Yeah, I remembered him, but was having a bread freeze on his name. In my old age specific names and time lines can be here one moment and gone the next. Eddie Johnson was and is important to this area as a player and now trainer.
But WM is young and with more experience you would think his soccer IQ will grow. He could really use a mentor. Can GB help him?
Am I an MLS fan? I am a season ticket holder from back when Orlando City was in the USL. I’m a member of one of the supporters groups that stand in the wall behind the goal. I’ve been to every home game but 1 do to illness. I even coached one of OC’s you teams. I’m not sure what me reading a thread I found interesting and responding to an old post (I’m taking your word on this as I have no idea what post you’re referencing) has anything to do with anything.
Now onto GR. My position on this has always been to let him come into camp and show he makes the team better. Also he needs to show where, what position. I personally don’t KNOW where he will or even if he will improve the team. I THINK he will help the team the most as a #10. I don’t think the US has ever had a real #10. I often wonder if a #10 is just not part of American soccer culture. I suspect that GB will start GR as a RW. That means he’s in competition with JM, not Lliget. GR and JM are very different players. They look to play in very different spaces. I think If the US needs a player to get in behind back lines instead of checking into tight spaces to link up play, than JM would be your man. Understand I'm not saying GR can’t do that, I'm saying JM would be better at it in my opinion. Lastly, I don’t care what you think of me as a poster. I think you are the worst poster on this board. I think you are dishonest, embellish, and spin to try and win arguments. You go on personal attacks and I’m sure many posters have left these boards because of it. I’m not going anywhere. I’m sure I can find an ignore button on here somewhere if I need it. I will enjoy sharing and discussing thoughts and ideas about the US Nats, and evolving my opinions.
Jackson Y is not Pirlo, but I wonder if many of you ever watch him play for the Quakes? You need somebody in the midfield than can control play and make a pass. He can do that and his team is as dynamic a pressing team as you are going to see. Prolly TOO dynamic for most tastes, as they leave themselves exposed more often than most. But I find that team really fun to watch. JY is good distributor in that system, is positionally sound, and has learned to play some defense too as often their players end up one on one all over the field. He is not the most athletic player on the field but if we really play him with McKinney and Adams that is not the top priority there. Like it or not, 3Gs wants to play his Dutch inspired system and if you are going to play build-up/possession you need a player in the middle of the park that can control play and pass the ball. Long diagonal passes are essential to the Dutch attacking approach so it is not surprising he wants player who can do that. We may not agree with this (I still think our personnel is better suited to 3-5-2 or 3-4-3), but that is what he is going to do here. I am interested to see how he slots GR into this lineup. He will prolly slot him on the right and let him drift inside as a point in a diamond midfield, but a lot of it depends on whether we sticks with a CF like Altidore or goes with a more fluid front line. If we ever get back to games, it will be interesting to see where we go from here. As more of the young talent comes through, he may end up changing his interpretation of his system. there are a lot of different ways to play 4-3-3.
If you click on the poster's name on the left side of their posts, there's a "ignore" in small text on their profile. I highly suggest using it. The poster you are referring to is dishonest and will repeatedly lie to try and win internet arguments. There's no point in discussion with a fundamentally dishonest person.
Why would any coach in a national team setting choose to play a particular system irrespective of the player pool, and then shoehorn players into that system? I can see that maybe with a club, but it seems crazy in a national team setting where (a) you have some very talented players, (b) coming from clubs with all sorts of different programs and systems, (c) for a few weeks at a time? That puts the cart before the horse. And when it’s done by a young coach, in the big spotlight for the first time, having been chosen via a dubious process, it suggests a bit of insecurity/compensation.
why do people assume that neither Weston nor Adams can control play and pass the ball (especially via long diagonals)? watch them both play for their major league teams and there’s plenty of evidence of their abilities to distribute. Put them vs. lower competition and I doubt they’d look worse at that than any of Bradley, trapp or Yueill.
1276957001613037568 is not a valid tweet id 3 long diagonals dropped on a dime to a teammate. Combined with better speed, instincts, defensive bite. What am I missing?
