International soccer is about the manager identifying how to put his players into the best system - not having a system and then force-feeding players into that system. The finalists of the Euros proved that point in spades. Mancini and Southgate both were very flexible with their systems in order to take advantage of player strengths and the opponent. In the last World Cup, Belgium and France both did a good job of adjusting their tactics to meet the strengths of their players. France put Pogba and Kante in the 2 of a lopsided 4-2-3-1, and it worked very well. It allowed Pogba to do what he does best while giving Kante the ability to do what he's the best in the world at doing. I've never once watched a USMNT game under Berhalter and thought "these guys are playing better than what their talent suggests. Meanwhile, I'll continue to watch Martino make adjustments and get this Mexico team to play better than it should be playing based on the talent it has. I'll say it again - this A-team squad with Martino coaching it would have been scary good and could have made some real noise in Qatar.
That's perfect!!! Winning results while providing plenty of room for cogent input (or complaints, of course) from the football aficionados of BigSoccer. With only winning and perfection, our verbiage might go dry and the basic existence of BS would be imperiled. I'd have to unblock several posters just to get a conversation going again, however dreadful it might be. Thank goodness GB's poor (yet curiously outstanding) team management schemes will spare me that horrible obligation.
Hoppe did not look nearly as fatigued as Lleget, or others, and I'll let his play in those subsequent 10 minutes speak for itself. As I said, Gregg was Fortunate.
Lletget just had a horrible game. I disagree about Hoppe, I couldn't understand why he wasn't replaced earlier.
Berhalter celebration analysis pic.twitter.com/7ZPeZk6Tmh— watke (@watke_) July 30, 2021 Apology 🇺🇸 @USMNT coach, #GreggBerhalter 🧢 is proud of his team and is excited for their chance to win the #GoldCup21 Final 🏆 #ThisIsOurs pic.twitter.com/5t5t9OBgnu— W Gold Cup (@GoldCup) July 30, 2021
I was agreeing with you and just noting a moment when the ball was pretty much out but Roldan slid in and saved it for some reason.
A reminder. This was even before last night's game. In the end this is a.................."the ends justify the means" business. Gregg has coached in three events that mattered. He made the 2019 Gold Cup final, won the Nations League, and is now at least in the 2021 Gold Cup final. All of the games that have mattered have been against CONCACAF. We get that. By the way, he's the fastest USMNT coach to 25 wins while almost completely rehauling the squad. The Nations League squad (the A team) bears little to no resemblence to the lineup he used in the Nations League group stage in 2019. USA is on seven-match winning streak, tied for second longest in team history. Record is 12 (2013).Berhalter's record: 24-6-3. Should the USMNT win tonight, he would become the fastest in program history to reach 25 victories.— Steven Goff (@SoccerInsider) July 29, 2021
If this thread is for tactics, I thought that both Sands and Vines seemed thrown or confused by the speed of the Qatar counter. Both had a lot of trouble with hesitancy making decisions about whether to challenge through balls coming their way, or to hang back and contain, and that hesitancy left them out of place. TBH, Qatar had a lot of should-have-been-goals in the first half, plus the PK. Whereas Robinson was outstanding, I thought. Speedy, anticipating, physically tough, never caught in no man’s land. I hope he put himself in the WCQ 23 mix in GB’s mind. I know we have few alternatives at LB, so I guess Vines has to be there too? I am not a fan of moving Dest away from his comfort zone. Vines looks erratic defensively to me, but he puts some nice balls into the box at times. (Remind what GB doesn’t like about ARob? Or why a 3-4-3 w/Dest and ARob forward is off the table?) Sands is young, esp for a CB. But he just isn’t up to it at the CB for WCQ, IMO. I think Ream and Miazga and Long might think that they are back in the mix after this if Zimmerman is out injured for WCQ. For me one of the best things about this GC, aside from eeking out victories, is the emergence of MRob and Zimmerman. But GB’s 23 for WCQ sure don’t seem all that obvious, even after two summer tournaments.
🎺 New pod!USA 1, Qatar 0. A tale of two halves. Turner massive, Miles and Acosta stand out again, Hoppe bright, and a late winner from Gyasi. https://t.co/5Q0ndGtip9 pic.twitter.com/oN5KzzcZCE— scuffed (@scuffedpod) July 30, 2021 1421226425697325056 is not a valid tweet id
Not to totally contaminate the Wheaties here but:Bradley had to play Mexico 4 times, Argentina 3 times, Brazil, Spain and England.— Bhima Jenkins (@Bhima_Jenkins) July 30, 2021
Berhalter and Tata have both managed their national teams for 35 games. Berhalter: 26 3 6 (W D L) Martino: 29 3 3
Still not sure Berhalter's "system" can ever create a decent number of chances, but hey wins are wins... It's clear the players like Berhalter, which isn't nothing. They’re singing Gregg Berhalter happy birthday in the team bus ❤️ pic.twitter.com/VJ6t1R8WAn— USMNT Only (@usmntonly) August 2, 2021 Also Tata Martino may be on his way out... Toronto next or back to Atlanta? "He has to be ashamed and he should present his resignation to the Mexican National Team"The Tata Martino out talks have begun in Mexico 👀 https://t.co/uxsOUEUKlG— USMNT Only (@usmntonly) August 2, 2021
At this point we should put to rest the idea that Berhalter has some monolithic system and we are stuck with it. He has progressed from working on possession to now working on high press and defensive transition. In spite of beating Mexico last time he still modified and improved the tactics. Tonight's win was a huge statement on Berhalter getting the most out of a team. He doesn't change too slow, he changes things carefully and incrementally. There is no throwing things out the window and starting over. Big plus IMO. We should also throw away the idea that he will not move forward players. He is never one to shut doors but he has no qualms with starting an unproven Bello and Williamson in a major final. That should be inarguable at this point.
