What's your take on USMNT preference for MLS?

Discussion in 'USA Men' started by DHC1, Apr 15, 2019.

?

What's your take on USMNT preference for MLS?

  1. There's absolutely no preference

    20 vote(s)
    19.6%
  2. There's a preference - it's deserved because they fit better with the system

    1 vote(s)
    1.0%
  3. There's a preference - it's deserved because they're better players

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. Way too early to say if there's a preference

    8 vote(s)
    7.8%
  5. Not ready to indict but early signs are ominous that there's an MLS bias

    20 vote(s)
    19.6%
  6. It's obviously a bias and it's bad for the USMNT

    53 vote(s)
    52.0%
  1. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal

    two quick questions:
    Who would you use to replace Adams (currently injured)?
    What team/league is "Islands"?
     
  2. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    If Otowase gets some time with Wolves, I'd put him over Palmer Brown on the second team.

    In terms of the USMNT Best XI, I'd replace Sargent with Morris and Alvarado with Long. I think that five man midfield would be fun to watch, crazy athletic/disruptive and elite aerially (although I don't know who would take our dead balls).

    I'd love to see this vs. Mexico.
     
  3. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    #603 DHC1, Dec 4, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2019
    He's a tough one to replace but I'd move one of Morales or Weston to the center and pick one of the following depending on how disruptive and rangy they could be:
    • Pomykal (he really fit the bill in the U20 tourney and first half of MLS)
    • Holmes
    To a lesser extent, I'd also consider
    • Yueill
    • Nagbe (he'd be pretty handy to have if he wasn't disinterested, not sure about his motor/drive though)
    • Lletget (doubtful)
    • Green (don't see it at all)
    • Otowase (he'd have to have a McKennie like impact when he emerged)
    Adams is the toughest to replace - the one thing for sure is that I wouldn't replace him with a regista type.

    I couldn't remember where Williams plays - I think it's in Cyprus. I think he was another dynamic player but I haven't seen him since his last USMNT match (where he played quite well). If he was back to that player, he'd be right in the mix with Pomykal and Holmes as a backup.
     
    Eighteen Alpha and Mahtzo1 repped this.
  4. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal

    Thanks,
    Then I'll take Holmes since Pomykal is MLS based.
     
  5. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    One more thing I just noticed. Are there two Morales or was this a typo? I know Alfredo...is there another Morales? If there is only one, which of the second eleven would you elevate?
     
    DHC1 repped this.
  6. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    LOL. replace one with McKennie and replace Holmes with Otowase on the second team.
     
  7. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    Let's assume that a non-biased system would have lower MLS participation. To get to a lower MLS participation number, we'd on average have to have the following switch from MLS to non

    Minutes Played (off base of 60%)

    50% - 90 minutes switched
    40% - 180 minutes switched

    Let's assume Adams is one of the players although it's unclear if he'd replace an MLS player but assuming so, we have about 50% non-MLS. I think that's a bit low given our talent as I only see the following as potential starters: Morris, Jozy, Long. If we get rid of Lovitz, Roldan, Bradley and Trapp, I'd guess that the minutes would more accordingly.

    Roster composition (off base of 67% and a 24 man roster)

    50% - 4 players switched
    40% - 6 players switched

    This is the amount of tinkering that Berhalter is doing IMO - it's not a huge number and therefore it leads to questions of "what difference does it make" but I think it does make a sizable difference.

