Maurice Edu: defensive, or holding midfielder?

He may be able to play holding mid at MLS level but he's purely a defensive mid at the international level....the same as Bradley and Clark.

I think one of the misconceptions we've all had about these new dm's is that they can play holding mid because they're all considerably better on the ball and on the attack than the Mastro/Armas types we've been trotting out over the last few years.

They're not holding mids and thus...the innefective results we get when we put two of them together at the same time. On the plus side...if Bradley ever grows a pair and starts putting one of them with Donovan/Benny/Adu in the middle we might see a level of attacking soccer that would even shut up Mexican fans who complain about our style.

 

Can we reduce some of the confusion by agreeing on some conventions, one of which is that a "holding" mid is the same thing as a "defensive" mid. From Wikipedia.org :

Given the above, Edu is not a holding midfielder, but a solid "box-to-box" midfielder. Feilhaber's game is more offense-minded. The problem he has is whether the US can afford him because he is not as good defensively as Edu, Clark or Bradley and he is not as good offensively as Adu, Dempsey or Donovan, candidates for an attacking mid position. Nor has he inspired when placed on the flank.

 

Well, i know Edu had a sick assist to Dolo vs South Africa, pure class.

 

Maybe he's a CB?...Edu trotted out twice at CB for the U-23's against China....
But clearly he is a box to box MF and is fighting for the starting job with Benny and Rico. Edu, in my book currently starts with Bradley based on the last 3-4 games. Benny, until he gets playing time just lacks the form. Clark did not look great in either Sweden and Mexico...but hey OK he "went fishing" he has an excuse.

 

Yes, he is a holding mid now ... but one hopes that his skills will develop at some point where he can become a quality 2-way mid.

BTW, guys like Jenas, Huddlestone and Zokora at Tottenham play the "Empty Bucket" as two-way mids.

Javier Mascherano, at Liverpool, plays it as a truer holding/destroyer since his partner - normally Gerrard - is the one to go forward in a 4-4-2 Y for Rafa Benitez.

Hopefully, Mo can play either role in time.

 

Agree one hundred percent. I think there is a big gap in the amount of skill needed to be a holding mid at the MLS or even Eredivisie level and being able to play that role at the international level. Bradley/Clark/Edu might get there someday but they aren't yet. The proof is basically there in front of us in the form of the lack of any sort of offensive rhythm when two of them pair up in the middle for the nats. I see lots of folks around here blaming the coach for not using his son in the right way. To me the problem is in the limitations of the players being trotted out.

I can anticipate some people pointing out that JOB mainly played left back in the Eredivisie and had plenty of success as a holding mid at the international level. I can only paraphrase Milton in reply: Better to be left back at Ajax than featured high-scoring attacking mid at Heerenveen.

 

A holding midfielder is just another name for a defensive midfielder.

At club level:

Edu plays a two-way role.
Clark plays as a d-mid or holder
Feilhaber plays in reserves.
Mastroeni plays as a d-mid and sometimes central defense
Spector plays some d-mid but mostly on the back line
Bradley plays a two-way role though he's used in a diff manner than Edu

Feilhaber needs to improve his work rate and defense and find a club in order to be a bigger part of the Nats picture.

Spector isn't really in the Nats frame yet.

Mastroeni is more of bench player for the Nats now.

Among Edu, Clark, and Bradly Edu is the best at handling the ball in tight spaces but he's not a creative midfielder like Feilhaber. Clark is the best tackler. MB is clearly more effective as non-creative, attack-oriented two-way mid. If BB wants to use his same central midfield tactics, he should start Edu and Clark and drop Donovan, Dempsey, or Adu into the hole. Good things happen for the US attack when one these guys drop back into midfield to get the ball. Imo there's often too much distance between the forwards and central mids.

 

Well IMO the term of defensive midfielder and/or holding midfielder has been terribly bastardized and the game has become more specialized and clubs have developed many new breeds of positions hence the confusion.

I think most of these people that are getting confused with these terms would agree that someone like Roy Keane would be described as a defensive midfielder whereas someone like our former captain Claudio Reyna would be described as a holding midfielder because he wasn't an attacking midfielder and he clear wasn't what they would describe as DF either but that he was the one who controlled the pace of the game and was more of an operator than a creator.

People just aren't on the same page the vocabulary and thats where are the confusion is coming from.

That said the USMNT has no quality younger talent at DM other than Clark IMO and I don't think he's quite enough quality.

