Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

NFT: USMNT vs Mexico tonight 8:30p FoxSports1

B in ALB : 6/11/2017 5:51 pm
Huge game tonight at Azteca in Mexico City. I expect the filthy el tri to try to manhandle Pulicic tonight and play dirty as usual. Flopping, flipping, floundering all over the field. The fans will undoubtedly be acting like dumpster trash and shouting their puto chant like the mouthbreathers they are. I'm also expecting a loss unfortunately. A tie/result would be unreal. Mexico has been playing really really well.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 <<Prev | Show All |
If you wanted to see a shitty team yesterday,  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 11:22 am : link
you should have checked out England. Absolutely brutal against Scotland.
Amazing difference isince last Mexico game  
The Turk : 6/12/2017 11:31 am : link
Arena changes formation with a plan, works the formation and plan through training, gets buy in from the players and gets a result in Azteca. Klinsman makes up a plan a day or two before the game, switches the formation, gets zero buy in, watches things fall apart for 30 minutes, lets the players change the formation back and loses in Columbus.

If Wood makes any sort of contact on the sitter in the box, US either goes up 2 nil or at least avoids the counter. Instead he whiffs and Mexico goes off to the races.

My only complaint is if you are going to short corner 6 out of 7 times, there is no reason to bring forward all 3 center forwards. Allows for the counter (lucky Ochoa mishit a kick) when possession is lost.
Even on the conceded goal..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 6/12/2017 11:35 am : link
I'm hoping the key players aren't critical pieces in Russia

Quote:
The conceded goal notwithstanding,
Go Terps : 11:21 am : link : reply
yesterday was an excellent performance. They achieved exactly what they set out to.


That play was a combination of Beasley allowing space, the interior defense not collapsing quickly and Guzan taking too long to anticipate the shot and react. And it was a fantastic shot by Vela.
I read recently that the USA is 'in good shape' to qualify for the WC  
Mike in Long Beach : 6/12/2017 11:38 am : link
But as you guys noted, Panama is only 1 point behind us and has a good chance of passing us in their next match.

So why is that I'm getting the vibe people consider us to be a likely qualifier, even though from what it seems to me on paper is no more than a 60% chance (at best)?

Is it because whomever we'd play from Asia if we finish 4th would be very bad?
I gave Jozy credit for his defensive effort in the previous match,  
shockeyisthebest8056 : 6/12/2017 11:38 am : link
so it's not too much to ask to see him be more active as a sub. That doesn't mean he's going to create 10 chances or create a bunch of turnovers/pressure in the midfield, but just some more effort.
FMIC  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 11:44 am : link
Yeah none of those guys should even be making the trip. I'd have liked to have seen Justin Morrow get a shot in Beasley's place.

I thought the move to a 3-/5-man backline was very interesting, and the players really reacted well to it. That was the best game I've ever seen Cameron play for USMNT, and both Gonzalez and Ream (who has had some struggles with USMNT) played well. I also thought it was a better use of Yedlin, who is still frankly a brutally poor defender.

It's worth remembering that in 2014 the teams that played with a 3-/5-man back line performed well as some of the bigger countries had difficulty breaking it down. Costa Rica, Mexico, and Netherlands all did well with it. I don't know if it's the way to go exclusively but depending on our WC group (assuming we qualify) it would be a good thing to have in our pocket. If we end up grouped with a highly technical team like Spain, France, or Argentina it could be a great tool.
Mexico plays touch line to touch line  
B in ALB : 6/12/2017 11:50 am : link
and they're very good at creating space, then attacking gaps in the back line. The US lineup last night allowed Mexico to play to the touch lines but the back line allowed virtually no gaps for them to play behind (other than the goal). Tactically, it was a pretty genius plan from Arena and executed flawlessly save for one excellent series of passing from Mexico.

My question at this point is can the US do even better against Mexico despite its latest plan to drop back, defend and try to quickly counter?
RE: I read recently that the USA is 'in good shape' to qualify for the WC  
Del Shofner : 6/12/2017 11:52 am : link
In comment 13496924 Mike in Long Beach said:
Quote:
But as you guys noted, Panama is only 1 point behind us and has a good chance of passing us in their next match.

