I'll try to keep it brief. The international is very different from the club game, for one you can't just buy players and the players only spend a short time together. I'm using all my soccer knowledge and proposing these axioms as things I know most everybody who writes about soccer (in and out the USA) takes as common ground. I'll stick to 10 because we have 10 basic axioms in mathematics (probably an influence of the Judeo-Christian culture). I. Existence Axiom: Fit the system to your player pool. As is not club soccer and you have the players you have. If it doesn't exist, don't expect it to appear in time. II. Adaptability Axiom: Being quick to fit the team is as important as technical proficiency. Players barely spend time together, they must adapt fast. III. Practice Axiom: A player who plays is always preferable to one who doesn't. Sitting on the bench of a top club doesn't tell you what you need to know about the player. IV. Complementarity Axiom: Use pairs who balance each other. A large, lumbering defender pairs up with a more agile partner; a great crossing winger with one better at central runs and switched foot shooting; etc. V. Defensive Square Axiom: The more players you send forward wide, the more men you need in central defense. Can't use two wingbacks with no proper DM; can't have two attacking wingers if you're also sending one of the CBs forward to head the ball; etc. VI. Plurality Axiom: The roster must fit the diversity of the rivals. Two very different rivals, two different game plans, and different personnel. Your squad must be prepared with that idea in mind. VII. Leadership Axiom: Each line needs a leader. One leader in defense, one in midfield, one in attack. Smart men, clear role as leaders. They have nothing to do with who is team captain, the captain is the voice more than the brain. VIII. Mentality Axiom: The attack starts with the keeper, the defense with the striker. Can't have a keeper who, from his kick, puts you in the defensive role trying to keep the ball; nor a forward who turns it over when there is a clear open channel for the counter behind him. IX. The Independent Value Axiom: Your value for the national team is not directly related to your value as a club player. It should be abundantly clear that not all top club players make for good NT players, or that a player in a weak club cannot be crucial for his NT. X. The Mutability Axiom: A player's form changes with time and tactics. A guy who is a great fullback in a 4-3-3 may be terrible in a 4-2-3-1 where he's expected to go forward more; a guy playing well today may be garbage in a month. * Big problems with us, beyond the lack of a tested LB or a credible striker: lack of leaders/intelligence (VII), lack of adaptable players (II), lack of variety in the pool to fit diverse rivals (VI). A coach cannot do micromanaging during the game. We need players able to adapt to the rival and to explain how to do it to the other guys.
This is just one example, but weren't people happy with our different players in June to face Trinidad and Tobago followed by Mexico? WCQs get a 23 man roster, and I would think if a player deserved to start in one game of a pair, he would be good enough to be on the roster even if it was focused mostly on the other game.
Indeed, but for the last game, the one that cost us the ticket, Arena kept the same group as he had in the home game. That was very dumb. You can't compare a game at home versus Panama, with a game away to a very fast Trinidad team with players trying to prove a point. Arena obviously didn't watch the Mexico-Trinidad. We lost that game due to arrogance. And part of that is making no adjustments to fit the rival. That's a fundamental axiom of modern soccer: you have to know your rival and adjust to it.
XI. The Speed of Play Axiom: Can't Depend upon Players Who Play in Leagues Below World Cup Speed. Player's performances in the minor leagues need to be thrown out the window if the pace of play in their league allows for time on the ball that is slower than WC. It's a mirage: excelling in the minors doesn't correlate when the game speeds up. It doesn't mean that they can't handle it either physically or mentally, it's just that we can't know. Note: this is not why we lost to T&T as we had more than enough skill/speed with the team we fielded.
That's a good observation, because you're not talking of the speed of the players but of the time they have on the ball. That's why often strikers who look awesome in a league where the defenders leave more time/space like the Dutch league fail to look so good in leagues where the pressing is constant, like the Premiership or the Bundesliga. I see it more as a corollary to the Mentality Axiom. If the attack starts with the keeper and the defense with the striker, then each player has the duty, in the modern game, to close down on someone and pressure that man to either turn the ball over, or become incapable of receiving a pass. That is the big issue with Bradley, for example. His entire decay can be explained by the fact that in MLS he's used to having too much time, so at the international pace he just loses the ball or has a lot of trouble controlling it because there's always someone on top of him.
The axiom I would recommemd most to Americansv- fans, coaches, players, all - is # VIII Mentality Axiom
Yet Donovan was still our GOAT. I would rather say that the manager must understand that he will have to get through to players comimg from MLS and explain to them that they will have to find a "next gear". Those who find it make the grade; those who don't will not make it.
XIII. It's A Young Mans Game Axiom: When choosing between two players, choose the younger player. This may well be an addendum to the speed of play, but not necessarily. Older players recover slower and are hampered by nagging injuries to a greater degree.
Good point. It's not like our skill level as a team is significantly above MLS - our players play there because that's their approximate level (notwithstanding that LD did belong in a major league). We are a long ways away from our player pool exceeding MLS in quality We just need to be aware that MLS speed of play is lower than WC levels and particularly need to be humble about minor league "skill players" who lack elite speed/altheticism. Lighting it up in the minors with skill rather than athleticism in any sport doesn't necessarily translate to the majors. Our decision (started by JK and followed by BA) (a) to play a ball-control game rather than our historic start-with-defense-and-counter attack even though we didn't have a top-tier GK; plus (b) our fundamental reliance upon minor league players to not give the ball away in dangerous positions with limited options even though the game is faster than MLS is one of the primary reasons we lost IMO. We set up our boys to fail.
