DC United's Formation :: What should it be?

Discussion in 'D.C. United' started by NavillusMot, Feb 7, 2004.

  1. NavillusMot

    NavillusMot New Member

    Apr 27, 2002
    USA
    D.C. Line-Up

    What kind of formation should D.C. United run this year. I was thinking along the lines of a 3-5-2 or perhaps a 4-3-1-2. It could have alot to do with the performance of Freddy Adu. He has been quoted saying that he prefers to play right underneath the strikers.
     
  2. sch2383

    sch2383 New Member

    Feb 14, 2003
    Northern Virginia
    I imagine we will see a 3-5-2, it is the formation that makes the most sense with the players we have.
     
  3. JayRockers!

    JayRockers! Member+

    Aug 4, 2001
    We should put someone up top who will shoot and score. We should have a keeper over 6' who can win. Defense and midfield should take care of themselves with this roster.

    Thx,

    Jay!
     
  4. TCompton

    TCompton Member

    Oct 21, 2002
    Alexandria
    I think we should do something in either a 3-5-2, 3-4-1-2, or even a 3-4-2-1. I personally like the latter two best because I think last year we had a tough time connecting our forwards with our midfielders. Putting one or two players directly in between the striker(s) and the midfield may help to alleviate that gap. Plus, if we went with a 3-4-2-1, we would have the opportunity to use two of our "withdrawn" forwards.

    Without focusing too heavily on our defense right now, I see a line up like this

    Defense:

    ----------------Rimando------------------
    ---Reyes--------Nelsen----------Petke---

    I’ll be honest, I’m not sure that I like Petke out of the central defense. He just seems a bit out of position in my opinion. However, I don’t think that he’s better than Nelsen in that role, so I’ll put him there. But, like I said, I’m not focusing too heavily on defense right now.

    Midfield:

    -----------------Namoff-------------------
    ---Olsen-----------------------Kovalenko--
    -----------------Convey-------------------

    I’m not sold on the Defensive midfielder slot with Namoff. Although, I like his toughness and he is aggressive, so that’s a definite plus. I’m not sure about Kovalenko on the left wing either, but Convey has got to be in the central attacking midfielder role. He’s a forward thinker and can help bring the ball out of the back very fast. Plus, with two outlets ahead of him (in a 3-4-2-1) it keeps that triangle of options when it comes to the quick passing combinations.


    Offense:
    (in a 3-4-2-1)

    -------------Stewart----Adu--------------
    ----------------(Striker)----------------

    (in a 3-4-1-2)

    -----------------Stewart-----------------
    ------------(Striker)—(Striker)----------


    The Striker can be any one or combination of Adu, Cerritos, Eskandarian, Quaranta, or Martins. Although, given Cerritos’ salary, I’d be more than a little tempted to trade him. Although, Stewart and Cerritos have combined well together, so they might make a good combination in the attack. Unfortunately, if it’s Adu, Cerritos, and Stewart leading the attack, then I’m afraid that we’re going to have a problem winning balls in the air (similar to last year.) I’d really like to have Martins as either the main striker or one of two, but his ACL tear will unfortunately keep him from fitting with the team right away. (It’s a shame too.) If Quaranta can regain the form he demonstrated his rookie season, and show that he’s focused enough to play solid soccer for 75-90 minutes, then I wouldn’t mind him there. The other thing is that Eskandarian is getting lots of experience and playing time with Convey which could also prove successful when the season gets going.

    There’s a lot of options, that’s for sure. I just hope that Nowak can turn this club around.
     
  5. TCompton

    TCompton Member

    Oct 21, 2002
    Alexandria
    Actually, thinking more about it, I might suggest switching Convey and Stewart so that Convey is more focused on the attack... but I don't think there'd be any harm either way.
     
  6. MikeLastort2

    MikeLastort2 Member

    Mar 28, 2002
    Takoma Park, MD
    I think we should use 10 field players and 1 goalkeeper.
     
  7. TCompton

    TCompton Member

    Oct 21, 2002
    Alexandria
    That's the worst idea I have ever heard of! Why limit ourselves to 11? We should play with at least 15! :D
     
  8. sckrmom

    sckrmom New Member

    Jul 17, 2003
    Gainesville, VA
    You know, I thought that myself LAST season, but it never came to pass.
     
  9. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    Raleigh NC
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    A 4-3-3 fits the personnel the best. Except for BP at LB, everyone is in a natural position.

    ..................GK........................
    Reyes...Petke...Nelson...Prideaux
    ...Olsen......Convey........Dema....
    ...Earnie.....Cerritos......Quaranta.

    The midfield lacks some bite too. But I'll tell ya, that right side is gonna lock down the opp. left side. They won't be getting forward much.
     
  10. Sanguine

    Sanguine Member

    Jul 4, 2003
    Reston, VA
    The strengths of this team are in defense and midfield - particularly attacking midfield. The weakness is up top. I say to get our best players on the field in positions that they're comfortable, we should go with a 4-5-1. (or 4-2-3-1 if you want a breakdown between holding and attacking mids)

    Reyes-Petke-Nelsen-Prideaux
    .......Namoff-Kovalenko
    .Stewart...Convey...Olsen
    .............Cerritos (Or Esky)

    Cerritos and Esky aren't tall, but Cerritos is a good passer with his back to the goal, which should work with the 3 top mids making runs off him. Esky has great leaping ability, and Martins can play the position when/if he comes back. Olsen is on the left because I feel he's in a better position to shoot when playing on that side. The only people playing somewhat out of position here are Kovalenko and Prideaux.

    I think the Prideaux situation is something we'll just have to deal with for now. His tendency to stay home rather than get forward will allow Olsen more freedom to attack, which would be stifled in a 3-5-2. Kovalenko would also be protected by Prideaux and have some freedom to make runs forward. You could even put him in front of Namoff in the diagram if you liked, which is closer to his natural spot -- if he even has one.

    The danger of this formation is obvious. With only one striker, he can be stifled if he doesn't get support from midfield. I think the midfield personnel we have will remove this burden if they're encouraged to attack and have confidence in the defenders behind them.
     
  11. mellon002

    mellon002 Member

    Jan 24, 2003
    Towson, MD
    Don't mess with the back line, we need four defenders back there because Nellie and Petke are center backs, not outside. We need a 4-4-2.

    Reyes - Petke - Nellie - Prideaux
    --------------Dema-----------------
    Stewart------------------Olsen
    --------------Convey---------------
    -------Cerritos-------Adu----------
     
  12. Blublub

    Blublub New Member

    Jul 28, 2002
    Silver Spring, MD
    I agree, except the bit about moving Olsen to the left (I'd put Stewart there on a probationary basis and deal him for a true left-footer if he underperforms again, but then again my ongoing doubts about Stewart's potential likely cloud my opinion).

    I do like having Stewart further back on the wing and Convey directing the attack. I think any formation that has Stewart further up front than Convey is a recipe for scoring drought ala 2003.

    I hate the 4-4-2 as much as the next guy, but I really don't see how the roster warrants anything else at this stage.

    We're definitely going to miss a true target forward in the above formation. Maybe Q1 could replace Cerritos if he finally gets his act together. I'd say don't feel a need to be so careful with Freddy - if his skills merit a spot on the starting 11 (as I'm sure they will), then so be it. Let him learn on the job at his own pace, it's certainly better for the team than the alternatives.
     

Share This Page