Mr. Josmer Volmy Altidore

So biased it's actually funny =/= hater...

Ok. Gonna need some sort of reading rainbow quote to square this circle...

 

Perhaps, but imo, Howard has always been somewhat inconsistent and, at times, likely to let in the occasional soft goal.

 

It should be noted that Olivier Giroud didn't score a single goal in the WC and started every match for France. At striker.

 

...And if we had won the 2018 World Cup, instead of failing to even qualify, then I think we'd view key players on the NT differently.

 

T&T defenders like him as well.

 

i miss jozy partnered with Bobby Wood or Charlie Davies. Those 2 understood him.

 

RW?

 

So much of USMNT seems to be done as some abstracted honorific. Right now we even sub like Next Man Up (in the coach's mind) and not like we're pursuing a result which the Add is seen as making more likely in some considered way. Net result, Roldan has like 15 caps doing basically nothing and never changing anything off the bench.

In terms of the Jozy assist, it would speak to something we haven't seemed to do in years. "Tactical subbing."



US down 0-2 72' in to ES away during the hex. Jozy gets put in as a sub against a small team for headers. We start crossing the ball in. He gets one header goal and is in the neighborhood of the other. Final whistle 2-2, point earned.

You link setup tactics to specific sub(s) who have certain attributes that mesh to create chances. These tactics may not match snob wishes, but sometimes you want a result.

We haven't had anyone playing this role off the bench in years. All your players need not be similar xeroxes of each other. Nothing says you can't have your best players starting but then subs picked for raw speed, finishing, or height. We seem to have instead shifted to "we're not going to change how we play to get a result" and putting the next guy the coach likes on. As a result we can be 1-0 down and the roster is set up where we have backs and mids to sub, and he'll put on Roldan and Lovitz, and we won't get close to the equalizer, and the subs will make no impact. The subs lack purpose other than to remove tired starters. We keep attacking however we have been, as though the issue is freshness and not tactics. This is like definitional stubbornness.

Instead, how about the old model. Sub on someone who can hit a cross and then someone tall to head balls. Or someone who can hit a throughball and then someone fast. Like you're actually thinking about how the goals might be gotten with your subs.

 

I also feel like at some point circa late Klinsi we lost the plot on how to set up a 23 man roster with a variety of tactical options you might need any given night. One of my disappointments looking at the 23 man in TnT That Night was how thin or old the attacking roster was. He played his Dempsey card off the bench and got one goal but it turned out we needed two.

This was his bench that night:
Cameron/Beasley/Guzan/Rimando/McCarty/Ream/Zusi/Acosta/Bedoya/Benny/Wondo/Dempsey

3 real attacking options, Benny being overrated and old, and Wondo scattershot. Perhaps 1 real option then. What was his plan if we went down? Or were Plans A, B, and C all grind out 0-0??

I like to think about these 23 -mans like a coach. Like okay what do I have to work with in terms of a result. Like what attributes does this bench offer me. Too often lately it's milquetoast lunchpail hustlers. You maybe need 2-3 guys off the bench as reliable 90 guys in waiting but we need more bench people picked like they are there to create a specific result-altering mismatch in a game not quite going how we hope. To me our sub bench is often anti-tactical, merely professional, overrated, or at best picked to execute a bland stalemate at the score they entered.

I was concerned about TnT the minute I saw the 23 man and scared once we gave up a goal, because I was like, how are we planning on getting our own. I already think our starting midfields are put together too much to defend (and they often can't do it), giving the onus to the other guy, and not enough where we attack and set the tone, and their threats have to spend some time of their own chasing. But the subs are often bland "8" mush picked to hustle as well.

This is not to say we can't defend as a tactic, but then pick people who can actually do it, and pick attackers based on their ability to finish what chances we create. Trying to defend and then set up Zardes to miss most of his chances is setting oneself up for misery.

Bringing this back to Jozy, he serves a specific tactical purpose. Is there anyone else who does the heading job better? You then need to have some wingers who can hit an accurate cross as opposed to him trying to get on the end of Roldan shanks. Dest, Robinson, someone who can put a ball where they mean to. This is not how you play for 90, as each player has his age or his limits right now. But in a game where you need a goal........

