I think the jury's still very much out. He barely played on the right at Chelsea & his improvement was probably other factors, i.e.: responded to a new challenge, motivated by being benched altogether, and Frank focused on the weakness of his runs. This was far from his first rodeo on the left. If you broke down his goals, a small fraction would be him starting on the left & cutting right. And I don't know why his passing would be dependent upon that, cutbacks, or using his weaker left foot when he does beat the defender to the endline. 2 of 3 years at Dortmund he actually doubled the assist rate he produced at Chelsea. Also, I don't think you made this assertion, but someone else did, that the modern game typically has two wingers that slash inside. It's more often that 1 does that, the left-winger who is right-footed & can shoot, and the other provides some width. Pulisic can be the first but the second more fits his profile. I don't think people factor in circumstance of club enough to how they personally utilize players. We have our own circumstance & always have to think about how we get the best performance out of our team as they do. Even if it would hypothetically be a marginal gain here, it can be a bigger cost elsewhere.
Yeah, and I think that's where Berhalter is as well right now. That said, philosophically, I would go with whatever the best mix is, especially when Pulisic is probably comfortable everywhere. But given Pulisic's evolution as a scorer, I think Left Inside Wing is where he belongs. If you watch last year, our biggest offensive problem was not creating chances. It was finishing them. We were a team of terrible finishers largely. Getting the ball to an improved finishing Pulisic in dangerous positions needs to be a priority, not just because he's our best player, but because our finishing options haven't stepped up enough for him to play more of a creator role. He's obviously going to do both ... but while I originally liked him best as a 10, his play with Chelsea has shifted it to LW for me.
I am completely against playing Pulisic as a 10. Gio can be better in that role. Pulisic is World Class in his pace and dribbling those 2 things can be more highlighted on the wing.
Pulisic slides in to the center/left frequently now, so it's not like he has his heels on the touch line like he did with BVB. He's fine on the wing. If we didn't have Reyna, and our next best option was Lletget or whatever? Sure, slide CP in. But having Reyna is a game changer.
I do agree with you in that his skill set is better suited to the LW, but the main reason I put it as an option to have him as a 10 is because if you look at his statistics with the NT, the overwhelming majority of his goals and assists came when he was playing a central role. The first time I looked at those statistics I was pretty damn surprised. The source is transfermarkt if you want to take a look. All of that was before Reyna was an option though, so that along with the success he’s had at Chelsea on the LW make me want to keep him there.
This is true, but I also think that the majority of his goals and assists with the national team were also in transition. Pulisic's a terror in the middle of the pitch on the break, and he's much more valuable on the ball on a break than streaking long, like Morris would be, for example. That's where he behaves more like a 10. But he's not as good in a crowded middle trying to create against a set defense -- it's better to get him into the wider areas where there's less congestion and more room to use his speed and quickness. The solution is simple: in transition, when there's a turnover, Pulisic should opportunistically streak back and to the middle to get the ball if it's turned over deeper, much like he does with Chelsea, where he likes to come back deep in the half-space region and turn and drive. (Obviously, where he is and where the ball is on a turnover makes a difference). And when the defense is set, swing him out to the wing. The bigger question is how are you lining up your lines defensively and where is Pulisic mostly roaming. How easily can he receive the ball in transition and how often is the better choice to play off. Playing him as a 10 put him in the front 2 of Berhatler's 4-4-2 and kept him in a good spot for breaking. Of course, the defense never forced turnovers, so that didn't help. At the end of the day, I think he's better out on the wing with a left-sided 8/10 who can easily swap with him -- whether Reyna, Holmes, Pomykal, etc.
lol hey if you think weah is the guy then its a great idea. however, if pulisic is the guy and weah hasn't even shown he is a starter...I'd play pulisic at his best position.
Exactly, my guess is we'll attack in a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 but defend in a 4-4-2 with Pulisic and our striker as the 2 up top and Adams and McKennie covering the center in the midfield 4 with the other 2 covering the wings.
Welcome to modern soccer. I don't need Pulisic overly committing to defense, but the days of offense only players is completely and utterly over.
dont get me wrong when they play a decent team and are playing 10 behind the ball and bunkering he will need to 'defend' but I still use the term loosely. However against a team that they are similar to or better then(and I realize there are only 2/3 of those on their schedule the next few years) he needs to be further up the pitch. He shouldnt even sniff the us back third of the pitch. welcome to the modern game...pulisic isn't a defender or a midfielder he is an attacking player.
