I don't even really think Arriola is particularly special. He's not in Europe not because there aren't players comparable in quality that play in Europe, but because there's too many players in Europe that are like Paul Arriola. He's older, doesn't have a lot of upside, and his piano carrier game is available domestically, without a transfer fee, all over these leagues. He doesn't bring anything overly unique that would require acquisition. If you want a strong defensive winger that runs all day and creates space ... those are a dime a dozen in a big country that plays soccer primarily. it doesn't mean he doesn't have value, and it doesn't mean he's not a better option than a more talented, more skilled, but more one dimensional player in a game. It all depends on what you need out of a position. I can see an argument where you want Konrad on the roster because he might create a great cross out of nothing. He's probably better in games where we control the ball, where we aren't worried about pressing hard or getting the ball to the attack, where he's going to get a lot of chances to dribble against a static defense. He's SOOOO much better than Arriola in those situations. Paul's not much of a dribbler or a crosser. But in a game where we are on our back foot, a lot of transition, an intent to press, a sloppy game on a possibly crappy field with bad weather in Central America? I mean, how often would Konrad even get that kind of set up that he excels at? We've already seen he's not much for transition play compared to an Aaronson, Arriola, Weah, Pulisic, etc. He's more of a set offense guy. He's not much of a presser. He doesn't drop back much to help shuttle. He's not much for off the ball movement. What did we do against Jamaica and Costa Rica so well? Ball through the midfield to the fullbacks to a streaking winger. Pressing hard, forcing turnovers. That's not really Konrad's game. Where did we struggle? Controlling the ball in the midfield. When the fullbacks couldn't provide forward progression. That's where the Scally complaint makes sense but the Konrad one is weird to me. What Konrad could do for us is when we've struggled with the final ball. He's better than many of our options at that last cross. So there are games and places where he's FAR superior to Paul Arriola. Not sure that played out at all this last window, but the Panama game was not a game he'd have fit into AT ALL.
Work rate is not meaningless garbage. Of course, you'd like work rate and skill and tactical knowledge and whatever, but frankly, we've won the games we've seen high effort in and struggled in the game where we are slow to the ball, lose our duels, etc. You speak in vague platitudes but very little specifics. I ask again: what from the El Salvador game do you see in Konrad's game you wanted repeated? Hell, just describe three aspects of his game at Marseille you think are strong assets, and for fun, give me three weaknesses as well.
I mean we definitely could have used more effort and hustle in Panama, where the whole team was lacking in energy and didn't seem like they wanted it. I disagree that independent evaluations of player performance are meaningless, just because they don't match up with any preconceived notions here.
Without the MMA midfield we just don't have the margin to play a purely attacking player. So if Konrad can't impact the game without the ball we can't carry that defensive liability, unless you want to see Adams getting pulled wide constantly and our midfield scheme break like it did against El Salvador. Now with 2/3 of MMA we can make that exception for a healthy Pulisic, not sure Konrad warrants that risk though.
Saw Vines play pro at a good level for the first time as he started and played 90' for Antwerp in their 2-2 game v. Fenerbache in Europa League. He put in a good shift with lots of good signs. I'd say he's #3 on the USMNT ladder because he knows how to play his position and has good feet. Maybe that Paredes guy at DC starts to come on and challenges eventually for that left back spot which was going begging for a while but now seems to be salvageable. I'd say #3 guys are pretty important because #1 or #2 could easily be n/a in which case the #3 makes the team (USMNT, that is).
I've never been a huge Vines lover, personally, but I do think he brings a couple of things. He's a very solid defender, if not overly speedy or spectacular. Berhalter used Bello in the GC against better teams; I do wonder if he holds up athletically against faster/better wingers. His other thing is that he can make some really, really, really nice leading sort of half-crosses, half-through balls on the break. He's really good at that. It's a weird sort of specialty, because he's not an amazing crosser in the box (not bad, just not incredible), but in that sort of facing forward, leading fast break cross, he really seems to have a great touch on that. That's super specialized, and he's clearly behind Robinson and anyone else that pops at Antonee's level. But I can see some value relative to Bello. I think Paredes can be a player, but I'm not sure he translates to true fullback.