Edu is a 2-way midfielder as is Bradley and while they have some defensive qualities it's not enough.

Feilhaber is like Claudio Reyna IMO whereas he's not DM, AM or a 2-way M he's what I describe as an operator who dictates the pace and keeps the shape of the midfield call him what you will but I think players like him are referred as holding midfielder by some whereas some refer to a DM as a DM or holding midfielder whereas they don't, they don't see the 2 terms as being interchangeable.

 

Clark's game make Bradley look bad. It's Edu and Bradley pairing I'd like to see become permanent.

 

I think it depends who he is played with. When he's with Bradley, they both play 2-way, often covering for each other, but this forces the 2nd forward (Dempsey or Adu) to be more responsible for the creativity.

When we say Bradley Bradley-Feilhaber, Bradley played more defensively, and Feilhaber was more creative.

I think Edu's a 2-way and could play with Feilhaber in the aforementioned semi-defensive role or with Bradley when they are both 2-ways.

He cannot be an all out DM like Rico or Mastro (Bradley can fill this role but isn't really best there)

So to actually answer your question, he's a 2-way mid with a shade on the defensive side.

 

Actually, both were more of "Y" mids, someone playing in front of a destroyer or side-by-side with someone in a twin 2-way role.

Keane had Nicky Butt behind him, when he went forward.

Reyna didn't jump as far forward as Keane but he could hang within 40 yards of the goal also.

 

Interesting.

Well, it depends on a lot of different interpretations and formations. I have heard the term Holding Mid to describe someone who, "holds possesion" as well as "hold back" an attack.

I prefer the following terms

Destroyer
Pivot
CAM
Box-to-Box
Possesion
A-Mid

These terms relate to specific "roles", not only position in the field as all of the above can play in the center of the pitch.

The key is to make sure the combinations are valid, our coaching staff has historically failed to do this, putting Destroyers with Possesion middies in certain formations, putting two possesion middies in a formation calling for only one destroyer...etc

Sorry been out so long, new computer,

Hi SFS
Hi Ilmorin
Hi Bob


PooBah

 

Hi, PooBah.

Your nomenclature has no role in the US system under Bradley.

The guy has two pivot men facing each other and playing lateral 10 yard passes.

Their completion rate however is almost 100%.

 

Just what I was thinking. I only saw him in bits at MLS, and when I saw him he was mostly fighting in the midfield and completing short passes while under pressure (quite nicely, too), not really in position to help with the attack. But I sure was impressed with the ball against South Africa ... the announcers in that match for a while were talking about Adu recording his first USMNT assist, because that was the type of pass they associated with Freddy, so they mistakenly thought he had sent it.

Sample size of one, I know.

 

Frankly, I think Bradley Sr just calls them central midfielders. I'll have to go back to see what he calls them. The nomenclature really only gets its relevence within the system. But I have certain names I use to describe various central midfielders in various systems to describe them, and my nomenclature is mostly based upon their style/role, more so than their positioning. I mean, once upon a time in the old English game, they were all just halfbacks. Until it became clear that the role of the wingers clearly wasn't the same as that of the central guys... and that some passed and pushed forward better, whereas some won balls better, and coaches developed a coherent system around this, and so forth.

Honestly, I think Bradley likes the idea of the traditional English box-to-box midfielder, and if our team and its players plays the very best that he envisions that they could play his system, that is what they'll look like as a pairing. Unless he realizes that a little tinkering would help ball movement and abandons the idea... (Whenever the press asks these guys to describe their role on Bob's team, they usually say that both center mids have basically the same job.)

 

I wish we had some more terms on the board to describe central midfielders. The term defensive midfielder is too ambigious to properly describe any central midfielder. I think we could start having a clearer idea of the roles we are talkinga about if we break them up a bit more. As marko mentioned above, their roles are really more based upon their function than their positioning. Though position and role can be intertwined, it certainly does not have to be so.

