Cila is a good kid who has shown a lot of heart this year, but I for one would much rather see Spenny start alongside Pedro, assuming the Scot is healthy enough. I'll take skill and experience over undeveloped youth any day. That said... how healthy does Spenny need to be for you to see him start? For example, does he need to be at 100%, or would say 75% be enough? Would you rather see him start and and go 60 minutes at less than maximum ability, or 20 at full bore? Or not start at all, under any circumstances? Thoughts?
I'm with you Greenie so long as the Wee Scott has had enough practice time this week. I don't want to have him out there at 90% of full health. If he's almost ready I'd rather see him as a 60th minute sub or something similar.
If he can go 50 minutes near full strength ... I'd want to see him out there ... with Cila brought on after.
NO NO NO... As i have said on the other post no why change a good thing.. Keep your boys spencer and de la torre on the bench... The team plays better without them
Here's the deal... IF Spenny is healthy, and he knows he's 100%, then he should start. It means we can sit Beckerman, and play Cila next to Mastroeni in the midfield. IF Spenny isn't healthy, I wouldn't expect him to be selfish and risk the shot at a championship...
This is the starting line up I would like to see ; Cannon Kotch Pablo Borchers Lewis Crawford Chung Cila Henderson Spenny & Pedro
If he is healthy enough to go 45 or more you should start him. I have always thought that if you have a player who cannot go a full game but and you want him on the field that you start them. Because when they can go no more you sub them. If you bring them on as a sub you run the risk of them not being able to finish a game.
I would rather play a 80% Spencer then Cila up front. If one good chance falls for both of them, I like Spennies experience. As for De LaTorre, no thank you. He's a liability on defense. If his free kicks are that valuable, play him up as a striker. He's a liability on defense. Causes the rest of the defense to make up too much ground.
Nope! I would rather see him sidelined...he is done! He gave up as Captain and I think he is meantaly done playing for us. Although I saw him at the game the other day with his family and he did not seem injured enough to get to his Club level seats. So...I think we are playing just fine without him.
I like this lineup. We then have Beckerman and De La Torre available for subs if needed in the 2nd half.
There is no on in the middle of the park to win balls, Mastro behind Cila, Kostchau inside with Crawford sliding behing Henderson, I believe Lewis is on the other side... That line up would require too much from Pablo in the back... Unless Chung decided to play some defense which he did not last game... when he does, this team is capable of great things...
The big thing is that Spenny has been great for us and like it our not this could be the last game he plays for us. I would like to see us show him some appreciation with a last start. On the other hand, I think that IF he is 80% or better you start him, but if he looks like he doesn't have it you pull him. This way you avoid giving up an advantage by leaving him in but it also allows him to dictate what happens. If he plays well great, if not I really would expect him to pull himself out. I think we will win regardless.
This has been my choice since midseason. I'd gladly trade Beckerman for Spencer (But then I'd gladly trade Beckerman for almost anyone on the team, so that's not saying much).
I'd agree. Realistically, I don't think Hankinson will alter the defense he has currently: Kotschau & Borchers in the middle with Lewis and Crawford out wide. That group has been fairly effective and I don't think you want to change it up. In midfield, I think you want Pablo in at D-mid. He is the best on this team at that position and his presence in the middle of the park, I think, adds to his ability to lead the team. Personally, I like Henderson out wide right since that is his natural position. Cila has shown promise as a goal-poacher (somehow knowing where to be at the right time) and should be in some kind of advanced position near the goal. Pedro is obvious. Chung out left because, well, why not? There aren't too many other options out there on the left wing. DLT? His ball skills are good, but he doesn't have the speed for the wing mids. I would lean toward starting Spencer for the same reason that Greenie cited: experience. I don't think any defender in the league is going to leave Spencer alone just because he is having an off year. He's a proven goal scorer, has always played with passion and, I think, can still infuse life into the attack on any given night. That being said, I think Hankinson should leave it to Spencer's consideration. If Spencer feels he is ready to start, then start him. If he thinks he should be a sub, let him sub and start Cila up top. He's a veteran of many years and often knows what he is capable of. My guess is, if Spencer is ready, he will replace Becks in the lineup, one-for-one.
The Sweez comin' atcha with some great points about our midfield. And I'm not just saying that because I agree. Spenny will do no good in the midfield, I'm not even sure anyone here suggested that. In any event, I like the idea and hope it will be that Hankinson puts this decision in Spenny's court. The Scot may have tapered off a bit this season, even become a bit disillusioned with Rapids/MLS/America, but there's no way you can question his competitive spirit. There's no way he'd take a starting role if he didn't think he'd be able to make a difference, and I would bet that he'd love nothing more than to leave Colorado on a high note -- whether that's simply getting to the semis or winning the cup, I'm sure he wants to give everything he is capable of. I do like what Cila brings to the game versus what Beckerman does. Hankinson may be largely responsible for Beckerman being so tentative in attack, but that's the situation we're in right now and if Pablo is part of the midfield then we need a central partner that is more offensive-minded... and thus I'd be happy to see Cila filling in behind Pedro/Spenny. Put Chung back out left (or wherever he winds up wandering) and Hendo on the right, backed up by Lewis/Kotschau/Borchers/Crawford.
Unbelievable.. . don't know what game you were watching ..... even the LA. annoucers made mention of the solid game that beckerman played. I want him on the field ..IMO Most of the games he has contributed to the wins and ties.whereas IMO Chung, Spencer have not done their job as of late and could come off the bench and even the back line has lost some games for us..
I agree, Beckerman has played well the past two games however if Pablo starts as a defensive mid then I like Cila as the attacking mid. Up top, if Spenny is 100%, he should be teamed with Pedro.
As far as I'm concerned, I want Spencer to start every match (if possible). Even though he hasn't produced this year, he's still more fun to watch than all the rest (save Chung and Cannon) IMHO.
That's all fine and good, except most of the time that's been with the team playing without Pablo in the midfield -- either because he's playing in defense (early season) or injured/suspended. I like Beckerman and have been a consistent supporter of his this season. That doesn't change the fact that he has very little attacking influence on the game. That may be how he's been instructed by Hankinson this year, but the bottom line is that we need to go out and try to win this game, rather than sit around and possess for a draw. The notion of playing with two holding midfielders in MLS is utter crap; no team has a pair of strikers and a pair of wings that are routinely dangerous enough to support such a system. When even Sampson starts singing the praises of playing with a pair of holding mids, (see his comments from earlier in the week), you gotta wonder where the wisdom is.
Got to agree. The formation leads to an excuse to have gaps in between your attacking players and your "holding" players. There needs to be some logical sort of shape in both ends of the field.