One thing I was constantly frustrated watching under Bradley that has changed is the way we had been funneling everything down an increasingly narrow space on the wings. We would force every pass straight down the wings and only on rare occasions swing the ball all the way around to the very back before switching the play around. Since Klinsmann has taken over, we actually make simple square passes in to our central midfielders and let the guys in the middle of the field distribute a bit instead of just playing down a single flank at a time with blinders on.
The problem with our defense right now is that it seems every position is pushing higher up the field leaving more space around the CBs.
You still had Beckerman filling in when a wingback would push forward. Most of our issues were fixed when Orozco was pulled Regardless of reasons it's still a problem and i still question how organized the defense is when you let those 2-3 chances through and demand Howard to come up huge.
Ah, that's still qualified by my previous statements that this was our worst defensive game. But the previous games I think we were better defensively, and with a new coach to boot. BUT going by the GOLD Cup, we really DID look better, more creative in attack, Especially this game (honduras). In the GC, it was just pathetic and beyond stiff. We were terrified to take chances or make creative runs up top.
Until his recent move to Puebla, Beasley has been in career purgatory for the past few years. Bradley would have been ripped a new one if he had tried Beasley out wide. In fact, Bradley did try Beasley out wide, Beasley played a poor game, and Bradley was crucified for it on here for more than a year afterwards. Again, you are just flat out wrong. Holden played the "Dempsey" role in the 2009 Gold Cup to great acclaim. Unfortunately, the mob crucified Bradley for playing Holden there, instead of his "natural" position in the center of the park. What the mob conveniently forgets is that the 2009 season was the first season in which Dom Kinnear had been playing Stu in the middle. Prior to that, the center of the park was patrolled by Rico Clark and Dwayne DeRosario. And as we all know, Holden has spent the majority of the past 2 years injured. So I'm not exactly sure what you wanted from Bradley. Heck, I'm a Mikey supporter and even I know that he's far too slow to play the wide, and playing him wide eliminates his best attributes as a player. And he was horrible. Bradley did, and Bradley was crucified for not playing Bedoya in his "natural" central midfield position. Bradley did. In fact, the majority of caps that Feilhaber got under Bob was as a wide player. This is just a pathetic attempt to pad your list. You don't see giddy celebrations because we got the result without playing Klinsmanns promised, attack/possession oriented tactics. The people screaming for those tactics have nothing to hang their hats on.
What the heck are you talking about? It is as if an entire narrative and 5 episode mini-series has played out in your mind and no one has any idea what you are talking about. Bradley was done. His time was over. Respect what he did and now move on. We are quiet on the topic for the same reason we are quiet on the merits of trench warfare. Against Mexico? His tactics against Mexico? You mean the friendly one month after the GC final in which he had effectively 3 business days with the team? that match against Mexico? Bradley was a one trick pony. JK realizes in order to be competitive we need to attempt to be a two trick pony. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. All substantive transformations are generally difficult and painful. In fact, the more difficult and painful, the more meaningful. We are trying to possess the ball more so that when we do, say go up 1-0 against mexico, or 2-0 against mexico we can keep a lead. We are also playing a dedicated DM so that those early goals, so common under Bradley are eradicated. I am more worried about keeping a high line when even the dude above and I can't agree on whether it is offsides or not, much less real time with screaming fans in your face.
plenty of us thought he'd do well up top and perhaps our next best option aside from Jozy. I always like the way bob handled it: Start him out wide and in the 2nd half bring in Feilhaber to push Dempsey up top. My gripe with bob was who he played up top with Jozy from the start. I thought Buddle and Gomez were far better options and dangerous in their own right. Feilhaber hasnt been an option as a starter since 08 imo (i know i said that already ) DMB was out of commission and worked his way off the team. needed to sort out his club situations Sasha was not a starter let alone a true contender come WC Holden was played out wide (followed with hate by MANY posters) and soon after got injured. Seems likely he'd have been the best option but injury took its toll. MB was always talked about here on the boards but its a position he's never played Spector could have been an option, especially leading up to the WC but he had a lack of PT and questionable to start (and bob was set on him as a wingback) Torres was used and performed poorly out left. He didnt even look that solid out wide against Mexico under JK. He's much more suited for the middle of the pitch. i dont disagree with that, but he's not saying it was 100% bob. It did resemble it for the reasons he mentioned Bob had always had a few out of the gate, and it appears so does JK. But neither i nor GVPATS are against JK. Not close. Merely pointing out the myth that all would be grand without bob at the helm. we could only hope... i agree things are attempting to change. Baby steps. I dont think we should remove the direct aspect of the game the US is so well known for playing. We tried the 100% possession style and it worked, but failed to create chances. Honduras was a melting pot of the old and new.
