USS97531 took the time to do that for every position cross categorized by age group so, yeah, I think it's excellent work.
The conclusion was absolutely horrible. Just to put into context, the starting dmids the last four cycles were Jones/Williamson, Delgado, Trapp, and Okugo. I wouldnt put any of those players over the four eligible for this cycle.
so, you ignore all the effort to pull a comprehensive list together of our youth prospects and complain about the relative strength vs. other historical teams?
I have no idea what HE is thinking. Off the top of my head a few that come to mind are Pomykal, Durkin, Sands. I don't know the youth players all that well and those stationed in Europe I know even less. I think he could be considering someone younger as well but I can't give you any names. the one thing that makes me think Sands might not be on his list is that he isn't on the U20 roster, so he is "available" for callup but wasn't. As far as the other two go, my favorite is Pomykal, followed by Durkin. Either way, I think Berhalter will be monitoring the U20 games very closely because there are several on the team that are likely already in his pool or on the fringes. He is doing a "combined" camp of selected U23's and Gold Cup provisional players...who knows? perhaps he has someone on that list in mind? (the only ones that I can think of that would fit woud probably be Hyndman? Maybe Parks? I kind of doubt it but who knows? (I can't say anything about Holmes because I don't know him at all). http://www.espn.com/soccer/united-states/story/3859181/us-plan-combined-training-camp-pre-gold-cup The U23's may or may not be in his immediate plans but I think it shows that they are at least on his radar and a breakout by one or more could leapfrog them into the 23 or the first 11. Bottom line is that my guess that he has players in mind is pure speculation on my part. I believe it is true because it makes sense to me but many things that I felt made sense to me in the past have failed to occur. At some point, if we don't see any new faces we can conclude that I am wrong or the hoped for development of players didn't occur as planned. Also remember that a guy like Kyle Beckerman, if I'm not mistaken, didn't begin his youth career as a dmid. He may or may not be focusing on current dmids...the next player for that role might currently be playing as more of an attacking mid or even as a defender.
So based on this, you’re guessing that Berhalter is planning on one of the following as the QB of the system? Trapp Bradley Pomykal Durkin Sands Hyndman Park To me, this list clearly shows that he’s building around Trapp as relying any of the others to step up to a central role is asking for too much (none of them play as a regista for their teams even when they do play) but YMMV.
If you were building a team for two years from now and you didn't actually have to have the player in the team until 2022, would you choose Pomykal or Trapp if that was your choice for your first player? Apparently you believe Pomykal is behind Trapp right now and that is fine but do you think he will still be behind Trapp a year from now? Two years? Also, perhaps he is considering a young player from Europe. The relative merits of each compared to Trapp right now are pretty irrelevant...look how much a young player can change in a few months, let alone a year or two. Look at Adams's progression over the 2.5 years he played for the first team of RBNY and then on to RBL. I think it is fair to say Adams isn't the same player now as he was 2.5yrs ago and that same principal applies to all of our young players. Some will stop or slow their development earlier than others but some might even accelerate and surpass expectations. Here's another wild guess that I could see but don't really expect: Nagbe. Nagbe has a skillset that is relatively rare in the US, is playing pretty well right now and even filled in at left back this year. He is on the roster and I can't believe he is pegged as a left back (but what do I know?). Another group to take a look at would be the European based U20 midfielders that will be playing in a few days. I don't know them other than what I have read on BS so have no legitimate opinion on them as to type or quality of player.
The statistics on U20 say x% turn out awesome (not many), y% turn out solid internationals or decent pros, and z% maybe end up out of soccer in a couple years. I see it as like the NFL draft. People talk up drafts all the time. It's usually more like 3-5 years after the draft you see that it panned out as advertised. You only know in retrospect how good the U20 team was. I do expect the future standouts to emerge and stand out against U20 competition that will be a mere taste of the senior team game. If you can't handle that bunch..... But then there is a transition period that some make and some don't. Some is senior talent and some is club choice. We have some players who make bizarre (Traffic) or career-retarding choices. And then I think we find out that standing out as a senior requires not just decent speed, height, skill, shooting, but exceptionality. One can stand out at U20 with the sort of gifts that at the pro level are basically average. For example, what impressed me on Mendez was finishing. The lofted long balls and passing I saw were actually kind of slow and mediocre, balls he needs to drive as a senior. I'm a Dynamo fan and we seem to love from our academy these slow, semi-technical players. Maybe they look technical relative to RGV minors or the academy. But you need to be sharp enough to deliver 10-15 assists to be a MLS star. That is another world of sharpness from getting a few assists on a minor league team. And then if you are a slowpoke you are going to be in a world of hurt in MLS. You have to think, ok, scale this kid up into a first team pro, can he do that thing he just did?
