Michael's a very good player and he is certainly one of our core players. But he always plays. The Slovakia coach who also has a son who starts, took his son out in the game against us. But Bob kept Michael in the full 90. All right, Michael was taken out against Denmark, but that appeared to be because he has a game coming up this weekend. And if Jones gets fit, will Bob move Michael to another position to make room for a superior defensive midfielder? Looking at our defensive back four without Gooch, we really need a true stopper at defensive mid.
lol. Your preaching with this one. No matter what you say..............never ever being used as a sub the last 2 years....will be something that will create a major conflicting discussion between people who think he should be used as a sub sometimes vs. People (who probally also agree, but just cover it up) that still post that it was ok for him to never be used as a sub.
First of all, props on the thread name. Anyway... I honestly think Bradley deserves to be starting every game simply because, well, who else would play? With Jones coming into the picture however that could and should change big time.
Michael is a very good player, one of our best and most consistent. We saw the first bad game for him in a while yesterday against Denmark. Bad game subbed off The reason he didn't come out against Slovakia was because he was one of the best players on the field. Who would we sub for him? Bad game - subbed off Good game - stay on It's a pretty simple science Michael isn't in danger of losing his spot to a Defensive Midfielder, he never has been. If Jones gets fit and breaks into the starting lineup, our midfield is confirmed. Bradley and Jones, with a very clear difference in their individual responsibilities.
so that makes this the 400th post about this topic?? if we ignore the rest of the games b/c they were in the past, let's just look at these two... who would you have played instead?? MB consistently gets PT with his club... he's one of (if not THE) our top CM.... Torres could not make the slovakia and couldnt play b/c of personal reason in denmark... Edu is injured...jones is injured... would you have played Kljestan?? Dax McCarty?? Clark only was able to make the denmark game... Feilhaber actually played both games (did well) MB is one of our best CM's... i would start him in any meaningful game... i would LIKE bob to let him rest a bit in some up coming friendlies... but our team was already missing players via injury and club duties (MLS and Mexican League)... i do not fault Bob for playing MB... and i am glad bob subbed him off...
Watch the 2007 Gold Cup, it's amazing how much MB's gamke has grown, but yeah, he certainly played like crap yesterday and he'd probably be the first to admit it. Simply too many errant passes and blunders that killed momentum going up the field.
all would have been forgiven by most if he managed to thread that pass from on top the 18 after having dribbled it around 3 Denmark defenders... but yes, i am glad he started, but more glad bob subbed him
In other sports, particulary basketball, there is a name for a guy on the team like Bradley. It's called tweener. Tweeners usually have to really work hard to earn a starting spot much less a guaranteed starting spot. He obviously is not a conductor, a #10, like Ramos was for us. However, he is obvioulsy not a Cholo, a destroying mid like Rico, Edu or Jones are. I dig on Bradley's game, however it depends on who our nation is playing that day if and when he should start. I feel most people that latch on to the Bob Bradley never sits his son debate, just want to see other combinations in our mid outside of Jr. + the other guy. For my money, getting our most technical men out in the center of the park should be Logic 101. Then the coach must balance that with who can cover the running required at the international level as well. Then are we playing South Korea that day or England. Jr. does many things well, a Jack of many trades Master of none like how O'Brien was, but Jr. ain't the passer or off the ball thinker like O'Brien was and no where near the techincal capacity of an O'Brien type middie. Torres + Bradley or Holden + Bradley shoule be on Bob's radar but we lose the bite, so if it Rico or Jones + Bradley we lose the conductor type mid for the sake of two more industrial players. I just want more combinations than what Bob has allowed to take place, more so with all the matches our nation played in '09.
Bradley has had more than two bad games so that means that he should not have been on the field as much as he has, and should have started on the bench and been subbed off more than twice. That leaves two possibilities, Bradley is playing his son more than he deserves because of nepotism or Bradley is a terrible manager and cannot tell which players need to be subbed off or not even start. I think we can now dismiss the nepotism arguement because Bob has given too many of his other favorites way too much playing time as well. It's not just Mike but I think that he has stuck with Bornstein, Johnson, Beasley, Ching, Sacha, and Casey way too long rather than looking for other better options. I think that Mike deserves playing time just not that much playing time. I also wonder how much resentment Mike is getting from some of the other guys in the locker room who can't get any time on the pitch because he must always be on the field. Maybe that's why the team looks so lazy, why bust your @ss if you know that Bob has already picked his team two years ago. Mike may be our best CM but it doesn't mean he should start. Look at England with Lampard and Gerrard, until they found the right manager they could not play well together. Since we will not be getting a new manager maybe Bob could try every midfield combination available. Two "lesser" players might control the midfield better than Bob's default setting of Mikey + Flavor of the week. Our midfield after over two years is still not syncing up with either the back line or the strikers and the common denominator over that time is Mike always playing in the middle. I think it's safe to say that Bob's "system" is a complete failure. Bob, the team is broken, please fix it!
The term 'tweener' carries a certain negative connotation in basketball and football. In that sense, Bradley isn't a tweener. There is nothing debilitating about his skill set or size. He's a typical box-to-box midfielder. The problem is that either the coaches don't know how to properly deploy Bradley, or that Bradley and his midfield partner don't know how to work in harmony, or perhaps both. It also doesn't help that we never get to see what other pairings, sans Bradley, have to offer.
If you say so. In Texas it was always a guy to small to play the 3 spot but couldn't handle the ball well enough to play the 2. That type of X's and O's breakdown of a player not that he was a weak spot for the team. O'Brien is the word you are looking for when describing box to box U.S. all around quality footballer. Donovan always commented on JOB being our nation's best player o' soccer. Bradley ain't no O'Brien. Bradley is our latest Mike Sorber type of player. Which if you asked Bora, that's wonderful for our World Cup chances. I think your comment about pairings in our twin deep lying mids is the focal point of what needs to be cemented.
That tweeners exsist in sports. Always have and always will. If they earn a starting spot it usually is cuz they found their ideal role on the ideal team. We can't say this of Jr. Follow?
a tweener in basketball relates to height, not skills. the analogy holds no weight in comparison to soccer, and i suggest you learn more about soccer so you won't have to make artificial and forced analogies to other sports in furtherance of your argument. if you want to say he's a jack of all trades, master of none, i might understand where you are coming from.
The fact that despite having worse performances, he never ever comes out. Bradley Jr is going to play 145 minutes* in SA, regardless of performance. Just get used to it guys. *Jr is eligible to play all 270 minutes, but will get red carded in the 55th minute of game one or two and will miss a match.
Yesterday yet again Bradley provided ANOTHER bad performance off of a decent game vs Slovakia. He cannot string two good games to save his life. Funny how Bradley is pulled the day we don't have any other options on the bench to really replace him with. But when Torres and Feilhaber are on the bench Bradley always plays the full 90.
I have a feeling that no matter which two i'll say, you'll say he was average at best in one of them. So, no! I'm not playing! Seriously though, I thought he was good against Costa Rica and Slovakia. This game against Denmark was the first game in a long while that I thought he was actually bad. Most of the time, his poorer games still get him in the 5-5.5 range on the player rating threads, while yesterday I thought he was a 4 or 4.5 at best. Edit: He was pretty good against Honduras as well, rebounding after an average performance against T&T.