interesting thread, Kolabear, from reading various foreign posters; Ellis never seemed to garner the respect due that her crude tactics of high pressing/preying on that the weakest part of woso are either basic opposing CB errors and/or clearing the ball from the back out of the danger zones(as compared to broso) were considered a ‘cheap’ way of winning so maybe the USSF feels like that Vlatko trying to take US to a long term higher, more sophisticated level is what will safe his butt from being fired? Otherwise his tourney record is worse now than either Sernami or Ryan(the two coaches that did get fired) problem is that whatever Vlatko’s sophisticated game plans were, they weren’t executed very well by his players. So basically you could add the adage for our over-the-hill gang; ‘you can’t teach an old dog new tricks’. And then interesting enough, while USSF $ Vlatko trying to keep a step ahead with a new, more deliberate passing style, both Sweden & Canada with their successful campaigns actually went back to Jill Ellis’s direct & high press tactics. So hard yo know what the future holds
Ellis never garnered respect cause she didnt play some of the fan faves and she was ready to phase out some of the vets on the team then those same vets got her fired.
How well do people think Julie Ertz played? Some people, here and on Equalizer, have suggested the poor midfield play is more to blame than the front line. While I see no reason to let go of my belief that fatigue and lack of match fitness was a major problem, my soccer knowledge is quite limited and I'm often unable to assess how effectively a midfielder, especially a defensive midfielder, is playing. On Twitter, one analyst posted some passing charts for Ertz in the Canada game, charts which I don't have the skills to comprehend well, but their point is that Canada prevented her from completing forward, progressive passes to advance the US attack. I know there are some critics here who would say Vlatko made no adjustments to do anything about it. Maybe they have a point? 1422120702107430914 is not a valid tweet id I think we all noticed the US, including Lavelle and Horan, struggle to complete and receive passes, balls clanging off their shins and that sort of thing, but it occurred to me, was Ertz showing for the ball when and where we're used to seeing her? Was part of the midfield problem that Ertz wasn't providing the others with passing options they normally have? This is tactical analysis more advanced than I can understand, but if anyone cares to chime in. It could be even more damning analysis of Vlatko's performance as a coach. Or not. (And match-fitness is potentially a related issue. I always thought, if not always able to express it, that the little things like off-the-ball movement and timing were the things that disappear when a player is rusty from months of not playing competitive games) @CookieRules goes a little overboard (even for me) in criticizing Vlatko, but still he/she makes some points worth considering ADD: the tactical chart by NWSLAnalitica on Lindsey Horan during the match with Canada 1422121022933897221 is not a valid tweet id
Well, that got me curious, too. A Press/Lloyd/Williams line never appeared at the Olympics but I went back to see if Vlatko ever used them together from 1/1/2020 to the beginning of the Olympics. Williams has been used in a large variety of different combinations, which is okay while the coach is experimenting with different combinations and even, of course, different players altogether to see who was going to make the Olympics roster. I'm posting a spreadsheet showing the different combinations Williams was in along with the number of minutes. (These are only for games where Williams was in for at least 45 minutes) Your Press/Lloyd/Williams line appeared in the very first game of 2020 against Haiti which the US won 6-0 4-0 and Williams had one goal and one assist. But this line never appeared again until the Doomsayer game in Sweden (the game which ominously foreshadowed disaster at the Olympics) earlier this year, where the line struggled (but I thought struggled reasonably well against a top team though the US didn't score until after Williams and Lloyd had been subbed off.) In these games where Williams has played 45 or more minutes, she's been part of a line centered by Lloyd about 44% of the time and about 22% of the time on a line centered by Alex Morgan. However, during a good part of this time, Morgan was unavailable as she was having a baby. From the time when Morgan returned to the team, the game in Nov 2020 against the Netherlands, Williams has been on a Morgan-led line for 136 minutes and on a Lloyd-led line for 121 minutes My feelings about Morgan's ineffectiveness in recent years has been quite clear, so let's just say those 136 minutes on a Morgan line are largely wasted minutes. I think the Press/Lloyd/Williams line both sounds good on paper and performed well on the pitch and, again, Vlatko seems a bit of a donkey to not make use of it during the Olympics. (FIRE VLATKO NOW?!?!?!) Only for games where Williams played at least 45 minutes. Also, do not assume I'm listing the line in correct left to right order. In many cases I simply don't know how they lined up. Also, during this period Vlatko was having players like Williams and Press interchange positions during play (a tactic I highly approved of) @McSkillz Don't say I never did anything for you (tee-hee!)
