The team won their first match under Arena 6-0 and got 8 points from their first 4 matches. Whatever confidence they had lost was back. At that point everyone thought qualification was in the bag. I booked my flight to Russia. Then came CR, @ Honduras, Panama, @ T&T ...
The 4-0 loss was horrible. "The whole team gave up" is just a narrative created by the JK hating crew. Even if that were true, it isnt the same thing as complacency. Arena replaced the so called bad morale with arrogance and complacence why playing players who had no business being confident in their abilities, let alone arrogant.
The Costa Rica team was better than us. Simple as that. We were essentially missing 2 of our best players of a generation. Bradley was a fraction of the player he was pre 2014 injury. Plus we were missing the most important player, Clint Dempsey. Perhaps, players did throw in the towel in that game. That is unacceptable. As a competitor, I find it hard to believe that professional players gave up on qualifying, 2 games in to WCQ. After playing the 2 best teams in the region. Plus Honduras at home is the cure all for morale, no matter the coach. Especially if you get Dempsey back revved up. Bruce Arena was a tactical dinosaur. He was going to get exposed at some point. The morale narrative is kind of overplayed to me. After Mexico, I thought Arena was Zen master. According to media, anyway.
I thought he was quite good in the copa america and against mexico in 2016. If the team was divided, it probably didnt help FJ that the coach chose the other side and eliminated his. It also didnt help that he was moved to the midfield where the central players were poor and having Villafana behind him. He didnt get the ball and had nobody to combine with. That continued criticism of the german-americans and Cameron when the MLS guys absolutely sucked, tells a lot about these posters.
I have a sense of how Berhalter wants to play when we win the ball in our half of the field. I think the rest remains to be revealed.
my favorite part of the Donovan goal is him making eye contact with Ricardo Clark afterwards to acknowledge the centering pass that started the whole thing
Hey, I have been watching the team since the 80s too. I prefer long distance blasts, individusl brillance and/or team combination play. I actually prefer Donovan's goal against mexico in 2002. The speed on this play was great, but wouldnt use the word precison. The pass to him and finish was nice, but LD's first touch was a bit sloppy and if it was any worse the defenders would have had a chance to pressure him. Interestingly, this goal didnt even make this guys top 30 goals. There are quite a few I'd rate over this one. I'd also take some of CP's goals where multiple other players were involved. I always find it funny that his first and last are somewhat simliar, but in the first Nagbe looks like a player with a lot of potential and the last, not so much.
You are right that there is some imprecision in LD's touch to get around Ramires. The greatness of the goal though has to do with the distance traveled and speed at which it is executed and the simplicity and economy of the passes. So there is no great technique displayed but it is great soccer. As good a counter attacking goal as you are going to see. Plus it was in a big game against a very strong opponent. The pass from Davies was struck with some pace and had to be. So it wasn't the easiest ball to handle.
It will come but Puli has yet to score for us against a rival stronger than Panama in a meaningful game.
If you've been watching Pulisic since he first came into the senior team at 17, it should be noticed that he hasn't really grown into his full adult body until recently. It's one of the reasons I don't really comment much on his game.
Odd stat. He has less than 90 minutes of play against strong rivals in a meaningful while still 17. It too bad the federatiion and coach let him down and didnt get him a chance at the WC. He did score in friendlies vs Bolivia and Venezuela. On the Venezuela goal, he showed how to cut the ball back to the left cleanly.
I did watch the games, but probably didnt sit still as I was a kid who didnt understand the game that well. I also recall going out to play during the FInland game. That and it being almost 39 years ago, made me not totally trust my memory. I had watched the movie in the last year and the part of the movie that influenced my comment was actually true. In an interview with Brooks for a documentary he was asked how he was going to try to beat the Russians, he responded, "I tried to take their game and throw it back at them". Have you played on teams that played like you suggest. I have and the general consensus of the players is that our coach was afraid of how much better the opponent was. It sent the message that they were better than us and we couldnt play with them. That can have a big psychological affect on the team. Besides that, it isnt any fun. What data do you have to support your theory? What games did we win against top teams where defended and countered. I've already mentioned that we went after Portugal in 2002 and went toe to toe with Italy in 2006. We also played open against Belgium in 2014 and had a chance to win in overtime and tie up in extra time. We also played Germany straight up in 2002 and gave them all they could handle. I also just watched the first period. I didnt say they went toe to toe with them but that they didnt play scared. Again, I am no hockey expert, but it did look like we went toe to toe with them in the first period. Apparently from the documentary, Russia dominated us in the second period and put tons of pressure on us after we went up with 10 minutes left. We also dominated the Czechs who were supposed to be the second best team and over ran Finland in the third period.
Anyone mention what Brooks said to the team in the locker room after the end of the second period against Finland (down 2-1)? "If you lose this game you will take it to you <censored> graves. Your <censored> graves!" and then supposedly left the locker room after that. He was just absolutely masterful that whole olympics, hard to think of many coaching performances more impressive in sports history than that. I'd put Leicester City winning the EPL in '15-'16 with it, but after that it becomes difficult to remember any teams that come close.
I'd say Brooks is the best back at the moment but he needs a very mobile partner. he also is very injury prone so at least two different partnerships should be found. maybe different players for different opponents.
I'm very excited about our midfield and even some of our attacking young guys. Unlike most, I feel we're going to have trouble with our defense, though. Brooks is a tronco, a guy who can be dribbled to the floor by our better regional rivals. Miazga is more agile but has issues returning to his position in a counter. And those two are the best defenders we got in Europe. Neither fills me with confidence. Add to it that we don't have a guy like Howard in goal, and I can see the need for a dedicated DM when facing MEX or CRC. Also, our fullback situation is worse than in other cycles, IMO. Yedlin and Robinson are not an asset in helping the defense. In that back line, we may end up needing MLSers.
Not sure why this is in this thread or why you keep bashing Brooks. Brooks has had some rough moments but also very strong ones against the types of teams you describe. I completely disagree that our defense will be worse than last cycle. Brooks and Yeldin will be in their prime and I would take Miazga and Robinson over Gonzo and Villafana any day. It also ignores that there are many prospects who could step up and that the midfield in front of them are much stronger defensively.
Also, notice how Newcastle have quietly gone from playing 4-4-1-1 with two "pulley" CMs back at the start of the season (Diame + Shelvey), to playing with a dedicated DM (Diame) to playing with 3CBs in a 5-3-2 (Fernandez, Lascelles, Dummett with Diame as the DM in front of them). That's because the fullbacks (Yedlin/Manquillo and Ritchie/Kenedy) don't do much defending.
ok, so change the formula to win 50% of your home games and qualify? One half good Brooks and one half bad Brooks. I don't know how many players are on Transfermkt but that's the pool of players Wolfsburg has to look at for a Brooks partner. The USMNT doesn't have that luxury.
I would like the USMNT identity to show, more than any particular strategy, tactic or formation, some toughness and desire. Balboa, Moore, Pope, Mastroeni, Dempsey,these guys and others just made it seem like they were going to give their liver to try to make a play, and they were going to keep trying until the whistle. Gregg should prioritize that ethic. Not to the exclusion of skill, but it should be a very high priority.