    Here's the list of guys whom I think deserve much longer looks given the competition:
    • Miazga (538 minutes played outside of CC)
    • Horvath (90)
    • Holmes (53)
    • ARobinson (80)
    • Alvarado (0)
    Less compelling but still worthy of a look
    • Carter Vickers (18)
    • Mix (0)
    • Green (0)
    If we're willing to look at Bradley/Ream aged guys (which i'd rule out but if we're bringing in old veterans, let's bring in ones playing at a high level):
    • Chandler (0)
    • Fabian (0)
    • Lichaj (0)
    • Cameron (0)
    The injured list
    • Fabian (also old): (0)
    • AronJo: (0)
    • Wood: (0)
    Worthy of camp cupcake
    • Amon (0)
    • Gall(0)
    • Sabbi(0)
    • Mix(0)
    High ceiling guys whom we should integrate
    • Reyna(0)
    • Ledezma(0)
    • Llanez(0)
    • Richards(0)
    • Otasowie(0)
    • Soto(0)
    The fact that we can't get on average 5 of these guys in the squad each time in replacement of the following sure seems like there's a benchmark for participation.....
    • Roldan (771 minutes played outside of CC)
    • Bradley (661)
    • Lovitz (467)
    • Trapp (430)
    • Gonzalez (272)
    • Guzan (270)
    • Djordje (180)
    • Johnson (180)
    • Lewis (84)
    • Baird (81)
    Here's the minute leaders this year (outside of CC)
    1. Tim Ream 1151 (i'm guessing he's heading to MLS/USSF soon)
    2. Aaron Long 1010
    3. Weston McKennie 992
    4. Paul Arriola 961
    5. Zack Steffen 900
    6. Cristian Roldan 771 (way too high)
    7. Christian Pulisic 764
    8. Jordan Morris 749
    9. Gyasi Zardes 724 (i like him but too high)
    10. Michael Bradley 661 (should be zero)
    11. Matt Miazga 628
    12. Reggie Cannon 561
    13. Daniel Lovitz 467 (should be zero)
    14. Tyler Boyd 462
    15. Joshua Sargent 458
    16. Wil Trapp 430 (should be zero)
    17. Jackson Yueill 421
    18. Nick Lima 374
    19. Walker Zimmermann 371
    20. Yedlin 272
     
  8. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    It is very tough based on the year. I'd keep Pulisic, mckennie, and Morris. The other three have no business being on the list. If I had to replace all three, I'd probably go Arriola, Steffen, and Cannon. The award goes to Morris or Pulisic.
     
    DHC1 repped this.
  9. Suyuntuy

    Suyuntuy Member+

    Jul 16, 2007
    Vancouver, Canada
    A midfield of Adams, McKennie & Morales looks ok on paper, but in practice we'd need more steel covering our CBs. A decent team can cut through those three fairly easily, IMO.
     
  10. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    And who in the pool can provide such steel? We've tried Bradley, Trapp, Roldan and Yueill so far.

    a 352 provides a solid 8 man defense that is also has the ability to attack. I don't see a better defense out of our grouping but I wouldn't be surprised if @juvechelsea has something in mind. What do you suggest to make our team better defensively?
     
  11. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    So this is your lineup correct?

    Sargent Pulisic

    Dest McKennie Morales Holmes Yedlin

    Alvarado Brooks Miazga

    Steffan

    I think that is a pretty strong lineup.

    I can't really give an opinion on Holmes because I have only seen him in a cameo, I have not seen Alvarado in a long time so mostly on reputation. Morales falls into the same boat as Holmes but I have seen him now three times (I don't watch too many B1 games and haven't seen him there but do feel that he has been fine with the USMNT). Of the rest, I would say most probably consider Pulisic, McKennie, Dest, Steffan and Brooks as lock starters on merit right now (I agree). (I know some have issues with Brooks and Dest).

    One thing that I find interesting to note is that if you include Adams, we have 4-6 lock starters: Pulisic, McKennie, Steffan, Dest, Brooks, Adams but of those 6, we have only had limited access for meaningful games to all six for a very short time (Injury: Adams, Brooks. Recently captied: Dest)

    From the little I have seen of Holmes, I would like to see him some more. I think Morales has done enough to have earned a spot on the team. Now he needs to find his level...whether that is in the starting 11 or lower. I have no opinion on Alvarado but am not at all against seeing him.
     
  12. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    I’m not sure that we’re done with this exercise but three questions pop up:
    1. why is Berhalter limiting non-MLS players to approximately 8 spots in each camp?
    2. Why are all the spots not dedicated to auto-starters almost always filled with MLS players rather than others?
    3. Why is the regista always filled with an MLS player?
    looking at this list provided which goes at least 2 teams deep, it doesn’t seem strange to you that there is a consistent ceiling?

    the fact that there have been injuries actually makes that case stronger as irrespective of them, the ceiling remains consistent.
     
