Interesting comment from Hayes to the team in the post-match huddle. She sees them as the better team, until Japan scored. And she says they are a better team v. a year ago in the SBC. Growing confidence 🤝 pic.twitter.com/i5zCLb9gsg— U.S. Women's National Soccer Team (@USWNT) April 13, 2026
Heaps, even in her peak, was never incredible at anything you mentioned. She was good because she could absord ton of physicality and serve as a target on the second line while still contribute to the ball distribution in an acceptable fashion. She was effective as a combination of great physicality and acceptable technical ability, never was a real first rated technical player. The differenece between her and real superb technical midfielder such as Necib, Caldentey and Bonmati cannot be more obvious. She always had a lot of poor touches and inconsistent passes and her defense contribution is negligible,but those shortcomings were acceptable when she can 1. draw a lot of fouls in the final third; 2. contest tons of headers; 3. be a goal threat. In short, Heaps strengths can be best used when she was deployed high up the pitch not as a central midfielder. However, Heaps is no longer very effective and difficult to deploy tactic-wise when she ages and became less able to constantly play up front. Her horizontal movement is poor and she is prone to mistakes. She plays as a pivot will always be a sub-optimal decision from a tactical perspective. In the recent two legs of UWCL QF, Heaps' error led to the loss in the first leg, and her failure to cover horizontally led to the opponent's successful switch and a clear goal scoring opportunity that was only prevented by Endler's very impressive save. Heaps currently is a defense liability when plays in the backfield, and Rodman's defense contribution is more significant than any active wingers today. In fact, she plays more similar to a wingback than a winger. Had Rodman was not starting or not tracking back as much as she did, Heaps would have been exposed. Japan was also experimental in their set up. They started Tanikawa, a tall and very technical young although less mobile midfielder, essentially traded fierceness in press with techinical control. This set up also reduced the pressure that Heaps could have been faced with. Currently Hutton or Moultrie can also carry out most of what Heaps does, probably without need as much additional tactical set-up that relies on support/scarifice from the teammates. Does Heaps, as one of pivots, offer enough to justify the additional costs of bolster her up espeically defense-wise.
This is funny. The reason the US lost control prior to their conceded goal had a lot to do with substitutions. Japan made a lot of subs before that point, and US only made two. It may not be very reasonable to expect the team can still retain the same level of control when the opponent radically changed their personnel and set up while the US did not respond.
Disagree. The setup had nothing to do with all those thru balls or the calm left footed finish on the goal. Also, to my eye, most of that match was not a double pivot. Coffey was at DM and Heaps & Lavelle both more advanced in front of her. With Rose usually more advanced, but also on the right a lot so she can cut in and shoot. On D, Rodman operates almost more like a WB/RM than a forward. But that is no different from the Triple Expresso days. Yes, it gives more cover/help to the CM, but it really is cover/help for the backline. Fox is usually more stay at home than the LB in the Hayes era. Be it Dunn, Nighswonger, Partterson, or Gisele. The equation changes a bit with Reale/Wiesner. But most times, LB is acting as a RM and Swanson/A. Thompson a real advanced and doing less tracking back. Those two are outright WF/wingers. When the left side gets caught upfield, the LCB has to move out left to cover, Girma & Fox also have to slide to the left a spot to cover, and Rodman becomes your RB until everything can get sorted. Trinity starts deeper, is more physical, and defends way more than Swanson/Thompson. Though she still bombs forward at speed. Her staying deeper is almost baiting the opposing RB/WB to come forward and expose space in behind for her to run into. More like a RM than a RW a lot of the time. Anyway, that is my $0.02. Rodman is less productive in terms of G/A than Wilson, Swanson, or Macario. Heck, maybe even Biyendolo, Sentnor, & Sears as well on a per minute basis. But she is also playing deeper and defending a lot more. The others are out and out attackers. And that work is more critical if Hayes wants Rose and Heaps both as 8/10s. Or Yohannes/Shaw/Moultrie as well. Coffey & Hutton are the only real DM/CM types on this squad. I guess Sonnett can play there.
you’re judging her career, not this match. It’s as if you didn’t watch it. For me, Heaps isn’t a starter. But she was remarkable in the first half and if she played like that every match, she would definitely be in my conversation.
100% in agreement. Great crowd at the game and overall fun game for a friendly. US controlled the first half, but after the Japan goal, the US started to get tired and Japan started pressing which caused the US problems. Girma looked rusty. I was reading that she isn't getting a lot of playing time at Chelsea. Smith/Wilson was just too slow in the decision process and then made the wrong decisions. Fox and Lavelle were my WOTM.
Her match performance was no better than her performance in other recent games. Her structual shortcomings are still there. She looked better because tactical set up made her. The set up was too costly, and we had better options that don't need this type of accomodation. More specifically, Heaps currently is a defense liability when plays in the backfield, and Rodman's defense contribution is more significant than any active wingers today. In fact, she plays more similar to a wingback than a winger. Had Rodman was not starting or not tracking back as much as she did, Heaps would have been exposed. Japan was also experimental in their set up. They started Tanikawa, a tall and very technical young although less mobile midfielder, essentially traded fierceness in press with techinical control. This set up also reduced the pressure that Heaps could have been faced with. Currently Hutton or Moultrie can also carry out most of what Heaps does, probably without need as much additional tactical set-up that relies on support/scarifice from the teammates. Does Heaps, as one of pivots, offer enough to justify the additional costs of bolster her up espeically defense-wise.
