where you at, little mikey?

i actually agree with the person who created this thread on the grounds that mikey starting and playing regularly is only a reality because of Bob being the coach. All that time we couldve used allowing a better player to get exposure and further his career was thrown down the shitter simply because of nepotism... Now mikey is assured a starting spot every single important US game and why? Not because hes an excellent player thats very clear. I really dont know what his role in the Gold Cup was... he had terrible distribution, rarely tracked runners, took far too many touches when really it couldve been one touch and a pass, and when the biggest match of the tournament came he failed to show up defensively as well as a holding midfielder (im going to call him that because I really dont know what else he would be described as). However, Jermaine Jones isn't all that much better, especially because at blackburn all he does is slow down the play and foul people kinda like a really REALLY shitty gattuso.

 

Mikey was one of our better, more consistent players this tournament.

 

Are personal attacks permitted only when their on a player? I would love to use a personal attack right now on this idiot and then use my get out of Big Soccer Jail free card.

 

Why is this thread still open? It's ridiculous, selfish, and illogical.

I thought this thread was a joke at first. If it is, this thread is a bad joke.

Even if Michael Bradley is so egotistical that he scours the internet reading about himself, he's not going to respond to a thread written by an emotionally charged egoist calling him out.

If I were him all I'd be thinking about is the honeymoon, and let my agent talk to any interested clubs. Having confidence that I could work back up the ranks at my German club with its newer coach, if no new deals come forward.

Lastly, will this thread please be closed?

 

Good job Mikey. Way to be consistent against powerhouses like Canada, Jaimaca and Panama (Oh wait, we lost against Panama and barely won the second game)
The mans just like Jozy Altidore. Every time he gets a good game in against a terrible team everyone jerks him off.
Where is that going to get us? What, do we have to hope we get put in WC groups with Slovenias and Algerias every tournament? Even then we barely made it out of our group.

I believe OmahaSoccerDude was one of the original people to stick up fro Freddy when he was cast out into exile from the USMNT.
All you fools were right in line with BB with his decision to throw Freddy under the bus and keep on giving caps to terrible Sasha and his beloved Son Mickeyboo.

 

Imho i believe the US would be better off with a more creative/better passing cm pairing. Like idk McCarty, JFT, Holden, Beckerman, maybe even Gavin/Alexander will develop. They can actually POSSESS the ball and thread the needle when needed which the usmnt is lacking right now...and coulda needed in the Mexico game thats for sure.

 

Good lord Omaha is nuts. If you will, however, I would like to take the time to turn this trainwreck into a thread into an actual, real, honest discussion.

First of all, Omaha, there is one thing you must get around your head: No matter how much you don't like Bob Bradley, no matter how much you don't like the fact that he starts all the time, no matter how much you don't like his passing skill (Or lack thereof), anybody with any semblance of brain can figure out that Micheal Bradley is going to be an integral part of the squad. EVEN UNDER BIELSEA OR KLINSMANN. ANYBODY.

I also agree with USAMEX who hated Micheal Bradley's passing and release. I agree- It's not fast enough, it's not crisp enough. He takes far too long to get off a killer pass or to look downfield. More often that not he backpasses or uses his physique to create space so he can take the time to find the final ball. As we have learned, any team good enough to shut down passing lanes can really kill off his game.

However, I disagree with Omaha who says that Micheal can never play at a high level. Micheal looked great at Heerenveen and the one game I saw him play for Gladbach he actually looked good. He's tenacious and physical, and if he ever applies himself and learns proper passing and release, he's good enough to eclipse Stuart Holden. Unlike Bob Bradley, who plays him full 90 no matter what, I see Micheal as a situational player. Against Mexico, you play Torres/Holden and Jones. But against the Czechs, who are going to hammer Torres out of any effectiveness, you put in Micheal.

In any case, here is something I have been wanting to say for a long, long time. I am sure some BSer has said- "God, I hate that long-winded Wessoman, unlike every other BSer, that jerk seems to be the one guy who seems to kiss Micheal Bradley's behind in almost every post, yet he can't stand his father or the his playing 90 minutes in every game. What's up with that?". Well, I'll tell ya.

One of my big criticisms of Bob Bradley is that he plays Micheal full 90. This of course, has a lot to do with his terrible coaching and his ham-fisted, route 1 system which doesn't allow for tactical flexibility. But there is a horrible side effect to all that, because Micheal is a genuinely talented player. The problem with making Micheal an automatic starter is that Bob Bradley is effectively stunting the development of one of America's finest players.

Micheal is only 23 years old. In all reality, he's gonna be with us for two more cycles. He was doing well at Heerenveen and got a transfer to a Bundesliga club. But at the same time he was made an Automatic starter for the USA. Under Bob's route 1 system, there is no need for passing, possession, and release. When Micheal was benched, he always knew that he could count on getting caps for the US. But here Micheal stagnated. The 20 year old phenom at Heerenveen would be expected to learn crisper passing as he got older, but now it's clear that the distribution aspect of his game has been completely neglected.