So why is that I'm getting the vibe people consider us to be a likely qualifier, even though from what it seems to me on paper is no more than a 60% chance (at best)?

Is it because whomever we'd play from Asia if we finish 4th would be very bad?


No, not because of the Asia team, although if we have to go that route, that should be a winnable game.

The short answer is that Panama still has to play us here in the USA and that should be a win for us. The longer answer - and I won't go game-by-game - is that I see Panama probably getting 7 points out of its remaining 5 games and I see the USA probably getting at least 8 points out of its remaining 4 games - with the swing factor again being that Panama game here in the USA.

So we should be able to maintain our lead over Panama. The other teams (Honduras and T&T) have no chance.
You've sort of hit on it..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 6/12/2017 11:54 am : link
in several points:

Quote:
I read recently that the USA is 'in good shape' to qualify for the WC
Mike in Long Beach : 11:38 am : link : reply
But as you guys noted, Panama is only 1 point behind us and has a good chance of passing us in their next match.

So why is that I'm getting the vibe people consider us to be a likely qualifier, even though from what it seems to me on paper is no more than a 60% chance (at best)?

Is it because whomever we'd play from Asia if we finish 4th would be very bad?


First off, we are done playing Mexico. We have 4 matches left(the rest of the group), including ones against T&T and Honduras. While we could lose one, we will be favored to win all of them.

Secondly, we are as close to 2nd place as 4th. We only trail Costa rica by 1 in goal differential.

Thirdly, if somehow we end up in 4th place, we will b e favored to win the match against the team from Oceania - which is exactly how Mexico qualified last world cup.

I'd put our chances of qualifying at higher than 60% - more like 80% or higher.
RE: You've sort of hit on it..  
mgp : 6/12/2017 12:14 pm : link
In comment 13496962 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:


Thirdly, if somehow we end up in 4th place, we will b e favored to win the match against the team from Oceania - which is exactly how Mexico qualified last world cup.


One small correction to the above: this cycle the 4th place CONCACAF finisher plays the 5th place Asian finisher, not the first place Oceania. I'm not sure exactly how the inter-continental playoff works, but it rotates.

As of now, the 4th place CONCACAF team would play the winner of an Australia - Uzbekistan playoff (they have some games to play still).
mgp..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 6/12/2017 12:15 pm : link
thanks for clarifying that.

I didn't know that was the case.
Thanks for all the info.  
Mike in Long Beach : 6/12/2017 12:20 pm : link
I don't really know much about the other less teams you guys noted (i.e. Honduras). While favored, I suppose I incorrectly saw all the games remaining as losable. But I don't have my finger on the pulse of it like you guys, do.
A little ridiculous to give Arena credit for packing it in  
Gmen1982 : 6/12/2017 12:20 pm : link
and settling for counters, while saying Klinsman never did that. I get it, he played guys out of position. Let's not act like this is night and day all of the sudden. I think that it's more of getting the best players on the field. There was no tactical brilliance to the gameplan.
RE: A little ridiculous to give Arena credit for packing it in  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 12:32 pm : link
In comment 13496990 Gmen1982 said:
Quote:
and settling for counters, while saying Klinsman never did that. I get it, he played guys out of position. Let's not act like this is night and day all of the sudden. I think that it's more of getting the best players on the field. There was no tactical brilliance to the gameplan.


It IS night and day. Klinsmann may have tried to do the same, but his ability to execute any plan was so miserable that we have no way of actually knowing.
RE: A little ridiculous to give Arena credit for packing it in  
Jon in NYC : 6/12/2017 12:34 pm : link
In comment 13496990 Gmen1982 said:
Quote:
and settling for counters, while saying Klinsman never did that. I get it, he played guys out of position. Let's not act like this is night and day all of the sudden. I think that it's more of getting the best players on the field. There was no tactical brilliance to the gameplan.


