I'm not sure that's true. As hard as it was to watch, starting Korb/Kemp/Kitchen (or Arnaud) would absolutely have an effect on Friday night. Ben made the choice to prioritize the regular season, Eastern Conf crown/playoff seeding/home field/Supporter's Shield. Although we're traveling to Seattle, they are without Martins, Alonso (I think), and Dempsey (with the US I think even though his suspension is over). That's a game where we could get a result given what we've seen from Seattle recently.
Looks like no more cup for us this year... I hope to be able to see one more USOC home game at the Soccerplex before I get an old man...
Because of the delay and other commitments, I couldn't watch the whole game. When I left we were up a goal and up a man. How the hell did we blow it?
As much as I would like to see them play more often, maybe that is why Ben does not play them more often...
General all-around awful playing, questionable-at-best coaching, and a very nice goal from Fabinho? The defense was lazy, the offense lacked any sort of killer instinct, and a number of players who had been giving us hope, instead played like they had been sniffing glue for the six hours prior to the match and again during the lightning delay. Olsen seemed to content to let the back-ups ride out the game, assuming that eventually the 11-man side would over-power the 10-man Union. That did not happen, in fact the opposite was true, and Ben still waited until very late to make subs. I guess he had his plan and was sticking to it? And yeah, Fabinho's was a nice strike.
I disagree. Even with our first team, we show terribly poor use of space and inability to recognize and take advantage of it, a glacially slow buildup on the attack, predictable passing and are often beaten to 50/50 balls. This was absolutely the case last night, too, even with a man advantage. We've even had man advantages in league games with closer to our A team than played last night and had a pretty poor performance there, as well. My point isn't that our A team sucks, but the difference in our quality of play with our A team vs our C team (which this probably was) isn't all that great. Over a season that works to our benefit vs. other teams. In the one-off or elimination games, it does not.
Well, he had Pontius on the bench and he's a guy needs to get his mojo back. He could have been a 55-60 minute sub possibly along with Silva & Rolfe. In my opinion, the real problem was maintaining possession in the midfield. Jeffrey, Doyle, Aguilar & Coriander looked pretty ordinary matched up against Philadelphia's "A" team minus one.
I don't think Ben is crying too much this morning about it all. Although I didn't see it, it sounds like this was a typical example of what happens when you don't mix the squad enough. Mishu might be fine mixed with more experienced players, but paired with players more on his level he's more exposed, and more importantly probably, I think every player takes a hit in their confidence level. Experienced players doubt the guys on the field with them a bit which can make them more tentative and the less experienced players feel kinda tossed out there. Not that Ben doesn't know this, but perhaps he wasn't concerned about it. He's got bigger fish to fry.
This is what concerns me. Ben coached in a way that hurt our ability to get a result AND likely hurt the confidence of guys we may need down the line. Putting in almost anyone at minute 60 would have helped...
Absolutely agree. No MLS team can simultaneously compete in 3 competitions and have any reasonable chance of winning them all. The CCL is coming up and DCU has a road game in Seattle two days from now. I watched a little bit of the shitshow after the women's game. Seemed that Philly had its first team in with Edu and Maidana. Of course, all they have left this year is USOC, sort of like us in 2013. Glad this sideshow is over.
Absolutely agree, Lloyd's assist on the second goal was some of the nicest work I've seen in a long time.
That's a little harsh, but I don't completely disagree about your comments about the offense. However, the starting defense isn't prone to giving up two goals, let alone a couple with a man advantage. The defense last night was, what is that word, "shambolic?" As ugly as DC plays and as often as I have yelled "faster" during bouts of DC possession, I don't think you can really argue that DC's defense hasn't been pretty good. I'd be disappointed in the players' lack of interest in the US Open Cup. Given DC's standing in the league and teams that we've seen them beat, there is no reason for the full DC line-up to lose to Philadelphia and certainly not a 10-man team. I mean, that was a weird game, lightning delay and giant patches of water in the center of the park that stopped the ball dead are concentration-breaking and really give a "lower league" feel to the match (I'm not knocking PPL Park; RFK has interesting conditions in the rain as well). I know why Olsen played Halsti, but playing your most technical player in lousy conditions seems like a misuse to me. But that, as well as the rest of the line-up, are a reflection of the lesser importance of the match. Olsen went in being willing to lose and I think that was reflected in his line-up and then handling of the game - Olsen was willing to win it as a free game, but if it was going to "cost" him anything in the league, he wasn't prepared to pay the price. I'm biased, I want DC to win every game they play, realistic or not. But DC will either win in Seattle or they won't. Seattle's offense has looked abysmal and their offense was covering their adequate-to-awful defense. Whether or not DC wins in Seattle, I think, has more to do with how much the cross-country travel affects the players. If they play like they're jet-lagged, playing tonight wasn't going to have mattered. If they don't, then a couple players with slightly more tired legs wasn't going to spell the end for DC. In my opinion - I do realize that I am guessing, but that is my impression.
You're arguing against a point I didn't make. Though our first-line defense is indeed respectable, even they aren't so hot at the points I mentioned (use of space, quality of distribution, quickness of play, and 50/50 challenges).
