You mean like JK did to start that winning streak with Evans? And since roster changes are idiotic on a winning streak, i guess that means Ld stays on the B team....
You know Evans plays in the back with some regularity, right? How about Zusi and Corona. Oh, no? And the "roster changes are idiotic" strawman. I see what you did there!
lol, seeing how half the winning streak is with the "B" team. In any case, I'm not sure why some of these fans are seeing the "A" team as some kind of static thing that shouldn't be messed with. We haven't used the same lineup in any game due to injuries, yellow card suspensions and so on. Cameron came in to spell Jones and Zusi missed the Panama game. Against Honduras Beasley was suspended. I'm skeptical that Zusi would work at right back myself, but I'm also fairly confident that we won't roll out the same lineup in Costa Rica that we did vs. Honduras. With everyone healthy, in good form and injury free maybe there is a definate first choice 11. But that's rarely the case so pretty much hypothetical anyway.
Saying that moving Zusi or Corona to the back line is laughable is a far cry from advocating for a static lineup. You see how the poster you responded to set up that strawman, right?
Yeah, I only skimmed the thread, so I'm sure you are right. To me Zusi or Corona ar right back seems like a sort of desperation move if we really were out of options there. My thought is that they may well see the field, even if they aren't a hypothetical first choice 11, simply because of the dynamic nature of the lineup. I assumed that the whole exercise was about finding a way to get Zusi and/or Corona on the pitch since it would seem clear that we have better options at right back, even if we don't get Chandler or Cherundolo back. I'd assume we'd see Evans, Cameron, Fabian Johnson and Parkhurst well before Zusi was thrown in at right back as a stop gap.
It was less a straw man and more an exagerated example to demonstrate the flaw in logic. This streak will not keep jk from trying to improve the roster. Zusi at rb may be a bad idea, but Evans use demonstrstes its not crazy or idiotic- which some were implyimg Again too much focus on "position" and not roles.
Is evans that much bette at rb than zusi? And evans beat out all competitors in camp. - ppl really need to let go of the fools gold of chandler. He not committed and not that good.-
Evans has rarely played rb before the qualifier- he said so himself http://m.ussoccer.com/news/mens-nat...ad-evans-steps-up-at-unfamiliar-position.aspx
Evans is a classic utility player. He has played all along the back line for his club as well as CM and outside mid. Not the case with Corona or Zusi at all.
Leave corona out - i think that is a horrible idea Zusi brings technical ability, far superior crossing, and vision to the role. What elements do you think make evans superior? 1 v 1 defending? Pace,? Postiming acumen? I would think all would be possible for Zusi to do well at and many better. Just a thought The idea that they play a "postion" at the club level that makes them unable to play a differemt role for the natiomal team is faulty. Zusi's role for the national team is nothing like his role for his club team All youre doing is putting. Players in boxes - thats not true soccer mntality
http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/66/u...vans-breaks-out-at-right-back-against-germany And he rarely played right back for his club
Its not really craming a midfielder in a round hole. -sigh- Its identifying the role and its pieces and determing who best fits 1 v 1 defending Positining savvy Composure on the ball High technical ability Smooth consistent passing ability Strong crossing ability Pace High soccer IQ Comfort under pressure Winger mentality That may not fit zusi It doesnt fit corona BUT ITS NOT ABOUT PUTTING PLAYERS IN BOXES Its about determining who best fits the roles and is asked to do thos things (not play a position) regularly for their club
Yall drive me crazy with these boxed in positions. You do realize Beasely primarily played midfield throughout his csreer. Castillo plsys in the midfield for his club and Yedlin whobyou love so muchvwasxa midfielder until Porter saw his potrntial as a rb Positions are temp and meaningless in soccer
Maybe. But is he that good as a defender both in his positioning and defending players coming at him? Those are going to be the key roles for our right back particularly at the World Cup. I for one am nervous enough about Beasley's defensive capabilities, such that if he is our left back, we'll need three strong defenders to compensate. Beasely relies too much on his recovery speed, as has been mentioned. I'd be very concerned that at best, with Zusi, you get Beasley minus the speed when it comes to his defensive responsibilities.
These are much better questions. It also depends on whi the dmid is and how much you want him howkding to cover I think beasely has looked vry good at lb recently
I wouldn't completely leave out considering fabian johnson as an option. I like him at LB or LW, but i think he's versatile enough that he could probably play RB pretty well. With that being said, I am kinda hoping Parkhurst keeps growing in the role. He looked very good in the el salvador game, and one of my big concerns with him before this gold cup was if he was going to be able to get forward enough. I thought he always looked solid defensively, but i never really felt he could provide in the attack. If he can build off the el salvador game and keep getting better, I'll start becoming a believer.
Evans beat out parkhurst. Cameron beat out parkhurst. Play against minnows where his best competion is a mls player who never gets a minute Im not sold on parkhurst at all
I just think it's funny that we have THREE right backs playing in one of the best leagues in the world (two starters) and yet we are contemplating using Evans or another midfielder instead in that role for the World Cup. I will be watching the Bundesliga with keen interest this season. (Figuratively speaking, since I can't get GolTV on Dish)
Fundamental soccer principles will always trump position, system and formation. But you overstate your case by saying these things are meaningless. These things provide overall structure, and are, therfore, important.
I dont think so. The position name is meaningless much like the numve system. The structure in soccer is much more about roles, skillsets to fit those roles, and the structure the interactive roles create. Thats very different to position names- which are pretty meaningless. A lb position in one system may be simialr to a lm in another or very different. Or a lb may be more similsr to a cb. The roles and corresponding skilllsets are more important than the the position name. Torres and zusi play attacking mid very differently. As do dempsey or brek shea. I would never think that the roles corona or dempsey play would fit in JKs left back. But shea, watt, zusi all play a role that is similar to a wing back in mwmy aspects The roles are paramount. The position name is useless
that's a fair point. I guess at this point i'm open to anything, really not a clear cut solution there (chandler is the only one i feel has upside, but he hasn't looked good on the NT lately and i still feel like he and jk have things to smooth over)
I think there a bunch of better options at RB than Zusi or Corona. In no particular order: Cherundolo, Chandler, F. Johnson, Parkhurst, Spector, Lichaj, Danny Williams, Orozco-Fiscal. By the way, I don't think Zusi (or Corona) are in our "Best XI" so playing them out of position makes next to no sense. EDIT: In point of fact, Lichaj has not even gotten a call, much less a cap, in the JK era.