1. Clint Dempsey- he doesn't play against Germany and thus can't prove he can play right wing for us in the the opening game... did it lose the tournament? No, but the game and formation may have changed had we known from the get go. Everyone on BS and the media (not everyone) were so up in arms about our right mid problem. Turns out our problem was at left mid and left back and center back and forward and most importantly at manager 2. Eddie Lewis- Well not really Eddie Lewis, it was Bruce's fault for not realizing we need a defender in a defensive position. Loyalty made Bruce want to play Eddie. This cup his loyalty didn't get injured before the tournament. 3. Johnny Specs- I think if Bruce honestly had to choose between him and Lewis... he'd still have chosen lewis and that's unfortunate. Having Spec in the game would have given us a stay at home left back in the opener. Is he a world beater at the moment? Nope. But he is damn good when he's on his game. 4. Johnny O- no blame here. we have no one good enough to replace what he could have potentially given. His roster spot was not wasted. 5. Referees- we took some bad calls, that's life. Maybe next cup the calls go our way, but as of now... we still don't get the benefit of the doubt. 6. Agoos- you're officially off the hook. Welcome Mr. Pope. Not Eddie's fault, he just got old. He wasn't owed anything as he'd played in two cups and his leadership was thought to be valuable. Another of Bruce's Loyalty players. 7. Bruce- It's time to walk away. His loyalty once again got the best of him... but in fairness no one stepped up to make that claim to starting spots. So instead of sticking to his claim that the Cup is a young man's game, he stayed with what he thought could work because it's worked before. He's not given a group of world beaters, but in retrospect, he was given a pretty good team that he just couldn't push over the hump due to a lot of circumstances. 8. Beasley- hopefully he finds his form again. No one knows on this board what exactly happened (injury seems most likely) but he's a special player when on his game. And right now he's off it (save the one moment of brilliance against Ghana) 9. My view- this was a team that needed an objective eye and a little bit better strategy. you don't lose on tactics alone, but they sure can help out quite a bit. A few key injuries (JOB, Spector and to a lesser extent Hejduk) coupled with youngsters a year away (Adu, Feilhaber, Bradley) and a couple guys out of form (Beasley, Donovan, Pope) meant that this team, though skillful, needed some luck. It didn't get it. That's the way the cookie crumbles. Is the world caving in around US soccer? In my opinion, no. It evidenced how one star around 10 excellent players can change a game. The US is without that star. If all players were healthy, in retrospect the starting line up could read Keller/Dolo/Gooch/Boca/Spector/ Reyna/JOB/Dempsey/Donovan/McBride/Johnson Am I completely off base on some things, probably. But my indepth ramblings are probably not any better than anyone else's, so I chose to just skim the surface here. Looking back this was a team that had the chance to grab the world by the throat and bring it to its knees. Instead it slapped the bully and ran behind its mothers skirt. Tactics. coaches. players. they all had their moments of failure and all need to be held accountable
I think you have to throw Gibbs onto this list. he was the real answer at left back, not Spector (yet).
Didn't matter. We had more problems than right midfield. Besides the way the CR game turned out, Dempsey strength (creative and well time runs) wouldn't have matter playing a team that was sitting back and counterattacking. Plus, I think people are getting too excited about a goal from the penalty spot... Beaten to death before the WC. While Eddie didn't have a great WC, Gibbs was hurt and Boca wasn't much better (I.e. his terrible play that led to the PK call). I believe experience, attacking ability, and speed was the reason Lewis played, not loyality. Frankly, Bruce is loyal to alot of players. Have you watched Spector? He attacks as much as Lewis. He is definately not ready. He had a terrible U20 WC and has been shaky in the EPL. We sure didn't need another young defender next to Gooch... True. Didn't make a difference for this WC... I believe Bruce stated that he didn't believe that there was luck. That a team made their luck. I wonder if he thinks different. Yes, we were on the wrong end of some calls. However, the players put themselves in the position. Porr judgement on many of our players... Bruce rolled the dice on experience rather in form (see DMB). Pope and DMB should never have been on the field for this WC. Both are in poor form. 100% in agreement. For someone who seemed to push all the right buttons and have a lot of "luck", he sure turned the US effort in WC 2006 into a train wreck. DMB is overrated. He had one good season with PSV (primarily coming off the bench). Thanks for taking a crack at the analysis. My simple analysis: too many out of form players, some of the players not comfortable in their position, and poor tactics (4-5-1) = out in the first round. For those who are paranoid and love to blame officials, throw in some bad calls...
