It was incredibly thoughtful of Gregg Berhalter and the #USMNT to win a second final over Mexico in less than 2 months, just as we were finishing up my story on their unprecedented project.My first piece @ringer is up.https://t.co/ITvkaZ7M81— Leander “same handle *elsewhere*” Schaerlaeckens (@LeanderAlphabet) August 2, 2021 Gregg Berhalter’s Plan for American Men’s Soccer Is Working https://www.theringer.com/soccer/2021/8/2/22601665/gregg-berhalter-usmnt-world-cup-qualifying-test
Some of us had concerns about picking the right players and implementing a straightforward scheme that supports the difference makers in our pool. Turner, Acosta, Hoppe, and Robinson have attributes that support and provide synergy for our pool. That is the best we can hope for and if we lose playing a scheme that makes sense for our pool with players that make sense implementing said scheme I won't complain. I don't agree that the wheels are coming off, I believe that in the last 6 months Berhalter has made changes that have in fact stabilized the wheels!
Where so much has been ascribed to GB’s rigid “system” this article shows he is working from a higher level involving a vision for the team and working hard to establish a culture of players and staff accountable to each other. There is a philosophy of play and game model but this stuff where people claim “GB instructs player x to do z and only z” is over the top. I believe he is building with the end in mind and seems to be a sound progression. His biggest problem may wind up being the eventual task of slimming down the pool and keeping everyone relatively happy with their roles/minutes. So far, so good, imo.
Yueill and Lewis were given every chance and couldn't perform at the desired level. Hopefully Berhalter will be less lenient of mediocrity as we approach the World Cup.
I mean, he probably will be. Decisions are made in a context, and anyone making those decisions is usually aware of that context. Berhalter's not more pragmatic in his game plan this year than 2019 ... he's more pragmatic in a Gold Cup Final with a B/C team a month before qualifying as compared to say, a friendly 3 years before a World Cup when he's trying to implement a philosophy. Situations mean something, right?
One of the more interesting thing to me has been the effect Berhalter may have had on some players' personal development. It's pretty clear that Berhalter has set down that CBs will be able to pass out of the back, and will be asked to do it. What's interesting is that a number of our players have really seemed to improve in that respect over the last few years -- Long, Zimmerman, Sands, Robinson. They may have done so without the National Team motivation -- Sands plays for City Football Group, so they clearly were likely to push him a bit there, for example. But I can totally see this being extra focus and motivation for these players. I wonder if someone like Zimmerman puts as much time in if it didn't affect his national team chances?
W/re to criticism of the roster structure, the main limitation was the quality the pool of MLS-based goalkeepers, defenders, and d-mids was significantly ahead of the quality of the central mids, wide mids, and strikers. There was only so much GGG could've done in terms of running his 433. The good news is the high quality part of the MLS-based pool did a great job.
Fun read. It confirmed my suspicions that Gregg's approach with the USMNT is very positive player-centric (in stark contrast, for example, with the Klinsmann approach), and that has definitely played a role in securing the services of some dual nationals, and that he's extremely detail-oriented, perhaps more so than would truly be beneficial given the limited amount of time spent in camps, and finally, that he sees it as his mandate to change the way the world views American soccer during his national team tenure. All of those are things that I've already been largely aware of. I'm not sure what other insights it gave.
I believe that Berhalter has always had a plan with primary goals and objectives that are different than the typical fan's. The grading scale needs to be based upon his goals and objectives. His focus has been long term; his initial goal is to be ready for qualifying. It is only now, that his goals closely align with the typical short sighted fan. The second stage begins with qualifying.
If Gregg came out and said "My plan was to possess the ball and take few risks in creating goals, while at the same time allowing shots on the break and trusting my keeper," then I'd be supportive of the idea that Gregg strategerized this.
