Having a 6 play as a 6 is not that crazy an idea. The idea that a player can't effect a game as much from the 6 as the 8 is not supported by any soccer I watch. Adams with NYRB dominated games from the 6. Kante dominated WC games from the 6, and EPL games with Leicester from the 6. He was actually less influential from the 8 for Chelsea. Maybe it is an American soccer thing where if you are not running hard all the time you are not playing correctly? Gregg has tried a lot of things and many people kind of look at the mess and see what they want. Is he trying to get 4 in the middle with the ball? Probably. However, except for Ecuador, we have never had four players who were technical enough to pull it off. We did look best in that game. Moving the RB in had to be abandoned because Cannon, Lima, Yedlin can't play CM. Moving the RW in has since been tried, but Morris, Boyd, Arriola can't do it so it hasn't worked well. Ferreira could do it if asked not to turn from the 9, Jozy a bit too, but I don't think Gregg wants his 9 playing like that all game. Gregg spent all this time on this but simply didn't have or didn't pick players that could do it. It goes back to the OP, is he going to adapt or not? What is interesting is that if you have Reyna or Pomykal or Weah on that RW, maybe you can get four in the midfield that can actually play.
BTW....Build-up is an essential part of the Dutch style. You move the ball around the back in order to move the defense and create an opening to go forward. And, as any good KNVB coach will tell you, when you CAN go forward, you MUST go forward.
Talk about lying: we don't do poorly against bunkers in games that count: Here's the Hex results: Games against bunkered teams: 03/24 Honduras 6-0 W San Jose 17,729 WCQ 06/08 Trinidad & Tobago 2-0 W Commerce City, CO 19,188 WCQ 10/06 Panama 4-0 W Orlando 25,303 WCQ Games against teams that don't bunker 11/11 Mexico 2-1 L Columbus, OH 24,650 WCQ 11/15 Costa Rica 4-0 L San Jose, CR TBD WCQ 06/11 Mexico 1-1 T Mexico City 81,000 WCQ 09/01 Costa Rica 2-0 L Harrison, NJ 26,500 WCQ Away games where opponents don't bunker 03/28 Panama 1-1 T Panama City 23,052 WCQ (roughly 50/50 possession) 09/05 Honduras 1-1 T San Pedro Sula 30,000 WCQ (US had 45% possession) 10/10 Trinidad & Tobago 2-1 L Couva 1500 WCQ (Us had 55% possession because we were behind)
This sort of raises at least one cause for optimism for me. If you look at Transfermkart's list of the most valuable USMNT players, the top 7 names are: Pulisic, McKennie, Dest, Reyna, Brooks, Adams, and Weah. Berhalter has only had 2 games featuring any more than 2 of those players. Those games were the Ecuador friendly (where Adams, McKennie, Brooks, and Pulisic played) and the Canada home Nations League match (where Dest, Brooks, and McKennie played). We generally looked better in those games than we did for much of the year. Since Gregg has been manager, Dest has only had 3 appearances; Brooks has only had 2; Adams has only had 1; and Weah and Reyna have had zero. So, Berhalter has not really had much of a chance to work with a huge chunk of what may be our starting lineup in qualifying (though we'll have to see what Weah looks like coming back from his injury). You can read all you want into his quotes and his decisions with other available players to claim that he would have wasted all of those players if he had them, and you can claim that his system is designed for those players to fail regardless (and I agree with the latter point at least), but I'm still curious what this team will look like when more than a couple of those players are available at any one time.
I could see Ledezma excelling in the Jackson Y role under this system. I also think the sooner or later Reyna will end up in the middle of the field. Under the scenario you laid out however, Gio's skillset would certainly be better suited out on the wing relative to Morris.
