Inverted Fullback thoughts

For clarity, I have no interest in being beautiful.

I do think the team would improve greatly by having an effective plan to score while in possession. Which is why I like a lot of what I see with Berhalter (certainly not all): patterns of play that players can learn and rely on to create space and chances; overloading parts of the field to create opportunities; a plan to try to be able to connect the defense to attack.

I'm not saying be Barcelona. I'm saying get competent enough at this phase of the game that you can actually score out of it and be a threat. The idea that we aren't talented enough to move a ball from the defense to offense without losing it is ridiculous.

 

I'm 100% with Herb Brooks: The "right" players, not the "best" ones. Having said that, Berhalter is not getting the kind of teamwork we should expect from the "right" players. The right players from Berhalter's perspective means the players who fit his system. Tata has implied that Berhalter doesn't have the time to implement his system.

The Hex begins in early September of this year, as I understand it and on TTS they said we are playing 6 of the 10 games in the Hex this year in Sep/Oct/Nov windows. The axe may fall quickly.

We don't have a left back. We don't really know who our cb's are except for Brooks who has a history of injuries. We can't be really sure about McKennie's position. His club moves him around a lot. We are drowning in rb's but the selection is Dest who is 19, Yedlin the gaff prone Prince of Couva, and Cannon whose game is immature. Our dmid might be Adams but we don't really know how he recovers from an injury that took almost a year to heal and was suspected of being "chronic" type. His back up is Bradley and Yueil.

The role of injuries will be magnified by the compact schedule.

I wouldn't be so negative if I saw players who understand their position and play well as a team. I just don't see the teamwork and some players don't have the complete package for their position.

 

If Berhalter is choosing the "right" players, who are the players who are playing anywhere near their ceiling?

I can only think of Morris and maybe Bradley/Lovitz.

The list of players meaningfully below their ceiling is long and includes our best players.

 

I was thinking of selecting out the elite and in-form group as a point of reference, i.e., how many players are sure things. I think it is Adams, Pulisic, Morris, Dest.

I feel like planning includes a chalkboard with those names etched in gold and you go from there. We have a 6, a 10, a lf and a rb. I'm tempted to add Brooks to the list because he is left footed and passes at elite level for cb.

If we fill those names in, we can ask what kind of a player is needed to complement the elite core.

The link between Adams and Pulisic is crucial - the 8 - not only as an outlet for the dmid in possession but as somebody who can read the game and be in the right spot to cover for the 6 on defense. Additionally the 8 (biased to the right with Pulisic biased left) will spring Dest up the wing. How does Pomykal sound to you guys based on that description? I'd add Delgado for same role and let them fight it out.

The left back is a question. Arriola has combined well with Pulisic, I believe. Egg thinks so. I would experiment with him as lwb or inverted fullback. Maybe Miles should be the rcb who covers for rwb Dest while Brooks and Long man the box..

Otherwise, I'd say we continue playing and watching the Jozy/Zardes/Sargent group and select the most in form player to partner with Morris up top.

My attitude is to make things easy for the elite group to do what they do best by surrounding them with the right players rather than creating a cookie cutter system and filling it with dough. When Pulisic looks bad in a game it will be on Berhalter, not Pulisic, in the ordinary course of things.

 

Morris is definitely a starter but I think he's just going through a hot streak, much like Boyd did two club seasons ago. I'd pull him from that elite list and replace him with McKennie.

No one on that elite list has played as well for the USMNT as they do for their club.....

 

It's the only way that they can build their narrative that everything is just fine with Earnie and Gregg at the wheel.

It's amazing to think that someone saying they should play may more direct and utilize their team's speed makes them think that I am advocating "hoof and hope". They make it out like I think that once Brooks gets the ball that he should just blast the ball 60 yards downfield. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Gogorath was saying I was being too simplistic, while he's the one who is saying that you either have to play tiki-taka or play like an overmatched U9 team where your big center back just boots the ball down the field (don't laugh, I saw my son's opponent do this one time. My son's team had to have 90% possession in that game because they just got the ball after the kick back and started passing again).

 

Please point out where I've said that. Because I'm obviously not communicating well here.

 

Sarachan’s teams were flat-out better

 

Every single post you've made over five pages extols the virtues of Pep-style soccer while saying people who understand the USMNT can't consistently win that are promoting us bunkering and defending.