The gold cup was a team getting stale. My concerns when bob was re-signed by USSF. Bob had a good cycle and it should have ended at that.
How much understanding am I "willing to admit"? Why don't you explain that to me. Because, if I may help, my position was that I'm just not ready to judge him yet on his performance. Do you think that being able to view whatever games are televised or that one saw in person amounts to the same experience as actually coaching them in training and seeing how they respond to your directions? Hint: it's not the same. If you want to say that JK should be performing at top level during these meaningless friendlies, that you've already figured out how well he'll do (and that's it's insufficient) and that JK has already reached the limits of his performance during this stretch, that JK can't learn anything more about the player pool going forward, then I'm sure you'll excuse people for not giving your opinion a great deal of time. I get that you've been very vested in the Bradleys for some time, but that doesn't mean that it's reasonable to damn JK for the results so far. Mind you, the only result so far that Bob Bradley may have bested was the game vs. Costa Rica. Yes, but that's not the same thing as saying that he has sufficient knowledge of the player pool that the results right now during these first 5/6 friendlies will tell us everything we need to know about JK as a manager, going forward. And no matter the knowledge that JK has, it's certainly a lot less than Bob Bradley had when he started, where he actually worked, as a coach, with a number of the players that were on the team. I think you misunderstood my point. My point was that BECAUSE these players have all played together for Arena and Bradley in a particular way (i.e. very defensive, counter-attacking style), the players have had to shake off those habits and tendencies beat into them during the Arena/Bradley years and learn the new style that JK favors. And because that is a change from years past and they have to shake off those many years of playing the same style, it's not reasonable to expect the change to occur instantaneously when it's a national team that is being discussed, that doesn't have the constant work a club team has. Agree, 100%, that's what I'm saying. The pros should be able to adapt, but it takes time. And that's why I'm saying that I think it's premature to make bold pronouncements about JK already (though I know that you, yourself, are not doing that). Agree, again, but at the same time, I appreciate JK's ambition in trying to change right away.
I probably should have used a winky thing there. I would agree that this is an overblown criticism of Bob. I still see what I would consider to be very different tactics from JK to Bob, even in the Honduras game. Mexico was what it was, not much time to do anything different and common sense would dictate any coach use similar tactics. I do. And as everyone knows, I am willing to go fetch quotes. The sensible majority. Just as the sensible majority felt that JK would not make a difference overnight, or be baby Jesus overall. I would say it is not black and white. I feel we are/were due for some significant changes throughout the system. I also feel that other countries have successfully undergone similar changes to both their senior and youth sides simultaneously. Chile would be my favored example and by the by, I would have much preferred Bielsa to JK. Many nations have made sweeping changes to their tactics, formation and philosophy at the senior level and as with anything, there have been mixed results. Sometimes with great success. Obviously JK having supervised this kind of transition with Germany, is exactly why he was hired. I realize it is very different circumstances, with a very different player pool. However, we are unique and there is no comparable nation exactly like us. So I admit, this idea may fail spectacularly. On the other hand, it is as disingenuous to my mind to assume it will fail because we are unique, as it would be to presume success because we are unique. I anticipate some success along the way, with our fair share of failure and that the end result will be more positive than negative with JK at the helm. Fair enough. I can respect that.
i was never making the comparison between Bob and JK. I was merely pointing out that JK knows his player pool. He'll certainly have his matches where he gives players a shot. He still has to go back to players who may have failed with Bob and see what they do under his tactics. Still, my whole point is he's fully aware of what he has at his disposal but that doesnt mean he doesnt have room to experiment. Im holding my judgment for now. ah i see what you are saying. Still these same players play completely differently for their clubs then they did for BA or BB. I suspect the transition wont take long. They've already shown capable of maintaining possession, now if only they can do that and create chances. This is the 2nd time we've agreed. Shocking i think we'll need to find some common ground to disagree consistently.