Rodman being an effective right wing back is the reason Heaps did not cause huge problems defense-wise. Secondly, it also has something to do with Tanikawa being not very compatible with Japan's pressing system. You're right. Rodman was also the same RWB in the olympics. An assymmetric 4231 with Fox tuck-in and Rodman tracks back a lot, plays from lower position and provides width in attack rather than cutting inside, was the default formation until last October, when Hayes started experimenting an off-center diamond plus one single winger to strengthen the midfield contestation capacity and deny opponent's body number advantage in the midfield. Moultrie plays more as a attack midfielder in her club and a tuck-in wide midfielder in the NT for this off-center diamond, but her playing profile and her own self-identity are both a typical central midfielder.
Just want to thank all for an excellent discussion with reasoned, well balanced posts. But where's all the name calling and overbearing self righteousness I've come to expect? What's a syko doing on a thread like this?
I One thing Hayes is really good at is multi tasking her players, thus getting a lot of mileage out of them. So Rodman can still hold on to her wing position while being an de facto midfield stopper(which she helped effectively taking Japan’s much hyped mids out of the game. so not sure if Rodman’s reinventing herself as an strong armed mid quite yet, but does kinda remind of my own fav player in the world, Jule Brand, as she now moved from wing to be Germany’s starting AM & overall best player, not saying that’s exactly going to happen to Trinity, but you never know what Hayes future plans got for her….and a lot of upcoming players vying of Trinity’s r-wing spot Heaps another who. benefit from Hayes style, as she looks completely outshined by both Yohannes & Shrader at Lyon
The u23 squad has had a couple of dismal showings against what should if been undermanned Netherlands & Denmark teams(both ended 1-1). But one thing for sure, Jordyn Dudley will have a bright future, she might just be the fastest player the US ever produced, but probably needs to settle a bit on a final shot selection. I could see her being used especially if US ever gets a red card & got to bunker—-her first step would let her flash by opposing defenders but then her final shot betrayed her(happened last minute against Denmark, but can’t find any YouTube replays)
Rodman will always be a wide player - she doesn't have that high level passing or technical dribbling to play in the middle. Not that they don't exist, but not at the level of players she has both for club and country. Saying that, she is having competition with Cooper, who is also strong and does well defensively, so Rodman will need to up her game in that regard. Rodman also likes to battle, and getting her more defensive duties plays to that strength. She's still the #1 on the right, but her tracking back and being more defensive also allows for whom ever is the LB to be more attacking, be it G Thompson, Patterson, or somebody else. This line up, of course, works best with Fox is on the pitch. Thinking about her, Heaps the only place that Heaps outshines everybody is her strength (apart from her captaincy). Yet she is quite good at dribbling, passing, heading, shooting, and positional awareness (usually). The big area she lacks is speed, and that can hurt the team at times. With the current team, it is difficult to figure out an effective place. She's not better than Lavelle or Moultrie or Yohannes or Shaw at an AM. She can't fill that CM role due to her lack of speed. She's questionable defensively and Hutton is defensively better (as if Coffey, obviously). The thing she has, though, that is really intangible, is leadership. All the players look to her, and even the staff recognize her as the team leader. So, technically, she might not be at a high enough level to really be a regular starter, considering who else is in the pool, yet she is going to get the call until either she willingly retires or is surpassed (not called up when healthy).
I have been saying Shrader deserves to be in the team on merit for some time. But iff field stuff is also relevant. Getting back to Heaps, I thinknit is fair to say that in the halcyon CM days if the USWNT, meaning 2019, with Errz, Sam Mewis, Heaps, and Lavelle rotating throughout the tournet Heaps was a pretty clear #4, even though she was the most versatile. Ertz preferred as the DM, Lavelle as the 8/10, and Mewis as the 8/10 or 8. Ertz was more mobile and cleaner on the ball and just as good in the air. Mewis a better connector, cleaner on the ball, more mobile, and just as goal productive. Lavelle faster & more creative and better off the dribble. Heaps has improved since 2019, but is on the other side of the hill, now. But she can still do a bit of everything, though the DM days are probably gone. And double pivot ones fading. Though she can still do it with the right setup. And Hayes provides that. Rodman and Wilson are still off offensively, and likely will be for a bit. I have always felt Swanson is the best attacker out of the three. Getting her and Cat back will improve the guile & decision making. But long layoffs take some time and having a baby is no small thing. As for today, I am assuming an all new XI, which is easy at every spot except CB with Sonnett's knock. ----------------------PTJ---------------------- Patterson---Sams---????----Reale ---------------------Hutton------------------- --------Yohannes-----Moultrie-------- Cooper-----------Sentnor---------Sears There is no Shaw in there, which feels wrong somehow.