It's all there for everyone to read.

All else equal, I'd much rather play Pep-style soccer as well. However, the name of the game is to win. To win, you play to the strengths of your most talented players. As I've heard college football coaches say for years, "It's about the Jimmies and the Joes, not the Xs and Os."

And people with a lot more soccer knowledge than I have - like Eden Hazard - pointed out that France played a counterattacking style in the most recent World Cup.

 

I think I hear my cue.

I refer you to the tasks required to complement Adams, Pulisic, Morris and Dest who are on the elite list. I listed them above. Even if McKennie were "elite" in your eyes, he doesn't do what we need done in the 8 position. We need the right player who happens to be the guy who can see what the Adams, Pulisic, Morris, Dest squad is doing and make them go while covering for them defensively. I.o.w, we need the right player, not the "best" player.

Berhalter is relying on the system to make the players perform. Systems are predictable, especially to high level managers in opposition.

There is already scattered criticism of American managers as "over controlling" coming from foreigners who have seen our game close up (MLS or otherwise).

 

Over the past five pages, I've repeatedly said that a) I like the concept of an inverted fullback because it overloads the midfield and b) I would like to have more of a plan when we have possession than just hoof it long.

I've also repeatedly said that I don't think this requires going tiki taka, or going full possession. And I've also repeatedly said that our defense and lack of counterattacking has been a huge problem and we need to do that, and then fall back on these skills once the counterattack is not an option.

I merely want us to be competent in a phase of play that we are not currently competent in. Even counterattacking squads have to have a plan when they have the ball.

So please find me somewhere where I said something counter to this?

 

weston is an optimal partner for adams, Pulisic and brooks. He fit in quite well between all of them and with a style that fits with all of them. He cover a lot of ground is an active defenders and has to ability to push the ball in transition via both passing and turn/dribble. I don’t see a problem with Morris or dest either.

Like our current coach, you are focused on roles and numbers while I am looking for a group of players who complement each other.

 

@RefIADad , let me phrase my question another way.

You are the USMNT coach. The team is whatever roster you want, playing however you want.

The opponent shoots, and your GK saves it. The opponent has not over extended, and there's no opportunity for a quick break out.

What is your team doing?

 

it takes a special kind of ignorance to claim that one isn’t binary all while repeatedly stating that if the team doesn’t do what is being described, the only alternative is to hoof it when we have possession.

we have been good enough in possession, particularly against bunkering teams.

rinse, repeat.

 

If in the end, Berhalter simply were to add a few wrinkles then that will have been enough. The team already had an effective style of play

Morris had 14 goals and 5 assists(reg sea and plyffs) in his rookie season. That was followed by an injury-ravaged 2 years. He emerged with 13 goals and 8 assists, last year. So he was not on a hot streak.

 

fair enough - I was thinking his USMNT play but perhaps those numbers bear out your point as well.

I think he is a much more complete player now than before.

 

We are pressing the tempo and playing direct, because that's the strength of the team. I am looking to find Pulisic in space with the ability to use his speed. I'm looking to get the ball down the field before the defense has a chance to get fuly organized. If we lose the ball, I'm trying to press to get the ball back quickly.

Since two can play at this game, how do you adjust when Mexico is allowing us to play out of the back, forcing us into bad spots on the field, and then pressing us because they know that we won't even try to play a ball over the top or try to play fast.

That's a much more relevant question, because it's what Mexico did to us at MetLife and made us look absolutely foolish. I'm WAY more concerned about that because it's actually happened.

 

It's no use trying to reason. He has his narrative, and he will not deviate from it. He'd rather see the USMNT miss another World Cup playing "attractive" soccer than, you know, actually be competitive.

 

In regards to Mexico September, etc., I would not advocate playing out of the back at all costs. If we see a high press and a defense overloading against it, we should play over it. Take what the defense gives you in the moment -- I am not interested in forcing a situation in competitive match against a team of Mexico's caliber.

I suspect that September was Berhalter's Norman Dale moment -- five passes before we shoot. Intentionally forcing the team to force things as a learning experience. When the real must win games came (GC Final v Mexico, Canada at home) the tactics changed to be much more varied.

