I don’t think there were any healthy players that didn’t travel to SLC for the game for him to integrate with honestly. Save maybe the suspended Fontas.
The discussion about Agada is moot. As are the excuses about Pulido and Kinda. Are any of them center backs? Can any defend a cross? For ********s sake, this teams CB situation has been a revolving disaster for six or seven seasons. At what point does management (you reading this Cliff?) hold anyone accountable for the revolving disaster of Coehlo, Fontas, Illie, Smith, Barath, Rad, Voldemort, Isi, etc.? If you don't hold PV accountable for that, how about holding him accountable for getting ZERO out of the EBP move, a guy that is going to the 2022 WC. By the way, that player came out of the "talentless" Midwest SKC academy footprint that PV bitched about recently. In 2016, PV made a transition to valuing CBs that pass better than they defend, brining in Coehlo. He doubled down on that vision in 2018 with the worst player personnel move in PVs career, brining in Fontas. That move directly led to pushing out Opara. That series of decisions is the beginning of the end for SKC. Its not coincidental that since the Fontas deal, the team will have missed the playoffs two out of the last four seasons (making the leap that SKC are out of the playoffs this year). For all the talk about SKC and the problems with the No9 position, it is the disaster at CB and the teams inability to defend hat has caused the problems. They have not had a competent partnership since the Besler/Collin and Besler/Opara days. Its also not coincidental that those were the "good ol'days" of the PV era. As for 2022, I'm done watching a team whose a defensive ethos boils down to "******** it, I'm not getting hurt".
So it was not possible to have Agada do some light training, watch some game film and then have a watch party at Pinnacle with Zusi, Melia, Kinda, Pulido etc. as a start for team integration? I counted a total of 9 players that could have attended a watch party with Agada on Sunday. I am not up on MLS rules but what about some scrimmages with SKC2 with some coaching and chats with veterans Feilhaber and Opara? Like what LukeD says about the defense issues, pay attention Cliff!, PVs coaching skills are going downhill fast.
SKC2 was in SLC too, they played the Monarchs Saturday so there wouldn't have been a scrimmage here in town. There's really not a reason to argue this, he went, my assumption was to integrate him with the first team, they had space on the bench given all the injuries/suspensions/etc so I don't see the harm in it whether he was playing or not.
. The only team in the entire MLS that have been scored on more than SKC (38 GA) is San Jose (41 GA). There is a big difference between the two teams in another stat that is really lopsided; that is goals scored. San Jose (33 GF) vs SKC (19 GF). But, the Quakes are only 2 points higher in the standings than SKC. If SKC had 33 goals instead of their paltry 19, the season would look quite a bit different. So, lets be realistic, the ball has got to get in the net to win games and SKC is not putting the ball in the net with any regularity. Having 2 DPs that were capable of scoring a lot of goals out for the season makes a big difference, not only with scoring goals, but taking the pressure off of the only two regular scoring options they now have; Salloi and JFR. To your point, I completely agree that PV and staff are completely responsible for the back line debacle. Bad decisions compounded by bad player selections all had a part in constructing the pathetic defense we watch every game. But also, you have to look at the other parts of the team. SLC’s midfield tore holes in the SKCs midfield all game long. To sum up,,,, every part of this team is in dire need of help and lots of it. But yes, the defense sucks and PV is the architect of this entire ship that is taking on water faster than he can bail it out.
To add to that, how much would having a threat at striker like Pulido and a threat in the midfield like Kinda force teams to be a bit more honest in terms of how many numbers they push forward. Which would in turn probably take some of the pressure off the defense.
I think that was what we are all saying again and again when we were wildly frustrated at having the slowest attack in the federation, years ago. Having a scary offense can be such a big part of having an effective defense. When teams can push their lines up and attack with impunity, things go from bad to worse. On the other hand, the number of goals we've allowed from attacks made of three or four players maximum can't be kind. I'm curious if there's a breakdown of the goals the team has allowed, counting the number of players who have touched the ball in our half before scoring. Though like most stats it probably won't actually say anything, haha.
This game has been particularly distressing for me and I would really like to see a deep dive tactical analysis of it. While SKC has been the worse team in most of our losses and draws (and to be honest even our wins), rarely have we looked completely and utterly outclassed. This has definitely been such a game. The only other games I could think of were Seattle and LAFC (which probably spells trouble for next week's game). Even the Portland game I feel like was a more even match than this one.
