Just got done reading that disheartening Stephen Goff thread ( Skip looks to the skies) and I decided not to add my 2 cents there but to think just a little bit on how to improve the team. Nothing really deep here, but it's kinda weird how little this gets mentioned here: how slow the team was this year in the center of the field, especially central defense to a-mid. Leaving aside the skill sets of the various players, using Nellie, Petke, Dema, and Marco as the spine of your team just begs for other teams to run circles around us. All of these guys are slow. Individually, one can justify (sort of) all of these players starting, but collectively, it's a mess. Remember in the preseason Hudson saying how he was planning to have Marco surrounded by players who could run? It never really happened as the area directly behind Marco was too slow. For me, this is one of the bigger reasons why the forwards had so little service. Whoever is coach next year needs to address this if we are to become competitive. This not only means dealing with Marco though. It also means looking hard at how to best use Dema- how well does he fit into the team regardless of his individual skills. The Petke/Nelsen tandem also must be scrutinized as together they do not do so well when they are directly run at, thus requiring the d-mid to concentrate on protecting them when he could be at times more productive elsewhere. Again, nothing earth-shattering here but the response to Goff's article hit a new low on this board and I had to do something.
All too true. Since the last Rongen year, other teams have run at Marco and the center of the DC defense with impunity. Removing Marco is the first step -- and long overdue. But, as you point out, that's probably not enough. Dema is not a good defensive player and, except for occasionally charging directly at goal, not particularly fast. I see him, at best, as a utility player who fills in one of several slots when the need arises. That leaves both central midfield positions open. Bobby in the middle? Perhaps. A good defensive midfielder would seem the highest priority. Maybe some tough guy from the A-league. I don't think Reyes can fill this slot, despite his athletic ability. His self-control is too limited. Failing all other options, trying him in the middle might be worth a gamble Namoff could fill one of these slots. The conventional thinking is that he would be the defensive midfielder, but I suspect he would be better as the attacking midfielder. Petke and Nelsen have their strengths, but I agree that the pairing has its weaknesses. Both are good with the ball in front of them, but weak when they have to run with an attacking player. I would look for another central defender and move Petke to the outside.
Well, Nelsen and Petke are stay at home defenders, so speed shouldn't be too much of a problem so long as they are not out of position. Dema has speed, but never got to truly use it as a d-mid. He was forced into staying back in the midfield and rarely got to make dangerous runs up the middle for fear of leaving the defense exposed. And Marco, well, he was slow. He is the true enigma of our midfield, as he wasn't fast enough for an a-mid, but couldn't distribute like an a-mid either. I think that players were inserted into positions where their skills were negated (see: Kovalenko, Stewart) and that can be readjusted during the offseason.
Dammit Skip, I wanted to name this thread and have the first post... In my ever-humble opinion, the ONLY thing wrong with this team's personnel (other than coaching) is that we haven't had a central midfield. Kovalenko Stewart Etcheverry Nelsen Namoff None of those players are a) natural d-mids or b) effective #10s. If we fix both of those problems everything else falls in place. We had trouble scoring this year, but how many times did we have a killer pass set up an outstanding chance or walk the ball into the net? I don't remember very many at all. Lots of scrappy stuff or long balls that someone got on the end of, but not very many easy goals at all. A good #10 sets up or opens up another 6-8 sitters and, while that's not good enough to lead the league in scoring, with our defense another half-dozen goals would make us one of the best teams in the league. It certainly could have been worth ten points this year. I'm not saying we shouldn't improve at forward -- we should if we can. But the #1 goal has got to be to find a central midfield pairing that works well together, with one d-mid and one game-changing #10. Which brings me to the point that you keep Namoff and Nelsen if you can (for defense), but that Etcheverry and Stewart and maybe even Dema (who I love as a player, who had a great season, but who maybe just doesn't fit very well) should be used (either through trades or use of their cap space) to find the two players we're missing.