I feel like Bello will be better long-term, but for now Vines is the better player. I'm very high on Paredes, I'm just not quite sure yet where he best projects in terms of position.
Plenty of people thought one or the other or both of the fullbacks, Moore and Bello, were a problem (as opposed to THE problem, which, yeah no one player would've been a magic bullet) in the Panama game. Not saying Scally should have necessarily made his debut down in Panama (although I wouldn't have a problem with it), but let's flip this around and ask what reason is there to believe either Moore or Bello would perform better than Scally would have? This is not even getting to the point that even if you think Moore/Bello are currently better than Scally, the latter could have still been brought into the team to get him acclimated even if he didn't play, since there was no roster size restriction. That didn't happen so now we're one window further into WCQ and closer to WC22 without Scally integrated into the team. Moore and Bello are both pretty much the definition of players who while nice to have in the overall player pool and no one should write them off, if you're having to actually play them right now in crucial games, you might want to try finding an upgrade if possible. Lucky for the US then, that they have at least one! But if you mention how many minutes Arriola gets in the Gregg area, that's a disingenuous and totally unfair usage of numbers! Does anyone here remember when Arriola want to the Championship, and was pretty much crap so they never played him and he ended up a training player for Swansea, and then when he came back with his tail between his legs and was asked what happened, he blamed the quality of the fields in the Championship? Like, not one specific stadium or whatever, but the general quality across a 22 team league, one that has numerous teams that at some point have been in the Premier League? I love watching MLS but think about some of the field conditions from artificial turf to ripped up grass from NFL and college football games, to monster truck rallies held the night before, concerts, quidditch tournaments etc... he blamed the friggin grass.
Yes that is true! And it might be a convincing argument IF: (note this is a big if) -The US was scoring tons of goals and creating tons of chances... they are not, in fact it's quite the opposite! -Arriola wasn't starting as a winger, one of the front three in a 4-3-3... where else are the goals/chances supposed to come from?? As it is, Arriola should pretty much only be playing if he's being subbed on to defend a lead and close out a game... I have absolutely no problem with Arriola running around like crazy for the final 15 minutes when it's 2-1.
Arriola helps with goal creation by stretching the defense, forcing turnovers, and providing off ball movement. He provides almost no one on one dribbling and some pretty mediocre at best finishing. But we've seen what happens when we put a bunch of dribblers who all need the ball to create something out there, even at offensive positions. That's the El Salvador game -- it's Dest, Konrad and Aaronson all standing there as everyone tries to take people one on one. Arriola-style players -- of which Tim Weah and Jordan Morris are versions -- provide more value off the ball. And there's only one ball. It's not a huge shock that Arriola paired really well with Dest against Jamaica -- Dest provided dribbling and one on one play, and Arriola provides space, someone pass to, defense, etc. It's that complementary dynamic I am referring to. People also way overstate Arriola's issues with goal production. He's not an elite finisher, but the dude can score and pass, and he helped earn what should have been two red cards against Jamaica. He's not a great finisher, but he's not horrific. He's got a goal or an assist about every 200 minutes in MLS, and while that's not devastating, he's not utterly toothless. How players interact is important. There's one ball. People who can help the team win WITHOUT being on the ball are important. If you've got 2-3 dribblers out there that just have to be on the ball to contribute, you've got more than enough. If I've got a lineup with Dest, Musah, McKennie and Aaronson out there, I want more direct players like Arriola (or Weah, or Morris) and Robinson and Pepi to provide outlets and drag the defense around. Don't get me wrong -- Arriola is neither spectacular nor irreplaceable. But if Dest is dribbling up the right side, you want someone who makes a run that drags defenses away while giving Dest a passing option, not someone who stands and points at their feet and gets in the way, even if when they get it, they can one on one. I have Dest for that. And I want someone who will cover behind him if he gets caught out.
