He's improved a bit assumedly from Fulham's use of him. Still if it comes down to him in the center and Gibbs on the left or Gibbs in the center and him on the left, I'll take Boca in the center. That more or less says it all about JOB's injury situation.
Seriously? Gibbs? Gibbs has pretty poor ball skills. I haven't seen anything from Gibbs that would lead me to believe he could handle the offensive aspects of the leftback position. I'd like to have Boca in the middle but not if it means Gibbs is out left.
I think it's just me, but Gibbs in the center of the US backline doesnt make me comfortable. I think the pressure by the likes of Adriano and other great attackers would possibly force him into costly giveaways. I'd like to see more of Gooch in the center to see if he is good enough to force Boca out left.
From the other pix it kinda looked like Zandvoort, or those dunes just north of there, I forget the names. Nice walk on a warm beach in October in Holland! That'll tear your hammy quick as anything. I hope they went for a swim and a run.
Gibbs did just fine against RVN in Amsterdam this February... (The CB depth chart for the US Nats appears to be: Pope, Berhalter, Boca, Gibbs, Gooch.) If Pope or Berhalter is unavailable, and Arena doesn't feel comfortable in the particular matchups with Convey or Vanney at LB, Boca will slide out there and Gibbs will play CB. But back on topic... I agree with ApooOnu that if the WC (or a "life or death match" was tomorrow, and all were healthy, the US midfield would be: ----------------------DMB--------------------Donovan------------------- ---------------------------JOB-----------Reyna-------------------------- Not quite a "box" and not quite a "diamond". Our strongest possible midfield.
Depending on who our opponent was, I'd take that. (If it was someone we wanted to control the ball against, I'd take that. Assuming we wanted to play hit and run soccer, I'd possibly push Reyna out to the right, Donovan into center, and throw Zavag24r2rdfwedin (too lazy to check my spelling...) in the other defensive spot.
Didn't bother with the link. Instead I decided that the best way to respond to one of your posts is to see what you actually read. Radical? I know, but once in a while some new thinking is required. Here it is: "He is just as likely to be healthy in 2006 as LD, DMB, etc." As I said before, this is wrong enough to make me question your state when you posted it. JOB is less likely to be healthy in 2006 than DMB or LD, or the average Nat for the simple reason that he has a history of injuries. Some injuries are chance, but certain players are also injured more often than others, especially with Achiles problems. JOB is one of the latter and the fact that he is good when healthy does not change that.