The United States Men’s National Team played host to Jamaica yesterday with an expectation of seeing some new lads as well as playing the new identity Gregg Berhalter has supposed to be instilling.
We saw new lads – but no new identity – same as it ever was.
Here’s my litany of observations for your consideration:
- Disjointed, poor decision making and no clear and present game plan.
- Of the new lads only Holmes stood out to me.
- The expected leader on the pitch – the guy that controls the tempo, shape and risk (Wil Trapp?) didn’t lead and didn’t even follow. This is absolutely stunning to me because he’s supposed to know and play in a system just like Berhalter is supposed to be coaching!
- The game plan was predictable – ALL but two balls, offered as ‘service’ to the box, came from the wings.
Game plan, get the ball down the wings, flood the box and cross it… that’s a tactical strategy for 10 year olds’… laughable from the supposed top one/half of one percent!
In purposeful possession the US squad successfully penetrated the Jamaica final third 43 out of 68 attempts.
In some circles penetrating 66% of the time you have the ball is pretty good. But this was against Jamaica, a team staffed with many guys who play at lower levels than Major League Soccer.
- The 66% of penetration resulted in 51 opportunities of “service”; only two of those opportunities of service were generated from within and atop the 18 yard box – the other 49 opportunities came from crosses or attempts to penetrate the wings and offer crosses.
- Is that predictable or what?
- All told the 66% of penetration resulted in five shots taken,
- One on target,
- Three off target, and
- One blocked.
- Overall, against an extremely untalented Jamaica team, the US squad was predictable and pathetic!
Lest we forget, US Soccer advocates, and even brags to coaches who seek #USSF certification, that the players on the US Squad are the very best, most elite, top one/half of one percent in our country. Really?
Throughout the game I saw great examples of:
- Poor decision making,
- Poor control,
- Poor shape,
- Poor risk taking,
- Predictability, and
- No triangulation in the corners, or even middle of the pitch, to create overloads,
So I ask – is it wrong to expect purposeful possession from guys who are fringe players on making the Gold Cup squad?
I don’t think so.
Gregg Berhalter has had plenty of time to drive home a message of playing controlled soccer – even if that is attempting to control the game without the ball like Tottenham or Liverpool.
It’s simple as a Head Coach – be verbal and direct is clearly state what is and isn’t acceptable as play on the pitch.
If the player can’t handle the mentality and discipline it takes to play controlled soccer get rid of them.
Will we see some semblance of controlled/purposeful possession when Gold Cup preparation continues against Venezuela this weekend? This may be harsh – but I doubt it.
Yes, it’s likely the US Squad will win games – hard not to when you have good athletes, but quality controlled/purposeful possession (the type that’s needed to win at the very highest levels of the world), no.
For me, nothing has changed – the US Squad and new US Head Coach continue to ride the same dead horse – changing the name and putting a new rider on the dead horse has not fixed the dead horse.
Questions for your consideration:
- Have the guys, behind the scenes, who assess, evaluate, and help make player selections changed? If not, WHY NOT?
- Just what exactly is Earnie Stewart doing?
- Fun fact – 97% of the game is played without the ball at your feet – when is the last time your head coach mentioned that?
In case you missed it I joined Daniel Feuerstein and Kartik Krishnaiyer for a post-game wrap up of the USMNT vs Jamaica here.
Kind Regards, Chris
You can follow me on my new twitter here.
After an exhausting period of time (almost un-ending) I’m pretty sure US Soccer will announce Gregg Berhalter as our next US Men’s National Team Coach.
Is this a good decision?
Earnie Stewart set the tone in Philadelphia by standardizing a system of play and directing the development of players (across the entire organization) to match that system of play…. the 4-2-3-1.
A good piece, by Philly Soccer Page, highlighting tendencies of Earnie Stewart, can be found here.
Some might call him steadfastly stubborn, I tend to think of him as being stubbornly steadfast and predictable.
As a youth soccer coach in both England and America the single greatest weakness I’ve seen in American international and domestic soccer is our predictability.
Below is a heat map between Crystal Palace (left side) and Tottenham Hotspur (right side).
Tottenham, who offered 581 passes to 306 for Crystal Palace, makes far more use of the entire pitch than Crystal Palace.
Spurs players pass, turn, dribble, use their first touch and alter their facing/movement in far more congested areas than their opponent. Doing more of this intuits two things:
- Players who are asked to work more areas of the pitch must have a higher soccer IQ as they have to learn to make decisions (with and without the ball) across the entire pitch.
- Players who are asked to work more areas of the pitch are less predictable – the more space you use the more space your opponent must plan to defend.
From a different perspective – passing distribution England vs the United States (3-nil to England):
The US Men’s National Team use virtually no space, with the ball, atop the 18 yard box…
England offered up 691 passes with > 60% possession while the Americans offered 450 passes and failed to reach 40% possession. The US Men’s National Team ball movement was predictable and they used far less of the pitch than England.
This passing diagram, for the US Men’s National Team, is the norm not the exception.
