I guess I don't understand the point you're looking for? People were talking about breaking a CONCACAF bunker, someone said CONCACAF teams don't bunker against us, I said you can't compare it because this team is far superior. A CONCACAF team playing against last cycle's group of geriatrics is going to play completely different than this year's team of UCL-level players. That's it. I don't know what your point is? That a team that scores lots of goals is good? That teams were bunkering in 2017 because we scored 10 goals in two games?
The point I'm making is that if teams weren't scared enough to bunker on the road despite seeing the rolling of Honduras and Panama, I don't know what was going to make them change their mind. Also, interesting note, as much as people like to talk about how terrible the 2017 team was because of the result beating the hell out of Panama and Honduras was unprecedented. "The U.S. had never before won a Hexagonal game by more than three goals." https://www.espn.com/soccer/report?gameId=466988
Ok - so the 2017 US team was good, and teams weren't bunkering on us. Got it. I think that'll likely change this Hex, but that remains to be seen I guess. If they don't want to sit back, and play us evenly, then Dike (which I think was what this was about) should slot right in easily, as he won't need to develop his hold up play. Would love to see him rumbling from midfield at 1 or 2 defenders.
I didn't say that AT ALL. Your bad posting from the Jozy thread is leaking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
This is my point Yurch. I think people carried residual Acosta loathing into the debate, in the background, but the bulk of the Acosta garbage chute critiques were of this sort, focused entirely on the friendly, and the rightly condemned horror show performance against NI without the added nuance that he's out of season AND was playing 2 games in 4 days which is pretty much impossible. Critique of '17-'20 I can co-sign, but the above critique I have a massive issue with because it lacks the nuance that explains a huge part of the problem in the second match in particular.
And he generated 2 scoring opportunities in a half an hour in that match. I was a huge Dike skeptic 4-6 weeks ago, I remain concerned about how much he can get done with the technical side, but thus far he's generated numerous scoring opportunities every time he's played, that matters.
The '18 cycle was not the only cycle in the history in US soccer. Very few matches against the US featured bunkering during the '14 cycle, a period during which the US had more talent. This cycle features US players with nice club affliliations. But the National Team has yet to take off under Berhalter. We'll have more solid info after the Honduras and Mexico matches. Burying those teams would then make talk of bunkering opponents in WCQing not stupid.
OK I'm gonna drop this. It seems your obsession with disagreeing with me is clouding your ability to communicate, as I'm not trying to argue anything, and simply trying to make sense of what your point is. Clearly I've failed in that, and have now lost interest.
Nice counter, and I agree. I think the argument that the attack last cycle was fine, or at least adequate is 1000% nonsense. The attack did little to nothing in 8 of 10 games, heck we were outscored 7-1 in four games against the top two sides: Costa Rica and Mexico, easily the worst aggregate performance ever in that match up, and quite hilariously, the 1 goal we did score, while certainly a practiced/scouted play by Bradley, was still half a fluke (perfect chipped shot from distance). Our attack last cycle sucked beyond Pulisic, and our defense was mediocre or worse, and we've never been that bad on the road either. As for what we'll have to deal with, I assume we'll have teams setting up for bunker ball in a large percentage of matches but not all. I don't think Mexico or Costa Rica do that in either game, I don't think Honduras will do that at home, Canada can't remember how they lined up for the nations league horror show but I dont think it was bunker ball (if they qualify). My guess is that probably something on the order of 7-8 of the 14 games could be bunker ball scenarios. Regardless, I still see Sargent as the starting Forward, and I think we can be judicious in our other choices based on opponent etc.
We were -6 and outscored by Costa Rica and Mexico 7-1 in the home and home. We couldn't score more than 1 on the road in the Honduras, Panama, or T&T matches. That's a horrible attack and unprecedented poor attacking play for the USMNT. The attack sucked. Piling in 10 goals in 2 matches against Panama and Honduras doesn't matter when you combine for 3 total plus a Bradley chip in 5 road games (and get shut out by Costa Rica, and kicked in the head by Mexico at home). Look through prior hex performances, we always struggle on the road, but we've never been that consistently bad on the road or in general since the summer of injuries in 2001 when virtually the entire attack was sidelined for 3-4 games in a row.
