So this is something I've been thinking about for a while with regard to CP and the MNT, and want to get other people's thoughts on it. Let's call it the Pulisic Conundrum. Preface: I fully recognize that this is going to be a question we can't answer with much certainty until we hire a coach, have a more set in stone base formation, and see how all the new young chess pieces look in their upcoming opportunities. So with all that said, my question is: What is Christian Pulisic's best position on the MNT going forward, with regard to the team as a whole? The origin of this issue is a familiar one for the MNT- the lack of really any player resembling a dynamic offensive playmaker in the middle of the field. We have some nice young central midfielders in McKennie and Adams, but neither of their strengths are a fit in that role, obviously. I think most agree that Pulisic's best position in a vacuum is as a winger that we can get the ball to in space, and can open up the field in a big way without the ball. However, is the overall team simply better off with CP in that attacking midfield role, because at the moment he is far better equipped to play it than anyone else in our pool? I lean towards yes being the answer to that question, but am by no means set on it. Weah has looked like a guy who can handle either wing position quite well in his place, and if Amon turns out to be the real deal, I would hazard a guess that this is the best move for the national team moving forward. I also think this would potentially allow us to place the maximum amount of overall talent on the field in a way that makes sense. I suppose we should all cross our fingers and hope that in the near future a guy like Ledezma, George Acosta, or Andrew Carleton emerge as the missing piece in that spot, but for now, I think it's a worthwhile debate.
No doubt for me and no conundrum. CP has a fast football mind that moves just as easily right and left. I would stick him behind at least one, possibly two strikers in the middle of the pitch. For once i would like to see the US have the sack to attack right down the middle. 4-3-1-2, realistically we might only need one striker if CP is playing, but since this is wishsong time, let's go with 2 strikers. -----------Sargent---------Weak, I mean Weah------------ -----------------------Pulisic--------------------------- Whatever-------------Weston------------------Adams Most want Adams at DM, but he's small and weston is a fat kid with a motor playing in Germany where they don't let you play sissy ball.
To me, Pulisic's greatest gift to our team that no one else has is as an attacker. I would like to see him play underneath the a lone striker with license to find the space, seams, ball. He would play similarly to the way Dempsey played. (position and freedom to improvise,not actual style). We need to find a player and or system that gets him the ball in dangerous positions.
I'd play without a #10 until some of the younger players emerge, so play Pulisic on the wing. He can play as a #10 better than the other options, but his playing style is much more like a winger.
Against decent competition, wing. He needs to be more aware of where the other players are, centrally. Often he's not and just dribbles into trouble. That'll be less noticeable on the wing. Against weak rivals, either is fine. He's able to create a world of trouble for teams like Trinidad with his dribbling alone.
To me, his greatest value at the moment would be to play him in the middle of the field as opposed to the wing. But I would only do that until another central attacking player emerges, because Pulisic seems more fitted to a wide role. Again, the problem is no attacking central type mid has stepped up for us at the moment … so we gotta do what we gotta do.
Can I see what your ideal lineup would look like with Pulisic on the wing vs. centrally? Might help swing me to the other side if I can see a good one.
We're still filling the blanks, it's early in the season. Right now, had we to play a competitive game against a decent rival tomorrow: --------------------Steffen------------------ Yedlin---Miazga----CCV---Robinson ------------Adams----??????------------ Pulisic------------------------------Green ----------??????---------Weah------------ with ?????? to be determined in the coming matches. If we had to play a Top 10 rival, I'd go with the 4-2-3-1 though.
I think this is just about right. But I would put Fabian Johnson at LB instead of Robinson, and John Brooks at CB instead of CCV. I would have McKennie at DM ?????? and Altidore at ?????? with Weah. That is probably the strongest team the US could field right now.