Holy shit.
RE: RE: A little ridiculous to give Arena credit for packing it in  
B in ALB : 6/12/2017 12:36 pm : link
In comment 13497008 Jon in NYC said:
Quote:
In comment 13496990 Gmen1982 said:


Quote:


and settling for counters, while saying Klinsman never did that. I get it, he played guys out of position. Let's not act like this is night and day all of the sudden. I think that it's more of getting the best players on the field. There was no tactical brilliance to the gameplan.



Holy shit.


Holy shit indeed.
It was..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 6/12/2017 12:47 pm : link
most indeed a tactical brilliance last night. I can't say it any better than this:

Quote:
When you're playing for a point at Azteca, you let Mexico pass the ball around the center circle as much as they'd like. If you re-watch the game, keep an eye on how Bradley and Acosta drop off and don't high press their midfielders until they've crossed the halfway mark. The kind of possession Mexico had doesn't hurt anyone.

Again, they had one shot on goal.


We played Mexico in the US the previous time and lost because we had no tactical plan. You might disagree with the tactics last night (not sure why you would), but it is damn difficult to say the tactics didn't work or weren't effective.
Let's not forget how difficult it is to get a result at Azteca  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 12:51 pm : link
Mexico's record there in World Cup qualifying since the stadium opened in 1966 is 40 wins, 7 draws, and 2 losses. That place is a fucking meat grinder.

This was the same guy  
B in ALB : 6/12/2017 12:51 pm : link
who thought the refereeing last night was fair. No big deal. Ref was calling it both ways.
.  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 12:55 pm : link
Oh, and after watching Kellyn Acosta and Bradley working together yesterday is there anyone that can say Jermaine Jones doesn't completely suck?
I just don't know  
Jon in NYC : 6/12/2017 12:56 pm : link
how someone can see the US team lose to Mexico 2-1 at home, and then see them draw Mexico on the road, with basically the same team, and give the coach 0 credit.

It boggles the mind.
RE: .  
Jon in NYC : 6/12/2017 12:57 pm : link
In comment 13497043 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Oh, and after watching Kellyn Acosta and Bradley working together yesterday is there anyone that can say Jermaine Jones doesn't completely suck?


Jones may suck, but lets not diminish Acosta. He's a stud.
RE: RE: .  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 1:01 pm : link
In comment 13497047 Jon in NYC said:
Quote:
In comment 13497043 Go Terps said:


Quote:


Oh, and after watching Kellyn Acosta and Bradley working together yesterday is there anyone that can say Jermaine Jones doesn't completely suck?



Jones may suck, but lets not diminish Acosta. He's a stud.


Not meant to diminish Acosta at all. He's surpassed "great prospect" status and is now simply an excellent player. And his impact on Bradley (vs. how Bradley played with Jones) is apparent.
RE: Even on the conceded goal..  
RobCarpenter : 6/12/2017 1:04 pm : link
In comment 13496916 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
I'm hoping the key players aren't critical pieces in Russia



Quote:


The conceded goal notwithstanding,
Go Terps : 11:21 am : link : reply
yesterday was an excellent performance. They achieved exactly what they set out to.



That play was a combination of Beasley allowing space, the interior defense not collapsing quickly and Guzan taking too long to anticipate the shot and react. And it was a fantastic shot by Vela.


That goal wasn't on Beasley, he's defending the outside there to keep him from getting past him and getting to goal.

The backtracking defenders -- especially Cameron -- needed to provide help on that play and didn't. Cameron had a terrific second half but he was closest to help on the goal and he ran into no man's land.

Other thoughts:

As to the quality of the U.S. play, the US had 7 corners and Mexico had 9. Even in a defensive posture they were still able to pressure Mexico from time to time.

I also thought Pulisic did a good job in the first half of giving the ball to his teammates with his first touch, but they usually didn't hold onto it.
Rob  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 1:17 pm : link
I don't know about that...Carlos Vela is heavily left footed. I would have preferred to see Beasley shade him the other way and force him towards the touch line. That said though it was a great play by Vela...he's a beast.
RE: RE: Even on the conceded goal..  
ColHowPepper : 6/12/2017 1:33 pm : link
i saw this exactly as Rob did; I was so incensed with Cameron's easy lope into "position" (not), that I was tempted to excoriate it him here. Good thing I didn't because he did have a solid 2H.

