I haven't had the opportunity to watch Herenveen play this year, but reading the PBP threads it is getting ridiculously fun to read about what Michael Bradley is doing with his club team. I'm curious to hear from those who have watched him what the differences are between (1) his role with the USMNT vs. his role with Herenveen, and (2) the differences between the USMNT formation and style vs. those of Herenveen. To set up the discussion, here's how I see Bradley with the USMNT: 1) He's one of two dual deep midfielders (I don't really distinguish between a DMid and Central Mid here - the point is he and his central midfield partner generally both play right in front of the back line). His defensive role is to provide support from the midfield, pressuring anyone who has the ball and stepping into passing lanes. He only very rarely plays wide, only on occasion running back to help pick up the ball. Offensively, his role is primarily to distribute the ball around the field. He doesn't get forward often, either by design or because of style of play. 2) The US formation under Bradley, which almost all of us should be familiar with by now: ------- Forward -- Forward ------- -- LAM ------------------- RAM -- --------- LCM ----- RCM --------- LB ------ LCB ------- RCB ------RB ------------- Keeper ------------- Bradley typically plays the LCM spot. Unfortunately (IMO), the US attacks via the long ball from defenders quite a bit, bypassing the midfield entirely. When they do play short, US possession more often than not progresses through the central midfield, meaning either Bradley or his CM partner. The CM then distribute the ball from there, but you don't typically see either one carrying the ball on the dribble. There isn't in the US system any one player designated as an attacking midfielder. This is most noticeable in the center of the field, where the US often lacks a creative presence. It appears that the US system and style of play is setup to pressure our opponents and take advantage of turnovers, starting with the forwards and especially in Central Midfield. The US is rarely the creative protagonist in a game, especially when they are playing against a team of equal or greater ability. I look forward to hearing about how those things differ at Herenveen. Thanks in advance.
IndividualEleven had a pretty accurate description of the role Bradley plays at Heerenveen in some thread in this forum. I'll try to find that post. edit: Well, I can't seem to find it so I'll just try to go on memory here and add my own observations. When the opposition has the ball, Bradley is further up the field than he is most times with the Nats, mostly harassing the opposition into giving up the ball. When he wins it he usually makes quick passes to the wings (he doesn't play much as a deep distributor like someone like Benny Feilhaber might, although I've seen him send some pretty impressive passes from long range too), or if he's close to goal he might look for the short through ball to send his teammates in on net. When a teammate has the ball, Bradley immediately makes a run either slightly behind the two strikers up top, or often even further forward so that he becomes the target in a very temporary three forward setup.
I also recall Bradley making darting runs through the midfield or through traffic earlier in the season with the ball at his feet similar to the one he made late in the first half against Mexico. I haven't seen as much of that recently from him, but I haven't watched as many Heerenveen games recently. But he certainly has shown himself capable of that.
I can only go from the video clips posted on BS. My take is similar to the above. Bradley is frequently able to make attacking passes (or someone else makes the pass), either down the middle or to the flank. Those result in the ball moving into the PA or to the touch line. From either location, it is passed back or square, to Bradley who has made a late run into the box. The point is, as Nutmeg has consistently documented, the recent mix of US players has been rather inept at getting the ball into any position on the field that allows anyone, midfielder or otherwise, to run onto a pass for a shot. Clearly, MBradley has developed an excellent sense of positioning and timing, but it is all done in the context of team tactics at the moment he applies these skills. If the game is not sufficiently open for him to make an attacking pass followed by a run, or for just a run following an attacking dribble by a teammate, he'll never be able to replicate his Eredivisie in Nats games. Personally, I feel if the team is more balanced, this is not going to be a problem. By "balance" I mean output from the left side of the field that matches the that of the right. And, either Clark and Bradley have to play a lot more together to learn proper coordination, or the switch needs to be made permanently to Edu and Bradley. I favor the latter because Edu brings defensive stability that Clark doesn't and, thus far, has shown very nice play interactive with, and complementary to, Bradley's.
With National Team: --------------Fwd--------Fwd--------------- ---------------------------------------------- ----l-mid------------------------r-mid-------- --------------mid----Bradley----------------- ---------------------------------------------- ---LB---------------------------------RB------ ---------------CB-----CB----------------------- in attack: in terms of central midfield action ----------------Fwd-------FW----------------- ------------------------------------------------ ------------------Bradley or mid---------------- ------------------Bradley or mid------------------ ------------------------------------------------- with LB or RB moving into attack often With H'veen: ---------------Fwd---------Fwd--------------- ------------------------------------------------ -----l-mid-----------Bradley-------r-mid-------- ----------------------mid------------------------ in attack: action as withdrawn forward ---------------Fwd--------Fwd--------------------- --------------------Bradley------------------------- -----l-mid------------------------------r-mid--------- or as center forward ----------------Fwd-----Bradley----Fwd---------------- the fullbacks don't seem to attack so often with H'veen. This is from the 150 minutes of actions I've seen.
I posted this in the USM N&A forum but I think it is more relevant here: As good as Beasley and Donovan are as soccer players, they are not good at taking players 1 on 1 and beating them off the dribble. On the other hand, the U20 wingers Rogers and Zizzo, often take on 1-2 players and beat them off the dribble quite easily. Not only that, they also are very speedy (IMO, they are quite comparable to Beasley and Donovan in term of pure speed). That's pretty much the difference between the US Men's and the U-20 team wing players. I watched enough Heereenveen games to say that their attackers are very much like our U-20 players (very fast, very good dribblers). By beating players off the dribbles on the wings, they would cause chaos, pulling the opposite teams' players out of position in the middle and then Bradley would crash into the open space and score on the cut backs/crosses. Until we have fast and (not or) good dribblers on the wings, we (US and Bradley) will not be able to replicate the playing style of Heerenveen. Beasley and Donovan are not the right type of players for that style of play.
