The whole idea of a "Best XI" is flawed because we need to see how they play together first. Soccer is more about complementary pairs. The two CBs, the two guys on each side, the two B2Bs in the middle (in Egg's 433).
reyna has 3 goals with the nats in that time, while malik has produced zero. ...its almost like club-nt form and/or production isnt the straight line so many of you continue to act like it is.
IMO the ideal situation is to have players that look like challenging for a starting spot (due to club form) earn it in national team games. So to extrapolate that to the Reyna/Tillman AM spot, Reyna continues to start (I understand that Reyna has just recently become the AM 8/10 spot, so an argument could be made it’s not even his to lose) and Tillman comes on as a sub and continues that role until he outperforms Reyna in national team games. This is a more conservative approach than what many posters on here prefer. For those that want Tillman to replace Weah, the same approach can be applied. Sometimes you don’t have this luxury as in the 6 spot if Adams is not ready. Then do we keep using Musah and McKennie as the mids? What if WM isn’t fit to go? Has Cardozo done enough to prove he can be trusted in previous NATS games?
I'm not suggesting we start Sebastian Lletget for Heaven's sake. Malik Tillman starts for a team competing in the knockout phase of the Champions League. Malik Tillman has played in every "A" team game in Berhalter's 2nd tenure that he's been healthy for. Started some. Came off the bench in others. He's a clear part of Berhalter's A team right, and he's in great form. Right now my best XI contains Pulisic, Reyna, and Tillman as the attacking trio behind one of Pepi/Balogun. Tillman on the right wing. Reyna in the middle. That is literally what Berhalter did in the first leg against T&T. [With Paredes starting in place of the unavailable Pulisic on the left.] A "Best XI" roster isn't necessarily the same thing as the "Predicted lineup against Jamaica in the Nations League." Against the speed of Jamaica's wings, I might want Weah against that particular opponent. Has Tillman done great for the USMNT? No. But that's just a matter of time. Some day soon he'll put that to bed.
1st I’m not saying what you believe is wrong, I’m merely adding my different opinion. I guess I should restate my belief again of how I think new players should be introduced into a starting 11. We already have a starting 11 that is our best or or has played our best ( we can and probably disagree with that also..... I think our best game was against England and that 11 is our best... others think it’s the Canada game and so they feel that’s our best 11 and so on.) that’s should be our starting point and players based on club play should get sub minutes to give us data points to see if they can replace one of our starters. So for me, club play gets you in the door to get into camps and sub minutes to outplay the starters. As you state, Tillman is getting plenty of chances to play; he’s not done anything with those minutes to replace Reyna nor Weah in my eyes. In fact if Tillman was an MLS player and put up those performances with the NATS many would be bitching about Tillman still getting minutes..... he was the black hole last game... that means he was where our attacks went to die. By far the worst player. But he is playing well in club ball at a nice level... so for me he gets more sub minutes till he proves he can play in a USA jersey. Of course this is in a perfect scenario where your best 11 is healthy and shows in camp that they are in form. BTW, I won’t be bitching about Tillman starting if that does happen. I understand the counter argument.
He has the club justification to play, and I'll also add, having trained with Dest, and Pepi for seven months, he now has experience with chunks of the teammates he'd play with so there's that, but honestly, I think he needs to win that job in the shirt. Probably not fair that Balo didn't have to do that, but with Reyna's production since last June, it's hard to argue anyone else should start as the tip of the midfield spear. He's basically been electric until his injury in 9/21, and electric again for us since last June. I don't know how you sit him. I'll also add that I don't think Reyna really has ever run hot and cold for us like he sometimes does with club. He's pretty much always been good in the shirt. Tillman has a similar club habit of being electric or invisible to Weah. I'm not super comfortable in starting him in critical matches. I'd rather give Reyna the first hour to 70 and Tillman the last 20-30+injury time pending game developments. I will say, though, Tillman's form is a reasonable claim, I'd just ignore that, like I've done with Reyna, with Weah, with Pepi, with Pulisic etc. If the guys produce in our shirt, I don't care what they're doing with the club, until that production stops (and not just for one game).
Previous NT performance does matter, of course. But so does recent club form, innate talent/quality and trajectory. Position of need within the squad. What also compounds the issue of NT performance are all the variables with the NT equation over smaller sample sizes compared to comparing entire club seasons across various leagues, as an example. There is so much fluctuation over strength of opponent, changes in the lineup, tactical intent, and general familiarity within the squad. I think familiarity is often overstated around here, but consider someone like Tillman. 8 caps total across about 21 months. 2 starts First start vs Oman as LM in a 4-3-3 with Musah/Wes and Puli/Balo/Weah up top. Second start vs T&T as RW in a 4-2-3-1 with a Musah/Wes/Gio midfield and Paredes/Balo at LW/ST. Now add in age, and club/league ascension over the same time period. We can do the same for Johnny. Young players without any real consistency or history within the NT, who have ascended quickly up the ranks with their clubs. For whatever the reason some get stuck with their favorites within the NT. Yes down the road we would need a larger and more balanced sample size to compare our players but these are not static assets. There is a fair amount of fluctuation. And it is quite reasonable and rational to say Malik and Johnny are making the jump into that top tier talent wise in our player pool, alongside the Puli/MMA/Weah/Gio/Robinson level talents. It's almost like some have been so stuck on MMA along with Puli/Weah as sure starters in 2026 that they haven't considered other players can quickly jump into the top 10 player convo, just as quickly as MMA and a few others ascended btw. We're also not knighting anyone FFS. It doesn't mean once you're in the convo for best XI that you just replace your direct alternative. I swear so much of this debate doesn't account for depth and development.
