I hadn't realized Akers had problems with Ape too. How much time was Akers under Heinrichs before she retired?
Re: Milbrett article Sorry, I didn't realize that this article was already posted in the Milbrett thread. I hadn't checked that one out in a while.
Re: Milbrett article I am glad that someone is taking Ape to task. It will be interesting to see if Milly gets back into the picture after the Oly's if we get a new coach.
Michelle Akers Michelle retired shortly before the 2000 Olys. She had all those injuries that just became too much - and I think that she wanted to give up her spot on the roster to a completely healthly player (not that April would use that substitute to rest any of her starters in the early games that would lead up to the final against Norway...)
Interesting words from Akers. I remember in February 2000 Akers specifically said in an interview that Heinrichs had gone out of her way to say that nobody's spot on the team was guaranteed, including that of Akers. I suspect that Akers, knowing she was at the end of her career on the Nats (she said in '99 that WWC '99 was her last and wasn't sure if she'd play in the Olys in '00), knew she didn't have to take any cr*p from Heinrichs. And she probably didn't. One book I read about the team's history said that when they were both players Heinrichs made a questionable call about a ball being out and Akers called her on it. Heinrichs backed off. And, of course, even though Heinrichs was captain in '91, Akers was far and away the dominant player. She was to women's soccer what Gretzky was to hockey. In other words, Akers intimidated Heinrichs like no other women's soccer player. It probably continued after Heinrichs became coach. I suspect that was what made Akers hard for Heinrichs to handle. Milbrett's situation is altogether different. She was never at Hamm's level, let alone Akers'. She thought she was entitled to top star billing, for example for "leading" the team with three goals in the WWC in '03 (but only one in the quarters and on), but Akers would also have had three goals had one not been deemed an "own goal" in the Nigeria game. And, Milbrett was a one-dimensional player. How many times did she start a give-and-go? As for now, Heinrichs has been playing the Wombat because she's better than Milbrett. The Wombat is also a more exciting player. Who would you rather pay to go see play? I can show grown men a soccer game with the Wombat playing and instantly she shows them that this is a real sport. Milbrett could never do that. She made her contributions. I'm not crying tears that she's not playing now.
Please pardon my ignorance here, but exactly how long is a player contract on the USWNT? It seems to me, that if Mr Contigulia wanted to get rid of the vets, he had ample opportunity in the approximately 5 years since WWC 99. I know professional players have multi-year contracts, but I can't imagine a national team player having more than a 1 year agreement. Otherwise the coach would have no control over player selections.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play Yes it is true. However, consider two important things: 1. UNC has the most aggressive college fitness program in the nation. Dr. Kirkendall devised UNC's program and is employed by UNC, however he also was hired by USSF to develop the USWNT fitness regime. 2. The majority of the older players on the USWNT couldn't do the fitness regiment done at UNC. An 18-22 year old body is a LOT more resiliant than a 32-36 year old one and is able to handle physical stress far better. So before you hurt yourself laughing, keep in mind the physical principles at play here.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play You know what I find odd about these statements? When Tarpley comes in, I see enterprising play. I see her attacking like the vets used to. And I don't see anyone on the sidelines chastizing her for it. When Heather O comes in, I see her getting behind defenses, setting up players, and getting shots on goal like Hamm used to do 10 years ago. And I don't see April yelling at her to be more mechanical. I've seen Mitts try to attack from the back, as have Rampone and Reddick. Bivens the same. This is what Fawcett and Brandi did back in the late 90s under Tony. And April seems to applaud it when it happens. In the China game you could see her applauding this kind of play. So that begs the question. If April has made the game mechanical and passionless, and if she is stifling the team, why is she applauding the enterprising and creative play of these young and fast players? Why are they allowed to experiment and run and players like Brandi, Fawcett, and Foudy not? Or could it be that the vets know that they lack the stamina at this point to run all over the field like they did 10 years ago, and still get back to play their primary positions? So maybe April has asked them to stay nearer to their primary positions and not stretch themselves because they couldn't recover to deal with the counters of Canada, Sweden, and Germany. This is mere speculation of course, but I've watched dozens of games since April took over, and it just always seems that the younger players are being creative, and the vets are not.