That goal was not on Beasley--how far do you want him to cross along the 18 into the middle of the pitch before someone closes on Vela? It didn't happen.

It did look like Guzan was a bit slow to push off. The TV crew indicated (maybe noted here during the match?) that Arena tapped Guzan because he was leary of playing TH twice within three days lest he aggravate his groin. He missed many months with that injury, and like hammies they are a bitch to re-hab with success. So that made sense to me.

Speaking of the US announcing crew--and it will be all US for the WC as announced by Fox (? Is that the network), too bad. Much prefer Ian Darke and the knowledgeable crowd. It may be appealing to some, but I dislike the homer content and supposed nuance of the commentary.

And that brings me to the commentary on Salcedo, and reaction on the thread: I have no idea whether any given crew of referees is corrupt or corruptible. And Salcedo did throw an elbow into Wood's face, possible SFP, maybe even more probable than not. But I think few here have a good grasp how difficult it is for a three man team, the center and two ARs, to see the entire field, especially when you have an experienced player who knows how to shield his action using his and his victim's bodies from the view(s) of the closest official.

Only on TV, with serial replays and in slo-mo yet, does the announcing crew become all knowing: "Well, that was certainly a Red Card for SFP and no reason for it not called." Unless the crew members didn't see it! This is not being pro-ref or anti-US, it's a fact of the game that a whole shit-load of crap goes on outside the view of the refs.

Compare last night's Game 6 of Penguins-Predators. The referee at the Pens' end of the ice was in absolutely awful position, on the GL up against the far boards, and from his view he lost sight of the puck as it was trickling from under Murray's body, to be poked in by Sissons, but Pollock blew his whistle because he lost sight of it. Never mind that he should have been moving toward the back of the net really fast. It was a game and SCP Finals-changing decision.

But back to USMNT, yes, Bradley's best game for the team in many months, the goal was just the cherry on top. I thought Arena was most apt to be second guessed for being slow to bring Nagbe in, same sub. Much better movement in MF, and the MF play didn't bother me that much at all. Pulisic is elusive and such a threat; he was effective because he had to be taken account of. The big surprise to me was that Mexico did not target him physically much at all, off ball or on.
ColHow..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 6/12/2017 1:39 pm : link
the only caveat to the refereeing discussion is that Mexico doesn't have an all-time great record at Azteca just because of talent. There have been so many questionable calls and favorable rulings that the officials have given themselves little wiggle room for error without it appearing to be biased.

Everytime opponents enter that arena they have to overcome physical play that often isn't punished. I just think last night was more of a function of poor refereeing than bias. If they were corrupt, they'd have given Bradley another yellow, forcing him to miss the next match, or called one of the several dives in the box as penalties.

Letting some of the wing play go and then producing the yellow on Yeldin was horseshit.
RE: Rob  
RobCarpenter : 6/12/2017 1:55 pm : link
In comment 13497069 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I don't know about that...Carlos Vela is heavily left footed. I would have preferred to see Beasley shade him the other way and force him towards the touch line. That said though it was a great play by Vela...he's a beast.


As a defender you should push him to where you have extra help, and that's what Beasley did. Three defenders ran past him, only one of them was actually marking someone.

Anyone who doubts whether Arena's tactics worked needs to watch that play, if the US doesn't play a defensive minded match then those transition plays would have happened much more often.
RE: ColHow....  
ColHowPepper : 6/12/2017 4:05 pm : link
In comment 13497101 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
the only caveat to the refereeing discussion is that Mexico doesn't have an all-time great record at Azteca just because of talent. There have been so many questionable calls and favorable rulings that the officials have given themselves little wiggle room for error without it appearing to be biased.

Everytime opponents enter that arena they have to overcome physical play that often isn't punished. I just think last night was more of a function of poor refereeing than bias. If they were corrupt, they'd have given Bradley another yellow, forcing him to miss the next match, or called one of the several dives in the box as penalties.

Letting some of the wing play go and then producing the yellow on Yeldin was horseshit.

