It's not then chosen response; it's basically the only choice. Call in McKennie or not, that's still one dude, and you still have a huge number of guys not here. I wanted to see these guys together more than most, I think. I like winning games and I do believe you need time to gel together. I think there's value in McKennie coming in. But there is absolutely value in McKennie maintaining his playing time as well, and probably more when compared to this camp. Now, how much staying home helps; how likely he is to lose it, etc., is something I have no clue about. I'm sure McKennie and Poch have a much better idea but also that it's not something you can know for any certainty either. Calls like this -- where there's logic to both sides and we can't possibly know the numbers ... I can have a perspective but I can't get worked up over the coach's decision being "idiotic." How can anyone, even the coach, being certain this is the right call? That's not how life works -- you play the odds and you move on. Pretending that you know this is a mistake is a joke to me. No one knows. I honestly am a bit lost here, but I will say this. We don't have plenty of time. That said, there's 5-6 practices this window and they are probably light. By far the majority of the learning will come in the pre-World Cup camp. This is not a good thing. This sucks. Our team will get some good reps there but will likely not achieve the well oiled machine that a more healthy group that went to the Gold Cup and played together more would. But that's not a choice. What the choice is a player here or there. Which has some impact, but we can't compare it to camps where we have 90% of the roster there or something. I can only speak for myself and not the folks you are lumping me in with, but my general reaction isn't to the idea that McKennie should be called in; it's in the exaggeration and catastrophizing on everything. This window is less useful than if people had been healthy. If not calling in McKennie is a mistake, it's a small portion of the impact of all these other guys not being healthy. The camp isn't useless -- we have Pepi and Dest back from long absences, to just start. Getting Tanner Tessman time has value. Would it be better if Pulisic and Tillman were here to play with them? Yes, but that's not the reality. I also think it's bizarre to be angry that we replaced Adams with Tim Tillman instead of ... Gutierrez? What? Is anyone watching? And the McKennie stuff is just rehash of stuff you were mad about last week. We know you disagree. Great, but like, basic common sense is that McKennie wasn't here not because Berhalter beat him out but for other reasons and Adams being out doesn't change those.
They are. But they are also both a certain style of defensive mid -- more used to defenses that sit back and patrol a smaller area. Less active. Poch has been having his center mids be very active and cover a ton of ground, get aggressively into attack, etc. Sands was uncomfortable in it -- and it makes sense, that's not really his game. Maloney is definitely not that guy. Or he could be nowhere near fit and it might not be worth having him fly halfway across the world. I don't know. I doubt Cardoso is completely out of the picture. I suspect it more has to do with fitness and pt than anything.
there are any number of things poch, you, me or anyone can or cant know, but wes' playing time under a new manager for these 2, 3 weeks will not matter- at all- in 5 months. all this does- ALL THIS DOES- is waste yet another chance to have a crucial player in the team. youre just wrong and/or lying to argue otherwise. you make like 80% of the argument yourself (that we need to play together as much as possible having consistently wasting it time and again), but you just cant help yourself. you know wes is one of the three best and most important players we have. the arguing is all you care about. so i get how it bothers you so much that i only care about the team.
Of course it will. Because it's about winning a job and keeping it. It's not about Wes' playing time next week. It's about Wes' playing time over the next seven months. There's plenty of situations of someone losing a job and the replacement killing it and the person never really getting a shot to get that job back. If a lineup is winning, coaches ride that lineup. Wes will never be particular secure at a team like Juventus because of his style of play. You don't want to open the door for anyone. Now, how at risk is he? I dunno. How much does it help to stay? I dunno. But it's a pretty common thing to get Wally Pipp'd, especially when you are more of a chaos merchant than the archetype of a typical center midfielder. Wes will never be plug and play for a new coach at this level; he's going to have to prove he has value beyond the generic labels. Wes is super important to the team, and big part of our slump was him slumping. So yeah, I want him in camp. I also just have a tendency to want to watch a good team and win every game. I'm just saying that it is absolutely more valuable for Wes to play at Juventus for the next seven months than come to this camp. That's not the question. The question is whether him staying home materially changes the above odds.
This was my reaction / interpretation of the roster selections as well. And TBH it makes me a little nervous. At this stage, feels like you get more return on the limited remaining camp minutes and friendlies between now and WC26 by getting your top 14-17 players in camp and starting to gel with each other in the system you intend to play. Getting final data to decide who gets spots 18-26 on the roster? Feels like a low return exercise in comparison.