I could be wrong; I'm not in the locker room or Berhalter's confidant. Slavish commitment to playing only direct or only out of the back weakens our team overall, and we're not good enough to always impose our will.

I'm not advocating for always playing out of the back. I'm definitely not advocating for abandoning a strong press, counterpress or counterattack opportunities. This last sentence has been the team's biggest tactical mistake -- nothing to do with the offense. And we didn't do that against Canada -- we absolutely flustered them by going at them.

I just think that when we have the ball ... only having direct play as an option is a mistake. We don't really have the forward personnel to execute it well, and defenses can play to that just as well as playing against playing out of the back.

Having to play long into a defense that expects it creates an inconsistent offense in all cases, and in the worst case, puts you in a defensive stance for a massive percent of the game.

There's no reason NOT to have something in your toolbox -- not to present it as an option and a threat. I agree that it should be forced when it isn't working, and I agree that possession to possession the option to play direct needs to be there ... but I don't understand the thinking that we don't want it.

I don't think anyone in CONCACAF -- including Mexico -- is so good that we can't, with some experience and with our A team -- play out of the back with some consistency. I'm not talking tiki-taka with 65% possession. I mean be able to connect the defense to the offense with some consistency without basically punting and praying.

One way to ensure we can do that without relying on an abundance of skill is to get numbers in the midfield. The whole reason I like the concept of an inverted fullback or something similar is that getting numbers in the midfield reduces the skill my players need to successfully navigate it.

Canada sliced through our midfield the first time by getting numbers. Berhalter adjusted and took those back in the second match and they couldn't -- and Herdman failed to adjust to our adjustment.

Let's not leave an effective option on the table. I don't agree with the degree of usage we've had, but the team under Arena and Sarachan was a disaster getting from defense to offense ... we're never going to be the team we want to be unless we can do that at some level.

 

Is he still on the copy paste avalange of text he has been producing for months now? I did put him on ignore and man, that was a relief.

 

None of this is either or. The only "either or" at the moment is: "Either Gregg is an idiot or something else". The evidence, such as the Mexico friendly, suggest Gregg is an idiot or zealot. Hard to believe anyone, not even Anthony Hudson, could be that big an idiot and got the job...but Gregg repeated the Mexico game in the game at Canada.

The only optimistic take going into 2020 was that 2019 was a failed training exercise.

Most of 2019, we tried to play a slow possession game. Our defensive tactics were designed to create POTB opportunities (to practice our possession game); not to create transistion scoring opportunities. Gregg says things were learned and will be used. Whether true or not, hopefully that spin allows Gregg to treat the USMNT job as a national team job and not some Football Manager exercise.

Hard to take any evidence about a change in direction from this January camp. Gregg and Earnie have too much ego to admit their big Moneyball idea was a huge failure, so they won't say it. Hopefully, they have enough smarts to realize it and change things.

Whether we invert the fullback or not is far from the point. It is worrying about a wrinkle when the whole organizing principle of the team was wrong.

The final Canada game gives the slightest hope. The defensive tactics were designed to create scoring opportunities from transistion. When the team POTB, they never went backwards more than once. Unlike against Mexico, and at Canada, if the ball went backwards, the next ball was an over the top ball.

Also, possession was not being drilled into the team to qualify or beat bunkering CONCACAF teams. Listen to Gregg and Earnie; it was to compete with Brazil and Germany. So, it is possible it is just put on the back burner for a year and then brought back.

Again, "possession" is not a problem or a binary choice. The problem was selecting a core of MLS players and thinking that the extra training the USA can get with them would allow for a complicated read and react possession offense. Even more fundamentally, it was that the selected MLS players had zero press resistance and the players with press resistance were not called in or didn't have enough time to learn the System.

 

I read that quote more as positional rotation in attack. The fullback can end up in midfield or in the halfspace inside the winger or outside. It is dynamic total football type stuff.

That contrasts to a set system where the fullback comes into a midfield 2 everytime. Klopp also never put Fabinho at FB and then had him come inside. Liverpool passmaps show the FBs in fairly typical spots and never in front of the CBs.

 

It's why they think Cannon is a senior team player and talk about how good his game was vs. this or that opponent and how surprised they are he hasn't been picked up in Europe.