McKennie would have been my pick before the season started. Since then, I must admit I'm not impressed by him. I'm still not ok with Altidore back with the team. I'd prefer if we can find some alternative, although I suspect that's his position in the end. Fabian Johnson is a good one. But I have a hunch with his recent injury history, he won't be too interested in a NT call. And if he's pushed to come, he'll be subpar again. Oh and I'm not a fan of Brooks. Too inconsistent for my taste.
oooh, oooh, oooh! I'll try too. Steffan Yedlin Miazga Brooks FJ McKennie Adams Feilhaber (Weah?) Pulisic Altidore?/Sargent?/Wood? I really like Weah but am not 100% convinced he is ready right now. Perhaps he is the best we have right now even if he isn't 100% ready. Sargent could leap to the front of the class with some real time in b1. If he gets that time and scores goals it isn't even close. Feilhaber, in my opinion is the best we have for that position right now...he will make Weah, Pulisic and whoever is up top more dangerous than what we have (I think he is better than Green too...you may disagree) but he is ONLY a temporary solution for the present and not a solution for any extended timeframe.
I think his size is more suited to the wing. He is our Figo. He can create from the wing, drift in when possible and use this ability to put the defense off balance. No matter where he plays, he needs a creative presence next to him. When you see him run out of room in BVB, that is from no outlet and his act being well known by now. Unless we go to 442. Then inside right may work. His shot is strongest off the right foot.
Depends if we have any young #10s develop.................. Developing elite #10s ain't easy. If it was, everybody would have one. I want Pulisic to influence the game as much as possible. Bruce Arena used to say that Landon Donovan was our best forward, our best winger, and our best #10. His job was figure out how to fit the puzzle pieces around him to maximize the team's performance. I've always thought of Pulisic as more of a winger than a #10. But I do think its more likely that we develop wingers (Amon and company) than more #10s. So I think its possible that even though Pulisic may not be as great centrally, the attack will be more dangerous overall with him in that position. The current Clint Eastwood U23 national team: (By that I mean players eligible for the 2020 Olympic cycle. Players born in 1997 or later. So Steffen, Shaq Moore, etc. are too old) ------------Sabbi-------- Gall-------Pulisic------Weah -------Adams-McKennie----- Robinson-CCV-EPB-Cannon -----------Scott-------------- I obviously put Sabbi over Sargent because the kid is performing at a high level in first team soccer. I think Sargent has a higher ceiling, but you do have to reward performance over a kid that's never played a first team game. Trusty is charging at CB, but I still really like Palmer-Brown. Glad seems to have stalled a little bit. Still really like him as a CB too. I'm just not sure his ceiling is as high as the others. But who knows.
I think the only reason we have a conundrum with players like Pulisic is the same reason we had similar discussions about where Dempsey should play. We don't have any other talent. If there were two or three other players at that level, this discussion would be moot. Put the guy in the attacking third and give him a free role with limited defensive responsibility. Tell all the other players to feed him the ball. That is all. It ain't rocket science. He's miles better than any other attacking player the US can put on the field. Hopefully Sargent can develop quickly to become a guy that can take some of the defensive focus off CP.
More and more, he sounds like Landon Donovan. Took 8 years to get the right players and play him in the right position.
The difference in perception between Glad's play and Carter-Vickers is that one plays on the preferred continent, the other doesn't? Glad plays a more proactive style and has played pretty decently this season in the same caliber of league that Carter-Vickers plays in. For all people talk about Glad's lack of muscle, Carter-Vickers can't pass the ball, is rash in his tackling and isn't particularly mobile. The media pushing Carter-Vickers and ignoring Glad is dumb and shows they are more concerned with hyping up guys because of the club teams they play in, the leagues they play in, storylines than skillsets and how each player fits within the system. Glad plays the type of game we need more of at CB, Carter-Vickers plays the type of game we need less of. Thats not to say Glad is miles ahead of Carter-Vickers, but if you believed the mainstream perception, its the opposite.