Right, so you obviously see what I was getting at-- who's willing to trade the USOC win for a result in Seattle? I'd be surprised if any of us are willing to do that. And yes, I realize I'm sorta creating a false choice because it's plausible to do both, by several means, but whatever capital you expend in Philly it leaves you with that much less at your disposal in Seattle. I love the Open Cup as much as anyone, but I don't have a big problem with the player selection. And, just one example, but putting a injury prone guy like Pontius into that game maybe isn't the best idea. If any of the those choices make it more likely for us to even take a draw out of Seattle, it was the right call. Honestly, I think we have our best chance in some time to get all 3 points there. Getting any kind of result there could, hopefully, if we're fortunate, be important if we can get results in the playoffs.
Well, okay, but saying that the difference between our A and C is minimal, I think doesn't apply to the defense. There was a pretty big difference there and ultimately, the defense gave up two goals against a 10-man team. The offense sure as shit made it hard for them by not retaining possession, but as you say, it's not like the A defense normally has a possession offense in front of it. No, I do, and I think Olsen went in with that mentality. Olsen didn't go in expecting such a disaster - a lot of that is on the players. But regardless, I think that assumption is wrong. You're probably right, if DC comes back from Seattle with all three points (should be hot as balls on that turf, so that should play to DC's advantage, right?), most of us will think he made the right decision. If they come back with one, we'll probably shrug and think bombing out of the USOC as no big deal. But, honestly, DC might lose anyway - most teams don't do well when traveling across the nation. If our next game was home against Toronto or NJ, I would more understand, but in this case, I think DC traded a most-likely-winnable game for a better chance at a game they are statistically likely to lose. Plus, looking at the standings, beating Seattle helps in the SS-chase, but Seattle, at the moment, probably isn't DC's greatest challenge for the Shield. Personally, I started rating the Shield lower ever since the unbalanced schedule and there are an awful lot of games in the rest of the season - a six point swing against Seattle may matter in the long run, but that's hardly a given. And DC has a pretty good position at the moment in the East (Toronto has a lot of games in-hand, but they do have to win their next few without Bradley and Altidore). If that's the case, then the USOC must have very low importance. All things considered, that's a lot of value placed on a game that I am not sure deserves it.
The thing I worry about with the defense now is that last night we had two players at CB that people argue should both be starters - but after last night's display I guess we know that either is only any good when paired with Boswell and maybe neither are starting quality - they sure weren't when playing together. Maybe they would have been okay with Hamid? Any veteran leader on the backline with them? Who knows. And you can count me as one who would have rather won last night than keep people out worrying about Seattle - USOC is an easier path to next year's CCL, now we HAVE TO win the East and/or the Supporter's shield - which is not going to be as easy. And we have a 50/50 chance of beating Seattle anyway, so what good did it do to save people? I guess you can answer/laugh at me after we beat them My voice is shot from screaming for a sub about every 30 seconds after the 55th minute, or more from screaming at people to please pass to a teammate instead of passing to a Philly player standing by himself not even near any United players. At one point I swear one of our guys purposely didn't even go for receiving a pass near their 18 so he could defend against a Philly player who actually was willing to run toward the pass - it's like we had no concept of scoring more than one and once we had it we had no ideas other than defending. At another point we had guys all around their box and we just whacked the ball around, maybe had 8 or so completely undangerous passes, then they intercept and within 3 passes they're shooting the ball at our goal. It was pathetic how badly we did not want to score.
Bad, because I dislike losing and value the USOC. At very least I would feel we gave an honest effort and showed club cared.
If we win Friday and win the shield this year I will be thrilled and applaud Olsen for it. Even if we lose Friday, fail to win the shield and pull off an MLS Cup win I will be ecstatic. Now, if we lose Friday and fail to win the shield and flame out in the playoffs then I will consider this decision to largely give up on the USOC to be a mistake. There are many variables and honestly we won't be able to fully take stock until the end of the year. Right now I felt we threw a result away trying to do the bare minimum. In several months it could still or be forgotten depending on how things play out.
They were fine in the midfield passing and maintaining possession, then would lob it into the attacking third with no real offensive vision. The second goal was the only really good attack in the match from either side (in the second half that I saw). I kinda felt like I was watching a United game. Then watching Germany dribble out of bounds, absolutely misfire on a PK and the US D turn a sure clearance into a German corner was enough for me to question whether these were the #1 and #2 Women's teams and not MLS.
Well, this is coming from a person who values the SS more than MLS Cup, but let me state I'm not really worried about the game in Seattle because of the SS. I'm worried about it because of MLS Cup. If Seattle wins the Shield, we'd play MLS Cup there, and on Friday we have a chance to get a result there, which could mean a lot in the minds of the players on both teams. So while I love the USOC also, I would sacrifice it in the manner we did to give ourselves any boost at winning the larger title. It could all blow up in our faces, of course, but Ben only knows what he knows today, not what we'll be bitching about in 3 months.
Good post overall. It's a tradition, tho, around here, that we play our scrubs pretty much until we get to semi-finals. Philadelphia, on the other hand, was playing their starters because they don't have any thing else to play for. I was surprised that Olsen didn't begin feeding in offensive players at around the 55th minute. Oh well, we can still qualify for next year's CCL if we win the Supporters Shield or if we can get to the MLS cup finals - or does CCL qualification go to the MLS cup winner and the remaining conference winner or the remaining team with the next best record?