Adams can pass. That Tyler Adams pass 👌The Yussuf Poulsen chip 🔥Poulsen completes the hat trick and Leipzig are running away with it! pic.twitter.com/kzQN1QktVg— FOX Soccer (@FOXSoccer) March 30, 2019
I do it in real life. If I find someone dishonest, I don't associate with them. I can't imagine why anyone would want to keep discussing things with a person who lies over and over again.
Great question, but I am not sure that discussions of this nature, with two people disagreeing respectfully and exchanging ideas in depth is allowed in N&A anymore, we might be sent to USA Men or Rivalries for this. As to the game plan for this pool and for both the minnows and the better teams I will start with the basic concepts that I have been advocating for going back about a decade now, I will then go to it's application to this specific pool. When an aggressive, pressing 4-2-3-1 started to emerge, particularly as practiced in Germany and by Pochettino at Southampton, I immediately thought, THAT'S IT! In general terms, a very balanced formation, with clear roles and responsibilities, that is built to press and can function essentially the same way, whether a team has the advantage in possession or not, fits us and our player pool to a T imo. We would, as is the basic premise of the formation stay balanced and attack with 4 and defend with 6, using our fullbacks (which we are definitely suited to), to get forward in the attack and provide width. The defense would be pressing, playing a high, but not suicidal line, keeping everything compact and would be pressing off of common and coordinated triggers, that should be adjusted game to game, team to team, which would start with defending from the front, which would fit a a Josh Sargent quite well, obviously the likes of Pulisic and Reyna are already comfortable with this. It would funnel the play into positions where the aggressive double pivot, the 2 CM's at the base (No need for a regista), would function like the ground eating, hard tackling duo of Schneiderlin and Wanyama, I think Adams and McKennie were born for this role together. When we get the ball and there is no immediate counter attack? Well first off I think it is important here to point out that we would be actively creating turnovers and looking to attack quickly, which is a massive departure from our current team and I would further point out that I think that would be even more important for us when facing superior teams and that this is a feature of the formation and style that really takes advantage of our player pool much better than the current set up. Pulisic, Morris, Sargent, Dest, McKennie, Adams, Yedlin, Cannon, etc. Were all born to run, not attempt second rate tiki-taka. However, when we are in more patient possession we would be just as capable of moving the ball around and side to side as we are now, if not more so. We are really talking about a difference of removing Yueill/Bradley/Trapp, to add a better offensive weapon higher up the pitch, whilst being more sound defensively. The fullbacks would be providing the width as discussed, because on the whole of it we would playing relatively narrow with the nominal wingers, because of the compactness of the shape when pressing, etc. This however suits all of our wingers, none of whom are old school, chalk on the boots crosser of the ball types anyway. As for the CM's, as alluded to earlier, two of them would play in the double pivot, with the responsibility of screening the back line, making recoveries and launching the counters. In possession they would both have license to get forward of course depending on the circumstance, opponent, etc and could simply play off of each other, or one could be the nominal 8 and the other the stay at home 6, I don't know that this matters overmuch, or would be worked out until we started playing with the pool. I would think Adams staying home and WM getting involved would make sense. Moreover this is a system that is relatively easy to integrate and explain to players, provided there is an experienced coach who understands and can drill in the specifics of the press that is going to be employed. Which is another advantage to the system, you can swap parts in and out and have them retain the same basic function once the foundation is laid. Moreover there are many qualified coaches who have employed systems of this nature, or been highly regarded assistants of managers we cannot get, who employee this type of system. Unlike the current which is nebulous, apparently complicated and requires the pool to adapt to it, rather than vice versa. When you make me type all this out I just get so frustrated all over again, that in an era where the teamwork and fitness of pressing has risen to become a commonplace standard of the game, we whose player pool fits this style above any other, have still not ever been built this way. Would you do me a similar courtesy of explaining why or how Berhalter and his present system are preferable, or better suited to our pool?
