I should know better than to argue with you 'coop, but look a little further back in the thread for how the comparisons got started. They were triggered by your rank dishonestly about MB's performance in the Slovenia match. And fyi, I don't have a shrine to any player (and a lot of posters here would find that suggestion to be pretty funny, as I have something of a reputation for being a bit too negative about all US players). Anyhow, all I really want to see on a going forward basis is Edu on the bench, I could care less whether it's Bradley/Jones/Holden/etc. who are keeping him there.
Well, I can still do that, too; just a question of time, pressure and passing options. But I'd only call a player a smooth passer if he's still able to do it under pressure, with no more than a second on the ball, and the other team shutting down his options. "Give him ten yards of free space, three seconds on the ball and some open players, and he can play a very clean square pass" doesn't define a good passer.
Let me get this straight. Because I dared to suggest that IMO Buddle, Johnson, and Chandler were the main architects of the offensive success against Slovenia that was “rank dishonesty” on my part and required a Bradley v Edu comparison? The other thing I just realized is that you appear to be having this conversation with a person/entity you call supercooper? It is very important that you distinguish reality from things which your mind may be creating. Talking to someone about your issues with this “supercooper” may be a good idea. Please don’t take my perceived slight of Bradley personally. I know I don’t understand just how important he is like you do.
I think the US showed in Llubjana the potential for a fluidity that leads to a simple answer to this thread's question. "In the attack." Where he is drawn on a chalkboard should be nearly irrelevant.
Again though, that's not all you did... Anyhow, thanks for your concern about my mental health, but I'm doing just fine. I'll concede that I may be wrong and you may not be the poster formerly known as supercooper (though your join date, which coincides with supercooper participating here a hell of a lot less frequently, along with your posting style/topics/frequency, has led more than a few posters here to conclude that you are he/she).
Probably not, he has a 18M€ buyout clause next summer, and that's a real bargain. Bayern, Arsenal, Manchester City and United, Milan and Madrid seem to be interested. There will probably be better offers in winter, since he's eligible for the CL, but I won't harm our chances of reaching the CL or even winning the Bundesliga title for 10 or 15 extra milions in winter. It's going to be very, very difficult to keep him next year, even if we could offer him CL games ourselves.
I wholeheartedly agree. I think Ian said it best during our last Mexico game, he just needs to be put in a position "...where he can do the most damage...", whereever that is in a plan is irrelevant, as long as he maximizes his touches and his ability to create.
Wherever he can do the most good. Which in my mind depends on our opponent, shape, and supporting cast. That also means that anybody could/should be moved around to put him in whatever particular role that might be.
There are really cool programs that compare word usage, writing style, typing errors etc. so you could have a really good idea if it was him or not. In fact, BS should have a sock-puppet ap that does that. Ok, soccer-forum-geeks (a triple redundancy!) get to code-writing.
Interesting thoughts! And what do you think about this article, which maps a bit your Man U reference: http://www.zonalmarking.net/2011/11/21/la-galaxy-1-0-houston-dynamo-donovan-tactics/ Notice how much LD *didn't* stay out wide. He cut in centrally like he usually does for the US, but he still spent an awful lot of time there rather than out on the wing. Now, that was due to a few factors: 1) He and Sean Franklin were overrunning Taylor and Ashe - overlapping galore. LD would come in, Sean Franklin would overlap - much like Cherundolo and LD. 2) Trying to give Keane an outlet that wasn't named "Adam Cristman." Aka, the scoring black hole. 3) Trying to add some creativity upfront. 4) He and Keane actually DO combine well. Keane's style of play being similar to Clint's (minus the aerial threat), this didn't surprise me. 5) On the Galaxy he often has to drift more centrally than the USMNT because otherwise he gets cut off from service stranded on the wing. When Sean Franklin is "on" (like last night), the Galaxy can afford for him to do that. 6) Beckham drifts wide from time to time, and LD drifts towards the center. I do understand that his role changes with the opponent - but that would be a little different than what he's done under Bob. For the most part, minus desperation when he would be moved to 2nd striker, he was at RM. Period. Now all of a sudden we could have him back to floating between 2nd striker, CAM and LM/RM. I think he can handle it, but the requirements of those roles and the players you link up with are different. Plus, it has a domino effect on Dempsey. So playing against Italy, where do we think Clint and Landon line up? I'm not sure yet (and I don't know enough about Italy).
I think the RM slot will continue to be the best use on Donovan's talents. At home against weaker CONCACAF opponents use a 4-1-3-2, a second line of Johnson AML, Dempsey CAM, and Donovan AMR with Altidore and Buddle up top presents our best attacking force against a likely bunkered in foe.: ..........Buddle..Altidore........ Johnson..Dempsey..Donovan Against stronger opponents on the road we can go to a 4-2-3-1 replacing Buddle with more defensive spine: ...............Altidore............ Johnson..Dempsey..Donovan ..............Bradley.............. Want more defense: ...............Altidore............ Shea......Dempsey..Donovan .................Edu................ In all cases Altidore, Dempsey, and Donovan are constants!
