Pre-match: Concacaf Nations League Quarterfinals @ Jamaica (Nov 14) & v Jamaica (Nov 18)

what other manager in the world had the fortune of playing only 7 away games vs. 38 home?

 

I think Poch's plan will be decent. What I'm still not sure is if the players will give 100% concentration and effort.

 

Probably none. How many teams are often out numbered by fans of other teams at home?

 

This is leaving out a handful of Nations League away games and a couple friendlies

I know we played Canada and El Salvador away (I had the misfortune of attending the former) and got a draw and loss in those. We also played Cuba at an "away" game in The Cayman Islands, Cuba couldn't play at home.

Also off the top of my head their were friendlies with Wales, Switzerland, and Northern Ireland (1-1-1) in those. Not sure if I'm forgetting anything else

 

For Poch’s first competitive game I’ll be content with a draw and no stupid cards.

 

I'm perfectly fine with the idea of sliding players around over having to have a specific depth chart that does not overlap and then calling in lesser guys because they fill the slot. To me, that whole thing where we have a depth chart and it's always next man up by position is faulty. When players go down, sometimes you need to change what you do because the replacements are almost never exactly like for like. We don't have Dest right now so we play differently, and we should. If Jedi goes out, we would also play differently and we should. We should be flexible and set things up to play based on who we have available and how they best work together, not just be tied to a depth chart based on a generic game plan.

 

Problem is that was partially done last game, and it was a disaster. Musah played wing, & had 0 duels won, 0 balls won, 0 key passes. Aaronson gets flack for the performance, but he had 10 duels won, 4 balls won, 3 key passes.

It's what happens if you play a guy out of position/role. In a vacuum, Aaronson's a superior winger. I haven't liked it w/ Pulisic on the other side because they're too similar. But sans a Pulisic, like v. Mexico, we'd have been better served playing him at winger.

Musah may have been forced to get into the action where Aaronson was if he was in the middle & the remit against Mexico may have been more about ball progression against physicality/pressure which serves Yunus. But if the emphasis is going to be more on creation, obviously Brenden is superior in that department, even if he leaves something to be desired. Luna, for one, ups your creation.

Playing the guy who's generally a higher quality player may make some feel better, but if they can't do the job that's required of that position/game, then it's counter-productive. And you may hurt yourself at 2 positions if he's moved from his better one.

Reading what the situation requires, & having players complement one another, is more the name of the game. Then you can get away with not having virtual world class players at every position. We've tended to err in putting ill-fitted b-teams together & then drawing the wrong conclusion that some of those individuals couldn't be next man up w/ the a-team.

 

I feel like much of what I am looking for today is eerily close to what I was looking for ... and somewhat didn't see ... last time.

1. Intensity. Last window was much more meh than I expected from a coach who preached fight and a team that should be looking to impress. Some of the player pool chosen was around for those days when we'd press ... but I simply wonder if we've traded far too much for the finesse game.
2. Tactical changes. I'm curious to see how close to last time we are. I don't expect huge changes, but I think we may get an idea of how much Pochettino will change things / thinks he can change things.
3. Are we mixing up CB?
   
4. Where does Weston play and who are the CDM(s)?
5. Mostly just hoping to see more with more of the A team.

 

Agree.

My guess, based upon my experience, (nobody is perfect), is that some of his assessments will be correct and some will not. (classic "duh" statement) Imo, at this stage of the game, it is more important what he does in evaluating and changing his player and positional choices (set his core and find/put in place a system). Some of those assessments will obviously be easier than others. The more prominent players at the top may need a bit of tinkering to optimize their roles, and the system around them, but that is more fine tuning. Once you get into the fringe roles (fringe/occasional starter, fringe 1st man off the bench, fringe 23rd man etc), it becomes more difficult imo. That being said, once the system is set in place, it becomes easier to integrate the rest of the players into the team.

 

If Poch trots out a similar lineup (Musah on the right, Tillman in the middle), I’m curious to see if those players have been instructed to be more involved and what that looks like.

 

I agree with this. I just don't think having a structured next man up who does exactly the same things in exactly the same position is how you get there. For me, flexibility is more useful to get to a game plan where the guys on the field compliment each other best.

 

Exactly.

Not only that, the better the first choice is at what he does, the harder it is to replicate that. Any attempt at duplication will likely end in failure.

We don't have a player that can do what Dest does....don't replace him with a cheaper knockoff. We don't have a player that can do what Jedi does, don't go for the knockoff. Scally, imo, does a good job at rb but for him to be successful he has to play differently than Dest. Any potential replacement for Jedi, whether Lund, someone else, or a positional/system change has to be made without the constraint of trying to emulate Jedi.

There has been a lot of talk about our system being asymmetrical. It's been asymmetrical because Dest is out. Everything else has been largely the same. Instead of attacking down both wings, now we attack down the left.

It's hard to determine from 1 game (I couldn't watch Mexico and couldn't bring myself to watch knowing the result), but I do think that we attacked through the middle more against Panama...I consider that progress. I have been saying for a while that we need to open and create space in the middle for a while now. I hope that is part of what Poch is hoping to achieve.

