Razov and Faria available...now what?

Definately start faria this game.Sit whitfield and pause.

razov faria

beasley williams ralph
armas

perez carlos curtin brown
thornton

 

Actually, Coz, I see our usual starting formation as more a 4-5-1 than a 3-6-1 seeing as how Dave's credo so far this season has been "Defense First!". Not that this has necessarily been a bad thing with a new coach and a new team with lots of young players, but I think our team has proven they don't necessarily need the extra help on defense. So, right now we have something like this:

Razov

DMB, Williams, Whitfield

Pause, Armas

Perez, Boca, Curtin, Brown

Thornton


The trouble is that this approach means that we live or die by keeping our opponents from scoring because the approach hampers our own ability to score. My own personal opinion is that this is being overly cautious now that the last few games have re-established the fact that we still have a solid defense. And the KC game proved that we can score if we get it into our heads to do so.

I'd like to see Dave open it up a bit by taking the extra d-mid out of our formation and starting two true forwards. Basically, take out Pause and put in Faria, Jacqua or Ralph up top with Razov.

So my formation would look like this:

Razov, Jacqua/Ralph

DMB, Williams, Whitfield

Armas

Perez, Boca, Curtin, Brown

Thornton

This way our left side is solid on boith offense and defense since DMB can run all night and play defense as well as give opposing defenders nightmares and Perez has shown that he can overlap with DMB to step up in the attack. Perez gives us the ability to go either 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 depending on the game situation.

On the right, we can have Williams inside to help Whitfield on offense while Armas breraks up attacks and then dishes off to Williams or a wing player or passes back to the back line from the middle.

I like the flexibility of my formation over being locked into a defensive posture from the start.

 

It is interesting and appropriate that you use the word "flexibility" because I think this will be Dave's hallmark this season.

I especially like the idea that with Whitfield on the right, we can send either of our left sided defenders forward (Perez or Boca) and have Whitfield slide back to keep defensive shape. I thought it was telling that Boca got forward on a number of occasions from his center back position.

There are a few problems I see, however, from benching Pause.

--One, the kid has played very well; what signal does sitting him down send?

--Two, with him in, we've STILL created chances. If we weren't creating solid scoring opportunities, then I might be inclined to say "go with a traditional 2-forward set." But really, we were inches and a couple of great Onstad saves from DECISIVELY winning the San Jose game.

--Third, we have the defensive liabiliites of Andy Williams. If you pull Pause, Andy has got to win some balls in midfield. As I mentioned in my post game comments, I was astonished at how soft on the tackle he is. While he is performing at a much higher level than I anticipated -- I absolutely winced when we got him -- we have to be realistic about his capabilities.

So, I think we should keep on doing what we are doing, and bring scorers off the bench when we need to press for a goal to get points.

 

That it's better to win as a team than lose as a bunch of individuals?

Ralph scores the winning goal in our only win so far and gets zero playing time the next game. What kind of message does THAT send?

It's not like Pause won't get playing time. He can sub in for Armas or maybe even start for Armas when Chris is or has recently been on Nats duty or just when Chris needs a rest. That's a luxury most teams don't have.

The first half, SJ had the run of play and could easily have been up 0-2 at halftime, just like KC. We only started dominating a bit before the last half of the second half. Plus, was it me or did SJ start playing for a draw around that time? Donovan was obviously tired and SJ is carrying some injured attacking players like DeRosario and Eckelund so their bench is not exactly deep for attacking players.

I think that in most of our games the Fire start off with Dave's "defense first" ringing in their ears and so we play defensively and almost (or do) give up the lead. By the second half, the players seem to just move forward on their own and that's when we actualy become dangerous on a consistent basis. We need to START games being that dangerous. Then we might actually win and not draw. We've been somewhat fortunate in that regards. KC tried to sit on a two goal lead and SJ didn't have attacking options to relpace a tired Donovan. We can't count on all teams to give us those kind of breaks.

It's Armas's job to win balls in midfield and he was doing a much better job than Pause (to be expected). I don't necessarily want Williams playing a lot of defense just like I don't want Armas playing as an o-mid. And our back line is one of if not THE best in MLS. If we don't trust them to get the job done with the league's best d-mid in front of them, why are they there?

Right now, our biggest overall liability is that we can't score. We have to address this problem now. Having Razov back will help but he's going to need help up there. Some one else has to step up and take some responsibility for scoring goals and keeping other teams from focusing on Ante. And the first such someone should be Dave - by experimenting with more attacking options.

Then you'd better hope that more coaches than Gansler are dumb enough to go defensive after a two goal lead and gift us some goals in the second half. I'd rather the Fire take their fate in their own hands and not just hope that other teams are dumb.

 

I think Dave played it right with the Faria substitution. He could have subbed for Armas though. Armas looked tired and made some mistakes that I have a feeling were fitness related.

