I think it's really unfair to group people as bashers. It's creating a false dichotomy. Michael obviously has a lot of good qualities. He's a smart player in general, and he definitely earns the trust of teammates and coaches. You are right that everyone is looking to pass to him. And we're on the 3rd coach who seems to deem him an auto-starter when he's around, which should definitely kill nepotism arguments or anything similar. However, I think it's willful denial to pretend that MB's game hasn't changed significantly since 2014. When I watched Mike 2010-2013, I basically thought he was our most reliable player (yes, even more than Dempsey or Landon). He looked so clean on the ball, so accurate with his passing, and so comfortable in tight spaces. Of course, he'd also show up to score some excellent goals as well (Slovenia in 2010 and the Scotland friendly jump to mind right away). From the WC on though, he doesn't play like that any more. His touch betrays him far more often than it used to. He frequently (for an international midfielder) turns the ball over with silly passes, and more often than I'd like it is in our defensive third. He hardly ever takes space in front of him (illustrated best in our recent match when he received the ball with 5-10 yards of open field in front of him and turned around, dribbled backwards and back passed). I'm not opposed to back-passing, but every game I watch MB back pass when there are better options. The attack no longer constantly flows through him, but often stagnates with him. None of this accounts for his tackling, which is frankly atrocious - he consistently gets to the right spot only to seemingly bounce off the attacker or fail to dispossess them while they continue on their jaunt forward. Yes, MB sometimes shows flashes of the player he used to be with a sparkling pass or a lung-busting run. But he doesn't do it for 90 minutes anymore (i.e. he's not MB90 anymore). With all this mind, as mentioned before, he seems to engender trust with coaches so strongly that they prefer to have him out there any way. Certainly, there's value in this, and unless his play drops off even further, it's probably going to continue to be the case. Still, pointing out the deficiencies is hardly grounds to be called a "basher."
He is a box-to-box mid, which was the position he most frequently played when in Europe. His strengths are stamina, pace. and mid-to-deep range passing. He can play as an '8' or either side of a skinny diamond. Before the injury, he excelled in limited opportunities to the play the 6 with Roma. In the main, his role as a specialist 6 is a conceit that has been indulged by his American coaches.
The bolded is really funny (probably not inaccurate). However, I disagree that he should be used as an 8. He just isn't dynamic enough on offense. He doesn't seem to see the field quickly enough or spot the right pass when we're on the counter. And we definitely need that for our team. Yes, he can make good mid-to-deep passes as noted, but too often on a break up the field his pondering on the ball kills the attack. At this point, I think the only place that he can fit for us is as a 6. That's a position where his taking time on the ball and occasionally sending a brilliant long ball benefit us. Unfortunately, as I noted and is implied in the quote, his tackling is just bad. As a 6, he doesn't really help the defenders enough to justify him being out there. It's a tough dilemma... I wish we had Bradley circa 2013 out there, because with the group of attackers we have now, that'd be deadly. However, I'm more or less adjusting to the reality that for whatever reason, that guy isn't coming back. Given that Mike is a real coach's player, it's going to have to be a really special player to replace him in the lineup. One where the talent is so undeniable that even Mike's personality isn't enough to keep him off the field. So far, I don't think we have that guy, although I'm really optimistic that it could be Acosta.
A fairly scientific poll, done by Stars and Stripes, over 1650 people voted for who they believed to be the best players in a 4-2-3-1 formation. http://www.starsandstripesfc.com/us...402376/ssfcs-usmnt-lineup-project-the-results Bradley (wanting to say suprisingly) got almost 60% of the vote for the first defensive position and 13,1% selected him as their second choice. In the closest vote in the poll, Kellyn Acosta edged Jermaine Jones in the second defensive midfielder position.
Unfortunately the ~25% that didn't pick Bradley for either spot are incredibly obnoxious and will never shut the **** up about their opinion. Like the Bradley-nepotism folks. Or the pro/rel folks. Or the Klinsmann is a brilliant coach and you're not European enough to recognize his genius folks.