Well. Of the midfielders Ertz at least had an excuse and on one leg she played the 6 better than Horan by my eye. Perhaps not in passing but in defensive holding, ball tracking and winning the ball. There were bigger issues on the team.
the friendlies serve a commercial purpose. The pay structure makes blooding newer players difficult. Vets want to get paid
While one can reasonably question about players selections, player play, tactics, lineups, and so on, in my opinion one cannot reasonably question the result of a third place finish. So harp away, but I suggest not overdoing it, as the result was what should have been expected.
if she couldn’t run she shouldn’t have played. Its a stretch to say she played better than anyone. That whole midfield was a shadow of what they were in the 2019 cup. They didn’t press as a group and dint pass well as a group- including Eartz. If you look at her stat lines she doesn’t stand out over anyone, excep maybe Mewis, who couldn’t do anything right. no midfield player will be in the hall of fame based on their play in this Olympics. They are going some making up to do. and since nobody got more than a goal except Rapinoe and Lloyd, the forwards didn’t make a case they are indispensable for the next cup, either.
Not disagreeing with your take, in fact, I do not think it is much different from mine. Ertz comparison was more on the comparison to Horan's play at the 6.
youll have to include goals and assist in the equation. Horan comes out ( only) slightly ahead. but like I said, nobody will be enshrined from this Olympics performance except maybe the two Anciens who are already locks and won the bronze. That the younger players did little is a pity. it’s still the case that it will be hard to exclude the geriatrics.in 2023.
The midfield is individually quite talented but also the youngest bunch and is supposed to be the kinetic energy of the team, but alas, everyone was terrible particularly Mewis and Lavelle (I don't want to question Horan much because she was forced to play a position she is fairly unacquainted with..). If they cannot redeem themselves going forward then Andonovski will be in a bigger crises than just dealing with the aging/retiring/collapsing frontline and backline.
Yea, isn't that something. I keep saying, we need youngsters to beat out the oldsters. Hopefully the up coming camps will give a legit shot to some of the up and comers.
Didn't Horan only play 45 minutes at the Olympics in a position with which she is fairly unacquainted?
Correct. So there goes one excuse for one player. So what was the problem in midfield? Our forwards were to blame? No pressing. Not showing for balls, not making runs. Conserving energy & "managing minutes"? Tactical decisions by other teams for which Vlatko had no answers? Sam Mewis had bad tournament * coupled with Lavelle's inability to handle the added minutes and workload given to her? Ertz was rusty from not playing for 2-3 months, not doing the little things like being available as a passing option? (This probably is wrong because I"m the only guy I know who's even suggested this as a possibility) The whole US tournament strategy was to conserve energy and "manage the minutes" of players and they didn't know how to respond when playing 80-90% of their normal energy wasn't enough to dominate opponents (This is not necessarily wrong even though I'm about the only guy who puts it this way**) * the soccer journalist Amée Ruszkai made an interesting observation about Sam Mewis on her podcast. She suggested Mewis was just worn out from playing in England, with league games from the beginning of the year, then returning to North Carolina (after Manchester City's season was over) and almost immediately playing full matches for the Courage. ** The problem with a strategy of conserving energy and "managing the minutes" of your "stars" is that there's another team on the pitch with 11 players ready to play 90 minutes who have other plans
Not buying it. She came back to the Courage on May 17 and logged 310 minutes in four starts up to the Olympic break. If anything, it was lack of match fitness. and as it the case with Lavelle, Heath, Eartz and others, if they aren’t at full strength they should have been replaced on the roster. There shouldn’t be automatic roster spots that ignore fitness.