Here’s the two most recent games played by Columbus against New York Red Bulls in the Major League Soccer Playoffs; Game 1 on the left – Game 2 on the right:
In game one Columbus pushed down the right side – in game two they pushed down the left side.
Their ball movement was predictable and lacked worthy penetration/movement, with the ball, atop the 18 yard box.
Possession – controlled possession.
In the highest echelons of professional soccer teams that possess the ball more – earn more points on a regular basis.
- France, who mastered counter-attacking soccer to the nth degree this past World Cup, still played controlled-possession-based soccer. Three of their wins saw them possess the ball greater than 55% of the time. The 2014 winner, Germany, averaged over 60% possession.
- The best teams in the EPL this year considerably out-possess their opponents on a regular basis; the same was true in 2014.
- The best teams in UEFA CL this year considerably out-possess their opponents on a regular basis; the same was true in 2014.
- Two of the top four teams in MLS this year out possessed their opponents on a regular basis.
- There will always be exceptions; here’s a couple .
- In 2014 WC Japan possessed the ball 59.22% of the time but earned just one point; need I remind about Spain?
- In 2018 WC Germany possessed the ball 71.97% of the time but earned three points.
A good yardstick when measuring possession, that can intuit higher soccer IQ, is when teams regularly exceed 60%.
If a team regularly hits this target it’s usually accepted that the team plays controlled possession-based soccer and they use every inch of the pitch.
A few examples before historical info about Columbus since 2014:
- Arsenal has exceeded 60% possession in all but one of their six wins this year.
- Chelsea has exceeded 60% possession in all of their six wins this year.
- Liverpool has exceeded 60% possession in four of their seven wins this year – in the other three wins their possession was under 50%; a trend matching France… being able to win with and without the ball.
- Manchester City has exceeded 60% possession in six of their seven wins this year.
- Columbus Crew exceeded 60% possession three times in 2014; they won one, drew one and lost one.
- Columbus Crew exceeded 60% possession six times in 2015, they won five.
- Columbus Crew exceeded 60% possession six times in 2016; they won one, drew two and lost three.
- Columbus Crew exceeded 60% possession five times in 2017, they won two, drew one, and lost two.
- Columbus Crew exceeded 60% possession three times in 2018, they lost all three.
Columbus has never consistently dominated games through controlled possession; only six times out of 34 games (2015 and 2016) did they exceed the 60% target.
How about 55% possession? Major League Soccer has a salary cap so perhaps they have a better track record in earning points when exceeding 55% possession.
- In 2014 Columbus exceeded 55% possession 14 times; in those games they won five, drew three and lost five.
- In 2015 Columbus exceeded 55% possession 18 times; in those game they won nine, drew three, and lost six.
- In 2016 Columbus exceeded 55% possession 18 times; in those game they won twice, drew six, and lost six.
- In 2017 Columbus exceeded 55% possession 18 times; in those game they won five, drew once, and lost six.
- In 2018 Columbus exceeded 55% possession 18 times; in those game they won five, drew twice, and lost five.
- All told, Gregg Berhalter has lead Columbus to 26 wins, 15 draws, and 28 losses when his team has exceeded 55% possession.
While having more than half their games exceed 55% possession, in four of the last five years, Gregg Berhalter has not shown a tendency to win more games than he loses.
How about in the general sense of out-possessing their opponents?
Gregg Berhalter has shown a history of out-possessing his MLS competitors, has this lead to more points on a regular basis the last five years?
- 2014: 53.84% Possession, 52 points, +10 goal differential, 7th overall
- 2015: 53.47% Possession, 53 points, +5 goal differential, 5th overall
- 2016: 55.05% Possession, 36 points, -9 goal differential, 18th overall
- 2017: 51.83% Possession, 50 points, +3 goal differential, 6th overall
- 2018: 52.57% Possession, 52 points, -2 goal differential, 10th overall
While earning more points than most opponents in some years Gregg Berhalter does not show a tendency to earn more points year in and year out.
If it’s reasonable to intuit playing possession-based soccer means players have a higher soccer IQ and make the game less predictable Gregg Berhalter teams don’t really do that.
- So is US Soccer taking a bold step to change the style and direction (regularly looking to exceed 55% or 60% possession per game) of the US Men’s National Team by hiring Gregg Berhalter?
- I’d say no… not yet.
- Does it appear US Soccer are at least lending credence to changing the style of soccer to match that of teams who historically earn more points through controlled possession-based soccer that also includes the flexibility to play a brutal counter-attacking style of soccer? (Liverpool and France)
- I’d say no… not yet.
- Does it appear they are looking to increase soccer IQ and make more use of the soccer pitch than previously?
- I’d say no… not yet.
- Does it appear the US Men’s National Team will be less predictable?
- I’d say no… not yet.
For now, I’m not on the Gregg Berhalter bus; but then again I’m not on the sidewalk disparaging his selection either.
Time will tell; the greatest asset Gregg has going for him is his ability to organize a team that wins more than it loses.
Having the capacity and capability to select players without regard to salary cap should be highly beneficial.
