this is what happened because I don't know what was going on inside the locker room. What I am saying is that we don't really know what happened and whether or not the implosion was the result of Bradley's poor leadership or something that was inevitable based upon forces outside of Bradley's control. Automatically saying the team's implosion and issues are Bradley's fault is unfair when there are so many other variables involved. We may get a clearer picture sometime in the future but probably not from Mike. Michael believes in keeping things inside the locker room.

If you do put the blame on Bradley, does that mean you absolve all of the other players? All of the veterans? Cameron? Beasely? Dempsey? Howard? Jones when he was in camp? Besler? etc. Are we now saying that the captain is responisble for the attitude and behavior of all the players? How much power do you think the captain has? have you ever been in a leadership position before? If so, is it different depending upon who you have to lead? does it matter if you have full power or if your hands are tied? does it matter what the policies of the upper management are?

 

I wouldn't have a problem with Cameron either. He's 32, and he's absolutely one of our 4 best CBs right now, and could easily be a starter for us next year.

I think people would be surprised at how much better our team would be with a better manager. I went for years saying that a manager doesn't matter all that much at the international level, but after having witnessed Klinsmann and now the 2nd itieration of Arena, I vastly underestimated how much impact piss poor tactics and man management effect the National Team.

 

There's a difference between a person who accepts a leadership role to lead and one who accepts it as a feather in his cap or one more stepping stone to a self serving career.

Bradley wanted to be Captain so he could live on the resume in retirement which meant going along to get along. He doesn't have any leadership qualities worth a damn. He's a good player when he is used the right way. He'll be an average coach best suited to Div I level.

 

I never have, and never will approve of giving anyone a permanent spot. Of course you have your core, but even then if someone is in woeful form, you look at alternatives.

Calling up Bradley now does not mean you MUST play him. I suggested starting Bradley because I wanted a veteran prescence on the pitch against a decent opponent, knowing we'd be playing mostly inexperienced and younger players. I'd like for us to have a platform to play off of in this match, and sometimes a veteran helps with that.

By no means am I saying that he has to start. Experiment all you want. I am really only calling out the people who want to banish him simply because he's Michael Bradley - and ignoring his onfield value.

It's an insult to his past history if you banish because of who he is. It's not an insult to let him fade into the depth chart and out of the program as other players surpass him in terms of value added on the pitch.

 

If you revolt because they brought in Bradley, do you promise not to come back?
I'd much rather not have people in the fanbase who hate Michael Bradley simply because of who he is.

 

Of course there was no negative opinion of him. Everything was fine. Problem? What problem?

I'm glad we missed out on the cup. So, to your question, "no".

As for Slovenia, was he Captain at that time? I don't remember. I remember his last minute effort at the office in Jamaica. I don't think he was Captain at that time either. I suppose he was eager to be Captain. Then when he became Captain he played like he did in Trinidad. Does that seem fair?

 

I don’t even know what this means. Michael Bradley is a human soccer player largely responsible for USA missing the World Cup. I can’t dislike him for that?

 

Bradley did play well vs tigres.

but the second half of the second leg is why I don't want bradley in the USMNT. TFC shipped goals and couldnt hold the ball at all. it was vintage USMNT of the last 2 decades.

it comes down to STYLE. Bradley playing = a distinct style of play that I detest.

the USMNT had like 25% possession when they tied mexico in mexico in wcq.....

there is a strong connection between bradley playing and the USMNT playing that style of play that has them in 20-30% possession.

i dont want to see the USMNT center mid drop back behind the CB's because thats all he can do. it's a wack approach.

bradley can only play in one type of team....a type of team that is inferior on the international stage because they cant press, arent fast and athletic and cant hold possession or create chances.

bradley can play in a team that cant hold the ball and is in its own half the whole game a la the argentina copa america game, the belgium game or the germany game.

it's about style of play and really has nothing to do with how good bradley is.

he doesnt fit.

he's a tweener...he cant play in any position in midfield and play the way he must for the team to be as good as they can be.

it's so clear to me i just dont understand why people dont get it.

 

Bradley or no Bradley, we're just not a high possession team.

The Portugal friendly, the one without Bradley and where McKennie scored, we hit 39% and that's actually high for us. Win or lose, against countries stronger than Panama we seldom hit the 40s.

 

Your point is a generally valid one, but the specific circumstances of that game actually weigh in the favor of the argument against you. I haven't looked it up, but I will take the 39% number you mention as truth. But here is the thing ... 3/4 of our starting midfield consisting of: 1) Adams - 1st year pro in the 1st division (in his first cap?), 2) McKennie - 1st year pro in the 1st division (in his first cap?), and 3) Kellyn Acosta.