I get it. What i will say is that this group that's out injured or recovering from injury (Weah, Pulisic, Adams, Johnny, Richards).................does seem oft-injured. These guys on the current roster that folks are labelling as backups? Some of them might not be backups come WC26. There are twists and turns to come in the pool.
That’s my fear. The last game that Roldan played was an anomaly. I have never seen Roldan produce for the National team. He had those two assists and he’s due credit. But I don’t believe we will see that ever again. If Poch went back and watched all the Nats games when Roldan was playing, I guarantee he’d reconsider his selection. Good dude. But not a World Cup caliber player.
I usually shy away from the MLS vs Europe debates as I think they’re pointless, but I have to say why do the Europe players seem to be held to such a higher standard than the MLS ones? Every Banks and McKenzie game gets psychoanalyzed and any mistake they make is a death sentence, but Ream can do the same thing in his games and no one cares? Luna has been extremely average since the halfway point of the MLS season and he’s a no questions asked shoe-in?
But there is not much recent history with Roldan playing the position he is now. With Berhalter and Callaghan, he was more of an attacking midfielder and even a wing. Now he's playing one of two deep-lying midfielders, and in this role, he's made positive contributions in the matches he's played for the US. So I don't see how Pochettino looking back at how he played as a wing five years ago sheds much light on how Poch evaluates Roldan playing in one of the defensive midfield roles now. For club and country in that role lately, he's been good. That's why he's getting minutes.
Roldan played very good against S Korea as a sub and it continued the next window. He won't be a start against France but he's already holding his won against actual WC teams. Do we have better? Probably? Thing is he's a glue guy and they always underwhelm except in results. Dirty work isn't for highlights.
Roldan is available. Johnny, Adams, etc. aren't. If Roldan was EXACTLY the same player he currently is, but played for a mid-table team in the Eredivisie (where he'd be paid a lot less), he'd be more valued amongst posters on this forum. Its like Tim Ream. Its amazing how all of the younger guys are always out injured..............................but somebody like Ream is always available. Richards, CCV, and Blackmon apparently aren't. I remember Alexi Lalas once saying: "staying fit and available is a skill." I never agree with Alexi Lalas, but that's 100% accurate.
I get the frustration, but as someone who has only watched USMNT and pretty much no club games this year, at least in the cases of Luna and Ream, it's how they look on the field for the Nats and who else is available, not so much their club play. The defense just looks better with Ream out there for whatever reason, and other CB candidates keep getting hurt. I think Luna is a little more iffy, but he always looks passable out there with occasional moments of real quality, and he doesn't have much competition for his role. Maybe that changes if Zendejas and Reyna can get healthy/in form. I do agree McKenzie is a weird one, though. It really seems like he's been good enough with the US (though obviously not perfect) that he'd be getting more consistent looks.
Sounds great in theory, but at least half of the top 14-17 players are injured, so how could that possibly happen. Poch can only work with the players who are able to play this window.
What are you talking about? Are you talking about fans or the coach? As for fans, every Ream mistake gets psychoanalyzed and there's literally an individual thread on him demanding his career be over simply because he's old - not because he had made a mistake. We talk about every mistakes from every centerback pretty much and the only person that tends to get handwaved is Richards, who, I wouldn't say he's earned that but we know even in a bad run is starting. Tons of people are constantly harping on Ream. If you're asking why people will defend his selection, it's not that anyone thinks Ream doesn't carry risk or is some elite player, it's that when we are faced with a number of shaky and questionable selections, many posters here don't see why an 18 year old making mistakes in the Bundesliga is definitively a safer or better selection than Ream. I am sure someone loves Ream, but most of us simply see this as a choice between different pluses and minuses and can understand Ream rather than think there's no way he's not the best choice. Yes, Ream is slow and it's very possible he makes a mistake. He's also very smart and passes well. Banks is very athletic but also makes a lot of mistakes right now. I think you'd find a discussion would be different if the conversation that starts it is different. The reality is that we have no great choices and everyone comes with different strengths and weaknesses. The discussion can be interesting if that's acknowledged, but it usually isn't -- it's usually that Poch is an idiot or that Ream is a disaster or that I can't believe we're leaving home a Bundesliga CB (ignoring that he's not played well). The idea that Ream shouldn't even be called in is absurd to me. I completely get trying out other guys -- McKenzie, in particularly, though mistake prone for the US, seems the best and most consistent option. But I don't know how anyone watches Auston Trusty and thinks he's more consistent than Ream. Like good lord, no. I question anyone's evaluation who says that. But as I said, this comes down far more to the level of certainty. I tend to think of these players in tiers, and if Poch prefers a player on one tier over another player on another tier, I don't get overly worked up over it. I try to understand why. I don't think these decisions are clear cut, and I'm actually not sure anyone "knows" -- performance variation is larger than the margin of error. Ream may doom us or Banks may doom us or McKenzie may doom us and I don't think the odds are as clear as people make out. Hell, Richards was poor last window -- our worst CB and far worse than Ream. ----------------------------- As for Luna, I think most people are just missing out entirely on what Luna brings and what Poch wants out of the position. He fits that role backing up Pulisic like a glove and plays well for the US there. He defends, which is something a lot of the alternatives don't. I don't even know what European based player you even think fits into that role?
I don't think Poch would at all. For one, most of those minutes were six years ago. Pochettino isn't so dumb as to think that's all that relevant either way. How many players on this roster aren't on it if we are evaluating them from six years ago? For two ... I think people are way mis-evaluating Roldan's play from back then and role he's being asked to play now. The whole goal and assist thing with Roldan is overblown simply because he's been used all over the field. He did play some wing at times but mostly at the end of games -- the majority of his actual minutes came in central midfield where you don't expect a ton of production. How many goals and assists do Aidan Morris and Tanner Tessman have? They have a combined 1 assist in over 1,100 minutes. Roldan has 5 assists in close to 2,000 minutes. G+A is not really any of their roles and evaluating them on it is pointless. The role Roldan is playing now is basically a high energy defensive CM that's basically playing in a very mobile double pivot. Goal production is a bonus; ball progression and defense are the attributes needed. If Poch looked back, what he'd be concerned about is that Roldan really struggled back then with the Nats to receive with back to goal, turn and progress. In Berhalter's more methodical style and six years ago, he wasn't great at it. He's improved that area, and Pochettino's more rapid, aggressive, direct style of build up -- with the higher risks it has -- fits him better as well. So yeah, I don't think Poch would have an issue at all. And I don't know why we are judging Roldan on G+A right now either. Might as well bag on Adams for his 1g and 2a career in like 4,000 minutes if we're doing that.
I don't think Zendejas is competition for Luna. Luna plays on the left; Zendejas on the right and neither seems likely to be effective on the other side. Both right now seem slotted into Pulisic and Tillman's backup roles, and somewhat safely, especially if the World Cup rosters are 26. Reyna obviously would challenge both of them -- Zendejas more, given his history. But he's going to need to actually run on defense. Heck, an active Reyna challenges Tillman, though I really doubt he ever defends enough to do that in Poch's eyes. McKenzie should probably get more of a chance, but he's actually the opposite. He's been far more error prone as a nat than at club. Which is good reason to keep getting him reps, IMO, but he's not been consistent with the US.
The last time McKenie started a game that sorta mattered he was poor. Canada in the Nations League. The pairing in that game was McKenzie and CCV. Neither covered themselves in glory, and neither have seemed to be top choice since. McKenzie was on the Gold Cup roster but barely played. Mark McKenzie (4/10): Had one very scary moment when a clearance banked into the box, but the U.S. survived. Was then totally twisted around on David's goal. Rough second half for him, and it cost the U.S. Cameron Carter-Vickers (5/10): Was caught flat-footed on a goal, but he was far from the only one to blame on it.
Where did you get those player ratings and why did you pick that one? Here is Fotmob's https://www.fotmob.com/matches/canada-vs-usa/1aoxor#4758790:tab=lineup
I would guess that if Pochettino uses the 4-2-31 with the hybrid cb/rb at the back on the right (where MRobinson and Scally have played), then Dest almost has to move up into the RMF spot. If it's a true 3 at tieback, then he's the wingback.
He may effectively play one in attack. If Weah was healthy and in camp, I would think it even more likely. I don't think it is super likely we see him at an actual CAM role. While this window's roster is a bit weak there especially if Reyna doesn't play much, I think long term, reps at RB to figure out the best way to integrate is probably more useful.
Will you be explaining to us again that Malik Tillman was not a top player in the Eredivisie because of xG+xA?
I got those ratings from the goal.com article about the game and forgot to post the link. Either way, McKenzie didn't have a great game that day against Canada. He wasn't the only one. The next game he started was our absolutely dreadful performance against Switzerland in the pre-GC friendly. Again, not a good performance from him. Also, he wasn't the only one. He's only started one match since.