- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
| Favorite team: | Arkansas  |
| Location: | Dallas, TX |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | SEC |
| Occupation: | Trader |
| Number of Posts: | 19539 |
| Registered on: | 1/23/2015 |
| Online Status: | Online |
Recent Posts
Message
Gere, Fassbender and Wright are so damn good in this. So are the rest of the supporting cast honestly.
Gere might be the best. His lines are so good.
"youre still a shitty agent but... no, nvm get out!"
"how do you think I got this fancy office?"
Gere might be the best. His lines are so good.
"youre still a shitty agent but... no, nvm get out!"
"how do you think I got this fancy office?"
0
Fair enough and won't argue that viewpoint.
I consider 2-1 with 33 minutes left "in the game", regardless of how bad we looked. Another set piece goal or goal against the run of play changes things materially without the 3rd goal.
And in all reality, you're probably right it would have come anyway before it was all said and done.
Doesn't matter at this point, just a shitty night and kick in the dick which is extremely frustrating with how we played earlier, wherever the fault lies.
I consider 2-1 with 33 minutes left "in the game", regardless of how bad we looked. Another set piece goal or goal against the run of play changes things materially without the 3rd goal.
And in all reality, you're probably right it would have come anyway before it was all said and done.
Doesn't matter at this point, just a shitty night and kick in the dick which is extremely frustrating with how we played earlier, wherever the fault lies.
quote:
More shots? Goals? No to both. Gio Reyna helped us maintain possession a bit better but otherwise nothing changed.
I won't argue with that. But we were still in the game until the 3rd goal, however shitty we looked and I'm holding no coach or player to turning around a deficit after something like that happens.
quote:
There is definitely someone doing that in this thread
I just laid out the stats for those periods that you said were ridiculous for looking at the game that way.
Do those stats not say there was a material difference, for meaningful periods, in the way the game was being played and ultimately were killed, twice, by two colossal 1 on 1 mistakes? 1 being way worse than the other obviously.
quote:
Jesus Christ someone didn’t watch the game or, at the very least, has no idea what they watched
They literally didn't have a shot on goal or not on goal from 14 minutes until the 2nd goal at 33 minutes. After that, in the second half, their first shot, on goal or not on goal, came at 57 minutes for the 3rd goal.
You're just basing your argument on feelings at this point and that's fine.
We have materially different viewpoints on how that game played out.
quote:
When you’re getting pounded and your coach makes adjustments to slow down the game and gain better control, players calm down and play better.
Is that not literally what he did in the second half and did it not create the intended outcome until the 3rd goal?
quote:
Seven shots on goal, four times our xG, fifteen shots total and four big chances, plus complete domination of ball progression and final third entries.
Did we watch the same game?
Break that out after the first 10 minutes and after the game was over and it would tell a completely different story.
quote:
I think you’re giving Poch an out here that he might not deserve.
I'm not completely disagreeing with you. My point is this is an entirely different game if players had executed 1 on 1 and not made catastrophic mistakes for their second and third goals.
Again, 5 shots on goal in the first half, with however many of those were in the first 10-15 minutes is not something that sticks out to me as a tactics or formation failure.
If Ream had been having to battle 1 on 1 with De Ketelaere for headers in the box from crosses bombing in over and over, that would be one thing.
But he didn't, he got beat 1 on 1 for a ball that should have never even made it into the box and was well covered by said "formation" or "tactics".
The third goal was completely avoidable and ridiculous and from memory, the only time we meaningfully got beaten over the top. It's not as if we were dealing with that over and over again.
quote:
too much space to exploit behind our line
How many actual chances did this materialize into? 2? Maybe 3?
Again, my point is that this wasn't like 2014 where it was chance after chance after chance.
Yes, whatever we were doing was ineffective but a formation or change of tactics doesn't address the sloppiness, turning the ball over and consistent lack of execution 1 on 1 whether it was on defense or offense.
quote:
Something very obviously wasn’t working tactically.
How do you objectively distinguish tactics vs execution?
When guys aren't winning balls, completing meaningful passes and giving the ball away at a very high rate, I find that difficult.
