Howard's the only player I can think of who ever got meaningful minutes for a club of Chelsea's ambition. Not counting players who mostly got spare minutes as youth potential, Donovan honestly is probably the next closest one, and ironically that's mostly just because Klinsmann rated him higher than Bayern's management (or that of any other major club) would have. Outside of those two, our best players basically only got meaningful minutes for clubs a tier below that -- Schalke, Roma, Everton, Ajax, Tottenham, PSV, etc. (I'm not going to separate those clubs into further sub-tiers, but obviously people may have strong opinions about that as well).
And there's Kirovski who won the Champions with Dortmund and even managed to play about half an hour there.
Wasn’t Reyna Sr a regular (not a star, but in the lineup regularly) at City, but before City was a top tier club? So I guess he would be in that category. I don’t know what McBride’s numbers were, but he seemed to have a lock on the starting CF position at for them for a long while. He might not have been a star but their fans loved him.
There have been guys who were on the fringes of teams like Dortmund and Arsenal. There were guys that might have had the ceiling of a Chelsea or Bayern Munich but got hurt. But you are right, most of the best USMNT players in history topped out at clubs that make it into the Europa League in good years. Top clubs in lesser leagues were also very big for Americans in the early '00s, Rangers, Celtic, Anderlecht, PSV, etc. With the failure of 2018 so fresh, it is hard sometimes to see a serious change in where our players are now playing. McKennie has basically spent 3 seasons at a level that Bradley, Dempsey, CReyna, Beasley, etc topped out for their careers at. Adams is at a higher level. Reyna is at a higher level. Pulisic is at a higher level. Dest might be playing for a bigger club than all three of them soon. More are coming too.
When Claudio was there Man City was a mid-table club, at best. Sort of like Newcastle is now. They were #16, #8, #15, #14 in those years.
When Newcastle gets that infusion of Saudi money and starts winning titles in 5-10 years, some people are going to be very confused when they notice that Yedlin was a regular there for several years.
City was a yo-yo club at the time. Reyna playing at Rangers was more impressive in that era as there was more parity between leagues. Reyna also did well at Wolfsburg, which was a solid team in the Bundesliga. He basically had the same kind of career as many others that we are talking about. Part of the problem for these older players is they started pro older. Reyna and Dempsey went to college for four years. Dempsey might have peaked higher if he had followed Pulisic's or even Bradley's career path. Donovan had talent, which is another reason he is a lightning rod. His fans hate when you talk about his failure in Europe (his loans to Everton were very successful, just short). I think it was more mental than talent. He probably wouldn't have been as good as he was in California if he played in New York. He just liked to be home.
So I'm not as well-versed on how you specifically play a 3-4-3. Is it possible to play a 3-4-3 with two defensive midfielders if the striker can drop back some, or does that type of formation result in too much open space in the center of the field unless you play a diamond in the midfield? I ask this because given the strengths of this team, a tactically flexible coach could play a 3-4-3 or a 4-2-3-1 and maximize the strengths of this team. A 3-5-2 may not be out of the question, but that could produce some imbalance unless Pulisic could play the second striker with liberty to go wide to the left (I'm assuming Gio could play in the 10 behind the forwards). There are some issues with center backs right now, so I do think the best approach is to play McKennie and Adams in front of the center backs. McKennie could play a bit more forward, while Adams would be the more defensive of the two midfielders. Playing Dest and (take your pick) as wingbacks with three at the back may offset some of the defensive issues our center backs have. I do fully agree that, right now, Plan A is to put Pulisic in his best position and build around that. When you don't have the depth of a Belgium where you can move world-class players into various positions (see KDB playing a false 9 against Brazil in the 2018 World Cup), you have to maximize the talent of your best players.