I gotta admit, never would I have thought that Bradley would turn out to be hugely successful in the role you describe here. When I see that "hole" position, I've been beaten into submission into believing it needs to be filled by some highly skilled trickster. Goddamn Dutch and their whacky ideas.
He does a good job in trailing the attack and finding the ball with Herenveen. Does not seem to do the same with the national team. I think its because for the US he asked to have more defense of role while Hveen want him as their more attacking player
JD had posted a video interview with Mike where he himself described what his role with H-veen was. Or was it in a USSF/US Soccer Players podcast?
As mentioned above, it's the wingers. Bradley needs good crosses/balls into the box in order for his runs to result in goals. Since the US doesn't play up the wings as often, he has less opportunity to run into the box and latch onto a ball.
he'd be incredible (possibly) with mcbride up top, donovan on the right wing and an actual healthy job behind him unfortunately, two out of three of those will never suit up for the nats again
Exactly--taking the other night as an example, there simply wasn't much of an attack for him to trail, what with all the long balls that seemed to bypass the midfield. You can't create space for a run of Bradley's type without some sort of creative midfield distribution and that, along with wing play (as everyone else has noted) is this team's achilles heel.
The biggest difference between Veen and the nats is that their forwards are great at holding and creating space on the ball . A good number of his goals at Veen come when forwards control the ball in tight quarters and create space for Mikey to run into. The only player we have who could do that above concacaf level is Landon (when he shows up). All our other options (Dempsey, EJ, and Altidore) aren't that type of forward. Now, as a previous poster already said...When Rogers, Nimo, and Zizzo are ready for primetime watch out!
Perhaps Altidore's best talent is holding the ball up! He can do it physically by holding off the defender or by facing the defender with the ball at his feet. I'd suggest that only Adu is better at the latter and nobody, including Gooch, is better at the former. Dempsey's problem, IMHO, is that he often doesn't look for the passing opportunity, but looks for his own dribble possibility to the detriment of the team. Donovan is by far the best at pulling defenders by running off the ball and by taking the ball away from the most direct attacking line, only to reverse direction with a good pass. The others that you mentioned are not remotely close to any of the others. That's why they are not ready for prime time. But, I'll keep my eyes open, just in case they show signs of being useful.
Yeah, I think you're right here but he's getting better at this, largely due to his being used as lone striker at Fulham.
Nutmeg, I don't think it much of a "whacky idea." In my view, the coach had the expertise to see a latent skill in Bradley and encouraged him to use it. Namely, making well-timed runs into the PA. He has to watch the play develop and press to take the opportunities as they present themselves. The essential point, relative to the USMNT, is whether or not the opportunities are ever successfully presented. If the attack is not balanced and the ball is not played on the ground by everyone most of the time, forget it. MBradley will not score a single goal if attacking buildup consists of long balls played out of the back.
The Revolution have much the same success, with the same type of player. Dorman at the beginning of last year, and Dempsey before him, scored a ton of goals from this position. As a-mids, they scored a lot of goals by making late runs into the box, but didn't play as the prototypical "creative" a-mid. I think the key is good wing play though, something that is a bit lacking for the national team.
True, and we all project Dempsey as a holding mid, too. I guess what still surprises me about Bradley is that he plays an even more fundamental game than guys like Dempsey or Dorman. He's not going to beat people off the dribble. He doesn't blow by people. It's all about reading the game and timing for him, and playing smart, simple soccer. People don't typically project that type of player as an AMid. But there's Junior, kicking ass.
The key, as was mentioned, is having "holding" forwards, who will keep the ball for a few seconds until a trailing mid or a wing will make the run into space. The US under Bradley neither holds the ball nor runs into space well. Heerenveen under Verbeek does both exceptionally well (plus, their wings are very aggressive off the dribble). If the Frisians played their defense a little tighter, they'd be a soccer textbook.
Dead on. IIRC, Bradley's goal for the US came from Edu playing it wide, a cross being played in (I believe by Cherundolo, but I'm not sure), and Bradley following up the play for the finish. So unless we're committed to wide, balanced play, the assertion is that Bradley won't be as effective as he could be? I can buy that.
Me, too. Claudio Reyna, Claudio Reyna, Claudio Reyna. Much better on the ball than Mike Bradley, without question far better, but godawful in the hole as it turned out. Moving without the ball and finishing are damn important too, if not much discussed, and there Claudio couldn't hold a candle to MB. It's not at all clear to me that Freddy Adu will be as good as MB in the hole, although for damn sure he looks the part, and yeah he'll beat out Claudio.
This seems to be another Euro vs. American coaching thing. The Euro coaches tell my son who plays forward, to hold the ball and slot passes to the midfielders making overlapping runs. The American coaches tell him to play two touch. Thus, you see EJ receiving the ball with back to goal, and promptly touching the ball backwards, as opposed to holding for the wingers' runs. Altidore is certainly big enough to hold the ball, maybe he does, but I haven't seen a lot of that yet out of him either.