Does Poch have his plan for that finalized? I have no idea but I doubt it. I do believe he has more than a concept in mind and I believe that he has a starting point that he needs to tryout. Whether he tries that in a game this window or just looks at people in training I don't know (my guess would be the latter but that is just a guess).

 

I agree with all this, and I'd just add that if you look at Pochettino's past tactical history ... his tactics in the opening window shouldn't really be a big surprise.

He would commonly create a 3 ATB in the build up, often out of a non-traditional 3 ATB. It'd be common, for example, for a CDM to slide back into the back line. Or, when he had a stronger passer GK, he'd even flank his CBs wide of the keeper, creating that as a back line (I doubt we ever see that).

He usually reinforced his build up by creating numbers and angles. Pulling back the CDMs and having the CAMs come back is exactly that.

He tries to create overloads in the middle -- we didn't see that as much but we did see trying to bring the ball up through there. I think this is one of those practical concessions -- we weren't going to overcommit numbers from the midfield with that roster. And maybe not this one.

He likes having two guys wide and it is often the fullbacks -- yes, but with Scally versus an offensive fullback. He adjusted. I'm curious that given that Dest is more of an interior guy, if we see adjustment.

It's basically the basic framework of his tactical plan, except he was less aggressive offensively, he held Scally back because it's not in his skillset, and he had some outlets deep up the left side because we're not as skilled as his club teams to always build out.

A lot of things can change now, but I don't expect things like the 3 + box build out to be much different, for example. The players may come from elsewhere, etc., but he's going to try and build out via numbers, and if he can do it centrally, he will. Exactly the positioning and number of guys on the lines or which positions come into it will all change on personnel. But I think it is far too soon to see something drastically different.

 

the basic deal with away games is since roughly klinsi this has gone 433 ish and that's an awful formation to defend from. and i don't care how you think we slide around or whatnot. if we lose a ball in MF or from a defender -- which we often do -- there is no time to slide and 3 mids is swiss cheese.

deployed aggressively at home, we have bigger home blowouts than ever.

deployed away, we have become worse at grinding results. because away is not let me cleverly throw bodies forward and take risks. it's absorbing a pounding, not leaking, then smashing and grabbing a goal or two to get results.

nope, you can look it up. roughly through bradley we'd gotten real good at ppg in WCQ and winning or at least tying away. we ran the table at home. if we tied or lost away it was mexico or CR. the good ones.

since then, we decided to get cute and take risks. and the rest of the region, now piling into MLS, USL, and europe, got better. so when we take a dumb risk or lose concentration, we get punished. so now we tie ES, lose to guate, lose to TnT, etc.

we need to get away from "tactically clever" in the abstract and get back to, i have a concept which thwarts the world's best teams, and an offense where we can get a couple goals a night and find the striker.

you want to regularly beat slop? get a good scheme and be disciplined. you want to beat good teams? ditto.

you want to try and show off? keep doing what we're doing. i am sure teams are delighted we are trying to build 120 yards with a bunch of dump trucks in the back 2 lines. or that for big games we show up with a vulnerable defense then take risks.

 

the xs and os talk is fine, overloads in the middle, blah blah. do you think for a second musah and mckennie are the guys to sustain passing through such teachings?

this is the problem, is it's like vague tactical talk over here. then fanboy all star team chatter over there. no one asks is the all star fanboy favorite over here the guy to execute the tactical plan over there.

i do believe jedi is suited to his tactics, setting aside whether i like his tactics to work. but i don't think a ton of our other players are suited.

other examples, say, if we are trying to get out on fast transitions, i kind of need mids who win balls then can hit a 30 yard pass where they meant to. what i saw last game, the only dude who did that was a forward tracking back. not any of the mids. and yet i get crap for saying that F (puli) should maybe be a MF in this scheme.

to me if you want your scheme to work, puli and reyna at MF, win it, they will hit that outlet pass.

or you need a different bunch of empty bucket guys who actually consistently win balls and then can complete a pass, to someone like weah, reyna, puli wide.

as it stands what i watch, is if the backs can even complete their pass, the mids can't string it much further, and we can't find the 9 with a telescope. which if the offense is designed to funnel to the 9, is bad news. explains a lot.

 

right, but hes carrying 4 keepers (only one of which both plays and is good), yet a line has to be drawn at fb?

 

incorrect. a lot of what CA was about was the team devolving into a cliche of itself. trying to break down a tough uruguay team with a sputtering half court offense where the idea seemed to be to whack crosses in without a target guy to head them. then not being defensively sound ourselves.

panama was about discipline, but, hey, they outcoached us the previous summer. and i think some of that indiscipline was at how much we'd been struggling for how long, eg, germany, japan, saudi, holland, on and on.

no, we think we're cute, we're gonna try and pass our way through 120 yards of some of the best teams in soccer. and with guys like musah and mckennie who are sloppy empty bucket tank mids. not technical la masia barca boys skilled at holding in tight spaces, and stringing passes. holland made that look just as stupid. in a way similar to colombia, actually. sit back, entice, win ball, long ball wide, counter, goal.

and the long ball wide and counter work because we've sent jedi 50 yards upfield.

and your reyna specific analysis is laughable. do you remember how he was being actually used at the end? GB had him jogging back to goal back to the backline like a point guard to bring it forward. he was almost playing 6.

the coach had taken his star playmaker and turned him into a ball fetching 6. how is that the player's fault?

are you serious with your theories.