This is interesting. If you have regularly watched the Thorns play, Horan and Dunn in particular, but also Sauerbrunn and Sinclair, put a ton of energy into every Thorns game. Even without considering the Olympics, I have wondered how Horan, Dunn, and Sinclair are able to do it, and even Sauerbrunn covers more of the field from defense to attack than I am used to seeing for central defenders. I wonder if, with the compressed Olympics schedule and difficult weather conditions, it was just too much to summon up the necessary energy. That actually would be consistent with what we saw from a lot of the players (but not the ones that managed to absent themselves for at least some of the NWSL season). And Clive, I am not sure this is a question of fitness. A player can be extremely fit but overplay, which should show up in body chemistry red flags. Essentially, a player can be fit but completely unable to peak because of already having expended too much energy elsewhere. Clearly, the team did not peak for the Olympics, and I think one has to look at how much energy -- physical and emotional -- the players had expended recently and whether the lead-up to the Olympics was (or even could have been, given NWSL duties) properly oriented to the players peaking for them.
Sweden was the first game. It’s a bit early in the competition to be blaming a compressed schedule and weather, especially playing a Nordic country.
true, but if they weren’t in peak form why were they there? Aren’t you supposed to take the best team? Heath didn’t even have a club after her injury. Eartz was dinged up. Lavelle was also dinged up. None of those players played too many minutes leading up to the cup. Morgan played 7 matches in club and 3 on the Nats before the Olympics for the year. She only logged 630 minutes in club. Is that enough to be match fit? Is it too much? I’ll wager every Swede played more than 10 matches. With that compromised lineup they couldn’t press. It played into the comfort level of the opposition. In 2019 it was the opponents who were uncomfortable all game. and the European player on top clubs didn’t have any easier schedule before the Olympics. The Canadians played essentially the same schedule Us players did and they looked like the fittest in the tourney.
Either (A) and Or Not (B) as I sometimes say just to clarify things... Naturally before the Olympics I thought the problems from an unfit roster would show up more and more as the tournament went on rather than the first game against Sweden. Either we discard age/lack of fitness/ injured players as a major factor. OR... The entire preoccupation or "strategy" of "managing minutes" and "building up the minutes" of players like Ertz and Heath (who were on the injured list for months) affected the US game from the get-go. Where was the usual US press against Sweden? Was there a lack of back-checking from the forwards allowing Sweden's midfielders the time to unfold their attack without pressure from behind? Where was the sense of urgency? In the Sweden game, too, we had the added problem of Ertz not playing at all in the 1st half, instead entrusting the #6 to Horan, a problem many of us worried about all along, the lack of an adequate backup to Ertz when it came to strong opponents. I think from the very first game the US fulfilled the warnings of the oracle: The problem with being preoccupied with conserving energy and "managing the minutes" of your "stars" is there's another team on the pitch with 11 healthy players who have other plans
All good issues to think about, but I will repeat my now regular refrain: Notwithstanding everything else, based on history where the team ended up (Bronze medal) is where one reasonably should have expected them to end up.
My thoughts on retirements: I think Carly will retire at least from the National Team, although I would not be upset if she does not. If she does not, it should be up to Vlatko (and not Kate or anyone else at USSF) to decide whether she continues on the team (which also will be the case for the other players on my list). I think Megan will retire. If she wants to try to continue on the National Team, I see her in the same boat as Carly but I am doubting her commitment. I think Alex should retire. I just have not seen her as sufficiently productive in recent times. I am unsure about Tobin. If she is going to continue on the NT, she needs to land at a club and be playing regularly. I am unsure about Christen. I see her in the same boat as Tobin. I do not know about Becky. I simply do not know enough about central defenders to know what is or is not realistic. I think Kelly should retire. I think she has been on a slow decline and we need more from that position than she seems able to deliver. Who have I missed that is a potential retiree? Whether some or all of these players retire, I think reasonable expectations for the 2023 World Cup do not include a US championship.
Hmm, don't recall her moving back to the 6 much after Ertz entered the game or in future games. Does anyone recall different. My comments above were strictly related to Horan at the 6.
To me, it is better for young players to beat out the Oldsters for their roster spots. How likely that is in a world of COVID, I do not know. Now with this wave of Delta, (I personally know of 4 vax'd people who have developed the 'rona) if it will be possible to play enough international games to make this a reality.