Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I wish I was able to. Moving up north to take a graduate assistant job and that move is making a trip to Vegas too expensive for this summer. Hopefully, I’ll be able to attend another one.
Paul,
I don’t suppose you still have a link to those Caleb Porter interviews do you?
Nick,
Because I don’t set up the field… And as I said, it’s probably closer to 120 yds long. Besides, I have no real control over the size of the field since I’m not the one who sets it up, the AD gets people to do it and I have to live with whatever they set up.
This is an issue for us at the high school I coach at. Our field is surrounded by a track which limits how big we can make the field when measuring and painting the lines. The most we’ve been able to squeeze out is only 60-65 yards wide and about 130 yards long. So a very narrow pitch compared to what we would prefer. Honestly there isn’t a lot we can do about it and so the possession inevitably gets tougher. All we really do is use the narrowness of the field as a way of teaching our girls to get the most out of the space and work to be better in tighter areas, that way when we play on a field wider than our own, they tend to have more success.
Jason,
Nice blog post. Summed up a lot of the same thoughts I had when watching the game the other day…
I think the most frustrating part, as you mentioned, is that the US players have the technical ability to play a much better style but seem to lack the tactical understanding of how to best use those skills. I would argue that Lloyd, Holiday, Heath, Rapinoe, etc… are some of the most technical players in the world in terms of ability on and with the ball, but they don’t seem to have been coached how best to use that skill set. Too often their first touches, while controlled well, aren’t controlled in a way that allow them to manipulate the defense. Much of this comes down to body positioning before they receive the ball and know where they next touch needs to go. Personally, I think Ellis needs to take some share of the blame here because there should be some more work on her coaching staff’s part to correct some of these issues.
I’m not having high hopes for the world cup and it looks like the US will be a lot of wasted potential without the right changes made in culture and tactics.
I just want to bring this over from another thread in which John posted:
“If you go look in the thread I started called “US to Brazil” you’ll see someone made a comment about training the 4-4-2 diamond a year in advance, not 3 weeks from the first game of World Cup. There is some truth to that… and here is what it is… If you’re going to completely OVERHAUL a system and change EVERYTHING… yeah, that takes time. But if you’re simply moving a few players around, but not reinventing the wheel… it’s doable. The problem the US is having is that there has NEVER been a clear style of play under Jurgen. It’s been a mixed bag and he basically sticks his hand in and pulls something out the day of and goes with it.”
I think you’re absolutely right and you put it very nicely considering now I feel as though my original comment on needing more time to switch to a diamond wasn’t quite thought out enough in light of this. As always, very nice input, John.
John,
If that’s what’s going on in the US camp as well, it would explain a lot. The players looked a little lost on the field last game. Personally, I’m extremely skeptical of the shift to a diamond midfield this close to the world cup. Personally, I like the formation and think it could fit the personnel of the US team fairly well in theory but it’s also a system that can be very tough to run and takes a lot of chemistry and understanding between players. This is a formation you start to train in your camps at least a year out from a major tournament, not three weeks out.
However, if we’re going to run it, I definitely see the idea behind it from Klinsmann’s point of view. The idea is not to free Michael Bradley up for attacking like I’ve seen a lot of people suggest on sites other than this one. Bradley is definitely a quality player and very much capable of being a very strong center midfielder on the international level with his possession ability, but first of all, he’s not a truly creative player. He’s simply a player who makes his reads extremely quickly and finds the right pass quicker than most players, but he’s not one that makes something out of nothing. That said, as I see it, the true purpose of the diamond with a designated holder and Bradley up higher is to allow him to provide high pressure up the field on the opposing team’s deep-lying midfielders. The closest comparison I can think of, and one where it was actually Michael Bradley used as an example, is this: http://www.zonalmarking.net/2013/01/22/roma-1-1-inter-bradley-guarin-sum-up-serie-as-obsession-drivers-rather-than-creators/
The US is going to play teams with midfielders playing deeper to start their possession. For Ghana this is Essien, for Germany it’ll be Kroos and Schweinsteiger, and for Portugal it’ll be Moutinho a lot of times dropping back to help in possession. By freeing up Bradley with a designated holding midfielder behind him (whether Jones is the best player for that is another argument considering I prefer Beckerman…), he can pressure these players and hopefully disrupt some of these teams’ ability to build up play centrally. Likewise, the use of Zusi and Bedoya on the flanks provides extra cover in the central part of the midfield. Then, the idea would probably be for the US to try and win the ball central through Bradley and then spring Dempsey or Altidore on the transition. Klinsmann can call it a more proactive style if he wants (again, Klinsmann’s words could be a topic all by themselves…) but it’s essentially a defensive formation as he’s using it.
