When did Michael Bradley go from one of our key players to "damn wish he retired from the NT"?

Going with experience / the devil you know in high pressure games is hardly an American thing.

While it was a mistake with many of those players, especially in restrospect, coaches worldwide, of all cultures, respect experience and value players with consistency that "they know what they will get out of them."

It's not an American thing, and while I think you can accuse Arena of some level of arrogance in his coaching, going to your experienced players isn't an arrogance thing. In many cases, it's the opposite -- it's playing conservative.

Every coach in the world values experience more than like 80% of fans. Arena may have made the wrong call, but he thought he put the best team out there to get a win. He didn't intentionally take a B team.

 

You know that Bradley is currently watching Michael Jordan videos. he will block the growth of the USMNT with his pompous delusions. he aint going nowhere. ESPN sock puppets are now back to calling him the captain again, and somebody needs to take it away from him.

 

Arena intentionally led an MLS heavy team to prove that people underestimated the league. That team still should have qualified as an all MLS USMNT squad should be good enough to qualify but he absolutely left more talented players off the field and squad to prove a point.

 

And this is where the lost generation comes in.

Our young players were not quite there yet, except for Pulisic. McKennie had literally just had his first start. Adams was still at RB and not yet dominating. Brooks, one of the few members of that general age range who is good, was hurt. Yedlin and Altidore played.

There's lots of tinkering that could have been done with the lineup. Cameron didn't play because he sucked the prior game but was still a better option than Omar. Howard should have likely been replaced by someone, because he never recovered from the groin injury against Mexico the prior year. Left back was terrible, and Villafana was already not good enough.

But it still took an own goal, and a complete lucky banger on an absurdly wet field along with a phantom non-goal in another match.

If I were to rank Arena's mistakes that day it would probably be: Omar over Cameron; then an overaggressive gameplan; then Howard.

But it was still a lot of bad luck.

 

Dude, we were beat by Average MLS'ers and Goat herders.

Your excuses know no bounds.

 

I think the injuries and premature decline of Maurice Edu cost the Nats a fair amount. He was better complementary player for either Bradley or Jones. The problem was even when Maurice was healthy and available the coach (then Bob Bradley) would sit him in favor of Bradley and Jones. I remember Jones even making a comment about this, indicating that he thought Edu should be part of the central midfield rotation. Of course the second issue is once Edu stopped being a national team caliber player there was no one in the wings. Now there is Adams, so really we have put the issue behind us.

But I would say it was mainly lack of central midfield options. And also lack of willingness to pair Edu with either Bradley or Jones. Well I'll add a third thing. Maybe some ego on the part of Bradley and Jones in not adjusting their games. Both had a bit too much of the alpha in them. Usually you want an alpha or two on the team. But in the case of those two guys it manifested itself in ways that hurt the team.

 

I think the blaming MLS diagnosis is suspect in this case. I think because of his injury his play had declined and Roma had shown he wasn't going to play like he had. He saw the writing on the wall and move to MLS and a big payday. Since Dempsey moved around the same time and his play didn't decline I don't think MLS is to blame here. I would agree that any player that never went to a top 4 league but stayed in MLS their whole career wouldn't be as good but it seems that those who played a lot over in those leagues have enough experience to know how to train to keep their level up. Could be if they came back for years there could be a dropoff the more years they are back. Altidore seems another example. His national team play hasn't really deteriorated it's always his work ethic and injuries that decide his level - when he's motivated and healthy he's still a good player.

 

You can certainly make that argument, but I disagree.

Would our team have been better served with Bradley going back to Germany and fighting every week for a place in the team? And Dempsey dropping back to a lower level PL team and fighting as well? Instead of a guaranteed starter and 90 mins player every game? Who's to say?

Did their play not diminish? MB and Altidore (and Dempsey to an extent) were focal points in a team that finished 5th in the Hex. Jozy scored in one game, which was a 4-0 blowout.

This was a similar team (and even more EXPERIENCED) than the one that won the 14 Hex and advanced out of the group of death.

Pulisic has played 3-4 years now at a high level in Germany and England. Would you be ok with him returning to MLS since he knows "how to train to keep (his) level up"? Or does he need to be 30? How many seasons in Europe at the top level before you learn how to not drop a level when going to a poorer league?