So, against a good European side, ON THE ROAD, we threw 3 youngsters together who had never played a men's international game together in their lives, in the same midfield, and managed to only get outshot by one (6 to 5) and go toe to toe for most of the game. Give our young talented guys time to play together and I would submit that they WOULD in fact be able to bring our possession numbers up into the 40s consistently, against even the better teams in the world. Remember, we still have guys like Pulisic, potentially Carleton, etc. to add.

I'm not only blaming Bradley (who I think is getting too much personal schtick right now), but we have some new kids on the block. The possession numbers are NOT all his fault, but I do think he is certainly a part of the problem.

 

39% is the possession mentioned here:

https://www.flashscore.com/match/SAQaC4eb/#match-statistics;0

It's hard to find statistics against strong-ish teams without Bradley playing because, well, Bradley has played a lot for us. In general, though, no matter who plays, whether young or old or with 40 caps or only a couple, or whether we play a 4-5-1 or a 4-3-3, our possession numbers against Top 32 (WC size until present) teams is always low.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, other teams play that style as well, like Scotland or Ukraine. It's who we are.

 

I had really hoped this coaching thing would have been settled but there seems to be zero progress. I did not want to see another Sarachan coached team...too much like Arena that being said:

I for one want to move on from Bradley and even Jozy. They had their chance and we're not going to the WC. Time to go young and fast as Tash said. Im just not sure Sarachan will do that? His mentor, Arena, never would and it cost us and him a job.

Everybody puts Rowe on their roster. As a Rev fan, I can say Rowe is fighting for time these days and hasn't looked that great (neither have the Revs), I can't say he's earned a call and I dont think Sarachan would use him anyway. I do hope Sargent gets called and Pulisic too. I would also like to see Andrew Carleton get a shot. I was more impressed with Carleton than Weah or Sargent in the WC but he's rotting on the bench at Atlanta. He needs to get off that team and get minutes somewhere. That kid is very good

 

The stats you speak of are a very sampling for games w/o Bradley. We hardly ever played without him except when we were running out totally experimental line ups, and even then he was often included.

Bradley pre 2014 WC was very good for USA ( thank you Mr. Jermaine Jones), post WC he has been mostly shit. He may be a great husband, father and team mate, but he stunk for the national team in the last cycle. Please let the powers that be give him his watch and thank him for his service.

Possession is a bit over rated, but it can provide some indication as to who controlled the middle of the pitch. A lack of possession can be compensated by a clinical and direct attack and a strong defense, but Bradley no longer has the skills (if he ever did) to provide either defensive bite or any kind of threat on offense.

 

With Williams out (fibula fracture), we're less one "veteran" CM. Sarachan no doubt will bring Bradley in as a veteran, since I don't expect to see Cameron, Morales, or any other veteran called in.
Face it, Sarachan is the limiting factor in roster decisions. If he's not replaced by May, we will see similar rosters vs Bolivia, Ireland and France. All this conjecture on BS will be just that.

 

Well, Sarachan is probably deluded. Thinks he's in the running for the permanent head coaching position. That or thinks he's entitled to it.

So young players are good, but it's not like you can build anything until the new coach is hired. And with the GM sham/debacle I'm not sure we'll have one by August.

Media has been praising Marsch, Vanney, and Berhalter lately.

 

That's what grinds my gears: it's very likely we'll end up with an in-house manager, so why wait until after the World Cup???

I can see a team like Paraguay doing so because they have been open about wanting to hire a coach who actually coaches in Russia.

But we seem to be just wasting the near-a-year head start we had for Qatar.

 

We've been making the WC for what almost 30 years. I imagine a lot of the pencil pushers simply do not know how to handle this sort of period.

 

Love Geoff, but he has regressed a lot in the past year. I'm not sure this statement is still true.

 

I'm hearing some good news on horizon for @Antonee_Jedi - who's about to get his first call up to the US senior squad for a friendly against Paraguay in Rochester, NY. #bwfc #EFC # usmnt

— Marc Iles (@MarcIles) March 18, 2018

 

Shaq Moore and Novakovich were also called up per their clubs' Twitter accounts. Also, Aron Johannsson was called up but won't join due to an Achilles injury.

 

Pretty sure it's Cary, NC. btw, when is the official lineup? We need enough time to bitch before the game.

 

Don’t they usually drop the roster during the Sunday MLS game? If so 3pm est fur FC Dallas and Seattle.

 

Yup that’s what I’m wondering as well.

 

Around 1 p.m. ET today https://t.co/Hc6d6YZ6uh

— Steven Goff (@SoccerInsider) March 18, 2018

In reply to my question of when the roster drops