Milbrett is just one of those players who got caught up in change and didn't roll with the punches. There are many cases in soccer around the world where a new coach comes in and a player who was an impact or maybe even a star does not fit in with the new scheme or what the new coach is trying to do. Or maybe because of new talent being introduced on the team that person's style of play no longer fits. Other players made the adjustment when April came in and did well. Milbrett refused, got a bad attitude, and is no longer on the team. Happens all over the world.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scoach: you really need to read everything I say. I have made the comment about the WWC 2003. No matter who played they were restricted. I mentioned this year that she seems to be giving them more freedom. Allowing them to go outside their designated roles to a degree. as a result we are seeing more goals in the run of play. and more give and goes and more deception as a result. That comment was made way back when Millie first left the nats. We had as of yet not seen the team play. there were clearly times she let them go and just play and there were clearly times she tried to control that play from the sidelines. these 6 domestic friendlies have been one or the other. she has either restricted them, thrown a messed up roster on the field playing people out of position, played them in a formation that does not work...IE the 4-3-3, and then like with the China match she has let them go. allowed them to be creative and the flow has been wonderful. I cincerly hope she is finally realizeing that she can not pigeonhole her players and restrict their mvement and that she finally lets them do what they do best instead of Micro-managing everything.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play Rubbish: Lets take this in turn. WWC03. I sit watching the US v Nigeria game from WWC03. Play is coming from the flanks as well as centrally. Wagner trying to score from the middle, Bivens has shot from the top of the box, Hamm has scored with a PK and a free kick, and the game is less than15 minutes old. The US is creating from all over the field. In later games, as the vets ran out of legs, play became more static. And yes the tactics against Germany were poor, but in fact may have been all the team could muster. Joy nor Foudy had legs, Brandi was out, Mac wasn't fit to play, Hamm was out of it mentally, and Germany was as good or better in the run of play than the US. Ugly tactics but probably the best she could come up with given her personnel. EVERY coach will allow the team to play sometimes, and try to manage from the sidelines at others. This is not unique to April. "Thrown a messed up roster on the field". I don't know what soccer school you went to, but it's pretty customary to use as many players as possible in pre-season or a run up to a large event. I just watched ManU play Arsenal and they both did the same thing. Although neither started with less than their best which was something April did that I am not so sure about. The 4-3-3 doesn't work? Since when? The US won WWC99 with it. Santa Clara won the college championship with it. Since when did we declare it a bad system. No one told me. The only thing I think April has finally realized, is that she needs to play younger players if she intends to win with this team. Every time she does, the team looks dynamic and powerful. I think you add Tarpley and Heather O to our WWC03 roster, and we win it. Just my personal opinion.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play I don't think Hamm-Star was saying the 4-3-3 was a bad system, just it doesn't work on this team right NOW. Watch the Japan friendly when compared to the China match and tell me which game had better midfield play. WWC '99 was 5 years ago, and there was one big difference. Michelle Akers. She could dominate a game single handidly from the DM position. Boxx is getting there, but not on the same level Mich was. Also, in a 4-3-3 the outside middies have a TON of ground to cover. Foudy and Lilly are 5 years older than they were back then. Bottom line, the 4-4-2 is by far the best formation for this team right now.
I agree that the 4-4-2 is the correct system to play when you have to play with the older players since they cannot effectively cover the ground they did years ago. For me, the choice comes down to this: Change the system to allow you to play older slower players and perhaps be less effective or Change the team personnel to allow you to play the system that causes opponents the biggest problem. It is my opinion that we have chosen poorly, and it will hurt this team through it's upcoming rebuilding phase the next 2-3 years. Those players who SHOULD be getting the requisite experience have been forced to sit on the bench or play in the W-League. And it will cost us dearly for some time to come.
Playing Nigeria VS playing Germany is a world of difference. Germany playing Nigeria would have been 9+ to Zero in Germany's favor Don't think the US did have legs for one game and not the other. Germany Dominated right from the start and stopped everything the US could muster, the addition of 2 young players would not have made a difference. Her tactics worked against lesser teams and teams warming up(Sweeden) but against an experienced team with great players on it, they were mechanical. I expect the Olympics to be more scoring from Set plays against the better teams. we'll see how it starts wednesday
Re: Sophisticated tactical play -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks FF...that was exactly my point. I just get a little sick of constantly having to repeat myself. We play exceptionaly well out of the 4-4-2. That being the case why play out of the 4-3-3?. especially when we are playing a team who is useing the 4-4-2. I mean really. isn't that an issue?. you are playing a team who is useing the 4-4-2. why in the world would you short change your team in the mid? if the other team is likewise playing a 4-3-3 then I have no problem with us playing that formation. but we must match up in the midfield. otherwise it is like playing a man down for us. if we can control the midfield we can control the match. and time and time again we have seen that proven out. we did not control the midfield in the match against Germany and we lost. We did control the midfield in the latest match against China and we won, and we won convincingly. it wasn't even close. other matches where april has chosen to play us out of the 4-3-3 against a team who is useing the 4-4-2 we struggled. though we may have on occation ecked out the win it was not a dominating performance and play was machanical and sketchy and as a result we were quite frankly very lucky to win. Scoach: quite honestly I do not care what man U and Aresenal do. this is not Man U. or Arsenal. this is the U.S. Women's national soccer team. it's strengths and it's weaknesses are unique to it. and not reflective of any other team. As a coach it is your responsibility to minimize a teams weaknesses and excentuate it's strengths. april seems to have a serious problem in doing this. I do not care whether you like my assessment of this situation or not. i do not care whether you agree with it. I am entitled to my opinion and it is no more rubbish then yours. But; if you want to float a post simply to disagree with me your welcome to it. But; I for one am not going to sit here and explain my position 15 times so that you can work up a sweat trying to tear it down. The above is my opinion, and it is the last time I will express it with regards to this topic.