I bet they do what they expected to do against Canada. Play a three man backline with Ream, Brooks, and Long. Push Dest up very high in the halfspace to help create against a bunker. Push arriola very high and wide to create space for crossing. WE could see Sargent start this game but beside that- I'd like to keep it mostly the same.
I don't disagree with that in principle- but I think they will try slowing and carefully. The current 23 know the movements and patterns. They can do them at speed. I would be willing to be they do integrated new players but not wholesale. They will need to prioritize who the include. Personally- I want to see the midfield worked on and improved more than I do the backline. I think this group can get it done in qualifying. I think the priority problems are elsewhere to get where we want to go. I agree and hope we have major upgrades by the Worldcup at several positions... including left back.
It's amazing to me how after we win a game that we should always win, posters come out of the woodworks to breathlessly state that Berhalter's system is working (even though the game was pretty typical for a pre-Gregg USMNT game. What's even more amazing is that they've lowered the bar to "I think we should qualify with this system." SMH.
Painting people's observation of McKennie's lack of intensity as a "narrative" is what I was talking about in terms of conspiracy theory. People use that word as a perjorative, as if it detached from facts. That's what I was reacting to. I think a lot of people noticed that his intensity and focus was below most of the team in this last game. And many people have noticed that his focus seems to waver in game, including many supporters. Is that a narrative? In that everything spoken/written is, but there's data behind it. I don't think McKennie should be benched or punished or whatever. But he needs to be a more consistent performer in terms of intensity and focus for the USMNT. And if there's friction on that here, I'd argue a lot of it has to do with a subsection of supporters who get angry any time someone claims he didn't play to potential. I've had lots of back and forth on here with several posters about why I don't think Green **fits** what we're trying to do. The counter is usual about quality -- not fit. My commentary wasn't that Green sucks -- it's that I can't imagine him bringing what Lletget brought. It's relevant because there's been a long back and forth over it, and this game illustrated why I think the **fit** with Green is bad. I thought it might bring clarity to what I mean. It didn't come out of nowhere. Calling anything the "second biggest" of anything is not a fact unless you are talking measurable size. That's a judgement. The #1 difference for me was the change in the US tactical defensive set up and the defensive aggression and effort level that accompanied it. I don't know if I can divide the two, honestly. Canada could not effectively attack all day -- they could not get comfortable. And more importantly, we got many of our chances off the counterattacks directly or indirectly. I think that was the largest change, personally. Don't disagree this helps, absolutely. I wouldn't put it #1, but getting on the board early is so valuable, especially against a team like Canada. I don't think the problems are suddenly solved -- far from it. But I do think we saw a change to the #1 tactical issue that the team has -- and I do think the aggression that came was tied to that tactical issue. Will that continue? We'll see.
To me, Canada looked like the team that was closer to turning into a possession style offense. IMO, the US isn't even close to competing w/ Mexico consistently unless they play direct and with passion/athleticism/hustle... essentially the same way we have done it in the past. Greg wants to play out of the back against lower tier CONCACAF? Sure, get some practice and insert bits of this play gradually... but they have to focus on good defense, electric fast counter-attacks, aerial assaults and other set-pieces.
I'm not sure why everything has to slam to extremes. I'm not talking about your post specifically -- I'm agreeing, I think. I think he had a bad game, personally, and if the coaching agrees on intensity, I could see some "learning consequences" but he's still a vital player and likely to be in the core of this team for a decade. It's okay for someone to have a bad game without thinking that they should lose their spot or never be called in again.
The main reason Brooks didn't get a card in the first half is because we were the home team. Otherwise JAB did well enough in the second half, helping come out playing from the back. And that's important because we still came playing out of the back when possible. A big difference from trying to do it always, which is stupid, with our pool. No one is saying McKennie was terrible. But it's yet another game where he doesn't rise to his Schalke level. He could have done more in attack, the guy has Jones-vision and can provide a sweet ball for a goal when he decides to try.
People equate possession with side to side and direct with vertical. They aren't necessarily the same.
EXACTLY -- iT's been driving me crazy. We did have some direct in this game but near as much as people are saying. For the most part- it was the same system as it has been with a degree of better execution - and still far to the level anyone wants.
