*Let's ignore Donovan and Dempsey for the purposes of this discussion, and Michael Bradley for that matter. They are givens in any line-up* One thing that has intrigued me is how Coach Bradley has managed his midfield personnel through our 3 matches thus far. Going into the World Cup, I was fairly convinced that he had set on a few guys to complement Donovan/Dempsey/Bradley. My assumption was that Clark would be the mainstay partner in central midfield with Bradley. Feilhaber would be the 2nd half CM sub when we needed a goal, and Holden would be the 2nd half substitute on the wing when Dempsey needed a rest or when we subbed out a striker. But my pre-World Cup assumptions have not really played out as I expected, and I haven't been able to figure out Bradley's strategy around using his midfield personnel. In the England game: Holden came on, but it wasn't until the 86th minute. At this poin, I felt confident in my assumption that Holden had beat out DaMarcus Beasley and even Benny Feilhaber for the substitute spot on the wing. Feilhaber did not come on at all against England in CM, which wasn't all that surprising given that Bob wanted to stay defensive and play for the tie. Versus Slovenia: Torres started in place of Clark. While Torres had played well in the pre-match friendlies, I was still surprised that Bob selected him ahead of Feilhaber, who I have always thought possessed more of Bob's trust than has Torres. Bob then substituted Torres at halftime (along with Robbie Findley) for Maurice Edu and Feilhaber. Again, two mild surprises that bucked my previous assumptions: Feilhaber was now selected as the primary sub on the wing, ahead of and in place of Holden Edu now favored to Clark (which I think makes sense because Edu arguably offers more going forward, but I didn't think Bob rated Edu as highly as Clark) Against Algeria: This time, Bob starts Edu alongside Michael Bradley in central midfield, which I've now accepted as the choice ahead of Clark because of Edu's greater contributions in the attack. Feilhaber comes on at halftime essentially on the wing (pinched) in place of Gomez, with Dempsey pushing up, again bucking my assumption that Holden had been the preferred sub on the wing. In the 80th minute, with the US bordering on desperation, Bob brings on DaMarcus Beasley, granted playing mostly at left back. No Holden. I'm definitely not criticizing any of Bob's player selections in midfield because I think they have largely been good. I am mostly wondering what Bob's strategy is with how he uses each of his 9 midfield players and when. Going into the World Cup, who would have expected that all 9 of our midfield players on the roster would see the field during the Group Stage? I certainly didn't expect that. Throughout the last half of the Confed Cup and the final stages of qualification in 2009, I thought Bob became very formulaic with his midfield subs. We always brought on Feilhaber in central midfield to provide creativity and calmness on the ball in the 2nd half when needed, and we always brought on Holden on the wing (often in place of a striker) to assist with possession and relieve Dempsey from defensive duties. Things have been different in the World Cup, however. We've been throwing in lots of different midfield players in different situations, and don't seem to have much clarity as to the pecking order or depth chart behind Donovan, Dempsey and Bradley. Maybe that's how Bob wanted it - to have a bunch of different cards he can throw into the game depending on the situation: Clark as the CM partner when we are overmatched and need frantic defending to play for a draw. Feilhaber when we need creativity from the midfield Torres: a like-for-like with Feilhaber in terms of his role on the team? Edu as a more balanced alternative to Clark in central midfield Beasley: Essentially as an attacking left back to throw in if we are down a goal late? Holden: with only one 5 minute appearance late against England, it's hard to say at this point...perhaps eventually a like-for-like replacement for Dempsey on the wing as we progress deeper in the tournament and fatigue becomes a factor? How does everyone think Bob views our various midfield personnel and their roles on the team? Has anyone else been surprised that we have already used all 9 midfield players on the roster, through 3 games?
