Sorry I don't have any real suggestions right now for non-MLS players DC should look at, but I really wish people would stop listing Dema as a d-mid. he is an attacking midfield player or forward who Hudson decided to play out of position for the vast majority of the '03. if Namoff or Nellie can't be used in the d-mid role next year, than DC must bring in a strong d-mid to free up Dema to play a more attacking position.
I agree with this. Our best instinctive attacking player was stuck in a defensive role last season. I think we need a dynamic, hard-working and mobile holding/defensive midfielder who can support our center defenders and allow our outside backs to provide our width and allow our many existing attacking midfielders (Convey, Stewart, Olsen, Quintanilla and Quaranta) to flood the middle of the field and do a better job of linking play from the middle third to the final third. Unless we can get a fabulous forward (top 5 in the league), I think we are better off moving Kovalenko back to forward and replacing him with a player like Colisomo. Most of the successful teams in MLS this year have had good goalscoring. But more importantly, they have had excellent holding midfielders. New England (Joseph), Chicago (Marsch and Armas) and San Jose (Mulroony) would not be the same without the guys in this role. They take tremendous pressure off of the defense and allow the attacking midfielders to play further up the field so that the forwards can make shorter runs, pick up the ball closer to the goal, receive shorter passes, do less physical work holding the ball and ultimately take higher percentage shots. These players also link ball movement smoothly from the back line to the forward line. DC has signed tons of different guys to play forward, but ultimately our best pure goalscorer (who doesn't play like he is smoking crack) was stuck in a defensive role (don't forget that Stoich and Etcheverry got goals off of pks and that Stoich is a student of the Greg Louganis school of scoring when you mention his higher strike rate). If we can have same amount of penalty box ping-pong going on when Stewart, Convey and Olsen are throwing shots into the zone (we did lead the league in corner kicks) - Kovalenko in a forward position will poach lots of goals and goad defenders into making mistakes. Cerritos would work well as a partner for Kovalenko - he would also do a good job holding the ball and touching it back to Stewart, Convey and Olsen as they hover and make runs through the box. We don't need Convey out on the wing driving crosses into the box when there is no one that consistantly puts crosses on goal. And when Reyes is back on the right, Olsen will be able to play more centrally too. But in order for this to work, we need a battle-proven defensive midfielder who can cover lots of ground and show a lot of steel (a MLS version of Makalele) in cutting down counterattacks in front of our relatively slow central defenders.
As much as Dema is NOT a defensive midfielder, he is equally NOT a forward. He is a central or wing midfielder. IMHO I think with our ideal midfield (Convey, Olsen, Stewart, Dema, some great yet unknown DM) - the forwards do much better by default. Assuming they have some sort of plan ;-)
I see Dema as being useful in a role similar to Chris Carrieri's. Drifting wide, sometimes appearing to be more of a wing as our nominal attacking midfielder (Stewart or Convey) pushes forward. And crashing the nets and "forechecking" defenders rather than holding down a primary defensive assignment in the middle of the field. He definitely belongs in some type of advanced role - at least given the personnel that we have.
I've thought that Benny might make a good Hmid/Dmid. His flank play suffered from his loss of speed. Defensive play and shot taking was at his usual high level. His got a good soccer brain and can pass well. We can then pay for a more dynamic/threatening goal scorer. Yabo
yes yes yes Liverpool SC I agree all the way! Why did that seem like such a surprise to me? Dema as a foward! why would he be a bad one? not enough speed? I don't know to me sounds like a killer idea. Put him and Thiago starting as forwards. Anyone else think that would be the formula for some offense?
