This will be a barometer on where the program is today. I don't care who BB runs out there or who is or is not on the roster. No excuses are acceptable. If we get embarassed by either score or competitiveness, then it shows we aren't progressing and I will be one of many that will call for his head. BB has settled in on a group of "favorites" and if this group isn't making it (and they're not) then the only possible solution is to get a new coach. I doubt BB will ever change so changing him is the only answer. We've lost enough time already.
They why is he on the roster? If he doesn't want to go "all out" play someone that does. This has always been a problem. The fact that he makes every roster, even if he stinks the place out his last outing Give us new cogs then. How many times does BB have to see Donovan, Beasley, Dempsey, EJ, all the defenders, before he knows what they can do? We're either in this to win or trying DIFFERENT players. I cannot tolerate prima donnas that may or may not play hard today. I wonder if England has this problem? My guess is that if someone decides not to play hard, they don't get another call right away. The US needs to do the same thing and send a wake up call to people that don't come to play. I think we'll get our Butts kicked today.
Hopefully a coach has it figured out by the qualifiers or there won't be a tourney time. Name an American player (healthy & available) that is killing the club competition but isn't on the roster today. We played six games in one tourney with Bradley's choice squad and won every game. But we only played one better-than-average team out of the six. The other tourney was useless as far as evaluating results (and individual performances) because we were overmatched in every facet of the game. This summer gave me more questions than answers. I know we can beat CONCACAF minnows and that's about all I know. And it's funny how you can give a detailed report of individual players but claim that is still what we need to be looking at. You make my point for me. We all know the players by now. We know their strengths and weaknesses. Bradley has this knowledge as well. Which means that he should be held accountable for the results he gets with the players chosen.
Teams aren't built from scratch. There's always continuity of players. We're mostly talking about adding a few new guys and the coach developing his system. This is appropos of? The statement wasn't in reference to a specific game. There was plenty to ponder over those games. It wasn't like the US swashbuckled its way to the title. We saw things differently, then. I learned a bit more. Not sure what claim you're referring to. Something got lost in translation.
There's only 2 things players can control: 1. How hard they work on the field 2. How well they strike a set-piece/deadball Everything else is relative and effected by the other teams' play/performance. So all the "strengths" and "weaknesses" are relative. You don't truly measure strengths and weaknesses without measuring them against the top level.
I will be happy with three things. (1) I want to see the defenders do a better job of picking up runs. Brazil is one of the best teams at playing players into space and I think this is the biggest weakness of our defenders. Our defenders do well with marking assignments but seems to need a fedex package to tell them when someone is going to run onto a pass into space in the box. (2) I want to see the midfield with Feilhaber and Bradley keep a tactical awareness throughout the match without living in a shell. That is defensively they need to be picking up the right players at the right time without fouling in bad parts of the field (especially with the good free kick takers on the Brazillian team). Offensively it means really making good decisions about passes wide and forward and moving into good spaces to continue the play. Bradley sometimes opts for the too conservative approach that results in a lot of negative play and Feilhaber sometimes goes too much for the killer pass that gives up a lot of possesion. (3) The forwards need to show creativity in the final third. We are good enough to get the ball there but are too predictable in our efforts on goal. With some teams we have aerial advantages so we score on crossess and set pieces; we some other teams we have speed advantage so we score on breakaways and counters. Against Brazil we will not have an advantage in the box and every player will be fouled on the breakaway even if they elude the defending mids and defenders. Someone with a good long range shot would also help with varying the attack.
Agreed, but you missed something that I added: "Everything else is relative and effected by the other teams' play/performance" and by the play/performance of one's own teammates.
I want to see those guys contribute to the attack, but NEVER get caught on a counter. That will take a lot of running and a very strong mental game.
I do & don't agree with that bolded statement. If player X decides not to work hard because Player Y isn't working hard, then player X shouldn't be on the team. If player Y is your Captain, then player Y shouldn't be captain and possibly should also NOT be on the team.
I agree. Though, I would like more purposeful running. I think we tend to compensate for tactical savvy with running. This works somewhat but has some definite negatives including getting too tired by the end of the game. While our team's athleticsim has paid dividends, I think that we have to careful not to become that player who given a particular strength, is less likely to develop others.
Alot of people want the US to try and hold possesion Try and be sound defensively and try to take some shots on goal.While thinking that we might not do all of this succesfully.The one thing I think is most important we do is go at them in transcition.By running at them and getting some early balls up to EJ who is starting of course