Pulisic is good enough to take our chance building the team around him. We have nothing to lose, frankly. That means he has to be the focus of our attack, and for that playing on the side is better because centrally he's going to be surrounded by defenders much faster. I'd try to copy the Tuchel model. As I said (and everybody hated me for it), Pulisic is a system player, the type who can flourish under the right circumstances. We have to create those right circumstances in the NT: two players to always keep close, to give him a way out when he dribbles into trouble; a single DM who can pass (the Weigl role); and a CM/AM with the creative duties, Pulisic is not someone who creates chances for others well (that's the key difference with Donovan). Tuchel played often a 4-1-4-1 with a midfield of two wingers who could move forward for a 4-3-3, and the two central guys always had one versatile player who could be CM and AM. That role often fell on Kagawa, and sometimes on Castro or Guerreiro when the Japanese was not available. Truth is Tuchel could never fill the creative role adequately, and that's why he fell short of lifting a cup. But it was in those games, when they played the 4-1-4-1/4-3-3 and the "creator" was one of the guys who kept close to Puli, that our guy had his best games. We'd need someone who can be a distributing DM like Weigel, and a creative CM/AM though.
I think the problem is, he is our best number 10 and probably the best RW/RM as well and the region we play in is known for Speed and Fouls. So putting him on the wing he can go 1v1 but while players aren't as technically gifted they are as fast and can limit his influence. But putting him inside, where I think he can have his greatest influence with dribbling, shooting and combination play, teams can double and hack him all game long if we don't have true wingers to threaten and open space. I think the answer is putting him inside in the hole and letting him drift around the top of the field to get involved in the game. But I do believe it will depend on the coach we get and their set up. But without coaching bias and strictly my own opinion of what I would like to see: Amon----Novakovich----Sabbi ---------------Pulisic ----Adams---------------McKinnie/Williams/Canouse/Acosta/Hyndman/etc Robinson----Miazga-----Hines-ike----Yedlin ---------------Steffen Hines-Ike fits the pairing better than Brooks though I think Brooks is the better player, so I think it would be Miazga or Brooks and not both. Miazga to me is more consistent so I give them the nod. Wouldn't mind seeing CCV and EPB as well.
While many of his attributes are A or even A+, "combination play" is not one of them. If the important pass is done by the other guy, we have awesome sequences with Puli in them. When it's him who does the crucial pass, though, it's usually a turnover because the pass was far too behind or the ball was too heavy for the other player to control it. We tend to blame it on the other player, but being honest here, most of the time it's on Puli. He's not going to combine in the middle, he's better as the guy coming from the side making the easy pass to the guy near the edge of the area who then makes the hard pass to the onrushing Puli entering for the chance.
Not many teams play with a central #10 anymore and tons of top quality play-makers start in wide positions. Pulisic's biggest strength is directly attacking teams off the dribble so starting him on the wing allows him to do what he's best at. I do think we need to make sure we feed him as much as possible, but he doesn't have to get stationed in the middle of the field where those direct dribbling attacks are generally a poor choice anyway.
CP's dad has CP in his phone as Figo, iirc from an article..... to me ...its the wing. i think of it like "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link".... and what CP can do on the wing...the other options cannot. that creativity, dribbling, chance creation, etc on the wing is necessary for the team and the postion. it comes down to who is playing wing? is it a dmid? is it a cmid? is that person able to create danger? if so, then you could play CP centrally. despite not having great options at CAM or second striker, I think the options there are better than the wing...SO i think CP at wing + a second striker centrally or a more attacking mid centrally is better than CP centrally and a non-creating wing.... i think the people who want CP centrally think it is okay if the wingers are not contributing much to the attack...and i think that is the recipe for a team that doesnt create very much...which is part of the reason why the team hasnt been creating many chances for a while now..... whoever plays wing MUST be dangerous...must dribble must have a good cross must pin their ears back and get by defenders etc.....CP can do that. who else can? it is a necessity for the usmnt...especially with CM's who dont create much.
It's the same problem that we previously had with Donovan. He would literally be the best player at any of the attacking positions. Pulisic was at his best when he could interchange with Aubameyang and Dembele. When the 3 of them were running at defenses it didn't matter who was what position because they would start in one spot and finish in an other. That's what we need to find.