Klinsmann violated the first axiom. He tried to mold the pool to his system, until he gave up & ran to the other extreme, putting 3 or 4 CMs/DMs & using CBs as SBs.
I deem this axiom false (at least occasionally). I have seen NT coaches creating rosters based on the systems they want to use (Conte has been using 3-5-2 extensively for Juve and Italy, regardless of his players' skills/abilitie) again, this axiom doesn't hold true many times. Can't come up with any example to prove my point, but intuition tells me I'm right um... what? Every team (both club and NT) sends all their players forward when they need to score (you see this especially in knock-out matches in important competitions - WC, EURO, UCL, etc when the outsider leads the favorites by 1 goal in minute 85 and the favorites send everyone forward, including the goalkeeper sometimes) again, I don't agree with this statement. Minions who qualify at WC / Copa America, EURO, etc don't have the diversity needed to counter their opponents, which is why (among other reasons) these outsiders rarely pull upsets and usually don't make it out of the group stage nope. One leader is enough for the good balance of a team, 2 or more is bad due to the strong personalities of the said leaders who often times contradict each other and ruin the chemistry. Well, at least in theory, because in practice I have never seen a NT with more than one leader. There may have existed, but I don't remember any such team. If any of you knows of such cases let me know. Huh??? You mean, having both Hazard and De Bruyne in the same team is bad? Or, what exactly is this statement supposed to mean? I am honestly confused this might actually be true, and a first example that comes to mind right now (albeit, not pertaining to NT soccer) is Thomas Muller under Ancelotti's reign. Muller has played great in 4-2-3-1 under Heynckess and Guardiola, and was shit under Ancelotti's 4-3-3, Once Ancelotti has been replaced with Heynckess and put back into a 4-2-3-1 system Muller shines again.
not really. See the Tim Cahill example for the Socceroos. He's saved them so many times as an aged player, regardless of whether he started the game from minute 1, or came from the bench
It means exactly what it says. A player that shows well for his club is not necessarily the best choice for his national team. An example would be Karim Benzema, who was often mediocre with France while looking World Class with Real. Another is Kun Agüero, who has wasted so many crucial chances with Argentina, chances he'd have buried with the light-blue shirt, that people wanted him to never again play for the albiceleste.
Oh, I see now what you mean. Well, I agree on the Benzema one (only he knows why he doesn't play so well for France), but I don't agree on Kun Aguero. It's not his fault that the Argentina's coach is incapable of maximizing his roster's potential. I've said it on another thread of BS and I'll say it again: I have watched Argentina's WC qualifiers and they were ALL atrocious to watch. Many low scoring games, many lost points against teams that Argentina should have dismantled, given the quality they have, but the worst part is the fact that their gameplay was boring to watch, they looked like a mid-table team from Serie B, only wanting to get a draw out of the game and go home ASAP. So little creativity, so few chances, so out of sync passes, starting lineups chosen poorly. I absolutely have no idea how they managed to qualify. Anyway... look at Kun how good he is under Pep. That's because Pep knows how to use him to the best of his abilities, instead of playing him in a defensive system that Argentina has played in the qualifiers. As for Benzema, not a fan of RM and France in general, so I can't say for sure why he's bad for the NT
Italy can win many games even if their coach doesn't use his players well. Italy winning games doesn't prove that they're doing better than if their coach used a different system. It's a good point that a player doing worse for his national team could be because of the national team coach, and the player shouldn't be faulted all the time.
correct, but this example came to mind first. I'm sure that the coaches of other, more mediocre teams have a preferred system themselves.
We need to not ask players to do things they cannot do. MB90 won't work as a 6. Villafana won't be a lockdown LB. Nagbe won't become Messi. Going off that, friendly results; the score and the play on the field mean nothing in regards to how the team will look in a competitive match. Friendlies are for money, getting guys a chance to play for the fans, and comraderie.
I see a lot about speed of play in MLS and I agree it's not at the speed of top leagues but US summer weather has something to do with that. Just as Euro teams had trouble in US and Brazil World Cups MLS speeds up in the fall when the weather cools down. IMO, a reason FC Dallas Burn has never fared well in playoffs as they are built for the extreme hot and can't compete with teams one the weather gets cool or cold.
Perhaps there are some qualifications on this per your example. But I still stand by it. Jeff Agoos comes to mind as a US example of contrary.
MLS is actually a very fast league. It looks slow compared to the EPL, that is basically the most visually spectacular league (but very limited in tactics until the last couple of seasons, when they finally got top notch coaching). Of course one thing is the speed of running, another the speed of closing down players and leaving them no space. In that second aspect, MLS is very slow. They run like devils but they just don't press as much as in other leagues. Personally, and this is a cultural thing in the USA where we like best things that are exciting without having to think about them, I feel the emphasis on speed over thought is characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon take on the game of soccer. The Anglo idea that being fast, strong, and having the stamina of a mule is the most important thing in the game. Soccer is very cerebral in other parts of the world. The typical Englishman (or American) gets bored watching a Serie A or La Liga game unless he "gets" what is actually going on, which is closer to a chess game than to a competition between runners.
Good point; when I speak of MLS' speed of play, I specifically mean how long a player has to make/execute decisions before they are closed down upon. MB generally looks quite good when he has time but his composure changes dramatically when heavily pressured.