Someone in another thread pointed out that Klinsmann seems to be trying to force certain players into his system as opposed to fitting his system around his best XI players. My question is whether or not sticking to a system regardless of all else is the best route to go. There are some pros to sticking to a system: -Everyone will know their role upon starting or entering the game. There would be less confusion about assignments and spaces on the field. -It makes development easier because you can groom players for certain roles on the field -You can essentially game plan every game the same. Here are some negatives: -It prevents you from potentially getting your best players all on the field together. -It makes you predictable to game plan against. -It hamstrings your ability to make tactical tweaks to attack your opponent. I guess my question is, with our player pool, does it even make sense to try and establish a system within the senior team at the moment? We have a lot of mismatched parts at the moment. Another question is whether or not anyone can think of a team that sticks to a system and achieves success.
And then you have problems that go beyond player and system. When a coach chooses the wrong player for a position even when there are others better suited for that position. Edu shouldn't be an 8. Williams shouldn't be a right mid. I'll list some alternatives to Edu as an 8 in my preferred order (with some injured players included in the list): Holden, Torres, Donovan, Mix, Fabian Johnson, Feilhaber, Bedoya, Zusi, Kljestan. I'll list some alternatives to Williams at right mid in my preferred order: Donovan, Dempsey, Shea, Fabian Johnson, Beasley, Rogers, Bedoya It seems to me the problem during the last three matches supercedes the issue of systems vs. players. What you have is a coach displaying a dismaying combination of stubborness and stupidity. That's a lethal combination.
Seems like both the current and prior USMNT coaches disagree with your assessment given that Edu has been third on BB's depth chart at #8 for the lastyear or so ahead of most of those you mentioned.
Maurice Edu was a 6 on Bradley's depth chart, and only ever played in meaningful matches in that role, screening the back 4 while we were chasing the game.
BB played a dual 8 and Edu was preferred by many over Clark as MB’s partner as far back as 2010 WCQ. He lost the starting #8 to Jones but remained the first option off the bench. BB even played all 3 a few times.
I agree that Edu was used as a dual #8 with MB during the BB years. The dual #8's played as a "pulley system" with one moving forward and one covering. BB seemed to prefer MB+Clark, but also used MB+Edu. Then, in 2011, when Jones beat out Clark for a spot on the team, Jones moved into the XI and Edu remained as the 3d choice. I don't think BB ever really preferred Edu as a starter, which I thought was a mistake at the World Cup, when Edu's form was better than Clark's form due to much more club match time in the spring of 2010. Edu's role as a dual #8 is different from a role as a primary #8 who has a dedicated #6 providing all the cover. Edu has the mobility to play a dual #8 role, but as a pure #8 he doesn't have the passing or scoring skills needed. Klinsi has gone to the #6+#8 system, in which Edu isn't well suited to play the pure #8. Frankly, BB's use of Edu as a substitute still seems valid today. I don't think he should be starting. Jones or Beckerman should be the #6 players under Klinsi's system, with Edu battling Williams as the 3d choice. Ideally, Holden would be the best choice #8, but he's not available. Next best #8 is Mike Bradley, who is a better passer and a better scoring threat than Edu. Indeed, MB would be shielded by the #6, which would make his relentless motor and attacking runs more effective. Kljestan would be the next best #8 option based on current club form. I think Jones could also play the #8, although his better club performances for Schalke and for Blackburn were as a #6. Torres, once he's back, would be a useful situational #8 sub.
I agree totally, and also agree that to a degree both Klinsi and Bob were slightly too system-oriented, although coming from a system as a sort of foundation or starting point isn't necessarily bad, as long as you're not too married to it. I'd also change the "you can essentially game plan the same" to "your team gets to know itself better," which is a good thing. Of course, as you'd pointed out, your opponents do as well.
his system is fine. He is just playing with the pieces too much. Edu is no pure 8 this obvious. Williams needs to be a primary DM. Not doing some dual shift on the wing and letting Dolo run our right side offense. JK was stubborn enough to not bring any any 8's in this camp for some reason with Holden and Torres out. That says he really believes in Edu at that position. Worrying. Jones can play a makeshift 8 much better than Edu. Lets hope he gets the start on Tuesday.
Well... in BB's system there was no 6 or 8. They were both just CMs. He did often go with at least one that was naturally defense-minded to stiffen the spine up, but he didn't deploy him specifically as a DM. Both were expected to go forward and track back. I wouldn't call that a dual-8 or a dual-6 system, specifically, because such distinctions were not made.
