Pre-match: USA vs. Argentina - Copa Semi - 6/21/16

His mind might be, but his body sure as hell ain't.

Messi vs. Becks would be disastrous for us.

 

Messi vs. who won't be? Beckerman at least won't get caught out of position and leave Brooks and Cameron with Leo running at them unimpeded. I want him out there to clog things up a little.

 

Yay my red card from last night went away! Man was I drunk.

So this game is really happening huh.

 

I'm not too worried. I think we'll put up a good showing against Argentina. We're certainly the underdogs, but we could pull out something impressive if they screw up and go in assuming the match as a sure thing.

 

Beckerman is a placeholder until someone younger who can be trusted comes along. In an ideal world he'd already have been phased out, but as we see with other players in the squad that are getting on in years, the generation just below has been disappointing, with almost nobody stepping up to displace them. Pulisic is part of an even younger grouping, and maybe from them we'll see emerging players that are capable of eventually displacing the incumbents, but it's too soon to tell. Getting back to Beckerman, and for all his flaws I don't see anyone else right now who is capable of doing his job.

 

Danny Williams has been strong in the Championship last year, I would have liked to see him as an option instead of Kitchen.

 

The US had more chances than I remembered in that game.

 

Beckerman seems to be the logical replacement for Jones in this match.

Here we go:

-------------------Guzan-------------------
Yedlin----Cameron---Brooks----Besler
Zardes--Beckerman--Bradley--Johnson
-------Dempsey-----Wondolowski-------


Also interesting to note, the three field officials are Paraguayan and the two off-field referees are Ecuadorian. I'm not sure if they helps our cause greatly or puts any doubt of receiving and benefit to rest.
http://www.ca2016.com/article/referee-assignments

 

Here is the line-up I’d like to see Jurgen Klinsmann start against Argentina on Tuesday night:


--------------------------------------Guzan-----------------------------------


Yedlin-----------------Cameron----------------Brooks-----------Besler


----------------------------Bradley-------------Nagbe----------------------


Zusi------------------------------------------------------------------Johnson


-----------------------------Zardes-----------Dempsey-----------------------


1. 4-4-2?

The U.S. has been comfortable in the 4-4-2 formation the last 2 and ½ games and has played well in the formation. For instance, in the formation, they have outscored their opposition 5 to 1. In contrast, they played in a 4-3-3 against Columbia, and they weren’t nearly as dangerous in the match as they have been in a 4-4-2. They also lost 2-0. Although the U.S. were dangerous against Costa Rica in the 4-3-3 up until Klinsmann switched to a 4-4-2, the U.S. was at least as dangerous in the match and subsequent matches in the 4-4-2 as they were in the 4-3-3 against Costa Rica. Also, this tournament, the U.S. has had good spacing, shape and midfield organization in the 4-4-2. I would be uneasy putting those important qualities at risk. Finally, starting with the Bora Milutinovic-era (and especially under Bruce Arena and Bob Bradley), the U.S. has tended to play its best soccer in a 4-4-2. It’s been by far the U.S.’s most successful formation since the U.S. moved from being a minnow in world soccer to something much more than a minnow. It’s a formation that takes advantage of two of our strengths, namely the ability to press and the ability to counter-attack. When we play the 4-4-2, we don’t need to out-possess teams in order to create dangerous chances. This occurred when the U.S. beat Spain and almost beat Brazil in the 2009 Confederation’s Cup.