Is your thinking that the defenders in a 3-4-3 would be 3 center backs? I don't think we have 2 good CBs, much less 3, so I'm not sure how that would work. With Robinson's ascent, our best talent fits perfectly in a 4-2-3-1. Dest/Robinson somewhat capable defensively, but bombing forward to support in the attack. McKennie and Adams perfect defensive counterbalance to those guys moving forward, as they can clog the middle and snuff out quick counters while the two outside backs get back in position defensively. This formation works perfectly against 90% of the teams we face, where we have better talent and need to break a bunkered team while being careful about quick counters. Maybe it's too offensive-minded against the teams better than us, but I'd still rather roll out our best players than sit Robinson so Tim Ream can get another cap.
Conventional 343s employ c-mids with box-to-box capabilities, whether or not one wants to label them as d-mids. Depending on skillset of the attackers, the formation can be deployed as 3:42:1, in which the wide-attackers play as wide a-mids. Alternatively, the formation can deployed as 3:4:3 with two wing-forwards. And, of course, you can mix and match. The tactics of Conte's Chelsea and Gasperini's Atalanta differ markedly, but they both use(ed) 343. The tactics and personnel determine how the formation is implemented.
I never had anything against Bob Bradley. To the contrary, I like watching LAFC play. But I fear that the “cult of Bob” is messing up our national team. It seems so obvious that these other formations suit our most talented players and provide the flexibility one needs in an international team setting where personnel change and time to drill is short. There used to be an expression, which is now probably politically incorrect — “He is more Catholic than the Pope.” I suppose “zeal of a convert“ is an equivalent of that expression. Coaching disciples adhere to the leader’s system far more rigidly than the leader ever would. Great coaches became great by innovating and adapting, even if they do have a central tendency toward a particular way of playing. I am following the assembly of the new Austin FC team, which involves a partnership between another disciple in the cult of Bob, Josh Wolff, and Claudio Reyna. I predict that eventually they will either clash, or Wolff will show more flexibility than GB has. After all, the objective is to win, not to vindicate a system.
That would be my assumption. I agree that 4-2-3-1 is the right formation to maximize the strengths of this team. I'm always in favor of at least having the ability of an alternative formation available, but I see your point about not having three (or even two) good center backs. My question about the 3-4-3 was whether having McKennie and Adams in front of the three center backs could allow Dest and Robinson to go forward more. However, if it's not the best alternative to maximize our talent, we don't have to see that.
Problem here is that you're adding a CB and taking away a better player in the front 3 or 4. With the 4-2-3-1, assuming health, you're getting Reyna/CP/Morris/Sargent on the field. I'm bullish on Sargent, but if you aren't, fine, stick Jozy in there... You have 3 CBs, Robinson/Dest as the outside mids, then your front 3 is what? Assume Sargent/Jozy and 2 of Reyna/CP/Morris. CP is a lock, so you're basically selecting a 3rd CB (let's go with Tim Ream, an avg/below avg Championship CB who Egg loves) in favor of Morris, our best player the last 12 months, or Reyna, starting/playing extensively for a top 10 in the world team.
4222, imo would be a good alternative formation to the 4231. We have two capable strikers in Morris and Sargent. Reyna and Pulisic are comfortable attacking on both the flanks and central areas. McKennie and Adams have the range to cover the flanks.
This is the reason I admire Bill Belichick as a coach. The man's only system is winning. I have jokingly said that I think he would be the best American soccer coach if we could convince him to take a few years to study. I think Greg Vanney has shown a lot of this at MLS level. 5-3-2 into MLS Cup 2016 4-4-2 diamond into MLS Cup 2017 after record setting season in 5-3-2 4-3-3 into MLS Cup 2019 He has swapped players, formations, integrated vets, kids and rode injuries. If you were going to hire an MLS coach, he seemed like the easy choice. My XI Jozy (CF) Pulisic (SS) Reyna (AM) Pomykal McKennie (twin 8s) Adams (DM) Robinson- Brooks- Robinson- Dest Turner
This makes a lot of sense. Don't get me wrong, I think the 4-2-3-1 is such an obvious choice of formation for this team. I see how Manchester United is playing right now, and I think that's how the USMNT would play at its best. It's not a total one for one, but having McKennie and Adams provide cover for the back line (with McKennie having some license to support attack more, playing into his box-to-box ability) is the right approach moving forward. While I think Sargent is the best option at the 9, playing a 4-2-3-1 would provide some flexibility for a healthy Jozy to be able to rotate some and also be able to be a better option late in games if we decide to play longer balls (whether to clear the lines when leading or to be more direct if behind). The 4-2-2-2 is an intriguing option, and I do think it would suit the team's strengths as well for the reasons @IndividualEleven mentioned. Of course, this would require a coach who is willing and able to be tactically flexible.
