quote:
I'm guessing it won't really be manifested for another year or two, into qualifications, until he can get players who can play his style. Certainly we have some guys......

FYI.... Qualifying starts next year.

Honestly, I think Bob's downfall was trying to get away from what the US did well.

In 2007 - 2008 we were still a bunker and counter team, and we were damned good at it. We tried to expand/possess/whatever you want to call it technically. In the next two years, our level of play decreased. When we went back to bunker & counter (Mexico 2009, Spain 2009, first half of Brazil 2009, @Honduras 2009) we played well. Really well.

Our players are still best suited to that style. We need to progress technically, but it may be at the cost of results.

I hope the fan base is ready for that.

Re: Klinsmann... I don't know. I've got the 2006 World Cup on DVD. I'll try to watch some of those games and get a grip on what's going on.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by ohiovol

Member since Jan 2010

20833 posts

Posted on 7/29/11 at 6:01 pm to Sheep

quote:
We need to progress technically, but it may be at the cost of results.

I hope the fan base is ready for that.

It has to happen, whether our fans are ready for it or not.

And I don't really think changing our style caused us to play a lot worse. Maybe some drop, but I don't think we were really playing great before that or anything.

This post was edited on 7/29/11 at 6:02 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by wm72

Brooklyn

Member since Mar 2010

7798 posts

Posted on 7/29/11 at 6:12 pm to Sheep

quote:
Honestly, I think Bob's downfall was trying to get away from what the US did well.

In 2007 - 2008 we were still a bunker and counter team, and we were damned good at it. We tried to expand/possess/whatever you want to call it technically. In the next two years, our level of play decreased. When we went back to bunker & counter (Mexico 2009, Spain 2009, first half of Brazil 2009, @Honduras 2009) we played well. Really well.

Thank you for posting this. I read so many comments on message boards about Bradley being "too defensive minded" ect ect which I just can't seem to wrap my mind around.

Recently it seems that this is the least defensive minded USMNT I recall. Maybe it's to Bradley's credit that he's tried to open up the style a bit and, like you say, results have suffered a bit due to it.
Only time will tell, but anyone who thinks we have the roster to go Chile on even decently quality teams is in for a rude awakening. Hell, even Chile and Argentina are having trouble doing it.

I know voices like Xavi would urge teams to lose the "right way" to the Spains of the world by 5-1 margins but I'll take beating them 1-0 in the most "boring" "negative" "anti-football" game ever witnessed and be damn proud of it.

I hope that Klinsmann's ideas about youth development prove to effectual for the future but I don't think we'll see better short term results by playing a more attacking style until we have defenders with the feel of game to keep clean sheets while doing so.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Keys Open Doors

In hiding with Tupac & XXXTentacion

Member since Dec 2008

31935 posts

Posted on 7/29/11 at 6:16 pm to Sheep

I think the general rule in soccer is to bunker against teams that are better than you and play possession against teams you are better than.

I think the U.S. has done that for the most part although it's always tough to figure out if we are better or worse than Mexico in a neutral setting (so do we bunker or posess?).

The biggest problem for the U.S. is just that the attack isn't reliably good at scoring goals, so we can possess and attack and still beat a bad side 1-0, and if we bunker against a top side, we are usually looking for a fluke goal. Spain was the best case scenario, but obviously that kind of game doesn't happen all that often.

2 ...

Report Post

Soccer Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board