Thanks for writing all that out. I wrote out a bunch trying to answer your question in a more comprehensive way and it went all over the place, and it makes for a more complete answer, but probably super confusing. So I'm going to try to do this simply. I don't know that what Berhalter is doing is better. There's part of your plan that I myself prefer and if I were building a set up would lean closer to. However, I will put out a list of things I wholeheartedly agree but also some things about what Berhalter is doing that I like in comparison to your stated version. Defensively, I would generally prefer your set-up. I actually would probably not go with a high line, but still counterpress on certain triggers and then press within a more compact area to conserve some effort and to create more open space on the counter. (I don't think we can count on the cohesion and fitness for a true 100% pressing team.) With our height, I would funnel to the edges. But all in all, I think pressuring is much preferable to the passive defense Berhalter has mostly played; although he did alter it significantly for Canada II I'm also generally inclined to not go with the regista and play McKennie and Adams side by side. But we'll talk about trade-offs there. But here's the argument for Berhalter's setup (or things I appreciate about what Berhalter is trying to do): Trying to come up with a better gameplan when we are in possession. I don't mean we have to be a possession team, but I believe working on being able to play with the ball; practicing movements and building cohesion around quicker passing; being able to attack not by counterattack or to a target forward we don't have: this is very valuable. I also don't think it's impossible. It's not about playing tiki taka; there's not a binary choice here. It's about advancing a part of our game that is (a) lacking (b) required if we want to dominate CONCACAF. I also don't think we'll see the slavish dedication to it when we actually play games. We didn't in the GC Final. We didn't in Canada II. We did in friendlies, which is exactly what Berhalter said. Building numbers in midfield offensively and defensively. But mostly offensively. In recent years, pre-Berhalter, we struggled incredibly to get the ball from the defense to the offense versus anyone half decent. Klinnsman, Arena, Sarachan all saw it. I think our players can pass and their skill level is increasing, but they are not at the level where they can beat numbers either way -- few are. And while Adams/McKennie may do better on the defensive side ... I think we need a system where players know how to shift into the midfield. And I'd like to do it without sucking Pulisic away from goal. We haven't seen Berhalter succeed every time, but we've seen different options. A Pep-style RB as CM; we've tried bringing the RW into the middle. We've tried pulling back the CF and we've tried it all the way to a true false 9 in Ferreira in January. I don't think you go into enough detail for me to tell here, but I like how Berhalter is working towards 4 in the midfield in multiple ways. I think it's a big unlock which makes us more flexible and enables us to connect defense with offense more consistently without individual brilliance. The pool has a structural weakness left back, which was a real structural weakness at both outside backs until recently. Even if you believe in Antonee Robinson, there's not any depth at natural left back. But if you back 18 months, there's a Robinson who had looked bad for the USMNT and no Sergino Dest. Cannon had not broken out. So you had a fast but relatively unskilled Yedlin and ... whatever you consider Robinson. I love dual bombing fullbacks ... but in the system you've outlined, they both can get forward, leaving the back somewhat open, and we're placing a ton of offensive (width) and defensive responsibility on them. Perhaps Robinson and Dest or Cannon and Dest will take that, but that's putting a LOT of responsibility on potential one of our weaker players. And pre-Dest, it was definitely an issue. We're also placing MUCH more defensive responsibility on Pulisic. If Pulisic comes inside and the LCM 10/8 provide width, neither has far to go to get back and Pulisic still plays a forward role defensively and in physical placement. In your setup, if the fullback gets caught forward, either no one is back, or Pulisic is racing back. That's effort and distance from goal. It's also going to be easier on whomever is in the LCM spot -- if the LB is bombing up, and Pulisic runs inside, the LCM needs to drop back and play defense -- again, if it's Reyna, maybe that's not what we want? Both system have four back, 2 swing, and 4 attackers. For Berhalter, it's 2 CBs, LB (most of the time) and the Regista as the 4 back. The swing are the RCM and the RB, and then the LCM, LW, CF and the RW are the "dedicated" attackers. In your system, it varies based on the attack. Yours, as set up, is much more flexible in terms of how to attack but requires coordination to keep from getting caught out. Berhalter's has actually more defined roles, with only really the RB and RCM really needing to cover for each other. Yours can create more surprise; Berhalter's should lead to to fewer breakdowns. I don't think it's a compelling argument, but it's worth noting that in your set-up, one of Adams and McKennie are staying home