The roles that i have time to describe now are:

Midfield roles #1

DLP or deep-lying playmaker: they hang back and look to create chances with ambitious passing often from deeper positions. they usually have the best range of passing on the team, but often tend to give up possession more than their partner as they look to create more often than not with their passing. they tend to be more cerebral players who spend more time observing the way play develops, which is what gives them the edge to create with their passing, but it often means they need a partner who dictates play more and who does more running and ball-winner, as their observation of the field means less time doing dirty work, and observing the higher percentage options available to them.

they often do not come into the game until after the opening 20 minutes or so as their game is not set for a fast tempo. they need time and space on the ball to people able to ping their passes, which makes them so reliant on their partner to win the possession battle and calm things down for him. if this does not happen they can fade badly from games, as they rarely have great engines. if their passing is off they rarely have much else to team, though they do tend to have solid defensive positioning.

examples: xabi alonso, carrick, huddlestone, pirlo at times

retainer: a retainer always looks to make the highest percentage pass so his team keeps possession of the ball. retainer's are so good at processing all the possible options when they receive a ball that you can often pause a video when a receiver receives a pass and he will pick out the exact option you choose after careful consideration. this role is quite unfamiar in modern football, especially american, and is often under-appreciated because it not understood. retainer's tend to be physically inferior, which forces them to develop other traits through their youth. this forces them to learn to treat the ball and possession preciously because they do not have the speed and engine to go about winning it back all day.

retainer's will set the tone of possession for the entire team and rely on patience to create their chances. they will tire out opponents physically and mentally from chasing the ball all day by pinging it around the field with quick touches. they advance the ball upfield slowly, as opposed to dlp's, and rarely look for over ambitious passes that result in giveaways. a perfect day for a retainer would be to see many more touches than anyone on the field and to have not turnover a single pass.

one limitation of the retainer's game is that they are by definition reliant upon their teammates. they can impose themselves on a game, but are still overly reliant upon their teammates to make the most of the possession that has been gained for them. they also need a physically stronger partner as retainer's almost always lack the physical tools requireed to chase the game.

examples: scholes, xavi, possibly mikel obi depending upon his role and development at chelsea, reyna would be our closest version
----------------
i'll add to this list shortly when i have more time. box-to-box, destroyer, runner will be my best additions i believe. i also look forward to discussing this more.

 

Please do.

 

Oh for goodness sake. Why do so many BSers apply an American football template to soccer? Look, this isn't a highly specialized sport. The basic skills are pretty much the same from position to position; one or two exceptional skills or physical attributes will normally decide position assignments. Good field vision and stamina? Midfield. Fast, good crosser? Wing. Quick reactions, tall? Center forward. Etc, etc.

So, Edu. Central midfielder. Sometimes he's going to tackle more, sometimes he's going to pass more, sometimes he might even shoot. It's going to depend on who his partner is, what's his particular assignment given the opposition, etc.

No battle plan survives contact with the enemy - that's especially true in soccer. So why is BS so often like a chat room for Axis and Allies?

 

I'd just like to say that the crazily wrong/right contrast in this thread is the highest I've ever seen.

 

Exactly. The team does not perform in a vacuum.

 

Personally...I could see Edu being a central defender. Seriously. He has a defensive mindset, he's got the height, speed, jumping ability, he's not afraid to go in for the tackle, and he would be EXCELLENT bringing the ball up from a deep position.

Onyewu is underrated as a long ball passer, but he's not solid bringing the ball up from the back. Bocanegra is poor at both long balls and at dribbling the ball up the field with any confidence. Parkhurst is excellent technically as a defender but on an international level his athletic ability and height are lacking.

History is replete with players who have been converted to defenders from attacking positions. Kolo Toure and Rio Ferdinand are two that come to mind. Gilberto Silva for Arsenal is one that has performed capably as a defender when placed in that role even though he's a shield for the back four usually. The U.s. is not lacking for defensive/holding/box-to-box midfielders. And there are more coming (e.g. Arguez, Kljestan, Szetela (?)) I see in Edu someone with the characteristics to be an international level defender. I'm glad to see they are prepping him for that role for the U23's.
A solid back four in time could be:
Spector---Edu---Onyewu---Cherundolo
with Wynne , with experience, slotting in at right back eventually. The international game more than ever before has become truly an athlete's game.

 

I strongly agree with this I would love to see him transition to a CB we have more than enough depth at CM.

 

this may be the best we have. But Onyewu keeps crashing into people.

 

I'd like to see Dempsey as an attacking center mid (w two forwards in front of him), especially as we face inferior CONCACAF teams in qualifying. Behind him could be Bradley, Edu or Clark, but I think Dempsey offers the best combo of skill, grit, & scoring in the pool to play that position. Of course, does Bradley have the cajones to use an attacking center mid? I hope so. It seems technical skill is being underratted in Bradley's center midfield pairings, especially as opposed to ball-winning. I can see Feilhaber re-asserting himself as a more conservative "attacking" center mid option, but only when he does it at club level first.