Another insightful article. I like moving Eliseo into midfield, but not at the expense of Convey being pushed to the wing. Convey in central attacking midfield was THE reason our offense appeared at the end of the season. http://unitedmania.mlsfansites.com/...06&PHPSESSID=b0fbd75355fc0ba7ddf10cd3de1c5408 -Tron
Diceson wrote: I'm not going into all the quotes, but I didn't read anything that screamed "head coach" material to me. Just my opinion. Sachin
True, Etch's presence definitely helped. But, I would rather have Convey and Eliseo in central attacking midfield rather than have Convey pushed wide. Etch didn't produce goals for this team when they played together. Convey did. Etch didn't produce as the sole central attacking midfielder this season. Convey didn't have a chance as the sole central attacking midfielder this season. (I don't count Colorado because he didn't have any practice with it before the game, as Etch was a game-time scratch). You have a point that it was a tandem, but the point remains, Convey was the engine for scoring. -Tron
Well it sounds like Convey is feeling more comfortable with being a central mid than he was early on in the season. Good thing and it's good that he wants to stay there. Our problem with that right now is that if Villegas is gone we only have Mappy as an alternative to Convey at left wing as Q2 can no more play the wing with his glacial speed than Alegria or Alevanja. However we can expect a fair amount of movement and I'd suspect that both Etch and Lazo are vulnerable: the midfield is being built around Convey, with an assist from Olsen. It's the other three pieces that are unknown.
They may be working Q2 into the midfield in the anticipation of losing Etch. I share Tron's worry over moving Q2 to the middle of the park at Convey's expense. Frankly folks, Etcheverry didn't start putting the wood to teams until Convey moved into the middle. I think it was a case of the sum being quite a bit more than the sum of its parts. You can't say Etch made Convey look good without stating the converse. I've been a resolute backer of Convey from the beginning and I was pretty critical of Etcheverry at the beginning of this season (and all of last season). By the end of this season I found that Etcheverry did (and does) still have a lot to offer this team. It will become that much greater a gift as he transforms himself into a complementary player rather than being the "Grand Central Terminal" of DC United. Yay Marco! Yay Bobby!
That's the point Chico. Convey isn't ready to take on that role by himself. And I would argue that he (unlike Etch) has never shown in a game that he can do it. (I am talking results not ability) Just like the dual role of Bobby and Marco, people are far to itchy to dump Marco and promote Bobby. --In reality I bet Marco stays and Bobby continues to play in the middle until he proves he can or can't take over. --Where is everyone getting that Marco is gone? Practically every source had him winning Ray Hudson over. The only way Marco is gone next year is if Ray finds some super steal in Europe that can take his place. ( I believe that the salary issue with Marco is about as valid as his annual anti-ref rants/retirements. He wants to stay in DC and will take anything within reason to stay) Now if anyone is a sure thing to leave... its Moreno. At least if your trying to read tea leaves.
Thanks Diceson for the great report! DigitalTron, thanks for the link! The most conspicuous thing in the report to me was: "In 2002, players due to injury missed a total of 94 games. By contrast, in 1998, the team had over 130 games missed by players due to injury. The norm is approximately 100 to 110 games per year." Which clearly indicates that the supporting players were much stronger in 1998.
In thinking about possibilities for next year's midfield, it would help to remember that DC's approach has been a bit extreme. At its best, the DC midfield featured one central midfielder who was all offense -- Marco -- and one that was all defense -- Richie. And the outside midfielders stayed outside to a remarkable extent. Other teams -- in MLS and in other leagues -- feature more two-way midfielders and encourage more interchanging of positions during the course of the game -- both between 'offensive' midfielders and 'defensive' midfielders and between inside and outside players. The future for DC should probably follow more of this model than the Marco-centered model of the past. That's not necessarily a knock on Marco (although we can go there if you want), but a reflection of the fact that Marco is an unusual player. It would be easier to find four/five decent midfielders who can interchange than one 'playmaker' in the Marco mode.
