Given what happened, I'm tempted to say "a lot." And, considering it dispassionately, I will say "a lot." Reason: the one position on the pitch that has not performed is second striker to Jozy. We've tried Findley, who can't control the ball, Gomez, who can't finish, and Buddle, who hasn't made a difference. It's a glaring deficiency, wanting both productivity and team inspiration. We are a damn good side, but palpably incomplete.
Agreed, but we play the guys that we have and I'm behind all of them. They are all proven (outside of Findley lately) at the club level to be quite competent and they showed well in the friendlies leading up to the cup. Don't forget some of the intangibles that guys bring to the field as well. Take for example, if you look at the Bradley goal against Slovenia you'll notice Gomez making a really smart diagonal run into the box drawing a defender away from space and opening that space up for Bradley. Now, would Davies had made that run? Maybe yes, maybe no. One thing for sure is that Herc DID make that run and it ultimately helped us qualify top of our group. I get what you are saying, and yes Charlie is missed, but some of that is due to the fact that the more time that goes by without him being able to play, the better reputation he had. He was a budding striker with good confidence and speed and he had a lot of potential but as fans we like to remember only the handful of great games he had...not saying he had a lot of bad ones too but I specifically remember him having some very disappointing touches throughout matches before. He is a good player, we'll have him back soon, get well soon Chuck!
I'd say not that much. Not only did we top the group in goals but none were from set pieces and we had as many 'good' goals disallowed as England actually scored!
We miss an in-form Gooch a hell of a lot more. As for Davies, the answer is simple. Just go back to the first two games and think of the space that Findley provided at times, and the runs he'd made, and how little he did with the ball when he got it. Now try to imagine as dispassionately as you can how much more Davies would've done with it. (And he would've done more, but in all honesty, there were always a few dodgy first touches and so-so passes mixed into most of his games as well as some confidence and good touches and finishing... It wasn't all like that cross to Donovan vs Brazil or the goal vs Mexico. Both of which Findley doesn't do, admittedly.) That's how much we miss him. A significant amount, but not a huge amount. That's on the tangible side of things. On the team chemistry side? I can't say.
A ton. We also could use a healthy Gooch. This has been a lot of fun, though. Our boys are going balls out. If we had healthy Davies, Gooch and Jones, we would be really dangerous (and *still* could make a deep run). If we actually lured Rossi and Subotic AND had health luck? That's probably a top-5ish team. Maybe better than everyone but BRA, ARG, SPA and NED. We're not that far away. Get healthy, Chuck D. We'll make good use of you.
I'd be tempted to go back to Findley. Buddle looked awful, and Gomez couldn't quite get a hold of the match. Findley won't score, but he will make tons of room for the suddenly rampant (in form if not in scoring) Jozy. I think I'd still start Gomez, and then pull the Dempsey thing at half if it isn't working, but Findley could be worth a shout.
Davies is still our best striker next to Altidore, no question....Buddle, Gomez and Findley have yet to solidify a spot, however, out of the 3 Findley is on the top. He plays similar to Davies, but lacks the ability to finish...he neds more experience... So to answer your question, yes, I still very much miss Davies.
The problem is not that we cannot score, it's that we can only score when we have to and not when we want to.
A lot. He would have really made a difference against England and Algeria. Slovenia, not so much, as that game was really a midfield chess match.
WOW. Putting it so concretely is revealing. I think you have to add in England and Germany though. My feeling on this is that we have 10 positions amply filled, the entire midfield with cover. But one missing -- palpably missing. I agree, certainly, that he's not Klose or whoever. But what he is, or more accurately was and WILL BE, was/is a guy on the level of the rest of our starting XI. Which Edson Buddle etc. simply are not. Frankly, this is the kind of thing that does make a difference in this sport.
Interesting to note that all six goals the US scored during the knock-out games (yes, I'm including the 2 that were disallowed) have been scored by midfielders. Donovan 2 Dempsey 2 Bradley 1 Edu 1
Ah we can dream a little, he would surely start over Findley and he would amp up the 'never say die thing' even more. Heck while were at it we probably miss Jermaine Jones also even though I know he's never played for us lol Yes we miss a fully healthy Gooch as well So many 'ifs' but so far so good...
Not to derail the thread, but given a reasonable expectation on how the team would play (not on-paper, man-for-man credentials comparisons), you're really putting the current ENG and GER teams clearly ahead of this? ------Altidore---Rossi------- --Donovan-------Dempsey-- -----Bradley----Jones------ Boca---Gooch---Subotic---Dolo -----------Howard--------- That's a really, really good team, with Davies, Edu, Feilhaber, Holden, Demerit, Spector, Torres, Clark all as reserves. Anyway, yeah, all six of our goals in this Cup have been from midfielders. I know that's how we're oriented, but it screams for a striker who can score. That's Charlie.
Well, fine (and good point) but I'm not going for random quasi-foreigners recanting on original allegiances. I'm just counter-factualizing the truly unlikely scenario of losing Chuck Deezy. And noting that it's not like losing a guy from ANY other position. And noting that's the one position where, clearly, we are wanting. Or at least it seems to me.
In four years, Jones and Davies and the current team will have a lot of competition from the young guns coming up - healthy ones.
This also reminds me of the Stephen Davis situation with the Carolina Panthers during their Super Bowl year. They IR'd him and then went on a deep playoff run, and he would have been healthy (and useful) for the Super Bowl but was ineligible. Given Charlie is tweeting about starting preseason with Socheux already, he'd probably have been available in another 10 days for our World Cup semifinal.
yeah the competition is gonna be hotly contested four years from now. this USA run in this WC has got the next generation salivating.. -but on topic Davies would cause damage and destruction to the opposing teams if he were healthy and fit
If he was in midfield this would not be an issue. Anywhere else, it necessarily must be. The dude is categorically better than what we have off-Altidore, and nobody can plausibly deny that. End of debate on this.
The US is getting little out of its forward slots. Against Algeria Altidore looked dangerous more often than ever before. However, you must remember that Altidore took a sitter off of Donovan's foot and blew it over the crossbar. It was a horrible horrible miss and display of lack of composure. The decision by BB to completely abandon all of his previous decisions and bring along three new guys who "are hot" but had never played for the USA in the qualifiers is looking like a collosal mistake. All three have looked in over their head. Altidore has not had what he needs -- someone to help him and do the dirty work for him since he lacks tactical smarts.
I remember in the england game, Findley had a clear path to goal but I think it was king who muscled him and took the ball away. That would of not happened to Charlie.