However, if we start in a 4-4-2 against Argentina on Tuesday night, do we risk getting thoroughly outplayed in midfield? I saw a segment with former U.S. Women’s National Team player Aly Wagner on Fox Sports 1 in which she argued that if the U.S. plays Argentina in the semifinals, the U.S. should start in a 4-5-1. She worried that the U.S. midfield and backline could be significantly disadvantage if they start in a 4-4-2, which has one fewer midfielder than does a 4-5-1. She worried that the U.S. wouldn’t have enough players to compete in midfield and provide the defense with support. Wagner made a compelling case. But I still would start in a 4-4-2. The U.S. has been so good in it this tournament. And, overall, they have been better in a 4-4-2 this tournament than they have in a 4-3-3/4-5-1. I would not want to tamper with something that has been so effective. In addition, when the U.S. started in a 4-2-3-1 against Germany and Belgium in the World Cup, we absorbed so much pressure. We were so defensive that we just didn’t put ourselves in a position to score goals. If we have two forwards, it enables us to press more and be more proactive. We’re more on the front foot, more going forward—rather than just soaking up pressure.

At the same time, if the U.S. starts in a 4-4-2 and is getting dominated in midfield in the first half, I think Klinsmann should consider switching to a 4-2-3-1. I’ll discuss this below.


2. Should Yedlin Start?

In the friendly against Ecuador prior to the Copa America Centenario, DeAndre Yedlin struggled mightily with Jefferson Montero. Then, in the first game of the tournament (against Colombia), Yedlin had the handball that was one of the decisive moments of the game. He should have kept his arm close to his body. Then against Paraguay, he had two yellow cards that forced this U.S. to play down a man for almost the entire second half. I’m uneasy about Yedlin defensively and about him being immature and not sufficiently disciplined. And, against Argentina, Yedlin likely would be matched up against Nicholas Gaitan, who is moving from Benfica to Atletico Madrid. Moreover, Michael Orozco, who is a more proven defender than Yedlin and perhaps less mistake-prone, could start at right back.

However, I would start Yedlin. He has great physical tools, and he played well for Sunderland in a relegation battle. In contrast, Orozco’s physical tools are more modest, and he didn’t play much this season for Tijuana. Also, against Costa Rica, Yedlin had the cross that led to Bobby Wood getting pushed in the back and the U.S. getting awarded a penalty kick. Yedlin’s qualities enable him to make plays like that; Orozco is less able to make those kinds of plays. Hopefully, Yedlin plays a smart game.


3. Besler at Left Back and Johnson at Left Midfield

One option would be to start Fabian Johnson at left back, Darlington Nagbe at left midfield and Kyle Beckerman at central midfield next to Michael Bradley. Another option would be to start Matt Besler at left back, Johnson at left midfield, and Nagbe at central midfield instead of Beckerman. An advantage of the second option is that Fabian Johnson is a more experienced and more proven outside midfielder in a 4-4-2 than is Nagbe. Johnson has been a very good left midfielder for Borussia Mönchengladbach. In fact, according to polls of some fans, Johnson was one of the top four left midfielders in the entire Bundesliga this season. Here is a link:

http://www.bundesliga.com/en/fanzon...nglisch&utm_content=tweet&utm_campaign=BLTotS

Moreover, Nagbe does not have much experience playing outside midfield in a 4-4-2. He rarely, if ever, has played outside midfield in a 4-4-2 for the Portland Timbers, and he has only played outside midfield in a 4-4-2 for the U.S. for 26 minutes against Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (of the U.S.’s 6-1 win in the World Cup qualifier on November 13, 2015) and for 22 minutes against Trinidad and Tobago (in the U.S.’s 0-0 draw in the World Cup qualifier on November 17, 2015). Although Nagbe has played a lot of outside midfielder in a 4-2-3-1 for Portland, it is often fairly different playing outside midfield in a 4-2-3-1 than it is in a 4-4-2. When defending in a 4-4-2, an outside midfield has less protection from his midfield teammates. In a 4-4-2, an outside midfielder is more on an island than he or she is in a 4-2-3-1. In addition, against Argentina, Nagbe would be on the same side of the field as Lionel Messi. That would be a lot of responsibility for Nagbe, who only has 8 caps and no starts for the U.S.

