And I think it's reinforced when you see Danny play. He's not doing poorly, but he's not playing as well as Rico. Danny has had several chances the last month, most recently up at Portland. I was not that impressed with him at Portland or at Columbus when he played the full games. (Couldn't see how he looked at Dallas, since we didn't have any tv coverage.....)
At the rate he's going hemight be winning MVP. This guy is just getting better and better. Himself and dero in the middle of the field are just a joy to watch. It's orgasmic.
I agree - Rico and DeRo both have engines that never quit, they are very creative and quick to the ball, and they really seem to be meshing well together. So much fun to watch! And I think they make each other better; the other team has to worry about both of them, so neither of them gets too much attention. Or if they do, the other one is left open and makes the defense pay.
Yes, he gave martino a good talking too, and the great part was that when he stopped him he got all ball.
Absolutely - compared to what Mastroeni and some of the other guys who have been playing defensive midfield for the USMNT, Rico's play has been head and shoulders more impressive. I'll be shocked if he doesn't get a chance in the next few months in one of the WCQs.
Yes, Rico was really tearing it up our there last night. We saw him not only plug his defensive abilities but also saw him push forward creating a few scoring opportunities. I think he has improved so much over the last couple months. He makes smart plays and his tackles are clean and smart. He is able to keep possession of the ball well and steal it away from other teams.
I wish we had Mulrooney AND Clark. Even though they play the same position, I could see them being effective together (just like Ekelund and Mulrooney were). I think too many people forget just how good we were with Mulrooney in the lineup compared to missing him. When Donovan was gone, we'd keep getting results. When Richard was out, we really struggled. Just look at how good Dallas was with Mulrooney and how hard it's been without him. I like Rico a lot, but there are things that Richard does better (like his fitness for one, plus he doesn't get "baited" as much as Rico).
Hypothetically speaking, where would you play Mulrooney? Who would you put on the bench? I don't think Dallas struggled much at all when Mulrooney went down; they struggled during July when they were without Johnson, Ruiz, and Vanney. I'm not knocking Mulrooney's skills, and I definitely think Dallas would be better with him. Just saying that they went 8-1-1 in the ten games after Richard went down with the injury.
Dallas had the softest schedule in the league during that time. I'm not unhappy with our lineup, just saying that Richard was better then we're giving him credit for. We COULD be doing just as well with Mulrooney and Clark in the center with DeRo up top, MAYBE. I wouldn't change what we're doing now, though.
Thanks for the clarification. I didn't read people's enthusiasm for what Clark has done to imply that they were not giving Richard the credit he deserves. Particularly in a lot of the "anti-Landon" threads, there have been many comments I have seen that said that Mulrooney was one of the keys to the Quakes success, and that he didn't get enough credit and Landon got too much. An unfortunate fact of life today in most sports these days is that players move from team to team, and the challenge is to figure out how to replace them. Richard wanted to move, and he was traded. I think many of us are just pleasantly surprised at how well Rico has done in filling in the void left by Mulrooney being traded. And Rico is a lot younger, so you'd have to figure there's a lot of upside still to come.
Both Rico and DeRo were the best players on the park last night, though only the former can be called up by Bruce. GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
I hope this is turns out to be true. Next to left back and right mid, d-mid is the position the Nats need to upgrade the most. Armas, Zavagnin and Mastro are fine as destroyers, but don't create smooth transitions to attack or add to the attack very incisively. Clark has that extra bit of skill and vision that gives him the veneer of an international quality d-mid.
the Q is not directed at me, but if we had the riches of Clark and Mulrooney and the rest of our team, and the benefit of knowing how well DeRo does in his current role...... Would it be possible to avoid the 3-5-2 (3-4-3)? (remember, we are in 'what if' land, and no one is injured here) ----Cerritos--Ching ---------DeRo Davis---------------Mullan -----Clark--Mulrooney ----ERo---Califf---Waibel(Dayak) ------PatOnSTad
I was actually kind of wondering recently if Dom would ever go to a 3 man defensive line. I didn't follow the Quakes formations that much last year, did he ever play that formation? When we were discussing how to get Mullan, Chung, DeRo, Davis, and Clark all in at the same time, one thing that came to mind was to play a 5 man midfield and a 3 man defense. But I figured that Dom would not change the defense, given how well they have been playing. But, I would agree with you that if the Quakes had Mulrooney and Clark, the obvious thing would be to try them both on the field together. I just wonder if it would make the middle of the field too crowded and cramp DeRo's style....
I'd like to see a 5 man mid if we face DC again. I'd be more inclined to play a 4-5-1 though, rather than disrupt the defense. I'd sit cerritos and let Dwayne play an attacking mid/center forward role and probably sit Cerritos. Against other teams though I think we should stick with the 4-4-2.
He would switch to a 3-5-2 towards the end of a game if we were losing. But I don't think we ever started a game that way. I also don't think we should right now. We seem to have the D clicking, remember: I was only talking about the 'fantasy world' where we had both Richard and Ricardo (good midfielders always have the same name, no matter what the language is?).
Now, you are actually talking about the real world! ...and you have a point. I think we have played our worst two games against DC. We will have to do something to get through their midfield, and a good idea might just be playing with an extra body dedicated to the midfield. That or signing a speedy forward and playing a lot more route 1 to try and stretch the field. (Long ball, stretch the field, short ball to work through the stretched field, long ball to stretch out when it gets compact again... this only works if we have a real threat for the longball. Someone fast? Getting Ching back?) With Rico's great play right now, it is hard to imagine that people were unhappy with him back in April/May. Has Rico gotten that much better/confident/comfortable, or was there really that much of a lack of chemistry for the O'Rourke-Clark midfield?
I think it's both, along with the fact that O'Rourke was not playing that well early in the year either. 1. Chemistry: O'Rourke and Rico had very similar games, particularly early in the year. Great at winning the ball, aggressive and willing to play physical, but not that good at passing forward or creating anything. 2. Rico: he was clearly not as comfortable with the ball at his feet early in the year; he would look to get rid of it as quickly as he got it. He also was not as good at anticipating (or at least not as comfortable) passing lanes and covering the ground he is doing now. Asked to be in the "offensive" midfield role, since O'Rourke was playing defensive mid, he really struggled and the Quakes struggled to generate offense up the middle. 3. O'Rourke: as has been noted, he was great at stopping the other team's attack, whether it was by making a tackle or taking a hard foul. He was the "enforcer" in the middle. He covered quite a bit of space defending, but once he had the ball he looked to give it up right away. Also, he didn't help create any room for Rico in the middle when he had the ball, as the defense knew that O'Rourke would pass the ball. So they dropped off him and covered the other players. This made Rico's job as a-mid even harder. But, if I had to pick one thing, Rico really is playing a lot better. And he's getting confident, which helps him to get better yet. This was shown in the Columbus game when he played a-mid with O'Rourke in as d-mid (back in July). O'Rourke's game hadn't really changed, but Rico was much better able to play the position and make an impact. He created the second goal which turned out to be the game winner in that game.
I agree that it's both improvement and team chemistry. Another big part of the success I think is dero's work rate, he's always finding ways to get open, all over the pitch and this provides a great target for rico to distribute to. That makes him so much better, not just to be able to win the ball but to be able to keep possession. But Clark has gotten a lot better too, it seems like he just got the confidence he needs and now when he sees a player in front of him he knows he has the option to pass or to blaze right by the opposition. He better not play too well tomorrow night, I don't want him getting any offers from Alaves to go to Spain.