Anyone agree or disagree with this guess?
Looked at the roster a little more and would love to hear what everyone else continues to think but here’s a few more thoughts I had:
– Looking at the young players included, I think I can start to see why more and more. I’ll start with Brooks. As I said earlier, I expect to see the US playing fairly narrow in the midfield and using the outside backs to provide a lot of width (more on formation later…). As such, you’re going to need centerbacks who are not only mobile but comfortable being dragged out wide to defend. This is why I’m almost positive you’ll see Geoff Cameron and Matt Besler starting at CB for the US against Ghana as well as why Jurgen took John Brooks over Clarence Goodson. Brooks is still very inexperienced but he has made several starts in the Bundesliga this season, is more mobile than Goodson, is left-footed (don’t underestimate that sometimes), and is probably just as if not more comfortable with a ball at his feet that Goodson. I actually like Besler, Cameron, and Brooks in all these regards as centerbacks given what it looks like he’ll do with the outside backs. That said, I still don’t rate Omar Gonzalez that high. Very athletic and big, but poor on the ball and very prone to mental lapses. Cameron should get the nod.
– The more you look at the midfield, in particular Bradley, Jones, Beckerman, Zusi, Bedoya, etc… you see that there are really not any true wide players here. Zusi, Davis, and Bedoya are more central players who can go wide when necessary but none of them are burners out wide either. This leads me to two possible conclusions, I suspect that not only will we play relatively narrow in the midfield (stay compact in the middle especially and force teams to go wide against us and try and beat us with crosses), but I wouldn’t at all be shocked to see the US play a diamond midfield. Beckerman is superb as a holder in the system for RSL and Bedoya, Zusi, and Davis are almost ideal wide players in a diamond and Klinsmann has shown a fondness for the RSL system and players.
– Julian Green. This is a pick that only makes sense because there are no true wide players on the roster otherwise. At least as I see it, he’s on the roster because he can bring speed out wide and create problems 1v1. There is a reason Klinsmann gave so many looks to Brek Shea over the years and why Landon Donovan was so incredibly dangerous early in his career. I’m not sure if Green is the best choice for this role but I understand that he provides the team with a tactical option that might not be there otherwise.
– Finally, formation. I expect the US to line up in a 4-2-3-1 or a 4-4-2 with a diamond midfield. Your starting backline should likely be Fabian Johnson, Matt Besler, Geoff Cameron, and Timmy Chandler. In front of them, it’ll be either Jones or Beckerman, along with Bradley, Zusi, and Bedoya. Finally, up top, you’ll have Jozy Altidore playing as a target striker and Clint Dempsey playing as the supporting striker underneath him.
One final suggestion I have is to slightly alter the positioning of your center striker. I assume that you’re having him/her play as high as possible which should do one of two things:
1) The sweeper continues to drop because they don’t want to man mark, creating more depth and space for you to play underneath or..
2) The sweeper marks and follows which means you an use the forward to drag them out of position even without the ball.
If the first situation happens, then you can play like everyone has suggested above. Agree with David, the lose your man drill would be an excellent warm up exercise leading up to the game here. However, if the sweeper begins marking the center forward, have the forward play a little off center to one side. If the sweeper continues to follow, then you’ve opened up a game in the middle of the field. If the sweeper doesn’t follow, then you have the opportunity to play into your forward’s feet and play off them quickly since the other three backs aren’t going to mark up on him when he’s behind them.
Again, these are just little suggestions and things I try to look for during matches. At the high school level, and even the college level, you still see a lot of stopper/sweeper systems so you get to try different things.
What I’ve always focused on when facing a stopper/sweeper system is pulling the sweeper out of place. In my experience (Not sure what level you’re seeing), sweepers tend to be fairly athletic players but not supremely technical or great at reading the play. As such, if the ball goes wide they’ll step over very quickly to help deal with the pressure, which leaves a massive hole in the middle of the field where players can make runs into and still be onside.
My suggestion is not to change your formation. Instead of looking for through balls, have the ball played into your wingers’ feet. As soon as they beat the outside back down the line, the sweeper will usually step hard over to that side, leaving the gap I talked about earlier. As soon as the winger beats their man and recognizes the sweeper coming over to them, they need to get their head up and look to play a ball into the space the sweeper just vacated (obviously with someone making a run into it). The danger of playing a sweeper is that if you can pull them to one side and then switch the field quickly, they leave everyone onside.