This is a reasonable post, I feel, and that's without having a concrete, extensive historical sense of the shenanigans that might prevail at Azteca. And there's a reason that Aguilar the center ref was selected, in part, because he has a pretty extensive resume at this level. You may say that should connote that the fix is in. But just as certain teams and players enter a match and certain venues apprehensive that the match and venue might be bigger than their capability, that's part of the refs' mindsets as well.

So, that could well play in to your narrative--and again, I don't use that term pejoratively here, there may well be an intimidation factor, especially at the outset. (Recall Howard Webb's "freeze" when DeJong went studs up on Alonso).

I agree that the officiating was uneven, agree that Bradley was (pretty crazily) walking too close to the edge, and agree that the inconsistency came into relief with the yellow on Yedlin--and that was a clumsy, all-too-visible attempt at a tackle on his part. Games ebb and flow, skill levels take over or recede, physicality is quiescent and then erupts, crowd noise, coaches' tactics, and it always comes down to judgment and game management: admittedly, these weren't too good in the opening 20 minutes. Salcedo's hits--as I said, I don't think, and I don't want to believe, that--they were seen and not called. Whenever players go up to head the ball, it's less often the case that elbows don't go flying as part of "leverage" (real or imagined) to get higher, so from a poor angle, Aguilar and/or the AR on that half (very poor view from across the field and two bodies in), the intent and contact could well have been missed.
RE: RE: RE: A little ridiculous to give Arena credit for packing it in  
Joey from GlenCove : 6/12/2017 4:14 pm : link
In comment 13497011 B in ALB said:
Quote:
In comment 13497008 Jon in NYC said:


Quote:


In comment 13496990 Gmen1982 said:


Quote:


and settling for counters, while saying Klinsman never did that. I get it, he played guys out of position. Let's not act like this is night and day all of the sudden. I think that it's more of getting the best players on the field. There was no tactical brilliance to the gameplan.



Holy shit.



Holy shit indeed.


ditto
Arena Had A Smart Plan  
Jeffrey : 6/12/2017 4:18 pm : link
Arena had a solid gameplan that fit the players on the field. I do not credit him with brilliance, but rather pragmatic planning that accounts for the skills of the players on the field. Given the skills of the players he utilized and the strengths of the opponent and the environment, he chose the only sensible tactic he could to maximize the American team's chance for a point. Intelligent? Yes. Brilliant? Let's give it a while and see how he handles Costa Rica in the Fall.

In contrast, JK was always tinkering with positions and mixing and matching players as if somehow the players would suddenly develop into multi-dimensional threats. His approach was unconventional to say the least.
RE: This was the same guy  
Gmen1982 : 6/12/2017 5:27 pm : link
In comment 13497038 B in ALB said:
Quote:
who thought the refereeing last night was fair. No big deal. Ref was calling it both ways.


Listening to you bitch about the Reffing is like the knocks fans when they played the cavs. I didn't say it was fair I said it wasn't as bad as some of you were making it. And I stand by arena not being a tactical genius last night. packing it in against a team we should be better than does not excite me. It was a good result but we shouldn't ever have to pack it in.
You guys are just trying to make everything seem like  
Gmen1982 : 6/12/2017 5:35 pm : link
We were god awful with klinsman. The fucking guy won at azteca and took us out of the toughest group we have ever been in in the World Cup. I like arena but when you make him out as this savior for everything he does it's just ridiculous. Playing a defensive game like last night is not tactical brilliance. It's playing it safe and smart. Fine, it got a point. To say that klinsman couldn't do that is fucking stupid.
RE: You guys are just trying to make everything seem like  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 5:42 pm : link
In comment 13497424 Gmen1982 said:
Quote:
We were god awful with klinsman. The fucking guy won at azteca and took us out of the toughest group we have ever been in in the World Cup. I like arena but when you make him out as this savior for everything he does it's just ridiculous. Playing a defensive game like last night is not tactical brilliance. It's playing it safe and smart. Fine, it got a point. To say that klinsman couldn't do that is fucking stupid.


We WERE God-awful with Klinsmann. He was a complete fucking joke...the worst manager/coach I've ever seen of any team I root for in any sport.

