Pre-match: International Friendly: USA vs Netherlands; March 26th 2020

didn't dest play RB against ukraine? you know, the game where he gets isolated then shielded off the ball badly for the goal. like schoolboy stuff i wouldn't even do.

i think he's an interesting player with a skill set that prepares him to currently be a wing sub up top or in the back. i'm not convinced he's a defender yet, and he has the worst GAA of the 3 options. but he's young. so like sargent he should be set up to succeed in a supporting role while he works on things.

 

I was adding to the point you were making.

I have been watching Davies at Bayern, and he looks like he has potential to be the best left back on the planet, and that he's not far away from that right now. Hes physically imposing in many ways, smart, and excellent with the ball in attack. He has come a long way from the skinny teenager that left MLS.

With Davies, we should expect that Canada has a surge toward competitiveness in the region.

Dest is an excellent young player in his own right and he has, as you have said, looked to be a foil at times to Davies, which I find to be very interesting.

 

a guy or two who are excellent might put you in the discussion for the top 6 and get you some home upsets like they got in LoN. like TNT lives off the Jones Bros., Guate off Ruiz, Jamaica off Bailey. but other than in some sort of Couva or 90th minute situation it remains a team game and what elevates or lowers you is accumulation of talent.

it's the difference between first year Beckham at LAG and then after Gullit got fired and they redid the team to be less the Three Stars and the Eight Dwarves.

so to me it's less a question of how does Davies grow and instead whether Canada has some more coming up.

i think the snobs want to blow up this one individual, because this is the growth curve they want to sell, and they think in terms of isolated players. but what really matters is cumulative effort. or pulisic would have qualified us for 2018 by himself.

 

sorry, no, unacceptable. 6/5/15 US 4 Holland 3, no. dumbing down GB expectations is practically admitting his own failure. this team should rank 1 or 2 regionally in its sleep, and be competitive in all friendlies unless a selection glitch is exposed (and then immediately fixed). starting out with "just don't embarrass us" is a low freaking bar only suitable if we switch around the game and do limbo instead.

also, to me if we are mimicking the dutch this should be a test of whether his system works or is just a crock. related point, we should be long past honeymoon or system anyway, and on to, does this effort produce results. umpteenth time, for this to be a winning plan at some point it has to objectively turn the corner and manifest dominant play or concrete results. you don't get to just ad infinitum say we are making changes and they will reap results but then postpone expectations forever. at some point there must be payoff.

 

though he struggled his first half a year, between year 0.5 and 1.5 JK upset Italy and Mexico away, destroyed scotland, tied russia away.

though now derided, in reality BA v.2 was undefeated all year -- including gold cup -- until his qualifier losses in September and unfortunately October.

BB was undefeated until the B team trip to copa america, won gold cup.

the arguments in terms of payoff lower the bar well below what the last 3 full time coaches did. normally the sign we did well with our choice is we start kicking butt and taking names.

also, i feel like the low bar flips the general historical sense of how US coaching has worked over time. ie, that coaches are strongest right out of the gate and tend to tail off second cycle when forced to adapt to new players and tactics. GB somehow gets to ride the notion his payoff is down the road when history suggests such coaches crash down the road.

also i feel like there has been an abandonment of objectivity altogether in the sense that if i am not getting results do we look more drilled, fluid, effective. but there has been little or no "lost the game but looked great." normally if you are building someplace it at least shows up in looking good even before you get the Ws. JK's first half year to close 2011 you could see us knocking it around before the results came. if you don't demand "pretty" or "drilled" you are basically just engaged in religion. if the medicine is working the patient should be feeling better even if the fever is still up some. if you've given the medicine a year and change and the patient looks sick and their temp is the same and you tell me let's not call the doctor but just finish the meds, this is wish fulfillment. the child should get their appetite and energy back, lower their temp, show actual signs of change.

 

You're not the only one pining for a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3 for the national team but I'm going to challenge going to three in the back. I can't really figure out who the best two CB's are right now and the ones in contention get hurt a lot. There are a lot better just on the cusp wingers and midfielders than CB's and I wouldn't take say Llanez off the field for an additional CB like Zimmerman. Dest is good enough at left or right back that he doesn't need the help and if Adams (iffy) and McKennie are in midfield they would help if needed defensively.

 

you need mobile people who can defend their butts off. you basically need 3 defenders so studly you can subtract a defender and they'll take care of it anyway.

i don't know what we're talking about guy who got megged twice, once on a goal, doesn't need help and can be relied on in a 352. 352 is "you are on your own." you need island defenders who need zero help or are so fast they can mop up each other's mistakes.

i mean, didn't we try a 343 or something like that in pre-GC and we lost twice and it was ugly? i get that's not quite a 352 but last time we tried 3 backs we got whooped. and the longs of the world, much as i like them, couldn't cover the extra ground.

personally my impression is 3 back schemes these days are crazy when teams play 3 forwards. they make sense for 1 or 2 forward oppositions where you can play zone/ sweeper/ or up to the wing mid to mark. but against 3 forwards you're setting up 3 v 3 with no net to catch you. i assume this is the reason 4 backs are now de rigeur, and 5 might even make sense. same reason a football team has a nickel or dime defense against 3 or 4 WR sets.