Actually, I"m less concerned about the individual speed as I am the ability of the team to "play fast" (ie: think quickly, transition quickly). In those areas, we're terrible (even when you have "fast" players like Barclay out on the field). Quick play and organization can compensate for a lot of things. Slow though, disorganization can rob foot speed (offensively and defensively). Ursula, while your point is well taken (about the speed in the center of the pitch), I think we're more likely to have either Convey or Stewart at A-mid next year (we just got faster), Namoff may get a trial at D-mid (faster there) and we'll add Reyes to the mix (outside back but good closing speed). Maybe we won't match DMB, but we'll be okay with footspeed. But until we get our system of play and roles and organization ironed out, we'll still be a slow team.
There was a lot of that in 2000 as well. We gave up a lot of goals on counters in those years. For those two seasons, Marco was spent a lot of time on the left sending in crosses. Since nobody rotated into the central midfield when he did this, it left Richie (and, in 2001, Ryan) completely exposed.
This thread made me think about something that I have been pondering for a while. Do we really need to have an attacking midfielder (a number 10) and a defensive midfielder. I think we all think this way b/c it is what we are used to so much with Marco as the AM and Richie as the DM. Perhaps it is time that we simply look to get two or three central midfielders who are willing and able to play both offense and defense. I think Convey fits this role. I think Namoff does as well. So does Kovalenko and so does Earnie. Three of the four have pretty good speed. When playing a 4-4-2 we have traditionally played the diamond in the middle. Perhaps it is time to play a flat four across...
Thjis was brought up in another thread, but my answer is the same. Under our current "system", we must have a d-mid to balance the a-mid. The d-mid serves as the calming force in the midfield and starts up the attack from the back. More to the point, an a-mid is our creative force who puts the passes together that lead to goals. I'd rather have just one of those and let the d-mid worry about backing him up. However, in a 4 across midfield, there is no true a-mid or d-mid. Both are expected to drop back if the other goes forward. The problem here is that the position is not clearly defined and can lead to gaps in the midfield. Also, neither Namoff or Earnie (or Dema, or Bobby, etc.) are spectatcular at defense to the point where we can depend on them to do both roles. The folly in the system is while it looks great on paper, the actual formation exposes our out of position players. I am not comforted by the idea that if one of them gets injured we have to do patchwork formations. If we get a proper d-mid, we can play any one of our attacking midfielders in the center because we have so many of them.
That seems to be the way the league is moving. With the retirement of Nowak, Ramos and Pibe, Cienfuegos, and possibly Etch, that leaves only Preki and Guevara (and maybe Martino) as the only traditional playmakers left in the league. I think it's a style that suits our talents far better than a diamond.
Get a coach in their that encourages actual communication between the players (as opposed to yelling) and it can work fine.
Once again, y'all forgot about Cancela for NE, Chung for Colorado, Vaca for Dallas, and Mulrooney for SJ. A good a-mid will get you far in this league.
Chung is a two-way player. Mulrooney is a two-way player. Vaca isn't much. Cancela is an excellent attacking midfielder. Cancela, Preki, and Guevara and the only three in the league who are true #10s who need traditional defensive midfielders to play behind them, and Preki, even the freak of nature that he is, has to got to be on his last legs. The issue is this. We have many players who can play both ways in the middle (Dema, Earnie, Convey, Namoff, even Olsen), but very few who are true defensive midfielders or who are true attacking midfielders. So say we go and get a defensive midfielder and plug him in behind Earnie (or whomever, this could be anyone, I'm just using Earnie for this example) and tell Earnie that he is an attacking midfielder with fairly limited defensive responsibilities. What do we do in the games where the defensive midlfielder is suspended, or away for his national team, or has picked up a knock, or, God forbid, tears his ACL? To play in a system you have to have multiple guys who can step in and play a position. If Mr. DMID plays til June then breaks his leg and we put Dema in the center again, do we want to limit Dema as a dmid or change everything around and have two two-way players in the middle? We have to adapt to the players that we have, and not plug them into certain set-in-stone positions. Plugging square pegs into round holes is not the way to build a team. Convey Dema Stewart Olsen across the midfield will work fine. The four of them play quickly, the four of them think quickly, and all can defend and go forward with equal skill. Let Earnie, who's main strength on the Nats has always been organizing the midfield, be the main vocal leader there, and I think we'll see a lot of energy and movement and quick play coming from that midfield.