almost all the time. Is that a plus or a minus? I think in the long run, Berhalter would evolve to something more like yours -- he'd love a more unpredictable attack. But combine the lack of a LB, a desire to keep Pulisic forward, and to actually keep the team from over-committing, and you can see the pluses of the setup. While I don't love Yueill, I also am curious to see Adams and McKennie wreak some havoc up front. If we actually dedicate one of McKennie or Adams to stay back as the six and never move up ... are we really that different? I mean, a 4-2-3-1 and a 4-3-3 are really not all that different to begin with. We're talking degrees here. Long and short, I see a lot of what I like and a decent amount of what I don't. If I had to summarize where I differ from people: Don't love the defense to date, and as that changes, so does everything Am completely supportive or trying to develop a plan for having that ball that isn't only direct play -- and think we will apply it more judiciously when it counts Think we need to have distinct ways to overload the midfield because we've struggled to own the space Don't think our fullbacks are at all capable of playing as wingbacks/providing front to back depth -- none of them is going to be fully two way in terms of being able to provide cover wide completely forward and back. I love Dest but actually am happy we have a set-up where he can get forward and there's still a firm back four. More clearly: we have fullbacks and we have wingers. We don't really have any wide central midfielders aside from Paul Arriola, a 33 year old Fabian Johnson and maybe Timmy Chandler? Appreciate not asking much of Pulisic defensively. Think the team will evolve as more talent comes on. People refer to Berhalter as inflexible, but he's never really been that on most things. He was tactically flexible at Columbus and he's done a bunch of different things with the US. He's even effectively played something much closer to a 4-2-3-1 while not telling anyone in at least one game. Look, I wouldn't lock myself into some of the personnel choices that Berhalter has made. I can't defend Roldan or Lovitz, for example. And Yeuill is not in an optimal midfield. And I don't think the regista is the way to go. But there's a lot of good thoughts there, and I lot of things I do agree with.
I’d just like to thank the last two posters for being detailed and not insulting. I’d really like to see Pomykal stay healthy and claim the hat left 8/10 (free 8) in the 4-3-3. He is versatile enough to fill in gaps whenever Pulisic cuts inside and has enough defensive bite to cover for Dest or another report mid if he covers for Dest. Reyna or Lletget haven’t shown what he has defensively and I’d like to see Reyna and Pulisic unleashed with Sargent up top for a bit see how that looks. I also see the logic of the 4-2-3-1. It could be we play both depending on opponent and whether at home or on the road.
I agree with all of this, and I would think most people would. I’ve also tried to understand where GB must be coming from. It seems to me, like most coaches, GB has a vision of what our team will look like. I think this vision is bigger than GB; I think US soccer is attempting to change the way the game is played in the states. They are using the model of “ if you build it they will come” where players build their skill sets to fit the known system. The obvious flaws of that approach have played out in front of us. There are some obvious flaws to the build the team around the strengths of your best players too. For instance, your dual Dmids of TA and WM would not have existed but for one game. TA was only healthy for one window. In my opinion, The difference between TA and our next Dmid is huge. So our we scrapping that system and playing a different system and style all year? Can we depend on Brooks to be healthy? CP is a little guy dribbling around players in the EPL. Call me old school, but I worry about how long a player can last like that in that league. Would that be too much for our players to have to change styles of play and system each window/game due to who is available? These are just things to consider that I don’t think enough posters on here are.
I have started an online petition to force the USSF to hire you. To my mind, that approach suits our player pool to a T, and (just as importantly) provides a way for our highest potential young players to participate and develop.
I was thinking about this last night. I understand the commentary against the Regista, so I'm not asking about that ... but what actually will we do to connect the defense to offense, and to generate offense against the bunker -- both things we've struggled with? I ask because this is so much of what Berhalter has focused on, rightly or wrongly. I think it's one thing to say Adams or McKennie can play the Bradley/Yeuill role (I think they can), but I think you are saying something else. What I like about Berhalter's attempt to implement positional play is that when we face a bunker or even simply aren't counterattacking, we're not just tossing the ball out to Pulisic on the wing and asking him to create against two defenders. There's a coordinated plan to try and create some space and openings. That said, still 100% agree that we need to create more turnovers and counterattack more. If we play more like Canada II, I'm much happier.
