Bradley blew it

Discussion in 'New York Red Bulls' started by studsup, Nov 3, 2003.

  1. studsup

    studsup New Member

    Aug 12, 2001
    Garden State, born N
    When the starting line up entered the field on Saturday, I asked myself -
    If me, the people around me, the folks who post here, and most Metro fans in general can tell that Woly, Gaven and Magee would make a much better contribution than Juskoiak, why does Bradely start him again. He did that in the USOC, too.

    If a player does not produce, and indeed he may be playing to the best of his ability, it is clearly up to the coach to sort things out. Why oh why on this game would Bob have not gone with the players who have scored more and clearly demonstarted their deisre, skills, and fitness over that waste of space.

    Bob does not appear to be an idiot. And yet if he can't tell who the better players are.....
    He is great at recruiting young talent, but his abilities as a pro coach in the clutch leave much to be desired.

    The coach is the one pulling the strings and making the choices. And he is ultimately repsonsible for not putting our best on the pitch when we needed it the most.
  2. studsup

    studsup New Member

    Aug 12, 2001
    Garden State, born N
    And another major coaching gaffe - our finishing.
    It's clear to anyone who watches that we squander way too many opportunities due to poor finishing.

    Portions of that late second half looked a handball game played with a superball in a closet. Come on, Coach Bob, surely you've seen us blow too many chances inside the six! With an agregate score looming, Bob- it's the result that counts -Bradley of all people should have spent time increasing our goal scoring potential.

    What do you do in those practices? Spending time on finishing would have really helped. Finishing leads to goals, and that is why they have a scoreboard!

    And not putting a premium on finishing is why you got nil up there!

    Magee is not great, but he's really trying and has a good goal poaching sense.... couldn't you have taught the kid how to finish properly? I mean he is so close so often that time spent on just that with him alone would have contributed to the bottom line.
  3. cjschlos

    cjschlos Member

    Jan 21, 1999
    New York
    And I am sure the metros haven't practiced finishing at all, Bob would never have thought of that!!

    Give it a rest, we went from a really crap team last year to a much improved side this year, true our recent form has been poor but give it a rest. While we didn't convert the couple of good chances we had I think we should really focus on our midfield and specifically the wing midfielders as our weakest link. How many times did a crap cross go into the box on Saturday? Also on the first goal NE scored where the hell was the team, they let them walk right in...don't even get me started on their second goal.

    True we didn't score, but we lost this game in the midfield not up front with Clint and Company
  4. studsup

    studsup New Member

    Aug 12, 2001
    Garden State, born N
    cjschlos, no we lost the game because we couldn't put the ball in the net.
  5. Matrim55

    Matrim55 Member+

    Aug 14, 2000
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How can you call for Woly's inclusion in one post, and then bitch about our finishing in the next? That's high comedy.

    No, the game was lost up front because Mathis and Juskowiak don't scare anyone. Nicol was about to push two-up into midfield the whole time, pressing Guevara whenever he got the ball within 40 yards of the goal, overloading on Lisi and Clark whenever they made deep runs, and allowing Heaps and Leonard the 1v1 wing match-ups which greatly favored them.

    Juskowiak and Clint both try to do the same things - drop to the midfield, receive and create (though Clint uses more touches). That leaves no one making diagonal runs off the ball, taking defenders with them and clearing out space for the attack. New England were able to rely on only Pierce and Llamosa (and Joseph's monstrous presence in the midfield) to shut down the forward attack.

    To Mathis's credit he made smarter runs and moved off the ball better in the second half, and Magee really opened things up when he came in and immediately torched Heaps with the ball on his foot. But it was pretty clear even then New England weren't scared that we were going to open up a quick counter on them, so in the rare instances they actually built possession they were able to throw numbers forward, which of course resulted in the second goal.