i also feel like there is some weird naivete going on where people are acting like a 352 is for the 3 backs to get forward. i played both marking and wingback in 352 in club and college, and the "3" guys generally stay back -- otherwise there is too little coverage for a counter -- and instead the "5" wings are the ones who get forward, and then also fall back as effective 4th and 5th backs in width. i would occasionally sneak forward as a marking back in a "3" on corners or if i saw room, but i also remember one of the few goals i gave up in college was i drifted up with the ball and made a bad pass and once you do that there's about no one back to save you. it's a stay at home formation.

a "dest" type would be a wingback in the 5 not a marking back in the 3. fwiw maybe he should be playing wing mid or forward anyway.

call me when we have 3 stud backs who can defend and cover ground -- think boca pope dolo -- and not an endless list of veteran mediocrity or unproven prospects.

 

It's a question of how much you want Dest to get forward.

 

I think people will eventually understand that our offensive problems are our back line.

Did you see the goal Brooks gave up this weekend at Wolfsburg? I just saw a little of the game but he looked problematic to me. But do we need his passing out of the back? We do if we want to play a high octane offense. The way to 'solve' the problem (alleviate it, anyway) is to add a good 1v1 defender like Miles who can shadow the opposing striker while leaving Long, say, available to help out Brooks. Our opponents are always going to look to get the ball behind Dest to pin him back or make him pay for going forward.

As far as McKennie and Adams back to help defense, McKennie is there to make mistakes and give up goals but let's discuss Adams: Wouldn't you rather he look behind and see 3 cb's and take off up the pitch looking for offense? I would.

 

surely people remember that in the first canada game he was played as a wing mid to start and then terrorized us right up the middle after they shifted things around post-injury.

which is one irony of the first game, that they stumbled into an idea that re-defined the game. they then did us a favor and used him as a back on the return game we won. neither wing mid nor up top. i thought their coach deserved a gift basket for that. i assume we were all selfish about xmas and forgot the man.

all due respect to "dest held him" but our RB isn't marking their LB most of the time. that doesn't even make sense. it would have been dest on osorio and arriola on davies, occasional switches for overlaps or forays forward. and i thought the bigger factor was simply their strategic withdrawal of the threat. it would have been interesting if he had been where he played the first game and dest did have to handle him for 90. or if they sicced him centrally on our iffy marking backs.

 

Davies is a good player but he has zero end product. He is big and fast, but Dest is a better passer and shooter and generally more goal dangerous in the final third.

 

This is a patent misunderstanding of how 2018 went. We led Concacaf in goals and didn't qualify. We were 4th place in goals allowed with 13. As such we had a modest positive GD despite 17 goals in 10 games, and failed to advance. So the response is more backs who can't defend, on the theory we need offense?

Brooks is overrated on the ball like Ream was. Ream was always praised for passing but would have a world class howler or two in possession every MLS season. Go call up CR away from 2018 qualifying and see what Brooks' version of slickness can look like on a bad night. Many of those goals start not from their build up but from Brooks mis-trapping, failing to clear, etc.

I feel like the obsession with backs who get forward or who can pass is a punch down obsession. It works on teams we should already beat. I want to punch upwards. What about teams with attackers we actually have to stop to win?

Ditto our 433 and GB tactics in general. I want something that's balanced and smart against Brazil. I don't care if it's pretty or shows up Trinidad.

At minimum, the first criteria should be defensive knack, and then tiebreak among people who can defend by what they add the other way.

Re Adams, in my experience as a back what I want is players behind me who are athletic and defensive enough to clean up their own messes, and to help me with any I make. If they are shaky on defense and like to run forward that is my worst nightmare. I am left sans safety net. And I didn't make a ton of mistakes but I didn't like a setup which systematically punished them. I want a team defensive approach that helps me mop up.

And for a DM he isn't "liberated" by the backs marking, he has a job to do in the midfield. If he feels liberated it's either the other team isn't pressing forward to give him something to worry about, or we have some sort of switching or shifting concept that covers him when he goes forward.

And with how 3 backs went last summer I giggle at the idea anyone in the midfield would feel confidence inspired by us having 3 backs behind them. What I recall is when they got to our last line we struggled to cover ground and stop goals. Someone would end up wide open. The 6 in reality might even feel compelled to wander back and patch holes in an overwhelmed defense as opposed to liberated to skip and hop forward.

 

Dest has 5 assists in 1175 minutes of league play while Davies has 4 assists and 1 goal in 1350 minutes of league play. Davies is a 87% passer and has 3.1 dribbles/90. Not sure what Dest is as can’t find those stats. Two good players with different strengths bit not sure about end product difference at this point.

 

In the U20 WC game against France, Dest cuts in and hits a laser on target that is then finished off the rebound. Dest shoots on target, mostly, from that position for Ajax once a game at least. I don't care to follow Canadians that closely, but I don't think Davies has a goal like that in him at this time. He might not have a right footed shot at all.