It's a little comforting Vines is back. He provides a base-level of ensured quality during wcq Bello nor Paredes (w/out proof or debuts out the way) does. We missed him for Panama last window. The injuries have been costly. Paredes should be in next camp too though. He may be the most valid choice for #2 lb. To determine that requires a little integration period 1st. He also would provide a lefty wing option to afford us width on that side still if Dest or Scally is shifted over. His versatility shouldn't be held against him. He can defend & offend. He's a big prospect, near Pepi-level, who's proven quite a bit already for his club. There's no utility for Arriola. It has nothing to do w/ his continental association. He hasn't produced for the NT, so some have to rationalize why it still makes sense to play him. We have alternatives. That would include KDLF. It wouldn't likely if a healthy Morris was available, since he's actually produced. The Euro magic believers are in a cult. It doesn't matter if Adams, Busio, Holden, Aaronson, Cameron, Gio, etc.; made almost immediate impacts. We needed them to create our players in the weeks they were there, instead of just provide a platform. Also, forget Donovan's, Pope's, Miles', Pepi's, etc. play for the NT. The #1 criteria should for spots w/ the national team should be performances w/ their club, or even loose league association. That's how you naturally get better results. There's no more self-loathing fan base than this one.
Is it possible that Dest is most effective attqcking from a deeper starting position? and without a strong defensive presence in front of him our shape would be compromised because the CDM or right 8 would have to constantly cover for him? When you have a direct player (Weah works here too) it pins the opposing LB and LW deep. It worked against Jamaica, it didn't work against El Salvador (with Konrad ahead of him). Hasn't really worked with Pulisic either but we haven't seen them together much. Maybe Arriola (or a space creator type like him, ie Weah) is all about getting the best out of Dest.
Good response overall, but I have a problem with this part.... There are different levels. Maybe that's decent production for a winger at the MLS level (although "not devastating" is damning with faint praise isn't it? Shouldn't the standard be a bit higher?). Even if that were the case, and I'm not saying it is, the national team is just a higher level. See also Roldan's inability to translate production from MLS->US. Arriola is pretty much no threat to get you goals or assists against the competition the USMNT faces. Or at least, outside of friendlies against completely disorganized teams and/or CONCACAF minnows. And the level of competition the US now facing is above that level for the Ocho, and certainly will be two steps above even that for the actual World Cup. So I guess my argument is that getting basically zero goals zero assists from one of your starting wingers (note again I have no problem with Arriola as a defensive substitute) in a 4-3-3 is "toothless" and kind of "devastating"?
I agree with this. He plays a similar relationship with Gressel (US eligible soon) in DC as he does with Dest. That is he occupies the opposing fullback and creates space for his RWB to exploit. Arriola prevents the build out from exploiting the space that Gressel leaves (interestingly Honduras' Najar plays as a overlapping RCB in DC's pressing 3-4-3 which shows how much DC's system is built around Arriola, regardless if it results in his counting stats looking very impressive). But I think part of Dest shining against Jamaica is Arriola just preventing much of any build up from Kemar Lawrence combined with clearing out and getting out if Dest/Musah's way. That's not to say we don't have better options who can do the same space creation and pressing with more end product (Weah/Morris). I think Weah, since he has higher upside and showed he can do it against Costa Rica should be ahead of Arriola now, but I still think having that the RW role is just going to be different from our LW inverted winger.