We had literally never beat a hex team as bad as we beat both Panama and Honduras. The 2014 team that finished 1st scored 15 goals. We were a draw against the worst team in the Hex from finishing in 3rd . A better manager would have qualified with room to spare. 2017 was a fluky result that people have gone wild over.
Dike actually had THREE great scoring chances (though generated is probably generous) since he missed a Pulisic header in addition to two good runs on through balls. Siebatcheu didn't get much going in terms of being on the end of scoring chances, but he played well as a target man.
I think there will be a decent home/away split to the bunker. I also think there will be a few instances where we force them into it, but they don't start in one.
Well, it's important to distinguish that there were two Hexes: Klinsmann's 0-2-0, GF1, GA6 (-5GD) Arena's 3-2-3, GF16, GA7 (+9GD) Arena's team scored more goals in the 2018 Hex than we did in 2014, coming in 1st place. He also gave up the same number of goals in 8 games that Jurgen did in 2. Really, it was getting nothing out of the 2 home games that killed us. To the topic, CR didn't exactly bunker, but they played a pretty rigid defense that allowed them to get a good result from that match.
Just to try to push back on one thing about Dike. He does have hold up play abilities, at least at MLS levels. He was very effective (much better than Dwyer) at hold up play for OC. Can he improve? Of course. But his first touch was much better than Dwyers, and the time from 1st touch to 2nd touch was better also. Of course that’s an area he will improve just by playing more pro ball. On the rest of this debate, I would assume that we will see more bunkers. Look what our MLS team did to T&T and El Salvador. Just look at the El Salvador game; they literally switched tactics after being beat into submission in the first half. So I’m agreeing with your conclusions.
It's good that he knows his body well enough to know when to shut things down to prevent the occurrence of muscle injury. Usually, this kind of self-awareness is seen in veteran athletes who have been around the block a few times w/re to muscle injuries. It's unfortunate CP has been injured enough times to have already acquired such an ability.
T&T and El Salvador aren't representative of what the US will face in the Octagonal. There's always been one bottom feeder in the final around.
There's also no question that in the 2018 cycle, we needed a really amazing confluence of events to occur over the last two gamedays in order to finish out of the top 4. Just in the last matchday alone we needed all 3 underdogs to win. In the penultimate matchday we needed Honduras to pick up a result on the road at Costa Rica. The list goes on. its one of those things. Qualifying isn't supposed to be easy. I went on a rant the other day about how hard WCQing was in 2002. People forget that because they recall the 2002WC. We struggled mightily, but not as much as Costa Rica. They lost to Barbados in a game that mattered. They escaped advancement to the hex by the skin of their teeth. Every cycle one of the big boys in the region has an unexpected, bad cycle. Before it was the US, it was Mexico (Saint Zusi bailed them out). Lest we forget, in 2006 HOnduras didn't even make the Hex after winning only 1 out of 6 games in the qualifying round. Didn't win a single home game. Its not supposed to be easy, and it won't be easy this time either. I think folks dramatically underestimate the quality of CONCACAF opposition. No we don't have Germany or France in qualifying. But Honduras isn't Lichtenstein.
There is no question that in terms of talent, CONCACAF continues to close the gap. They may not have the depth. Jamaica, for instance, really has an intriguing "Best XI." But we saw recently that when some of that group isn't available, the drop-off is steep. Canada's in the same position. As a nation they all collectively held their breath yesterday as Jonathan David was taken off. They may have gotten off easy and he ONLY has a ruptured ankle ligament. Its sort of hard to really analyze CONCACAF very well right now. Most of the teams in the region have absolutely tanked in the FIFA rankings. Not due to bad performance in some cases. They just haven't played any games that help them in this regard. [Other than T&T. They've been tanking for years and its continuing. Uncle Jack's cash flow stopped. I trust my eyeballs on that one.]