 

The challenge is that a player's quality can decline and it wouldn't really be noticeable in MLS while it would be obvious at higher levels. I think that's the bigger problem with Bradley - he lost the ability to compete at a faster/higher level but was more than able to show well in MLS. We assumed his ceiling was where it used to be and that was clearly wrong in hindsight.

It doesn't really help to blame MLS but I think the takeaway I'd learn from Bradley is that once a player drops to a lower level, we should only consider that person a "core" player if they are consistently killing it for the USMNT. If we see a bunch of neither-the-worst-nor-the-best-player performances for the national crest, it's time to send them out to pasture as a building block (where we move them around or try to find other pieces to fit around them). They become an ancillary piece to the puzzle (like Zusi/Beckerman historically or Morris/Yedlin/ARobinson today).

 

We were beaten by an extremely experimental Trinidad team. We were beaten by them. We only needed a tie, and we couldn't manage it. To me, that rules out us being "unlucky" immediately. You cannot claim poor luck when you so clearly outclass your opponent both with starters and on the bench, and can control your own result.

If you remain unconvinced, I would submit that it is arguable that Trinidad, who created their fair share of chances, was also unlucky. This was not as bad of a game as, say, the Honduras away game, but this was not a game that Trinidad was uncompetitive in, as we have sometimes seen in Hex games.

Omar Gonzalez could've had a red card, and we would've given up a penalty when he tackled a T&T player in the box. This wasn't called. One minute after the Pulisic goal, Yedlin cleared a ball off the line from 1 yard out.

In terms of the US's "poor luck", the T&T GK made one or two good saves, Omar Gonzalez shanked an OG, Howard was absurdly beaten from a mile away, and we hit a post.

The events as I have laid them out do not suggest to me that this game was "a lot of bad luck". Particularly when someone can credibly argue that Trinidad was being plagued by its own fair share of "bad luck". Things went "right" and "wrong" for both teams.

Furthermore, we must consider the morale of the players and whether or not it would be unreasonable for them to get a result, even with the two goals given up. We scored our first goal in the 47th minute. We were down a single goal for almost an entire half. We had plenty of time to throw everyone forward to get a second goal. We had plenty of motivation and morale to get a tie/win. And we did not do so. That is not bad luck.

------ This part below is not in disagreement with your post. We both agree that Arena screwed up. I do not necessarily see the team's failures as those few specific lineup/tactical choices. I think there are even more numerous and unforgivable failures. ------​

The team was poor, both in setup and roster decisions. It was completely unchanged from the Panama home game played 3 days earlier, which is absolutely mind-boggling. As if we could play Panama on an immaculate home field, and then play the same game against Trinidad away on a waterlogged cow pasture!

The entire XI is at least tired from a late-night game in Florida, plus a trip down to Trinidad (which is akin to traveling down to South America, it's right above Venezuela). Fatigue is a problem for any team, which is partly why there is often so much rotation, and it's especially key for a team filled to the brim with older players.

Adding McKennie and Adams are choices that make sense mostly in hindsight. A better coach, or a crazy guy like JK (because of his love for Euro-based players), could've called WM and maybe Adams, but it's not for sure.

That doesn't matter though, because such conversations obscure the real issues in that team by being unprovable rabbit holes when we already have plenty of gristle to chew on with Arena's roster choices.

I don't think the entire XI was bad. I wouldn't have necessarily taken out Howard, Altidore, Pulisic, or Wood, for example. I wouldn't have set up the team the same, but I think those players are plenty good enough to get the job done on paper.

However, there are several choices that I disagree strongly with. While Nagbe and Bradley jogged around ineffectually, fresher midfielders like McCarty, Bedoya, Cameron, and Feilhaber sat on the bench. The first three being players with experience, grit, and defensive chops, and Feilhaber being 100 times more influential than Nagbe, and deserving of a start rather than 6 minutes at the end of the game. Those are changes on the roster that would've undoubtedly improved the USA on both sides of the ball. Ream, Cameron, or Orozco would've been suitable replacements for tired, slow Gonzalez.

Arriola had such a poor game that he was subbed out in favor of Dempsey at the half. Instead of starting the not-very-productive-but-runs-hard winger, play your well-rested, all-time goalscorer. And if that necessitates a tactical change, perhaps that'd be a blessing in disguise, because instead we simply allowed Trinidad to run at our slow, tired, old guys all game long.