    Patrick167 repped this.
  13. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #613 juvechelsea, Dec 5, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2019
    I think you could take this in one of two directions.

    Direction 1, emphasize defense.

    451 or 541. Not sure if the DMs are good enough or that a regista works? Clog our half with sheer numbers. Go back and look at what worked on France and Mexico 2018. They could batter us, but not break the shell. We also made the GC final giving up 2 goals all tournament. If they can't score they can't beat us.

    What has instead happened since GB got the job is we went to a 433 and opened things back up***, and effectively re-created the midfield sieve that JK/Arena had last cycle. This is where I get into, the New Thing needs to respond to 2018 and not 2011.

    This approach would be effective but trips over aesthetic and missionary theories of where to take the team. It also hides individual selection issues or defensive/development weaknesses (all these questions people have about Brooks Dest Ream Yedlin Bradley Yueill etc. etc.) by defending in sheer bulk where the next defender is 5 yards away if you screw up. At least part of the problem is trusting mids too much to cover too much space.

    I also think precisely who you select matters on how effective the defense is. It matters if it's Yedlin vs Cannon, or Bradley vs Holmes or Adams. Some people base skepticism on how we looked the first half of Mexico 2018. I don't think that was the best team. But the tactics worked. I don't think we have quite seen the convergence of selecting our best defense with tactics where we defend in numbers.

    Direction 2, emphasize offense.

    451 but with 2 AMs. 442 with only one mid chosen for defense. 433 with all 6 chosen for attack.

    You could swing the other way. I think one of GB's problems is he tries to play a 433 with 2-3 DMs. They may be reframed as 8s, but they are chosen more for hustle and defense than creativity. This is an odd choice for a 433, and invites teams to press us.

    You look at the tough game when we looked good and it was Canada home. Why? We had Lletget out there with McKennie instead of Roldan. 2 points of attack and not 1, plus the forwards. More people for them to worry about and hang back and defend, more mids with skill who can beat a press, more creativity to unlock the forward talent we have. You get attacks that come from someplace other than whack it wide and cross it in. You also probably get better dead ball service if the "technicians" available on the field are someone other than a 6.

    Worse, we don't get that great of defense from fielding Roldan and the like. So don't bother, sell out on offense, put Holmes Weah Gall Green Pomykal Mendez etc. out there. Then have Adams mop it up. Adams can also create. We become something you have to defend and not just something to attack. The best defense might be a good offense for a change.

    If it scares you to have a ton of offense out there, play a 451, select for attackers, but let the more pushed back formation and the bulk number of mids do the work for you. FWIW I think some mids like Holmes have shown they are willing to not just attack but get stuck in. The idea we have to play multiple DM specialists instead is oversold.......if you use someone like Holmes who will play hard defense.

    Direction 3, mix them.

    If you play something like a 451 and a 433, the distinction becomes as simple as sliding the wings up or back. Same personnel. Similar shape. You could play 451 for difficult opponents and then shift into 433 when the game required it or for weaker teams at home.

    ***The one time I have seen us defend ok against a decent opponent from a 433 was Canada home when Morris and Sargent would run all the way back to the defensive line. And when they made their second half moves we looked less effective.
     
  14. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #614 juvechelsea, Dec 5, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2019
    personally i would play something like

    Sargent
    Pulisic Holmes Green Morris
    Adams
    Lichaj Long CCV/McKennie Cannon
    Steffen

    Bench
    Jozy
    Arriola
    Weah
    Pomykal
    Lletget
    Mendez
    Morales
    Richards
    McKennie/CCV
    Dest
    Horvath
    Frei

    Adams is good at his job and should be left be. McKennie is the man without a position we should be moving about trying to figure out how to shoehorn on the field. Precisely how Schalke has used him. If he wants on the field as a specific "type," play your position well for 90 then.

    Jozy for production and the aerial element on dead balls.