The quotes around the midfield are as follows: There's no doubt the ball is going through the 6, but I think this quote is a lot more about actually teaching the 6 where to go and where to move to get open and then what to do with the ball. There's no doubt it is the preferred route. But I think people are overplaying it a bit in terms of "this is all we're going to do." The other quote about the midfield is interesting as well. It's been parsed to death on here but it's pretty clear: It's pretty clearly set up as McKennie and Adams pressing hard, winning balls in the midfield, and providing cover so the top 3 (looking like Pulisic, Reyna and whomever) can be more aggressive. Again, not sure it's the best, but it is pretty simple and allows for pretty consistent structure. No one is getting too far out of position except maybe RB. I agree. It does limit Adams in my perspective, but I think with Morris, Reyna and some other young talents rising like Pomykal, you simply are going to have to change to get the talent on the field. I'm not sure Adams is a better passer than Yeuill, but I'm not sure he's not. I'm not sure the difference matters here. I think this is the biggest miss we all make, and Berhalter has made, when trying to put together a reasonably consistent decision. Our depth is fundamentally pretty bad -- there's a pretty big gap from our first six or seven right now. So any system built to optimize some of our players needs to have a backup systemic option, because at most of these positions, we can't count on someone being able to play at a level of Tyler Adams or Christian Pulisic. I think that's where I struggle with demanding a lot of our LB, for example, until we figure out what the real depth chart is there. It doesn't make things impossible, but it does mean you've got to have tactical alternatives if you don't have personnel alternatives.
I don't think he will ever have the defensive chops. If we're moving a strong offensive player back there, Pomykal is a better option. But even then, Adams or McKennie are still probably better, IMO.
When I consider Adams a better passer, I am really looking at it more as to the type of passer he is. I think he is a much better passer of the type that would help this team. Who can hit a better ball from a static position and drop it on a dime is much less relevant to me than which of them can pass quickly and who can pick out an opening through traffic and who makes passes that move the team quickly. Yueill may well be better at hitting long passes under little pressure accurately, but I find this much less important for playing in what is generally one of the more crowded spots on the field... unless you drop deep all the time to give yourself extra time and space, which slows down the whole process and we're back to square one. And if you watch Adams at Red Bull, he makes those longer passes as well when the opening is there, and he hits them with more pace and actually creates danger so I'm not even sure I'd say that Yueill is technically a better passer as those lofted passes are far easier to hit. But absolutely agree depth is a huge problem for this team. We've got a super solid group of 6-8 guys at least 3-4 of whom are easy starters on any version of the US national team we've seen. Guys like Pulisic, Adams, McKennie, Dest, Brooks start for the US today, in 2002, in 2010, in 1986, whenever. Then, we have guys at the long end of the bench who get game time nowadays that would have been nowhere near the field in many cycles, really unbalanced. Some of this is down to Berhalter's choices, but a lot is down to the player pool.
Yeah I hear you but I think his argument was that he would be playing in front of WM and TA for the most part. A lot of this stuff comes down to semantics anyways when the game actually starts. If I'm reading his post correctly, his 4 2 1 2 1 seems pretty similar to what people have been calling for with the the two dynamic D mids. Yeah, and I agree, Paxton should probably have a place on the team in some capacity. Bottom line, is that a young, dynamic, athletic midfield appears to be developing into a strength for us. I think that is why so many people just can't wrap their heads around this idea of a passive deep lying playmaker at the 6.
Can someone explain to me why we'd use theoretical lack of rangy 6/8 depth to justify using a regista, where we have no depth? The consensus of our midfield pool is: McKennie (100%), Adams (100%). Next level: Pomykal (69%), Holmes (62%), Morales (46%), Yueill (46%), Ledezma (31%) and Lletget (23%). Fringe-y: Bradley, Roldan, Aaronson, , Servania, Gressel, Sands Here's our rangy 6/8s pool: Adams McKennie Morales Pomykal Aaronson Holmes Here's our pool of international quality registas: [nada] Morales and Pomykal are a big step down from Adams and Weston but they're better than any of our deep-lying playmakers.
I like Pomykal and I hope I am wrong but I think he will struggle to find a spot in the way Berhalter wants to play. He seems to attack with the ball at his feet pretty often, which basically is only allowed for the wing players. And, on the wings, Pulisic has one on lockdown and then you have Morris doing really well on the other or you may have Reyna playing on the other (which sounds like where Berhalter is likely leaning toward using him). I don't think the midfield roles as I've seen them under Berhalter really suit him well. They are more passing than attacking with the ball roles. And, the one time Pomykal did get on the field that I remember, he was put on a wing. I'm really curious how things will pan out for him if he keeps improving in MLS, but I would not be surprised to see his minutes pretty limited even into the future because none of the guys in front of him are exactly about to age out.