I don't think it's proven yet that McKennie is a "stopper." I think he will turn out as a pro compared to many U20s. I am not sure as what. Schalke don't leave him be. I see some aggression and technique but 6 is a clean up position. Adams strikes me as the better oriented to hunting down people for 90 from line to line. The backline situation is a mess. A coach for regional purposes can come up with some sort of offense leveraging scheme with players who can run and/or pass. You get down to it at a world level -- or even Hex -- they have to defend well. Robinson and Yedlin can't defend to save their lives. Re Sargent and others, and Berhalter, I feel like I am dealing with that dingbat HS or college coach who believes in seniority for seniority's sake. For some reason Steffen gets to jump the age queue -- and should -- but Sargent has to wait turn and Adams may even get shoved wide right so I can watch Bradley or Trapp play central. I would like to see a coach play with a 2022 type team like we are looking at the big picture and not continuing our goofy obsession with chasing next week's second tier trophy. Is our goal to win the World Cup or to win the Gold Cup? It's a difference in horizons. Boyd hasn't kicked a NT ball and may not even make the team. Turkey etc on loan from Portugal, switching from NZ, doesn't carry any inherent cachet.
I do agree McKennie needs to get into a situation where he can play the same spot regularly. Getting shifted all over isn't going to help him at all if it continues. And I listed him as the 8 by the way with Adams as a 6. In the end, we have deficiencies all over the field in comparison to top teams no matter who or how you line up. That lack of more higher end players is why you want to maximize the few higher end guys you have and you hope your role players work hard and do their jobs at least acceptably. Our goal can be to win the World Cup, but we're not going to, not in 2022 and not likely in 2026. Winning the Gold Cup is at least a goal that is possible to accomplish. Teams that win World Cups have multiple players at or above the level of Pulisic and no amount of coaching trickery is going to change that.
I've said this before, what is the build up premise on Bradley whacking early balls wide? This is not Weah wide, this is more like Baird. Think of Elis with Houston and tell me who we have like that -- that the coach is using -- to activate the value of whacking it wide early. We instead seem to be chasing technical wings and then talking down what happened versus Chile. That those wings will then have to pass and pass to move the ball downfield. It's like having a super slow target forward who is your build up focus. IMO you need footspeed to use the wide balls and diagonals. Get behind defenses, create breakaways and chances with balls played behind the defense. Instead what I hear being discussed sounds like a lot of low percentage crossing with the defense back. And in which case who is the 10 to break down a defense. I also feel like talking up longball ability is like running a squirrel by dogs, if the DM can't actually do his primary job. At best you're offering me a trade off and as a defender I don't like how many times we trade off defense for claimed attacking value. I say claimed because it's rare that the player in discussion actually puts up some Robinson type numbers where there really is an actual trade off positive to evaluate. Often enough we say it will be of value and it really isn't, and the negative on defense was baked in to start with. Trapp has 2 assists in the last 2 seasons of MLS. Bradley has 7 assists. I feel like the sincere and bright comparison if they are being proposed as attacking value, is compare their defense to other options, and compare their attack to other options. Are they the best 6? Heck no. Are they better than our attacking choices? No. Voila, problem solved. They sit or don't make the team. To me this starts to wander into a recent fad in favor of jack of all trades master of none hybridity where people pimp "8" type players who don't distinguish themselves in any particular way. I don't like it. I want 6s who can clean up or attackers who produce. I am bored with tepid players getting favored for supposed all around game. When we are playing Mexico you can either score or assist or defend or not. That you can do a lot of things ok doesn't tend to help in situations demanding more than "all around kind of OK."
Personally the debate is a waste of time. Adams plays the defensive aspect of the position better and had more assists than Trapp or Bradley last season. The longball discussion reeks of post facto justification for a silly decision already made. OK, how can we justify this. Because if you went by either the eye test or the numbers -- like, actually compared the other players' production from the same spot -- it's a well duh pick. We are developing a disturbing tendency to justify players by ripping on their competition for some item, that then is not applied back to the selected player. That feels like an irrational process with rationality used as a defensive mechanism, not a rational process. That reminds me of modern gotcha politics, talking points, etc.