I'm less knowledgeable about tactics. Partly because I've never been a coach, and partly because it's easier to see what doesn't work and simply say "hey, that doesn't work", than it is to actually have a solution for that issue. But, much like the Honduras away game, Arena pushed the attackers waaaay too high, while dropping his slow backline, leaving massive amounts of space in the midfield for his slow, tired midfielders to cover... Whoopsies!

There are a few players Arena might've chosen, but he had enough talented players on the roster to win both games. The fact that we couldn't even tie Trinidad is on him and the players, not luck.

 

No me expliqué bien - I probably didn't explain myself well.
What is American (Jersey) is the arrogance - not the reliance on veterans.
But it is a special type of hubris more akin to defensiveness than confidence in one's abilities. You, or anyone else, can argue all you want about it but I have seen it all my life. It is exhibited in masterful splendor on BS every day.
The specific point about the pundits calling for veterans might not be the best example of it (from a WC cycle literally spasming examples) but I think it ties in with the overall idea. You see it even now in Galarcep calling for Bradley to start in the 22 World Cup. Americans, in general, respect guys who have paid their dues and are suspicious of potential "flash in the pans" " johnny come lately's", etc, to a much greater extent than people from other countries. There is nothing quite like an Horatio Alger tale. The Kearny guys will back a Jersey boy 1000 percent because it is in their blood and God love them for it. I respect that kind of loyalty. I just don't want it to guide roster selections.
Many of our former players deserve our everlasting love and respect. They worked hard to make soccer what it is in America. They played for peanuts on ridiculous pitches in ridiculously inadequate facilities. And finally they achieved a measure of success. Those life lessons now guide their punditry. I enjoy listening to these guys talk about the old days. I hate listening to them talk about the present days but I especially hated it in the final games of the hex. There was just a dripping undercurrent of assuredness that Arena would find a way to qualify us now that that dumb kraut was out. And they proceeded to rubber-stamp his every move to include his insistence on playing the tried and true (largely MLS but that's not my point) guys regardless of age or form.
Even after our failure to qualify these were never the guys leading the charge to try new options on the pitch nor were they criticizing the Fed for their colossal complacency and incompetence.

 

I'm not going to get into the whole luck thing. I think a team can both have bad luck and have done better to win a game. I'm not really into the 100% blame thing.

As for 2017 and Arena and all that:

• The biggest over all driver was simply the complete lack of talent in their prime years with the older talent falling off a cliff and the younger generation not quite ready
• Injuries played a large role as well
• The team STILL should have qualified
• Agree that Arena's gameplans were not great, especially in his last two away games
• Several good players (like Cameron and Brooks) played like trash and several bad players (like Omar) played even worse
• And they still probably should have qualified

A few things I will disagree with / waffle on:

• Perhaps someone was stumping for McKennie back then -- a few games into his pro career -- but I'll want to see proof if someone says Adams. He wasn't dominating at RBNY yet, and most people here thought he was never going to be good enough.
• A lot of people criticize Arena for not going with fresh players, which I can understand. And some guys looked gassed. At the same time, if he had played others and lost ... people would have criticized for not playing the perceived "A" team. I don't think this one is as clear a mistake as people claim.
• I'm not saying you're wrong on Dax versus Bradley or Nagbe versus Benny. But we're not talking players who are clearly superior here. I saw a lot of all of them in 2017, and I don't think I'd agree on either of those subs. Different is not always better, and we're talking similar levels of talent at that time, not a clear superior option.

 

The Beginning:


The Middle:



the End:




Edit - I don't really say the end. If Bradley plays at a level to deserve call ups, I have no problem with it. He has not played at that level since the Couva loss however as his '18 and '19 seasons were mediocre. This Corona situation is doing him no favors.

 

Bruce Arena is super arrogant.

And yes, there's definitely a bias towards experience and "proving it" especially as people get older and have done so themselves. And it's super true amongst lazy, aging sportswriters and coaches who don't bother to keep up with the times.

I don't think Americans are particularly notable for their adherence to the experience/age/proven it thing. I think it was particularly noticeable in this era amongst player selection because the generation that should have seized the reigns sucked.

But no matter how veteran heavy Bruce was, he played Pulisic. He played young guys with talent. But the toss ups went to the old guys.