 

two trophies!

 

to me the GK absurdity is if you're gonna carry 4 keepers actually try some in games and work on cap tying kochen. and god forbid turner hurts himself or keeps making gaffes and we need to make some decisions and put someone else out there.

kind of like they repeatedly called sargent about 3 windows in a group of 4 strikers, which was out of whack itself, then he finally sees the field the 3rd time there. does squat. hurts self. gone again. waste of time.

the US has lost the spirit of position competition, of earning your gig by playing well, and of having a challenger who gets some caps.

and to me calling 4 people then barely using some hints at we overemphasize club form or practice players and not enough of how games go. to me you call 4 guys to get 4 guys in games. not to have them for practice and make the decision there.

 

saying x y z could also play back is fine. and i agree with some of the "but he also plays" stuff. yeah, richards has played wide.

what you're missing is the team is struggling and you're wanting to shift guys around when we barely have anything sorted. so move richards or weah, 2 of the few things working?

it'd work if we had guys identified two players deep at spots. i think a lot of us would debate if the starting CBs are good enough, or who should be the wide subs. and you're like, move the CBs or wide starter?

you're acting like this is some smooth functioning machine and not a mess where you want to double book some of the few guys paying well.

that and like i said, no one is saying "no plan," they're saying poor plan.

 

invoking the cult of poch, that's earned. eg bradley went undefeated around a year. do that and i will defer to the genius. until then i am like i see the same players called with the same results and some of the same issues. i saw about 30' of harder showing to the ball and faster passing tempo, and defensive intensity. i then thought i saw us turning the ball over tons. for a supposed possession team. and not trying to thread some ball deep in the final third. i am talking just stringing balls to build upfield.

 

you win soccer games regularly being mismatched with other teams, too skilled, too fast, too good in the air. or by developing some sort of star-negating defense that links up to an offense.

we try and be cute and then usually are not dominant in terms of skill that day. we aren't faster. sometimes we're even slower and not that skilled. we act like we want to cross the ball but often don't field anyone to win the aerial battle. and the defense is set up to pass the ball sometimes to the right team, not to stop messi or neymar or whoever.

worse, GB has drilled into this team to be tentative final third when any possible mismatch ability is like buried. and repeating myself, we are not unusually skilled to break teams down in half court, but nonetheless let teams get back to create precisely that scenario.

i feel like this team has some nascent athleticism but the scheme is not set up to create chaos then counter and crash the box -- which is what the pool might be suited to.

or, we have some technical mids, but they sit behind the fanboy all stars who don't fit the scheme.

to me we have mature soccer team problems. before, when immature, we didn't have the fanboy type politics of who played where, because barely anyone would sign us abroad. so there were not distortions from the scheme. and the scheme was picked assuming we were overmatched, to try and stop their key players and win counter style. we now have players in all sorts of leagues but have struggled to set that aside and figure out an effective scheme that stops opponents and gets goals, and to separate out fanboy favorites from who fits scheme.

i am not sure how soon we get past this because right now it's like the fanboys won the debate, forget what wins games with our pool, i want to play pep ball, i want to show off......and then our team is not actually that showy. and then on some separate field it's like the fanboys adore having guys in UCL but do not connect up what they just said about what they want us to do, with how their favorites actually play. maybe they are so excited to see americans in UCL games every night they don't think it through.

to me the snobs when i was growing up would connect the 2. i want technical passing soccer on the floor. ok, go get the technical mids. but i think part of it is they didn't have the same ability to see all these guys on tv and confuse themselves. they knew what they wanted. and they would try to actually play that way.

 

epiphany -- it's just one big scattered mismatched Grab Bag of European Stuff. just grab some guys who play UCL. and a coach who was UCL. and some ideas from europe. and who cares if any of it coheres in any constructive, harmonious way. in short, we don't know what we're grabbing, or if we do, we lack the discipline -- little different from dest or weah, in a sense -- to demand it from the field product. or to shift the field product to what the UCL players can execute.

yep, that's it. bingo.

to be fair, i hope we win. i hope we look better doing it. but to me the call sheets hint at whether we are "getting it," and i don't see it yet. you can't possess without possession type mids. period.

and people can make fun of the old, crude ways, but that crudity was planned, was intended to negate superior opponents and coutner them, and was generally done by selection to scheme such that some good nationals didn't get a ton of caps or have much success, because they weren't suited to what we were trying to accomplish. and so mcbride and dempsey are heroes over jozy and lassiter and wondo.

fulham lads.

maybe at some point when we are sick of losing, and where we have a jillion kids abroad and every single guy is big club and it all cancels out, and it's not fanboy pouting on "how could you bench the juve player," or "how could you not use the guy who barely scores NT but had 15 in club," we'll get a clue back.

but on planet reality wondo had both the MLS goals record and basically the biggest howler miss in team history. i don't know when this became club form = country, that's never been true before.