Yeah, props to those giving details without yelling at each other. Always a pleasant surprise when that happens. I would add that one of the biggest issues with Berhalter's system is not so much the system as it is largely an issue of fit with our squad since it includes major roles for players we don't have and does little to free up the quality players we do or pair complimentary players. So, discussing the system in a vacuum is only so useful but I do have issues with the system itself. First off, the regista, in addition to our having no one to really play that role well, has been too instrumental in the buildup. We play way too many balls slowly around the back trying, in Berhalter's own words, to "get the 6 on the ball." Well, all that plodding around the back just lets the defense get back and get set. It makes us predictable and slow. You want to unbalance the defense? Then, you need to do things quickly and have a bit of unpredictability in your play. The way he uses the regista does not accomplish this. I get the need for more possession, absolutely in favor of better possession. But, a plodding approach isn't what I would have in mind. Something more focused on getting the ball out of high traffic areas and keeping possession in more forward positions is far more to my liking.That's not even getting into the issue with leaving your most dangerous midfield area up to a guy you selected for his passing range and not his defensive chops. Frankly, that whole position is a disaster. Then, you have the two 8/10 hybrid positions in front of that. For me, these positions end up being too static because we are also playing with three forwards, making the spaces too crowded unless the midfield cedes those positions to the front line. Again, this makes things too slow if you really want to try to unbalance the opponent. Moving forward with the ball, the refrain of too slow is a big problem with this team. You can't get the defense moving and out of position with slow deliberate movements and lots of static positions. We've got two ostensibly attacking midfielders in the center yet we seem to create little through those positions. In the end, Berhalter says he wants a dynamic midfield, but he doesn't construct a system where that's likely. The whole midfield is a mess and when you start sorting out who goes were with what we have in our squad. You want a three man midfield? Our two most accomplished midfield players both play deep midfield roles, just take what god gave you. You want a 10, well here comes Gio. He also moves around a lot and is going to be better with more space and not paired with another guy he has to share the width with. Need possession? well, a couple ball winners in deep roles will get you the ball more often in the first place and I'd absolutely argue letting someone like Adams who excels getting the ball moving quickly will let you keep the ball better than someone who dawdles on it in a dangerous area. Worried about McKennie roaming too much? Adams is our most positionaly sound player to partner with him. It also solves issues with our center backs lacking mobility as they get more help and we keep players from running through the midfield and attacking our center backs, which can be a real problem especially if we posses and move forward and draw the defensive line higher. You can still posses the ball and you can more easily get your front three moving around and you create opportunities for McKennie to crash from deep just flipping things around. So, I see flipping this around being both more defensively sound with our two highest quality midfielders playing deep while still increasing the offense since it is no contest picking between who helps your offense more between Yueill or Reyna. I guess I see some good intentions in Berhalter's system, particularly improving possession, but there are other ways to accomplish what we need to do without so many trade-offs both tactically and in squad selection. I see very little his setup accomplishes that can't be accomplished by other means with fewer negatives and a better fit for our players.
I agree everything needs to move faster. I'm not really sure that's a function of running through the regista so much as everyone is learning. But it may be. Regardless, the passing has mostly been too slow and too deliberate in games where we've played poorly. Canada II is a good exception; the first half of the Gold Cup Final is another. I don't really see have a 4-3-3 with a 10/8 and an 8, which is really how Berhalter's system runs as all that static or crowded. We push everyone up versus a bunker, but that's fine. Against Mexico, we basically played a double pivot. We've been flexible based on opponent and I'm not sure crowding has been an issue since the very early days when no one knew where to go. I think you limit Adams' effectiveness by keeping him back. It's a choice we can make, but both McKennie and Adams are fundamentally 8s for the US, and that does mean that you either hold one back or potentially get exposed. Since they've barely played together and McKennie already has some positional issues, it's a risk to let them go. But you limit Adams' effect on the game if hold him back. I am curious in the 4-2-3-1 setup how you would want to get numbers into the midfield, or if you think it is unnecessary? If we are anchoring one CM back, I don't love the idea of the other DM trying to get the ball forward by himself with only really Reyna or the perimeter as an outlet. There's lot of solutions, of course, but I'm curious which you'd do? I love Reyna and McKennie, but if we are holding Adams back ... it's a lot on Reyna and McKennie to hold possession.
