We already get most of our width on the left from Jedi bombing forward while Pulisic drops deeper and cuts inside so really not much changes on that side in practical terms. The only place I see any less wing play would be on the right with the McKennie for Weah swap since Dest is more prone to cutting inside. And honestly, with so little aerial ability in the striker position I'm not sure get down the wing to cross is really all that important anyway and McKennie at Juve has generated a lot of attacks down the right and he can absolutely arrive late to get on the end of crosses from the left as well. Personally, I'll take the defensive improvement and increased ability to play with a better passer centrally over more direct wing play on the right, but any setup involves tradeoffs and this does sacrifice those direct attacking wingers that we have exactly one of (Weah). I think even when you figure for depth, not having a solo 6 that can go down and make the whole thing fall apart is a big bonus as I'd be much more comfortable with Acosta subbing in with a partner rather than taking over all the responsibilities deep and getting guys like Reyna and Aaronson into the position they're best at is an upgrade and provides depth at that key position. Then, you've already got Weah backing up McKennie and you need only decide who is the backup left sided guy and even there you can play a variety of guys with the wing play mostly taken by Jedi.
Well, yes, that's what I'm talking about. Pulisic cutting inside, McKennie cutting inside, Dest Cutting inside, Reyna pushing forward all into a very small space. It's not just crosses. A lot of what Weah and Arriola brought starting in the October and November windows wasn't just about the run to the endline, it's about forcing the defense to extend towards the corner. Particularly if you can engage the centerback at times, it pulls the defense apart. Even if it is just the LB, it creates space and a one on one situation. If there's no concern about that, then the defense can contract and cut off all the spaces a Pulisic or Reyna could play into. McKennie's great at arriving late and great at making runs in the box when arriving from CM. I don't know how good he is when he's expected to be in that place, when he's effectively playing RW. What defensive formation are you playing out of this? Is McKennie playing a 4231 RW or are you dropping into something else? I think if we want to play Reyna in the middle, we play him there; I don't think we need to play McKennie at RW to do that. We still have Weah and Aaronson, both of whom would give us more width. I think the McKennie decision at RW can be evaluated a bit more on it's own. I'm not necessarily against it -- Weston brings some unique things. But, in general, I think it's a mistake to abandon key elements of shape for personnel choices .. especially when neither Weah nor Aaronson are poor players. If we want to play a really narrow offensive setup and counter-attack -- which is really where narrow offenses do well as once a defense is set narrow offenses are a bit rough -- I'm not sure McKennie as a RW makes as much sense as Weah or Aaronson ... ... Unless maybe he floats back? Functions more like a midfielder, kind of like Blaise Matuidi did at LW for France in 2018? Then you want an assymetric attack -- the striker should come over and Pulisic push up almost in a two striker system? I could see ---------------------CF (Weah/Morris Type------ ----------Pulisic------------------------ Jedi---------------Reyna-----------------Dest --------------------------------McKennie --------------Musah---------Adams-------------- That being more what it looked like in attack. There's so little difference between a 433 and a 4231. We've played a decent chunk of the latter in terms of pulling a CM back; I think Berhalter has shown that he'll adjust at this level both for offensive and defensive reasons. Honestly, I don't even really view them as different formations; it's at the instruction level. We're never going to play a midfield as rigid as the writing / talking about formations suggest. I think it is simply trade-offs. I don't actually think we need to pull someone back with Adams to put a more offensive player in the second 8 slot, for example. Those are two discrete decisions. I think we've seen with Aaronson that while it has sometimes generated offense, it has also struggled a couple of times, and his tendency to press high creates a lot of space in the midfield. Dropping a guy back doesn't really stop that -- it's much easier to get through us if we press four high. For all the success of the Morocco match, we've twice tried it against El Salvador and haven't scored. I'd like to see us continue and see Reyna there as well, but I would not act like it is a slam dunk that is going to outperform MMA. I think it is far more likely a game by game decision. We have enough talent in this space that I think we should be looking to fill out a lineup based on skillset need if everyone is healthy. I do think there's some leadership/man management here that needs to be incorporated as well (it'd be hard to move McKennie or Pulisic to the bench). Across Pulisic, Weah, McKennie, Adams, Musah, Reyna and Aaronson, I don't think there's that much of a drop off where the differing skillsets can't play a role. It's 7 quality players for 5 spots. That's if healthy. That's actually kind of ideal in terms of bringing in subs, rotating for 3 games in 8 days, allowing for knocks, etc. I actually think there's a lot of value, especially at winger, in this depth. But if you need to force more of them on the field ... I suppose there's a situation where one of these guys could play a wingback in a 352 or something, but I feel it is likely a stretch for most of them. Given that, the practical option to cram more of these guys onto the field is to switch to some kind of 442 or 4222 with two of them at striker. I'm sure there's other formations we could use (361 anyone?) but pragmatically, this is pretty much it. I think this would be a very nice pressing/counter-attacking formation. Go with Weah and Pulisic at striker and it follows from there. Of course, a lot of these start to fall apart a little more quickly if someone if hurt or needs to be rotated. But that said, as a core strategy, it's less adaptable than a 433, and our overall depth is reduced a bit, I think. It's less versatile in how you score, etc., though I suppose you could rejigger it in the attack.