Explain to me how you show a players intensity being down,.... in footballing terms? What data supports this. Outside of your own eyes, is there some proof. Are you telling me that nobody besides Mckennie has been inconsistent during this year with GB. You cant name a single player who has been consistently good this year. So it raises an eyebrow when I see Mckennie getting singled out after a decent team defensive performance. If you were to say Green doesnt have the vision that Llegett has....I could understand that from an analysis standpoint. But instead we get arguments like 'he doesnt fit the system' or 'He cant turn at pace like a guy who has been repeatedly injured'. Its poor analysis in my opinion. Theres no comparable data. Another interesting thing for me. Weve seen posters bash players like Brooks for being injury prone. Yet LLegett gets a pass? Seems like anytime it gets 'intense' hes been hurt for club and country.
To be quite frank, bull hockey. There is absolutely a snowflake culture. It is clear as day. You are just ignorant of what came before you. You don't know what you don't know. People who have lived through earlier times can tell you about the strong contrast with today
Must admit there is a lack of grit of late. The Mexican U17 looked gritty as hell, scratching wins even when outplayed. They reminded me of our teams in the past. On the other hand, grit can only take you so far. If it's replaced by actual professionalism and technique, so much the better. But when everything else stays the same and you lose it, well, then it's not a good time to watch.
There are certain players BS wants on the team even as they say they are not focused or give up goals or don't know what to do because, they say, the players will learn. The problem is that it is not just that one position that comes up short in the meantime. The weak link in the chain will be sniffed out by the likes of Tata and similar first rank managers. Moreover, the other players will all play below their optimum level when they have to play with somebody who just isn't up to it. The Hex starts in 9 months. Is the Hex going to be an opportunity for teaching fundamentals, getting "focused" finding a position gaining confidence ?
I grew up with the older generation freaking out about participation trophies (which they then blamed on us once we got older despite us being 7 at the time) I remember old people freaking out about satanic churches in public schools, razor blades in Halloween candy. Etc. etc. But you are free to call me ignorant and wrong despite not knowing me and presenting no evidence whatsoever. I’m used to it talking to people like you.
You made the same absurd posts about Morales not fitting that you make about Green. There is a sad pattern there. Lletget had a good match against the FIFA #69 team, don't over hype it. Lletget is not a creative attacking player even in MLS. Lletget played as a AM behind Zlatan who scores if you get him the ball anywhere around the box, and in front of JDS who may be the best controlling CM in the league. Lletget had 5As, tied with Castillo, Fafa, Jozy, and Delgado at 35th in MLS. Morris had 6As. Beckerman, Roldan, Nagbe, Yueill, ... had 4As. Here is Green at Cuba in on a very bumpy pitch 2016 with a 1G , 1A, and a few key passes: This was the first of the 2 friendlies before HEX2014 and sadly we were already seeing the beginning of the "jogging MB90".
I suppose there are probably some hustle stats -- duels, interceptions, etc., that could be normalized for position, opponent, etc. Unfortunately, the stats publicly available for international matches usually suck. So, it's the eye test, where we can all disagree. Factor in that sprinting everywhere isn't always the smartest in a sport where you run for 90 minutes, and I agree this can be a tough thing to measure and evaluate. No offense, but comments like these make me raise an eyebrow. One shouldn't have to criticize everyone to put a criticism on a player. Nor should someone only be criticized if no one else has ever done something. That's a weird form of whataboutism and is pointless. This isn't keeping score amongst players. It isn't even making a long term comment about McKennie. It's an evaluation of something that occurred during this game. There's no long term ulterior motive here. It doesn't matter if another player didn't exhibit strong effort before. It's irrelevant to the discussion. The whole team came out on fire, pressing and playing with urgency. Weston didn't. He moved slower. He was less attacking (though that improved as the game went on). Most importantly, he didn't seem as focused based on his choices and execution at times. We can qualify with the McKennie that played on Friday, but to make noise in 2022, we need him to be better. And I think he will be. But his biggest issue right now is consistency in the game. If I were pitching a replacement, and I'm not, McKennie's focus, effort, whatever you want to call it, versus that