This is just one suggestion on how you might deal with this.
Guess we should start with the elephant in the room so to speak? Donovan not being on the roster is surprising but I’m not going to cause the same type of uproar over it that you’re seeing in other places… He hasn’t been great for LA so far this season, looks to be a little out of shape to me, and he’s consistently been giving reasons to doubt his desire to push himself at this point in his career. Besides all that, I certainly haven’t been in the US training sessions so I have no idea how he’s looked compared to the other players. He may very well have looked a step or two behind the others…
As for the rest of the roster, I think the back line is the most interesting. We’re bringing several outside backs who can get forward and join the attack and have good speed/athleticism, but who also have somewhat suspect defending. Timmy Chandler, Fabian Johnson, DeMarcus Beasley, and Deandre Yedlin all fit that mold. Coupled with the fact that you’ve likely got a Bradley/Jones midfield as well as Bedoya and Zusi on the wings (neither of whom are true wingers in my opinion), you’re looking at a US team that I’m guessing is going to play relatively narrow and rely on their outside backs to provide a lot of width when playing through the thirds.
Of course, this is just a thought that occurred to me when I glanced at the roster. I’m sure others might see something different.
I think it’s a good idea. Had thought about suggesting something similar myself.
Eventually what you can do is train them both at the same time as part of an exercise.
Something I’ve done in the past is to set the defense up and have them start knocking it around the back as they’re being taught to do. Once they’re warm and comfortable, you start adding attackers looking to try and win the ball through pressuring. However, the ball always restarts with the goalkeeper or the centerbacks. As long as the defense is still able to play out of the pressure well, then you keep adding attackers until you end up with a even set of numbers (of course, the back have an extra man to play through with the keeper). Then you tell the attackers that if they win the ball, they can go to goal while the defense goes to mini goals around midfield that would represent winger or attacking midfielder outlets. This allows the attackers to work on their high pressure as well as countering and also allows your defense to try and maintain possession in a more game like setting and develop decision making ability.
This is just one suggestion which I have found useful for situations like that, especially when I was the only coach at training that day.
Nobody is saying that the focus shouldn’t be the fundamentals, but I have to agree with Andrew in that some have to continue to go further due to their coaching situation. For example, I’m assistant coaching at the University level. Most of my girls have fairly solid fundamentals (Of course we always work on such things through the course of our training sessions) but that means that we also need to move on to more indepth tactical sessions with these kids.
I know this isn’t the main focus of this thread (more on that in a minute), but I thought the quote from your ‘B’ License instructor was interesting regarding pattern play/shadow play. I can see why it stuck out in your head. In a certain way I both agree and disagree with the quote, although obviously I have no idea of the context in which it was said. He’s right about pressure causing those patterns to break down but that doesn’t mean you can just toss your players on a field and automatically expect them to have proper movement under pressure without any preparation beforehand. The purpose of shadow play/pattern play, at least how I use it, is to introduce a team to the cues and movements I want to see on the field in order to give them ideas which reduces the amount of time they have to think about their next move when they are under pressure. As I see it, shadow play/pattern play is the warm up which then provides the base to expect such movements in game like situations where the movements and patterns are now opposed. USSF has always stressed the idea of progressing practices and training from unopposed to opposed and simple to complex. Starting with pattern play, unopposed and in controlled environment, in order to introduce a team to the cues and movements would be very effective as long as they eventually have to complete it with defenders afterwards.
Anyways, as for the licenses, I’ve done the initial part of my ‘D’ and have the evaluation session coming up later in the summer. I’ve already started prepping for the ‘C’ with the head coach at the college I’m lead assistant for and he’s done a good job of mentoring me as I get started with my coaching career. Basically, he’s always told me that the licenses won’t make me a better coach by themselves, only I can do that, but that they might give me different perspectives on how I see the game and also show a commitment to being professional as a coach. I will say that I haven’t found the ‘E’ or the ‘D’ license challenging in terms of expectations out of me but I will say that it has gotten me to think about some of the ways I plan out and run my sessions which is always nice. Of course, like everyone else I’ve heard that there is a large jump from the ‘D’ to the ‘C’.
A little tangent, since I plan on getting my ‘C’ as soon as possible, I would love to hear any advice people have for the course.
