Again this tenuous theory of 'national team styles' simply does not hold up under scrutiny, but seems to be trotted out at moments when a poster wants to justify his stylistic preferences. The style of any national side is determined by available players and a manager's tactical instructions. The World Cup is played once every four years, and managers are frequently changed. There is no force dictating a style across cycle generations and there should not be an attempt to force one into existence. Defining a national team with a style would be constraining and unfair to the manager and his squad..
Do posters think the USMNT should pursue an identity that seeks to win high scoring and open games or seek to win via low-scoring tight games? I’d like to understand why we’d have a sustainable competitive edge in either scenario. Should this strategy be different between the Hex and, assuming we make it, the WC?
Our identity has always been to play conservative soccer, careful/crowded at the back, exploiting the rival's mistakes in the counter. We're not far from anti-football usually, reason why many people around the world celebrate when we get beaten hard. You won't see us losing 7-0 because we go for the little risk strategy against any team of Haiti quality and above. It'd require a total re-wiring to go toe to toe against the big guys, and would get us destroyed because our defenders, particularly at this point, are not that good. So expect us to keep defending with numbers.
I’d like to hear the other side of the argument as well. Or perhaps the argument that an attacking style will lead to better defense.
At this point of our history we can no longer be a pure counterattack team. Most teams in CONCACAF and percentage of world cup teams will bunker us. We need to be able to do more.
No, if the other team is bunkering then they are waiting for the counter. At some point we have to realize that we are technically superior to some of the team out there. As such, we need to recognize the situation, circulate the ball and create a mismatch or tease out an opening.
What really bugs me is remembering how Tata asphyxiated us in that Centenario game. He outcoached Klinsmann, and I'm afraid he's also going to outcoach Gregg. When that happens, Tata reduces you to your minimal expression. Of course Mexico is not Argentina, but still I feel they are a good fit for him. If (big if) their press doesn't go full xenophobic mode and the guy doesn't feel pressured into playing more "their style" than his own, he could well do it again. Zero shots (zero blocked, zero off goal, zero on goal) is something you don't see... well, ever.
Here's my warm take: 4-2-3-1 ---------Zardes/Wood---- LM/W---Puli---Yedlin------ -------Adams--Mckennie-- LB-----LCB--RCB--RB--- --------------GK-------------
2 mids is why we got sliced open by England. The two mids were McKennie and Trapp. It doesn't work We need 3 mids. My recommendation is Adams-trapp-Delgado.
Exactly. I think we can leave Yedin to one side at this point. Let's go for it and try some offensive wb's/fb's at rb.
We have time to try some youngesters out in Jan camp but he’s still our best RB. He should never be used as a RW/RM. He isn’t an attacking player. He’s a decent 1v1 defender with elite athleticism.
Yedlin would be a wing-forward, wing-back, or attacking fullback. He wouldn't be a RAM in a 4231, though.
Perhaps it was the wrong 2 mids. So you're advocating for a 4-3-2-1 where the 2 are essentially wings? I mean that's basically my 4-2-3-1 except i Have pulisic more advanced as a 10
I’m sorry but no. He should never be used as a wing forward. He isn’t an attacking player. Wingback or attacking fullback is fine. He’s a defensive player that can use his speed to be dangerous getting forward. However he in no way shape or form should be used as an out and out attacker.
No he wouldn’t. This isn’t fifa. You don’t just plug players in and say he’s fast he can play wing-forward. He isn’t a very good dribbler or crosser and he doesn’t make decisions with the ball in the box. When you play that style you have very few chances with the ball in the box. You want someone who knows what their downing when their there.
It is not theory, it is basic football. International football is a war of football philosophies. If there are no styles, why do you suppose Brazil always has fantastic outside backs? Argentina always develops great number 10s? Italy always has great defenders? Germany's legendary GKers? Spain's tiki-taka style? Mexico's passing and possession style? Actually, there is -- culture. There is no need to force anything -- American soccer culture already exists, though it is still growing. There is already an American style of play, though it is still in development. A style emerges naturally from playing to the strengths of your culture. Yet the most successful teams have a signature style that all of us can identify. The key is for an insightful manager to bring the most out of the players he has already, playing to their strengths. That becomes the style. A team without a style cannot achieve because it has no philosophy or identity, which has been the problem in the last few years.
We have to find our way with the 3 forward of midfielders. It's a work in progress. Essentially, having Trapp and McKennie play as double 6's meant Pulisic and Weah were sitting back wide as outside mids, far from goal leaving the forward duties to Wood and Green. So much for offense - while it may have been designed to have more, it actually had less. On the defensive side, what you see with the two 6's is that one of them has to follow the play wide at which point the second 6 has too much area to cover. Notice how people blamed Pulisic for the first GA in the England game. That shows you the lengths they had to go to when they should have realized the midfield scheme was all wrong. The 4321 notation ------------------------weah9 --------Wes(Sarge)10---Pulisic 7/11 -----adams 7/11--Trapp6- Delgado 8 Adams is a free 8 basically used to create imbalances. 3142 would work if we had intelligent wb's like Gressel and Garza but we don't.
Against some of the C-CAF teams, I rather have Reggie Cannon over Yedlin. Sorry but Yedlin is dumb as rocks when dealing with teams with decent wing-play.