Would love to see this lineup. I know we probably won’t start with it, but if we are hunting a goal late in the game I’d love to see it—you sub out Adams and sub in whomever didn’t start between Aaronson/Reyna.
@gogorath I think you bring up many legit points. I'm not going to go point by point to all of them because I just don't want to construct a novel and I already tend to ramble with these long posts as it is. But, overall, here's a bit of a summation of my response. I think most of what I was thinking is based around wanting to get one of Reyna/Aaronson on the field with my preference being Reyna. And if you slot in Reyna or Aaronson for one of Musah or McKennie I see two issues. First, just having to play without either of them looks less than ideal to me. They both bring a lot to our game and sitting either of them even for very good players like Reyna or Aaronson is less than ideal in my mind. And secondly, thinking that what we give up mostly seems to be defensive presence in my mind because I think while they both help in attack, they are both also guys who play a lot of defense, tackle very well, cover a lot of ground and just generally do a lot of the dirty work required. So, for me if you are going to play someone like Reyna or Aaronson in midfield, they should have some support behind and as much as I like Adams, I don’t think any single player is ideal as the competition level rises to do all the work in midfield on his own. Then, the fact that Musah is looking like he’s going to be playing centrally instead of the wing this year and also looks like he is likely to play deeper means he’s already moving in that direction and McKennie has had a lot of his success at Juve playing on the right in a more or less free role. So, those shuffles serve to both get guys into spots they will be most familiar playing and keeping us from losing the hard work and solidity we get with both Musah and McKennie on the field. The biggest issue I see is the lack of width on the right since Dest is so prone to cutting inside when he comes out of the back. I do have reservations about losing Weah on the right both because of his quality and more specifically his direct running to stretch things. I think a 4231 setup would work best with a mobile striker who can stretch the defense a bit himself. And as with just about ay formation with a single central striker I think we will struggle without that important piece of the puzzle. Ferreira is mobile but he seems mor prone to dropping deeper than stretching with his movements. And yeah, I don’t disagree that likely a 442 or some sort, either with a box or diamond would likely be a solid fit for this group and accomplish a lot of the same things. Mostly I favor the idea of a 2 striker setup because no matter what direction we go in we don’t have a single central striker who brings a lot to the table. But, we do have several quality attackers who have played up top in a variety of ways. My picks would likely be Weah and Pulisic for that sort of pairing and I absolutely think that would be a much more difficult proposition for defenses to stop than just keeping our attackers confined to wide positions and stopping whichever mediocre #9 we throw out.
