The number of goals that the Dallas defense gave up late in the season suggests, contrary to popular opinion, the defense of our beloved Red and Black did not improve in 2002. Last year the defense was feast or famine. The team recorded many shutouts (9, if recall correctly), and they were involved in just about as many blowouts. The 3-5-2 formation was vulnerable to the counter-attack, and when Dallas needed to push for a goal they usually got one in the back of their own net. This season, the formation switch to a 4-4-2 helped the team limit the number of blowouts in which they were involved mostly by having an extra defender to help contain counters, but did not necessarily mean that the defense was improved over last year. This year’s performance by the defense when games mattered most down the stretch was very poor to say it nicely. Throughout September and 1 game in October, the defense conceded 3, 4, 3, 2, 3, 2, 1, 2 goals. That averages out to 2.5 goals per game. There aren’t many teams that are going to win consistently when they have to score 3 goals to get the “w”. The Red and Black’s record for this stretch of games was no exception as they won 2 and lost 6 matches. And just to highlight the fact that their Defense was not pulling their weight, in the two matches that they won, they scored 4 goals. The key question is where did the defense breakdown this year? One of the places to look is Matt Jordan. Once DJ Countess went down for the season, Jordan was forced to play every minute of every game down the stretch. I think that the goal he gave up late to Colorado on September the 1st, rattled his confidence going into the US Open Cup against LA two days later. Once Ruiz hit that rocket for the first goal Jordan was done mentally for that game. Unfortunately, he did not have but two days to recover for the next game, and then Mathis scored in the first 90 seconds of that game which started the vicious cycle all over again. Not having spelled Jordan at any point down the stretch was one of the causes for the poor showing of the defense late in the season. The other obvious place to look is at the back four. Centrally, both Morrow and Bonseu have a tendency to concede the midrange shot to avoid getting beat by balls played into the space behind them. Teams took advantage of this late in the year. You never saw Jason or any other Dallas forward getting that kind of space near the top of the box of their opponent. A pattern to several goals Dallas conceded was for the opponents taking advantage of the space vacated by the outside back, either Suarez or Broome, drawing out one of the central defenders and then crossing the ball to an open man in the box. Mathis, Faria, Twellman, Valderrama, and most painfully Chung all scored in a variation of the same play. The most disconcerting thing about these plays is that most of them were not even out and out counter-attacks. If the Dallas defense had learned to stop that single play, they would still be playing LA right now for the right to go to the Cup. The last place to look is the defensive support coming out of midfield. There is little doubt that the midfield was geared towards offense. Martinez and Vaca/O’Brien on the wings would come back and help on defense, but their focus was offense. Deering while better than Zarco at D-Mid this season would never be confused with Pablo Mastroeni or Chris Armas. And Pareja by this point of the season was playing on one leg. The biggest fault of the midfield in their defensive responsibilities this season was their inability to maintain possession effectively while providing a safe outlet for the back line to play through. So as we gear up for a long off-season we should all be aware that one of the priorities for 2002 should still be a priority going into 2003: Upgrade the defense.
Statistically the defense did a much better job. Here are some stats I just pulled from mlsnet.com: 2001 47 goals allowed in 26 games 1.81 goals per game 18 allowed at home 29 allowed on the road 36% of goals allowed in last 15 minutes 8-4-1 when scoring first goal (11th in the league) 2002 43 goals in 28 games 1.54 goals per game 15 allowed at home 28 allowed on the road 25% of goals allowed in last 15 minutes 9-0-3 when scoring first goal (1st in the league) I think those last two stats are particularly telling. In 2001 our defense had a habit of folding at the end of the match, and leaving us with the feeling that "the defense lost the game for us." Not so in 2002. Our defense was much tougher holding on to leads. And even beyond the statistics, Morrow and T-Bone in the middle gave me a sense of security I never knew for all of 2001. But our defense is by no means the class of the league. Our goals allowed total this years ties us for 5th in the league, which is the very definition of mediocrity. But that's better than last year. I agree that our defense needs a tuneup, but I don't think we need personnel changes. Maybe Gbandi challenges for Broome's spot, but I don't think major changes are needed. We made marked improvements in the back this year, and I bet we'll make just as big an improvement in 2003.
I really think the midfield and the forwards are the culprits here. When Oscar got hurt he couldn't help as much on offense or defense. While Deering played out of position as a straight d-mid he is not the destroyer need when the other three mids are offensive minded. So while the goals against increased at the end it was because the other team had constant possesion at the Burn's end and the constant pressure that entails. Don't forget that it is also usually easier to defend when you have a lead and the Burn was pressing a lot because of a goal drought and that meant that broome and Suarez had to make runs up field that left their spots open.