I guess there's reasonableness to shared blame but the players, individually, looked like absolute shite aside from Tillman and occasionally Mckennie and Adams.
I'm not disagreeing there was probably some tactical opportunities but when the entire team looks that bad, I don't think it's a simple as "tactics" or "formation".
Again, you can debate whether that is on the players or the coach until the sun sets but bottom line, we folded and did not execute man for man when it counted and to me, that's more clearly on the players vs the coach.
quote:
We adjusted very little overall
What is your specific said adjustment?
Let me guess
"we should have given CP the ball more in space and let him create!"
quote:
Changing tactics does not mean subbing players champ
How do you distinguish a tactics change directed by coaches vs players executing?
Your eyes and ears must be a lot better than mine or you have an in with the team to say Poch did nothing for the entire first half.
I've also heard nothing about specifically "what" we should have changed with the same personnel outside of "MUH TACTICS!"
quote:
Yes, great coaches are proactive, not reactive.
It was obvious 10 minutes in that we were out of our depth.
Got it.
So your expectation was for him to sub players, with all our depth, 10 minutes into the game? I don't know what soccer you watch but I'd say that is not a common practice among "great" or even bad coaches.
If you're talking about a formation change, fine, but that's pretty hard to pinpoint and say he did nothing formation wise or tactically for the entire first half.
The guys just weren't executing shite.
And again, this wasn't like 2014. It's not like our goal was getting peppered for an entire half or the game, we just couldn't put shite together and they capitalized on our catastrophic errors.
You can chalk it up to playing into their game plan but they still only had 5 shots on goal and I think 3-4 of those were in the first 10 minutes. With 2 of those shots being goals that were very preventable with basic individual defensive execution of guys doing their job.
quote:
Those adjustments should have been made after we got shellacked for the first thirty minutes.
The game was literally tied at 31 minutes. Yes we looked like shite, but you wanted him to panic and blow up the entire game plan based on a tied game vs letting the team try and work into things?
quote:
Poch got them wrong yesterday.
Please elaborate on this statement. What tactically, outside of taking some random gamble to start the game, should have been different that he didn't change at half time?
quote:
USMNT's performances only met expectations, which feels like some meat was left on the bone considering everything that was in our favor.
Don't disagree with this take. Pretty fair assessment.
quote:
He also had prime Harry Kane and could not win Premier League.
He finished runner up and their highest points total ever.
I'm not saying Poch is god's gift but this nonsense that he sucks and is a failure is BS.
quote:
You're the only one disregarding results here.
To be clear, 2 wins in the group stage vs 1 and another in a knockout stage are the same since it was still a round of 16 exit?
Again, we're just going to have to agree to disagree.
quote:
Yet, all we did was make as far as Gregg, Jurgen, Bob et al.
Poch won 2 out of 3 group stage games and a knockout game. (you can argue the draw here, fine).
The other 3 won 1 game each and have no knockout stage wins to their name.
Talk about a convenient way of looking at things.
If we're looking at results in absolute, fine, Poch sucks like the rest but I think that is unfair given the circumstances in which he took over and the lack of full qualification build up.
Can agree to disagree.
re: Tim Ream. I don’t even know what to say.
Posted by STLhog on 7/7/26 at 10:43 am to The Pirate King
He was who we knew he was and finally got exposed on the biggest stage.
Have to find better and build a better talent pipeline.
Richards was just as bad, if not worse.
Have to find better and build a better talent pipeline.
Richards was just as bad, if not worse.
quote:
Under Poch, we never beat Mexico
How many times did he play Mexico? Twice? Wasn't one a friendly?
I'm not putting him on a pedestal, it was an awkward cycle, with no qualifying and he managed to get the team playing some of our best ball on the global stage for 3 games out of 5 in the WC.
He deserves credit for that and I don't think a tremendous amount of blame for last night.
Doesn't matter at this point but I struggle with sitting here and suddenly forgetting the excitement after the first 2 group stage games and the BH game and then pull the woah is Poch card.
Popular
36
