• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Wondo Lets Down an Entire Nation

CHillDeac said:
Wondo didn't let down an entire nation. Our anemic offense did. USA ranked 31st out of the 32 teams in attack opportunities. Klinsmann knew the only way for us to beat Belgium was to attack more and we saw very little of that yesterday. Against Belgium we only took 5 shots on goal compared to their 17. Thanks god Howard had a massive game or the final score wouldn't have been as close as it was.
Click to expand...

No Jozy, no USMNT attack.
 
RedSoxFaithful said:
The guy who mailed it in for the entire group stage and pushed himself all the way out of his team's starting XI for the knockout game, only coming in when the game improbably went to extra time?

Look, Lukaku is a hell of a player, and probably would have been the most talented kid on our roster, but let's not pretend that he's had a great WC.
Click to expand...

Lukaku's strengths do not match up with how Wilmots likes his teams to play. Wilmots has made no secret of how much he wishes Benteke was healthy because his hold up play and ability to get the wingers involved in dangerous positions is not currently a strength of Lukaku. Lukaku isn't that good of a passer or a "back to goal" striker. He likes to play on the back shoulder of his marker and make runs through. Beast of a player, just not a great fit with this Belgium side, IMO.
 
No suitable replacement for Jozy = no USMNT attack
 
iodeac said:
No suitable replacement for Jozy = no USMNT attack
Click to expand...

Yep, if I hear another "this is good he's out because he's fat, slow, and lazy" comment I may murder someone. He's almost as important to this team as Bradley. Almost.
 
AttilatheHoo said:
midfield couldn't hold on to the ball. Belgium definitely outplayed em.
Click to expand...

Midfielders...

Belgium:
Witsel - 46/51 passes (90%)
Fellaini - 36/48 passes (78%)
De Bruyne - 50/62 passes (81%)
TOTAL: 132/161 passes (82%)

USA:
Jones - 26/39 passes (67%)
Cameron - 66/81 passes (81%)
Bradley - 80/91 passes (91%)
TOTAL: 172/211 passes (82%)


IMO, we lost the match because Belgium had more creative players than we did and could do more with the ball at their feet. We actually out-possessed Belgium yesterday and we out-passed them as a whole (84% on 570 passes v 82% on 468 passes). But on those passes, Belgium had a lot more that were a lot more incisive, defense-splitting passes than the US could muster. Hell, De Bruyne himself just slaughtered us up creating 10 chances -- previous high for the WC was Messi with 8 earlier yesterday vs Switzerland. Setting up 10 teammates for shots over the course of a match is nearly unheard of, even over 120 minutes.
 
CHillDeac said:
Wondo didn't let down an entire nation. Our anemic offense did. USA ranked 31st out of the 32 teams in attack opportunities. Klinsmann knew the only way for us to beat Belgium was to attack more and we saw very little of that yesterday. Against Belgium we only took 5 shots on goal compared to their 17. Thanks god Howard had a massive game or the final score wouldn't have been as close as it was.
Click to expand...

If it had been six shots on goal we would have won.
 
iodeac said:
No suitable replacement for Jozy = no USMNT attack
Click to expand...

One nation, one team, one striker.

That's got to change.

dv7, I was in a Facebook conversation last night with a guy who said this:

"When you look at the average age of the USA team right now, you can see what kind of stylistic influence they were taught with. The game has changed. With LMs like Hazard, Ronaldo, Ribery. CAMs like Ozil, Messi... the game is not pass and cross. It's dribble, pass, shoot. If you saw how Yedlin controlled the upper left of the pitch, that's the new style of play. In contrast to the old style, look at how Beasley played. One was creative, the other organized."

Thoughts?
 
Agreed with that for the most part. Inverted wingers (left-footed wingers on the right, that then cut inside to shoot and vice versa) seem to be here to stay.


But the game is definitely more technical now than it was just 10/15 years ago -- dribbling more important than trying to win with a long pass.

But it all goes in waves and you can see hints of big, physical football being the next "in" thing based on how the club season went last year. The short, intricate passing, or "titi-taka", has been destroyed by this rebirth of big, physical football that just presses the living hell out of the opposition. But in a few years time, the game will morph again and something new will be the way to move forward.

As I said, it goes in waves. I also expect the 3 in the back to be the new formation of choice for many teams since it has been successful at the WC.
 
So will the young US players be prepared to play this new style going forward?

Also how are we looking for 2016 Olympics qualifying rosters?
 
Surprised at those passing numbers from Cameron. He seemed invisible yesterday.
 
I wonder if those passing numbers levelled out towards the end of regulation and extra time. At the beginning it definitely seemed like we couldn't possess the ball and kept turning it over. I still have the game DVRed, so one day after a fifth of Evan Williams I might rewatch it.
 
PhDeac said:
So will the young US players be prepared to play this new style going forward?

Also how are we looking for 2016 Olympics qualifying rosters?
Click to expand...

I like what they are trying to do in development in youth soccer right now with the academies, but I don't think it will help much in time for 2018. And we still have the "problem" of kids going to play at colleges when that isn't in their best interests from a strictly footballing sense.
 
deacvision7 said:
I like what they are trying to do in development in youth soccer right now with the academies, but I don't think it will help much in time for 2018. And we still have the "problem" of kids going to play at colleges when that isn't in their best interests from a strictly footballing sense.
Click to expand...

How do other countries handle education for their young players?

Or are there just so many levels of soccer than most anybody who makes it to a top academy as a kid will end up making money playing somewhere?
 
AttilatheHoo said:
and whether the passing was occurring in our defensive third or elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Belgium's pass chart regulation:

258qecz.jpg



United States's pass chart regulation:

262b6l4.jpg







Belgium passing ET:

2w3cnco.jpg



USA passing ET:

6pyjc6.jpg
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
How do other countries handle education for their young players?

Or are there just so many levels of soccer than most anybody who makes it to a top academy as a kid will end up making money playing somewhere?
Click to expand...

Club academies do schooling for their players through age 17 and they basically get a HS education as well as a footballing one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top