Trapp is just another dime-a-dozen decent American in MLS who doesn't have the athleticism or vision to break out to the next level required of our national team. He could be useful depth in a pinch for qualifying but nothing more. There's really just this one odd poster who continuously pushes for Trapp. Perhaps non-coincidentally, he's also a big Bradley defender. Take that for what you will.
Beckerman was far more dominant in MLS than WT90. He also looked good in his national team appearances, unlike WT90, who has looked weak against mediocre oppositions. With Adams and McKennie, we have two elite athletes locking down the center of the park. Perhaps it is possible that WT90 will be a CM backup, but I'm betting we will continue to develop better CMs to compete with Adams and Mckennie as the current starters.
A 3-4-3 in possession with the middle four in a sort boxish formation. A 4-4-2 in defense (technically a 4-2-2-2 with the middle pair very wide sort of a squashed hexagon). Nick was playing a hybrid role. A right back in defense but not a right back in offense. The key here is that there are going to be at least two players that will have to switch positions. Not every game need have the same positions switching. In offense, Adams fits very well in to Nick's role. In defense, not so much. I don't think I would have him dropping off to the right back in defense because the dude is pressing machine and he would be wasted there.
I think he’s talking about you but doesn’t realize you don’t rate MB highly (nor do I). I think Pragidealist rates MB highly as an anchor
Perhaps in the Panama match, but when faced with a decent opponent that actually pressed, the formation was just a 433 with the midfield trio shifted somewhat to its left.
I've seen quite a few, and I'm included, that think Bradley is better than Trapp. Now most of those people dont want to see Bradley play though.
It was the wrong system then. We could have easily played with Beckerman staying at home and Bradley, Edu, etc having more freedom to go forward. Who am I kidding? Bradley is the only one who would have played the other role.
Why should Bob have changed his system to accommodate a complementary player? The system was built around Donovan and Dempsey.
Because M Bradley wasnt disciplined enough and Beckerman may have complimented him better. Aka, it would have simplified the roles for the two deepest midfielders.
With Dempsey and Donovan in wide position, box-to-box mids were needed to cover ground so the former two could cut inside to create. Bob started a positional mid, Torres, in the Slovenia WC match; the US got over-run. Beckerman's eventual matriculation addressed the different needs of a different pool.
I dont disagree, but that doesnt mean he was disciplined. I think Beckerman was a nice little player but over rated by many. I was only suggesting that playing a true #6 and freeing up Bradley may have been more effective than having two 6/8s.
Four years ago I would have died on seeing this group. With the talent we have today I'm excited. I want to see them against all the top teams.
My historical take differs from yours. I remember personally hating the hippie, then coming to really appreciate him greatly for the things he did very well (short, quick, and accurate passes [note the Oxford comma--just learned about it yesterday on bigsoccer], tackling while keeping his feet, quick recognition and closing down of crucial spaces). And I remember him continuing to be viewed by a clear majority on BS as I had previously viewed him--a mediocre, MLS midfielder.
With BB, we played a standard 4-4-2 with 2 CMs (one of Edu/Clark/Holden and Bradley). Then we had Clint and Donovan on the wings doing their thing. Jozy up top with whoever from MLS was in decent form (post Davies accident)--one of Robbie Findley or Edson Buddle.