I don't think being slow to play the ball is intrinsic to having a regista, but I think the way Berhalter emphasizes playing through that spot often necessitates multiple passes in the back trying to get a specific player the ball in a specific spot. It takes more time, slows things down, becomes predictable. Go read the article in the Athletic, Berhalter specifically talks about spending a lot of time trying to find ways to get the ball to this player, which honestly makes no sense at all to me and is a big part of these issues. Devising a myriad of ways to get the ball to a mediocre passer 70 yards from goal should not be 1) difficult, or 2) desirable. I say we need to make the decision to hold Adams back. McKennie can slide forward as an 8, you've got Gio as a 10 and then we can play to the outside. That's no fewer options than having Yueill sitting on the ball at the 6 with two midfielders ahead of him and wide options available. And, for my money, Adams is a better, quicker passer so it's a plus to have him with the ball over Yueill. He'll also absolutely get the ball moving quicker. I know Adams can do more than play a stay at home 6, but he's stated his favorite position is the 6 and the last couple of times out for Leipzig he was absolutely staying at home and doing quite well. I think the trade offs to have a very high quality 6 sitting even if he stays more positionaly limited is absolutely enough to merit keeping him there. I honestly think it is a bit under-valuing what a good 6 brings to the team to want him to do "more" than defend the center, distribute, cover al that ground, get the team moving quickly. It's actually quite a high demand position as it is and we have players better in more attacking positions anyway, with both other midfielders being better attackers and a three man front line as well. My biggest question would be more around the issue of who takes up that role if Adams isn't available. I absolutely think a lot of how this team looks is due to too many injuries to important players. And that's really about the only reason I give Berhalter any slackIf he had all players healthy and decided this was the best way to play them. Wow, that's bad. At least as things have happened, he has the very real and valid excuse that he has never had anything close to his full team available. I look forward to seeing what he does once that actually happens.
We can argue all day about which system fits our personnel best. I have posted many times that I think a system with 3 in the back fits best, because we really do not have any quality defensive FBs but quite a few guys who can play as Wingbacks and we have a lot of OK CBs. But...it doesn't matter. Gregg is not going to employ my system, so I think it is more productive to talk about how we can make HIS system better. And frankly, I think his system potentially is a bit more dynamic than we have seen so far. There are a lot of ways to play 4-3-3, and I do think his and Earnie's view is to play it like a classic Dutch side. That would be with 2 dynamic MFs like Weston and Adams along with a distributor which right now looks like Jackson Y. However I don't really see him playing behind the other 2. I think he will play further up the field more like a Frenkie de Jong at Ajax than like a Pirlo at Juventus. From the games I have seen him play at San Jose, that is closer to how he plays, not as a static deep lying playmaker like most of you are describing. To me the key to making this system work is the CF. If we can get a real CF like the Dutch have had traditionally with guys like RvN and Kluivert, then you can let Reyna start on the right and cut in playing more of a Denis Bergkamp kind of hybrid wing/forward #10 position rather thanthan a traditional #10 or winger. With the speed we have a FB, when he cuts inside we can run the FB up the wing for the width we need when attacking the box. Same the other way with a guy like Pulisic. He can also cut in and provide goals and assists. And the left sided FB can go forward then, whelk the right falls off for cover. The key is by putting Pulisic and Reyna in wide positions to start they will often be 1 v 1 with their defenders and they are both creative and skilled enough to utilize multiple options. The 2 other MFs, can provide the ball winning, work rate and defensive cover when the FB bombs forward. So....the key to me is not Jackson Y as a deep lying defensive playmaker. That makes the formation too static. But by putting him in the lineup along with Reyna and Pulisic we have a lot more skill on the field allowing us to keep possession, work the ball through the MF and springing passes to free runners, than we do with what is primarily a ball winning counter attacking side. But he will have to play up and back through he center of the park between Adams and Winston. I think Gregg and Earnie want to construct a free flowing side like the classic Dutch teams and IMHO he is a good quality CF away from being able to do something like that. This is what Earnie means by style of play and he wants to get our youth set ups creating players for each of those roles. So you have 4 in the back with at least one FB going forward and the other tucking in, the central MF player going up and back through the center, 2 flanking MFs winning balls, providing defensive cover and, esp. with Winston, bombing forward into the box, 2 wingers in Pulisic and Reyna (or Morris) that have multiple options when on the ball and a loan CF playing at the top of the formation to provide hold up play and to finish in the box. really a 4-2-1-2-1. Sort of a diamond in the attacking third. Will it work? I don't know but I do think that is what he is trying to do. If it does work it will be some of the most attractive footie we have seen out of a USMNT.