Michael Bradley interview on Extra Time Radio: The interview with him starts about 21:30 https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017...radley-1v1-us-mexico-and-toronto-fcs-ambition He speaks of the rivalry with Mexico, his role in bringing Jozy to Toronto, his time at Herenveen and his interest in coaching when he retires. TFC is on a five match win streak.
Here is an article about the Sounders coaching dilemma, squeezing three playmakers onto the field. The Bradley reference is the one that is pretty telling: https://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/feat...rce=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_m_medium=t I once asked Michael Bradley about the on-field tactical issues that go hand-in-hand with playing alongside Dempsey. It was back when Jurgen Klinsmann was bound and determined to re-make Bradley into Zinedine Zidane. That is, into a creative, attacking midfielder. I suggested to Bradley that perhaps he can’t be at his best in advanced positions when Dempsey was also in the U.S. lineup, due to Dempsey’s wildcat ways. The answer was exactly what you’d expect from the U.S. captain, a consummate team guy: He stressed that Dempsey is a great player, a crackerjack goal-scorer, and any team is better with him on the field. As such, Bradley stated unequivocally, it was on himself to find the game around Dempsey, to make the necessary adjustments and provide balance around his goal-scoring teammate.
Another terrible game where he ruins everything with his need to get on the ball by dropping BEHIND the centerbacks and screwing up all the spacing and shape.
Look, its becoming obnoxious from Arena. We know that bob and Bruce are close buds. If the US qualifies to the world cup, the success of the US team will squarely depend on Michael Bradley. He is either going to make people eat crow or he is going to continue to be a liability as the CAPTAIN. The way he drops back to receive the ball is absurd when you have Brooks and Cameron two very skillful passers/dribblers as your CB's. Howard is the emergency outlet ( a US great). There is no need for Bradley to play sweeper. We should evaluate these next two games. The Michael Bradley from 2015, needs to step up.
Not sure if folks realize this but it is be design. He's charged with starting possession. The alternative, of course would be to have the back four work the ball up. Actually, Klinsmann is the one who started this with Bradley and certainly it slows things down. Of course, the benefit is possession. And most realize he has to get to a spot where the ball is safe and he is facing our attacking players with a view of the field. I think I mentioned this earlier, but in Panama, Omar Gonzalez would move to the right back slot and Zusi into the midfield when Bradley dropped back.
This is absolutely false. In fact the only consistent public complaint that Klinsmann had of MB90 was dropping back too deep to get the ball from the CBs. Klinsmann who prefered CBs such as Cameron, Besler, Alvarado, Birnbaum, and Orozco based on their ability to pass out of the back complained that MB90 needed to be further up the field in front of the opposing Strikers.
do you think he starts possession and distributes effectively? because if he doesnt excel at that, you'd have to agree he shouldnt be out there, right? i think a high majority of fans can see what you've described; he does it countless times per game. what critics are sick of, if their observations match mine, is watching seemingly 9/10 plays he either makes a safe pass that didnt really need to go through him or turns it over. while i dont think he's great on the defensive side of things, i also dont think he's as ineffective at disrupting the attack as people claim. but those who watch cameron at stoke say he does it as well or better against better competition. and we know bradley doesnt take free kicks well... full-game energy isnt enough... so again i'm wondering why he's playing... why cameron hasnt taken over at 6. is the cameron-brooks partnership so good that bradley(6)-brooks-cameron is still superior to cameron(6)-brooks-gonzo/besler/birnbaum/etc? are his captaincy off the field and 130+ caps' worth of experience really that valuable? are we placing too much blame on bradley and not enough on tactics? just looking for an honest, rational response, because i may be missing something important here. the guy did play at roma. i tend to think i am because that's a shitload of caps coming from multiple managers, even if our pool isnt great. they know infinitely more about soccer than me, as do many posters here.
Doesn't matter if he convinced Arena that this is a "tactic" or not, or if someone else is dumb enough to think it is deliberate design. It is absoultely killing us, MB is the one doing it and it has to end now.