I mentioned Benny as a possibility at this position in another thread on the team forum. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=81352 I think he could do the job, although I don't know how well he could handle the rough-and-tumble in the center of the field (especially at such a physically demanding position) over an entire season. One thing is for certain, we need to add quality - not depth. There are two positions that are major weaknesses for DC United: defensive midfield and striker. If we do play a narrower formation in midfield (PLEASE) and allow our width to come from the back (we simply don't need that much width with the style of forwards we have), it might make sense to exchange Benny with Dema and allow the three central mids to be Bobby, Earnie and Dema (maybe switch Earnie and Dema). We need to consider if Ivanov, Quaranta, Alegria, Martins, Caroll and Quintanilla are worthy of roles on the team. If our weakest position is still at forward, we should do whatever it takes (short of getting rid of a starter) to clear enough cap room to sign a player who can be a top-5 scorer in the league. If we are willing to give our current forwards a shot, I think we should make a similar outlay for the defensive midfielder. We need another 2000 minute impact player. Not a guy who is going to play, maybe not embarrass himself, but completely lack the class to change a game (i.e. Cerritos). Is Daryl Powell the best we can expect as an all-around midfield player at league max? With the number of English and Scottish clubs in trouble (many teams are cutting way back on squad size - even in the Premiership), it seems unlikely there are not other solid midfielders on wages around $300,000 who would be willing to come over here.
Don't overlook smaller leagues. Australia (Colosimo), New Zealand (anyone Nelsen can recommend), or Central or South America (players in Chile, Costa Rica, Peru, etc.) are all viable places to look for good talent, but at a lower price than most European leagues. And while I like the idea of Olsen as d-mid, the actual result doesn't seem to pretty. He'd take a lot of physical play and I don't know if his body is up to that for an entire season. Keep him on the flanks and bring in an actual d-mid. I say Martins starts with whatever player we sign or put there (Kovalenko). Move Stewart to the left wing and Convey (if he stays) in the mid. Or reverse that and keep Convey on the wing and move Stewart to the middle. Defense should be Petke, Nelsen (if he stays) and Reyes. We need a good left flank and I don't know if Prideaux is the answer. So in short, my lineup is: Martins-Kovalenko Convey-Stewart-Olsen D-mid (Colosimo) Left Flank-Petke-Nelsen-Reyes Rimando Now this may change if we expand next season, but that is a damn solid lineup.
Why do we need a "d-mid" and an "a-mid?" Why can't we have four midfielders who are all two-way players? Stewart, Convey, Olsen, and Dema all go forward well and all defend well. None of the four shirk their defensive responsibilities, in fact, both Stewart and Olsen were at times chided this season for being too defensively focused. That match at the Metros sticks in my head as the best we played all season, with the four of them creating a very "busy" midfield by busting their asses to win the ball then busting their asses to create scoring chances. Pair Cerritos with a top quality striker playing in front of those four (with Martins and Esky off the bench) and I think we'll be fine.
Based on who we have: ------Martins--Stewart ----------Convey--------- Tino-------Dema-------Olsen -----------Nellie------------- ----L-Back---Petke--Reyes -----------Rimando--------- There are a few options at left back, Prideaux and Namoff to start, possibly Stokes to give the back line more size. I have Tino out on the left because he is one of our best players when healthy and if he has a healthy season he will be an all-star. Dema is neither an a-mid or a d-mid, so I put him in the center. Convey plays better in the middle and he deserves that spot. I really like the way Martins plays, heart and hustle, plus his size means those high balls we send into our forwards might create chances. I think Stewart would play more of a forward/mid (think Paul Scholes) in his spot. Now if we pick up a quality d-mid, then I would drop Nellie into back line and it would be Nellie-Petke-Reyes, which would be great. Another possibility for the left mid spot could be Carroll, but since we haven't seen him at all I really don't know how he would do.
There is a serious gap between our defense and midfield and a d-mid can fill that gap on the field. We need a player that can hold the ball and help distribute out of the back. We currently have no one who can do that. A d-mid is necessary if we ever want to control the midfield. We can't make one, we must find one. All the experiments this year proved that. And yes, while we have a great deal of two-way players, none of them are as defensively minded like a true d-mid is. And whoever thinks Q1 is a starter in any position (forward or otherwise) is dreaming. That boy needs some serious growing up before he can step into a starting job. He needs to improve physically, tactically, and mentally before next season or he needs to be gone.