I don't know why you decided to make your own thread, being that there about eleventy billion threads you could've posted this as a reply to. My guess is that you haven't watched Spector play. He's not ready. And please. Eddie Lewis played exactly 1 game at left back, and if Gibbs were healthy he might not have played any. What I don't get is that we played the 2 best attacking wingbacks we had (Cherundolo and Lewis) we played the best attacking midfielders we had (Beasley, Convey and Dempsey), and now people are saying we should've had a more attack-minded lineup? Pope wasn't sparkling, but Agoos level? Come on. You're being silly. The simple analysis of what went wrong in '06? The other teams were really good.
and there you got it. Miked9 got it. We were not "too conservative" in our 4-5-1. sure, another striker might have been a better idea, but that 4-5-1 was supposed to blister forward on the wings to become a blitzing 4-3-3 - or at least allow LD room to roam to make it 4-2-2. The only problem is when your first touch is abysmal against good teams, you often don't get a second.
Gibbs was going to be the answer at centerback in my opinion - his injury made Arena's decision to go with Pope almost a no-brainer given our other options and their recent performances my simple analysis -- we didn't score. we actually didn't play badly in certain respects and showed marked improvement in possession and general soccer "maturity." but we showed too much respect for our opponents (yes, they are all good, but so are we) and we didn't get the breaks we got the last time around in terms of good bounces. add opponents capitalizing when we made mistakes in the czech and ghana games, and you get an early ticket home.
Defense aint brilliant, either. On set pieces, it does not seem if we have a meritocracy. It seems that the priority is Reyna gets first dibs, then Donovan, only after those guys somebody else. Getting the kicks is more of a perk given to the captain types, rather than something that is earned by the right to strike a ball from distance with power and accuracy.
1. Too many players who were not in-form and sharp. Quickly now, name the members of the NT we took to Germany in attacking roles who were sharp and in-form before the camp at Cary? My list would be: Eddie Lewis, Bobby Convey and Brian Ching. If you stretch it, you'd add Ben Olsen (D-mid) to that list. McBride had great moments at Fulham but then got hurt and slumped. DMB--terrible season plus coming off a big injury at PSV. Donovan--LAG were terrible except for 1 or 2 matches with him at the start of the year and he hadn't scored in 16 international matches (some of which were against real patsie's--the kind of teams you pad your scoring totals against). EJ? 35+ games (for club and country) and 5 goals over the past year. Wolff? Some positive moments but basically not in great form in 2006. Reyna? Coming off a series of injuries. O'Brien? No meaningful games in several years. 2. Really tough competition. We were the true "group of death." I thought we made fewer errors and played better, sharper soccer this WC than in 2002. But we didn't have a team like Portugal that rolled over for us. We didn't have John O'Brien. We didn't have the best GK in the tournament (Friedel). 3. We tried to play too offensively. Let me make it clear--I dispise bunkering and playing for a single point--especially when you do it consistently. But if you conclude that Donovan ain't a forward, unless you're willing to start Ching, we had no second forward worthy of starting on this team. EJ struggled in our warmups and failed to score against Angola when they were a man down and didn't look good for his club in nearly a full season. So he's the answer when we're a man down against Italy? There is one school of thought that says you pick your tactics and force the players/team to fit-play those tactics. For instance, you conclude that the Czechs have no speed on the backline so you set up a strategy that relies on speed to beat them (regardless of whether you have speed or not). Or, you look at the talent you've got and built a strategy/tactics/scheme around that talent. This WC, we didn't have a second forward worthy of starting. If you picked the 10 best American field players (based on form and talent), you probably would have come up with this list: Lewis (great season at Leeds), Convey (great season at Reading), Donovan (talented though not in-form), Reyna (talented though not in-form), McBride (proven but slumping), Onyewu (rising and good physical shape), Pope (coming off several months of good play, especially for country), Dempsey (outstanding 2005 club season and 2 good NT appearances), Olsen (outstanding club performance and good recent NT work), Ching (outstanding club performance). Now that lineup has both Ching and McBride starting (I think most of us agree that wouldn't work) and no outside defenders (unless you play Lewis there). It also means that the last 2 guys chosen for the roster (Olsen and Ching) are two of your top 10 players. Arena played a 4-5-1 partially b/c he' likes a 442 (with it's wide play and overlapping outside backs). But also b/c he didn't a second true forward who deserved to start so that second forward was usually Donovan. But it was an attacking 4-5-1. We gave up the first goal to the CR when we got caught with our outside backs and outside mids downfield. We gave up the first goal to Ghana when our D-mid (Reyna) was the last man back and others were pushing up field. Don't get hung up on the formation. The Dutch play a 4-3-3 which is optimally an attacking formation but they sure looked defensive and cautious in their match against Argentina. Switzerland played a 442 but man were they defensive. I think if a very good tactician had been our head coach, he would have opted for a very defensive scheme. The outside backs would have been told to never cross midfield. Dempsey never would have left the bench (b/c the first pre-requisite for the outside mids would have been to defend). DMB's play would have been held up as a model (defend, chase balls, always make the safe pass rather than try to take players on or attempt thru-balls). 4. We gave up the first goal every match. A little bit of that is "breaks." But bottomline, our offensive aggressiveness allowed a great cross to Koller so they score in game #1 (combined with Gooch and Pope not being able to stay with Koller). In match #2, Gooch blows the offside trap and they score on the free kick--then Matroeni takes away our man advantage with a stupid play that looks like it deserved a red card. In match #3, we're pushing up and Reyna gets stripped of the ball with no support. Trailing in a WC, you end up chasing the ball, vulnerable to counters, no space for quick players (which was what a big part of our offense was built around) and dependent upon the ability to break down a good defense (and only Reyna showed that ability--no-one else on our team demonstrated that tactical acumen and skill).
Well we don't really have anybody that can do that or at least anybody who is good enough to be playing when we're not running set pieces. Mapp maybe, but he's as inconsistent on free kicks as anybody else. Good on corners though. We don't have many good ballstrikers at all and I can only guess that this is something that needs tobe corrected earlier in a player's development than we tend to correct such things.
The 4-5-1 was probably the wrong formation, and definitely the wrong formation for a 34 yr old McBride. I would have gone with a 4-4-2 with McBride and GAM, and Ching replacing McBride at 60'+. I never liked Lewis at left back. I've always thought he was a far better midfielder, and certainly more comfortable in that position. As I've written many times, Reyna is not really an offensive nor a defensive midfielder. Therefore, I don't see a place for him in the center of the park. He's too slow and not physically strong. I think his best position is at right midfield. ---------------------McBride(Ching)-------------GAM(Wolff) -----------------------------------Donovan ---Beasley(Convey)-------------------------------------Dempsey(Reyna) --------------------------------Mastroeni(Olsen) ---Albright--------------------------------------------------Cherundolo -------------------Conrad(Pope/Boca)-------------Gooch------------------------ ------------------------------------Keller
He's a two-way central mid.If we had another player of his quality,we could play woith 2 two-way central mids. We couldn't because: 1)JOB was hurt. 2)Donovan stays too high. 3)Dempsey's not quite there. 4)Bruce is committed to the a-mid/d-mid combo,either with a diamond or box.. Had JOB been ready,I think we could have seen a flat four midfield in at least one group game.
OTOH,Germany were dire on set pieces yesterday. It's a good weapon,but it's a bit dangerous to rely on set pieces.Either the ball must be struck perfectly or you must be lucky and get the second ball.