Don't others think that Q2 is a bit too slow to play in the midfield?? We need to come up with a killer d-mid for next year. Think rapids would take a lassiter for Pablo trade??
Reading what he has to say, he definitely wants to play in the middle because he played there before when he was in the U-17 team... The only reason he moved to left wing b/c he was tooo small when he came to the league and he wasn't ready to play in the middle... But after several stint in the league, Convey is ready... I know Hudson knows with Convey in the middle, they started winning alot more.
You're exactly right. I've said it before about this past season, that our midfield is outdated. Of you want to look at a good midfield, look at Liverpool. All the players are two way players and they're all over the place. Of course they have more talent, but D.C. should reconfigure the structure of their formation in my opinion. I like the idea of having a full time fitness coach. I figured we already had one.
The only remaining team in MLS playoffs with the traditional playmaking midfielder is Colorado. Everywhere else it's offense and defense by committee. I thought we had a full time strength (fitness) coach too. It's odd that he was here as a volunteer last year, one day per week. Glad to see the restructuring. And regarding the player games lost, I think they should be weighted by the salary to get a true picture of the effect on the team. GM
I wouldn't say salary but rather what their contribution would have been had they been healthy. In 1998 we didn't have Peay, Gori, or Simpson for stretches of the season, but they were hardly as likely to get into many games anyway. As I recall, of our starters, only Sanneh and Llamosa suffered prolonged injuries (Pope and Goose missed games due to the Cup), and Kamler . Also, 4 more games were played in 1998 than this year. You cannot compare 1998's injuries to this year's just by looking at the numbers of games lost. Dave
Yep. As to whether Convey is ready to be the sole attacking midfielder, I don't think we can answer that. With Etch there, it wasn't going to happen unless Etch was injured. The only game Etch was out with injury was a last minute scratch just before kickoff at Colorado. Convey had no practice for that position, and performed poorly. But that's not a fair test unless you give him some time to practice there, and give his teammates time to get used to him there. IMHO, the last few games when he was the withdrawn forward and Etch was the Holding/Attacking midfielder were more indicative. Etch played next to Convey some, but usually one was high and the other low, so there was a clear "attacking central midfielder" and it was usually Convey. In fact, on almost every goal we scored during that stretch (which were quite a lot!) it was when Convey was the attacking central midfielder. Nifty play is fun to watch, but to me, it's just more Chris Albright. Lots of good things happening, but it's not putting the ball in the back of the net. Convey was the engine for us putting the ball in the net. If he doesn't deserve his chance now, then I'm doubtful that people will accept anyone besides Etch. When Landon came into the league it took him quite a few games (like 8 or 10) before he finally found his rythem and started to look like a star. We've played Convey in central midfield 4 games now, the first was an emergency situation and he performed poorly. The second he did pretty well, the third and fourth he was simply awesome, leading DC United to an comparative avalanche of goals. Convey deserves the keys to midfield IMHO. -Tron
FYI - The 'Attendance' should read: "G - Chris Snear (from Cybersoccernews.com)" . . . the same guy that writes the excellent columns about DCUnited on that site. He's been out at practices as much as I have all year long and knows the team very well. His insights should be required reading. One other item that I didn't add orginally was Ammann's retirement, only because I belive it is inevitable. At this moment, Ammann is not retired officially. In fact, as I understood it, the WP article caught him by surprise. However, re-reading the article makes it sound as if he 'might' be forced to retire, but the decision hasn't been finalized, a viewpoint I agree with totally - everyone is reading too much into the article. Olsen was able to come back from 4 surgeries, Ammann might attempt another series of surgeries and then see what options are available. He is only 31-years old, and can easily play for several more seasons if healthy. His Goals Against Average lifetime is a meager 1.77, and he was an All-Star. He still has jump in his game if he can come back.
