I think he's saying that criticism of Moore is unfair because he's a limited player being asked to play a limited role. Moore is fine for what he is, but the fact that Berhalter is happy to rely on a player like that instead of being bolder and using a player with a higher ceiling is what is really worthy of criticism: "But against England it [playing Moore] seemed like a capitulation. Why not be a little braver? Even if it was Yedlin to be a little more offensive and go for a win." I read his comment as a critique of Berhalter, not as an attempt to deflect criticism of Moore by claiming that it's all veiled anti-Berhalter sentiment.
he literally said he was trolling. period. if you agree (or disagree) with points he made about moore great. if he only made those points about moore i wouldnt have had any reason to reply. but thats not all he said. why you ignored that other part but not my reply is what i dont understand.
The board always has to be pissy about something. If we're unhappy with the 3rd string keeper and a backup fullback, then it's a pretty good roster. Shaq Moore is one option as the backup RB at Copa America. Did Berhalter knight him or something? Berhalter has literally said the following: "You look at what we're trying to do with Sergino going down, we have to figure out the right back situation and there's a couple of different options we can look at. We have like for like with Joe Scally and Shaq Moore, we have a winger that can play there with Timothy Weah who played that for his club, we have center midfielders who can play there in Weston [McKennie] and Yunus [Musah] and then we have center backs that we're looking at [to see] can they play there," Berhalter said about his options at right back heading into these matches. "So we just wanted the ability in this training camp to have options and to have flexibility. Some of it may revolve around a back three, but the first objective is to see how we're going to fill that right back position, because we know that we're going to be missing Sergino." So at the camp and the friendlies, Berhalter is going to assess his options. Shaq is one of those options. I hope Berhalter plays Adams at RB, which he's done before, just to create another meltdown on the board.
This isn't remotely true, but to each his own As the 8 in a double-pivot. 1. Johnny 2. Adams 3. Maloney None of the others has excelled at the position at a high level. But 3-deep at deep mid is quite good.
The only good team on the list is Germany. And Musah got subbed out in minute 63 against Jamaica with the US down 1-0.
He was fasting during Ramandan during the Jamaica match. Was poor against Germany. Other matches he played well. I think it does highlight that Adams grows in importance when we are playing a team that is better than us.
Tessmann and Bus should be good to go for the Olympics whether or not they make it to camp. Morris plays box-to-box in Columbus, but Tessman is a true 6. If he makes it to Serie A, we could have 4 d-mids in the Top-4.
More generally, it highlights the importance of playing with a specialist d-mid against good teams. The US even earned a draw against France in '18 with Wil Trapp playing d-mid in a 352.
I think it highlights the importance of a player like Adams. But at some point we will get to see how a non-Adams "specialist d-mid" does against a team better than us. I'm not aware of any data points on that questions.
Again the US, grinded out results against '18 France with Trapp in the single pivot '19 Chile with Bradley in the single pivot '17 Portugal with D.Williams in the single pivot '15 Germany with D. Williams in the single pivot '15 Holland with Beckerman in the single pivot '14 Portugal with Beckerman as the d-mid in a double pivot '14 Ghana with Beckerman in the single pivot What they have in common is that they mostly specialist d-mids.
Interesting data. I think in general against a superior team we will want to go with a "specialist d-mid"--even one not named Adams. I would note that Bradley is the antithesis of the "specialist d-mid." So at least one of your data points does not back up the argument We also "grinded out a result" with Bradley and Jermaine Jones against Germany in 2013. With respect to including Maloney in the Copa roster, I can see the argument. If Adams turns out to be not ready, I'd want him on the roster.
Bradley was a regista-style d-mid who also excelled box-to-box. But he wasn't specialist in the role. Let's just say he played plenty of d-mid.
trapp wasnt a true 6, nor was williams. i think the data is useful, but not entirely convincing. you could easily make the case that almost all of those teams had stronger back 4/keepers. so the biggest benefit there of a lone 6 was allowing another "attacker"/non-6 on the pitch (in any scenario you have to find a balance of team defense), with the current team i think covering the backline is the primary benefit. by a lot. thats what makes adams so incredibly important. musah or cardoso could play that position/role to a degree, but maloney is the only true, sitting on top of the backline 6. the compounding factor is our lack of passing/attacking in the other midfield options, so minus adams the safest/smartest play is 2 back. that puts a lot of pressure on our attackers, though- reyna in particular. that little something clicking in maliks head would certainly help that but i think 2 back either necessitates (very slightly) lesser players and/or limits what we are able to do at this point. i think our best adams-less, not-maloney defensive 2 would be cardoso and musah, but thats a huge loss of passing, even basic connecting passes. you can go with wes as one of the two, but that lessens his danger to a degree. if maloney isnt in play- which this roster suggests- i think committing to a 2 back/1 ahead right now is the best move. spending time on a set that relies on adams just doesnt seem like the best use of the little time we have.
Were basically at peak roster stability, at the moment. We have about 26ish players who are on the top level.. That will probably change over the next 2 years, as some young players start to challenge. But for the moment, choosing the roster is pretty easy.
Your initial response was so snappish. I responded in kind, and perhaps I shouldn't have. Maybe it's silly to harbor hope that he'll be healthy given his injury history, but I feel like there's a 50-50 chance that he can give us 60 minutes in two of the group stage games. His play frees up the team in so many ways that it's worth the risk to have him at all.
Snappish??? No one questions Adams's quality. The only point is the team should have additional depth at his position.
We have a few more years where more players will age in than age out (due to the lingering effects of the lost generation).
The Adams, McKennie, Pulisic group is only 25 y/o. 5-7 years more to go before we have a fully developed demography of the pool
They told Maloney to stay near a phone (never hear that anymore since cell phones but it still sounds cool) in case Adams isn't healthy during training or friendlies. Of course I'm speculating but he's the obvious one to bring in that doesn't disrupt the Olympic team.
That was one reason I wasn't as bothered by Berhalter coming back as I would have been with a usual national team. Next cycle we nee a new coach so there are no incumbent favorites. This time they were all still young and basically no one we'd all agree on wouldn't make the team.
The only player this cycle and last that a different coach likely would not have frozen out is John Brooks.
You're a tough man to persuade. I've only seen Maloney play a bit with Heidenheim - mostly I've followed him on his thread, match reports and occasional highlights. He's big and physical, and (all sources agree, apparently) he brings it - every time he plays. We could use that intensity. Just for example, our two upcoming friendlies might get a bit chippy, who knows, and we'll need this ... ... to calm things down, and make our opponents think twice about roughing up our guys.
OK. You've persuaded me. I'm actually a fan of Maloney's and have watched quite a few of his games with Heidenheim, a team that has grown on me.
I'd also argue that he's just in the midst of a disappointing season, like Weah. Musah's never quite reached what one had hoped for when he declared for us back in I guess it was summer '21, he's not developed an attacking game still in terms of generating assists and goals, and goal scoring opportunities, others could break it down better, but so far his strength has been carrying the ball and press resistance w/the ball between our D and the attack and runs towards the box. I can't remember how good he's been on the defensive end, but everything other than that press resistant ball carrying skill seems theoretical and like Weah, 2023-2024 in Italy seems like a largely below average experience so far. It happens. Hopefully he has a better season in '24-'25.