Holden is a possession and crossing player. If Bob feels we have an advantage in the box and have guys who can finish in the air, he brings him in. If he thinks we need to play through the middle more with possession, he brings in Benny. Edu and Torres act as dmid and holding mids while MB is essentially given a free role. Personally? I don't think Torres ever plays for RObobob again. Beezer, in my eyes, still has the biggest role to play. His speed and defensive tenacity cannot be duplicated on our squad. At some point, maybe Ghana or if we are lucky, SK or Uruguay is going to feel his speed.
I think Feilhaber played well in his opportunities and that is why he is ahead of Holden. I don't think it was necessarily a plan, just that Bradley has liked what he has seen from Feilhaber (expect him to start against Ghana). Doesn't mean we won't see Holden if Feilhaber doesn't continue to play strong or in a different situation.
Interesting thoughts. I'll add mine. Specific individuals, but the assessment is related to the later tactical discussion: Torres - He just isn't quite ready yet for the speed and intensity. Bradley made a major mistake in thinking Slovenia would be a 'chess match', and hung Torres out to dry while almost costing the US the chance to advance. Tough to see a role for Torres going forward, given the bracket. Feilhaber - 3-4 choice AM, 3-4 choice CM, which is important. The Confederations Cup experience is crucial, Bradley knows he can trust him in the middle at this level. Holden - He's hurt here by timing. He's a good player, but untested at the speed and intensity of a major tournament. Frankly, I think his use against England was more to get his feet wet that any real tactical intent. It's going to take injuries or cards for him to see much time, given the remaining bracket. Edu - Good deep center mid, decent in the attack, prone to soft passes in bad spots, decent CB which is critical. A real shame he missed the Confederations Cup. Clark - Good deep center mid, quick, fairly fast, occasionally over commits in the attack, so-so passer. Tactical use: The biggest mistake from Bradley, in my opinion, was the first half of the Slovenia game. He set it up to be a 'chess match' and it wasn't. It was a high pressure counter. The biggest strength, in my mind, was understanding what he had available to him, and using their unique abilities. He did not lose site of the fact that scoring a goal isn't the final destination, just one step along the way to a needed result. The Edu-for-Torres and Feilhaber-for-Findley subs, instead of Clark-for-Torres and/or Holden-for-Findley, at half time of the Slovenia game set up the option of the Gomez-for-Onyewu sub. It allowed Bradley to get another attacker on the field to increase the chance of a goal, with the obvious risks of giving one up due to reduced defensive cover. But it also allowed Bradley the option of switching back into a decent 4-4-2 should that needed goal be scored. Which is exactly what happened. Edu drops to CB, Feilhaber switches to deep CM, Dempsey drops back to AM, and you have regained a nice defensive shape to hold the gains made by that second goal. Against Algeria, in a must score, must win game scenario, at the end of the game the US had five players on the field who had played forward at the professional level, with the weakest league represented being Buddle's MLS. Once again letting Bradley get an incredible amount of attacking talent out on the field with the option to drop back into a conventional 4-4-2 should the goal come.
In this WC? It's a possibility. We don't have any midfielders sitting on a yellow except Beasley and our central midfield is deep and playing well. Torres had a chance and didn't do much with it. Maybe he'll get another one, but Bob can't afford to fool around if Torres is looking shaky in training. There's no "view to the future" here, it's put up or shut up. Long-term, Torres isn't going anywhere. He's the second-youngest player in the squad and I wouldn't at all be surprised if he blows past Benny in the 2014 cycle.
Holden also could be in line to start on Saturday if we decide to push Dempsey up top in an effort to get more fresh legs on the field and defend better on the wings against Ghana's pace. I suspect we'll see Findley (or Buddle) pair with Jozy up top, but it's not crazy to think with Ghana's outside pace that this is a spot for Stuart. I also have a sneaking suspicion we'll see Clark back in the central midfield for some rested legs and some steel as we try to reinforce our tiring back four and rope Ghana into a classic suckerpunch. As a longtime Bob critic, especially in the way he manages his roster and substitutions, I will go on record as saying I strongly approve of his moves in this World Cup (with the exception of waiting so long to bring Holden on against England when we were clearly gassed). In the last two games, he has been creative and unpredictable. Heck, I actually thought he pulled the ripcord on Edu too *early* yesterday. We spent the last 30 mins of that game with no defensive midfielder *AND* two dedicated strikers. I never thought I would wonder if Bob was being too aggressive. Who knew? (Side note: Our back four deserve an outrageous amount of credit for yesterday's win. They kept everything tight and allowed us to attack relentlessly with six very attacking players in the final third of that game.)
