I also don't understand why everyone is on board with Yuiell. I thought he was average-below average in every other cap so far but he played alright against Canada at home.
I looked up Piette's salary and it is $135,000 base and 143K gteed. Hard to believe. He got his training in Spain. Watch him on Dest's breakaway where he cuts out the tap in for Wes or look at the block on Wes on the indirect free kick we got when Fonz backpassed illegally to his gk. He deserves to play for a much better team in MLS. If he plays for club like he does for Canada he is worth 10 times what he is getting. $1m per, anyway. Heath will be needing somebody like that in Minny.
If Spain put up poor passing numbers, accepted 40% possession, and constantly bailed out of moderately intense pressure to boot the ball into midfield would anyone say they were playing their system?
We were still trying to play out of the back, but it's undeniable we're reverting to the usual. Next time we meet a rival stronger than Canada, I expect similar possession numbers but with a lot more hoofing.
You're a McKennie fan, totally unable to ever see anything wrong with him. It's like a religion for you. He was great against Cuba though.
There have been various podcasts/shows in which the journalist or host have questioned Mckennies place or role. I can post links if you would like. On here that same view seems to be mirrored by certain posters. Its not a conspiracy theory, its facts. In a game where we won 4-1 playing direct football, Mckennies performance is being picked out. When posters say that he has Chandler 'disease' it sounds as if they are questioning Mckennies effort. In person it didnt look like his effort was lacking. His passing could have been cleaner, for sure. You felt it necessary to make a comparison between Green and Llegett when Green has been iced out of the program. What are you proving? Its pathetic. Of course Ive seen him play at club and usmnt. Green has shown he can play at a decent level when given the opportunity. That takes nothing away from Llegett. The biggest difference is that we scored a goal, after a set piece, early in the game. A fact. Am I wrong? The second biggest tactical difference is Canada changed their whole formation and approach. A fact. We were able to concede possession to Canada. Canada are more threatening as a countering team. Herdman hurt his team by removing the 2 outlets they had high up the pitch. Also the Lb that played in the last game added a level of physicality that few on our team could match. I dont understand why Herdman felt the need to change his tactics so drastically. Im not denying the effort was better but there were other big changes in the game.
what a rah-rah piece of status quo under Berhalter. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to make the argument that this game was a vindication of Berhalter’s pro-active via possession strategic system. To achieve such mental gymnastics, it was like reading 50 juvechelsea posts all together but without the interesting nuggets buried within.
There are two crowds of vocal fans that seem to be pushing this narrative of McKennie in this game. Like you, I was perplexed by it as I thought he was good. There was the bad pass, but if you compare how Canada eased through us in Toronto to how they had to work hard to get anywhere near Zone 14 in this game, McKennie and Yueill were obviously an upgrade. Unlike you, I just thought of doing this. Arriola gets high marks for running around, but he was pretty poor. Nobody cares to talk about him. He does make the pass to Morris for the Zardes goal, but the Canadian CB probably should have done something to stop that. But it looks great on the score sheet and pace and quick play can make CBs miss things.
What role? Whatever we thought GB wanted was thrown out the window for this game. We don't know if the failed System from the past 11 months will come back or we are going to build off what we did in this game. Playing a more aggressive defense with a double pivot of players willing to engage physically, and win more often than not, could be what we do going forward. I would hope so. Yueill did it against Canada relatively well. Bradley, Roldan, Trapp are not suited to that at all. The whole passive mid-block we had used until Friday was almost a reflection of how Bradley plays the #6. Sit back, do little, wait to recover an opponent mistake. Rely on your CBs to bail you out when you are bypassed. What we did Friday is better for Adams, Servania, Canouse, McKennie, Morales, and Yueill. That is a better #6 depth chart than Bradley, Trapp, Durkin?, Parks?
No. Has anyone seen a possession breakdown by half? Many times that stat gets skewed if one team goes out to a 3-0 lead. Why kill yourself pressing high and hard when letting their CBs pass back and forth helps you with the clock? USA 4 v CR 0 in the Copa was similar. We dominated until 3-0 then sat back more and looked to counter. If you look at the stats now, CR has 60% passing and almost 150 more passes. But the game was never competitive. It is just how games are managed up 3-0.
The question is, is he better than Adams. I fear some are engaging in the fallacy that the player standing before them must be better than the one they haven't seen. Yueill is better than Bradley and Trapp. Duh. But is Adams better than Yueill? Everything takes on this bizarrely conservative tone around the team. If Adams is better than Yueill you are repeating threatening to play Adams wide to suit Bradley, just with better components. I want the spinal position maximized before I decide who else to stick out there.