He'll need to defend if we're pushing into the back third of our own end on defense. We aren't good enough against good teams to post him and let the opposition have numbers. He shouldn't be in the box, and he should be as forward as he can go for the counter, but we're not in a position against anyone decent to cherry pick. But that's not what I'm talking about, really. The bigger defensive point is that if we're going to press, he needs to defend. You can't effectively press and have players not pressing. The whole point of pressing is that you remove all the immediate options. It's a crappy press that has an attacking just .... not. So people need to decide: is our pool perfect for a press? Do we want to apply pressure? If we do, Pulisic defends to a decent level or our press sucks. Or do we want Pulisic not exerting energy on defense? If he can play both ways for Chelsea -- and he does to a certain extent -- then why not the USMNT? Pulisic should be our least defensive player for sure, but if we're building a team to compete with equally or more talented teams, and we're building around young, defensive pressure, we can't afford for anyone to not put in some level of effort. Lastly, the most dangerous move after the restart for Pulisic was to come back into the midfield, turn and slice through the opponent's defense. I have no issues with Pulisic coming back into the midfield. I think he's FAR more dangerous when doing that than sitting out static on the wing. I know you meant this as a clapback of some kind... but you know what you are saying doesn't make sense, right? I see this point of view on soccer all the time on here. There's a whole crew that still has incredibly defined spaces and roles and the the whole team is fundamentally disconnected -- the attackers attack and attack only; a defensive mid stays home with the defenders, etc. People claim Berhalter's stuck in 2010; this mentality started dying in the 1990s. No one wins anything high level anymore with one way players unless those players are demi-gods. The top teams roll out guys like Bobby Firmino and Karim Benzema instead of one dimensional strikers for a reason. Bayern just ripped apart the Champions League with a comprehensive, extremely compact, two-way squad that is extremely fluid in positioning. Traditional 10s are all but dead at the highest levels. Pulisic is 21, about to turn 22. He can run a bit. Let's stop acting like he's 30+ year old Messi.
you started with repeating what I said which I think is good? after that you are overthinking literally everything. I think you are way too concerned about the moon's alignment and mars and the gravitational pull of the unknown gravitational force scientist still can't explain. stop comparing the us with a club team and absolutely don't compare them to the club team that just won the champions league lol. there is a reason that you keep listing club teams...national teams don't have that time or ability to plug guys into those roles they have rosters that are very limited especially with a team that lacks talent like the us. the idea that in a few week and half periods with different player pools each time they are going to turn into a team where guys don't even need positions they will be some magic fluid machine that moves magically knowing what to do without a role...is a joke. players have roles and they are defined the idea that players are just out there going anywhere they are needed isn't what is happening.
Players want roles, clear instructions. It' simplifies the game for them. It's a sign of a good coach With the national team jobs in international soccer it's even more important. Almost, the most important thing a coach can do. In rare exceptions a player is smart enough where you give them truly a free role, but even with that there's be a couple ideas you might remind him about or you see something during a game and point it out to him. We will press at times, but it's not going to be this constant pressure all game long. Our biggest strength as a team is our speed. At fullback, in the center of midfield and on the wings. So while pressing certain teams will work against anyone good, they'll be skilled enough to get around it most instances and it will drag us out of position. When playing anyone good our best bet is hitting teams on the counter. We're not going to be out there defending like Atletico Madrid but we're also not going to be out there pressing like Liverpool. Those clubs can buy players specific to each role. Our players happen to land as far as style somewhere in between that. As far as Bayern, they all had very clear roles. Back four was told to play as high as possible with Davies and Kimmich getting forward as much as possible. The front 3. Gnabry was trying to get in behind all the time and Coman/Perisic was given the same instructions but on the left. Lewandowski isn't the type of 9 who's going to beat teams in behind he was given more of a target man role. The midfield 3 Goretzka and Muller where the legs. Constant movement with the ball constant pressing without. When building up play they'd always look for Thiago. He was their deep lying playmaker. They felt confident enough with Alaba as a centerback they could play that high and not get beat in behind. They were wrong a few times but teams never really punished them for it. Partly due to the fact they were scoring so much. Partly do to their good pressing but both Barca when it was an actual game were getting in behind regularly and missing that last killer pass and PSG had even more success getting in behind but they just missed their chances. Having Neuer as the keeper who likes to come out a lot and is big and a good shot stopper means it all flows together and makes sense for them to play that way.
Yep played counter attacking football. Giroud as target man Griezmann as playmaker behind him and Mbappe on the wings running in behind.
Yes, I definitely went all mystical with pointing out that everyone needs to defend if we're going to press. And that Pulisic has been most effective dropping back. This is not rocket science, though you are trying to define it that way. Despite what you think, national team coaches do more than just roll the ball out and say "go play." Of course, it's never as cohesive or complicated as club play, but nothing I've said has even gone there. And yes, the best national teams DO have some continuity -- that's because they are run by real coaches and not a bunch of message board fans who simply want to plug and play random players every call-up. If people really think all you can do is say "hey, you're playing LW, stay forward" then I don't know why people complain about Bruce Arena. You had the perfect coach for that.
And Blaise Matuidi on the other wing for defensive presence, which is my point. Both the Giroud selection -- who is a lot more multi-dimensional than you give him credit -- and the Matuidi selection were blasted. But they were selected for defensive presence and fit with other players. The original discussion here was not about style of play of counter attack versus possession; it was whether Christian Pulisic should be allowed to --gasp-- drop into the midfield or --shame! -- have to play some defense.
Right and I think most of us would prefer him in a minimal defensive responsibility winger role so he can utilize his pace and dribbling skills. Put Gio in the Griezmann playmaker role. WeaWe probably to a much lesser extent a poor man's version of that French tea than anything else. My issue is Berhalter wants us to play like Pep's Barcelona.. The Matuidi move was really smart by Deschamps knowing your not going to ask much of Mbappe defensively. McKennie as our Pogba and Adams as our Kanye. Again only talking stylistically in the comparison.
I'm not making Pulisic's defense the crux of our gameplan or anything, but I also think that given our talent is not quite France's, we're going to have to ask Pulisic to you know, play a little bit of defense. And since people want to press -- we're going to ask him to play defense. These discussions all mix together; but are people really disagreeing with me that our whole team needs to play defense by citing France 2018? The team that had MORE talent by FAR than any other team in the world ... and decided to play really defensive? That's the argument against having a solid defensive team? Of course Pulisic is going to have less defensive responsibilities than anyone else. But it'd be a massive mistake to post him up top and not use him in other parts of the game. [I also don't think Berhalter is trying to get us to play like Barcelona. People act like having any kind of plan to build out of the back is suddenly tiki-taka. France built out of the back plenty in 2018.]
you can't run a national team like a club team thats the point. what you are talking about is putting together a club and a long term strategy over years and buying/selling players for that strategy. on the other hand you can do what you want to do but it will require big decisions. do you drop a pulisic for an arriola type and a robinson/dest for a ream/vines in the back and don't look at a reyna type and go with a morales and play with on the counter with a big target guy up front. I think thats a terrible idea. love the idea that ur right because the national team isn't run by a bunch of message board fans because a fan who has never coached anywhere thinking they can fifa/football manager type coach the national team is exactly what you are. don't forget that jk tried the shift formations/strategy stuff with a bunch of more experienced players and it was a disaster.
No, I'm not. That may be how you interpet and extrapolate it, but that's not at all what I am proposing. Our pool is rapidly improving and we not longer are restricted to talent that only has to play one way. I also think people are completely missing something when they think a team can't both possess the ball and play out of the back on offense and counterattack when the chance comes and so on. I've literally never proposed any of those things. Where are you getting this? The radical things I've said: I'd ask Pulisic to press, play defense when needed and absolutely allow him to drop back since that's actually when he's at his most dangerous I want two way players because everyone has to play defense in modern soccer It's completely outdated to pretend your attack can just sit up front and wait for the ball, never helping on defense, which, you know, is pretty much true everywhere This comment solidifies my belief that I'm talking to a 12 year old year. Yes, we should never try anything again. Even though we have an entirely different set of players with entirely different skillsets. Klinsmann also didn't lay out tactical direction or like coaching in any way. I'm not sure how that's relevant.
the us is not everyone else get over the genpress thing I understand thats what you see super talented teams on tv do so you say...hey lets do that. ur overthinking the room the us has an improving in promising talent but the fact is a lot of it is a long way from developed. most of them are still trying to become first team regulars to think ur going to get them to play a bunch of different ways with the national team is a reach at best. ur overthinking the room
I think we're all in agreement that asking Pulisic to play some defense all well knowing there will be times we will press and times we won't. Giving him the least amount of defensive duties. I think maybe there is some commonalities in our discussions that we aren't all seeing. Berhalter isn't asking Adams to play like Busquets. But for our liking asking him or whomever is in that role to play too much like him when we think we need to be a bit more direct given our talent pool at this point When you say Pulisic playing defense you don't mean Atletico Madrid style but somewhere between that and what Neymar is asked to do for PSG. Is that fai