I agree, he could absolutely play that role. But, Musah could not play the more advanced role Weah has often played, or at least we haven't seen him do it for the US. McKennie not so much either. So, if the role shifts such that more players can play it, the competition for that role goes up.
Well, they weren't on the CM's line, either, for most of the game. For me, a wingback is someone who has offensive and defensive responsibilities of the entire length of the field. The differentiation for me is the level of responsibility and the distance needed to cover. It's more about the defense to me, really. Musah wasn't playing wingback because he never had to come back very far, either in possession or on defense. Whereas Jedi did come back a lot on defense and ran the whole span. In the build up, Jedi came back more from what I saw, but he also would stretch the field and didn't play that much in the build up overall. Musah rarely came back very far because Scally was always there, and Puli and Aaronson would come back to the same line quite a bit to create that small box. Once we got into any level of attack, the AMs, Jedi, and Musah were all playing in a line. What do we want to call that? In attack I see a 3241. In the build up, an assymetrical sort of thing with a 3-2 base, a left wingback, and right shifted line of three midfielders (CP/BA/YM) and a striker. Musah stayed VERY high and VERY right. I struggle with the 3421 designation because it actually usually plays much more central and conservative than what I was seeing -- when I see that I think more what we played versus Northern Ireland ages ago -- Pefok, CP and Reyna as the top three and then true full field length fullbacks or wingbacks. So you can call it that -- I mean, this is all approximation -- but I think it is somewhat inaccurate to what Jedi and definitely Musah played -- they were not on Morris' and Busio's line most of the time. Just Jedi part time in some of the build-up. But not attack, not defense and Musah rarely at all.
And I don't really think we understand what will happen with that role more generally until Dest comes back.
Totally agree. I tend to think we may see more gameplans that don't just stick to a standard script and more games where we see a wider variety of roles based on who is available and the opposition. At least that's what I'm hoping for.
Agree. I think the most interesting thing about that gameplan yesterday was the Musah decision and the reason behind it. I wonder if we see it if there was other options available, though? I think we'll see more gameplans targeted at the opposition as well. I'm very interested to see what the gameplan is when we play a pressing team. Do we see Morris and Busio in the midfield then? Do we actively attack weak links? Aside from some switching against over aggressive defenses, it seems we rarely attacked gaps in a tactical manner (we would try to get individual matchups). The gameplan yesterday was adapted a bit, but it was also Pochettino in quite a few ways. I am really encouraged, though, by some of the clarity of it. There were some clear directions you could see from the outside, and they all worked. Namely, the two patterns in the build-up (the central box with give and go, plus the alternate deep ball to Jedi / play off to Pulisic) as well as he clear attacking focus on the edges of the box and the cross/Man City cut. We've run boxes before in the build up, but the tighter proximity is something Berhalter didn't do much of. We definitely have used Jedi as a longer outlet before and on deep switches, so that isn't new, but it felt like that was THE prescribed outlet to simplify for Turner. It'll be interesting to see if it works as well if Jedi doesn't have as much of a physical edge. And of course, we've done the Man City thing a ton ... but I do think we were more focused on it. Just repetition, over and over and over. And a lot more freedom to interchange. I guess the issue with these simple and focused plans is when they don't work ... then that simplicity becomes predictability, etc. And I think we should keep in mind we didn't exactly dominate. Fun to see and analyze, but hardly really crushing.
I was quite happy during the first half and thought we were pretty dominant but blew our chances. When we got the goal in the second I thought things were going well, but the way it fell apart in the second half makes me agree that it was hardly a crushing win and that late goal made it look better than it really was down the stretch. For me it was not just Musah to the wing, but also Morris and Busio in midfield that was a bit of a surprise, especially Busio. I think when that roster was put out most people thought 2 of Musah, McKennie and Morris would be the guys playing at the bottom of midfield, with probably many if not most assuming McKennie and Musah. But, McKennie was rested and Musah played wide with Morris and Busio taking over. And, I liked how we looked for long stretches with more passing and less dribbling in midfield. The questions for me becomes if we want that type of game, who plays in those spots when everyone is healthy. I think Adams can move the ball quickly and safely so I wouldn't bet against him taking one of those spots if he gets back to his normal level, with the added bonus of bringing some steel to the center. But, neither McKennie nor Musah are really adept at that short pass and move type of midfield game. Wil the players change or will the strategy change once we have everyone available. Looking forward to Mexico, but really looking forward to seeing the plan when more of the pool is healthy.