I think Bradley has done a good job in this regard. He realized that you don't bring 20 field players unless you're willing to use 20 field players (not that you must use them but that you must be willing to use them as circumstances require). I think he and his staff have always shown an incomprehensible (to me) preference for Ricardo Clark but realized how much a liability he could be after the England game. This shows he's not letting stubborness and ego get in the way of cold analysis.
Bob Bradley has done a very good job in managing his midfield over the course of the 3 games. In addition to finding the right combinations at the right times...more or less...he's basically given everyone the opportunity to see the field which should help lessen some of the nerves/nervousness that might otherwise prevail. With particular respect to Torres, he's just been the scapegoat du jour for that 1st half against Slovenia. Re-watch that 1st half, and tell me in all honesty that Michael Bradley, Clint Dempsey and Landon played better. They didn't. It's just because he was the only change from the England game that everybody focused their ire on him. That said, he may yet have a role to play here in this tournament. I can see his possession abilities being highly valued in a situation where the U.S. is protecting a 2nd half lead, particularly against a South American or Asian side...think Uruguay or South Korea...in the quarterfinals.
JFT plays well against a tiring Latin or Middle Eastern side. The Koreans are as fit as the US and would be as bad a matchup against JFT as a European team. In any case, unlike the OP, BB obviously gameplans according to the strengths and weaknesses of the opponent, so different midfielders will play depending on the opponent, game situation, and Gooch's fitness (because you have to plan for sliding Edu to CB or Boca to CB and Bornstein/Spector/Beasley to LB).
I don't really think Torres is being used as a like-for-like with Feilhaber. In my opinion the reason he was removed from the Slovenia game was not because he wasn't doing what was expected of him; I'd wager, as others have speculated, that Slovenia's gameplan wasn't what we were expecting. Listening to the coaching staff before the game, it was pretty clear to me that we expected Slovenia to sit back and absorb a lot of pressure, and we expected the game to be played at a much slower pace. If things had gone according to plan, Torres would have been a deep lying play-maker circulating the ball around the field as we attempted to break down Slovenia's defense. Instead, Slovenia came out with high intensity and put us under a lot of pressure early, and Torres' play wasn't quick or aggressive enough to be of much use in that situation.
I agree Torres didn't play extremely well in his half of play. I was happy to see him in the line-up, because I believe he can add a lot to our team. I thought it was a good seletion by Bob. To be fair, however, he was deployed wrong. For much of the first half, he played either behind or beside of Michael. Bob should have flipped them and let Torres play in front of Mike. For some reason that I have yet to figure out, Mike's style of play (at least with the Nats) adapts to the person he's playing beside...but not in the way you would like. With Benny or Torres, he often abandons his defensive responsibilities in favor of attacking runs out of the midfield and high pressure. When he plays beside of Clark, he often drops deep and adopts more of a defensive position.
We continue to have difficulty finding the right complement to Mike inside. Torres, despite his skill, doesn't seem to work with MB because Jose needs a true d-mid like Clark. This is going to hurt Torres' pt for the national team maybe throughout his entire career given how close he and Mike are in age. Edu has looked like the best option to pair with MB. I was surprised how much Edu got forward against Algeria, but I suspect that had a lot to do with the space they were conceding in midfield. I expect him to play more defensively against Ghana. An earlier poster sees Beasley as an offensive sub at left back, which is true. I think Beasley might also be used as a defensive sub on the wing if we have a lead and Dempsey or Donovan is injured/tired/on a yellow.