Just to add that that Edu played in the WC beside MB and was the starter beside MB in the post WC matches. IIRC Edu, Jones, and Bradley played the the CM in one of BB's first 4-2-3-1 experiments. So back to my point, both BB and JK rated Edu over the "non-Jones" options (Torres, Kljestan, Bedoya, Feilhaber, Zusi, ...) in CM.
Against CR and Belgium, I believe Torres was the #8 and Edu the #6. Wouldn't that be suggestive that JK prefers Torres over Edu as his #8?
I don't remember Edu starting with Bradley too much. Making the bench for sure, but not starting a lot, or when he did start it was usually with someone like Feilhaber. Feilhaber started next to Bradley fairly often and Kljestan did a few times including our big win against Mexico before his form fell off a cliff. Do you have stats for how many times each of these guys started together? Obviously Bob's preferred guys, Bradley, Clark and Jones are hardly Klinsmann preferred guys at this point though, so whether Bob liked Edu more than some of these guys might not mean much.
How Kljestan played under the BB era, and where BB ranked him really isn't relevant. It only would be if form/production/skill level didn't improve. Kljestan is playing the best soccer of his career. He's also getting more minutes/games at this point. I think some people are making the mistake of simply comparing how JK rates a player vs how BB rated that player, without mentioning a change in form. So you pointed out both coaches rank Edu as a better #8 then Kljestan. But I'd argue that doesn't mean a whole lot because Klejstan wasn't the same player he is now when BB was coach, and for JK to do that is far worse given Sacha's current form.
You can play whatever system you want,we need players who can play it and are good enough that the other team has to adjust to us,instead of the other way around.
My intent is not to trash Kljestan, he is a good player and has been in both coaches camp in the last 5 months. I have seen his last 2 matches and IMO he is just not going to make much of a difference in JK's system. The current system is missing a pacey 1v1 attacking winger on the right hand side, not a slightly better distributor much worse ball winner in the center of the pitch.
I'm pretty much in total agreement here. BB used dual 8's (or as I called, dual 6's). JK is supposedly using a #6/#8 system, but he puts two players who are best suited as #6's in CM, and one at RW. Then acts surprised when we can't score. As for who are the best #8's on this roster. I"d go with Bradley and Fabian Johnson. I think Jones can do it, but I like him much better as the #6 ahead of Beckerman or Edu.
Edu was injured for long stretches during Bob Bradley's time. Its a stretch to say that he wasn't favored when during long periods he wasn't available for selection. Until Holden's problems Edu was the most injury prone in the player pool.
We don't have the depth to build our team around a system or idea. In my opinion, Klinsmann should building the team around our best XI, not his preferred system. We can't sign players like a club can; if we need to fill a particular role and we don't have a player for that role, the system needs to adapted. Keep in mind that Bob was slow to change his tailored system after Davies's accident. Robbie Findley and Cunningham were both seen potential replacements for the speedy strike-partner role CD9 occupied so well. Unfortunately, our manager's adherence to that particular system may have cost us some goals (or wins).
I did and starting lineups of Bradley/Edu don't come up much. Bradley/Clark was most common and Bradley/Mastroeni, Bradley/Feilhaber and Bradley/Kljestan are just as common if not moreso. There is very little evidence Edu was preferred to any of those guys as a starter. He saw more action as a sub, but Bob often filled with roster with player to fill various roles not just the 11 starting positions (Big defensive forwards, speed forwards and wings, possession midfielders, more or less defensively inclined fullbacks, etc...), so its possible Bob saw him more as a good tactical sub in certain situations (like Torres) as a opposed to a preferred starter.
I think the way he was used in South Africa in 2010 shows what role he thought Edu had. He was used to screen the defense while we were chasing the game. He was not put in a position to really spend a lot of time attacking in the final third.
Iam not sure what you looked at. To verify my statement I compiled the following about who played the CM #8 along side MB in A team action 2010 and 2011 under BB. 2010 CM under BB Clark 4 starts Edu 4 starts, 3 subs Torres 3 starts 1 sub Jones 2 starts Kljestan, Feilhaber, Bedoya,... 0 starts, 0 subs 2011 CM under BB Jones 6 starts 1 sub Edu 4 starts 2 sub Kljestan 1 sub The rest 0 starts, 0 subs
You're right, and that's because Edu has had some bad luck for the US: -He couldn't get off the bench for Rangers for 7 months after his move, so Kljestan was ahead of him for the US. -He won a starting spot for Rangers only to get his knee wrecked a month later, so a late sub for Michael Bradley against ES was Edu's only appearance in 09. -Bob Bradley unfortunately preferred Torres and Clark to him in 2010. -After the WC, a healthy Jones and a healthy Holden surpassed him as well, although Holden has only been available for 2 matches since the WC. But the post-2010 / early-2011 friendlies have been Edu's longest run as a starter.