Lots of posters care I imagine. Can’t wait to see the US playing with the alacrity and sophistication of those squads.
I disagree. Relegating a national team mainstay like Yedlin, a World Cup veteran in his prime and the only U.S. starter in the Premier League, to the bench or a new position is definitely noteworthy. Yedlin is definitely worth some news stories, and not just "sigh, he just doesn't fit Berhalter's system". I want to hear words from Yedlin himself. The good news is that if Gregg Berhalter is confident enough in the U.S. player pool and his system to make a bold decision like this, then my expectations for him and the U.S. in the coming years will increase correspondingly!
My point being - it doesn’t really matter if others do it. It matters if it makes sense and if it works.
Happens with every coach. He’s pretty overrated. He is on a mid table team and just lost his spot as rb (to win it back as wing back). He’s a limited specialist player - whose specialty is special
Tim Ream is a premiere league cb too and people don’t complain about him included or not. Yedlin is just another version of Ream.
I’m sorry but there was not plenty of coverage. You can reference the shots but Ecuador was miserable, with that being said I think in theory the coverage issue can be solved with more communication and rotation. The question is, is all the rotation worth it? We got exposed on the right a few times, a few other times we could have been exposed if they were better. It’s hard to say who was at fault for the weaknesses, apparently the entire right side shared responsibility for defensive cover (Morris, Adams, and McKennie). But make no mistake, there were times that we lacked coverage. Hopefully they work out the communication, I would still rather a system that doesn’t rely on perfect chemistry/communication between 3 players. When it works it’s probably better than a standard strategy, but I think it’s way harder to implement at the international level with constantly changing players.
No one of them is a championship defender on a premier league team. Yedlin’s team has a far superior defensive record, and he Is an established premier league player. Whereas ream won’t even be there in a couple of months. He has also shown well with our team before, the last couple of years have been a cluster ******** for the program, he wasn’t great during that time but he deserves another go. I think the only player that was great during that time was Adams
Did you watch the game or do you just look at charts? Do you think our right side looked secure the whole time?
It was not nervy for the US, imo, except the one shot Ecuador had. Teams attack and teams defend. To me, the US defense had it over the Ecuador attack including the right side.
interesting that I suggest that there is room for improvement defensively and people think that is not the case. Fair enough. I’m kind of ashamed to have perfection in front of my eyes for 90 minutes and not recognize it. just to give an idea what I am talking about, I couldnt find the full game for more comprehensive examples, but in the first two clips from the time stamp, I identify lack of coverage on the right side. I am pretty sure GGG stated that he expects that space to be filled by a combination of the RB, RW, and right sides #10, but perhaps I misread the quote. That is all I'm saying, is that this happened several times during the game, but Ecuador sucked and couldn't do anything about it (like seriously look how bad they are just in those 2 clips). This is not by definition a system problem, someone was supposed to be there in this system, I am just hoping to see some improvement, despite us not needing any. the time stamp didnt save check 3:51
Exactly. There were times where big gaps and holes opened up on the right hand side. A better team will kill us for that.
Of course it wasn’t perfect. Never expected it to be perfect. Something to build on? I think so although I suspect next match will be more traditional back four or three in back due to personnel.
Okay but that's all I was saying in the first place not that we were terrible and there was nothing to build on.
Others have - but even if they haven’t it doesn’t take a genius to be innovative. Just a creative tweak
You are dead serious just using shots on goal to prove our defense is near perfect... Aren't you the guy who "craves" talking about analysis and tactics? And you make judgements on entire defensive structures based on shots on goal against a weak team? very interesting indeed.
I’ve already explained the tactics. I’ve pointed to the shots. I’ve shown graphics and references passing charts. Lol Some just want to believe what they want and facts and logic are irrelevant
You said that you did not see an instance of our right side being exposed last night. I provided video evidence otherwise. But I guess to you logic and facts are irrelevant. Also the fact that you think it is a "fact" that we were near perfect last night is downright hysterical, I bet you if I asked GGG himself if we were near perfect defensively last night he would say "no" because he doesn't decide those things with shots on goal or passing charts, but by watching the game.
Or it could be that, as Twellman pointed out, Ecuador played 3 dmids in midfield, for some strange reason. As US fans know, you aren't likely to have much attacking thrust if your entire midfield is made up of people who are used to sitting back and have no forward verve. I'm puzzled by that choice from Ecuador … in a friendly no less.