    I like Mendez for the cannon shot. We need some deadball specialists, people who can hit a free kick in, or hammer it on cage. Canada underlined the usefulness of that approach. Everyone should not be picked on hustle and run of play like they are a 90 minute person. Particular people on the bench for particular situations. TnT gets 2 goals up and you need to respond. Canada gets 2 goals up and you need a gamechanger. If you look to the bench and see Roldan and Bradley and Yueill you are already screwed, like an "I" formation running team fallen behind 2 TDs.

    More mids who can purely attack and fewer 6s and 8s who are basically hustle players. You only really need 1 stopper backup -- Morales -- of the type, and then Holmes and Morris and McKennie could deputize tactically/in an emergency.

    He is in the neighborhood at forward. He has not yet sorted good from bad in the back. He has backup keeper all wrong.
     
  15. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    I also think we should consider CP as an outright striker, if you don't think Sargent is quite ready yet

    that would give you the missing central sniper since Dempsey retired

    in which case

    Pulisic
    Morris Holmes Green Weah
    Adams
    Lichaj Long CCV/McKennie Cannon
    Steffen

    Bench
    Jozy
    Sargent
    Arriola
    Pomykal
    Lletget
    Mendez
    Morales
    Richards
    McKennie/CCV
    Dest
    Horvath
    Frei

    People who are like CCV? Lichaj? Cannon? Go look at who played France and Mexico last year.
     
  16. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #616 juvechelsea, Dec 5, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2019
    To me you graduate to 3 backs from doing 4 backs so well that you can spare someone. We're not quite competent with 4 yet, and I see some like Long as iterations that need to be superseded by the Next New Thing over time for us to improve. Games like Venezuela underline precisely how bad we're not ready for 3 backs. People who maybe shouldn't be out there -- because what they do is get forward -- being further exposed on defense by inherent lack of numbers and absence of a safety net.

    Worse, I think GB played 343 which was basically crazed.

    I also don't know if I like 3 backs in a 433 era simply because that locks every back on a forward man-marking without a net. 3 backs are wiser when teams play 352 or 451 or 442 or otherwise give you fewer forwards to worry about.

    I actually played 352s in club and college and loved them, but it's a Boca Pope Dolo era formation, not this bunch.
     
  17. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    My purpose for asking about European players had nothing to do with many of the things you are talking about. In short, it was about curiosity.

    It was simply an effort to define (somewhat) who are the players that others consider legitimate international quality now. I know that is subjective but it gives me a start. I know some will chime in with names of players that they have not actually seen but hopefully enough will have first hand viewing knowledge of players current level. Perfect example would be Green. I haven't seen him (other than scattered NT appearances for the past few years) but know that there are probably others on this list that have been following him fairly closely.

    By ranking them only with Euro based players I was hoping to do three things: 1. avoid mls vs euro bitching and 2. get an idea of where people ranked certain players relative to the other euro players. (we could easily compare and rank mls and euro combined later). 3. Get a general idea of how big the Euro based US contingent really is. My guess is that it would be smaller than MLS (this is a pure quantity, not quality data point) but I haven't really put much thought into that....perhaps the Euro contingent is larger if you are looking only at players in the range 18-? playing at a specific level or higher?

    I thank your for your input. The teams you put forth were helpful.

    As far as some of your questions?
    1. "why is Berhalter limiting non-MLS players to approximately 8 spots in each camp?" I don't know.

    2. "Why are all the spots not dedicated to auto-starters almost always filled with MLS players rather than others?" I don't know.

    3. "Why is the regista always filled with an MLS player?" I don't know.

    I'll add one:

    4. "Why is Bradley an auto starter?" I don't know.
     
    DHC1 repped this.
  18. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    The problem is that the "International Quality" player pool is probably only 9-10 players deep. Maybe another couple can fake it most games.

    Green is only interesting (good player on a not great 2.Bund team) in the fact he has performed for the USMNT, but did not get called once this year.

    Weah was not called then hurt. He has also looked good for the USMNT, in some ways, better than he has at the club level.