I think Yeuill is a better passer than you give him credit for. I see him able to function at pretty high speeds with the Quakes. It's just MLS, of course, but he's not actually a sit back and bomb guy. But that's neither here nor there. Depth has always been an issue for the US. The Charlie Davies injury was shockingly devastating -- for a player who was very promising but not a centerpiece, having no one to play that role took the ceiling of that team between 2009 and 2010 really drastically. Losing Adams for this team is devastating. Probably more than anyone. But losing any of the top 5 or so drops this team's talent so quickly.
I don't mean to knock Yueill as much as it seems. I do think he is a good young player and a big upgrade over playing Trapp or Bradley in the role for his increased tenacity and mobility if nothing else. When I saw him in person, I was very impressed with his overall ability as a good all-around player who worked hard and had decent touch on the ball. (Honestly I wish I was able to see more of our player pool live as I think the impressions you get on TV vs what you can see up close can vary substantially.) I simply think if you compare him to Adams, he falls well short and while the bigger reasons may be Adams' ability to defend and close down, it also includes his quick passing ability. And that may just be my thing, but whenever I watch Adams what always stands out to me beyond his quickness and defensive ability is his ability to keep the ball moving and make good, quick passes even if he's plucking the ball out of a crowd. I don't see anything comparable to that from anyone in the pool, not just Yueill. I certainly agree this team is much poorer without Adams in the lineup.
Good post. Pretty much sums up my thoughts on how the team should play, and why I've been calling for a 4-2-3-1 for a while. Part of me both hopes and thinks that Berhalter will do something like this for qualifying. Most importantly just playing Adams as the 6, Mckennie as the 8, and Reyna or Pulisic as the 10, but I'm not too confident in that. He could very well keep Bradley or Yueill as the 6 and play Adams at RB or something like that. How do you think we should line up if either Adams or Mckennie aren't available for qualifying? In other words, who do you think our 3rd and 4th CMs should be? As of now, I would probably go with Yueill and Holmes, but its a really tough call without having many recent club games to look at.
I don't get why the above system you recommend is different from Berhalter's Crew. I think your thesis basically comes down to playing Berhlater's Crew team and imagining that Adams + McKennie will make all the difference (as opposed to Trapp + Tchani or Artur).
Very true. The optimist take is he sees the talent coming and is playing the team the way that talent can, even though most of the players he was using couldn't. I doubt he thought Reyna was this far along here. Sounds like Dest was a surprise, albeit a happy one. He didn't call Weah at the first opportunity nor the second. He played Adams at RB the one time he had them. I think the more realistic take is that Berhalter thought the guys given spots, and major minutes, were going to be able to play the way he needed to to make the system work. To me, the optimism is solely in that he has learned that Trapp, Roldan, Lovitz, Baird, Zardes, Zimmerman, Bradley, can't play at a high enough level to hang with anyone in the FIFA Top 50 at home. Gregg possibly, and we have no real evidence yet, learned that there is something different about coaching the USMNT vs coaching in MLS. I have my doubts that he thinks that about half of that list. Hist talent ID has been poor.
(I got a little wound up again, sorry. Love you all, much prefer keeping this fun and constructive) There is one specific point that I think we need to hash out better, that is fundamental to a lot of our other discussions. Defense, specifically pressing. I have ranted a few times about how we need to start evaluating Berhalter and his system based on the reality of what has actually occurred and what he has actually been saying, rather than our hopes and dreams (illusions/delusions). I think this is important because although I acknowledge completely that he has never had all the personnel available, players like Dest and Gio just emerged, etc. We do have his entire (short and mediocre) coaching career at Hammeraby and Columbus, his many interviews and stated aims and most importantly 19 games with the USMNT to discuss. He does not have his teams press, never has and until someone shows me any evidence whatsoever, even him just ever stating that he wants to, I will not believe it. Furthermore, if anyone agrees we should press, or thinks that Berhalter will press, then you might as well go over to the fire Gregg Berhalter thread and lend your voice, because why would we not rather hire one of the very many competent coaches in existence that know how to teach and run that system, rather than a guy that has NEVER played that way? No he did not press. Canada II was a repudiation of all things Berhalter, not a celebration. We played the same low block basic bitch "defense" we always do, only Canada sucks balls in possession and they eventually ran out of room over and over again, or we had our good individual players make an individual play on the ball. This was old school bunker and counter, because Canada pressed US for some crazy reason, completely dismantled the Berhalter system of passing and build up, but left huge gaping holes behind them that we took advantage of, same as we have done since time immemorial. We did not "use the ball to disorganize our opponent and create scoring opportunities" either, Canada had 65% possession! “I think their approach was different,” said Piette. “They all came back and basically played a deep block, and it was hard for us to find the space in behind. They let us have the ball more than the previous game, and I think we managed the ball well. In the final third we couldn’t create anything.” This is another thing, it is not "Dutch" at all. Anything classically Dutch, since 1972 includes an aggressive and suffocating press. All of this positional play stuff isn't Dutch either, that is Lillo and Guardiola. Building out of the back is not even a tactic, or a system, it is just a thing that any team who isn't completely broken does. Which, going back to that Canada game...If we are calling this Dutch, then I don't know what isn't Dutch. So I just don't even know why GGG was our coach in the first place and I certainly don't know why anyone advocates continuing with him when any argument in favor of him is an argument for a coach that knows how to organize a press.
