This is my one real knock on Cooper. If he played the ball quicker, he'd have a much bigger role on this squad IMO, and if he learns to do that at the speed of the international game, then I think he will (or at least should) be on the 23 as a legitimate option.
Paraguay disagrees. http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/prelim...tches/round=250491/match=300035293/index.html
In all fairness, that was a home qualifer for Paraguay. And given that Brazil is well on its way to qualification, not one that was a must win (as opposed to a tournament final).
A lot of people are suggesting that the 4-4-2 (KISS, I guess?) has emerged as our first choice tactical set-up. For me this tournament proved that we still have no good system for including our most-skilled players - and it is that subset of players that need to be on the field at the same time in order for us to develop a possession game. (And I think at this point there is widespread consensus that not having a possession game of any kind is what will keep us from seriously threatening the big teams in '10.) When I look at the player pool, and I consider the individual technique offered by each available midfielder or forward, I would want the following 6 guys on the field at the same time: Landon Donovan Freddy Adu Michael Bradley Benny Feilhaber Jozy Altidore "The sixth man" - a pick I would have a lot of trouble with The obvious omission here, is Clint Dempsey, a player with EPL credentials. How can I possibly not include him here? For me Dempsey is very fortunate to be receiving big accolades after this tournament - the reality is that outside of a lucky goal here, and a poached goal there, he didn't really prove his worth at all. Now some may argue that he's tired and I'm being unfair - that's fine I can accept that. He may be tired and generally deserving of his spot, but if I'm fielding a team right now and if I had to pick between having Dempsey on the field and having Bradley, Feilhaber, and Adu on the field at the same time - I would always pick the latter. (And there are numerous other options that would give me great pause in considering the value of Dempsey as a starter.) Thus for that "sixth man" pick, I would consider the following options: Clint Dempsey Jose Torres Ricardo Clark Maurice Edu Yes I'm ignoring Brian Ching (who is technically deficient to me and offers very little that Jozy doesn't offer with considerably less skill - again in this exercise workrate is not something that will win me over.) There are obviously other considerations when picking a team besides just the so-called "raw skill" of the players, but if we want to improve the technical ability of this team, we need to start placing emphasis on using our most-skilled players consistently. So to recap, after a 4 man back line, there are 6 midfield/forward spots available for the following players: Donovan, Adu, Bradley, Feilhaber, Altidore, Dempsey, Torres, Clark, Edu. In that list there's 1 forward, and NO wingers. Donovan and Dempsey have been playing as wingers only in the symbolic sense - in reality Donovan flies all over the place and is rarely beating guys down the byline and delivering crosses from wide positions, while Dempsey basically "defends" (term used VERY loosely) wide and pinches inward to attack. More often than not in a 4-4-2 there is great emphasis on play directed down the flanks, and towards the corner, but our best players do not give us that dimension in our attack - they are naturally best utilized towards the middle of the field. I feel like right now we are settling for an incomplete sort of 4-4-2 - where the attack ends up centrally based, and keeps us one dimensional. I think to go forward, we must seriously reconsider the 5 man midfield, and we must develop a more sophisticated set of roles for those midfielders. The introduction of Jermaine Jones might just further stress this issue as well. edit - I want to clarify a point about Jozy. I include him because he's got the potential to be that rare blend of physical power and technique, and already he's a real difficult mark. But realistically I could easily see putting Charlie Davies there instead, based on the opponent and form, or even Ching if the midfield has guys like Donovan and Adu in it at the same time. Basically I don't feel like we should have two forwards given the talent available at the midfield but I could see reasons for including any one of those three as a single forward, with support coming from a combination of donovan, adu, bradley, feilhaber, or dempsey.
The initial problem is that you are including Adu as one of your "five" and leaving Dempsey as an option for your 6th. That makes no sense. Look I hate how Dempsey looked in the first 2.5 games as much as anyone, but it is literally impossible to make any argument that Clint isn't one of our best two offensive options. There may be matches where he is down... but your best chances are going to be with he and Landon on the field. End of story. That being said, while I am definitely not a fan of the lone forward style of play (4-5-1's make me sick), I think the US can just as easily employ a 4-3-3. Our 4-4-2 currently plays very skinny right now with both Landon and Clint as likely to be found inside or turn to the inside as anyone. Instead of playing: davies-altidore donovan - jones/feilhabber-bradley-dempsey you could simply play: X-altidore-Y Donovan Bradley-Jones X and Y could then be Davies/Adu, Dempsey/Adu or Dempsey/Davies. Frankly with the ability of Donovan and Dempsey to play anywhere on the field, the only way this lineip would really play any differently than our 4-4-2 would be that Donovan who was prodigious in tracking back defensively on the wing in our 4-4-2 might play out a bit differently.