Another potential advantage of starting the second option (the one with Besler at left back) is that Matt Besler is a very smart customer who doesn’t make many defensive mistakes, at least when he plays center-back. It might be good to have him matched up against Messi. Besler is cerebral, deceptively fast and a good, solid defender. In addition, with Fabian Johnson at left midfielder, the U.S. would have another good defender on the same side of the field as Messi. Johnson and Besler could work together to try to keep Messi in check. Finally, against Ecuador, Besler had the cross to Zardes that led to Zardes' goal.


4. Beckerman or Nagbe in Central Midfield?

Should Klinsmann start Nagbe start at central midfield instead of Beckerman? Klinsmann could start Besler at left back, Johnson at left midfield, and Beckerman next to Michael Bradley in central midfield. Beckerman is much more experienced that Nagbe. Beckerman has 56 caps compared to Nagbe’s 8. Moreover, in the 2014 World Cup, Beckerman played well against Ghana, Portugal and Germany, and Klinsmann should have started him against Belgium.

However, never fast, Beckerman has seemed to slow down quite a bit since the 2014 World Cup. He looked particularly slow against Mexico in the CONCACAF Cup (October 10, 2015). I worry that he would struggle to keep up with the Argentinians while playing in a 4-4-2. In a 4-4-2, he wouldn’t have much cover, as one of only two central midfielders. Also, Nagbe is more skillful, more capable of making offensive plays that make a difference, covers more ground and is more athletic. He also had the winning goal against Ecuador in the friendly before the Copa America Centenario and had a lovely assist to Christian Pulisic in the friendly against Bolivia.

By a fairly narrow margin, I would start Nagbe. I think he is the better player now, even though he is less experienced. However, if Klinsmann were to start Beckerman, he should consider bringing Nagbe in for him at the 60 minute mark. Nagbe could inject some skill and creativity into the U.S. attack as people get tired and the game gets more stretched out.


5. If We are Getting Dominated in Midfield

If the U.S. starts in a 4-4-2 against Argentina on Tuesday night, there is a chance that the U.S. will get thoroughly outplayed in midfield. Argentina likely will start in a 4-3-3/4-5-1 or in a 4-2-3-1. So, Argentina will have one more basic midfielder than the U.S. will. The U.S. also is not as skillful a team as Argentina. So, there is a chance that the U.S. could get outplayed in midfield the way they did against Mexico in the CONCACAF Cup and against Germany and Belgium in the 2014 World Cup. If this happens during the first half, Klinsmann should consider dropping Zardes underneath Dempsey during the first half and playing a 4-2-3-1. So, the line-up would be this:

------------------------------------Guzan-----------------------------------


Yedlin----------------Cameron--------------Brooks-------------Besler


---------------------------Bradley-------------Nagbe----------------------


Zusi---------------------------------Zardes------------------------Johnson


-------------------------------------Dempsey---------------------------------


Although Zardes isn’t a true play-maker, he covers a lot of ground and will do a good job of getting back on defense. And if the U.S. does have an opportunity to counter-attack, Zardes has the endurance and speed to get forward to provide Dempsey with support so that the Dempsey is not isolated and so that the U.S. have enough numbers to be dangerous.

Another possibility would be to play Zardes as the one true forward and Dempsey underneath Zardes. But I would prefer playing Zardes underneath Dempsey. Dempsey has been such a good goal-scorer this tournament, I want him as close to the goal as possible. Also, he tends not to play that much defense anymore, whereas Zardes is a good defender.

If the U.S. makes it to half tied 0-0 but is getting completely outplayed in midfield, Klinsmann could bring in Beckerman for Graham Zusi, play Nagbe underneath Dempsey and move Zardes to right midfield. So, the line-up would be this:

-------------------------------------Guzan------------------------------------


Yedlin----------------Cameron-----------------Brooks-------------Besler


---------------------------Bradley-------------Beckerman---------------------


Zardes--------------------------------Nagbe------------------------Johnson


---------------------------------------Dempsey---------------------------------

Although Nagbe hasn’t been a great goal-scorer for the Portland Timbers, he is a good possession-player and would likely be good at linking the midfield to Dempsey up front.