I definitely don't believe he ever strategized giving up chances on goal and depending on the keeper. I believe his primary goal in this tournament was to add to the foundation that has been built and identify depth. Another goal was build an attitutude that the US could compete with anyone and never be satisfied with a loss. This team could easily have lost the game but they would have emerged deeply disappointed and knowing they could have won. That, in my mind, was where the real success is. If they lost, but felt that somehow it was ok because they were playing with house money it would have been a failure....perhaps not with many fans who were already saying that, but for him and the team. Again, his primary goal was more about the overall philosophy or mentality of being part of the USMNT vs the goal of winning a single game or tournament. (Obviously, I hope, he had a goal to win....it's just that winning was part of a larger, more important goal. One that is critical to our chances of qualifying and doing well in the wc)
He apparently did said that he knew that we wouldn't be able to produce a ton of goal opportunities this game and gameplanned around it. I believe this was pre-game since one of the announcers talked about it mid-game.
Ah, so every game except Martinique was a lead up to Mexico. Brilliant! We are lucky he is willing to be our coach.
It's not that hard to figure out this roster was not going to be an offensive juggernaut and that we're going to win low scoring games. Honestly, it's so clear and obvious, I am not even sure what your point is, except to reveal that you may not know much of what you are talking about. We are lucky he is our coach. There were a lot of worse options out there. You gotta love a poster who is like "I'd give Gregg respect if he said this." "He did say this." "LOL. Gregg's a loser and I'm brilliant."
Mixing Nations League champions with Gold Cup champions is going to be one difficult task, and keeping egos in check during all of that perhaps even more difficult.
My deepest apologies for making you make such a personal attack. I do concede that I was being jovial when I claimed that I would be happy if Gregg admitted he was a chickenshit coach. However I don't concede your point that we could have a worse coach. That's unprovable. I love posters who lick boots.
LOL, do you think anyone read what you are writing and thinks, "Yeah, that guy, he's got a great point"? On to the ignore list.
Maybe. I believe he tried a grand experiment in 2019. It ended with the Canada loss. He hasn't radically changed the underlying tactical set up in attack, but radically changed he defensive approach and brought in younger, better, players. But it should be 100% priority on winning from here to we qualify. Watching Berhalter these last few games, I do think he was trying out a way to rotate the team in qualifying, but also managing to win. There have been few times in the past where his priority was winning.
Agree 100% with the second part. And I believe that Berhalter sees it that way too. I also agree that he hasn't changed his attacking philosophy but unlike you, other than the right back stuff (mostly due to having Dest), I don't believe his basic defensive strategy has changed significantly. I think he has scaled it back and tried to simplify it. I believe that he has determined that he was overly ambitious in what he could successfully implement with the limited time he has with the National team. He may try to add in some things he is leaving out when it comes to final preparations for the actual wc but that will be determined at a later date. (As you say, the result against Canada probably did influence his efforts to simplify the "system" and become a bit more pragmatic)
Going from a passive mid-block 4-4-2 defense in the 2019 GC to a high pressing 4-3-3 in the 2021 GC is a radical change for me. Probably the one thing they have not worked on is transition offense. That might be the last piece of the puzzle.
Fair enough they have also shown more variety in defense. I believe they did some 3 in the back early on (don't remember for sure), but it seems to be more of a legitimate option now.
While I think that he keeps the door open for guys to impress him later on (exhibit the returns of Zardes and Acosta), I do believe that the winnowing of the guys who have not performed is underway. Notice that we haven't seen any players the likes of Mihailovic and such since the Olympic qualifiers, guys who were a part of 2019. I don't think we'll see either again this cycle in the absence of something dramatic. There are other newish guys to look at, and the guys at and near the core of the team are going to need to dominate the minutes in most of the windows we have left.
Today's article seems to hint that such has been his intention, in that his stated goal is that that the US national team should change the way the world views American soccer, and that the national team should in all ways set the "A-number 1" standard for soccer in this country. Which means to me that, amongst a lot of other things, it means that he believes that a defender who represents the US at the senior level should be able to demonstrate that he can distribute the ball under some pressure. That doesn't mean that he needs to be dogmatic about it at the expense of being reasonably pragmatic, and I don't think that he necessarily will, either. But that's been the guiding philosophy, for what it's worth.