Thanks for the response on the other piece. Really only wanted to comment on the two striker portion. I think there's two ways to go with the two striker. The most intuitive is the sort you'd use in a more aggressive/pressing, counterattacking scheme. That's two fast, athletic guys who work well in space. I think we have three guys who fit that really well -- Pulisic, Weah and Morris, but it's worth the caveat that a) none of these guys actually play striker at all and b) that role often has a pretty strong hold up element, and I think only Morris is all that good at holding up play. We'd also be pretty terrible in the air with this set-up, except Morris, again, who is likely coming off the bench. There's a number of players who could play more of a second striker half of it, like Ferreira, but kind of the point is replacing Ferreira, no? But I think Jesus could do it and bring some depth. Because otherwise, we'd be thing at a position that requires a LOT of running. The other sort of intuitive set up is to go traditional big/little in terms of two striker. Those are traditionally done less with a pressing system and more with a more traditional, play without the ball type, but if you had the right big, you could probably do it. You might not lose too much with a Dike or Vazquez there and could get someone who could play aerially. Of course, you're back down to 5 of 7 anyway, there, much like with Ferreira. Either way, I'm not sure the two striker set up solves that much in the final third in possession so much as it provides a different look in transition or in going direct. I would love to see a two striker format as a change of pace / tactical choice in the World Cup. But it's also pretty clear to me that this team may be better served with consistency. It really hasn't responded all that well to changes. That's why I suspect we will simply see something that pulls the striker back in a 433 ... that will look suspiciously like a 442 diamond in a lot of phases.
I think with his abilty to stetch the field and stay wide like a true winger, Weah is one of my penciled in starters. I think we all finally saw what he could do once he was finally fully fit. Pulisic, Reyna, and Aaronson aren't going to stay as wide as Weah and I think we need at least 1 guy out there who can, and likes to do that. I'd be ok with a 442 with Pulisic and Weah up top and MMA and Reyna as the midfield, or call Reyna a false 9 in a 433, whatever. Right now Weah and Dike are my favorite players. So happy to see Dike getting really involved in the game in his limited minutes Saturday.
Of course, while I'm running my mouth about how we don't have any decent #9s, Pefok goes and does this: Jordan Pefok with a massive goal in his Union Berlin debut! pic.twitter.com/hONP6DjfTO— USMNT Tracker (@usmnt_tracker) August 1, 2022
First Vazquez sighting? Turner; Jedi, Richards, Zimmerman, Dest; Musah, Adams, McKennie; Reyna, Vazquez, PulisicNote I’ve got Reyna at LW & CP at RW, though Berhalter’s usually used them the other way.— Matthew Doyle (@MattDoyle76) August 2, 2022
Best V Pulisic or Donovan?@tyler_adams14 picks his All-Time #USMNT 5-a-side team 🇺🇸Who's on your squad? 🦅NEW EPISODES of Tyler Adams: Road to the Cup, powered by @VW coming soon pic.twitter.com/mnroaryEWP— Men in Blazers (@MenInBlazers) August 3, 2022
I agree with what Rongen says about needing to build an American team that people can recognize the way they recognize Brazil or Holland or other traditional power teams. That would be cool instead of trying to copy the way top 5 leagues play which seems to be Berhalter and Stewarts goal. Rongen's best xi looks like -----------pulisic------weah ----------------aaronson --------musah------------reyna ------------------adams? -----?-----brooks--------?---dest --------------gk: Turner Would have been nice if they would have let him talk instead of "prompting' their social media faves and cutting off where he was going. He doesn't rate Dest highly but seems to accept that we don't have anybody significantly better, so... -------------starts 38' mark
He also says he used bigsoccer to try and find and identify dual nationals when he was the U20 coach.
Any best XI today that includes Brooks is a joke. Dude hasn't played a match in several months. And only even found a team in a low level league two days ago. Any best XI that doesn't include McKennie....oh never mind we know why you liked this idiot. A best XI that leaves a blank at LB and CB is a cop out joke. Its best XI not best IX.....LOL.
Loved this quote: “I want my best 11 on the field and then we’ll figure it out.” he was also very firm about having a left footed left side CB.
The funny thing is I just watched the video and Rongen did include McKennie in his best XI. (He also had Brooks and Zimmerman as his preferred starting CB duo, and said Robinson will obviously be starting, so I don't think there were actually ?s there.) The problem though is he included everyone else you could possibly have in there, and when informed that his lineup would have something like 13 players in it, he just shrugged and said basically that someone or another will be injured then (using McKennie as a current example).