I think the answer lies in the question of how do we go about being the more proactive team that tries to, in some way shape or form, take a bit more control of the game. One of the luxuries of being a counter-attacking side is that if your opponent likes to commit a lot of numbers forward, there are spaces naturally open for you to exploit when you win the ball back. However, we've moved away from being a counter-attacking side, and with that shift comes the question that a lot of proactive, attack-minded, positive soccer sides must answer: how do you create spaces in the opponents defense? If we get more of the ball, then the opponent spends more time retaining their shape, meaning the spaces we found being a counter-attacking side are no longer present. Barcelona answer this a few ways. First, they press intensely high up the field. This of course makes for a very high defensive line, but it also means that if you win the ball back, then you can catch the opponent out of shape, the same principle behind counter-attacking sides. We saw how the USA scored their first goal against Slovenia by pressing high up the field and causing a mistake from the centerback/goalkeeper. Second, Barcelona also move the ball in a specific manner. They pass the ball from flank to flank hoping to catch narrow defenses on their weak side, and they move the ball back to their centerbacks, hoping to drag the opponent high up the field, creating space in behind their defense for their speedy runners like Lionel Messi, David Villa, and Pedro Rodriguez. We saw how the USA switched the ball from flank to flank very well against Slovenia on the second goal, and it caught out their right back, who was too far from his centerback, widening the channel between the two so that Fabian Johnson could sneak in. Finally, they use Lionel Messi in a false nine role. Often times, creating space in the final third comes down to tiny minutae in terms of movement/player positioning. Messi creates space by starting as the central forward, but dropping deep and drifting wide in order to drag the opponents' centerbacks out of position, making space for Pedro and Villa ( the wide forwards ) to make diagonal runs in behind the defense. If the centerbacks, don't track Messi, then they've likely just left the best player in the world completely open to do as he pleases. This is often where some of Messi's brilliant runs come from, and why he can at times get so much space despite clearly being the most dangerous player on the field. We saw Landon Donovan operate in the false nine role against Mexico in the Gold Cup final, and it worked best on the second goal when he dropped deep to help build up play and continued to make a run in behind the Mexican defense completely unmarked onto a Clint Dempsey pass. So I think we've done well in terms of the first two parts of being a more positive, proactive, attack-minded side - defensively being more proactive, and moving the ball smartly, two things that Klinsmann has stated he wanted to work on and has come through. However, Klinsmann needs to find a way of dragging the opponent out of shape with player movement, but I'm not sure focusing on the minutae of the team is really one of his strengths or style. I personally still say we should try Clint Dempsey as a false nine to create space in the opponents' backline. He can be selfish with the ball sometimes (Actually a lot), but his off-the-ball movement tends to be very unselfish and intelligent, creating space for his teammates to take advantage of. Again, a line up like this: http://this11.com/topics/show/7522/dempsey-as-a-false-nine-again- This time with Altidore next to Dempsey and Donovan as the right midfielder. That way, we don't completely lose a physical presence in attack to hold the ball up.
Barcelona is a completely useless model when your first touch and other ball skills are lightyears away from their level. Where's the point in "let's play like Barcelona", when several players can't trap the ball, or play a clean one-touch-pass? I can go to my bike and try to ride it like a motorbike, but it won't move. The fundamental skills aren't there.
I wonder if Klinsi didn't have this lineup in mind when he came up with the diamond against Slovenia: -----------Dempsey-------Altidore------------- ------------------Donovan---------------------- ----Johnson---------------------------Bradley That's a lot of scoring power. When we go up 2 goals we can pull Altidore and put in a DM like Jones to help out Beckerman.
The only challenge I have with this approach is that we are always relying on Dempsey in the center at CAM. And I'm not quite sure that's where he should be all the time. I like him more in the 2nd striker role. However, we will not always play the 4-4-2 as you pointed out, so if not, makes sense to bring him back to CAM. With that said, if he is going to play there all the time as you have him, his assist number MUST come up. He will not always be the goal scorer. And to be honest, I'm not 100% sure if he can make that transition from time to time. His assist number for the Nats and for Fulham isn't the highest. Agh - decisions, decisions!
It could also be LD at RM, Dempsey at CAM (like he played), and still having Buddle up top. The decision seems to be CD: CAM or 2nd striker (i.e., don't know if we're ever going to see him at LM again based on Jurgen's system); LD: RM, 2nd striker, CAM?????? When JFT comes back all of this is thrown to the wind again. That 2/29 formation and game is going to be fascinating. I would expect LD at RM, Altidore up top, and Clint at CAM (LM is either Shea or Johnson) for defensive reasons, but who the hell knows with Jurgen.
Are you going to sit there and tell me that pressing high up the field defensively is a Barcelona thing when we just produced a goal from it no more and no less than a week ago? Are you going to try and convince BigSoccer that switching the point of attack from side to side and front to back is a Barcelona thing when we produced a goal from such ball movement no more and no less than a week ago? Because those are the principles that I mentioned we used in our most recent match. You don't have to be Barcelona to do these things, and the proof is right there. Plenty of teams follow these principles of pressing, switching the point of attack, and using movement to drag opponents out of shape EVERY DAY. That isn't a Barcelona thing, and never has been.
Do you know what happens to teams that try to play like Barcelona against Barcelona? They get smoked like Valencia and Villareal. It's usually really exciting to watch, but Valencia and Villareal almost always lose. And they have good players.
Again, I NEVER said we should play like Barcelona. These are concepts that teams use ALL OVER THE WORLD. Like I said, we just saw how we could press high up the field and produce results from it with the first goal against Slovenia. We JUST saw how we could do well switching the ball from side to side with the third goal against Slovenia. That is NOT a Barcelona thing. Plenty of teams press high up the field defensively, and plenty switch the point of attack. The comparison to Barcelona was just to use a well-known team.
I've been pleasantly surprised with the ability of the team to press and play up the field. The difference coaching makes. Chile played with a very high line and did decently enough, so that aspect isn't limited to the big boys.