As long as Poch has the CM pair making short passes and maintaining strong defensive discipline, McKennie doesn't make a ton of sense there at all. Of course, was that really a choice based on those personnel or a choice based on broader personnel (i.e. protect the CBs)? The instant you ask that player to make long passes or maraud more aggressively forward (Morris was up a decent amount but rarely pressed into the box; Busio made one run I recall) then Weston makes more sense. That said, Weston in Aaronson's or Puli's build up role? Sure, you run some risks with his close in passing, but getting McKennie or Musah on the back end of that give and go -- a freight train running the other direction -- would be a very good thing. Weston's better passing vision makes me think about him in Brenden's role as well given it's paired with Pulisic. It'll be interesting to see what Poch thinks he can get out of these two guys and what he gets out of them. Obviously, just based on tools and athleticism, they should be playing. But if you need short passing and to stay home ... I'm not sure either really fits the double pivot (Musah better than Wes). Of course, an Adams/Wes double pivot or Adams/Musah would allow the latter to range more. I'm not as confident as you that they can handle the ball control portion as well, especially Adams. Both Morris and Busio seemed so much more confident with it than Adams ever does. But maybe, again, that's competition.
Yeah, Yunus has played a good deal of RM but not RWF. He said he played wide at the youth level and Poch was familiar with that but I don’t think it was on the front line.
Good first game under Poch. I liked the energy and press early in the game. The press effectively protected the backline of three. I thought that McKenna has his best game on the USMNT. Tough, physical, decisive. While I was fine with Busio not getting called in the past, I thought that he looked better (strong on the ball) and would like to continue to see him get another callup. Turner did what he does which was make two great saves in one series. Otherwise, I don't think anyone else really was poor or stood out. I did think Morris was pretty quite compared to his last couple of games, but not poor. Now, we say the same problems in execution and defense that we have seen the last couple of years. The game could have easily ended up a tie, and it was essentially 1-0 until mass subs occured. Good start. Plenty to build on.
i think- from what weve seen to this point and assuming fitness/availability- adams and morris are the best fits in roughly the setup we saw. tesserman and cardoso are in that mix ideally, but that gives us a historically unreliable tyler and 3 very raw/still developing guys. busio and possibly luca (though i dont think either brings enough defense) are there. an interesting thought (for me, anyways) would be reyna in one of those spots (and yes, i see him as more defensively capable than either busio or de la). but that leads to the real question, which has lingered since arenas first tenure- that third/attacking central spot. reyna is the obvious first thought, but i dont think anyone else is up to it as seen against panama. neither aaronson nor tillman are up to that job at the intl level- theyre too low usage, too physically weak, too little presence. so unless we can somehow merge the two (or the switch flips for malik in a huge way), i think that spot is either for reyna/mckennie (wes as a high pressing "free" player)...unless that spot evolves into more of a second striker role. that seemingly leaves less numbers in the middle, but not if you factor in puli dropping in as a nominal second 10/am as he did a bit or the right wing(much more "back" in this scenario) with either weah or dest. its great that musah found a moment, but im pretty surprised how impressed people seem to be with him as an option in that role. almost every touch was an immediate play back to scally/busio. panamas lb was the least tested player on the pitch (which i guess explains how he completely fell asleep and let yunus walk in for his goal). i just think- and i dont think im in a minority here- that musah is in a really bad place right now, but i get not wanting to just leave him out. i think he could be useful as a pressing/moving more central defensive sub role from that spot. he can be valuable as a sub at any of the cm spots but i dont think hes even close to starting anywhere for us. anyways, that third "attacking" mid spot is the biggest question for me. my random, trying to guess what poch is going to do thoughts had malik as the dele ali/second striker option and gio as the eriksen/right sided playmaker role (opposite puli as a more dropping into the hole son). what i saw in game 1 was a pretty standard cam shading to the right and thats a problem for us. its as hard to count on the idea of reyna as it is adams, and while i think wes is really interesting i dont know that he links the 2 cm to the attack nearly enough. but i know for damn sure aaronson and tillman cant. its gonna take as big a "miracle" as having tyler and/or gio fit in 26 for malik to even slightly evoke thoughts of the psv-version of himself for the nats. i mean, i get that it takes time but we are coming up on a couple of years and, what, 14 caps? we are getting into 27 year old "but, but...cbs develop later" territory here. so yeah, to join the consensus poch still has a lot of work ahead. freaking obviously. first match was fine. if we spend 4-5 windows figuring out whos in the team we are gonna be in serious trouble period, but being a grumpy old bastard i can only say for the couple or three interesting tweaks that showed promise we really need him to recognize what a tough needle that central spot is going to be to thread. cause look, im a relatively big fan of brendan too but hes not the answer in the middle- and filling in the full fit and available players/team around him isnt going to change that.