--------------------Sargent--- --------Morris------Pulisic----Reyna --------------McKennie--Adams---- --Jedi-------------------------------------Dest-- -------------Brooks-----Robinson--- ---------------------Steffen------ --------------Morris------Sargent--- -----------Pulisic---------------Reyna ------------McKennie------Adams---- --Jedi-------------------------------------Dest-- -------------Brooks-----Robinson--- ---------------------Steffen------
1. I'm not really sure why Robinson's ascent makes a 4-2-3-1 a perfect fit. He's an attacking left back; there's plenty of formations that can accommodate an attacking left back. And one might even argue with a 4-2-3-1, the basic set up actually pushes an attacker player wide, making a bombing left back a little crowded at times. Furthermore, we have no back-up attacking left back (except Dest, who is also our attacking right back), so if Robinson is not as good as people would like, or gets hurt, we're kind of screwed there. Bigger picture though, an overlapping, attacking left back, which Robinson would be, doesn't really apply to a 4-2-3-1 in the sense that it shifts thinking there. There are plenty of other formations that require that -- say a 3-4-2-1 or a 3-5-2. 2. I am a big fan of 4-2-3-1s, but who are you playing at the 10? Is it Reyna or Pulisic? If it's the former, I am also a big fan of Reyna, but let's not act like Berhalter is some idiot for not running a system with a straight 10 when he hasn't even called in Reyna. Or for not doing so forward when you'd basically be putting everything on a 17 year old when you don't have to. Is Pulisic the back up? Is it really ideal to run a straight 10 out there? I know people REALLY want the double pivot with Adams and McKennie and I can see how that fits them really well, and I can see how Reyna could slot right in... but let's not pretend we have a backup to him and let's not pretend that's a lot to put on a 17 year old. 3. I think I get the Bob Bradley connection to the 4-3-3 (though not what Bradley usually ran out there with the USMNT, right?) but the harping on a 4-2-3-1 versus a 4-3-3 is exactly what coaches get absolutely exasperated about. The formations are slight differences from each other, and really a 4-2-3-1 is just a specific version of one of several major ways (and a million minor ways) you can run a 4-3-3. Berhalter's effectively run a version of a 4-2-3-1 with an overlapping FB against better teams as we've pulled back the right-sided 8 to come back with the 6 against Mexico and some other, tougher teams. Actual play is fluid, and not nearly so didactic and numbers in a line. 4. When you have almost no left backs, virtually no wide midfielders (not forward/wingers), depth of mediocrity at cb, questionable strikers, and a 17 year old 10 with no real backup that you'd want to run your offense through ... I don't know that there's an ideal formation or system. We don't click into a 4-2-3-1 because of the above. It's not a bad setup, but it's got some pretty big question marks. We don't click into a 3-4-2-1 because of questionable CBs, questionable LB/LM. But that system puts Pulisic and Reyna into very familiar spots in the half spaces (especially Reyna, who plays this at Dortmund) and allows for a lot of room for Dest to attack Hakimi-style. And it would be a good use of McKennie and Adams. But LCB and LM are ???. We don't click into a two striker system easily because we have no depth in striker and that which we have is a whole bunch of people who want to play the support role and Gyazi Zardes. In a 3-5-2, you have the LCB and LM issues; in a 4-2-2-2 I'm curious what personnel we have where -- generally the second line of 2s provides width offensively and defensively but I think it'd be insane to put our wingers there as we're really running out a very offensive lineup. Berhalter has been running a 4-3-3 that offensively comes out to a 3-2-2-3 most of