If we lose this series, should Gansler get fired? He puts Burns in and we give up two goals in 25 minutes. It's so f-ing predictable. You need a great defense to be able to bunker successfully.
I had to attack Gansler since I've always admired him, but we keep blowing games and tactics are the only explanation. He'll go down as a hero in my book no matter how many times he screws up, but that doesn't mean we should keep him. If there are any Gals reading this (i.e. Topper), I still think we were screwed and deserved to win the game 2-1, but that doesn't mean we didn't fvck up monumentally.
Burns should be out of the league by next year. He's a misery. Maybe Gansler will be too. On the plus side he has the team ready to play. On the minus, his game tactics are lunacy.
Well the KC players were doing their "Let's pass every ball to LA or out of bounds and let them back in the game" impression. The players let them back in, but ultimately it was Bob's fault for not clamping down on the problem earlier. Between tonight and the atrocious choice of subs in C-bus, I'm not gonna put up with it anymore.
Gansler should be gone whether we lose this series or not. Even if we pull off an incredible run, I'd like to see him go. I appreciate what he's done for the team, but all coaches must move on at some point. Some earlier than others. I can't take another season of this mind-numbing "attack, get the lead, then defend" stuff. How about "attack, get the lead, keep attacking"? I've been kicked in the gut too many times this summer. I hope the Wizards pull it out and win the Cup, but I'd still like to see a change of coach.
I hate to pick on him and think he's been treated unfairly, but what the heck is he still doing in the league??? He's like a bad nightmare that won't go away.
Why? You're not thinking about this at all? I can't imagine any Wizards supporter not thinking about this.
Gotta go... I may not post much, but I do watch as many games as I can, and this is agonizing. The college football team (yes, that dreaded sport) that I follow (where I went to college) used to play like the wiz does today - play great soccer, then stop, and try to maintain a lead. You lose all momentum when this is attempted - that which got you to the point where you had the lead. Well, when the coach finally realized that didn't work (he is a young coach and learned from his mistakes), he tried the aggressive thing the entire game and whamo, we started winning games. It's a sport mentality, not just a soccer thing. I think Bob is past his prime to try to learn from his mistakes, and a new leader, even one that might need to learn on the job, would be better than watching the same thing, game after game. Nough said!
It doesn't suprise me that you are the one to say this. Personally I think you must be sleeping with Bob cuss you are the only one defending him. Come on charter open up yor eyes and look what has been happening. We get a lead and then everything stops. The Revs last night went a goal up and against the Fire and did that stop them from going forward? Hell when they went up 2-nil they still didn't sit back. You don't stop another team from coming back by bunkering. You keep going forward to keep the other team in check and not letting them push everyone into attack. And you sure as hell don't bring on Mike "I need to retire" Burns.
Despite the obvious inequity of comparing an unidentified college team with KC, I get this point. On the surface it looks like a good reason to jump a coach's case. Obviously, the game is not just made up of one team dictating tactics and the other team giving in to them. The problem I have with this view is KC has at times given up goals at the end (although not as many as most MLS teams) by having an inability to link up with forward people after gaining possession in the final :10. In MLS you get increased pressure at the end if you are leading. Every team does regardless of system, score, or game location. The difference is how a team handles it. C'mon, I seriously doubt that BG issues an edict from the sidelines to play in a panic mode after the 80th minute and immediately whack balls out of bounds! KC hasn't blown anyone out all year, so it should follow that every game they have won, they have done so by being able to handle the inevitable late game pressure.
Which really hasn't been alot of late when it most counts. The team folds instead of handling the pressure.
When the bunkering works, the team feeds off of it and becomes better, perfectly tuned for playoff soccer. When it fails, they become burned out and shell shocked. This team is currently toast. I hope they pull it out. I want the Wizards to win, but I fear for this team. Gansler must go.