Isn't the leading scorer of the Costa Rican league coming to MLS this year? If so, I'd like to see DC try to trade for an allocation and try to get this guy cause he might be a perfect fit. If this happens (MASSIVE if though), my line-up would be- -----Cerritos/Martins--Costa Rican Guy -----------------Stewart------------- Kovalenko-----------------------Olsen -----------------Convey-------------- Prideaux/ Namoff/----Petke-----Nelsen-----Reyes Stokes -----------------Rimando-------------- Also, I would like to see Bobby run the midfield, but Stewart is very capable at the position too and I can see Bobby as a very good D-mid (his experience in the back for the US helps here). And finally, if Bobby goes forward, Earnie is much more competent center mid to drop back and cover than Etch was.
That would be Claudio Ciccia, who is now considering the MLS as an option. And, no, Bobby Convey is not a d-mid, not even close. While he can serve as a flank player (both in midfield and defense), he is not that good that he can handle the defensive responsibilities that a d-mid would have to undertake. Bobby is better at the wings where he can use his speed to attack the goal. Placing him in the d-mid spot means that he won't get to use it that often and is thus a waste of his talent and speed.
I'm still not sure why Dema and Earnie can't both play in the middle as two-way players. The reason Dema was stuck so far deep was because with Marco in the middle nearly all of the defensive responsibilities in the middle of the field fell on Dema's shoulders. With Earnie in the middle, that is certainly not true. Both will be free to go forward, both will have to defend. The one argument for a d-mid that I think has validity is when you need someone to man-mark when you're playing a team with a scary #10. Preki fits this role, maybe Guevara, too, but is there anyone else in the league who makes you say "Oh sh1t, we need to mark him all over the field?" If Colossimo can go forward with some competence (like Mastroeni or Armas), then yes, by all means, go get him and play him. But if he's merely a destroyer (albeit an effective one) a la Richie Williams, I'm not sure he's the right fit. Defense is not this team's issue. This team lacks attacking spunk. But then again, maybe there's a reason I'm not the Technical Director...
Mulrooney-SJ Cancela-NE Martino-Columbus Williams-Chicago Vaca-Dallas Chung-Colorado Yes, there is a need for a d-mid, someone to hold the ball up and distribute to the offense. We keep trying to have someone makeshift that role, but it never works. If you have an a-mid, you need a d-mid. However, if you have two central players, neither a or d, then there isn't as much need so long as they play both roles. Our problem is that positions are not clearly defined and players play out of position most of the time. That leaves gaps in our midfield and exposes our defense. A good d-mid will cover that gap and leave our midfield and defense covered.
Thats not a done deal, but if we do get Adu, then I agree, there's no way the league would let us pick up Ciccia.
All true, but as I'm thinking of Bobby as a more John O'Brien role in the World Cup games where Masroeni was benched and we had JOB at d-mid and Reyna at the a-mid with no true defense-first midfielder, just a solid two way player playing the d-mid in an attempt to get our best 11 on the pitch (not saying it worked well then; we went 0-1-1 in those two games, but it is a similiar situation and may work under different circumstances) However, I would prefer a trade to get a solid d-mid than Bobby there, but that was just what I thought may work best with the roster we have.
If we're talking about players we have, then I would like to see Nelsen as d-mid and Stokes in center-d. We would have increased height on corners (Martins, Nelsen, Petke, and Stokes are all over 6') and I think Stokes is good enough to challenge for a starting role. I really like my vision of our team, as we get almost all our big guns out on the field and still have quality off the bench (Stokes, Cerritos, et al.). This team could really come together given the right pieces.
Ah, I forgot about Cancela. Martino and Chung are maybes, Andy Williams (scorching 25 yard volleys aside) and Vaca I don't know about. Who says we need an a-mid? The beauty of Stewart and Dema in the middle is that neither will dominate the ball and not work back to defend. Getting a d-mid just for the sake of getting a d-mid is silly. Our first priority must be a quality striker, someone who can finish. If we bring in someone like that, and if Colossimo is the real deal, and if we can afford him, then by all means, bring him in. But to say we need to go get someone to link the defense and the offense when teams with two two-way players in the middle can do it as well, I'm not sure that's addressing our most pressing need.