My hope is the US Men’s National Team learn to dominate the entire soccer pitch – when that happens the flood gates to create great soccer players in our country is limitless.
You can follow me on twitter here: ChrisWGluck
This should have been the repeat headline from last week – and thankfully the last week headline wasn’t a repeat this week!
I’ll be the first (probably 100th though) person to congratulate the players on their performance yesterday – well done lads!
Now the grist – with the caveat “I’m still frustrated”! 🙂
It’s my view there’s a critical failure in US Soccer when the Head Coach can get the tactics and player selections and what positions they play that wrong in a game.
When it comes to head to head matches, where the tactics and selections are limited in their adjustment given three substitutions (unlike in an away and home leg setup) I wonder how much confidence there is in the ability of our head coach to get it right the first time?
For me, this 4-nil win is NOT a ‘bye’ for Jurgen Klinsmann!
So – next up statistics; shame on me!
I usually hold true to the form that individual statistics, even when added up – on their own – don’t tell a reasonable story about the game.
Proof is the pudding when viewing my last article and my references to crosses should make my point.
Like last game, the US offered up a number of crosses this game – none of them – I repeat none of them were successful in open play. Yes the USMNT won 4-nil.
What can we take away from this?
I’d offer two things:
- It’s a slap on the wrist, to me, for falling into the statistics trap without the full context, and
- It’s another way to reinforce that the general tactical approach, the players selected, and what positions they played were completely pear-shaped in game 1 last week!
I’ve learned my lesson – has Jurgen Klinsmann learned his?
- The USMNT can’t afford to get tactics wrong in the first of two games against opponents in the future.
- Second chances are rare in this game – even those on the pitch.
- Jurgen Klinsmann needs to settle on a set group of starters who maximize options in tactics, not maximize options in versatility of players to play completely different positions.
Since I was pretty harsh in my previous article, about the leadership of Jurgen Klinsmann, it’s only fair I offer who I feel or think (without seeing these guys train on a regular basis) who should suit up for the USMNT.
This isn’t about me being right or wrong – it’s about me offering up, my views, so others can throw sticks and stones at me. 🙂
- I think DeAndre Yedlin and Fabian Johnson should be the starting fullbacks – who starts at center-back is a toss-up given injuries but seeing John Brooks and Geoff Cameron as the starters with Matt Besler and perhaps Steve Birnbaum in the wings is reasonable as well. Personally I would like to see Jorge Villafana called back into the national team; otherwise this country is extremely weak at the fullback position – and MLS continuing to ignore that position (on a regular basis) when offering up their Best XI exacerbates the problem.
- Hard choices to be made in midfield:
- Is Darlington Nagbe a top choice over Michael Bradley – given the recent game? He’s NOW a true box-to-box midfielder who’s got a great first touch with top flight passing, turning, and dribbling skills, who’s also got very good vision and improved tackling skills.
- After seeing Michael Bradley play for three years now I simply don’t see him offering the same level of skills nor the ability to maximize tactical adjustments Klinsmann might make – however infrequent that might be. It’s a bold move to bench Bradley – but it’s a worthy move if you want to have a better game of possession and/or penetration.
- Others, in the mix, adding value should include Alejandro Bedoya, Lee Nguyen, Kyle Beckerman, PerryKitchen, Wil Trapp, and Graham Zusi – with perhaps Matt Polster and Luis Gil.
- Where has Sasha Kljestan gone – and what about Benny Feilhaber?
- Likewise at the forward position:
- No true #9 exists in the USMNT; that’s five years now that the US has failed to produce a true #9… wow…
- As for the others – Clint Dempsey continues to show value, and perhaps Bobby Wood and Gyasi Zardes add value with their width. I, however, would prefer to see more of Ethan Finley (he does play for one of the best possession-based teams in MLS) as well as Chris Wondolowski (he usually has a knack for scoring).
- Goal Keepers – Make up your bloody mind Jurgen Klinsmann – wow!
- I used to think Brad Guzan was a reasonable replacement – now I’m not so sure. Not only hasn’t he gotten the head-nod to regularly start USMNT games he’s mired with a team that is being relegated for the first time in a very long time… His confidence is surely lacking! New blood now might be a good thing.
- Wild cards?:
- Gedion Zelalem – Midfield
- Rubio Rubin – Forward
- Julian Green – Forward /// a continued unknown who got tons of press but has shown very little substance
- Jordan Morris – Forward
- Khiry Shelton – Forward /// perhaps the player who most physically represents what a #9 looks like – but I don’t think he plays with his back to goal – others may know that better than me
- Matt Miazga – Center-back
- Any others?
Bottom line at the bottom.
We live in a huge country and Gedion Zelalem is a great example of a player who flew completely under that radar – how many more are like him?
I wonder (with soccer almost being an exclusive sport now because of the travel and training costs) how many really talented players continue to go unnoticed?
You would have thought, that over a five year period of time, the United States would be able to find at least two to three players who could play a traditional #9 position!
COPYRIGHT, All Rights Reserved PWP – Trademark