And winning a friendly in Azteca means shit. How many examples of the meaninglessness of friendlies do we need before that concept sinks in?
I'm just holding in my enthusiasm until I see some good results  
Gmen1982 : 6/12/2017 5:47 pm : link
Against better teams. I'll disagree that we were god awful. I agree we needed a change.
RE: You guys are just trying to make everything seem like  
Jeffrey : 6/12/2017 5:52 pm : link
In comment 13497424 Gmen1982 said:
Quote:
We were god awful with klinsman. The fucking guy won at azteca and took us out of the toughest group we have ever been in in the World Cup. I like arena but when you make him out as this savior for everything he does it's just ridiculous. Playing a defensive game like last night is not tactical brilliance. It's playing it safe and smart. Fine, it got a point. To say that klinsman couldn't do that is fucking stupid.


Unlike others on this Board, I do not believe we were God awful under JK, just horribly inconsistent and underwhelming. He continuously searched for answers and tinkered with how and when he used players.

I do not think that Arena is a savior, but rather an intermediate step to where I hope that this program can go. I want him to handle the transition between past and future by giving the younger players an opportunity to experience the challenge of WCQ, instead of playing it safe and returning to older veterans who have reached their limits.
RE: You guys are just trying to make everything seem like  
marbles : 6/12/2017 6:02 pm : link
In comment 13497424 Gmen1982 said:
Quote:
We were god awful with klinsman. The fucking guy won at azteca and took us out of the toughest group we have ever been in in the World Cup. I like arena but when you make him out as this savior for everything he does it's just ridiculous. Playing a defensive game like last night is not tactical brilliance. It's playing it safe and smart. Fine, it got a point. To say that klinsman couldn't do that is fucking stupid.


Arena had the team in the quarterfinals in Japan/Korea. They then suffered a heartbreaking loss to Germany, in a game they were clearly the better team. And they managed a draw with Korea in the group stages.

Bradley won the group in South Africa. He also had the US in its first ever final of an international tournament when they lost to Brazil in the Confederations Cup.

Also, while Klinsmann navigated the team through a difficult group stage, he laid a coaching egg against Belgium. If there ever was an embarrassingly defensive game plan, that game was it (Wondolowski's mind-numbing miss notwithstanding). It felt as if Klinsmann played for the 1-0 loss.

It isn't a stretch to say with better coaching from the beginning is of qualification, this team would be well on its way to Russia.
A word about the 2014 World Cup  
Go Terps : 6/12/2017 6:04 pm : link
That group was not nearly the brutal group it was painted to be. Both Portugal and Ghana were almost completely dysfunctional, and the truth is that we performed pretty poorly for both of those matches save for parts of the Portugal match. The team was disjointed, disorganized, and there was zero plan for dealing with Jozy's injury.

I'll also add that Klinsmann's performance in the Belgium match was pathetic. Deploying Cameron as a midfielder (over Beckerman, along with Fabian Johnson our best player in the tournament) because he happened to play in the same league as Hazard was a joke. He got it completely wrong and Belgium, a flawed team that was less than the sum of its parts, should have won 9-0.

If you want a refresher of that nightmare of a match, here's the Zonal Marking article on it. A key passage from it is the following:

Quote:
USA have shown some glimpses of real quality, and this game fits into the pattern from throughout the competition – they’re best when they need a goal.


What that tells you is that the tactics leading up to the match are a mess, and the team performed better when the tactics had to be abandoned in search of a goal.

Klinsmann's hiring, and the incredibly long leash he was given, was everything that's been wrong with US Soccer for years. Too many people (not just fans, but within US Soccer) believe that someone is going to know more about soccer just because they're from Europe, or that a player is going to be better because he plays in Europe.

It's a gigantic load of horseshit and it drives me insane. Bruce Arena and Bob Bradley take shits that know more about soccer than Jurgen Klinsmann, whose greatest contribution to the game was to ruin the 1990 World Cup final with a blatant dive to earn the decisive penalty. And then he comes in and destroys our 2014 World Cup.