Good luck to Reynolds when Mourinho next gives him a chance in 2037... just kidding Jose will be in Newcastle by January just kidding they wouldn't want him Mourinho says Bodo Glimt's first team has much more quality than Roma's "second team" that he played tonight in their 6-1 defeat. He's talking about Rui Patricio, Kumbulla, Diawara, Carles Perez, Villar, El Shaarawy, Borja Mayoral, etc. https://t.co/HV2J98WROf— Gabriele Marcotti (@Marcotti) October 21, 2021 And yet Gregg refuses to call up Zarek Valentin
You have totally underplayed the experience with the team. If this were some random friendly, then sure, call in Scally over Vines to get acclimated. But this is World Cup qualifying. I am not taking the left back that performed well at the Gold Cup and replacing him with a guy with 8 Bundesliga and 4 MLS games as his entire resume, based on him now being in the Bundesliga as opposed to the Jupiler. Let's put this in perspective -- people have already shown a willingness to throw Bello overboard. In this coming window, that leaves us with Antonee Robinson as the only left back. So if Antonee gets injured, we are starting Scally as the left back against Mexico in the next window, in his 1st cap? That's the pressure people want on him? Nope. I have no problem with calling Scally in for "acclimation purposes" as you say. But having Scally deputed as the left back over a 22 year old player with valuable experience at the position in recent tournament competition -- possibly by leaving that 22 year player at home so Scally does not have to compete with him, is a no-go. Last thing -- Vines was brought in to be the starter at Antwerp, which is obvious. The only reason he has not been starting is because he has been injured, which is also obvious. And to be sure, Antwerp knew all along that Vines would be going on national team duty, as a major reason (if not "the" major reason) they bought him is because he performed well at the Gold Cup this year. So, arguing that Scally is further along in establishing himself in his respective team is a bit disingenuous as it does not tell the whole story. Again, bring in Scally. But you do not bring him as a replacement selection for Vines, if Vines is healthy. You bring in Scally in addition to Vines, with no expectations at first, and let Scally win you over in person. And if he does, spoonfeed him 20 late minutes, if you can find them.
Fotmob Scores Europa League Konrad(dnp) Yedlin(7.7_3rd) McKenzie(dnp) Vines(6.8_6th) Europa Conference League Reynolds(5.1_13th) Argentina Sonora(7.2_5th) assist Brazil Johnny(6.6_11th)
Change LB to RB, and Jupiler to Spanish second division, and this was the exact argument that was made for calling in Moore over Scally for the last set of games... and yet somehow Moore doing okay at the Gold Cup didn't really count for all that much months later.
This is criminal behavior! And his stuborness forced Zarek Valentin to switch to Puerto Rico. Fire everyone.
I've been somewhat in agreement about the desirability of calling in veterans. But the fact we have the youngest team in world soccer is a testament to the degree that the Talent Gappers just don't have what it takes. I'd like to call in some veterans. And I would be, in theory, fine with Scally waiting. I'm just not sure if reality is going to fit with that scenario.
I was on record (prior to the callups) that I would have called in Scally over Moore in the last window ... Moore was not even playing for his 2nd division club at the time, much as Cannon was not. It was puzzling to me. So I can't answer for other people. Scally literally has 2 or 3 games on the left side of defense ... for now I take the natural left back, with positive national team experience at left back and who is starting Europa League games AT left back, if healthy. Of course that is subject to change after Scally comes to camp and wets his feet.
My feelings about Arriola are mixed. After Couva, I listed about seven players in the pool who I thought were worth taking forward and he was one of them. So I do think he has value. I also said that one of the hardest things about this cycle would be going from a talent-poor mentality to a talent-rich mentality (overstated in both parts, but you get the gist). That Josh Sargent would score goals and goals at youth tournaments, but he would still get criticized for his holdup play and not hustling enough. The things that we valued in the past we need to look clearly at and wonder if we overvalued them because that's what we had a lot of. The other thing is not to over-romanticize our own heart and fight, because other teams in CONCACAF show just as much. And while we can think of games where we showed that quality in spades (Italy in the 2006 World Cup) there have been other games where we showed nowhere near enough (Czechia in the 2006 World Cup). I just think we overvalue the Paul Arriolas because we've had a lot of them in the past. And we need to think about it.