Problem is to pull off Bob's tactics, you need one hell of a F'ing defense cause he'll start his bunkering scheme at halftime with a 1 goal lead. We had that in 2000, we sure as hell don't have that now. Between that and the fact that the MLS has continued it's increase in talent and there's some pretty good forwards in this league now who can handle the pressure, create chances, and finish, Bob has to change his philosophy or he's gotta go. The Morelia game was one thing, you can't coach a team to a 6-0 loss or whatever it was, that was 100% the players fault (though the schedule didn't help out much). But in two of the three most important games this season, the team, and Bob has blown it, the LA game and the Clb game. I don't know how close Colorado was to scoring so I can't comment.
Why cuss the Wizards finally played liked they should have all year? It is amaising we can turn the switch to attacking when his ass is on the line.
I started this thread to have a discussion not to bash Gansler. I even prefaced the quesiton by "if we lose the series" Gansler should not be completely immune from criticism or have 100% job security just because of 2000. Taking off a guy that scores goals in favor of a lousy defender increases your chances of losing. Even teams that have great defenses might not be served with this strategy. Put your best team on for 90 and you'll mostly likely have the best results.
Yeah, Gansler is the problem in KC. The game has changed in the past two years, more than it had in the previous 150. It's now a shoot-out. Offense wins the championships. He should plan on the typical final score being in the 23-21 range. What gets me is that he has so much more talent than anyone else in the league and, still, he fails to produce the 10 goal masterpieces we deserve so much in this city...
I'm sure it was the 30 posts on the board innanely calling for his head that was the much needed catalyst to spark the finishing.... Whatever. The reality is that KC played the same game they have been attempting to play all year. This time they finished and did so to a high enough degree that it was pointless for LA to expend energy at the end to pressure. Some on this board like to believe that KC bunkers with any kind of lead. Well, if you've been drinking (nothing wrong with that) and just look on the surface, then yes, it appears that way. KC at times is forced to play on thier heels (or chasing) because the wingers and forwards are forward and have not bothered to defend or they are still kicking themselves for missing yet another sitter). The consequence is that KC has to pick the ball out of the net or defend with 3-5 guys against a heavy attack. If enough pressure is put on by the other team, the wingers and forwards come back to help and then there is no outlet. With no outlet, it's a dump and chase clear. Under pressure, when KC does get a clear leading to possession it goes trough Zags or to a corner with one-touch buildup up a wing towards midfield. They don't do anything else with consistency. If KC can't direct the play to those two "outlets", they get stuck in their own end and lose the ability to use width and breadth in an offensive shape. Also, it's normal for any trailing team in this league to dominate the final 10 min. Only dc during thier scoreless binge wasn't even able to produce that kind of pressure. Under any amount of pressure, a team must be able to transition from D to O. If you can't, you will lose eventually, sometimes big. When KC can't possess, everyone falls back to cover. "Bunkering" isn't a gameplan, just a by-product of having to cover for many screw-ups on the field. Think about KC's biggest weakness all year - the inability to defend set pieces. How do you counter that? Don't give cheap corners and fouls out front, by getting multiple people goalside and in position. In the 15+ games where KC couldn't finish a sentence, the priority becomes defense by default. Simply, it's rarely bunkering, it's a complete inability to control possession and run a transition game. You want to blame Ganlser for that, fine, then there's something to discuss. Whew, I'm done.
Not really defending Gansler on this thread. But his decision to move Diego into the inside left defensive midfield position has been of great benefit over the last few matches He was suspended for one, I know) But you could see in the LA match yesterday that not only did we have Zavagnin breaking up any attacks they could muster (not many) Diego was doing this and bringing it forward and creating too. Good move by the coaching staff.
This is the problem - that the bunkering starts at half with a one goal lead. Wizcharter mentioned starting the bunkering in the 80th minute, and that might be OK with a two goal lead, but to start at half time with a one goal lead is assenine (sp?). Take the 1st LA playoff game - get lead, bunker, lose lead (tied up), start playing aggressively - regain lead, start bunkering again, lose lead, start playing aggressively and regain lead... you get the point. Now, astound me, but the second LA playoff game, we didn't pull the dogs off. Maybe Gansler has been reading this stuff about him to old to change, so decided to make us look bad! Not to hard after that game. Way to go, Wiz! I don't mind being wrong with wooping like that!