I think the Mexico piece is probably more about open play, it wouldn't surprise me if basically we play better consistently against Mexico's, Canada's and other top 40 caliber teams, then more bunkering oriented teams (not that El Salvador was, they were more toothless than bunkering). The Credit I'd give in terms of game performance is in terms of mentality based on the NL, GC, and Mexico qualifier last window, and I think halftime adjustments he's gotten better and better at that over the years, and the defense has been excellent the past year more or less. So I'll give him that, w/o question, but the attack has been a problem for years, regardless of personel, and I definitely put the bulk of the blame for that on him because it doesn't really matter whose in the shirt unless we're playing a third tier concacaf side in a cupcake winter match. Beyond that, the attack generally is garbage other than moments of individual brilliance here and there.
My point is that young teams have growing pains, which are to be expected. Not that it's impossible for them to win. And indeed we are only one point out of first place. But the original point was that teams as young as ours don't typically make runs in the knockout rounds of the World Cup. A point that you did not disprove as while France had one of the youngest teams in the World Cup, we still have a younger team than they did by a couple of years.
We are tied for the 2nd most goals in the Octagonal. You don't get that many without showing some flashes.
These are all contradictory statements. Why are we cucking ourselves to Johnny Come Lately Canada already to where we have lower standards than them? And Mexico played them on the road. Won by a greater margin. At home it would project to be widened. If you think it's acceptable to have the 3rd highest standards in the region, that's a sad state of affairs. It used to be #1 or #2, depending upon the cycle. The fact El Salvador didn't bunker at all works against your argument. Because that's our kryptonite. We'd have had a tougher time scoring. That's been shown in smaller samples of teams actually testing us in that regard. We have a dearth of players who can be intricate due to their lack of touch, quick & clear thinking, + vision. It's a tribute to our d that we were relatively secure in spite of ES coming to play. But it's shameful our o didn't create more separation. One goal is by definition enough to secure victory, but that also leaves little margin for error, to where if the opponent has a brilliant moment, like Alex Roldan could have both home and away with threatening shots, or like we succumbed to at T&T last cycle to get dq'ed which was one brilliant shot & a fluky OG. It's not an edge we should be living on as a fb nation at the point. We didn't used to live on that edge. And it's not too much to ask to meet our own standard. You're deflecting to complain about the complaining, which is a natural effect not the cause of a legit problem.
I mean we beat them 4-1 on the road already. I don't think it's crazy to think that we'll beat them by more then 1-0. Especially in the third game of a three game window when they've eliminated from contention. As for Canada, I expect a game similar to the one in Nashville, but it's not crazy that we would win there. Especially with Davies and possibly Eustaquio out.
Fair analysis. I think we would be scoring more against a team that commits more numbers forward (of course, we would be giving up more as well).
In fairness, I think we'd probably feel about 35-40% different if Ferreira had finished his chance and one other was finished, and if simply 1 was finished people would still feel a bit better but it would be camouflaging problems. This is a team we should be able to generate numerous chances from, and instead we played like we had no clue how to play in combination for much of the night, running into each other, not using space well, not filling space others opened up etc. Some, like Weah, seemed to be exceptions, but it remains a huge problem.
As a rule, teams coached to play in that style will underperform against inferior opponents and overperform against superior ones.
El Salvador did commit #'s fw. So did Costa Rica. And Jamaica for more than a half. This is the thing - opponents aren't really showing any fear of us, even on the road. And we're still not making them pay to any real degree. To have stayed afloat is a tribute to the defensive might, like we showed throughout the GC. But this is living on the edge. Think about the Costa Rica game. What happens if they call the pk on Richards and/or Navas doesn't get injured and we luck out w/ an OG off the new guy too? It only took one moment of brilliance against us last night. That happens. The way you avoid getting burned by it is by systematically breaking down the opponent throughout the game to give you a multiple goal cushion beforehand.
Gregg had to play the MMA midfield which meant he had to drop the 9 in to help in midfield. Isn't that what he did with Wales? Maybe we should get a different midfield. p.s. edit: Also, many of those lofted passes from Zimmerman are just of the variety of "I don't trust this midfield not getting swamped and have this pass boomerang" and I think that is why we see deference of Richards to Zimmerman and Richards not trying the passes he does at Hoffenheim.
Yeah, I think I do. My comment was on our finishing. Some people look at xG in a game where our finishing sucks as some type of bone to throw the team to pretend they played well. Finishing is a huge part of playing well, so IDGAF what our xG numbers are if we can't put a damn shot on goal in a half, like in the first half last night, and the game ends 1-0....
Yep. There are a lot of other areas of improvement, especially if we simply look at last night in isolation. But if we want to know why we feel our offense is struggling, the #1 thing is a lack of a consistently effective striker (and Canada has TWO!) and the #2 thing is set pieces.
