I missed the game like some others because I didn't realize it was early, today specifically, and wasn't a high priority. But from the sound of it, the US played another game to stubbornly implementing Gregg's/USS' highly flawed system they latched upon because a decade ago Barcelona and Spain were winning titles with it. And it doesn't even involve the collective pressing Barcelona's did. It's more straight up Spain, tiki-taka. One way to generate offense - passing thru the defense, after you held played keep away, trying to avoid giveaways in a bad spot, while back passing repeatedly if need be. Why the eff just not update it and play a less rigid, more diverse system like Liverpool's who are actually winning titles now? France and Portugal were more super-charged versions of what we used to do. Not only does it have suspect effectiveness that doesn't fit our pool and could run us into the ground across levels. But where did this perception that it's entertaining come from? It's un-eventful. In basketball you're not viewed as enjoyable to watch if you play 1950's keep ball.
So predictable, minus the Llanez sighting. Arriola making great runs into space, working off his defender and having no idea what to do with the ball when he gets it. Lletget looking all world; if he's one on one with the defender and has lots of time and space (ie. almost never today and never against good teams). Zardes is your sub in a friendly with the lead? They wonder why the place was empty? I missed that commentary.
when every time you play one of the 6-8 consensus studs off the U20s, they show well, quit being cute with the youth selections and just do the obvious please (Pomykal Llanez Weah Reyna Mendez Sargent Richards etc)
I always enjoy reading detailed commentary of a match from people who didn't watch the match. Some thoughts: Overall, I saw plenty of good. Especially in the first 20+ minutes, we both controlled the game and created a lot of good opportunities. You could see the movement and, risking everyone's ire, the patterns of play we were looking for. The team also did pretty well playing out of the back except that one instance. When Costa Rica did press forward, we largely broke it and pressed into the available space. One of the big differences with this group was that our midfielders -- namely Aaronson and Lletget would press forward and attack once they got the ball in space. In general, the players today were much more comfortable turning, making a guy miss and moving forward. I thought the cornerbacks were more aggressive in this way as well. The game got boring because Costa Rica bunkered, pulling 10 back and making the first real line of confrontations about five yards above the box. It leads to a lot of back and forth and what could be call boring play. The US doesn't really have the players to break it down one on one but did some good stuff on switches. The positive is that Costa Rica really didn't have more than 1-2 dangerous counters out of it. It's slow, it's boring, but it is a way to win. The US' other big problem is pretty simple, and has been for a while. We don't have clinical finishers. This should not be a surprise, and looks even worse at a January camp with less talent. But we controlled the game, and I think that should be a plus given how often we've been beat up in the midfield. Player thoughts: Llanez was our big winner, which was not a shock. He wasn't anywhere close to perfect but clearly has the talent level to break things open. Winger is going to be a spicy competition over the next few years. Paul Arriola is basically everything you want in a glue player ... until he has to shoot. Man, if he could finish. But he can't. I do think having Paul and Lletget out there helped the younger kids. Both work very hard and help spread the responsibility. Lletget brings some extra explosion but both just don't deliver at the end. Vines' one pass into Llanez was more offense than we've seen out of Lovitz all year. It is Costa Rica B, but still, it's important not to be completely hopeless. Not a long term solution, but better. Ferreira and Aaronson both showed flashes in their roles of creativity and ability to be something more. But both needed to be more consistently there. Aaronson picked it up in the second half in terms of activity. Ferreira probably needs to be a bit more goal aggressive but he's a really nice passer from that receding 9 role. He set up both Arriola and Llanez for quality opportunities more than once.
some are ready, some aren't. Sargent hasn't shown much in quite a while. Weah is hurt. Richards, who knows? Wishing isn't the same as showing.
Oh lol, my bad. Robles may have had the single worst game I've seen a US keeper have v. Haiti in the Gold Cup, but he has been a lot better than Johnson at club level IMO.
I always enjoy you bending over backwards to provide cover for USS. As if one doesn't have a general idea of a movie's plot, if you've seen the first 19 installments, and everybody who saw the most recent are indeed confirming it was pretty much the same. Maybe provide a less s**tty product and more people who were serious fans of the franchise originally will be motivated to make sure to catch the opening of all sequels, like they used to w the USNT. No longer destination tv. That's a you problem.