Fuck that guy.
Link - ( New Window )
First, wasn't comparing the two.  
Gmen1982 : 6/12/2017 6:06 pm : link
Second, did u really blame klinsman for wondos miss?
RE: First, wasn't comparing the two.  
marbles : 6/12/2017 6:15 pm : link
In comment 13497444 Gmen1982 said:
Quote:
Second, did u really blame klinsman for wondos miss?


Of course not. My piint was aside from Wondolowski's miss, the team didn't come close to an attempt on goal.
RE: RE: You guys are just trying to make everything seem like  
section125 : 6/12/2017 6:16 pm : link
In comment 13497429 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 13497424 Gmen1982 said:


Quote:


We were god awful with klinsman. The fucking guy won at azteca and took us out of the toughest group we have ever been in in the World Cup. I like arena but when you make him out as this savior for everything he does it's just ridiculous. Playing a defensive game like last night is not tactical brilliance. It's playing it safe and smart. Fine, it got a point. To say that klinsman couldn't do that is fucking stupid.



We WERE God-awful with Klinsmann. He was a complete fucking joke...the worst manager/coach I've ever seen of any team I root for in any sport.

And winning a friendly in Azteca means shit. How many examples of the meaninglessness of friendlies do we need before that concept sinks in?


I'm not technically sound with commenting on the nuances of Soccer, but Klinsmann was just awful. The best team was the 2006 WC team that was a missed handball in the goal away from beating Germany and getting into the semis. This tea is vastly improved.

Last night was smart playing with a reduced team. Getting one point was more important than attacking all night and losing 3-2. That one point was huge.

As far as Salcedo's elbows (TWO in the 1st 5 minutes), how did they not see those since the ball was there? It is not like it was behind the play and out of sight.
With GT on JK  
ColHowPepper : 6/12/2017 7:07 pm : link
(and that's not a no brainer, as we often disagree)

In retrospect Klinsmann talked like he was some theoretician of how soccer should be played, all elliptical and goal-oriented in his perorations, and his resume COULD be said to fairly glow, and Gulati fell for it. But it turned out he was an airhead, a true California beach bum, with no feel for tactics, no concept, no ability to communicate them, and no feel for his players' respective positional aptitudes. Contrast his approach to his formation quake (debuted for, what was it, Mexico in Columbus in November?), when Bradley and Johnson had to derail him at the half--and he proceeded to throw them under the bus--with Arena's formation quake which was planned and thought through. (And in looking back at the thread before hitting the Submit button, I see that Turk said much the same)

My feeling is that USMNT is still mortally deficient in the back. I took Cameron to task in the pre-game thread, saying he and Brooks were too slow, physically reactive and in reading fast combinations. Cameron had a good 2H, and he, Gonzalez, and Brooks have good size inside the 18. I just have a hard time believing there is no one better lurking offstage. And I do not believe that Cameron is the answer on the outside, nor is it DB.

The one thing I think you can say is a JK positive is that he shook, not stirred, the martini of channels of access to USMNT. We had become a bit stale in player development under Bradley, hung on to the stalwarts too long, like the Giants' OL in 2011/2012. I am not saying JK was good at player development (too much position changing/did not let chemistry take hold), but he did shake up the mix and that made it easier to let talent flow.

Holy Cow, taking Jozy to task for coming on late and being slow and lazy? Often you have to let the game come to you, and the last 15 - 25 minutes was all about not letting El Tri cop a winning goal.

I'll admit I didn't quite get that switch (Wood out?), because those two have worked together well, and thought that the Nagbe for Accosta (was that it?) came about 10 minutes late.

The players' work last Thursday and the altitude in Mexico City last night obviously weighed heavily on Arena's 11 (including TH's groin) and substitutions.
I'm not sure what Klinsmann's philosophy was  
Mr. Bungle : 6/12/2017 7:21 pm : link
outside of "being fit" and "loving the sport."

And, man, was I spitting fire after that 4th-place finish in the Gold Cup. Just disgraceful beyond words.
Klinsmann..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 6/12/2017 7:51 pm : link
took a team on the upswing and garnered pretty much the same results. Most casual fans marveled at friendly wins vs. Mexico and Germany, but then we all saw the team unravel, not because of an exodus in talent, but because he couldn't cohesively communicate his gameplan or strategy.