We just played one of the most technical and best NTs in the world and Heaps was arguably the best player on the pitch. I think talk of her being phased out is a bit premature. We did not do anything special to hide her or help her. Rodman played her normal game. Maybe abandoning the double pivot was a bit unusual. But I think sensible, given that more of our CM options are better offensively than defensively. More 8/10s or 10s (Heaps, Lavelle, Shaw, Moultrie, Yohannes) than 6/8s or 6s (Coffey, Hutton, Sonnett). Roster wise, if you are gonna carry 5 8/10 types and 2 6/8s (3 if you count Sonnett), it does not make a lot of sense to play a double pivot. We'd need another 6/8 on the roster. I'd say there are numerous possibilities: 1) Hayes is planning to play a single DM at the bottom of a 3 person CM more often than a double pivot. Hence more 8/10s than 6/8s. 2) She thinks Sonnett will eventually be a 3rd DM option if Davidson is starting at LCB, 3) Hayes thinks one or more of Heaps/Yohannes/Moultrie can play just fine in a double pivot if asked, or 4) She plans to add another 6/8 type to the pool of 26 before 2027: Shrader, Jackson, LaBonta, Meza, Hershfelt, etc. None are mutually exclusive and all 4 could happen.
Let's agree to disagree on the player Heaps was. Arguably, she was the USA's most technical player for a while. She has never been blessed with great athleticism/fluidity, but she was strong, good in the air and a High IQ player. I feel that her time in Europe made her see the game slightly differently to some of her US teammates and that could lead to some disconnection at times. I always thought of her as an excellent player who had the skills to play in any central position from CDM/CM/CAM or even ST. I beleive she could play CB as well in a ball dominant possession team as long as her CB partner had pace. Perhaps versatility has led to coaches playing her sub optimally (for her) because she can give you a min 7/10 in any role. As far as her current play, I have not seen her often enough recently to comment, but It is telling that Hayes has kept her around.
Great post. Attacking and defensive shape in the first second and final phase are so much more important than "formation". Thanks for the insight
Having watched a decent amount of Dudley in the ACC, I have seen faster College players. Maybe not at that size, but I think she is rather one-dimensional. The technical side of her game needs work.
Disagree. I think Lavelle was clearly the best player on the pitch. Heaps was quality, but I'd also put Fox ahead of Heaps. But this is also one match, and I've long said she will be around until at least through WC27. Any player can have a single, brilliant match, but it doesn't take away from the long term, and Heaps has shown over the past year at least that she is not there. Perhaps she has a renewed desire by moving back to the US, but we'll see. I would like somebody to ask Hayes about Shrader to see what the answer is. Saying that, I think it is notable that other players are coming up and getting senior team experience while Shrader, who has senior team experience and is playing well, is not getting called back in.
Lastly, on Heaps, when the majority of your team's PRIME asset is pace, I could see her sticking out like a sore thumb. In reality, the ball does move faster than the player.
Ertz has always been a CB for me. Not clean enough on the ball, and a pure destroyer. Def more mobile than Heaps, but nowhere near as clean or progressive as a passer or connector. Lavelle much more nimble and a better ball carrier, but worse passer than Heaps. Mewis was, imo, the best #8 in the game for a long time. Had it all. Agree on Rodman and Wilson. Swanson has always been the most naturally gifted, in my opinion, but of the three, I think she "cares" about the game the least. The other two love being "faces of the US game". Rodman has never really been a natural finisher, but probably the best athlete of the 3. Wilson was always a high volume shooter who wore down defenders by her relentless, direct play. Swanson was the smoothest and most versatile of the 3.
I think that some of what we are looking at Heaps, even in retrospect, are comparisons to the current group of players like Lavelle, who is better, and Yohannes, Moultrie, Coffey, Hutton, etc. who all have a higher ceiling than Heaps achieved. And I do agree that at her peak, Heaps did have excellent game IQ. But none of that can ever take away from Heaps' lack of speed which has been exposed over the years, sometimes at critical points. I also think that her lack of speed is also more of a hindrance now as the US has more highly technically gifted midfielders and play with more possession than we have in the past.
Rodman, prematch - interesting comments about building connections within the team. Dickey, prematch. Interesting comment about dealing with the pressure. Related, Riley and O'Hara talk about that on their most recent JWS episode (here, if you anybody is interested). Forgot the "yeah" counter previously. Yeah counter - 2
Maybe. I think Heaps is a possession player, but I think the attackers on the team now are mostly transition players. Interesting that you mention Coffey. I have known her since u12 and consider her a great comp for Heaps. For me, in her prime, Heaps was better than Sam is now. I mentioned it a few days ago as a balance issue. Need to find a player who can win duels and hold up the ball. This would allow the team to get up the field and pin opponents back with possession. However, I don't think possession really suits the current attacking options. As I write this, it strikes me that the job of the USWNT coach has really changed. it used to be, pick the most popular players and then find a way to combine them as a team that can win games. It has moved much more towards building the best "team". The USA have to do this now, or they will not give themselves the best chance of winning the WC.