I have half a feeling that, for the last decade since we beat them in the MLS Cup final, RSL has specifically and intentionally built their team to counter our play style. They terrorize us every time, even the games we've won.
If we look at the stats, the passing map kind of tells the story of this game. the average field positions of Uri, Salloi and Espinoza, were about five yards apart on the left hand side of the center circle. Despite the fact that Fontas was not playing, we ran our possession through the left CB, meaning Volodor connected with more players than anyone else in our starting 11. He completed passes to 9 players, leaving out only Tzonis and Pierre. He is not capable of playing that role well. If you look at the comparative shapes of the teams, we were a muddled mess in the center of the field. I don't really get Uri's positioning, at all. Salloi, the 9 or false 9 or whatever, had to stake out a position just about on the half line, and in the middle of a mess of folks. I wouldn't think that's ideal. we allegedly came out in a 4141, was probably acutally a 4-3-3 but played more like a 2-6-2, clumped in the middle of the field, no attacking width to speak of. The possession stats for the match tilt to them, 56-44, but they so completely dominated the post Red Card half hour that it's tough to say if that was anything real. I got the sense in the game it was roughly even before Roger's red (and, I mean, we could blame him for that, but he's young and he will learn from that experience to apply it as his career unfolds). The shot maps show a pretty sad outing. We had one shot on goal. Do we remember it? That Tzonis blast from the right side of the six? It is not a shock that our xG was .3. Oddly, to me, their xG was only 2.0, despite 19 shots and 10 of those on goal. I thought Pulskamp did a nice enough job, but xG actually didn't like their chances much. If we break down our play, a couple things stand out: Uri only missed on two of his passes, but he only attempted (i think) 27, but might have been 29. That said, Ilie at his best would have 60 to 90 attempts, same sort of completion percentage. We are getting very, very little from the 6 in terms of possession, and, by the stats, nothing in terms of defense: No ints, one tackle, A couple recoveries, no blocks. IMO, this is where we were worst, in the Uri, Roger midfield vortex. Roger went in on 4 tackles, won one. No ints. A couple clearances. Only missed the connection on one pass, but only connected on something like 16 and they were all in this fairly tiny bit of the field. I give Walter a bit more credit, because he was marginally better at pushing the attack. His passing chart was all over the field, but he was pretty much alone. So, that's my take, our midfield got owned, and when the midfield is that bad, it cascades in both directions. Defenders can't defend well without actual midfield support, and the attack cannot work with the midfield. We were horrible in the middle of the field, and we were completely clogged together there.
Good analysis. Like I said in my previous post, SLC owned the midfield and that exposed more of the glaring weakness in both the SKC attack and the defense. It was really uncomfortable to watch. SKC just does not have anything like Benny and Nagamura controlling the midfield anymore. Since they left, just like Ike in the defense, the midfield has decayed to the point that we are now seeing.
On the broader point, I don't disagree that PV has been less than optimal in this roster build, and in his eye for CBs. I think what I've labeled as point 3 is dead oner. That said, on 1: it's way, way too early to call Rad and Voldemort part of that disaster, isn't it? CBs peak at 26, 27, 28. they're both 21. They have a couple years before they'd be expected to be even solid pros. Also: I still like Isi. I think his problems are systemic, not talent. I think without a proper midfield, no defense is any good. We do not have a proper midfield, and in a game like this last one, we had 2 dead spots in our mid triangle. 2. I place a lot of value in retaining EPBs MLS rights. I've heard quite a few folks in BS insist EPB left SKC because he hated PV and KC etc. I've never seen EPB say that. Before he latched on with Troyes (and under the initial manager, it wasn't going to happen) I was thinking, brilliant, he tried europe, it didn't work and now he will return and we didn't stand in his way and he will be thrilled to be back and playing. Now I think it will be another 6-7 years before he returns. But selling him didn't get us anything that holding on to his right wouldn't. he wasn't going to sell for $10m, more like $1m. But 3 is so dead on, and i don't get it. CBs who can pass lights out are more expensive than those who can simply defend, which for some reason worldwide is out of fashion. So we're spending $1m plus on CBs who are slick on the ball, but light on defense, and esp with the athletically limited dmids we can afford, that leaves us in a lot of trouble. I do think if we were willing to accept old school defenders who defend first then have to get it to someone who can play the ball, or hoof it forward, we'd avoid this sort of valley. Might not have a shot at the highest peaks, but that seems a ways away.