So Amman's salary may be on the books next year as well? Look, as much as people may love him because he's a great guy, we can't have $125k of the salary cap (as reported by Goff) being taken up by a guy who has no chance of playing because of injury, and even if he did, would be no more than an expensive back up to Rimando.
Nothing against Ammann, but I will be furious if we have to pay his salary again next year and it counts against the cap. I don't mind compensating him, but it would be ridiculous for us to be penalized for having signed him only to see him miss all these games due to a career ending injury. Aren't we being penalized enough by having to pay one of our "players" 125 g's who isn't stepping foot on the field in the forseeable future?
Tron, don't forget this telling quote from Convey before giving him near-sole credit for every good thing that happened near the end of the year: "I was glad I was in there with Marco because they mark him and I kind of have a little more space to roam around."
I have the utmost respect for you as a fan and your analysis of United Atouk, but I cannot underscore this point enough. True, Convey said that, but anytime someone is marked, someone else is likely open. It would be silly to say that they didn't gameplan against Etch, but they've been doing that all season. The difference was Convey centrally vs. Convey wide. When Convey was wide most of our productive offense came from the left hand side--no surprise because we had Convey there. Reyes was on the right supporting as an extra attacker, while Convey had to track back to cover for McKinley, or he had no offensive support from Prideaux. Still, the majority of the productive attacks came from the left. It is just unfathomable how some people continue to discount Convey's success. When Convey was out wide, was Etch marked? Yes. If anything, having Convey centrally subjected Etch to less man marking. Therefore, one would expect Etch's productivity to rise, but what we saw was Etch playing a productive game and Convey playing a dominant game. If teams were smart you have to assume that they noticed that. If the argument is that Convey was not closely marked, then it is simply incorrect. Convey's speed, vision and dribbling ability allowed him to either beat his man or "pass around" his mark. When you do this consistently to a defender, they tend to play back and give you room for fear of getting burned. Sad, but true. When Etch was in the game he very often played behind Convey or as a withdrawn winger (for lack of a better description). Etch has always liked to meander wide--it works for him. The difference was that with Convey consistently in the center, many many good things happened. Look, Convey's not tall, not strong, not a great quote machine, not a true goal scorer, and has not been the subject of transfer talk. But, IMHO, many people are letting that obscure their vision of his play. This guy is the real deal. His game is entirely different than Etch's. His strengths and weaknesses are entirely different. But, Convey is, IMHO, the best American playmaker in MLS, and would benefit United, himself and the USMNT best by playing centrally. He's proven he can take possibly the worst ever offense in MLS history and get it to produce goals. He did it without any real help from Moreno or Santino, our consensus "only" finishers. To me, the MLS talk about Convey sounds a lot like what Taylor Twellman said happened to him in Germany. He produced yet everyone looked the other way and he never got the chance. I say give Convey the chance as central attacking midfielder now, with or without Etch. -Tron
I'll second that but I'm not sure i'd say Convey is the BEST. I'd say one of the best, especially up and coming. Kyle Martino isn't too bad either. Anyone know anything about Capano with the Fire? Just wondering.
I agree with most of what you say and, for instance, I think Convey is stronger than most people give him credit for, having already formed an opinion about him when he was a bit smaller. However, because an Etch/Convey pairing in the middle of a 3-5-2 was and can be productive, I'm not sure that leads inexorably to the conclusion that Convey alone running the middle of a 4-4-2 would lead United back to the top of the heap next season. Is that what you meant when you said "Convey deserves the keys to midfield IMHO."? And if you meant Convey in a 3-5-2 without Etch, who else would be there with him? I'm inclined to leave The Kid in a central position in a 3-5-2, but I think Etch beside him could be a very good idea and that his play is more than "nifty" and "just more Chris Albright." However, is Etch the only one who can fill that role? No. And if Ray is out finding someone else who can, that's great. Anyway, I simply thought you downplayed Etcheverry's role in United's semi-turn-around late in the season and thought that Convey's quote at least somewhat supported that thinking.