It's somewhat of a bizzarro world that an American fan is trying to use Thomas Rongen as a definitive authority, given his reputation amongst the fanbase. Even weirder is this comment: Given that that intepretation is pretty much counter to everything Rongen did. Rongen was hardcore Dutch and was part of the crew that pushing us to copy everything European, and often at the expense of any kind of Latin influence. I don't know if he was the cause or the symptom, but his recruiting went hard after European talent and generally ignored the Latin Americans in our own country. The idea that there's some wholly unique, yet winning style of play waiting to be discovered out there just for Americans is also kind of silly. People recognize the Netherlands and they recognize Spain, but the latter is in large part Cruijff-influenced Barca taking over much of the football culture. No one is ranting that Spain should find their own style because it is too Dutch. We'll have our own take, but the sport is the sport.
iirc First, he said Musah was a must for him. He really digs the guy Second, he said Turner in goal. Third, he said the guys he absolutely had to have on the pitch were Pulisic, Aaronson, Weah and Reyna. Fourth, he went to the back line where he went with Brooks because he said he must have a left footer at lcb. He discussed how Dest isn't the greatest but who else. I'm guessing he's ok with ARob and Zim. I don't recall exactly how that discussion went as they wandered on to Ream at some point talking about Lpool game. At that point the prompts began and clarity died. I agree with Rongen when he says somebody is bound to be injured out of the starting xi and most of the 23 get used by the end of the tournament. Klinsmann used all the field players except Mix and Chandler. There's no need for hysteria attacks.
There's something to that, albeit the comment was harsh. Howvr, the last thing we need in this thread is a discussion of Cup-less Messi.
I'll quote the relevant parts in the order it was asked and answered: GK: "Matt Turner" CB: "In my opinion the two best CBs are John Brooks and Zimmerman. And the natural lefty in the left zone if you want to play out of the back, I'm telling you, letting the ball run across your body vs taking a touch and then that could kill you at the highest level...In saying that, I understand the high line. But I'm telling you, I've worked with Brooks in a few camps; he's not slower than Aaron Long who's probably going to start right now next to him. If I had to pick another one, I would pick Chris Richards after John Brooks in that position, but I always want a left footed player in that left zone in the back. I don't care where you find him." CF: [after being presented with a list of #9 options] No, no, because I have to fit in Musah, Pulisic, Aaronson, [Davies chimes in with McKennie], Timmy Weah, and Gio Reyna. So I will play Aaronson as my false 9....I always try to get my Best XI on the field." MF: "Adams, McKennie, Gio Reyna, Pulisic, Timothy Weah, Aaronson." [The panel then asks him "No Musah? So Musah's out?"] Ok well...[sighs, then cross talk among the panel]...Somebody will play out of my eleven during these next 3 months. Injuries occur. Look at McKennie -- it's started again. So who the hell knows?" LB: "Robinson is your starter on the left obviously." RB: "I've never really rated [Dest] to be honest with you. First and foremost defensively he's a liability I think. It could cost you a game. He has to fight for his starting position. Thank god they've bought everywhere else but not necessarily at RB....Potentially he's a starter for that team, and the way they play, always in the half of the opponents, it's a little bit of a different story, because the starting points can be higher. He doesn't defend that much, quite frankly, and when he has to defend, it's just straight [something?] back in transition. But when we play against equal teams that will possess the ball a little bit as well, and say it's 50/50, they're going to force us backwards. And now you gotta make decisions in 2 v 1 or 1 v 1 situations, and every time I look at him I'm going 'He's not really aware of his surroundings that much.' Is there anybody better out there? [Davies asks if Yedlin would be an option.] Well I think that Gregg will look at opponents, but what I've seen of him, he's pretty much gone out and said 'This is the way I want to play first and foremost and let the other team adapt.' Which I kind of like actually, but you've got to be adaptive in a World Cup in a one-off game, and you might have to make a change tactically. Let's say it's Foden or Grealish on that side. Although Dest has got great physical speed, he doesn't have great mental speed. So I don't care how fast you are over 5 yards, those guys potentially off the dribble could take him on. Whereas Yedlin -- and I call every Inter Miami game on the radio -- has been pretty darn good on both sides of the ball. [After long digression]. But if [Dest] plays predominantly, I don't think you can make a case for anybody else that should start at RB, including Joe Scally or whoever."
-----------------Aaronson----------------- Pulisic------------------------------Weah ----------Reyna---------McKennie------ ------------------Adams------------------- Jedi----Brooks--------Zim----Not Dest -------------------Turner-------------------