Excellent response - I agree with most everything you said. And I realize that framing my argument around the 4-5-1 is the wrong move, actually. I just want to get away from this idea of fitting our players into a 4-4-2 that doesn't actually suit the talent available. 4-3-3 is definitely an intriguing idea considering the speed of Davies and Donovan - also intriguing in that it lets Dempsey play a natural forward kind of role, as you have pointed out.
I agree, I continue to think that Dempsey's best position is *probably* in a withdrawn forward role that pushes him closer to goal.
The biggest lesson I took from this tournament is that it's possible to claw your way out of a group of death, even after a very slow start, and that anything can happen once you do. (In fact, it really made me wonder what might have been had we been able to beat Ghana in 2006 despite our horrid start against the Czechs and somewhat hard luck result against Italy. Alas...) Incidentally, I think it's an over-reaction to say that our players need to stay on their feet. We have to continue to slide tackle, we just have to cut out the red cardable varieties, particularly studs up and/or late slides. It should be clear by now that any borderline red cardable slide by a US player is likely to draw a straight red. But clean slides are fine. (For example, Benny's slide in the middle third of the field in the early going against Brazil was sublime.)
Correct. It worked against Spain, a smaller side that likes to go up the gut. Against Brazil, a team with size and attacking flexibility, Boca outside creates problems for us.
yeah, those lucky 'goals' here or there are seriously overrated. anyone can score against egypt and spain and brazil. i mean, so many players have done that. Just like those two he got passed Chelsea that essentially sacked Scolari. No Biggie.
If there are three tiers of players that have scored against Spain and Brazil in consecutive games, then Dempsey is in the fourth tier. Sincerely, JoeColeIsSoHot1989
Not to mention the excellent assist to Jozy for the first goal on Spain. I don't hear much about Spector's offensive contributions either. Guy was our very own Dani Alves with the moves, passing and crossing. It seems like half the fans here don't really care about offense, just running.
Only knock on spector is that he gets beat to the edge by quick players and allows them to cut him inside pretty easily as well. He did find his touch though. I would rotate him and Wynn (for speed, Wynn would have scared spain/brazil senseless with his runs) and possibly Simek if he comes alive again. 'Dolo for me is probably a great locker room guy, but a liability at times.
IMO Wynne is a serious downgrade at this point in his career. He has speed to burn, but his touch and crossing are leagues behind Spector (as is pretty much the entire USMNT pool at fullback). And additionally Wynne was even a defensive liability against CR. Simek also doesn't offer the same sort of offensive capabilities as Spector, though he's better defensively. Spector needs to work on not being turned so easily, and on defending headers. These are the two major reasons I think he isn't a regular at West Ham (Hammerette correct me if I'm wrong).
To be fair to Spector (not that that means a whole lot when we are trying to field the best team possible for SA2010), he was an attacking player until only a few years ago, when he went to ManU, and they converted him to a central defender, and now for the last few years he's been asked to play out wide, at least at times for West Ham (and sometimes centrally) and now for the Nats. It's a testament to JS that he's likely at this point our best option at right back, a position that likely 3 or 4 years ago he had never played. That also isn't saying a whole lot about our options at RB, but that's been beaten to death on these boards.
Wynne really has no business being in the player pool honestly. Speed can only get you so far when you have zero skills with the ball at your feet.
I'm not debating your central premise, i.e., that Spector hasn't been playing defense for very long, but he was converted to defense in 2003 at the age of 17. That's six years now. Most of that time he has been playing as an outside back, though he has seen a decent amount of time at CD and even a little as a DMid.
Right about an attacking player being converted to a defender, wrong about the rest. * It was the U-17 program at Bradenton, not ManU, that converted Spector to defense. * He was converted to a wide defender rather than a central defender, and despite continued assertions from some U.S. fans that his best position in defense is central[1], he's rarely if ever been used there by his clubs (his minutes at ManU were wide, his defense minutes at West Ham have been almost exclusively wide, not 100% sure about Charlton). [1] I find this disconnect a little odd, because in general the people who are doing the asserting are people who usually have well-reasoned opinions. It may just be a function of relative depth at central defender and lack of depth wide that leads to his usage for both club and country.
This isn't really true. He was playing defense to fill in for an injury and a ManU scout saw him and recommended signing him based on his defensive instincts. ManU converted him.