6. Klinsmann, Don’t Hold on to Your Subs too Long

While commenting on the U.S.-Ecuador game, Landon Donovan rightly noted that Alejandro Bedoya looked tired and heavy-legged fairly early in the second half. Donovan said that Klinsmann should sub him. I agree with Donovan. Bedoya looked dead-legged. He was also carrying a yellow card. I would have put Zusi in for him at the 65th minute. Zusi has been good this tournament, and Bedoya was laboring. Bedoya was extremely active and played hard; no wonder he was heavy-legged.

It’s important that the U.S. not hold on to their subs too long. There is no overtime in the semifinals of this tournament, so the U.S. doesn't have to worry about putting in fresh legs if the game goes to overtime. And our players could well get tired against a team that is as good and technical as Argentina. Klinsmann should keep the idea in mind of injecting fresh legs into the match in order to give the U.S. a boost.


7. Avoid Red Cards and Penalty Kicks

In the 49th minute of the U.S.-Ecuador match, Geoff Cameron ran into Enner Valencia in the U.S. box. Cameron could have been called for a penalty kick, which would have greatly disadvantaged the U.S. He should not have touched Valencia. Cameron might have eventually been able to block Valencia’s angle without touching him. But even if Cameron couldn’t have done so, he shouldn’t have touched Valencia. Valencia was in a far less dangerous position than a penalty kick would have been to the U.S. Valencia was dribbling near the U.S. endline. In that kind of scenario, it’s hard to dribble to goal and score on a good goalkeeper. Moreover, John Brooks was in the box and would have been able to block Valencia’s path to goal. And if Brooks did not do so, Brad Guzan would have had a good chance of blocking any shot that Valencia got off.

Moreover, in the U.S.-Colombia game this tournament, Yedlin’s handball in the box was one of the crucial moments of the game. There is a lesson to be learned here. When the U.S. plays elite teams and avoids getting red cards and giving up penalty kicks at important times, the U.S. almost always has put itself in a position to get a result at the end of the match. For instance, in the 2009 Confederations Cup, the U.S. didn’t give up any penalty kicks against Spain in the semifinals or Brazil in the finals, and the only red card that the U.S. got in either of those games was one that Michael Bradly got in the 87th minute against Spain, when the U.S. was ahead 2-0. And, in those games, the U.S. beat Spain and almost beat Brazil. In contrast, against Italy in group play of the same tournament, Ricardo Clark got a red card in the 35th minute, and Italy won the game fairly comfortably 3-1. And, against Brazil in group play, Sacha Kljestan got a red card in the 57th minute, and the U.S. lost 3-0.

Furthermore, against Portugal in the 2002 World Cup, the U.S. got no red cards and conceded no penalty kicks. The U.S. won the match 3-2. Against Mexico in the round of 16 in the 2002 World Cup, the U.S. got no red cards and gave up no penalty kicks, and the U.S. won 2-0. Against Germany in the quarterfinals of the same tournament, the U.S. got no red cards and conceded no penalty kicks, and the U.S. only lost the match 1-0 and was in it until the very end.

In the 2010 World Cup, the U.S. got no red cards and gave up no penalty kicks against England. And the U.S. drew the match 1-1.

Meanwhile, in the final of the 2009 Gold Cup against Mexico, it was 0-0 in the 56th minute when Jay Heaps gave up a completely unnecessary penalty kick, which Mexico converted. The U.S. then had to come out of its shell to score, and they got stretched out. Mexico won 5-0.

So, if history is an indication, if the U.S. avoids penalty kicks and red cards against Argentina, they will have a chance to win. There is an ethical element to soccer. If the U.S. can avoid plays that are unethical (red cards and plays that result in penalty kicks against them), the U.S. will have a better chance to win. So, be ethical, and put yourself in a better position to win the match.