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play I'll refrain from explaining why someone might want to play a 4-3-3 against a team playing a 4-4-2, but it does happen quite a lot. Generally the idea is to commit more players forward if you believe you can mitigate your loss of strength in midfield. It's certainly a gamble, but you'd figure that superstars like Hamm, Wambach, and Lily/Parlow could apply enough pressure to another teams defense to keep them on their heels. I suppose this was true 5 years ago, but no longer true today. I don't feel that playing a 4-3-3 versus a 4-4-2 makes play mechanical or "sketchy" as you call it. In fact, the 3 front is all about individualism, which is why UNC plays it, Santa Clara plays it, and any number of other teams as well. But I know many people who follow the WNT don't care about what other teams do. The USWNT is the only one that matters. Que sera sera.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play Hamm-star, It occured to me that you probably think I have some axe to grind with you and I really don't. I apologize if my posts come across as argumentative because that is certainly not how they are meant. Really. I simply want to see our WNT play good soccer. In truth, I am far less worried about them being #1, or winning world titles than some fans seem to be, and I feel that somewhat puts me on the fringes of fans of the team. I also have far fewer personal attachments to the players on the team than the team itself, and that is something not shared by most of the other fans of this team than I have encountered. Truthfully, I don't care who puts on the uniform, as long as the team plays well and is entertaining. So again, I'm sorry if I came across as antagonistic. I am passionate about the game and that comes across in my writing, sometimes to the point of obstructing what I am trying to say.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I want this team to meet it's full potential and I feel that this coach often does not allow them to do that. I mean, doesn't it stand to reason that if every time we play the 4-3-3 we struggle but in the 4-4-2 we are stronger and play more solidly, that maybe the 4-4-2 is a formation in which we are comfortable?...and should we not use the formation that best fits this team and compliments it's strengths. Who you have for personel, where on the field your speed can be found, as well as other factors often determine which formation is best suited to the team. Sometimes I feel that she tries to get something form this team that they do not have. Especially out of the mid. there are no speed demons in our mid-feild....therefore it is rediculous to expect them to cover that much ground. especially against a team that has speed in the mid. what we have in the mid is experience, and good positioning. those are the things that we must utilize. But; you can not utilize those things if there is too much space to try to cover. FF I beleive said that Boxx is doing great but she is not Akers. I would agree with that assessment. While she had a great world cup, she had not had enough time with the team and she struggled against Germany. now with a year under her belt with the full national she has shown improvement. but; she is still not akers. and she never will be. but what she is is Boxxy and she will make that position her own. i am very comfortable with her there. she is tough, wins 50/50 balls and her positioning is improveing as well. No mater what direction you go you are going to deal with weaknesses and strengths. Go young and you lose the calm and experience of the vet. go with all age and you lose speed (though not in every case) and some athletasism. what we have is a blend. I do not agree with all the roster selections. But; i can live with it.
FTR - Germany beat Nigeria in a recent friendly (in Germany) 3-1. The 5-0 scoreline flattered the US last fall - two questionable PKs, another goal I seem to recall was questionable, and two Nigeria goals disallowed for close (albeit correct) offsides calls. That game was closer to being 2-2 than a lot of people realize.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play It would seem reasonable that the best way to determine what is our best formation is to try them out against various type of opponents and see what works best? If the ultimate goal of this last year is to win the Olympics (or is it to allow the Fab 5 to go out winners) then you experiment with this group of players before the Olympics? If April uses the 4-3-3 in the Olympics and we lose then you may have a point but we don't know that yet. With the first game two days away I don't think April will be fired before the Olympics. So why don't you just support the team and the Coach. JUST MY OPINION. You are not the only one! You are not the only one! Sorry for repeating myself. That "last time" did not last very long.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play Well now, why would you accuse someone of not supporting the team? The coach perhaps, but I don't think anyone here is not supporting the team. The thing with the 433 is that it was tried in the last critical game we played, which of course was against the Germans. Even when it became evident that it was not working, but rather was playing to the German's strongpoint, their midfield, no adjustments were made. The problem is when a coach "tries" a formation, which is not working, and which probably would never work, you tend to get pissed off at the coach for making dumb decisions which doom her team to struggle more than they have to. In this case one could argue that formation very well cost us the cup. The 433 leaves a very bad taste, and lately we have not looked so hot in it even against weaker teams. On another note, I seem to remember in the old days we played with 3 on defense, which allowed us to play quick offensive futbol. We do not have that ability anymore-and even if we had the wheels back there, I am not so sure it would be practical- but those were the good old days.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play Since the 4-3-3 is such a bad formation for us, it is ironic that it saved us against Brazil. Good thing we practiced using the 4-3-3.
Re: Sophisticated tactical play Well the reason it worked was this: "Brazil played the game almost without a midfield..." http://www.dailycomet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040815/APS/408150681 In other games, this has not been the case. Props to April for making an adjustment, something she's not been doing in prior situations.