I don't think Tillman is a wide attacking player for the nats. I rate Paredes ahead of him at the position. And of course Pulisic and Weah are the starters. His position with the nats is midfield. He is a 10. That's his best position. But if we want to field an attacking lineup I would have no problem playing him next to Reyna as a hybrid 8/10. When everyone is healthy he is our fifth best mid: behind Reyna, McKennie, Adams and Musah. Ahead of Cardoso, Maloney, LDLT and Aaronson.
Tillman and Paredes have both made tremendous strides this season. Sargent has been terrific too. I've watched all three a fair amount with club and country. They are knocking on the door. But I still like the incumbents better. Not because I can't consider that someone could surpass them. My allegiance is more to the national team than a particular player. I'd always want to play the guy who gives us the best chance of winning.
Let's put it this way. I'd find ways to get Tillman into the lineup rather than Cardoso. Such as playing Musah as a 6. And I say that as someone who thinks Cardoso is a very good player who is going to have an important career with the nats. I just rate Tillman higher.
Pretty sure I coined MMA and for one reason - it's a midfield that plays like their nickname - physically. Employed for use against teams that we need that for. I never said and there either that it had to be the only group of players used and sort of remember stating at the time that against weaker teams a more offensive collection should be used. Everyone should be happy that all over the field the depth is increasing and it's harder to pick auto starters. That helps with schemes, injuries, rotation in tournaments and form. MMA did it's job against England and it's too bad a few who are now ready weren't then to give MMA a bit of rest.
If we play Brazil or Argentina in a match that matters this summer, I think MMA might still be our best option.
MMA is the single most impressive field unit we have ever deployed. They dominate possession of the ball and the space in the midfield. They did it against England in the World Cup. It’s one of the reasons we have begun dominating Mexico…they can’t do anything against MMA. MMA is a fantastic block to build around and the team actually has some good pieces around it to make it work. The squad is young and growing, including MMA. MMA features three of the top players in the squad.
If only they created a lot of chances as well, they'd be one of the world's elite midfield units. That's the one thing with them that's lacking. But it is indeed our most impressive unit of any part of the field we've ever been able to put on the field as a national team program. Three elite (McKennie, Adams) or near-elite (Musah at this point) players who cover ground and dominate possession at an elite level.
England had 56% possession against the US who did a good job. McKennie had more of a wide role in the match. McKennie's evolution could make an MMA central midfield viable against a high level opponent. But McKennie in a wide position did work against England. Current Best XI: ------------------Sargent--- ------Pulisic----Tillman----McKennie-- ------------Johnny-----Musah---- ---Jedi------------------------------------Dest---- ----------Richards-----Robinson---- ------------------Turner---- McKennie is scheduled to be back in training this week.
In fairness to the guy, he scored an outsized # of penalties last year (I wonder what his conversion rate was back then, I assume it was good, as the penalties were a non-story).
As someone whose been spazzing out for Tillman ever since we got him, and manning the barricades against some pretty weak sauce, borderline flat out idiotic takes for two years, I'm beyond sympathetic. Quite a few on this board took a look at a friendly or 2 in June of '22 and declared him "not good enough," and wouldn't budge no matter what he did at Rangers, always pulling out bogus excuses (well he didn't play well against Celtic, well he wasn't great in the CL group stage etc), or that he's always sucked in the shirt (he's never been good or great, true enough, but he definitely hasn't always sucked). I am a big fan of Tillman, and I think nearly all of his uneven play in less than 270 minutes is totally explicable, but he's not earning the starting gig for me in central midfield until he does the business in the shirt, and multiple times. In fairness, I am willing to plug him in at RWF if Weah is hurt. I'm flexible in terms of midfield too. I agree with your long standing argument that MMA+Berhalter equaled stagnant attack, and good to great defense until the players were run into the ground, and a compromise with greater flexibility is needed, especially with Musah in the midst of a "meh" season and Adams having been out for 12 months (McKennie picking up knocks every single season too, especially w/his shoulder).
You may not be knighting him, but if you are putting him in a Best XI, it does make quite a bit of sense why people would disagree with putting someone in a Best XI who has yet to really have a strong game for the National Team over players who consistently perform at an above average level. I'm not sure why you are so aggravated with folks disagreeing with the idea that Tillman is not yet Best XI, or thinking that past performance in a national team shirt is more relevant than club performance, but no one is disagreeing with the idea that he's "in the conversation." But I'm surprised anyone would honestly put him in the team given his November window was poor (even as he was playing well with club) and that neither Reyna nor Weah have had a poor game for the US healthy in any kind of recent memory.
There are several of us here who have been strong advocates for Tillman from the start and are not ready to plug him into the starting lineup. This reflects a few things. First, the bar is very high, especially in midfield. Second, his club performance still has more ups and downs that we would like to see. And finally, he needs to show he can make the team better. That last part is a bit of a chicken and egg problem. He needs opportunities. But they will come.
That includes me. I was one of the original Tillman proponents -- and I would actually be fine with him in a starting lineup. But I don't see the argument for Best XI yet, regardless of how he is doing at club.