Mario Kempes, here's the problem I see with your scheme... 1. Our game plan (and Arena's general MO) was to use speed on the flanks to create problems for the Czechs. To move Reyna to right wing is to effectively take away that approach. Given that no-one else on the team showed the ability to break down a defense, Reyna was really our only option. I don't disagree with you that he isn't a true A-mid or D-mid. In fact, he'd make an ideal holding mid in a 3-5-2. But we don't have the 3-man backline to play a 3-5-2 effectively. 2. Yep, Conrad looked good when he played and Pope generally played well but all of his mistakes or misplays were really punished. But prior to the runup of the WC, Pope was better than Conrad. And Conrad returns to KC and promptly gives up an OG. My point isn't that Conrad is a bad player--I catually think highly of him. My point is: I look at our defensive talent and am not overly impressed. I think none of those guys really showed over the last year they were international class. Pope has played well the past year, Conrad stepped it up in MLS prior to the WC (one of the few fringe players who did--kudos to him), Bocanegra and Cherundolo deserved callups b/c of their experience and big league pedigree, Gooch impressed the second game against Borghetti and is physically impressive (plus going against Toni and Koller, we'd have kept Gooch on the roster even if he'd been a schmoe!). But I look at that bunch and there isn't anyone that I think would start for many of the other WC round of 16 teams. That's a very pedestrian group of defenders. So anyone (you, Arena, whomever) can make just about anycase you want for who should start--I don't think it would have made much difference (other than we did need someone physically imposing against Koller for one half and Toni for one game). 3. Mastroeni as D-mid wasn't overly impressive to me this match. Plus you have to figure out who to play the remaining 1.5 games that he's missing. 4. We played Donovan as an a-mid this tournament (either that or people have to stop insisting we played a 4-5-1). He didn't get it done. 5. I think the world of EJ/GAM and hope he turns out to be a world class striker. But if he doesn't burn things up with KC over the next 10-15 games, that is going to mean nearly 45-50 club and country matches (with many of the country matches coming against patsies) where he isn't getting it done. Folks, we've got to face the facts--unless Arena was going to jetison EJ for Razov, Donovan for Cunnigham, DMB for Eskandarian, and start players like Ching and Olsen and Conrad, the team we selected and sent to Germany consisted mostly of players who have been in horrible form the past 6 months for their clubs.
Agree,but.... I'm curious-are you saying that dumping those guys was what we should have done,or due to the lack of form of our best players,expectations for the team should have been ratcheted down?
I'm saying that expectations were too high. If we'd gone to the WC with a starting lineup of: Razov, Ching, Convey at A-mid, Lewis, Dempsey, Olsen, Pope, Conrad, Cherundolo and Albright (plus Keller), would any of us have predicted getting out of the group? But Razov, Ching, Olsen, Conrad, were in clearly better form than some of the better players we were counting on to get us out (like: EJ, McBride, DMB, O'Brien, Reyna, Bocanegra, Wolff, Donovan). And despite being in better form, I don't think any of us believe that Razov is "the answer" (or Ching for that matter) internationally when it comes to scoring goals, or that Eddie Lewis was going to carry his own against his counterparts from the CR and Italia, or that Olsen was going to be our defensive destroyer in midfield. If anyone had suggested a lineup with all of those players, we'd have laughed at them and they've have no credibility with us. Nor am I arguing they should have been chosen or started. But it's my way of saying that we had guys who were critical to the team who (on a deeper side) would not have started or even made the team. And that list includes almost every single attacking player on our team. Guys like: McBride, O'Brien, Reyna, Donovan, DMB, Wolff, Eddie Johnson made the roster and or started b/c: --they've done well in the past (faith that past performance equals future performance). --they've played well in big games (so even if someone like DMB was in bad form, maybe he could come up big when it counted--this is called wishful thinking). --potential: someone with size, speed and skill who IF they get hot could be a force (Eddie Johnson, I mean you). --because we have no-one else with their potential impact as a player so we just have to trust that they'll get it together in time for the games that count (in this regard, you'd put Reyna, O'Brien, Donovan, McBride, EJ down for sure). And it's not like what Arena did was include an overweight, out-of-form Ronaldo (who when on is one of the world's great finishers). Folks, we just didn't have enough horses. The guys we had (and needed to count on offensively) were mostly in poor-form and mostly didn't produce. I'd argue Reyna was the exception (Dempsey doesn't count--he was in a support role like Donovan was in 2002).
It seemed pretty clear to me before the World Cup that the breaks were not going our way. Gibbs gets hurts, O'Brien not getting fit, DMB not playing well, Heyjuk getting hurt... That said, while the US is much better than they were 20 years ago, we still are not a sure thing against any other qualifier for the World Cup finals. Even the top tier can struggle at times, and for us, it's never a sure thing. We need to be at our best and get breaks. Neither of those happened this year.