 

Last point, to be blunt, my experience in club and college was the teams who thought they "played the right way" and stubbornly stuck with those tactics were mediocre. They typically traded pride for results. I played on the teams that usually beat them. We would view stubbornness as a lack of sophistication. That's not working today, try something else. We would also view stubbornness as a lack of fire in the belly to get results. Like you'd rather have ephemeral non-tangible pride instead of a concrete result. I took pride in breaking down other teams' tactics. You're bunkering back, I can't pass the ball through, I can't get to the corner and cross effectively, let's try long and early.

I find snobs who can't make such adjustments second rate. I find one-note team tactics shallow. One team wins trophies. In my experience the trophy winners produce more pros than the "play the right way" teams.

We need to get back into what tactics maximize this roster and win most games, and away from trying to convince Eurosnobs how fashionable we are. I seriously doubt we are imitating the world cup winning type teams if we think we can play a naive 433 and never tactically adjust and never have negative gameplans designed to absorb for periods, or attacking units designed to get goals some way other than build forward from the keeper.

 

Bobby Wood is hard done by. If you look at the NTs he has scored on, he should probably start. Holland Germany Mexico x2 Honduras Panama Colombia Ireland Paraguay. And regardless what the snobs think "because club form," those last 3 were this cycle. Club form is overrated for NT producers.

By comparison Zardes scores on teams like Trinidad or Canada. You know, teams that might or might not even make the hex. Then we wonder why we can't score on Mexico. Well, you left off the guy who has scored on Mexico, twice, to start "club form." I don't get why this was obvious for Wondo or Twellman but is off limits for Zardes. There are people who lead leagues in scoring but might get a hat trick on Cuba and that's it. This used to be NT Coaching 101 until the club snobs got their teeth into the Fed. You start the people who score in the shirt.

Wood needs to make smarter career choices, but to me he is the younger temporary solution to "Jozy vs Zardes." ie, neither. Or one or the other as a sub behind some mix of Pulisic, Wood, and/or Sargent as CF.

To me if you get someone in there who can hold a ball and get some real striker goals, then the quick attacking types can run off him. As it stands we have a mix of good and poor wings hitting crosses to the donkey Zardes, which is a recipe for frustration.

To me the team is better set up for success when there is more of an option to deliver ball to feet in the box, where everything is not low percentage get to the flag and loft it in. Most drilled defenses will send you a gift basket for just going to the flag all day, particularly if your 9 can't finish. I just explained where it's a good bench option to send a guy in for headers. It's a bang-your-head-against-wall-bloody 90 minute tactical approach, particularly without a target guy in.

 

Excellent layoff from Jozy. That's a difficult header to make--off a very long ball, able to gently lay it perfectly into his player's path without much bounce.

 

based on gold cup last year as well as MLS lately i don't think jozy is a 90 minute guy

but he doesn't have to be, to be useful for a 23 man roster as a sub

my point is not whether he in some generalized sense is pretty good -- in fact i am arguing against such gestalt conceptions -- my point is what specific qualities do players offer off the bench

if you want to say, well, he has a few useful bench qualities, where he could be part of a unit brought in to hunt late goals, fine. i think jozy would be a useful target sub. he might also work as a wing. i think he is underrated running at people, and that gets rid of some of his back to goal brick-feet problems from time to time.

if your argument is he should be used because "good all around player," "don't limit this to heading," that's precisely the mentality i think needs to be reduced. i think we need more of a tactical, simplified approach to bench use. setup play, crossing, speed, heading, finishing, players who offer specific matchup issues when we need separation, creation, and a goal. i want to see us putting on people who can create goals because "one thing" as opposed to subbing on the next highest number from the coach's mental FIFA game.

where are the "Preki" type supersubs who go on and things just happen

but then part of the US' problem right now is you don't win minutes based on game performance enough -- you win them based on rep or because you play for some name brand club team, but not because you follow through on that when i sub you into a game down 1-0 to mexico with 30 left

i want people on my bench who when i put them into that situation, maybe the result changes. that doesn't happen from "gestalt" or "hustle guy." that happens because someone can cross, has afterburners, puts the ball in the corner every time, scores headers, some special quality they can't fight to a stalemate.

 

Why was he so poor on the Hex last time around? And why would we expect him to be better 4 years older?

 

because his spot is up for grabs.

 

Still, you are the biggest Jozy defender on the board. He had a very poor hex. Now he's four years older. I don't see why he'd have a central role on the team again. Perhaps depth for injuries, but not a key contributor.