I noticed that too. It appeared that Poch knew the Panamanian staff as they all looked acquainted and equally excited to all greet each other. This included the entire staff for Panama. I thought it was pretty cool that he also spent quite a bit of time speaking to Katia Garcia and the entire referring team. I thought they did a very good job.
I think one of the key things we will have to see is just how many Pochettino chooses to attack with and what he does with Dest. And obviously, that's not going to be the same game to game, always, so I can see these guys moving around. In the tactical set up we saw Saturday, Aaronson's role is clearly the best spot for Reyna. He could play further back, but the way we played, that's unnecessary, and offensively, at least, he's better forward. In Pochettino's old Spurs set up, I think Reyna could play Aaronson's role or the RW spot, which basically mirrored a lot of what Puli did with a wide RB. Of course, in that situation, Aaronson's role might play more defensively (or not). But given Dest isn't really a wide guy, maybe we see Dest come inside more. Or maybe we see Dest play RW. Or maybe it is Dest and Reyna playing the same interchange on the right we have with Puli and Jedi on the left. The attacking mid spot basically played right side CAM / 10 in a five man front Saturday. But in the old Spursy world, it played the central bottom role of an attacking central diamond four (with bombing wingbacks on the outside). And if we don't attack with six but want both fullbacks to attack ... it might just a more defensive role / shuttler role anyway. I think if Reyna is at his best ... he plays that CAM role with five attackers in front of him and you let him decide when to press the attack and when to defend. But that requires him really being smart and focused.
Nice.. validation! That's alot of non-back passes.. 85% and 78%. I'll take that. Whether that's normal or not I don't know, but it looked like they both made a concerted effort to turn with the ball and assess forward options first. Poch colored glasses are in full swing for me.
I generally don't get as annoyed with others when we pass around the back or are testing the defense. But man, it does really annoy me when we do the quick backpass without any real pressure or when we have space or open players in front of us. There's too many of those lazy passes and they very often lead to actual pressure situations that hurt us. If you pass back in the wrong situation, it makes an easy press for the opponent and a good chance for a turnover BEHIND you with the opposition's physical momentum going towards your goal and your teammate static. If you commit a turnover forward, you are still BETWEEN ball and goal, as well as the defender behind you, and there's just a lot of distance to travel.
Yeah, I just rewatched the first dozen or so minutes. I feel pretty confident in calling Jedi and Musah wingbacks in possession. For me a WB defends on or close to the backline when in the low block and covers the whole length of the field in the wide channel in possession (often while also having to balance the need to not get caught out). When pressing they will get higher than FBs usually do because they are usually tasked with providing cover in the widest channel with no immediate help ahead of them. Because we weren’t really defending with these guys as wingbacks they were hybrid roles and it mostly comes down to where they were in each attacking phase relative to the situation. I describe the lines of an offensive shape like this: GK>Backline>DM/FB Line>CM Line>AM Line>Front Line. Because we were playing a double pivot + box we had the backline and then the DM line covered by the 32 base. Then, the next line was the AMs. The gap between DM and AM was about 10-20 yards. I don’t think all those potential lines are always present but I would argue that when the AMs were tight they were basically on the CM line and when they were further up it was more like an AM line. Not super important or that big of a distinction because we weren’t trying to occupy both an AM and CM line in the middle at the same time. So basically the in possession dynamic was that if the marking back had the ball the WB on that side would check back onto the DM line to provide closer support. The weakside WB would hang or push higher. In buildup to me the most typical WB play sees them higher than fullbacks so this was consistent with that. In this game once the ball advanced and Panama went into their low block our WBs tended to be higher still. I would call that the “wing” part of being a WB. The wrinkle is that once we pushed up Scally would release further forward and could overlap while Jedi was basically dedicated width. I think if Scally went Yunus would sometimes drop back/hold. That to me is a bit more indicative of WB tendencies than winger. With the proviso that standard formations most closely describe what a team’s defensive shape looks like… in the platonic 3421 those 4 players are not on the exact same line at the same time in build up. If it’s a