I heard another podcast mention this, but I do think it needs to be noted, if you blow your best two chances to score, one of which you almost certainly should have finished, it's unlikely you played a good game unless you generated a couple of assists. It's not fair, but nobody cares about a player who does 20 little things right, but in a game where goals are rare, you blow the best chances your side generates, you didn't play well in the only aspect that really mattered. Completed dribbles and duels become far less important then.
Whether the talent is being overestimated or not, dropping 10 points at home pretty much qualifies as a disaster. Honduras dropping 14 points at home qualifies as a disaster of Biblical proportions.
No, there was more than that. Robinson had a point blank shot on goal. Weah rushed his shot in the 42' minute when he could have been one on one. Dest had an open lane to goal and donkey touched his first touch. And that's before we get to all the things that were dangerous situations that were blown before the real "chance" stage. I documented a 12 minute period last night where we blew three strong counterattack situations alone with poor execution and/or decision making. We had 17 shots and something like 16 chances created according to the stats. It wasn't quite overwhelming, but taking 17 shots --> 5 SOG ain't usually on the coach. People keep saying common denominator is Berhalter, but the common denominator is also the players. There's plenty we could do a bit differently tactically, but I have no idea what people think the shit passes, dribbling into three players and inability to put wide open shots on goal are on him.
Honestly, it might be due to unfamiliarity with each other. I believe it was said that’s only the second time that our three best players, Pulisic, McKennie, and Adams have played together, and the first time in three years! It’s hard to get into a rhythm when our key players are so damn injury prone.
I started the post with 'Those misses can't be ignored'. At the same time, a striker can still have a good game even if he had missed scoring chances. It happens all the time, really. And the little are indeed important.
Christiansen has been the best in the region, IMO. They simply look like the best combination of improvement in attacking and defending. I'd love to see Perez get a chance, and this doesn't mean he couldn't succeed with more talent, but what he's doing with Panama won't optimize a more talented team. They aren't generating ANYTHING on offense. They are playing to keep things close. I just don't think that is that hard, or that useful. The entire strategy is working and they aren't anywhere near qualification. Now maybe this is the absolute best Perez could have done with his talent. I can't judge that. But it's literally a strategy that seems designed to minimize losses but have no chance of going to the World Cup. I think there's plenty to question. I just don't get the point of the blanket assertions a lot of people make. That's not useful -- Berhalter hasn't been a bad coach; he's not going anywhere. So if there's a question it needs to be at an actual actionable level or otherwise it's just a pointless whine. Personally, I think Berhalter's biggest challenge for Canada might be man management here. How do you fix Pulisic, who seems intent on playing terribly. And most of it is decision making?
JF showed some skill on that chest trap and quick shot. And he hit the right header to assist on the goal. Other than that I thought he looked mediocre at best, and not the answer to our CF puzzle.
It's worth noting that El Salvador beat us once again on duels (as they did in ES) and this with the MMA midfield. Pulisic kind of sabotaged us there, but they brought the intensity, absolutely outmuscled us at times, and did it without bunkering. They deserve some credit.
To be fair to Ferreira, if Musah's shot gets past the keeper, he would have had two assists! But yes, as much as Jesus did well in that sort of Firmino role in the passing, we need someone to lead the line. Especially since our Champions League (TM) winger decided that running near the goal was not something he'd like to do.
Yes. And he's also apparently the left back with the worst crossing % in the Ocho. I don't think we have anyone better, and our strikers are no help, but our offense tends to look good or bad way too much based on Jedi's passing accuracy, and he's wildly inconsistent. This is one of the things I think Berhalter needs to work on. In 2019, he punted LB and basically made it a LCB. That's why Ream and Lovitz. Post-COVID, he's made it a vital part of the offense. Is there something in between? I think it is tough between blending really well requires really strong coordination between the left side 8 and the LB, and if there's one thing I've seen about Berhalter's tactics during WCQ is that they've become incredibly simple in execution. You do this, you do that. With constantly changing parts, we haven't had the chance to progress to a more fluid, on demand, decision making.
He did generate an assist. Was inches away from another. And had 2 other key passes where if his teammate was more clinical it could have netted another. One of the two chances he created for himself. And it was like a .25 xg chance from a semi-difficult angle. A lot of people are like Steve McManaman, who when he used to call games, acted like they would have been 6-5 if not for the finishing. Goals come from virtual sitters (like he had one of), 1 v. 1's w/ the keeper, pk's, & outstanding finishes. You don't expect players to have outstanding finishes. You just may need one. That's why you put the player who is clinical closest to goal. And that may not be Ferreira. I was against him playing the 9 because of the lack of physical tools and being an average finisher in close (but strong from distance), But anyone would be remiss to ignore overall contribution, to see you couldn't say he played bad (2nd highest rating on the team), and even if you don't think he's a striker, those other attributes give him some role as a starter on this team in plenty of situations, i.e. a rotation and bunker-breaker.