    But most of the roster GB has been working with is not international quality. The strange thing is that he continued with players all year after they showed they weren't good enough rather than try other not obviously international quality players.

    A good example is Lovitz and Robinson. Is Antonee IQ? Probably not. But with 5-10 caps, maybe something is there. Who knows? Not us, because Lovitz got all those caps and he might not even be a professional player this time next year.

    The logical thing would be to churn through the not obviously quality players to find those with potential, are better than thought, or work well with the players we have. That simply wasn't done. A roster was written in ink during Cupcake and kept all year.
     
    DHC1 repped this.
  19. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    That was actually part of the exercise. If there is no one for the postion,...leave it blank. See what we actually have.

    If we did the same with MLS we would have blank spaces as well.

    Historically, we have put out many teams that are not 11 deep. I just wanted to get an idea of what we actually have right now.

    Game day, of course, we have to put in the best of the leftovers but that wasn't the idea here
     
  20. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    #620 juvechelsea, Dec 5, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2019
    The catch 22 I would note is that he has barely been experimental, and has missed some players like Adams and Weah his whole tenure, plus he is very predictable and repetitive. This creates a feedback loop of sorts where the initial selections perpetuate almost by inertia, and anything else is a "change" or a "risk." It's the approach coaches usually have much deeper in the cycle, during qualifying, where new is risky.

    Except to me until next fall this is all play-time.

    Except he came in day 1 knowing most of who he wanted to go with. It almost seems to throw him when a Sargent or Holmes plays better than expected. When reality crowds the abstraction.

    I don't see him as pro MLS so much as conservative. Yedlin Brooks Bradley Zardes Guzan Ream is conservative. Wanting Nagbe back (and he says no) is conservative. Some of those are befuddling and foreign. Some of those are befuddling and MLS. It is not league specific.

    To me the common thread is he prefers a player getting minutes to one who doesn't, older over younger, and one already repeatedly capped over ones who haven't been as much.

    I think the continuity from Bruce Arena is what fools you into seeing him as pro MLS. Arena outright said he had trust issues with the dual national Germans and you can see where for many calls they disappeared. That looks more pro MLS than this. But he didn't so much favor MLS as go with the ones whose loyalty and effort he wasn't concerned about. Berhalter is then dipping back in that same pool for people. Continuity.

    He has brought back too many Euro based to be biased. Some of them like Brooks and Yedlin strike me funny just the same as MLS choices like Bradley. But to me it's more about he believes in more last cycle people than we do. They are not 39 years old. He prefers their veteran minutes over the risk of calling in young people playing on II teams -- even if they might be better just like Pulisic and Sargent were coming from those same teams. It's risk aversion, not bias.

    Which is why I have pushed "experiment." I feel like we skipped the basic step of trialing a bunch of new people and seeing who could play, before narrowing down to a regular roster. The more he did that the more you would get Holmes or Sargent surprises, and the further we would get off predisposition and instead on to performance.

    There is no inherent bias. There is we largely ignore the Sarachan Year, where we had experiments, and instead look back to 2017 era players. And in 2017 this leaned MLS and most of the insurgents were on age group or II teams or the like not getting playing time. And as long as he obsesses about prior NT status or club playing time, you're not going to get the involvement of the emerging new generation, which would tilt this back European. But their careers may not be settled until they are 23-24 years old. Which league is going to have settled midcareer American players getting minutes? Ours, of course.

    I also think he has a little bit of a midtable MLS mentality where some unproven U20 kid is seen as risk instead of upside. He's used to no budget and needing people who can play right now. This is not Sigi Schmid accumulating US U20s topped with Schelotto on the road to a MLS championship. This is the guy who couldn't find time to play Gall his first run through under him.

    He is looking at stats sheets for reliable producers for first teams. We have very few of those in Europe. If you are myopic about what stats mean, Zardes and Jozy on paper are our best forwards, because they score the most league goals. Is this reality? No. Is this lazy? Yes. If you had this mentality last cycle Wondo would be the starter. Wondo who set a league record but was useless in internationals.