Chung is a two-way player. Mulrooney is a two-way player. Vaca isn't much. Cancela is an excellent attacking midfielder. Cancela, Preki, and Guevara and the only three in the league who are true #10s who need traditional defensive midfielders to play behind them, and Preki, even the freak of nature that he is, has to got to be on his last legs. The issue is this. We have many players who can play both ways in the middle (Dema, Earnie, Convey, Namoff, even Olsen), but very few who are true defensive midfielders or who are true attacking midfielders. So say we go and get a defensive midfielder and plug him in behind Earnie (or whomever, this could be anyone, I'm just using Earnie for this example) and tell Earnie that he is an attacking midfielder with fairly limited defensive responsibilities. What do we do in the games where the defensive midlfielder is suspended, or away for his national team, or has picked up a knock, or, God forbid, tears his ACL? To play in a system you have to have multiple guys who can step in and play a position. If Mr. DMID plays til June then breaks his leg and we put Dema in the center again, do we want to limit Dema as a dmid or change everything around and have two two-way players in the middle? We have to adapt to the players that we have, and not plug them into certain set-in-stone positions. Plugging square pegs into round holes is not the way to build a team. Convey Dema Stewart Olsen across the midfield will work fine. The four of them play quickly, the four of them think quickly, and all can defend and go forward with equal skill. Let Earnie, who's main strength on the Nats has always been organizing the midfield, be the main vocal leader there, and I think we'll see a lot of energy and movement and quick play coming from that midfield.
This helps point out one of my biggest problems with Rongen. The worst thing a coach can do is say "This is a brilliant system if the players would just learn to play it. My system has worked elsewhere so it can work here too." The best coaches try and get the players that can fill the system the prefer. When a) they can't get the players or b) players get injured they then change their system to fit the strengths of those players. Rongen was terrible about putting his players in a postion to succeed. Hudson, at times, would fall into the trap. See the begining of the season when he ran the 3-5-2.
Y'know I had that same analogy going about the 4 across concept. I like the idea, but I don't want a clusterfvck of talent in the middle. There's only one ball and I don't want all those players jostling for creative control. I don't think that we have an ego problem if they all play in the middle, but too many cooks spoil the broth. I'd rather see Kovalenko up top (which we never saw this season, though that is his natural position) and let Earnie run the midfield. Our problem is that we never defined positions this season and we had mass confusion on the field. If the players know their role, then it's not as big a problem. However, the coach needs to set up a system and use it consistently. None of this "flavor of the week" bullsh!t that we had all season. Yes, injuries will happen, but if he trains the players to take over when a player goes down, then our problem isn't nearly as bad. We tried inserting guys into different positions all season and it killed us. We need consistency, both in lineup and in system.
I had posted this in another thread but I see DC as having a really dynamic midfield if given the chance. Putting Olsen, Namoff, Kovalenko, Convey or Stewart in a four man midfield gives a lot of options. Plus adding Reyes at right back in a 4-4-2 gives the midfield the option of pushing Olsen inside and having Reyes run the wing in a 3-5-2. While Dema is not a true defensive mid, he works better in the center and he actually has a quick release on the pass. The July 2, Dallas game was the showcase for Dema's ability to move about in the middle of the field and fire off quick passes. While Kovalenko is not going to ever replace a true attacking mid like Marco or Valderama, if he plays with people that actually move - like Ben, Bobby, Earnie, and Namoff - he can be successful. Personally, I'd much rather have a bunch of quality journeymen than rely too much on a single star - like DC used to with Marco and Jaime.
Chung for years played on the left and only in the past year or so has pinched in to help out in the center because Beckerman isn't that good. In Dallas, most of the time they used Pareja and Deering in the center, with Vaca on the right. But by the end of the season, Vaca had basically lost his starting job.