People claim Berhalter is beholden to age and experience as well, but honestly, he's played a ton of young guys, too. But probably more than Bruce because the young guys are finally good enough to shove out the old guys even after you account for experience.

 

I guess it's splitting hairs. My conception is, if you can identify good/bad "luck" on both sides, and it's not overwhelming in one way or the other, you don't put it as a factor in your victory. Soccer is a game in which there are very few plays that end up deciding the game. A miss-placed pass here, a shot off the post there, every single game played at the international level that is close, and not a 6-0 stomp, could be decided by luck... So, my solution is to just ignore it as a factor unless it's very significant.

1. Agreed, superior talent would be good.
2. Agreed, Jordan Morris and Brooks were both hurt before Cuova, IIRC
3. Agreed.
4. Agreed.
5. I'd have nit-picks over who was OK (Cameron as RB instead of CB, Brooks featured only twice in home victories because he was always hurt) vs. who was bad, but everything is skewed by how badly we did away from home (which were exclusively OG/Besler CB pairings), so whatever. Whatever combo you put out there would've been fine at home.
6. Agreed

I was agreeing. I think it's a decision that looks bad moreso in hindsight, not that it was egregious at the time. I was just saying that I could've seen WM making the roster under a different coach, like if he had a special eye for talent (e.g Martinez), or a penchant for German league players (e.g JK). Adams probably not even then unless the former saw something in him. He did score at 15 against Chelsea, which was pretty neato.

Maybe. But it was the first (and ultimately last) time that Arena used the exact same lineup. That's pretty wild, and a pretty obvious gamble when you think about the differences between Panama/Trinidad and home vs. away in CONCACAF.

True, it's just that there were several players who were extremely ineffective that had fresh players of roughly equal quality on the bench. If there was a huge dropoff between the starters that were terrible and the subs, then you could see Arena's logic. But there wasn't a big dropoff, that's (IMO) what makes it a mistake.

 

I agree completely with you that how a player performs for the USMNT should be the crucial factor in deciding his role for the team. But that bolded part? Not so. More specifically, in his first couple of seasons with Toronto, MB was good to reasonably solid. But he showed significant decline in his second year, and by the third season it was a pleasure to watch him play for Toronto only if you were a fan of the opposition. He looked poor before Couva, and he looked abysmal after that. Now Toronto FC had a huge investment in Bradley, and decided to try to fashion a team that would as much as possible mask his slowness, his inability to defend, his increasingly conservative -even timid- play on offense.. and find some space for his remaining ability to hit, once or twice a game, a reasonable long pass. But this effort at sustaining a marketing icon built only a team increasingly out of balance and unable to put any trust on a formerly central player who yet demanded to remain central... In short, he looked bad with Toronto. Not as bad as with the USMNT, but not that far behind.
Of course, had he been playing in the EPL his decay as a player would have been made brutally clear quite early, and no team would have thought of trying to mask it.

 

Howard should have been benched for Guzan. Arguably Howard is the biggest reason we did not qualify, giving up soft goals against both T&T and Costa Rica.

Omar was terrible as well. So bad.

 

Then go watch the second and last game of the 2020 season for Toronto vs.NYCFC when Oso and Delgado were playing partners at dub 6's in a 4231 (virtually) because Mikey was out (surgery on foot). They were excellent partners and I was eager to see Toronto's 3rd game with Oso/Marky pairing.

Ofc, the season was disrupted and it now looks as if the season will restart just as Bradley completes his rehab from surgery which kept him out for the opening of the season. I think they reupped him for 1.5$M. Hard to see him on the bench with that pay.

 

If you want to see an inept Berhalter midfield, watch USA @ Canada with

USA
-------------------Bradley
------------mcKennie---roldan
-------------------pulisic

vs. Canada

-----------osorio-----arfield
-----------fraser------piette

Fraser is a 6 with Toronto reserves (Toronto II)
Arfield is Rangers Captain for Steve Gerrard
Osorio is homegrown starter for Toronto
Piette was trained in Spain, starts for Montreal

The USA midfield had no idea what was happening to them. They were totally lost at sea and clueless what to do.

At the half with the score 0-0, Berhalter agrees with the reporters "Canada had dangerous chances" and continues "our back line has to drop quickly".