This is it. But I'd go even further. I thought MB should be rotated the last few years. I don't think Trapp is good. Everyone for the most part agrees Adams is better than both, by a large margin. If Adams even had more assists than MB or Trapp, which I didn't know, then what the heck is going on? Seriously, we're no longer at the point of even debating it. So what is the reason? It ain't system, even though that'll be the first excuse offered. When you have a 50m defensive midfielder for the US, you build your system around that player. I have no idea, but it's fun to speculate. I'm still convinced it's the caps record, at least with MB. For Trapp, I have no clue. Maybe just a "junior MB", and for some reason that's enough?
2018 MLS stats: Adams 0G 7A 2328 mins Bradley 0G 5A 2857 mins Trapp 1G 1A 2620 mins 2019 MLS stats: Bradley 2G 2A 1080 mins Trapp 0G 0A 1170 mins 2019 B.1 stats (half season): Adams 0G 2A 721 mins I haven't gone through and run the numbers on other choices but to me the eye test plus the numbers are clear on these three. If the justification is "he doles out assists," ok, what do the numbers show? Not really. Adams has the numbers and in fewer minutes. And I still think that's missing the main function of a 6. I have this issue all over the field, Zardes over people with better strike rates, keepers getting called in with GAAs worse than people left off, stuff I have already done on which backs are on the field when we give up goals. Conversely defenders on the field for "getting forward" who don't tangibly produce assists when put out there. [Robinson, warts and all, is one of the few who actually does know how to strike a ball and rack up assists, but at a definite cost.]
Are we evaluating deep lying playmakers / registas by assists? DLPs set up the game, they rarely make the last pass before a goal. Andrea Pirlo is one of the best of all time -- the dude got an assist every 500 minutes in Serie A. Andres Iniesta played a little further forward at Barcelona, and he still only got an assist about every 300 minutes, and these are two of the greatest passers of all time. Do you folks understand the position and the role? I feel like I am reading things from people who don't really understand the game when I see an echo chamber of bad stats and bad ideas. (Other bad stats: I like Robinson, but the dude has 5 assists in 4500 Championship minutes -- he can get forward but let's not act like he's a savant up there). Either way, people who are viewing Adams as being punished by moving off the QB role in Berhalter's system -- or having Berhalter not play something like RB -- are missing the point. Berhalter doesn't think this system underutilizes Adams. I get the argument about the defense, but he's still counter pressing in central midfield and this role has a ton more flexibility to attack and to range in defense than the role Bradley and Trapp are playing. I don't expect anyone to agree at this point, but I had to interject when people started evaluating playmaking defensive mids by assists. Or ball playing centerbacks by that as well. It is system, and the choice to play possession. You can disagree with the decision all you like, but it's absurd to ignore everything the coach has detailed about their decision making process.
I was listening to a new podcast yesterday. The guy was going through the provisional roster. He then makes the case that Hamid should be on the roster because he has better MLS stats then Miller or Guzan or Johnson or even Steffan. Ok. Guys playing in the same league at the same position can be evaluated on league play. Got it. But then he got to Bradley and went the complete other way. Nothing about whether he is better than anyone else in MLS statistically. All "leadership" and saying he is the best American MF, and everyone hates him but us smart people know the real quality. It gets so annoying when withing 5 minutes, someone can contradict their own logic. To ignore everything about a position but one aspect to justify inclusion, that is dumb. But that is where we are. It is Billy Hamilton in baseball, he will steal 50 bases, but only get on base 60 times and stolen bases are not that important compared to getting on base.