I think we need to be resigned to a 4-man midfield next year--unless there is a tremendous amount of turnover on the team. Why? --Reyes is a great back in a 4-man backline, a guy who gets forward easily and is an offensive threat while shutting down attacks on his side. In a 3-man backline he has to stay home AND he's not as disciplined as you'd like a defender to be in a back-3. --Olsen, when we went to a 4-4-2 suddenly became a great attacker. It was always there, but in a 3-5-2, he spent most of his time tracking back and playing defense or winning balls and playing VERY wide. In a 442, in can pinch inside. --Stewart can be successful as an A-mid. Oh, he's not Etcheverry or El Pibe. But he's quick, will run all day, knows the game, is unselfish, has skills. He may not be the kind of player you want all of your balls to go through (ala the younger Etcheverry) but there aren't too many A-mids in MLS you'd say that about anyway. --Convey can play outside left in a 442 and still pinch in. Or swap roles with the A-mid at times. In a 3-5-2, he becomes more of a defender and purely outside player. In fact, in a 3-5-2, he needs to play inside (b/c he tends to disappear when playing the sideline rover role). --Kovalenko is better the closer he is to the middle of the field (withdrawn forward, poor-man's A-mid, D-mid or an outside mid pinching in). He doesn't work as an outside mid in a 3-5-2. But in a 442 he could play outside decently. I personally like a 3-5-2. But it just doesn't fit some key pieces of talent on this roster. Ultimately, we need to play a scheme that fits the talent.
In fact, in a non-diamond midfield, you don't really play "four across". You play a box like Brasil, with two defensive mids and two attacking mids where the outside defenders are charged with holding the flanks, or you play an offset box like Argentina, which is ostensibly a 4-4-2, but often looks a little like a 3-5-2 with two defensive midfielders--only one wing plays higher than the other. In our case, I'd shift Olsen to a sort of left flank role, push Convey in and higher, Stewart would be a withdrawn forward, Kovalenko would play in the inside right channel and Namoff would be the d-mid. Reyes is the right back with license to attack, Nelsen, Petke and (probably) Prideaux would string across the back, and then you really only have to fill the striker position. Cerritos might work there, though you've got some options if certain salaries are no longer around. Sort of like this: .......................Striker ...........................Stewart .........Convey........................Kovalenko Olsen ..............................Namoff .................................................................Reyes ........Prideaux.............Petke.......Nelsen
Dema a utility player, what are you on? The guy can score and has a very good touch, but he was out of position all year. Dema is particularly good as a withdrawn forward. If you want evidence look at the Fire line up before he came here. He links up well with the front runners and if he has better defensive support he is a good solid attacking player that could probably start for any team in the league. If you we can attain a solid forward and a good d-mid then you will see some real contribution out of him. With soccer players it is not always a matter of speed. Two good examples are Reyna and Valderamma (and I am not comparing Dema with Valderamma b/c of skill, but as a comparison of athleticism). Also if you want speed in the center of Midfield Con-Vay is a good option.
Uh, no. Valderamma basically jogged around the field, while Dema hustles his ass off. And yes, I have watched both in action. I was surprised that El Pibe could stand around so much and still command so much respect around the league.
I don't think he's saying that, but rather that we just don't have those guys anymore - and not many teams in this league do. You can only play the cards you're dealt, and If I had to guess, I'd wager that we're not going to find another #10 of Etch-of-old caliber in the offseason. We may well end up with a Moreno-in-training in Adu, but we all know that he's not there yet, and when he gets there, he'll be gone.
Is there anybody out there that thinks that we should be planning to play Stokes in the back like I do?? To me, it seems that we would have much less problems in the midfield if we actually had guys in the back who you didn't have to worry about. None of the guys playing back there has speed (take your pick), and that causes a chain reaction of the whole team collapsing to the back. We need more athleticism back there. Reyes AND Stokes should be playing. This talk of Prideux, Petke and Nelsen as a 3 man backline continuing to get the minutes is scaring me!
If this season taught us anything, it should have taught us (1) we need four in the back because we're more comfortable playing that way, and (2) we need more speed of play (not necessarily speed of foot) in midfield. If you bring Stokes along with veterans like Prideaux, Petke and Reyes around him, he'll do fine, and they can provide cover when he doesn't. If you have a box midfield w/ Convey and Stewart at the top and Nelsen and Olsen at the back, speed of play and balance will not be issues. Kovalenko can play either of the top midfield spots, and Namoff can sub suitably for eith either of the back two, as well as filling in for backs when needed. At the forward position, it's whoever is finishing well at the time, because this midfield should make plenty of chances.