The mentality argument is a load of horse crap imo. The players that need to be questioned for their mentality are the ones that most people praise. Players with real skill and technical ability like Nagbe are the ones that care more, outwork all their contemporaries, spend every waking moment with the ball, constantly think about the game, etc. That is how real skill is acquired, through blood sweat and tears, not this fallacy that guys like Nagbe are born with "it" and he is somehow squandering "it" and he should be more like these hustling donkeys like Bedoya, Zardes, Zusi, etc. If you want to question someones heart, hustle and mentality, question the try hard donkeys that never put in the work to develop real skills. So tired of us crapping on our few creative players and lavishly praising the dime a dozen piano carriers.
He'll be 33 in January and turtle slow. Like McCarty, the game at WC level will pass him by. Now, if you want to say he's a better option than Bradley, I may not agree but I'm listening.
That kind of criticism is fair, are there better players of the same creative type who could be more effective? Maybe. That is a fair question of skill set, not the intangible mentality argument based on conjecture and perception. I would agree that SK and BF are similar sorts of players and if any of the three of them are better than the other two overall it's not by much.
No, that's not true. He is still pretty fast for position he is playing. And somehow he always gets back on defense while Nagbe happily lollygagging around.
You seem angry for some reason, but it's a good point. For me, it should start with the right mentality. All the best teams have players that will beat you every which way, and since Nagbe has the skills and physical tools, more should be expected of him. But I don't disagree with you, really. Nagbe deserves credit for becoming a terrific player, and I've given him short shrift here.
Sorry if I came off more abrasive than I intended. We have just had this mentality discussion a few times in this thread, a few times in benny threads, sascha threads, LD threads, etc. and obviously I see it counterintuitively to most people. To be truly fair Nagbe is a super frustrating player and I totally get the criticism. I just find the other imperfect pieces more frustrating.
No 8 is going to look good in a midfield with a false 6. That said, I think Nagbe tends to be too reluctant to attack up the wing with the US; he routinely pulls it back, which sends us into the dark pit of our defense and false 6.
I still can't believe Arena plays him at LW at times. We need pace, width, willingness to get forward and final 3rd composure there. None of that is Nagbe. He's an 8, a CM, a guy who needs a true DM behind him and creative options in front of him. Problem is the chosen DM in Bradley is not a true DM and that results in some dual-pulley crapola, and to make it worse, Arena sticks our only real 10/ACM in Pulisic on the wing. Essentially, while Nagbe is very good at what he does, to actually do it effectively requires a limited set of circumstances and just about everything around him currently with the NT goes against it. That's where disagreement here comes from. There is a way to play Nagbe and let him excel at what he does but Arena isn't doing it. Hence why if he's not going to be put in that situation, some ask is it better to put someone else in there instead. That's why IMO while not as good on the ball as Nagbe, in the formation Arena played vs CR, a guy like Williams would being of more benefit to the team. Arena seemed to think similar in Honduras and chose Acosta to pair with Bradley and stick Nagbe wide, and that's not a solution either.
Nagbe was fine against CR. His job was to break the press, maintain possession and make drives, which he did very well, IMO. He also did not play as a "winger" versus Honduras. Arena's wingplay comes from his wingbacks, which is true of most modern formations.
IMO, fine and very well are not appropriate descriptions of his play. The midfield against CR was poor and Nagbe was critical to that. Ok, not a "winger". he played wide left... very passively.
While Nagbe has shown he can be useful at times, I wonder can he fit in a midfield that already has a MB we have to work around and a Pulisic we should be building around?
Nagbe's strengths are why so many fans were PO'd at Klinsi for using Nagbe so infrequently and only as a sub. Nagbe's weaknesses are why Klinsi didn't rate Nagbe. I'm glad Arena has featured him more, because his ball-handling skills are unique in the US pool, and he's had good games and forgettable games. The key will be figuring out which games to start him and which games he would be better as a reserve. He clearly belongs on the 23-man roster. I see him as somewhat like Reyna was back in the day. Arguably the most skilled player in the pool on the ball, but a possession player lacking some offensive bite. Many fans complained bitterly about Reyna being a back-pass machine, wanting more from him. Nagbe gets similar fan complaints, although I think his pure ball-handling skills are better than Reyna's were, while Reyna did show more intelligent passing and distribution. Reyna's more diverse skill set made him more valuable in his day than Nagbe is today.
Pulisic has 5 competitive matches against CR, Panama, and Mexico. On the basis of competitive matches against those teams and of the always brutal away match to Honduras, Bobby Wood is whom the team should be building around. Nagbe can excel in a variety of positions.
JK seemed to have a problem with low-key, relatively unambitious personalities like Donovan and Nagbe, players whom he felt needed to 'give more'.
Interesting that he played better and was more effective under Klinsmann. The roles he played with players around him in these last two games didn't suit him and really highlighted his weaknesses.
He was only positioned centrally for 30 mins in those 5 games. I wonder if that had something to do with it? I thought he pretty effective against Mexico and Panama... The Honduras and Costa Rica matches were by far the worst performances for the team. All players need support, and he got little in those games. Yes. Nagbe is versatile but his weaknesses are apparent in all those positions. He's a very talented player but doubt he'll be successful at this level without a very defined role with the right players around him.
The superstar is supposed to providing the support. He doesn't play centrally for BVB. Nagbe did quite well playing CM again CR. What was his weakness in that match?
I'm surprised more people don't. When I played or coached, nothing was more frustrating than a player that didn't give his all. It hurt the whole team. If you can't count on a player, the team begins to adjust to cover for him or have to find ways to make up for their production. Nagbe has the skills to be a very dynamic player, but instead he's just a skilled player who makes dynamic plays every now and again.
Can you elaborate? He was way to passive. He had no urgency to go forward down a goal with them packed in.