This is a good try but ignores the fact that what GB is focused on is the long final pass. Everyone went gaga over the pass from Bradley to Baird against Chile. If Baird finishes that, it is an assist. That is what is being pointed out that GB wants and what Adams lacks. So, while Assists for Iniesta or Busquets might not be the best stat since they aren't suppose to bomb the ball forward. The QB in Bert's system is. So, when comparing three players playing DM, if one has twice the number of assists, it is showing they are capable of making the long killer pass. That player is Adams. Again, you and GB, seem to be discounting everything else about the position. But even on the one part people say MB and WT do better, they don't. They might do long diagonal passes that lead to nothing more often, but they aren't creating goals. Also again ad nauseum, Adams at RB will get involved when we have the ball 60% of the time. However, we are not going to have the ball 60% of the time except against teams we have historically always beaten using any system. Last September, up a man for 30 minutes, we had the ball for 47% of the time against Mexico. We will not play Adams at RB against Mexico if we face them. Just like against Chile, GB will abandon this great system. If we aren't going to use it anytime we are challenged a little, what is the point of doing it at all? We should use the system that will work against Chile and Mexico all the time to get great at it. I'm sure it will work just fine, also, against Martinique or Cuba. Plus, if we get really good at a system that will work against Mexico and Costa Rica, maybe we will qualify for the World Cup and be able to use it against Germany or Italy.
That is sort of the problem with Greg B's "system." He pre-decides that there is a "system" he wants to play and the goes looking for players that fit and if he does bot find enough correct matches he shoehorns players that are marginal in ability or in skill set to get the players to play his "system." I suppose it makes his job easier because the need for thinking is reduced for both coach and player but, unless the "system" is very flexible it will almost always result in some players playing below, often well below, their ability. Of course the "job" at the national team level is not really "coach" but rather it is "manager." And Greg B may well be a good "coach" but he does not seem to be "managing" well at all. BTW: I think that possession is all well and good BUT the US does not have and does not look to have the personnel to run a possession game against even decent teams and we should institute a system that is about 50% possession and 50% direct attack. It seems that the goals we produce are as much or more of the "fast strike" variety rather than the "build up and create" variety. We should play to our strengths not to what we wish our strengths would be.
Thankfully, the ones GB needs to convince that the system is tenable are the players. You'd think everyone else would give the idea at least a full tournament before trying to deep six it. Why are we wringing our hands so much about this? Remember, GB is the most supervised coach in the history of the program. He's got Earnie over one shoulder and the ex-pro council over the other. Why are we so uptight and think that nobody will pull the plug if things aren't working? Not to mention the players themselves will express misgivings.
Meanwhile, the format for this pre Gold Cup camp is awesome. I don't think this is a Gregg thing. It has Earnie's fingerprints all over it.
Omar Gonzales and Tyler Adams. Those are the reasons. His handling of those two players has made his managerial ability suspect.
Again, our problem last cycle was playing against teams that would sit back. We need to improve that facet. Once we qualify we can rebuild the tactics and roster to better fit our needs at the WC.
If you are so upset then why don't you contact the Athlete's Council. A lot of the members are quite accesible. Also, if the handling is so bad don't you think the players themselves will know how to complain to the Athlete's Council? You know who can get Berhalter fired? Bocanegra or Stewart. Do you think it's that hard for those two to figure out that the players are pissed? Just saying.
Sounds like Arena and his idea to fix the roster after we qualify. Well, Ecuador sat back. We had our full team at home. We only scored on a fluke 35 yard deflection. So far, fail. Again, we can invert our RB and play a 30 yo CB at LB and have MB in the middle and beat Guyana and T&T at home and Panama too. But we would have done that anyway. Did Mexico bunker against us in Columbus? Did Costa Rica bunker against us in San Jose? Did T&T not have a 40 pass move before their two goals? Did Honduras bunker against us or did they use their wingers to destroy our outside backs? Misdiagnosing the qualifying disaster is a huge risk. The players were old and not good in many positions. One in particular, Omar, started the last game under GB. The other, MB, is back and a key piece again. New, younger talent, is available and being shunted out wide or ignored to allow the older players to continue to be mediocre to bad in more key positions. Against any decent opposition, there is a lack of offense unless Pulisic does something.
TBF, I think you are misdiagnosing the qualifying disaster. Gotta remember that Atlanta killed RBNY in the playoffs by sitting back and springing long counters. I don't think Adams at DM for qualifying is a solution. Calling the Ecuador game a failure is misunderstanding the dynamics of that game. In my view, keep Trapp at DM for qualifying and then put Adams at DM against quality opponents in preparation for the WC.
I do not see that Greg B's "system" addresses that at all. What it does do is allow the organized "sit back" teams more time to get and stay organized and then sit back better. To beat a bunker you can try to do that or you can whenever possible attack. On the offense against a good bunker if you are not attacking you are just wasting time which is exactly what the hunkering team wants. Yes, attacking comes with a risk but without risk there is rarely rewards.