I thought Davies as wing back was a gift. And you see how they looked better in the second half after the subs, which I often take to be a sign you messed up the XI.
No, the primary job of a 6 is to stop people and the minute we get confused about that we will get punished again. The question is can he handle a better opponent than that.
I take Zardes to be a sign of our meh 9 options. Soto hasn't been given a go, Sargent doesn't seem ready yet. Jozy is dinged. Wood and Green are in exile. Having framed it thusly -- and in particular relegated Wood to the wilderness -- Zardes is the one who can score on ok teams. The problem is we already know how this ramps up to tougher opponents ie he disappears, both as a target option when we need to advance the ball, and as a scorer. The problem is Wood isn't being considered and who else has earned it. I expect GB to take this as confirmation when it really should just raise questions and have you shopping around with Zardes in pocket as, well, if no one can do much, then you're gonna be the guy. But we like to settle on things quickly and go in frustrating circles. If GB knew what he was doing you now pit Zardes against the others to see if he can find another gear. He instead is dismissive which lets Zardes relax.
Zardes can play in this game. Pressing high, playing direct. Crossing in from the wings. Zardes has been used by GB in the System, which is where it has been frustrating. He cannot check back and link up play consistently. Only Altidore can and Sargent is probably next best. What Gregg was doing from January to this game was not what he did with Zardes in Columbus or what Zardes did against Canada. If we are going to play this new way, than Zardes is maybe better than Altidore until Sargent is ready. Dwyer might also be good in such a direct system and Wood, if he ever gets back in form, would be great.
There is nothing that Zardes does that Sargent cannot match. I say that as a challenge to Sargent - add this to his game and he can take it to another level.
I disagree. It was exactly the same. The team just made better decisions. I do think Zardes is a better fit right now for this system and team- mostly because the current squad is relying on hustle and athleticism to make up for technical deficits under high pressure. But the system was pretty much the same. I think people are mistaking what they were most successful at vs what they wanted to do. They wanted to possess much better than they did.
I thought the backs were meh, pressurized when he reconfigured his team second half, shipped a goal. I thought what bailed them out and made the whole team look better was midfield selection. A competent 6 and then two guys who could attack. We have been fielding two incompetent 6s and McKennie who is sloppy as the attacker. So it boils down to the benefits of a more aggressive attacking posture and a competent 6. As many of us have said lately you select better and this is magically a top 3 team. You put out midfield trash and the region has caught up enough a top 10 team could whoop us. McKenne is sloppy and you can do better. He has proven he can contribute so he is a good bench option. But for 90 minute guys you don't want constant giveaways. You can fade the giveaways if you need a goal that bad and he's a sub choice. Adams over Yueill and someone else over Lletget. Though, they should then staff the bench. If approach right, we could be finally moving in the right direction. However moving the right way is an iterative process. A is better than B who shouldn't even be on the team. So cut B. But is A better than C, the promising youngster? We need to resist stopping at A is better than B and that's it and that's his job now. But my concern is I doubt it. I am concerned he goes right back to Yedlin Bradley etc. And to negative shoddy mids like Roldan. The question is, does he backslide first chance he gets on formation, instructions to the defense, selection/lineup, midfield composition.
I would consider CP as a 9. Arriola and Morris wide. CP ramps up to bigger games. Zardes does not. One should resist the urge to settle. This to me is kind of like when Dempsey got moved from wide to 9 in a similar down period. if the best conventional choice is sloppy and the new options not ready, go with an elite player.
This was mostly my take as well - though I didn't go all into the Bradley/Yuiell comparisons. Mckennie was a huge upgrade over Roldan and his defensive strengths vs offensive strengths were a big reason we were a lot better in controlling the midfield and poor in possession. Llegett was a big improvement on McKenniee as a CAM that helps cover defensively and was still a weakness in possession as well. It also helped Lleget (defensively) that he had a better defensive partner up top to help close down space and angles with energy and consistency. It required him to step out of the midfield less. But player selection, better intensity and better execution by the players were the key differences in my opinion.
Wow... the script on Weston has certainly flipped after this one. The kid is 21 and is an every game starter for Schalke. Did he play poorly?... Yes. But I have seen enough of him in the Budesliga to say that he deserves a lot more slack. This guy gets moved around the pitch all the time... it would be nice if he could get the time to master a single position.