Post-match: USA vs. Mexico - Gold Cup Final - August 1, 2021 [R]

The Copium intake by Mexico fans is actually much more satisfying to watch than if they were to admit they were outplayed by the better team.

 

Take a look at this: https://www.theringer.com/soccer/2021/8/2/22601665/gregg-berhalter-usmnt-world-cup-qualifying-test

It echoes your point in places. But after reading it I have more faith that both Berhalter and USSF (or at least Cindy Parlow) understands what the next steps in our evolution must be in order to meet expectations. Part of that is moving beyond grind-it-out 1-0 defensive victories toward a style of play that exploits the creativity in the talent pool better. While the evolution may be slower than some want, I no longer think it is because of any ideological resistance to the need to evolve in those ways, or the inability to do so at all (as opposed to quickly).

 

I love this team!

 

This is the comparison to make - solid organization, good defense, eek out the goals when the opportunities present themselves, and make the best use of free kicks. That is how we will advance in the world cup.

 

See, this I just don't get. So you're happy with the performances because one team, nearly 20 years ago, managed to use it successfully? Instead of the 30 teams since then that have dominated play and created vastly more scoring opportunities than their opponents?

I guess that's one way to look at it, but not something I'm interested in trying to emulate.

 

Agreed. The GC Final was by far the most impressive result, and really nothing else comes that close (I was disappointed in everything about the NL final besides the result). But still, we're talking about the best result, the most comprehensive performance, was one where we were outposessed 65-35, had far less chances, lost xG, and scored one goal (again, not from the run of play).

Those here that demand fans just appreciate the wins and cease any kind of critical analysis, on an analysis message board, just want to look at the final scores. Which is fine. If these people want to choose the Greek Euro Champions from 2004 as our ideal goal, have at it.

I just don't think that's what we should be striving for, and I think the talent we have at our disposal should be creating more than 1 goal a game. If we win the World Cup (against top 10 teams) by playing that Greek-style, I'll let it slide.

 

I don't think my view of Berhalter has changed all that much this summer.

It's great that we won the Nations League and Gold Cup, and I enjoyed both immensely as a fan.

But I thought he was a pragmatist before, and he proved it. I think the A team started to look better offensively, but has some ways to go in terms of really clicking.

Ever since we stopped playing defense passively, we've actually had a pretty strong defensive record. I'm not surprised that continued in the Gold Cup.

I am very happy to see certain players emerge, and to see the team play with an effort level and commitment that we're used to.

But I do think not so much that the results are lucky so much as the scores are in the positive range of outcomes for how we've played. I hesitate to call it luck because our players made plays when needed, and that's not luck in the sense of someone rolling a die.

But to say that if we came back and replayed these the outcomes would be for certain identical is far too strong.

We won, that's great. We played well for stretches, poorly for stretches, but in general did what we needed to do. But yeah, sometimes the opponent plays a little better or one of your players makes a mistake and all of a sudden we've lost to Jamaica 1-0 instead of the opposite.

The simple reality, I think, is this: We're at the point where where we're really not likely to lose to T&T again, even on the road. We're going to blow out poor teams very consistently, and even some decent teams at home.

We're still probably about even with Mexico, or within the range that there's certainly no massive favorite in a match. We're also in the range that we're probably winning against the next group, but especially on the road, it won't be a shock if we tie or lose.

Is that where we should be? I dunno. It's better than a lot of people portray, and I think there's a better chance now of us winning in Honduras or Costa Rica than in the past, but we're not at the place where we're a 80-90% favorite against these teams.

I think it's going to be harder to get to that point against Canada, Jamaica, Costa Rica than people think.

The inherent matchup randomness of soccer helped the US a lot in previous World Cup performance. We had easy entrance to the WC through CONCACAF and then were able to get Top 16 and even a Top 8 performance by being scrappy and perhaps winning some games we shouldn't.

But getting to being a team that can reliably do something that like -- to dictate the game in EVERY game against good teams.

That takes a lot.

 

Still havent heard anything about the egregious chant. There was absolutely one in the Vegas match.

 

Some of my Freezeframe Analyst videos have made it onto this site, and I've enjoyed reading the comments, so I thought I'd post my latest analysis video of the USMNT.

Glad to finally be a member of this historic soccer community!

 

That sort of camaraderie doesn't happen at random.

Kudos to Egg for coaching a team that played as a team, even as a family.

It's the sort of stuff we had not seen in a long time. When they're like this, they can beat anyone.

 

It's hard to judge the GC group offensively because Hoppe was the only player in the stratosphere offensively as our offensive core of Puli, Reyna, Weah, Aaronson, McKinnie etc.

I don't expect those guys to continue to struggle through the whole qualification cycle. Ups, downs, issues, miscues, yes but I think window over window the offense will improve as we figure out our best combos to attack.

No one should expect free flowing Spain or incisive Italy but our parts are better than they've shown and should improve by the time of the WC.

 

the problem is i have already watched klinsi make the same New World Starts Here arguments only to revert back to Empty Bucket when money was on the table. usually the "mark" doesn't fall for the same "con" twice.

[unlike GB, he then due to the aging process ran out of talent to do either cute or physical, at which point his tactical limits were exposed. GB has young talent to ride for a decade if he's allowed.]

i personally think in places like germany or italy they teach kids to both attack and defend, it's a false dichotomy. you can have highly technical players taught as kids they won't see the field unless they get stuck in. thus ends the schizophrenia of "he can play offense but not defense" vs "he hustles around and plays team soccer" we just witnessed consecutively.

i also, to admit my biases, think last cycle (and to some extent that tournament we just saw, as well as the euros) showed that GA is more important -- at least as an initial condition for success -- than GF in terms of helping or sinking a team. "defense wins championships." you cannot beat what you cannot score on. i will get at least kicks if i can pitch shutouts. and this team has too much firepower, properly aligned and freed to do their thing, to itself get shut out too often. so before people get going, i am not advocating playing for kicks round after round......though i won some tough tournaments doing that as a kid.

like i said this morning, not sure why the choice seems to be 3-2 or 1-0 and not also 3-0 ie the A offense and the B defense. i think we overrate the need for the backs and the keeper and the equipment manager and the masseuse to get forward to help this offense. i think Italy showed with the right set of attackers who will also defend, you need really no more than 5-6 going forward to get the job done. they just have to be talented and efficient, capable of creating on their own.

i also think a wingback player like dest, if deemed necessary enough to the cause, can be a wing forward player/sub if he can't defend. they have qualities useful further upfield where vulnerabilities can be minimized.

however players like brooks who are CBs and can't mark would have problems if you insisted on proficiency at their job.

i also think if we ever make up our mind whether the mids are there to win balls on defense or as deep lying playmakers, that decides whether several players should be bothered with -- independent of them being generally trash. if you actually demand they dominate their defensive space, yeuill and a list become useless. not sure people realize it but the "deep lying playmaker" excuse/redefinition is itself necessary to make that list viable. from my perspective it's just a "settling" excuse like wingbacks who don't have to defend. "his role is deep lying playmaker" means, "he's not out there to stop anyone. problem being, if he's not out there to stop anyone," in case someone like me starts beefing.

thing is, there is often a better pure attacker who could be nominally 6 or wing, if we just generally don't give a sh*t. why stop halfway. it's kind of an excuse to wedge some favorite out there. "i gave him a special role."

 

The press against Mexico was quite good. We also saw it unfurled against Switzerland. We had some good pressing players on the field against Mexico, especially the front three of Hoppe, Zardes and Arriola. I expect us to press certain teams (hello El Salvador) pretty hard in qualifying.

 

italy is not that much better than us. we had them, what, 1-0 under sarachan, and that goal was very late? what they are, is willing to be even more dogged than we just were -- press as a whole team -- which makes snobs nervous because they want pretty -- and then they, what, played high tempo keepaway, and had maybe three guys who could put a shot exactly where they meant to, given the chance.

so, you struggle to break them down, and if they get a couple chances odds are they can score them with precision. we are instead veering down the croatia spain path with the first team, a lot of low percent chances, not enough emphasis on pure finishing and precise service, less commitment to team defense, put players out there that can be gotten after.

your response may be, but not the B team. fair enough. but that schizophrenia is my point, and contrary to those depicting him as a tactical genius who can be all things with all players, the reality is he can do one thing with one unit, another with a different one, and short of sewing the front half of one to the back half of the other, a gap between.

IMO the way to bridge the gap would have been the old process. you identify defenders who can defend. you identify attackers who can attack. you then tiebreak or toss out players who are useless at secondary portions of their game. in other words, having picked defenders who can defend, if one particular guy is a passing mess, he gets dropped, but having already found 6 others who can defend and pass, not before he even gets started and shows his defense.

similarly, if an attacker won't chase at least some, they get benched. odds are they will figure it out and chase. if they turn out to be valderrama on defense you have a decision to make. but if you motivate them -- say, pulisic -- that this is a job requirement, they generally will learn their job.

you run it that way you get 11 guys who can generally do their job and some extras for the other end. you run it our way you pick backs for passing and forwards for chasing and you're not quite getting all the offense or defense.