double pivot in build then the WBs are going to, on average, start higher than the pivots or where FBs would tend to be (I believe having 3 on the backline causes this to prevent redundant spacing). The WBs will move up and down depending on the available space and the support distances that make the most sense. The AMs will tend to start a line higher than that but often check back. So it’s like 3 CBs on the backline>Double pivot on the DM line>WBs averaging on the CM line>AMs starting higher on the AM line but floating to find space. Starting with that same proviso, a 3241 does not seem like a system that is practical in each phase. That’s because it’s basically requiring the back 3 to cover the width of the backline in the low block with the wide midfielders or wingers defending like wide midfielders or wingers (marking opposing FBs and providing help defense from a defensive line ahead of the backline). Obviously something that looks like a 3241 is something I can see happening in attack, we see it all the time. Because it’s not a shape/set of relationships that can really apply to most of the defensive phases I’m not sure it can be a base formation, only a description of what happens in attack. I would argue that the standard 3421 becomes a “3241” in attack. Therefore because it is subsumed into the meaning of the broader, more common term I would apply it in a limited manner.
This is basically what I was saying -- I don't love calling it a 3421 as a generic formation or calling Musah a wingback in this game because he didn't / didn't need to come back that far in defense or defensive transition. The fact that Scally was playing something of a RCB / RB role and not a straight RCB and that Musah's range was limited is worth calling out in the broader context when comparing to what other teams running a 3421 often do. That's helpful clarification. Of course, there were individual moments where everyone was everywhere, but I think we were imbalanced in build up in the sense that Musah generally hung on a line with the AMs and rarely came back as far as Jedi did. Scally tended to roll a bit wider to take that deep outlet spot (which we rarely used anyway) but Musah hung higher. Jedi, of course, came pretty far back fairly regularly, to the CDM line, but also stretched forward. That's what I think of as a wingback, that's all. I didn't see Musah coming back very much and I didn't see Scally going forward all that often. But even the mere presence of someone playing like that -- where the RB can go forward, sort of disqualifies the standard wingback designation in my mind. After all, while some RCBs can go forward, it's not really a standard thing. This is the sort of difference I am calling out versus a "platonic" 3421 with wingbacks ... the RCB isn't playing as a RB half the time. This was a RB playing rolling to a RCB with a RM/RW in front of them. RW and RB will switch on defense when the RB gets forward; it's not normal for a RCB to do that at all. At least that's how I saw it. I don't think Musah and Jedi played the same and I don't think Ream and Scally played the same. To me, the usual 3421 is going to be differentiated from others in defense. If we played that and had two wingbacks, we'd see us easily slide to a 541 in defense with the wingbacks going to the back. They'd also be responsible both for the full length of the field. So that's my big differentiator -- they play both wing and defensive back and essentially without help. I find value in that definition because that's why a lot of player CAN'T play wingback -- the lack of need for help in defining the wide areas offensively and defensively is the key positive attribute of a wingback. If you need to cover with another player because it's too much ... not a wingback for me. I think we both agree that when talking in attack, it is helpful to differentiate where those outside attackers end up, so a 3241 is more accurate to once we ran once we got forward as opposed to a 3421 which definitely tends to imply a more counter attacking team.
The Musah goal is the best evidence that we were in a 3-4-2-1. You can clearly see Scally and Mckenzie maintaining a shifted central pair with Ream strong side with the ball. Musah has dropped back in line with the CM as one would expect of a weak side WB with the strong side WB very high. In any kind of a 4-2-3-1 Scally would be where Musah was and Musah would be very up the pitch.
its not that complicated- in possession/attacking jedi pushes high, the cbs and scally are a 3 back... J_______M __X_X_S the only time scally is really a "right back" is defending, as the cbs both move central... ________M J_X_X_S musah was no more of a wingback than puli was when panama attacked.
Lots of good comments post match, nothing much I want to add. Personally however, I was looking forward to seeing what role Busio would be deployed at, then he gets the nod to start, did well. And damn the eternal back passing culture from Berhalter. More so when there was space to be attacked up the wing. Sure is a breath of fresh air under Poch.