Nice analysis from both of you. To me the biggest culprit was the formation. You played a 2-6-2 formation. Broome and Suarez were almost always playing up. It makes for some exciting soccer! But unfortunately, they never got the feel for balence of one or the other wingback staying back on defense while the other plays up on offense. This is the reason that Morrow (no speed) and Bonseu (covering too much ground) had no choice but to concede the midrange shot. The two of them were the entire back line much of the time. While Broome and Suarez both played up, they also both played wide, so the Dmid didn't really get any help on the inside. Martinez and Vaca/O'Brien often pushed into the forward line, so they weren't helping win too many balls in midfield. Your analysis of Pareja was spot on. He helped out most of the season by performing both playmaking and ballwinning duties, so the attacking system covered some of it's defensive flaws. But, as the season ground onward, Pareja wore down, and without a rest, was unable to do the same defending he did earlier in the season. This exposed Suarez and Broome a lot more. Next season Jefferies needs to instruct Suarez and Gbandi/Broome that only one goes forward at a time, and they need to alternate. All have speed, but that's not enough. They need to ensure that there are 3 back at all times. And, when they're caught forward, they need to destroy or delay the counter. Neither was particularly good at that this season. Also, Jefferies needs to rest Pareja and Kreis. Vaca, O'Brien, Martinez and Broome can cover for Pareja. Johnson can cover for Kreis. -Tron
Ideas One theory would be to have Suarez commit to a 'stay-at-home' role, essentially creating the 3 back and allowing Broome to push. However, I believe the Burn would be better served if Suarez was allowed to push and Broome was replaced by a 'true defender'. Either Broome plays mid or we trade him. Just because Broome gets burned at 'critical times' during a season is not the main reason why I think we'd be a stronger defensive squad with a true defender. I believe that Paul gets turned too easily, and when he has to 'chase back' from midfield after a failed 'push' - allowing the opposition a dangerous, deep crossing attack... well, this is no way to defend. Forcing Bonseu and Morrow to eliminate forwards on the receiving end of crosses in this 'all-too-often-rush-to-defend' atmosphere, is extremely counterproductive. Desperate defending on deep counter-attacks due to midfield giveaways - is no way to make a living at central defense. Jordan would be a better goaltender with this setup, and we'd have a happier Suarez (I believe he'd want to be traded if relegated to a stay-at-home defensive role). If the Chad, Oscar, Chivas and O'brien keep their same roles, then Broome would be forced to sub in for Chivas... actually, I would enjoy seeing both play 'all-out' for a half each. The Burn would, by far, have the most dangerous left side... WITHOUT giving up the left defender position, in all of MLS. Come to think of it, we could do the same on the right side too. While I don't think Vaca could match the defensive skills and get back like O'brien can, I think we could give Stone a shot at playing the first half and let O'brien go wild in the second. Just an idea.
I see Stone as the most likely answer to the defensive mid destroyer although he probably isn't ready for next year yet. As a way to get Oscar rest, Stone should relieve him when we have a lead and Vaca when we are behind. Both Vaca and Stone should get occasional starts as Oscar gets some games off. I see Bussey as more of a late option wide right than Stone because of speed (he really needs to work on ball skills this off season though) and Behnke will be in the mix on the left next year and could develop into a left sided Chris Klein.
Yeah, it was really disappointing to see Bussey's ill-fated attempts at going around defenders this past season. He needs a LOT of work. Question is, can the Burn afford to 'develop' him by giving him valuable game time.
BINGO! That is precisely my point. When you do a straight statistical comparison between 2001 and 2002 you would conclude that the defense was much improved in 2002. However, the trend of the performance of the Dallas defense looked like the charts of my 401k: a defnite downward spiral. They played well early on. They were steady through the middle of the season, but then they took a nosedive as the season came down the stretch drive. By the end of the year, the defense was not any better than it was last year. The trend was established over 8 games (over a quarter of the season).
See, I look at it differently. In a lot of those matches late in the season, we were struggling offensively, we couldn't score, we were trying to battle back from an initial deficit, and we would get burned on the counterattack. The Colorado series was a perfect illustration. When we score, we're able to keep things cool, not have to press forward, and the defense can handle things nicely. Yes, we gave up the first goal in Game 1, but it was a fluke goal and by the time Colorado got #2, they were down 4-1 and the game was over. Meanwhile, in Game 2, we lost 1-0. We only gave up one goal. Problem was that we didn't score. And in Game 3. We gave up only one goal again (during the game). But we only scored one goal. Result: We're off to the minigame. And we all know what happened there. If we have any sort of consistent scoring, Colorado is done in two games. But we couldn't score, so the few defensive mistakes that the boys do make become that much more glaring. When we were scoring more consistently earlier in the year, those defensive mistakes weren't as costly. They'd ruin a shutout for Jordan. They'd make a result seem a bit closer than it really was. At worst, they'd change a win into a draw. Now, they're changing draws into losses and making close losses turn into blowout losses.
No doubt that the lack of consistent scoring was the primary key to the downfall of the Burn this year. This is a problem that the 7 teams that are sitting at home right now have in common. I am just pointing out that the defense played a role in the downfall as well. Getting beat on a counter-attack within 90 seconds of kicking off a game more than once can hardly be blamed on the offense. Not to mention the number of games when the opponent should have scored in the first 90 seconds and somehow just missed a gimme.