Number of US Senrior Team Caps in the stating lineup before the Serbia game: 1--------0--------0 -----1-------0----- ---------0---------- 1----0-----37----0 ---------0----------
IIRC Serbia had 7 players with 0 caps in their starting XI and nobody with more than 3 on their entire squad. We saw 2 very young team play a very entertaining January camp match. Both started in a 4-3-3 and both looked comfortable and composed, which is not surprising given that the 4-3-3 is the foundational formation used by most top teams.
For the US, calling anything a foundational formation is new. Sure it seems trite but we really have had a lot of issues there. How far MLS academies and the youth teams have advanced in creating that foundation is, to me, an important topic. Serbia has many advantages over us foundation-wise, a small league, a decades old footballing culture, drawing players from a handful of clubs. So they are a good baseline to judge who much we have advanced in that aspect. We looked pretty decent in familiarity.
I think the word "foundational" is really key here. I think, like a lot of people, when thinking about a national playing identity, there are a lot of pros and cons that come into play. There are plenty of top countries with a fundamental identity, even if it changes over time: Brazil: Spain; the Netherlands; England used to; Italy; Croatia; recent versions at least of Denmark and Switzerland. That doesn't mean they adhere strictly to everything, and this will be important later. But it does mean that players often have a common style coming up in development, and that integration and insertion into the national team is often easier. There are also plenty of strong teams, like France, that don't really seem to have one except that they are really good. I think the concern for a national identity for the US, is that given our size and natural cultural diversity, establishing a soccer identity would be fundamentally more limiting than beneficial. If we go with a very pragmatic style, does that wall us off from players with flair and creativity? And so on. Is it even possible across 330M? And if so, advisable. All good points. But here's where foundational comes in. Anytime you are trying to do something, people have a tendency to want to jump to the creative. I did amateur filmmaking for a while; everyone wanted to write Memento or Pulp Fiction before simply learning to hit basic story beats. (Or learning a sport. Or running a business.) In order to evolve, adapt, find a new space, you need a fundamental foundation to jump off from, otherwise your creative new take on things is often lacking key things like "conflict or interesting characters." Given that we don't have a developmental foundation, and we are still trying to create the basic framework, seizing on a decent, adaptable foundation makes a LOT of sense. There's a reason that when we first implemented the out of the back rule, they simply rammed it down people's throats. Because we were even ready for the nuance -- we just needed people to stop always booting it long to their biggest and best player. Nuance be damned for the first five years or so. That's why I don't mind taking a strong technically driven, tactically astute base like the Dutch basis for a foundation or development. We don't need to stay there forever, but I think it sets a standard and a direction for everyone in the country to follow. Don't be a centerback that can't pass. Learn to pass quickly, one touch (we are far from this). Teamwork. It doesn't have be that version. It just has to be foundational in nature -- that it gets us on the right skills and mindset that are useful in a lot of situations. Players who can play with the ball can learn quickly how to play more without it. Players who can't play with the ball can't go the other way.
The 4-3-3 was put in place by then YTD Claudio Reyna in 2011. It has been the foundational scheme for over 11 years. The 2012 U23 team under Caleb Porter played the 4-3-3. Every YNT since that time plays the 4-3-3 ( or its 4-2-3-1 variant. Some advanced teams may also play the 4-3-1-2 ). Earnie certainly never changed that basic foundation. I agree that Serbia has advantages over the US but the US also has many advantages over Serbia. That is life on this planet. Serbia in the last 5+ years have tended to be a 3-5-2 squad yet they came in and played a fluid 4-3-3. Not that hard.
I must have missed it. I saw the same with the attack being on the wings and nothing up the middle. I didn't see much development in attack.
Hopefully folks are watching man city v Arsenal with Turner starting for Arsenal. City in a 4-2-3-1 while Arsenal in a 4-3-3 and you can clearly see that Arsenal man-marks when they put their full press on. Turner is very good at hitting a precise long ball to Saka when pressured by City. Weston could definitely have a spot in Arsenal's starting midfield trio!
Correct, put in place since 2011 and little by little it has become the standard. At this point we should see that foundation be evident but it is nice to see some confirmation in practice. (Side note: this is not about Earnie or Berhalter. This is about the national team.) I don't know about the current Serbian MNT but I do think that the style Serbia played this game was very similar to their 2015 U20 WC champions. I believe that what we saw was their foundational style or close to it. The senior MNT can of course modify from that foundation according to what they need for games that matter. I would think that Serbia has no interest in straying from their foundational style in a game of this magnitude.
Hopefully Neal starts getting some games... Jalen Neal USMNT debut vs Serbia#LAGalaxy #since96 #VamosGalaxy pic.twitter.com/r9t35dvbzY— smoothie comps (@smoothie_comps) January 27, 2023
Does require subscription as well? A lot of subscriptions required nowadays in sports so trying to manage all that
First time I had seen him play and watching during the match i kept thinking young Jerome Boateng. That is top class distribution from a CB. Yes he made a gaff which led to the goal but that is a typical mistake made by R footed CB when they play as a LCB. Perhaps it would have been better to let the guy with 37 caps play on his off side?
Based on the article I read post-game I expected the U.S. performance to be pretty dire, but when I watched it I was pleasantly surprised. Unfortunately Serbia capitalized on a few bad defensive blunders and we lost. But unlike most of our games over the past few years, where we would often dominate possession but fail to generate scoring chances, this game featured many good opportunities to score. We converted only one and we still need to work on that, but you have to get chances before you can get goals and creating chances has been one of our struggles. Pleased to see that possession translate into goalscoring opportunities. It certainly makes the game more fun to watch.