It is a deliberate tactic, but it was a response to how Bradley plays regardless. He has never been great at presenting himself as a passing option to defenders. For years he has trotted back to pick the ball off their feet. Arena is just trying to see if he can make it work as part of a system. It did not work, but I applaud Arena for experimenting. It happens. I hope the experiment ends, because I really doubt Geoff Cameron - a better midfielder than Bradley at this point in their careers - needs needs Michael's help in distribution. As Arena himself said, the US is playing too slowly. Opponents find it easy to set their defense. And it made Venezuela's defend and counter tactics (not to mention Panama's) more effective.
Everything old is new again, from 5 years ago! On the things to take from the game: “I think that we just have to circle the ball around faster. We’ve got to find the midfielders playing in more forward positions and not having midfielders, as I mentioned at halftime, coming back and picking up behind. I told Michael [Bradley] and Jermaine [Jones] to ask for the balls further up because we need the ball further up in their half. Even there, if you watch a bit from the first half, we often had the midfielders on the same line and then we had the forwards on the same line. There needs to be a lot more movement off the ball, which is easier when you have space. Obviously we don’t have space because they’re defending really well there and were very compact with 10 guys behind the ball. It’s a bit more tricky. But that’s when you just have to release the ball earlier. You have to control your pass or try a one-touch if possible so you can get behind their backline faster.” http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/201...tch-quote-sheet-us-mnt-vs-antigua-and-barbuda
That was from the "try to make Mike a #10"era. Later Klinsmann used Bradley as described. If we think we're done with Mike in that role - who is his replacement?
No. Klinsmann's comments started 2 years prior to the April 2014 (v Mexico) move of Bradley to CAM in the diamond. Note Bradley as CAM in a diamond lasted only around a year and by Gold Cup 2015 was over except for a brief return at CONCACAF Cup v Mexico IMO, MB90 is still the best option to play the #6 for the US. He just needs to trust his CBs and not drop back and take the ball of their feet. Dax's form does demand some kind of a look at the #6 slot.
Not sure you understand that no one cares if it is by design or not, Bradley is doing a terrible job of either executing instructions, or inventing bad ideas on his own. Either way this crap is screwing everything up.
I am done entertaining this falacy any longer. Cameron is a better option and it is absolutely criminal at this point that he or some other option has not been tried. Why does MB go 90 again in a meaningless friendly? There have been countless examples over the years of this inexplicable trend. Playing MB every minute of every available game has kept us from finding adequate replacements and given our relative depth at CB and our paper thin depth at CM, not trying Cameron in that spot is no longer excusable.
I share your concerns but I am not sure GCam is the right answer even if he is a better CM than Bradley at this point. Cameron is 2 years older than Bradley and has been increasingly injury-prone the last couple of years. Cameron is needed at CB, especially if Brooks is going to be our starter. GCam and Brooks have tremendous synergy together bordering on a world-class pairing as we saw at Copa100. Yesterday would have been a great time to give Dax a run out instead of Bradley. Once we were in a dog fight Bruce did not seem comfortable giving Dax that chance which was unfortunate.
Like I said, I have been happy to go along with that logic up until now. I am done with that, Bradley is killing this team and Cameron needs to be played there so we can actually see the difference with our own two eyes. I now suspect he would be a vast, not slight, upgrade and I want to see it.
I am a professional musician and it is an unspoken rule....you never miss a gig and if you have to get a replacement, make sure they are not as good as you. MB plays every second of every game because he knows that he has no control over who replaces him. Him being captain is what is complicating this whole situation. It is very apparent that we must move in a different direction but I am slowly reaching the conclusion that we are cursed with another World Cup with MB killing attacks and giving away the ball in dangerous places. On a side not. This Acosta love-fest going on in the forums lately is over the top. The guy has really not proven anything at any high level and people are calling him the next coming. What I recall was the World Cup where he was always the worst player on the field and just getting blown past all the time. You have battle hardened #6s playing in various leagues who are not getting a chance to prove themselves and people want Acosta to be bumped to the front of the line? Give me a break.