8. Defending Set-Pieces

Ecuador’s goal against the U.S. came on a set-piece, namely a direct free kick outside the U.S. box and near the U.S. endline. It's important for the U.S. to be totally tuned in when defending set-pieces. All three goals that have been scored on the U.S. this tournament have come off set-pieces.

 

Beckerman and Wondo are garbage.

 

Great write up with reasoning. One thing: Gaitan is out with yellow card accumulation.

 

Jones and Bedoya out.
We need to stop a dynamic Argentina midfield and attack.
Think that's where the game-planning starts.

My best guess would be a 4-3-3 that may end up playing more like a 4-5-1 defensively at times:

------------------Dempsey
-Fabian------------------------------Gyasi
------------Nagbe------Zusi
-----------------Bradley
-Besler---Brooks--Cameron---Yedlin-
-----------------Guzan

Three in the midfield with good ball control and positioning.
Pace on the wings.
Defend solidly and break on the counter.

Pulisic is the first sub when you need a spark in the attack, maybe for Besler and move Fabian back to an overlapping left back role.
Wondo is the second attacking sub when Dempsey tires.
Not sure who the third sub is. Castillo?

 

You have to protect the center of your backline when you are facing a team with Argentina's attacking talent. That's job number 1. If you let them create chances down the center, you're toast. So I wonder how so many people think that lineups with Bradley at 6 (whose work at d-mid in this tournament has been criticized a lot on these boards), no Beckerman or Kitchen, and no Zusi (who tends to do good work defensively in tight spaces) are going to keep the US in this one long enough for a slick counterattack or two or three to matter. I guess we could get lucky and have 1. great and mistake-free centerback play 2. Argentina missing chances. But I wouldn't count on it. I would batten down the hatches a bit, play Beckerman or Kitchen, play Zusi (side benefit is that he is a better set piece taker than Bradley), and an attacking group of Nagbe, Zardes, and Dempsey, playing like a 4-5-1, with Pulisic as the sub if we're trailing. Or Johnson for Nagbe if one prefers Besler at left back (I'm 50/50 on that question). We should be able to threaten this Argentina backline a few times with Dempsey, Zardes, Johnson or Nagbe, and sometimes Bradley or Zusi or a fullback joining in. If we can't, we have no business winning since it would mean that, like in the 2014 WC, we still can't create chances without committing so many players forward that our defensive cover is shot.

 

I have zero optimism about this game.

I'm not sure how we can win, but I imagine it would have to start with a good shift from the back four. We'll probably need to cover them with 2 DMs that are willing to chase the ball and close spaces. I also don't think that man-marking outside of the 18 yard box is a good idea with a side that can be fluid in the attack. We'll probably see very little of the ball - around 30% - so keeping early cards to a minimum will also be key.

 

We can win this game if we bunker and counter. If we leave them any space we're toast. If we get behind at any point in the game we're probably toast.

The narrow slow field and extra rest will help

Beckerman/No Beckerman will indicate a lot about how we're trying to play.

 

Giancarlo González went from the Crew to Palermo. Granted this tournament doesn't have same amount of eyes on it at the World Cup but it's still heavy scouted.

 

Matt Hummels just left Dortmund forBayern. Replacement at lcb needed

P.S German playing at CL level would be a plus.

 

I wonder if the Texas heat will help the US. Forecast is 91 with 30% chance of showers Tuesday.

 

I think we can keep the ball as much as Venezuela did. I do expect we will not win the possession battle since we like to be more direct in our attack. We have a punchers chance so there should always be that much optimism. Your points are very good and definitely quite important.

 

Dome

 

What a hideous looking stadium.

 

Retractable roof but pretty sure it's been left closed all tournament during games.

 

Thank you. So I am guessing 72 and 50% humidity max. I am not up to date on all of the stadiums as I usually follow the USMNT and USWNT teams. Slowly getting into the flow with MLS.

 

It is not hideous. It is utilitarian.


OK, it is hideous.

 

It's an NFL stadium. Houston Texans play there.