At 50' even Marcel Balboa has to agree with Univision guy that Canada is bossing the game. Berhalter's got nothing. After 15 minutes of HT he comes out with same team that actually looks worse than it did in the first half. The difference is that Herdman brought mids who play the middle third. Berhalter brought mids who (apart from Pulisic who runs thru the middle third) players who play in the defending half or the attacking half but have no clue in the middle third. The limits of Columbus Crew Sat afternoon MLS football are all too clear.

 

@Excellency - what do you think happened to trapp? I think we were the last two on the trapp is the heir apparent to Bradley bus.

Was it poor coaching at Columbus that ruined his confidence?

 

b.t.w. 2nd game v Canada

Herdman made the mistake of putting Kaye in the game over Fraser. Kaye plays the 6 for Bob Bradley at LA. He also pulled Fonz back to lb where he plays for Bayern which was a mistake. They missed Fonz' threat up top.

Berhalter wisely left Bradley out and started with a midfield of,

---lletget------------yueill------------mck

Additionally he brought Brooks in and had Dest playing instead of Yedlin. Ream who had played cb in previous outing is moved to lb to replace Lovitz. This means Berhlater has two left feet on the left side in Brooks and Ream

Zardes is playing instead of Sargent at cf. Arriola replaces Pulisic but Arriola plays the rw.

The attack is typical Berhlater with wide wings and a rangy, speedy cf able to deal with crosses and a wide pitch which isn't Sargent's forte. Lletget in lieu of Roldan is interesting and suggests more midfield and attack at the expense of man to man defense of Roldan.

At 2', the replacement of Yedlin by Dest results in an immediate goal as Dest jumps on a corner kick to pass to morris for the goal. Dest is a difference maker; Yedlin's future lies as spokesman for Bean-o. Dest wraps Fonz up with ease.

7' Mckennie with a hospital ball to Yueil which could have broken his leg.

We're lucky we don't have to face Fraser. Herdman is going with Bradley's man Kaye instead and we be bossin the midfield. Morris is blowing by Kaye. Memo to Bunker Bob: Offer Vanney Kaye for Fraser. Vanney may just be dumb enough to take it,lol.

16' gott im Himmel McKennie is bad for USA. His game is crap.

Yueil otoh has a dynamic game compared to Bradley. Can he defend the big boys? Dunno, but games in Concacaf never see attackers like Messi and Ronaldo.

22' Borjan clears for Canada, Dest with an incredibly astute header to Arriola who quickly crosses to Morris for the cross to Zardes - score. USA 2-0 Canada. Dest has just facilitated the second goal. I'm trying to remember the last time Yedlin did anything like that. Most BS savants want Dest on the left so Cannon can play rb While they were "discussing" how wise they were, Bayern was lining up a multi million $$$ offer for Dest.

 

Affirmative. Disclaimer: I was a big fan of Trapp moving immediately in to replace Bradley after Couva for some stability and organization. My view was that we should then sit back and call various and sundry to take the spot from him.

Berhalter's scheme left too much space for anybody to cover. Trapp ended up frozen in his boots trying to figure out how to do his job. Take a look at Inter Miami @ LAFC, inaugural game of 2020 season. Trapp looks like he is already venturing out of his shell. He has Ulloa playing the 8 for him and he is a smart guy, even if he is physically a bit fragile. I think if Miami get Delgado (whose contract expires this year) they will have a great pairing and it looks like they go for that 4231 scheme with Pizarro at the 10. They would have 2 great passers in Trapp (aerial) and Delgado (ground) who both know the game really well. Toronto paid Bradley 1.5$M and last year re-upped Osorio at 600k. They won't pay Delgado what he is worth.

 

I don't think Trapp's confidence is necessarily ruined nor it was poor coaching. Berhalter wanted consistency and Trapp was able to provide that in his first season. There has been little growth in Trapp's game the last seven years and he should have moved years ago.

 

I

I'm geo blocked from the game. I really need to consider a VPN.

 

Edit to above: It turns out Delgado just got a contract extension. Apparently there was interest from other clubs. Taking into consideration the weird environment this year (covid19), I'm guessing it made sense to re-up for both sides.
https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2020...-has-agreed-marky-delgado-long-term-extension

there's an interview with Morrow at the end of the vid (starts at 26')in the link which is on youtube . They interview Toronto GM Ali in the first half.