If the idea is start defensively, I would start the game the same as Saturday and sub Faria for Pause or Armas based on their performance.

If the idea is to attack right away, take away Pause and insert Faria as a second forward.

 

I'll concede your point about Pause/Ralph.

However, I think it is very simplistic to say "I don't want Williams playing a lot of defense."

It's not a question of "a lot." It's a question of "any at ALL!!!" What little he plays, and he plays very very little, he does so quite poorly.

If he played better at that aspect of the game, I wouldn't have a problem with your approach. But the fact is, if you go that route against an opponent with good ball-holding midfield, and Andy is flailing his legs uselessly at an opponent dribbling by him, you are going to be back on your heels and not have many opportunities to get your vaunted attacking players INTO the attack.

That is, by the way, what happened in the first 20 minutes or so of the San Jose game as Mulrooney in particular -- as good a ball holding mid in MLS -- really made life difficult for us. You want Armas to track down him AND Corrales AND Mullan?

Again, if we WEREN'T creating scoring chances, then, yeah, let's go with two traditional front runners. But we're doing creating scoring opportunities.

By the way, I think the KC game, both on the defensive end and offensive end, was an anomaly. And one of the key reasons we WON that game is that Logan Pause, who had a shaky first half, really clamped down on Preki.

You see, if you tighten the vise on the OTHER guy, it starts to loosen up for YOU.

Just so you know, this is a fundamental principle of soccer that a lot of fans, in their zeal for scoring, tend to forget.

 

Now that I am finally back from school I am looking forward to not only going to games again, but being able to watch them on television. I haven't had a chance to see guys like Ralph, Jaqua, and Faria play yet, but I am hoping they can all make some impact (like the kind of impact where the ball finds the back of the net). The defense has proven itself so far against everyone they have faced (ok, KC was a bit of a debacle, but they pulled it together). Razov and Faria are both talented and feared offensive threats, and both can be up top alone and scare the opposing defenses, but I personally think that having the two up top (possible have Jaqua in and have one or the other subbed in) would prove much more dangerous. Each has proved they can score, and from what I have read, Faria and Razov worked well together on Saturday. Give em a chance Dave. I think that sporting a 3-5-2 would prove a strong threat. If Beasley can start putting them in, along with Perez and Ralph contributing regularly, and the occasional goal by Whitfield and Boca, things should fall into place...if Razov and Faria can produce as they have in the past (and Pause can show us he was worth it-which I think he will).

Good points. It is my train of thought that with a line roughly made up of Boca, Curtin, and Brown (with Perez and Whitfield when necessary) and Armas anchoring the midfield we have very strong defensive capabilities, however, it is every players job to play both sides of the game and I agree that not only do we lack confidence in Williams defensive capabilities, but so does Williams.

 

I'd vote for starting Razov and Faria up front. We need some offense so we can win some games.

Ties are better than defeats, but they don't cut it in moving toward a playoff spot. If you tie all 30 games, you're no better off pointwise than a team that wins 10 and loses 20. Winning 10 and losing 20 probably gets you the "we stink" allocation. Ultimately, we need to be winning games if we are going to have a successful season.

One of the exciting things about Saturday's tie with SJ was that when Faria and Razov were on the field together, they seemed to play off each other and with their teammates well. Part of it may have been SJ being tired, but it created a situation where all the Fire players looked more dangerous on offense.

 

The trouble is that the catenaccio fans also forget that:

1) if you can keep the ball in the opponent's half of the field or make him think you have the ability to do this, that takes pressure off your defense. Bad things happen when you let your opponent camp out in your half of the field for 60 minutes.

2) if you can't score, all your opponent needs is one goal to beat you.

3) game wins are worth 3 points and draws only 1. We can average a point a game and still maybe not make the play-offs.

I also personally think you underestimate Williams and overestimate Pause. But that's unprovable and we can argue all day about it to no effect.

The KC game was an exception in that we actually scored goals after Preki, who Pause did a decent job of marking for a rookie, was instrumental in giving KC a two goal lead in the first half because we had nothing offensive with with to put any pressure on THEM.

The trouble with looking to defend first is that if your opponent does score first, you're usually screwed - especially if your opponent isn't dumb enough to back off on pressuring you with his offense (thank you, Mr. Gansler!). Again the KC game is an exception because our first two goals came from great individual efforts (remind me, who scored that second goal again? ) and not from purposeful team play and KC was holding back on their two goal lead which proved a mistake.

The Fire have plenty of players who we already know can defend. Even if Dave told Williams to never set foot in our own half of the field upon pain of death, Perez, DMB and Whitfield will all be tracking back to help out on defense. And like I asked you before, if we can't trust our defense with them AND Armas in front of them, how come Dave is not out looking for new, competent defenders? I say that having Williams on the pitch along with Faria/Jacqua/Ralph rather than Pause is not going to cause our defense to collapse. Just because Pause isn't there doesn't mean Armas, Perez, Boca, Brown, Curtin and Thornton suddenly become a collective sieve.