    Blaming the midfield - our greatest asset outside of Walker - is the wrong tack. The blame lies squarely on the fact that none of our forwards scares anyone with or without the ball, meaning our midfielders see twice the pressure of any group in the league. Did you watch the game and wonder why Cancela, Raslton and Joseph had so much more room than our guys? It's simply because we actually had to mark Noonan and Fabbro(!) with numbers, we had to respect their ability to put the ball in the net, when they attacked. Nobody respects our forwards when we attack.
  6. studsup

    studsup New Member

    Aug 12, 2001
    Garden State, born N

    Sorry that wasn't clear...was trying to blame Bob for not going with our best when it mattered the most. Would have rather seen Magee or Gaven on the field rather than Jusko at the start.
    Personally I like Woly coming off the bench. No, I don't think Woly has good ball skills, but he does score by sheer enthusiasm and crazy effort.

    I must have lapsed into "high comedy" from having the Loosing-to-New- England- how many-times- in -a -row blues.

    Your point about our forwards not scaring anyone, but our fans is well taken.
  7. JoeW

    JoeW New Member

    Apr 19, 2001
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Here's the 2 cents of a relatively neutral observer...

    I don't think Bradley made poor choices with the lineup. All year's he's milked just about the maximum production anyone could have reasonably expected from the talent and experience on the roster. Complain about the finishing but if you'd known at the start of the year that Moreno would be hurt and contribute little, that Mathis would underperform (especially the second half of the season), you'd have to predict disaster. To argue that Magee, Wolyniec (reread the Metro fan reviews of him in his first games with y'all) and Gaven (who was originally projected to spend most of the season in Bradenton and show up in Sept.) would contribute as much as they have--Bradley is doing a superb job getting as much as he can from what he has at the moment. Instead of disaster you've got a side that was in second place in the East for much of the race and in the playoffs.

    And NE has a little bit to do with this result as well. They've underperformed on defense most of the year. But they've got tremendous defensive talent, they've got a solid scheme and they've peaked at exactly the right moment.

    MUNCUFAN New Member

    Apr 13, 2003
    Northern NJ
    Looking back this season, we struggled because we are short of players who is at his prime. Take a look at our current squad:

    - Gaven, Magee, Wolyniec, Clark -- not reach their prime time yet.
    - Williams, Juskwalk, Addo - already passed their prime time.
    - Mathis, Moreno - struggling to maintain their prime time status.

    I applause Bradley for developing young talents however with due respect to our young talents, "you can't win with kids" as they say in English football, you got to put the kids with experienced players who is at his prime. IMO, only Guevara can be considered as a reliable player at his prime, you got to have at least another Guevara quality player to team up with Gaven and Clark. Our forward? we have no player at his prime.
    No wonder we have hard time to score.
  9. Father Ted

    Father Ted BigSoccer Supporter

    Manchester United, Galway United, New York Red Bulls
    Nov 2, 2001
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Ireland Republic
    Actually, it was Alan Hansen who made the bold "you can't win with kids" prediction at the start of the 1995/96 season after Manchester United got rid of Hughes, Kanchelskis and Ince. They brought in kids like Beckham, Scholes, Butt and won the double.
    So actually, you can win kids.
  10. The Magpie

    The Magpie Member

    Nov 19, 1998
    Cambridge, MA
    "They brought in kids like Beckham, Scholes, Butt and won the double..."

    Well, understand the difference: Beckham, Scholes, and Butt had already played a fair number of matches with the United first team during the 1994-1995 season, and had been playing regularly for the United youth and reserve teams for years to that point.

    I can applaud Bradley for getting the professional ball rolling for the likes of Magee, Gaven, Clark, and others, but these players haven't exactlly enjoyed the same set of circumstances as Beckham, Scholes, and Butt. They haven't been weaned on the club, the haven't played together for a long period of time... they made their first-team debuts without benefit of a professional intuitiveness that Man. United can afford to instill.

    So in a professional sense, the United trio were hardly kids when they were gven the burden of carrying on after United's senior statesmen departed, whereas those younger players for Metro... really are kids.

    The Magpie

Share This Page