 

Kind of obvious you don’t follow Canadians as you sounded pretty sure he has zero end product. Davies one goal this season was a right footed volley. But, yes, if looking for goals, Davies is better central or cutting in from right. He can hit a shot even in traffic if needed. If Dest can hold up on left, cutting in on to his right will be a big plus.

 

How about we all just marvel at how two of the best outside backs in the world play for Canada and the US and could be teammates for Bayern by next fall? If Richards (not sure they think he's ready but their CD's are aging quickly) joins them then 3/4's of their back line would be from US and Canada.

 

what exactly are you basing better shooter/more goal dangerous on? he scored once for jong ajax...and thats it. never for ajax, never for the usmnt, never for any youth national team.

to be clear i dont care about davies at all. but thats based on absolutely nothing.

 

what exactly are you basing better shooter/more goal dangerous on? he scored once for jong ajax...and thats it. never for ajax, never for the usmnt, never for any youth national team.

to be clear i dont care about davies at all. but thats based on absolutely nothing.

 

Pfftt!!!!!

 

Maybe that is the problem. Not sure why his crosses are so poor. Maybe, being a new fullback, he just hasn't done it much.

Enough about Canadians.

Dest defending on the left is the issue. He squares up like he is a right back and that caused problems in September. He could probably learn it, but is not playing much LB for Ajax. Would rather see Robinson there and Dest on the right.

 

In the U20 WC game against France, Dest cuts in and hits a laser on target that is then finished off the rebound. Dest shoots on target, mostly, from that position for Ajax once a game at least. Dest shoots equally well with the right and left foot.

And Dest has scored two goals for Ajax. So, not sure what you are thinking there.

He had the assist for the first against Canada. He has only played 3 games for the USMNT, and in one we ran a training exercise and the other he played on a baseball infield.

 

I attended this game. What a goal this one was!

 

the poster is right, dest has a cannon shot, but 0 NT goals, 1 U20 goal, 0 first division goals. and to underline something on that, we are talking about defense-shy eredivisie ball where ajax is averaging a hair under 3 goals a game ie 65 goals in 22 games. this is the league where jozy got 30.***

boyd comes to mind for a similar attribute. problem is to me "power" is like an age group way to try to score where "placement" starts to be what separates adults.

to be fair, any ability like this is useful, particularly tactically. there might be a time in a game where you could use a guy who can nominally play defense but hit cannon balls that maybe ricochet and get finished. just the numbers aren't there to say start the guy because he can shoot and score.

it is fair to point out he does get assists. on that i fall back on my arguments that (a) I like defense first but even if you disagree with that (b) such theories are all well and good but it's an objective production question if you're picking someone for that task. would he deliver more assists than robinson on the left? or yedlin or cannon on the right^^^? numbers i ran so far -- 3 games, mind you -- were he was only as productive as the other 2 RB. his league numbers could suggest he has more upside (5A this season so far), however, remember which league that is. grain of salt.

my conclusion, thus far, he does not stand out from other options. and the other options are not generally old farts unless we bring back lichaj or something. cannon is 21. robinson is 22. to me it then feels like putting fingers on the scales to be like, we must bet on dest as the upside choice. that feels like the recent american vogue for picking your winners before we start playing, dragging the ones not living up to hype behind you, as opposed to winnowing down to the performers even if they surprise.

if he wants me to believe, what i need is impeccable defense on the right -- as though it really was just a left side issue -- and some production during the next 4 tough contests on the schedule. if the reality is he ends up pinned back and ineffective, we should really have a pure defender instead.

***people pimping this GB 433 stuff tend to finesse that the league from which this stuff sprouts is so defense shy it's not funny. i do not think we can proceed on similar premises that teams will back off when we start to build from the keeper/back, soft defense, good teams that average huge goals per game, mirroring horrorshow defenses at league bottom. we will face scrappy teams tackling anyone who moves on any line, or sophisticated presses like mexico. i am curious if the abstracted people theorizing this ever considered concrete concacaf reality. no one is going to let us qualify through uefa playing dutch soccer.

^^^Lima played a role in a key recent goal fwiw.

 

Well, I could take a math test given to first graders and declare myself a math genius. Or I could play Mexico twice without scoring a goal and declare the level of my offense inadequate.

 

personally what i think you need is some sort of +/- statistic that tries to capture whether the team does better or worse with you out there. or maybe just specifically compares your G and A versus your goals you are on the hook specifically for.

eg in the games Dest played -- even when subbed out -- the scores net out 0 (and our record was LDT)
during his particular minutes the scores net out +3 (all that canada game)
anecdotally he nets out 0 on his own, assist on Canada, megged for a goal by Mexico

i also think that in the obsession with big picture tactics and claimed "fit" the more basic value of "what does this guy offer and how does it fit in a roster" has been lost. coaching 101 stuff like you might want a bench with some creative players, some destroyers, a shooter or two, a crosser or two, a speed guy, a tall guy. you know, a little more thought than let me throw lovitz and roldan out there to hustle.
approached that way we move to something more like, do we want an attacker at back or a defender? do we want an attacking back to bring in off the bench? which option is the best? thinking what the game needs as opposed to just put a fit piece out there and let the system sort it.