It's also the reason why Villarreal spent so much money on Altidore. He's so young, Villarreal figured his touch would improve. It didn't. And Jozy doesn't have to learn it with the USA. And Jozy doesn't even have to win a spot on a club to play for the USA. Right now, I wouldn't play Jozy as a starter. He would be a late game Joe-Max Moore type forward designed to dribble the ball into the corner, and maybe make some hard shots on goal against tired legs.

And this, my friends, is one of my biggest reasons why Bob Bradley should go- He's foreclosing on the future of some genuinely good, raw talent. If Jozy learned first touch, he would be Dwight Yorke. If Bradley learned how to pass, he would be John O'Brien. But playing for Bob Bradley, they don't have to. They will automatically get starts.

And here's the good part: A coach like Klinsmann would relegate those guys to be situational players. If Micheal wanted his starting spot back, he would have to work hard at his club to get looks and starts, and to learn passing and release. He would be a player good enough to handle any given situation, so he would then be a definite starter. If Micheal is forced to watch the US National Team from the bench, he will have to force himself, make himself improve to get that coveted start back.

And this is how Bob Bradley has lost his way with his son, and with our national team.

 

Michael would be starting CM no matter who was coaching.

Yeah his dad is a sub-par coach. But Mikey is a decent player and probably our best CM.

 

So seriously, why is this thread still here?

 

Anybody that doesn't believe that mike starts because his dad is coach is very naive.

On the other hand, anybody that doesn't recognize that mike is a good player and deserves to start for us is just delusional.

Those two viewpoints aren't mutually exclusive.

Mike is good enough to be starting for us. But Mo Edu is also good enough to start. Jose Torres is also good enough to start, as is Stu Holden. I even think that Rico Clark has some value to add if he can ever get back to form.

Given all of these options, most of whom are actually starting for decent clubs, Bob still choses Mike Bradley.

Does anybody really think that, say for instance, Bielsa starts a rusty Mike Bradley who is not getting minutes for his club for six months, over Mo Edu who is starting for Rangers, or JF Torres who is starting for Pachuca?

Or, does a Bielsa or Hiddink or whoever, adjust to get his in form players on the field?

 

Big soccer dot com, everybody.

This is embarrassing.

 

Odd b/c people who criticize him dont even wait for a poor match, they merely hound on any mistakes he might make.

seeing as his signup date is Feb 2011, i dont see this as being possible unless he created a new account. There were few people who wanted Sasha to continue to get called up. MB has deserved all the callups and caps he's notched. He's not perfect and you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who says he is, but then again point to 1 player who is.

 

I like Michael, but I wouldn't agree with that. I can imagine a coach wanting to run a 4-4-2 and preferring Holden and Jones starting.

Did YOU hit the report post button? That's how this place works. You have to send up the bat signal to get he moderators' attention.

 

How old are you? Better get off the interwebs before mommy and daddy find out.

Mods, did you fall asleep? I fail to see how this thread is news and analysis related...

 

There is a lot I agree with in this post.

The rock throwing between the hate and love MB camps sometimes drowns out the more legitimate criticisms of the guy.

I legitimately view MB as one of the best U.S. midfielders and would definitely call him in if I were coach. However, unlike his father I would not play him 90 minutes no matter the situation or how MB is playing that day. Only on rare occasions have I criticized starting MB. More often, as the match develops I see that MB is having a bad game or is not an ideal fit for the situation that the U.S. finds itself in, but BB won't pull the guy!

In addition to the issues with touch that Wessoman mentions, I also notice that in some matches MB is just all over the field and ends up poorly positioned when the U.S. team turns over the ball and the opponent counterattacks. I think BB and some fans love this "hustle," but it sometimes ends up hurting the team more than helping.

 

Funny you would phrase it that way, "a coach" would but not Bob.

 

I don't normally visit that thread but from my viewpoint I believe this thread being merged would derail the nepotism thread. I say bin the whole thing.

Just my 2 cents.

 

Comedy.

Except for Stu..get well soon man.

 

The original post has nothing to do with nepotism. It's just a personal attack on MB. It's below the level of even the nepotism thread. How can you read the first post and think the thread belongs anywhere? At most, take relevant posts from Wessoman's, where he tries to redirect the personal attack into a nepotism discussion, and onwards. Anything before should be left here and the thread closed. Or just close the thread altogether.

 

Close it. The guy is basically trolling. Nothing but hate. No substance to his criticism.

 

Agreed.

 

Yes, it would be a problem. It would be in effect saying that the mods do not believe any discussion of Michael Bradley is reasonable.

 

But in the spirit of THIS thread, Mikey is somewhere saying this: