ah, well... so much for wishful thinking... Ya know what, while if this projection holds true, it would mean they ignored my previous post, but then again, in the Earnie's frustration's thread, it would seem Ray's getting the point there..re: consistency, albeit a bit too late, and blind to the fact that positive consistency is what we need. Yeesh, garnering a win by 2 or 3 too much to hope for I suppose. God, I hate sounding like Eeyore. Guess I should still maintain some belief that Stoichkov and Etcheverry have some resiliency and backbone, hopefully it doesn't only apply to their temper being immediately tied to their mouths. Stoichkov has played well at times for us this year, so maybe not so big a leap for him to step up-and besides, he's due according to his frequency of scoring on the year. I love Etch's fire, and nothing would please me more to see him in better condition to show us truly what he's got left. I just hope Ray notices that practicing away from the team so far this week to nurse his calf means he needs to be sorely tested well before starting him on Sunday. Diablo's pride maybe almost as big as his heart, so only seeing should be believing here. On the not so cynical side, I sincerely expect big games from Prideaux, for redemptions sake, Stewart, Nelson, and Dema-think we may see whatever their conversation last Saturday night yields- if anything. But I would love to be pleasantly surprised with either/both Marco and Hristo contributing to fulfill my fantasy match from before.
Given the identical lineup, I must prepare myself for experiencing major frustration and pain throughout this game.
If Etch and Hristo start the game, I'm gonna watch very intently to see what Wynalda says. You just know he's gonna have a field day with this one ...
I'm not gonna get all twisted up about that lineup until I see them on the field. Hudson has been known to field a different lineup from that which he posts ahead of time. I guess it's just inconceivable to me that he would start both geezers. No one else on the planet would make that mistake again. I hope.
I actually think, from Hudson's perspective, it makes perfect sense to start the same lineup - geezers included. The lineup that we fielded last week is the lineup that Hudson thought matched up best against the Fire. I don't think the one loss to the Fire will necessarily change that assessment for Hudson. Part of the reason I think that is probably because, contrary to some here, I don't think Hudson is wholly motivated by the "what have you done for me lately" calculation. I actually think he defers more often to experience than the last game. The lineup we sent out last week is the experienced lineup - aside from Warren and Namoff. Warren starting is out of necessity and Namoff - Namoff truly is an exception here. To field a different lineup would mean to place less experience players in there in place of the more experienced guys. Do you really see starting the Qs or Eski or anyone else in a playoff match? I can't see it. That lineup that we sent out last week makes perfect sense for "rely on experience" Ray. It still makes sense for him ... even if it makes no sense to anyone else.
You've got a point there. Dammit. Whatever. Bring on the geezers. Any chance we can call up Roy Lassiter, just for old times sake? Doesn't matter. Since I'm expecting nothing less than total anhilation, I can't be disappointed. So no matter what happens I'm happy. Screw it. Yeah, I'll just keep telling myself that and maybe I'll start to believe it.
Well, not one to ever quote Michael Jackson, unless it's a quote about beer, You are not alone. Oh, and you honor me with the sig. Hope that means you liked it. Here's to everyone stocking their respective fridges Sunday-wherever you take in the game.
Naw, I don't think Ray will run with the same lineup as last time. One sage warrior at a time, Etch then Hristo, that's my prediction.
Fine, but remember that "'Rely on experience' Ray" started Stoitchkov just eight times during the regular season. He did start him in 2 of 4 Fire games (3 of 5, now), including our win over there, but I don't think both of the older guys start on Sunday. Anyway, I've got a twenty that says we don't start the same lineup, if you're interested. Last week's lineup was the lineup he thought would work best for keeping a clean sheet and nicking a one-goal win at home. This is a very different game. In any case, I seriously doubt he gave an answer to the PR folks, if they bothered to ask him in this situation. I assumed they just put up the last one because they didn't know.
i wonder if i can figure out how to just record the audio this is the best explantion of ray's tactics i have heard all year. You can count me in the group to which it doesn't make any sense. I just hope against all hope that your wrong and we actually put some speed out there.... BTW, just because i quoted you twice in a row doesn't mean i'm stalking or anything... not that there's anything wrong with that...
http://www.mlsnet.com/games/03/tracker.php?gamename=11092003_DCCHI&version=preview&lang=eng REFEREE: Brian Hall. SAR (bench): Craig Lowry; JAR (opposite): Richard Eddy; 4th: Terry Vaughn ----- Also of note in that preview, it says: D.C. United at Chicago Gillette Stadium- 1:00 pm ET Game Two Damn, and we bought tickets to go to Chicago.
With the lineup: Warren; Prideaux, Nelsen, Petke, Namoff; Stewart, Etcheverry, Kovalenko, Convey; Cerritos, Stoitchkov It's about the only thing available in the cupboard. Considering the injuries, this is assembling the best IX players available. There really isn't much debate as to which substitute should be on the field. I mean you've got Quintanilla, Quaranta, Martins, Ivanov, and Eskandarian as the only viable subs. Q1 isn't ready to take back his starting role. Q2 would get torched by Beasley. Ivanov would get the best view of Q2 getting torched, just before he got torched. Martins and Eski do not bring anything more to the table than Hristo.
I suspect that's true. My point wasn't prediction, just to demonstrate the reasonableness of starting the same lineup as last week. I'm not sure if I agree with you that "Last week's lineup was the lineup he thought would work best for keeping a clean sheet and nicking a one-goal win at home." Ray was going for a win but I actually think he was going for a multi-goal margin. Nicking a one goal win at home, I think Ray knew, probably wouldn't suffice. So again this week we need a multi-goal win. From that perspective the games really aren't as different as you say. But Ray's in a real bind here. The defense didn't work last week but there's really nobody but Ivanov who might step in. And the offense was crap but it was still the most experienced lineup we could offer. The only change that wouldn't surprise me is Q2 for Hristo. But then again, we're playing Chicago and I get the distinct impression that Ray like's to start Hristo against Chicago. And I think Hristo likes it that way too ...
I kinda felt we were going for the 1-0 home win and the semi-traditional DC/Chicago 0-0 game in the return. In any case, a case could be made for that lineup in this situation, that's for certain. I'm just guessing that Ray will go with his oft stated feeling that Hristo is more dangerous when the opposition has slowed down a bit.
The only place Chicago can be truly exposed is on the wings and DC will have trouble doing that unless Convey shows up huge. They're easily our equal in every starting spot except Convey against Whitfield, and/or Perez against Namoff/Q2. We win those matchups, or get extremely lucky in other lineups, then we got a decent chance, if not, see you all next year. We absolutely cannot win this game down the center, or through our defense versus their offense, (maybe Stewart-Cerritos can confuse their defense, but even I'll scptical of that) but we can exploit them down the sides if our players choose to show up. We'll see.
Uummm... Saying a team needs to exploit the wings does not mean they will ignore the center, nor does it mean the central players are not important. After all it is a team sport after all. My point is that if United expects to win based solely on Marco (and maybe Stewart) beating Marsch and Armas, then that's a waste. If, on the other hand Marco occupies enough of their attention that SuperBobby and Quaranta/Namoff, etc have enough room to win the game then yes I'd say that's correct. However, it wouldn't hurt my feelings the tiniest bit to be compleytely wrong and watch Marco win the damn game all by himself. Looks like a no lose situation to me. At least I'm not Knave hunkering in my cave waiting for the holocaust.
Well now that would depend on the scotch, now wouldn't it? I would think a United victory (and advancement) is well worth some of the worst wretched swill, while a DC loss is barely worth the best Scotland has to offer (fingers crossed of course)