other player would be relevant. I'm not. You're welcome to call it poor analysis. I'm not going to reiterate my full argument against Green every time, though. My line was a commentary for people who have read my argument many a time. But you've made it -- he does have poor vision. I think I mentioned he's a black hole -- because he is. He receives the ball, and everything slows. He tends to shoot it more often than I want out of a 10, rather than finding a pass that opens the D. He's not good one on one. I've said all this a lot. He's the opposite of what I want, and what Berhalter's looking for as well. As for he can't turn at pace like Lleget -- I don't care that Lleget's had multiple injuries -- Green doesn't do that. He's ... methodical? I'm not going to be accountable for what others say. Brooks has been injury prone, but I don't bash him for it. It is what it is. Lleget has also been hurt quite a bit recently (I don't know his full history), but I won't bash him for it as well. I think the whole concept here of bashing for injuries and giving passes is kind of ridiculous. It's not nearly as controllable for the player as people like to think. I think one of the stronger arguments, though, against Berhalter's limited group is that it isn't well equipped to deal with injuries. I can understand focusing on the core ... but it leaves you exposed. So you could make the argument that even if you think Lleget is a better 10 ... you need more than a few options. Which you do. Honestly, though, my list at people I'd try at 10 takes a bit to get at Green: Pulisic or Weah, Lletget, Holmes, Ledezma, Pomykal, maybe Mendez and Llanez, though I like the latter better as a winger. I don't think I want McKennie there -- it feels a bit wasted, but I do think he can be a heckuva passer. Perhaps I'm too youth focused above. I might be jumping the gun on some players because I do tend to get overexcited about young players. But I'd rather give Lletget and Holmes a shot now (I think Holmes is the bigger snub from November) with Ledezma getting a camp call and some token minutes. And when Weah comes back (hopefully soon!) I think you need to spend time on how your front three shake out because I think Pulisic, Morris and Weah are a likely crew of attacking wingers/mids but I'm not sure how they fit right now. So you need time there to figure out if Weah deserves a starting role, and if so, is he the attacking mid? Is Pulisic? So I wouldn't be angry to see Green. He can control the ball, hit bangers and defend. If we were rolling out a super conservative 3-5-2 he might be that second striker, if you know, Pulisic is hurt. But right now, our best way to score is through speed and aggression in the counter, and the way Berhalter wants his 10 to function is through passing, not as a second striker. In those roles, I'll take Pulisic, Weah, Lletget hands down over Green. And I think Holmes. And if it weren't for youth Pomykal and Ledezma. Does that make sense? If you had to build a depth chart at the 10, who is on it for you?
Do you think Morales fits what Berhalter was/maybe still is trying to do? I'm glad for him to get his shot, but he's not exactly a great fit as -- and this is what that commentary was about -- the regista-style 6. Let me know if you disagree. And as much as I think he's a massive improvement on Roldan, and I love his energy on D, he hasn't exactly blown anyone's socks off overall. Am I overhyping Lletget? I liked what I saw, and I've liked him nearly every time he's stepped on the pitch for the USMNT. Agree that he doesn't always show up as well for the LAG, but Zlatan actually stifled that team in terms of showing what you can do as the plan was hoof it to Zlatan (which works, but is limited). I think he can do things Green can't. I don't think he's anywhere near a lock starter or dynamic at the World Cup level. I'm not sure that's overhyping. Let me know what you consider competition worth evaluation against. I get that this was on the road, and yes, the pitch sucked, but Cuba is not good, either. If Lleget against Canada doesn't count, does the FIFA #7000 team or whatever Cuba is count? But thank you for posting this. This video is exactly why I say Green doesn't fit / I put other players in front of him as a CAM or an attacking winger/outside mid. EXACTLY. Start at 2:28. These are back to back sequences that describe Green's game to a T. He's on a 3 on 2 break. He gets the ball. There's openings multiple times to pass to better options, but he slows down, does a little hesitation, moves right and shoots. It's a terrible waste of a break. Cuba comes down and gets a shot off the post on the counter. Next play. It's another break and Green gets the ball. It's a bit more crowded and unclear, but Green does the exact same thing. There is an open pass to the other side of the box, though, and probably the better play. Either way, he shoots -- it gets past the defender this time and get to the keeper, who poorly allows the