One thing that most unbiased fans should agree on is that replacing Shea, Williams, and Edu with Johnson, Bradley, and Buddle increased the attacking effectiveness. It also significantly decreased the defensive intensity and organization. I spent most of the second half thinking that it was going to be the Mexico game all over again and Slovenia was going to reel off 4 straight goals. That’s how bad we looked defensively. Klinsman likely should have brought on Edu sooner than he did but that is the real dilemma isn’t it? I think Klinsman understands and has struggled with this question and has to pick our poison. I think it is also clear why Klinsman talks about how well they play together. Beckerman and Edu are better than the sum of their individual parts.
This much is true. Apart from pre-injury Holden, I can't think of a single "one-size-fits-all" American CM/DM who should be favored over the others in every tactical situation. In most cases, one's better at this, but another's better at that.
Note that was 1 of a dozen or more flipcharts, each of which presents a specific scenario to the squad. Williams played the same way in the same formation for all 3 matches he started.
The difference is that both Bradley and Johnson seemed to have similar roles. They both got forward, they both came back to defend. Johnson was positioned much more conservatively than Shea had been in the previous games, while Bradley actually got forward, unlike Williams.
Slovenia is a team that is weakest where the USA is strongest: midfield. Bačinović, Vršič, Lazarević, Iličić are guys just gaining experience as A-team at this point, with a dozen or less caps yet. Their midfield is in transition, and that is what makes this Slovenian team a few notches weaker than the one seen last year. Koren and Komac, the leaders of their WC midfield, are gone, and Rado is getting phased out. Think of it as the situation of the USA in about four years, with Landon and Clint out and Jones being phased out. When the rival has its weakest line coinciding with your strongest, that's usually very good news for you. Their defense and attack still have the strength of the WC, the (few) replacements are equivalent in ability and experience. At any rate, it'd be dangerous for the USA to over-estimate this win. 3-2 was very much expected. It's the sort of result Bradley could have easily managed as well. It's a good sign, showing that at least things have not worsened significantly, and that it's likely the team is just as strong as it was a few months ago. Which makes qualifying out of the third round in CCAF basically a given. That cannot be bad.
You do the homework. You watch and review the games. You don't rant and rave. You make a lot of solid points. Why do you care if bigsoccer posters, emboldened by anonymity, disagree with you or want to argue with you? Nothing in soccer is ever as black and white as ANYONE tries to paint it. Keep posting your analysis in all forums. My two cents. The sequence is at 1:58. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkRgCGdfRzI"]MNT vs. Slovenia: Highlights - Nov. 15, 2011 - YouTube[/ame]
Susaeta, to add on a little, Mike does seem to anticipate that the next pass was going to go to his right (toward the sideline as that player was moving forward at a fast rate) and seems to make a move in that direction, possibly leaving the through ball lane a little more available than it should have (if using text book space occupying defense). But he had FOUR pretty easy pass options available to start that counter attack. Everyone seemed out of position due to a really poor turnover by Buddle and Dempsey's overcommitment to try to win it back immediately.
A breakdown/analysis* of the 1-1 Slovenian equalizer. https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dcqtsjq5_346fgwbcjgc&interval=30&autoStart=true * Independently done before reading Right Foot Planted, Susaeta and other contributions to this thread. (Since this has just as much to do with the Midfield as with the Defense, I'll post this in both threads.)
Exactly my thought. Although (Bradley) knowing this, he should've probably played it more to the outside (Buddle's weak foot) which would've forced Buddle to turn to the outside of the field where there was space, instead of forcing him into a situation where he might mess up. (This is at least how I play the ball to weak players on my team)
Let's be honest, MB is the best center-mid on the squad. Klinsy kept him on the sidelines for a month to make a statement about transition of coaching leadership. Whatever. At least the nepotism comments are finally silenced. MB is needed in the midfield. I also think he makes it possible to fulfill the dream everyone has. Putting our reliable goal scorers up top. Imagine this: [LINEUP-4-4-2]Dempsey, Donovan, Shea, Torres, Bradley, Johnson, D, D,D,D[/LINEUP-4-4-2]
I agree with this, BUT in a 1 v 1 (or even 1.5 v 1 in this specific situation) it is extremely hard to close down the space if you have no eyes in the back of your head. That's why Goodson (not Bocanegra) should be the one coaching Bradley to take one step to the left. Otherwise there's no way for Bradley to know where the danger lies. Watching it in slowmo though: the Slovenian on the ball makes a slight step to his left, which makes Bradley step to his right. Bradley's now on his right foot and out of balance, giving the Slovenian a small opening to play it deep. I would say that's a small 'mistake'.
Little bit of Bias here as I come from Real Salt Lake. I think yesterday's match was not Beckerman's best but disagree that his play was as bad as stated so often above. For me Beckerman, both at Real Salt Lake and with the National Team does seem to get lost after his first out-let pass . Too often it seems KB could be another option in moving the ball forward but does not receive another pass as the team moves forward in the attack. Thing is, his long attacking passes have shown to be very effective.
Given your hesitancy to speak of Bradley . . .what were your thoughts regarding Beckerman's performance yesterday in the four man midfield
Bradley did what he was supposed to do in this play. He helped to cut down the angle of play. It was other players (Beckerman, Chandler, Goodson) that fell asleep on this play.
I think that Beckerman looks great in MLS and would look good against a number of Concacaf teams but against more physical midfields, I think he gets bullied around way too much to be the DM.
Thought midfield was mixed bag. The positive aspect was that the team moved the ball more quickly and at times more fluidly. I'd attribute this to Shea and especially Williams being removed from the lineup. On the other hand the team midfield got broken too easily. Bradley isn't a strong defender; Beckerman is a deep-lying mid who needed to be more of a destroyer in the arrangement; and Johnson generally plays one of the wide positions in 4231 at club level. In 4312 the selection should have been: --johnson------jones ----------edu Johnson getting forward the most. Jones pinching in more. Edu acting as more of true holder. I also agree that Beckerman didn't have as bad of game as posters are claiming. He didn't really the tactics as much either.
All out of rep for SPA2TACU5 and his nice slide show. That sequence was one of at least two times Chandler was totally lost on a Slovenian possession, holding players onside AND allowing opponents to get goal-side of him. He's still a work in progress.
Very good analysis. My problem was the angle he did not shut down because he did not close down his mark. I am not talking about a Dempsey all-or-nothing lunge. I am talking about getting tight with your mark and forcing him wide. This is something you see good defenders do constantly. They steer the play away from the most dangerous spots on the field. Cutting out vertical passes after a turnover is the play I was taught to make, the play I teach other players to make on that play. You cannot do that if you cannot get tight with your mark. It is one subtle aspect of Michael's game that I think needs improvement. Certainly not a condemnation of the player overall.
I don't Beckerman was bad, he did not have the same level of defensive support that he has had in prior games. The central defense which had been rock solid in previous games suddenly looked disorganized and downright scary especially in the 2nd half. We replaced 3 very good defensive players with 3 more offensive-oriented ones and it showed. Johnson instead of Shea = defense downgrade Buddle instead of Edu = significant defense downgrade Bradley instead of Williams = defense downgrade. The key question is can we be successful with our existing back line with a single defensive presence in midfield and can that be Beckerman?
Wow, interesting work on the slideshows and video--especially with the fog. Well, he made 3 changes in the lineup, so I'm not sure much can be taken that way.