Totally like GGG's Crew teams. Only pressing and attacking quickly and directly, so the opposite basically.
That and featuring absolutely none of the players Gregg had in Columbus either. Pretty big difference when there is zero crossover between teams with the possible exception of Zardes or the return of Trapp and I don't see anyone who wants changes asking for either of them.
This is the other pertinent discussion point. Yes our depth is bad and it is unfair to consider alternatives like 4-2-3-1 I laid out or anything else like that as if we have the perfect line up with Dest, Reyna, CP, etc. all available, when Berhalter to his credit, has been making due with what is available. This again however is actually an argument against his complicated system that requires drilling and training to get down exact patterns of play and relies on positions, traits and roles that are not now and never been have strengths of our pool. Pressing out of a 4-2-3-1 is a relatively simple system, that is why it became so popular, it is a great equalizer of talent and system that promotes a plug and play concept within a structure like the national team where you do not have a lot of time and a smaller roster like you do in club ball. Additionally, the vast majority of our players play in a system like this and played is a system with more similar principles under Tab at the youth level, then they do in a Crew like positional play system, which is again the whole and only explanation for a player like Trapp coming anywhere near this team in the first place. Had we been playing a bunch of young dudes in a pressing and relatively direct attacking 4-2-3-1 I think we would have been able to make it work better than the current system even with the personnel issues, not that I can prove a negative. I can prove however that we are a lot longer on athletic 6/8 types who can press and move a ball quickly forward than we are on Pirlo types who can dictate play from deep. We would also be asking everyone, including our less than stellar fullbacks, to do more of what they do day in and day out with their club teams, rather than having them stuck in their own heads trying to figure out what zone to be in based on what this guy and that guy and the position of the ball are doing.
Watching the play on the field has been sufficiently discouraging that I would prefer never to see Trapp, Zardes, or Bradley again.
For qualifiers it's a safe assumption to count half of our best players out due to injury or lack of match fitness due to recent recovery from injury. Since Berhalter has had to deal with players like Weah, Adams, Pulisic and Brooks being out for a long time, we can think of the games played as a trial for those who will have to cover once we need it during WCQs.
So.....we don’t have depth of players who are good enough technically to play at a high level. ...yet the answer to that lack of depth is to rely on a system that requires superior relative technical skills even though our pool is deficient? Even worse, we have no one to competently play the most important position in this system? By competence, I mean the ability to have at least 3 if not all of the following - maintain possession under pressure - be defensively good - break lines under pressure via passing - break lines under pressure via dribbling huh?
Of course not. Watching actual domestic games and educating yourself on American soccer makes you part of the conspiracy against the USMNT created at MLS/SUM. You probably get Christmas cards from Don Garber. Real NT fans watch Bundesliga highlight reels and tell you that any American who steps on the pitch there is God, even if they haven't actually shown form yet that would make them an asset. I think Reyna's time will come but he's not done anything yet that would make him an automatic starter for the MNT. But he's definitely got talent.
FTR, I love MLS. I watch as many games as I can. One need not be biased against MLS to conclude that the Americans playing in top leagues abroad, commanding higher salaries, are better players. It just means that we are agreeing with what the market is saying about them. Also, I see no reason why the United States should be completely dominated by Mexico, lose to Canada, etc. given the available talent.