The way the team was set up and adjusted in these last three games, it is like we got an entirely new coach. Super pragmatic, timely subs, high press all game. I still think he hedges expectations. Even last night, there was a good amount of, "we are here just to look at players not win". One example of pragmatism: but I can't imagine 2019 Gregg deciding that he liked a GK so much for shot stopping that he just had the team lose the ball on long goal kicks 80% of the time for 120'.
And it seems that the two programs are moving in very different directions, some of which relates to their work, and some of which is probably beyond the scope of their work and has to do with who is developing which players. I can say this, I don't think I'd take Tata now, at this point, to prepare us for 2026. I believe given what I've seen over the last few years that he would become overly reliant upon a set of players (perhaps the right players, but still) and not integrate the younger set of up-and-comers that we have currently breaking through that are likely to become important between now and then.
Look, I know full well that people are riding high on beating Mexico, but maybe we take a moment from sucking each other off and look at things objectively. I don't think Egg learned anything here. He was once again saved by luck. In this case a moment of individual brilliance from Turner. How many times did he have to come up huge to keep us in this tournament? and how many of you honestly believe he will compete for the number 1 against Steffen (who I think is maybe the most overrated keeper in the pool ever) Without Turner, I think we are having a very different conversation right now. The construction of this roster was bad. I can't find the quote, but when it was pointed out that he did not bring enough wingers after Arriola got hurt, he said something along the lines of "that is a problem we are facing." My dude, you built the roster and you only now realize that is an issue? In one of those rare moments of consensus, BS figured it out the moment they saw the roster... And for everyone saying well he did make the correct changes tactically, yeah only after he was forced to do so. And why was Lewis called in? Can anyone give me an honest defense of this? He also continues to overrate his guys. Lleget over Musah in the NL for example. I am also sure we will see Yueill again as well. As someone much smarter than I pointed out, Egg keeps looking at secondary traits as being more important than the primary traits need for any given position. To put it another way, we should look at it like this: Good Process, Good Results (the ideal) Good Process, Bad Results ( sometimes this happens can be fixed) Bad Process, Good Results ( You are here. those wagon wheels are very wobbly) Bad Process, Bad Results ( everything needs to change) I am sure some of you think bad Process, Bad Results is the worst place to be, but it isn't. It is Bad Process, Good Results are the worst place to be. And that is where we are right now. We have benefited, with a few exceptions, playing, by and large, teams that are either weaker than us, or are largely disinterested in actually playing us (see the Swiss) The wheels on the wagon are very wobbly right now, and at some point, they are going to come off the wagon. It will probably be ugly when it finally happens. Again when has NT looked more than the sum of its parts? in fact, when had the NT looked like the sum of its parts? I honestly can't remember. We used to be the Goonies, now...well we have more talent than we have ever had. Yet we always look disjointed. we are not creating a lot of chances. we look terrible on set pieces, we look bad playing out of the back. If not for some hero ball now and then it looks worse. Look it is nice to win, and Turner, Hoppe, Robinson, and Acosta made that happen for us. But sooner or later we are going to run into a team that is up for it and we are going to run out of luck and it is going to get ugly. Not to be a negative nancy, but we should enjoy this feeling whilst it lasts. because I have a feeling it wont...
As the old cliché goes, "you make your own luck". I don't think restricting Mexico to one half shot in the second half was down to luck.
I take this post as yet further proof that people invent their own reality, regardless of what reality actually places in front of us.
This tournament. No one before this tournament would have placed this team as the most talented team in this tournament. I continually see this criticism in different formats and there are plenty of times the team does not play up to full potential, but are we truly pretending that the fanbase's estimation of this roster was to beat a Mexico team that had 7 starters from Nations League? I see the results/process discussion and I've used the argument myself. It's not wrong. What is missing here is an understanding that we're not talking about one process here. We're talking about hundreds of decisions, often with many, many inputs. A lot of people would say that the process that led to the inclusion of Yueill and Lewis is inherently flawed. And maybe it is -- we're not likely to understand everything included. On the other hand, part of that process may be tied to how Berhalter interacts with players, offers them feedback, gives them opportunities. It may just be that many of the same reasons the team outworked Mexico yesterday is tied to Yueill and Lewis getting one last shot. Or not. I mean, I didn't want them on the roster, either. That's somewhat irrelevant, though. There's an element there of process that might be broken. But the bigger picture is that there's a ton of decisions here -- and just a few revolve around player selection. There's some luck involved to win any hardware, and there's certainly luck anytime a slightly outgunned team is involved. But I'm not sure how it is luck that Matt Turner played well, or that the team outworked opponents, or that certain players played really well, whether Matthew Hoppe in a new role or Kellyn Acosta or whereever. Lastly, if we're going to make a big deal out of good results and bad process, please detail what about the process you think was bad. Because "Matt Turner played really well" isn't fundamentally bad process. Especially when your biggest complaint is that the team doesn't play better than the sum of its parts. Because somehow it seems you think Berhalter is terrible at player selection, doesn't make the team play well together, but somehow gets bailed out by those terrible players playing well ... just not together. And no one is saying Berhalter is perfect or anything like that, or that there aren't questions marks. It's just I find it weird that we're portraying this win as somehow much more lucky than any tournament win, or devoid of positive attributes. At some point you need to actually question your basic assumptions and worldview.