I gave him a lot more leash than others. I thought he was experimenting to find the right mix, but then I realized that playing people out of position and suboptimally wasn't an experiment, it was his cluelessness shining through. By the end, he lost the team, alienated some of the best players, and had us out of a qualifying position and an embarrassing showing at the Gold Cup
I was excited for the klinsman era initially, mainly due to the effect  
GMenLTS : 6/12/2017 8:10 pm : link
he might have for the development of the program in all facets.

It did not take very long at all to see how in over his head he was as a communicator, gameday/roster/personnel, and just general incompetence.

The cost far exceeded the benefits after the abomination against belgium, one of the worst game plans I've ever seen for a team so poised to move on.

The post-WC mess was just the nail in the coffin.


Bruce was about as unexciting a move as we could have made but it just goes to show the job he did with the lesser talent back in his early tenure. I'm starting to get very high hopes again.

Unfortunately, as many already note, we just can't seem to find the talent in the back.
klinsman  
giantfan2000 : 6/12/2017 8:57 pm : link
what bugged me a bout klinsman is his almost irrational hatred of MLS

if a player played in europe - they were automatically better than any player that plays in MLS

Pulisic is unlikely to be called in the Gold Cup.  
Mr. Bungle : 6/15/2017 4:15 pm : link
Quote:
“I doubt it,” Arena said when asked specifically if he would call in Pulisic, who is on the 40-man Gold Cup preliminary roster, from which the 23-man final roster (and up to six replacements for the knockout rounds) can be selected.

“It’s bad timing for [the Gold Cup], because the guys in Europe have gone through this long club season and now the World Cup qualifiers. They need a break. They have three weeks off, and asking them to come in for Gold Cup makes no sense. It would take three weeks to get them ready.”

When asked how many players on the Gold Cup roster will come from his best possible U.S. roster, Arena said: “Almost none. Very few. Maybe [Omar] González and [Matt] Besler. Maybe [Clint] Dempsey and [Jozy] Altidore at some point. [Darlington] Nagbe is a possibility.

“I have to see in the next couple weeks how everyone is doing. We’re pretty sure [Brad] Guzan is coming in. [Tim] Howard can come in after the group stage. So we’ll have to name at least two other goalkeepers.”


link - ( New Window )
While I'd love to see  
PaulBlakeTSU : 6/15/2017 4:39 pm : link
Pulisic on the Gold Cup squad just to watch him more in the US uniform, I think it's better off that he competes for a spot at Dortmund.
It's tough having Gold Cup and WCQ in the same year.  
Del Shofner : 6/15/2017 4:49 pm : link
You'd love to see us do well in Gold Cup but I completely get where Arena is coming from. As a positive, it's a chance to audition some players who may help us in WCQ.
RE: RE: I read recently that the USA is 'in good shape' to qualify for the WC  
Del Shofner : 6/15/2017 7:46 pm : link
In comment 13496959 Del Shofner said:
Quote:
In comment 13496924 Mike in Long Beach said:


Quote:


But as you guys noted, Panama is only 1 point behind us and has a good chance of passing us in their next match.

So why is that I'm getting the vibe people consider us to be a likely qualifier, even though from what it seems to me on paper is no more than a 60% chance (at best)?

Is it because whomever we'd play from Asia if we finish 4th would be very bad?



No, not because of the Asia team, although if we have to go that route, that should be a winnable game.

The short answer is that Panama still has to play us here in the USA and that should be a win for us. The longer answer - and I won't go game-by-game - is that I see Panama probably getting 7 points out of its remaining 5 games and I see the USA probably getting at least 8 points out of its remaining 4 games - with the swing factor again being that Panama game here in the USA.

So we should be able to maintain our lead over Panama. The other teams (Honduras and T&T) have no chance.


Panama was two points behind us after our tie with Mexico, not one, and Tuesday night they couldn't beat Honduras at home - it was a tie. So Panama just left two points on the table that they pretty much had to have, and they still trail us by a point.

Not guaranteed for the U.S., at all, but that was a good result Tuesday for us.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner