While I hope she does make changes, I would be amazed if she does. Ellis is always way late when it comes to making any kind of adjustments and her spreadsheet says its Morgan, Heath and Lloyd.... no matter what recent performances indicate
USA’s Ellis praises Puerto Rico progress http://www.concacaf.com/article/usas-ellis-praises-puerto-rico-progress "They lose 10-0, but there's pure joy in their faces just being out there and taking in all the experience and taking in the opportunity and that's what I didn't have in England-- an opportunity to play," the 49-year-old remarked after the Group A finale. "I said to a couple of them, 'I hope you are now more committed to this.' It's lighting a fire under them. “For these girls to live it and experience it at this level is special. It's good for our game. It's good for our region. It's something they will never forget." Not to mention, the exposure might be a good recruiting tool for drawing in stateside-based eligible players.
There is also the safety net. If she plays the normal starters and it goes sideways she takes some heat but a lot goes on the group that won the cup. If she throws out a funky line up and it goes wrong, Ellis gets vilified.
There's also the consideration of a player's body of work over some relevant period significantly longer than the last couple of games as compared to who's been hot over the last couple of games. A good coach has to look at both and then make a judgment. Ordinarily, someone who actually has coached successfully at the level involved for a significant period of time will have more expertise and make better decisions on where to draw the balance than someone who simply watches games, maybe has coached at a much lower level, and simply expresses opinions without bearing the burden of being the one who actually has to carry the responsibility, and possibly get the blame or credit, for the results.
Actually Ellis has shown herself to be decisive and a bit pragmatic. Rampone's legendary body of work didnt help her after Johnston had a good Algarve. HAO certainly didnt get the benefit of the doubt because of hers in what I saw as a toss up call. I havent agreed with a good number of her decisions but she certainly isnt afraid to make the call. Now on some calls Ellis may have to look at other things besides play between the lines. She is just a spoke in the wheel.
I'm not sure Rampone is a good example. I'd say her legendary body of work wasn't "over some relevant period ...." It was a little too long ago. I'd say that Rampone was a question mark based on the relevant period, due to injuries Ellis gave Johnston a look, and Johnston's performance let Ellis settle the question. Ellis probably went through the "weighing" process I described and the scales came down for Johnston. In fact, the Rampone/Johnston decision probably is a good example of what I was talking about. Sometimes the decision goes one way, sometimes it goes the other.
I might buy that... Rampone was on the decline ... except Engen was also injured for Algarve and Johnston jumped them both with her performance. As u know Im not big on the coaching theory that players make the roster based on what they do in practice as opposed to matches. As Johnston was the #4 CB before Algarve and the #2 CB after, there seems to have been a flaw in her case.
I agree with this. The idea that a full time starter should be replaced on how an individual performed against a tomato can team like Puerto Rico is perplexing to me to say the least. Heck, Leroux was able to score 5 goals in one half against Guatemala (same thing with A-Rod against Dominica), which temporarily (in Leroux's case) put her ahead of Morgan as the super sub, even though Alex almost single handily gave us a chance to win the 2011 WC final. After that performance Leroux went 14 straight matches and tallied 0 goals and 0 assists against the top 6 teams in the world (albeit mostly as a sub). Not so much on this forum, but on Equalizer I've noticed people asking for Ellis to replace Morgan (and to some extent Press) on top with Dunn since she has the hot hand right now. Perhaps I should start visiting the local park and running circles around 8 year old's just in case a Barcelona scout is looking for the next superstar to play alongside Messi in Spain. I like Dunn and believe she has a place on this team as a future starter, but let's not please make these assumptions based on how the team performed against a tomato can like Puerto Rico.
There seems to be two trains of thought on the personnel. One is take Dunn out and replace her with Pugh and the other is replace Morgan with Dunn. I dont buy into either theory myself but I do find it amusing that u could have two completely different reactions off the PR match.
Agreed. I'm all for giving players the opportunity to prove themselves one way or the other, but let it be against teams whom actually give you some level of competition. Like you mentioned, if Dunn gets a start against Germany/France/England and fails to deliver, while Pugh proceeds to score a goal against Colombia, people will likely be asking for her take Dunn's spot on the team.
For me the key to this isnt necessarily where u start Dunn but how u use her. Just like they like to swap outside mids from one side to the other u could do that with Dunn for stretches during the match. U move Heath to the right, drop Morgan back to left mid and play Dunn on top for 10-15 minutes then rotate them back. Let the other team try and figure it out.
Great point, which is exactly what they do in the men's game. I'd like to see WoSo employ more of these type of tactics.
I believe, like some have mentioned, that it's important to evaluate players' performances against top-flight competition. For example, I seriously doubt Lloyd was 100% into the PR match. I would add that Morgan also seems to play up or down to the competition; her run and finish against Brazil a couple of months ago was as good as it gets. I think we will see similar plays in thr She Believes Cup. If not, maybe she needs to come off the bench, but, again, evaluate her against real teams first. As far as Dunn, Press, and Pugh go, let's see how they fare against Germany and France. If they look as good as they did against Puerto Rico, then by all means give them starting positions. I just think it's strange to replace WC champion starters with unproven players a mere seven or eight months later. I have a hunch that Pugh will show her elite potential in the She Believes Cup (assuming she is on the roster). Press and Dunn haven't looked great in the past when a heavyweight team is on the pitch. Poor first touches and/or keeping the ball too long get penalized against good teams.
Very well said. I have absolutely no problem with fans asking for certain players to be given a chance to start against teams like Germany, France, England, etc. If that means Lloyd and/or Morgan have to sit on the bench against a top flight team to test out Press, Dunn, Pugh, etc., then so be it. As you stated, what I do have a problem with is fans assuming that just because so and so player lit up the likes of PR, then they're automatically better than starters who have performed extremely well against the top teams in the world. Again, I completely understand the argument of "how could player X prove their worth to the team if they're only given chances to start against weaker teams?" This is a totally legitimate point, which I agree with. If Ellis decided to start Dunn and Press over Morgan and Lloyd against a team like France next month I'm all for it.
The Houston Dash do this. It's actually frustrating to me... I personally do not believe the pro's of confusing a defense outweigh the cons of moving a player to a new position on the field every 15 minutes, with a new mentality, roles, & defenders to get used to each time. I'm telling you this as a Kealia Ohai fan... I hate it to no end when Waldrum moves her about for no apparent reason at all other than to confuse or force a defense to adapt to it. Is what you gain really worth what you've lost with having a player getting comfortable & familiar with the role you've put her in to start the game?
Let me put it this way, I think switching player positions does help against teams that like to bunker down and double/triple team our forwards. For instance, if Morgan is being tightly marked in the box, pull her out to the wing position and slide someone like Press into the middle. All of a sudden, the defenders man-marking Morgan will either have to come out of their bunker mentality and chase her outside the box, freeing up Press to attack in the middle, or remain bunker'd down and deal with a completely new player in that position. This may also confuse the defender marking Press to switch off on Morgan, as she roams around outside. I agree that this strategy may not work so well against Germany or France, since they'll be ready to make an adjustment accordingly.
& this is common sense and completely agree with you... but the point of the conversation that this was brought up at was on the heels of a player proving themselves against teams in the Sheeba Leaves Tournament. With the Dash I believe Waldrum is in a Notre Dame mentality, using tactics that were appropriate for a team with athletes that were superior to the majority of his opponents (such as he had with ND). The Irish don't have that much of an advantage as of late playing in the ACC, and the Dash certainly do not have anything remotely close to it in the NWSL. Yet Waldrum still does it, and the result is the Dash attack, most of the time, looked disorganized, confused, and frankly, inept. The stats back it up: 19 goals last year... worst in the league.
Tell ya what-- you guarantee-- and make me believe-- that Dunn would have scored against Nigeria and I'll agree that Wambach shouldn't have gone...
Very depressing thread to read now that I have had a chance to watch the game. I'll content myself with a couple of other comments and try not to express the really patronizing mood I'm in beyond these: 1. I thought Mewis played very well, and that folks are reacting as though it is reasonable to expect her to be both a finished product and a superstar already, one of which she is not and the other of which she may never be. But she played within herself, didn't get all wrapped up in the pursuit of goals, and took care of the pedestrian work no one else really was-- supporting the back line. In fact she pretty much was sweeper for a day... 2. Is it just possible that Lloyd's pregame briefing went: "I'm going to play you because I'm going to rest Sauerbrunn and I want one of the captains on the field, and there might be penalty shots to take. But don't burn a lot of energy, OK? You might need it in the semi, depending? " Oh yeah-- 3. Can we now see sense in why Kreiger came out of the Mexico game early?