rebound. Wondo, opportunist that he is, races to it, beats his own man to it, and knocks it home. This is Green's "assist." I will fully acknowledge there's value in both those shots that make it and the rebounds, but this isn't evidence of his PASSING ABILITY -- IT'S NOT EVEN A PASS! But the fact that he basically ALWAYS goes to that shot -- that he passed up the pass both times. That he doesn't press the pace on a break. That's what I am talking about. He does make those shots sometimes. But I'm really not interested in limiting the team's upside to Julian Green lottery tickets on bangers. I want a CAM or winger there who pushes it, attacks, finds his open teammates. Not one that settles for a shot at the top of the box on 3 on 2. And Green does this a lot. It's his game. Does that make sense? It's great if you feel differently, but this is my view on "fit" here -- it's not some MLS love or hatred of Germans or Europeans. It's simply that I want my attacking players to attack differently than Green does. I want someone in that spot who makes his teammates better. Green gets his goal later on a tap in from a great Wondo play, btw -- this is WONDO's game, not Green's. If it helps, rank your preferred depth chart, healthy or hurt, at CAM and Winger. Or wherever you want Green to play. Don't worry about whoever Berhalter is calling in -- just who would be your Top 5 at where you see Green playing for the USMNT.
Julian Green has nearly 6,000 career 2.Bundesliga minutes and 4 assists in that time. He has no assists this year. I think goals and assists are pretty blunt instruments, so that's hardly a death knell, but if we're going to use it to evaluate players, it's not a compelling argument against Green not being much of a distributor.
Dempsey was moved to forward as his legs declined while his game continued to develop to the point where he could excel in the position. At this point, CP at the 9 makes little sense given his game is further from goal. Morris, who has excelled at striker should be the starter there.
3rd goal? Because the 2nd goal was the very nice fast transition after Canada played the ball directly to Dest.
And this is why the USMNT is in the position it’s in. It’s the job of the coach to take the talent he has and develop a style and system to fit that talent. When you don’t do that, you get Gregg Berhalter.
Ream was not on the Mexico 2018 winner lineup. That was Moore CCV Miazga Lichaj. Off the bench was Robinson.** We also played more negative of tactics for at least the first half. I have been proposing some of them for months now and no one listens. Ream was on the Mexico 2019 GC loser lineup. But when we have beat Mexico a year ago with a different lineup I am at a loss why I go for the loser set instead. Because he can create? They shut us out. It didn't work. "Not enough data points?" Ream is only in his 30s with dozens of caps. You know precisely what you are getting, positive and negative. The other choices being squeezed out might lack data points but when the position is struggling that suggests they get their chance. Otherwise what you are actually doing is making the pro-incumbent lame logic that he who starts before should start again because we don't know what the next guy would do. Except that logic works poorly when you are spilling goals. At that point it's laziness. Lichaj played against Mexico last year, when we won. Lichaj's GAA when he plays is good. "We've played 3 man" is kind of superficial when we didn't play it well at all and got clobbered. It's kind of like "we've played Ben Sweat" as an argument to bring him back. The formation should be something fairly consistent that is built primarily for Mexico and the like. Part of GB's on the job training appears to be to latch onto anything that beats anyone minor in terms of style and personnel. Which is pointless if it doesn't work for Mexico. And to me part of our problem is we let other teams dictate to us, too often. **Others playing in that game included Green Weah Delgado.
They played us to 2-0 in Havana 3 years ago. And we will again be facing the Couva decision of whether to squad rotate off a win or not. There also will be the question of whether with the pressure on and a road game, GB reverts and the team goes back to looking like hell. I am taking nothing for granted. Dest needs to string positive games and make me think the issue was playing left. I think we fall in love too much with one game wonders and should be looking at patterns of performance. It's the difference between Morris scoring or assisting about every other game lately, and Zardes having a burst every 5-6 games. We are sufficiently parched we get the two confused.** **This includes the coach. Until he strings wins I have to wonder if an individual result is a happy accident. Every time he uses a sexy lineup or finds a new player he drops it next game. And what if MB Pulisic were available? Had he figured that out or did MB dropping out make him change?