On Llanez- he had a few errant longer passes, and he needs to improve there. His short passing is good. There were times when I thought he could have been more active, but that's just being a young player learning his teammates and the system. He has a slight build, so he can be bodied off the ball. I have a feeling that this area could be why he hasn't trained with Wolfsburg's 1st team. All that said, he has a much better skill set than just about anyone else who played today, and that's what excites U.S. fans. His potential is very good, and these next two years will give us a better indication of how far he can go.
. I don’t know how it sounded on TV but they asked the crowd to do a minute of applause at the 24th minute. About two thirds of the crowd started clapping at 23:01-24:00. Than the other third started their applause at 24:00. Soccer fans know what the 24th minute is in a match others did not.
first off- spot on opening. i dont want to pick this one apart too much, we all know what it is. jan friendly, new players, comp level, etc. as i said in my initial post i thought there were some good signs (and no real hard negatives), but i dont know that we can give any of the good too much weight. from our possession and control of the game early to our (more) attacking mids attacking to settling in as they fall back- none of that is going to matter when qualifying starts. the bunker is already gonna be bunked at the opening whistle. knocking it around in the attacking third isnt going to matter at all. even in this match (again, i know the circumstance) we dont penetrate and truly create scoring chances. and im certainly not disagreeing on a lack of finishing, i just think its more that we dont even get to that. heres an unexpected "defense" of a player- we dump on zardes for wasting his couple or three chances (any given match)...but hes only getting 2 or three chances. conversion rate arguments aside i think our finishing is WAY less problematic than our ball before the final ball. ferreira scored just as few as whoever else would have cause we dont build to anything. so i just get frustrated at praise for possession (the way we have it), and good movement, probing for chances cause so SOOO little ever comes of it. and its not that ferreira, or zardes, or jozy, or sarge are blowing chances at unacceptable rates. its not simply poor crosses or a missed through ball in and of itself (that particular touch). its the way we play (the system, if you will). i dont see the virtue in possession if theres no plan at all for actually attacking. holding, side to side, little openings to get in a more dangerous spot...gah, to what freaking end? how can we possibly evaluate ferreira from his zero chances? im not disagreeing with your points, or just arguing for sport (im really not arguing at all)- i just think a lot of the positives, the "progress" we are supposedly making is as empty as our possession. when it matters its going to be a slog, ugly ass bunkered mess on non-soccer so we shouldnt excuse not being able to break it down in a match like this one. a friendly like this should have a cuba-esque scoreline- and thats not overconfidence or over-rating our players. if we cant get ball on our strikers foot/head a single time (regardless of caps, age, experience, etc) now, in this setting, why am i supposed to believe we can when qualifying points are on the line? on a lumpy, damp field against 10 in the box constantly, being hacked, relentless diving, etc etc etc? yeah, its a process. we are young, inexperienced, gotta walk before you can run and all that. but today was "eh, ok" walking. our last set of friendlies, and the ones before that too. thats our resting pulse for the last year. vaguely impressive, "held the ball more this time", "playing out of the back wasnt a disaster this time", "controlled more of the game" in friendlies... we shouldnt take too much pride in being able to walk ok. again, not directed at you or anything you posted im just frustrated with our "progress" (even at this new year restart point). our lack of any coherent attacking "system" (no pun intended, for lack of a better term) is just maddening to me.
I just don't get you guys. They announced it would be a U-23 heavy USA and surely, you weren't upset with the quality? I though the newbies looked great!
i'd say quite quick and probably fast. He wasn't in any/many footraces but he moves quickly. I noticed he also got back well on defense. He also plays "sturdy". He can take and give a challenge.
I agree with quite a bit of this. There's a reason that I didn't use the word "chances" a lot and rather opportunities, because we aren't generating real chances enough. You're right on that; it's not just finishing, it's the ball before the ball. That said, I think your expectations a little high. This Costa Rica team wasn't bad -- no one is beating them like Cuba. Cuba is terrible. And we were fielding a team of very young players. I am curious at to what people think are other strategies to break down the bunker aside from lateral movement and attempting to draw out the bunker. Aside from CP, we don't really have a lot of one on one players. I'm just not sure there's a lot of great options. Bunkering works for a reason.