********ing Marrufo is reffing... For those that don't remember the last time we had him (also against San Jose).
Marrufo can be an idiot, but at least he is a equal opportunity idiot to both sides. SKC better worry more about Godoy and Wondo.
Uh, I could be mistaken ....... according to Sam McDowell #SportingKC has won only one of the past 13 matches in which Marrufo has been the referee.
we're 5-11-6 with him all time. we've scored 22 allowed 32, 37 of 62 yellows have gone to KC, 3 of 7 red cards.
Yeah, I know it will not happen. But I would really like to see a formation changes. PV is too stubborn. But why not try a 4-3-2-1? Miela SAS - Opara - Besler - Sinovic Zusi - Sanchez - Espinoza Feilhaber Dwyer - Fernandez Let's score some goals! And ignore the antics and trash talk of Kinnear's rowdies.
I'd like us to go old school and play a 2-3-5: Melia Opara-Besler Zusi - Ilie - Medranda Blessing - Feilhaber - Dwer - Saad - Gerso You can't tell me this team isn't built for this.
Gosh, I don't even know what I'd try. Hartley's diamond look is probably the best I can think of. Zusi and Espinoza as opposite mids sounds great. Gerso as a true forward sounds excellent unless he never develops as a goal threat in MLS. Then throw Blessing out there. But I want to see more Salloi, like now.
Pretty sure kinnear was one of the first to figure out how to frustrate SKC at home. Sit back, absorb, and wait for a mistake at midfield to punish with a breakaway. A second target like salloi or porter may be more useful than speed and quickness for this one.
Except I don't think you can do a diamond with Ilie, Roger, and Benny on the field. Roger is the best choice for slipping out wide left, and Roger just isn't a winger. I'd also argue that Roger is one of the most important guys on the field for us in the 4-3-3, solely because of our reliance on him to break up the counter after a press, so sliding his position over raises a lot more questions (problems?) than it answers. Any kind of a diamond with those three guys on the field just feels lop-sided to me. As much as I'd love to see two up top, I can't see us doing it in a 4-4-2. I think, if anything, we'd need to do a 3-5-2. Maintain the Ilie-Roger-Benny backbone through the midfield, throw Zusi on the right, Medranda on the left, then have Dwyer and Gerso up top. Backline would be SAS-Opara-Besler or something like that. And that's scary solely because of the added defensive duties you're putting on Medranda. With Medranda and a Besler-current-form on our left, we'd be pretty susceptible over there (not that we aren't already in the 4-3-3). I dunno, just spit-balling here, feel free to chime in.
A way around it that won't do what people want in the 4-4-2 is to play Feilhaber as the withdrawn second striker. But then it basically just looks like our 4-3-3/4-5-1 again with Feilhaber just sitting a bit higher.
There has been talk on this forum every year I can remember about a change to the 4-3-3. The same suggestions are brought up, kicked around, and argued. The only way PV changes the 4-3-3 is when a player gets a red card.
Every team always has scores of fans hoping to see different formations. Sporting is no different. We always just want to see players succeed rather than be marginalized into playing the exact same role as the guy before him.
Agreed. My post was an observation not a criticism. I also like to speculate about how each player would do with a different formation, but I feel a lot better now that I have given up all hope in that actually happening.
I don't really even know how to make Vermes's 4-3-3 work. I mean, if I had my pick of the world, who would I sign for a forward and two wingers that would match what he wants? And I literally have no idea. Maybe Adam Lallana on the wing. That's a tough game.
I agree that Roger cannot go out wide. In the 4-3-1-2, he wouldn't. The width would be gained from the outside defensive backs. In my lineup above, Zusi and Roger would stay in tight and move forward ahead of Sanchez. This also pushes Benny further forward and makes it easier for him to provide to Dom and a second striker. And weather it is Gerso or Latiff or Saad [my choice actually], Dwyer needs a strike partner. In our current 4-3-3, our outside forwards are too far outside and don't contribute to goal scoring enough. That leaves Benny and Dom as the only possibilities to score in the box -- other than those occasions when Roger gets forward also. Dom will get goals. But he cannot be the only goal scoring threat game in and game out.
I'm embarrassed. Was the offseason consensus that our broadcast team weren't homerish enough? Matt Lawrence (or whatever his name is) has been steadily ramping up his blue-tinted analysis of the game. And Nate has started joining in, coming up with tortured logic to convince himself that a Dwyer dive might not have been Dom's fault. This is really painful to watch.
OK, it obviously hasn't resulted in any goals yet, but Gerso is the real deal. He is making moves and passes like no one else on the team can make except Benny. And he is working his tail off with the high pressure. The problem is that he does not appear to be a goal scorer. He appears to be another assist man, like Benny and Zusi. But in order to get assists, you have to have somebody willing and able to take a shot. Medranda is useless. Absolutely useless. He has no offensive ideas - passing the ball to him is death to the attack. We went out and got all those wingers and forwards -- Blessing, Saad, Salloi, Pasher, Iwasa -- and I just have a hard time thinking that Medranda is a better option than all those guys. If he ever actually scores a goal I think I'm going to fall out of my chair in shock.
OK, good defense from Jimmy there. Maybe make him a defender again and I won't be so peeved at his lack of offensive production.
I mean, he has played 2654 regular season minutes in his MLS career. That's close to 30 full games. He has 1 goal and 2 assists. In 30 games. THIS is our starting winger, PV? WHY?
OK, one thing Matt Lawrence says is weird to me. He calls a center back a "center half". I don't understand that at all, and I don't recall any other English commentators using that phrase. When I was a kid, a halfback was what we called a midfielder, so a CM might have been a "center half". But never a center defender.