Why is this necessarily the case? Even assuming the first part, Dempsey and Donovan are significantly older than Torres, so it's not hard to imagine a midfield with Torres, Bradley, and a more defensive MF in it as well.
A seemingly subtle change I think had huge ramifications on this team: Donovan and Dempsey switching flanks. Ever since the 3-assist revelation against T&T at home, Donovan played mostly on the left. Throughout the Confed Cup, he played mostly on the left while Dempsey and Spector manned the right. Against England, Donovan and Dempsey were pretty fluid, but from the second half of Slovenia on, Donovan's clearly been a right mid. As such, if Donovan holds down the right, that means Dempsey is on the right. However, when Dempsey moves up top, we opt for a replacement on the left instead of moving Donovan back over. I think this is where Feilhaber became the first mid off the bench, as our options on the left are: - Dempsey - Feilhaber pinched in - Beasley - Holden as an inside-out winger - Torres pinched in - Bornstein pushed up (Incredible to think we had a *surplus* of left mids in 2006 ) I still don't love Feilhaber in this role - he plays a very narrow left mid, and I feel much more comfortable when he is in the middle - but he's the best of the options. Given how well Donovan is playing at right mid and that Holden (I'm guessing) isn't 90-minute fit, I can see why we don't shift Donovan back over.
I think your are right about the RM situation. Donovan has thrived in that role, and Donovan ain't coming out. So, when Dempsey moves up top, a LM will come in, which is Feilhaber or Beasley rather than Holden. In the England game BB still used Donovan on the left, which allowed Holden to enter the game. But Donovan has stayed on the right the next 2 games. *********** As to the opening post and the CM's... Is it possible that BB game-planned the Group games for Clark vs England, Torres vs Slovenia, and Edu vs Algeria all along? 1) Clark's prior experience vs England (2008) and the high likelyhood of the US conceeding significant possession made him a logical CM/DM vs England. 2) Slovenia's defensive, counter-punching style was known through qualifying. Torres may have always been the presumed starter for a game in which the US expected to face a bunker and didn't need a DM. 3) Algeria's speed was a known factor, and Edu covers a lot of ground, while adding more to the attack than Clark. The CM selections after the England match might also have been more hap-hazard and/or based on training form, but BB is a highly thorough planner and film-studier, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if the three CM's were planned for each match ahead of time. BB clearly has plotted out scenarios in which a 3-man back line might be needed in order to get more attackers into the game. His use of Edu and Beasley and the shifting/adjusting between 4 and 3 backs was logical and useful -- and given BB's personality these were surely planned personnel moves for specific situations.
Clark is the Second best defensive minded midfielder in the pool. The first being Jermaine Jones who is not able to play. Honestly, people hate Clark for little reason and love Edu because he played in Europe before. Edu offers an attacking edge but defends like a central defender. he is not static like Clark. I hope Edu starts against Ghana due to the speed, but enough with the Clark beatdown. CM Defensive rankings 1)Jones 2)Clark 3)Bradley 4)Edu 5)Feilhaber 6)Kljestan 7)Torres
Took nine posts for the obvious answer to the question-- Bob is playing match-ups. We have nine midfielders with nine different sets of strengths and weaknesses. Outside of Landon, Dempsey and Mikey, none of the other 6 have a clear claim to being that much better than each other. So we play match-ups. That's just plain good coaching. I've not always been the biggest fan of Bob Bradley and I'm still not, but you have to give credit where credit is due. Just like with Bruce in 2002, Bob has made some bold decisions and they have (mostly) paid off. That's a coach earning his pay.
Ah, so that's why my international managerial career was so short-lived! In all seriousness, this is a good point, rtung, one that cpwilson80, Mr. Martin and FirstStar have all insightfully touched upon as well.