the time, but also has been a more traditional 4-3-3 at other times with varying levels of fullback involvement. It's got it's plusses and minuses as well. When he runs out Ream as a LB/CB, then you've got 3 CBs out there, two of which are eh. On the other hand, if Dest is running out at RB, you've likely got the RW (Reyna?) swinging in and joining McKennie forward at times, with Adams back in a pairing with Yeuill. So that actually plays into a structure that's not all that different than a 4-2-3-1 with a bombing fullback on the right. I get it. People don't want Yeuill and they really don't want Bradley. But we don't actually have the personnel that's perfect for any system. Or really even close. It's all trade-offs. I don't actually view it as a bad thing - I mean, the lack of quality depth is bad, but it's just a thing; not surprising. There needs to be some flexibility. But I find it kind of hilarious the railing against a 4-3-3 but the ideal is a 4-2-3-1. That's just one form of a 4-3-3.
That 4-2-2-2 is a soft, soft team. I could see it doing pretty well against bad teams, but the defense on that team is not something I'd want against anyone good. I was formerly a big fan of Pulisic at the 10. Seeing what he's doing at Chelsea right now ... I think I want him at the wing.
Pulisic has an incredible record at the 10 with US. wide attacking mids in 4231 can play narrow. backup to Robinson would be one of Vines, Cannon, or Dest. Strikers would be Morris, Sargent, Zardes, and Altidore. That's solid depth for Concacaf Zardes has a strong record under Berhalter.
It's not that Robinson is the key to making a 4-2-3-1, it's the fact our best talent is set up for it, and he fits in nicely. CP loves to be on the left and cut inside. And with Chelsea recently, I've noticed that he is coming inside more to find the ball (rather than standing on the sideline waiting for it, like he would usually do at Dortmund). If he's cheating inside a bit, Robinson fits in perfectly providing additional width. Reyna is a surefire starter right now. If he is injured or the illustrious CONCACAF Hex/Octa/whatever proves too much for him, then we could easily drop Lletget or Pomykal in there (and then bam, you have your 4-3-3). Or CP as well, with Uly on the wing. It doesn't really matter, tbh, as long as we're not sticking a midfielder BEHIND our two best defensive midfielders.
I don't love having that second line of 2s being so very offensive minded. And add in two fullbacks who are known a bit for getting caught upfield and I think it's great against cupcakes and soft otherwise.
The empty bucket evolved under Bradley evolved into the 4-2-2-2 for awhile and it was fun in attack but a bit vulnerable.
Gotcha on Robinson. I just think that's true for a whole bunch of formations. It's not like Pulisic can't cut inside with what Berhalter is running. I think Reyna is the real deal, but I am a bit wary of running too much offense through him rather than letting him play within the flow of the game. Whether it's him or the other players you mention, I don't think we should put the offensive focus on him yet -- he will seize it at some point, but I think he'll do better letting the game come to him. 4-2-3-1s tend to ask a ton of that CAM. I suppose you could design it to relieve some of that pressure, but you are likely doing things that get closer to other formations. Like I said, I'm not opposed to a 4-2-3-1. I'm not sure it makes a TON of difference, though, because you're still going to end up in a lot of situations that look a lot like what Berhalter is running. If you think through, even in the scenario you are talking ... Pulisic comes central, Robinson bombs up the left, where does Reyna go? Morris, Dest? It's not all that unlike, depending on what Dest does, creating a 3-2-2-3 like Berhalter has tried when he's brought in the RW but just on the left side. Or if you get really attacking, a 2-2-3-3.