    He is that naive and unless a Jozy or Nova throws up 20-30 abroad this approach will favor MLS. Not because it's a better league, but because we will have more guys getting playing time there and putting up bigger stats. On foolish paper, those are your performers. As long as you ignore strike rate and NT play. And we these days could give a crap less how NT games go, in terms of who comes back and who leaves.
     
  21. RalleeMonkey

    RalleeMonkey Member+

    Aug 30, 2004
    here
    Is there any indication that Mendez ever scores with his cannon shot? I watched the U-whatever it was WC. I saw Mendez kicking the ball hard sometimes, but I never saw him score. Has he scored a lot of goals?
     
  22. TheHoustonHoyaFan

    Oct 14, 2011
    Houston
    Club:
    FC Schalke 04
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How are you defining "International Quality"? My definition is; A player with one or more attributes that can be successfully executed against HEX-top-4 level and above competition.

    If we use that definition then we likely have a pool of 36+ players. That is around the same size that we have had for the last 3 WC cycles. It is up to the coach to use our pool and design the most synergistic starting XI out of that pool.

    The last major tournament we played was Copa 100 where we unexpectedly played for the 3rd place match against the then #3 ranked team in the world. Our only losses at Copa 100 were to the FIFA #1 and FIFA #3 (twice). Here was our first choice lineup at Copa 100.

    Wood Dempsey Zardes
    Jones Bedoya
    Bradley
    Johnson Brooks Cameron Yedlin
    Guzan​

    https://www.mlssoccer.com/copa-america/usa/roster
     
  23. a_new_fan

    a_new_fan Member+

    Jul 6, 2006
    1)if you are going to accuse someone ur first point can't be saying 'approximately' you have to have an actual number.

    2)'almost always'....so again you can't say something is happening and then say it 'almost always' which in itself proves its not happening.

    so no the 'ceiling' that you say 'approximately' and 'almost always' exists isn't an actual thing because if it did you would have proof and give actual numbers and say things like always and never not 'almost' and 'approximately'
     
  24. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    One attribute? Against Honduras or Jamaica? That is a low bar. That probably is 20+ guys. That is not the bar I would set.

    Functionally, the bar could be set as being able to compete against Mexico. If we ever get to the WC, we will play a Top 10 team at some point. Who can function in that game. In '94, Ramos could more than function. In '02, O'Brien, Reyna, Friedel, and some others could function.

    We didn't beat a FIFA Top 20 team at COPA did we? The games were at home. As the Argentina game showed, much of the bench was not at all good enough to even hang with Argentina.

    We played Mexico twice recently, the only players that seemed undaunted were Pulisic, Morales, McKennie, Ream, Altidore, Steffan, Yedlin. Bradley was undaunted, but not effective. Long might get there with reps. Miazga is not awed and never has been.

    The first step is to not be so mentally awed as to be unable to function:

    Pulisic, McKennie, Adams, Brooks, Altidore, Bradley, Dest, Miazga, Ream, Morales, Yedlin, Steffan, Guzan, Horvath, Green, Long, Cannon, Weah, Wood

    Have shown they usually can function in friendlies versus top 10 teams or games against Mexico.

    Bradley, Ream, Morales, Guzan, Green probably don't have the skill to hang with a top 10 team or really tilt the field against Mexico yet or anymore. Horvath has never been in a competitive game against anyone. Wood's form has collapsed.

    So that leaves an International Quality pool of around 13.

    I think Sargent will get there. Holmes and Boyd might be there. Several of the young players on the U20 team seemed to have the mentality. Pomykal, Mendez, Ledezma, Llanez, Richards. If they progress, that would deepen the pool immensely.
     
  25. juvechelsea

    juvechelsea Member+

    Feb 15, 2006
    8G 11A as a U20 in 17 games, including 2G on Mexico U20 in the Concacaf U20 final. 2A at worlds.

    I am not saying start the kid, I am saying he might be tactically useful off a bench, just like if we had a brain we'd have a tall target guy and some fast people off the bench as well. Not every game goes as expected. Give yourself some people with unique skills on the bench, and not just the next hustle player up.
     
    RalleeMonkey repped this.

Share This Page