We've proven we can defend this year. It's time to prove we can score goals on a consistent basis with purposeful team attacks rather than hope for some outstanding individual effort to save us. "Defense wins championships" as they say but only if you can score as well and we have more to prove on the offensive end of the field right now than we do on defense. 0-0 draws just aren't going to cut it in the long run. I'd rather score a few goals first, and then have the luxury of subbing in Pause for Williams or Faria around the 70th minute rather than desperately playing catch-up after going into halftime a goal or two down because we let some team make their home in our half of the field.

I expect more "sit back and counter" against a strong team like the Revs but the least Dave could do is experiment with a more offensively oriented lineup against, say, Colorado or Dallas. If that doesn't work, we can go back to the 4-5-1 and grind out more 0-0 draws.

 

But did you WATCH the San Jose game?? Did this happen with our ostensible single forward set?? After 20 minutes we DOMINATED them. Your premise assumes facts not in evidence.

But if you prevent the other guy from scoring, all YOU need is one goal to win.

Flash!!! This just in!! Scoring in 1st division soccer is HARD. What matters is that we are creating quality scoring chances with a bunch of guys who are still getting to know one another.

Gee, thanks for that enlightening info about points earned. Meanwhile, we're not going to tie every game.

You can personally think that, but you would be personally wrong.

Pause fills a role, he does it pretty well. He's not the second coming of God.

Watch the game, watch Andy Williams tackle...or should I say, TRY to tackle. He tries. He fails. If you don't have somebody...ANYBODY behind him to pick up the pieces, then you are in trouble.

The game is won and lost in the center of the field. You have a gaping hole in the center of the field defensively, and you are in trouble. Potentiallyserious trouble. Williams is a gaping hole defensively. Armas is great, but he can only do so much.

I guess there's no end to the variations of naivete.

Look, 1st division professional soccer is not about "proving" you can do something and then moving on to prove you can do something different.

It's about putting the right players out in the right configuration against THAT particular opponent to put yourself in the best position to get a RESULT.

Rinse and repeat.

By the way, I think COZ is right that against New England, with not the greatest midfield, a two forward set may make more sense.

Against a San Jose or a Columbus, probably not.

 

SJ outshot us 6-3 in the first half and you call that "domination"? What were you smoking before the game, dude? And how come you didn't share?

Even in the second half when the Fire were able to take advantage of Donovan's increasing weariness, our attacks weren't as dangerous as they could have been because Pause was a liability in the attack. Which is why he came out in the 85th minute once Dave finally decided to try and win the game with two forwards. If you think we generated offense with two d-mids, just think of what we could have done with two forwards! Why, we might even have won the game! You do want the Fire to win games, don't you?

Oh, and ask Jim Curtin about the shot from Coralles he had to clear off the line in the 64th minute to save our asses. Both teams dodged bullets on Saturday.

Also, you obviously haven't seen any Fire game except the SJ game or my comments would make more sense to you. Try basing your arguments on something more substantial than only 30 minutes of just one game and you won't embarrass yourself so much. I'm sure someone can get you the game tapes for the other games besides the SJ game. Go watch those and then come back and we can talk Fire tactics.

Until then, except for the KC game which everyone realizes was an exception, the Fire have three draws with one whopping goal scored. That's not going to be good enough this year. Defense is necessary but while catenaccio may be short-term solution for a cautious coach with a new squad, sooner or later the Fire are going to have to go out and try to win a game rather than play to not lose. We have to seize games, not just hope for red cards (NE), really piss-poor finishing (DCU), tactical blunders by our opponent (KC) or the opponent's lack of attacking players off the bench (SJ) to help us.

That said, Coz is right. Dave has to choose between starting Faria up front or starting Pause in the d-mid slot. We'll see if he's feeling confident enough to go for the win or if he'll settle for escaping from Foxboro with another draw.

 

San Jose had only one truly dangerous scoring opportunity, and that was because Thornton was caught off his line.

Pause was not at fault for that.

We had three outstanding scoring opportunities, with our 1-forward set, with three excellent on frame shots.

On balance, we outplayed them, and were unlucky not to win.

Even after my cigar -- a pre-game Punch -- that was OBVIOUS.

 

My 100th Post!

Interesting thread.

I tend to follow the "our defense is pretty good" theory. Lets stretch out a bit more and try to score some goals.

I think our defense good enough to handle that. Let's see more of Razov and Faria when we can.

And lets start seasoning these young guns as the season progresses.

If we press early, we can maybe grab a goal or two lead, then bring in the young guys late in the game to keep the pressure on and try to increase the lead.

 

It makes a lot of sense to start in a defensive posture in this game. That said, I have a feeling that Dave S. will get both Razov and Faria a lot of
PT this week and go for the win (and risk the loss).