But on the other hand (and I'm not defending him like certain posters), Klinsmann's sample size is ruined by the lack of patsies. He played the two toughest teams, and the results were horrible and unprecedented (losing at home to Mexico was the first time since I've been watching in a qualifier (1997, we didnt play them in '89 or '93), and the --- kicking Costa Rica handed us was our worst ever (we'd lost bad every time save '97, but never lost this badly)) but they're also against the two toughest teams in the confederation we have for opponents by orders of magnitude. Nobody was close to Mexico/Costa Rica from 2013-2018 other than us. Arena went 1-1 with Mexico at Mexico and 0-2 with Costa Rica at home, that's obviously better, but not substantially, since the Costa Rican loss was every bit as unprecedented as the Mexico home loss, and the degree of butt kicking Costa Rica gave us. The T&T road loss was also unprecedented for a hex. We already know all the outside issues, but just as bad was: We were ghastly on the road across the board save Mexico (played off the field at Costa Rica, the worst performance I'd ever seen against Honduras at Honduras, generally bad at Panama, and our worst ever performance at T&T). and we were the worst we'd ever been against Mexico and Costa Rica as a whole. There were some bright spots: the dismantaling of Honduras, and Panama at home, the road draw with Mexico, but that's it. All the other results save one, were substandard or worse in terms of performance, with many being as bad as we'd ever seen. I've seen sketchy bits in qualifying in the past: Costa Rica has humiliated us for five straight cycles, Honduras sometimes causes us problems home or away, Jamaica used to cause us problems on the road in particular, Mexico is always a strugle, and throughout the decade we'd begun to produce some real stinkers in semi-final round qualifying that were most, what the hell type results. However that Hex didn't have the injuries excuse that 2001 had, it was just a bad team, period, defensively, and in the attack, especially on the road.
[ I rewatched that game during the early stages of the pandemic. The US actually had plenty of chances. The first google result for xg agreees with my opinion FWIW. We had more shots on goal, more possession etc. Navas made a couple of very good saves, Howard did not. https://www.infogol.net/en/matches/...qualifiers/usa-vs-costa-rica-2017-09-01/17582
Interesting take, and some of it I agree with: '18 we sucked '14 Mexico sucked '10 Costa Rica sucked '06 Honduras sucked '02 we had the summer swoon and Honduras imploded right after they beat us in D.C. to jump into position to qualify. '98 Costa Rica and Honduras failed I think when it comes to '18, everything has to be covered and you're right about matchday 10 being an absolute ---- show of worst case scenarios. Panama wins on a ghost goal and I didn't realize it at the time, but their other goal was a bit nutty too with Costa Rica inexplicably flubbing their defensive lines in a way they never did against us. In the other game Honduras beat Mexico thanks to a ball off the back of the <expletive> keepers head and back into the goal. thanks a lot for compensating us for gifting you a '14 slot, <expletive>. Two goals in those two games were freaking abusrd, and a 3rd was a total freak botch job by Costa Rica's defenders. Then in our own game T&T scores the best goal they've scored in decades, and they get a freak own goal. ALL TRUE. Oh, plus we were freaking horrible for nearly the entire hex and weren't good in the semifinal round either. I think all of that applies. Every last bit of it. For us it was a case of being incredibly unlucky and bad, and yet clearly, the standings didn't reflect reality, that cycle we were 3rd best, but finished 5th. It happend. In two RSO leagues in the twice three years I've been first in scoring and second in scoring respectively and 8th/10 and 7th/10 at the trade deadline. Bad luck happens. The '02 cycle was an example of that. Losing Wolff, and Mathis to ACL tears, along with losing McBride and Reyna to injuries, can't remember if we lost more, basically gutted the players responsible for the success in the first half of the hex, which lead to the goal scoring drought during the summer. They righted the ship after the Honduras loss with back to back results, but it wasn't easy. Up until this cycle, it's pretty much impossible to imagine a USMNT that could lose all four of its most talented attacking players and succeed in any sense, not surprising that they fell apart in 3 straight losses to the 3 toughest opponents in the region mostly on the road (@ Mexico, @ Costa Rica, vs Honduras).
I mean, that's 3 of 8 results under Arena as better. But that's really beside the point. Winning big at home in a couple of games doesn't mean anything in the point structure. The only thing it does is really reduce the probability of dropping points at home against less talented teams -- and that probability was pretty low. As to the bigger discussion, it seems to me that the defense and offense both failed at times, but that the defense was probably the slightly larger culprit.