Well, that's a matter of opinion. We do need forwards, but we also need people to distribute the ball properly. I'm comfortable with either Stewart or Kovalenko in the middle, but not both. I want one of them to be on the end of the other's pass. Our biggest problem was playing people out of position. Dema is not, repeat NOT, a d-mid, yet we used him there because were forced to. Under our current "system" we have a d-mid position and it must be filled. Hudson has repeatedly said that he wants a d-mid. In fact, he targeted Colosimo as a possibilty during the Conver Transfer saga. The need was already there and it still remains. We play a 4-4-2 with an a-mid and a d-mid. It's pretty much the same with every other team in the league. DC is no different. To say that we can clog our midfield with other quality players does not eliminate that problem. It only covers them for the time being, which is what we did all during 2003 season. I really don't want a repeat of that. To answer your concern about a forward, we may be getting the one with the most upswing. Should Adu sign with the league, he will go to us. Yes, there will be string attached, but his signing will be an interesting one. A forward lineup of Adu, Stewart, Cerritos, Kovalenko, Martins, Q1 (regretably), and Eski can go far given the proper service. A d-mid starts the engine going and if he can serve balls like Mastroeni, Armas, or Williams, then we would be stupid not to go after him. Service was lacking all season and now we have the opportunity to finally get our act together. We need to make the parts fit, not cram them all together once more.
It all depends on who is coaching and what kind of system he wants to play. If we're going to play 4-4-2, we need a left back. If we're going to play 3-5-2, that's less necessary, since we can put a midfielder on the left flank opposite Reyes, and we have 3 competent central defenders. (Nelsen, Petke, Prideaux) Prideaux, however, is not a left back. If you have a left back who can make good overlapping runs down the flank, it adds a lot to your offense. Reyes is obviously that kind of player on the right side, and we'll be a better team next year because of it. Namoff can make some competent runs, and he'd be an upgrade from Prideaux, but I'd like to see us get a left back so Namoff can work on playing that elusive midfield marking role.
Bingo. We have no reason to trade for midfielders, because those four should absolutely start. Olsen-Kovalenko-Stewart-Convey, from right to left, is flexible and capable in defending and attacking. They could stand in with any midfield in MLS. I wouldn't man mark Guevara because of the current system the metros use. Now, if Bradley actually gets a couple wide players (current wide midfielders on the metros: 0), that changes it a bit. Right now, though, you can just stay compact and you're fine. That's why they fell apart at the end of the season. Yes, but the current system only exists because we have to start Etcheverry. With him out, you don't need a 100% defensive midfielder. And actually, the only teams playing the way you say are New England, the metros, and Columbus. KC plays a 361 now, Dallas has been playing 433 (and lots of other formations), SJ plays a 442 similar to the one eltico suggests, LA plays a 352, and Chicago and Colorado both play with 2 holding mids and attacking wide players. I guess we just disagree. I think, with no Etcheverry and a new coach, the parts will fit very well. San Jose's system seems to fit our personnel near-perfectly, once the striker question is addressed (though, I think our current forwards will also look better with this midfield in place). The only other question mark is a true left back, rather than playing Prideaux out there.
We do have a difference of opinion. I don't want a clusterfvck of talent in the middle. There is only one ball and putting two of our better players in the middle to control it means one of them will be tactically wasted. Also, neither of those players suggested can play straight up defense. That's not to say that they can do some of the responsibilities of that type of position, but it diminshes their other skills. A-mids want the ball, want to distribute it, and want to be creative. A d-mid serves as a counterbalance to that position. I want a calming force in midfield. An a-mid does not do that. Neither will two central players. I don't want us to cover up the problem by fielding more midfielders. I want us to solve the problem directly. Watch our last games of the season. We were abused in the middle of the field and throughout the midfield. That problem will still be there if we choose to field two central midfielders or an a-mid/makeshift d-mid combo. I really don't want to see that all season.