 

Yeah, they are.

 

fwiw if you carried 25-30 people in a quali traveling unit you could execute the two distinct game plans. nothing says you can't pick different 23s each time the dress roster is due....24? 48? hours ahead. teams like italy and wales were juggling NL/WCQ and us by almost having a second team. i advocated something like this to get some experimentation out of cuba when we also had canada to play. we historically travel with 23-25 at most. we tend to treat that like the dress list right there. we every so often "swap" someone for injury or when we clinch. but it's not gold cup, you really don't have to commit til shortly before the game.

you could take a stalemate unit and a kamikaze unit with some overlap. i just don't think within a normal 23 you could fit both full sets. you kind of end up committed one way with maybe 5 or so slots you could spend on alternative tactics. this is why most teams play a system, is you want to know what you're doing in your bones when you show up, not just make it up as you go along, and the roster generally has to be attuned to carrying out that game plan. the As would have had limited roster ability to play B ball. vice versa.

but if you paid for several more people to travel, hand picked to play stalemate ball for a particular game, you could in theory do both.

 

I have seen lot of delusional posts on here, but that may take the cake!

And judging by his screenname he appears to be a juve fan so that makes the take even more hilarious. He should know what he is talking about, but clearly he doesn't.

 

they really aren't. for starters, this should have been regionally dominant from the cycle start, when we beat mexico in 2018. that team tied france and lost 1-0 to italy. if you throw away the intervening two years of berhalter mess, we have come back full circle to that point. where we were 1-0 worse than italy.

what else shows this?
US- Bosnia 0-0 Italy-Bosnia 2-1
US-Portugal 1-1 Portugal-Italy 1-0 (L)/0-0
US-NI 2-1 Italy-NI 2-0
Swiss-US (L) 2-1 Italy-Swiss 3-0
US-Wales 0-0 Italy-Wales 1-0
England-US 3-0 (L) Italy-England 1-1 (W, kicks)

that last increment is not easy to acquire, but head to head we could play them decently tight IMO.



i also want you to notice how many of GB's recent "discoveries" were already known to exist 3 years ago
https://www.transfermarkt.com/spielbericht/index/spielbericht/3032160

hmmm is that zimmerman horvath moore acosta sargent ??? is that horvath making clutch saves? is that acosta hitting deadballs? did we really have to tear that down and then find it again? people forget how big a "set the clock back to zero and forget what we'd already learned" january 2019 was.

i also think as a basic matter people neglect how well a solid backline and top shelf keeper can keep you in ANY game. get me a solid back 6 and we can play anyone in the world to a tie regardless who the rest are. and we have some offense too.

for some reason this wandered off on some jacked up tangent where the keeper is out there to pass balls and the backs to run forward and so on. we hired an inexperienced and under-resumed coach who is learning what actually works on the job.

 

as a future reality check the coaching applicants should be required to discuss the existing pool, both to assess their familiarity with the players, the tape, and their coaching chops with same, but also to ensure we don't do years of time-wasting wheel-reinvention again. i feel like i am glacially watching someone learn to coach and learn the full depth of the pool at his disposal. even someone with no wish to employ sarachan tactics could have saved some time and cherry picked the ones from that year who could play.

i'm also going to be curious when the snobs crack if they pimped a coach to change things who over time reverts to old school but gets enough results to stay employed. our pattern is hiring people to change our ways who figure out we weren't actually that clueless what is important for basic advancement, and just need more ball skill that would need to be taught age 5 up and can't be coached into existence age 24. in other words, you get that growth anyplace but the senior team. the senior team should play practically in whatever tactics balance offense and defense to optimize advancement.

 

I think that FIFA has decided that there isn't all that much that they can do about these chants when they take place outside Mexico. It's not easy to prove that it actually was Mexican fans doing it even when it happens in Mexico. When it happens in places like Vegas and Arizona, it's that much tougher.

 

Sacramento sports anchor swung and missed with "USA wins the 2021 Soccer World Cup" (awfulannouncing.com)

We won the world cup guys! this is bigger than we anticipated!

 

i mean the normal process is you start with the incumbents and your cute ideas have to beat them out in friendlies, as opposed to the other way around. there, saved you three years.

 

thanks bastian!

 

I didn't notice it (in fact, I noticed that I didn't notice it). Perhaps that was Fox deliberately washing it out. When was it?