EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
Chrisou101
Post #16
Saturday December 14, 2013 7:32pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 548
h cameron did start centrally against Jamaica right? And a three man backline..... not happening.

USnLFCfan
Savannah GA
Post #17
Saturday December 14, 2013 7:36pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,125
Original post from rainORshine

i know. you do realize that cameron is not going to start centrally, right...?

besler-cameron?

not going to happen


More likely than the 3 man backline. Cameron has played CB a few times, Klinsmann has NEVER ran 3 man backline.

rainORshine
Post #18
Saturday December 14, 2013 7:55pm

Joined Dec 2012
Total Posts: 1,764
Original post from USnLFCfan

More likely than the 3 man backline. Cameron has played CB a few times, Klinsmann has NEVER ran 3 man backline.


as long as you realize that it is about equally likely - next to zero

cameron is not a CB

since 1st WCQ cameron got ZERO starts at CB in meaningful WCQs (before securing qualification)

7 meaningful WCQs since honduras
- gonzo - 7 starts (see a pattern there?)
- besler - 5 starts
- goodson - 2 starts

those are the realistic options

if im choosing a for a 4-man back line:

goodson-gonzo

USnLFCfan
Savannah GA
Post #19
Saturday December 14, 2013 8:09pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,125
No it's not equally likely. 3 man backline 0% chance, Cameron at CB 20%, it's not like any CB has stood out. Something you aren't factoring in is that we had no options at RB which forced Cameron out. "He's versatile, and this is a plus, but I think still that the best position of Geoff Cameron is the center back," Klinsmann said. That was a quote in October.

admsghs27
Post #20
Saturday December 14, 2013 8:13pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 2,744
Whoever on this thread thinks Cameron can play cb theur insane. Be is not even our top 4 cb. If he plays at cb USA get killed in all 3 games. He has been the worsest cb this past yr, always has the lowest grades/ratings. I would rather have orozco at cb than Cameron. He is a dm/rb.

USnLFCfan
Savannah GA
Post #21
Saturday December 14, 2013 8:22pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,125
Original post from admsghs27

Whoever on this thread thinks Cameron can play cb theur insane. Be is not even our top 4 cb. If he plays at cb USA get killed in all 3 games. He has been the worsest cb this past yr, always has the lowest grades/ratings. I would rather have orozco at cb than Cameron. He is a dm/rb.


The insane calling others insane....good stuff. Klinsmann is insane?

rainORshine
Post #22
Saturday December 14, 2013 8:32pm

Joined Dec 2012
Total Posts: 1,764
Original post from USnLFCfan

No it's not equally likely. 3 man backline 0% chance, Cameron at CB 20%, it's not like any CB has stood out. Something you aren't factoring in is that we had no options at RB which forced Cameron out. "He's versatile, and this is a plus, but I think still that the best position of Geoff Cameron is the center back," Klinsmann said. That was a quote in October.


mmm... cameron played 2 of those 7 at RB

also if he was best option at CB... he would play CB.

15% would be being generous

surprise you are not supportive of a 3-man back line - which would actually probably put cameron in an ideal position as a RCB

USnLFCfan
Savannah GA
Post #23
Saturday December 14, 2013 8:36pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,125
Original post from rainORshine

mmm... cameron played 2 of those 7 at RB

also if he was best option at CB... he would play CB.

15% would be being generous

surprise you are not supportive of a 3-man back line - which would actually probably put cameron in an ideal position as a RCB


Didn't say I wasn't. I use it myself a good bit, I just honestly don't see JK doing it.

tjsoccer93
Columbus, OH
Post #24
Sunday December 15, 2013 4:10am

Joined Dec 2013
Total Posts: 31
brooks won't be a starter in brazil because we have omar gonzalez (aka gooch 2.0). he is just like brooks but better.

and a three man backline would be SICK.

FJ Gonzalez Lichaj

that puts our best three defenders on the field and gives us speed, height, and defense. fj is fast and can cover for anyone's mistakes, gonzalez has the height to head out any balls that come into the box, and lichaj can shut down players that give us problems. this will be especially important when we play portugal. lichaj is our only defender that can contain cristiano ronaldo, and contain him he will if he has a good game.

again, this is the best possible line-up:

Johansson Boyd Wondolowski
Adu Kljestan Bradley EJ
FJ Gonzalez Lichaj
Howard

nskarie
Post #25
Sunday December 15, 2013 5:13am

Joined Dec 2012
Total Posts: 42
@TJSoccer93

I can't tell if you're kidding? First off, most teams who play 3 in the back usually play three CBs and two wing backs who get up and down the field. We would get destroyed with Johnson, Gonzalez, and Lichaj as our only defenders.

Adu and Johnson? Maybe in an alternative universe where Adu actually was good and where Johnson provided anything other than numerous, predictable step-overs.

Lastly, up top you want to rely on two guys who have never played in a top league? As much as I like Boyd's potential he is a spark plug off the bench right now. Jozy is a clear #1 forward because of what he provides with hold up play. He's a hassle for defenders in the EPL this year even if the goals haven't started coming. Wondo is even worse. If we're relying on him to start in the WC as a winger we're in a lot of trouble.

My idea starting XI in Brazil would be:

Johansson - Altidore - Donovan
---- Dempsey ----
-- Bradley -- Jones --
FJ - Besler - Gonzalez - Cameron
---- Howard ----

Subs: Guzan, Goodson, Chandler, Boyd, Diskerud, Bedoya, Zusi.

MSantoine
Post #26
Sunday December 15, 2013 8:27am

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,945
Original post from 2tone

Goodson has been inconsistent, Gonzo has been inconsistent, Besler has been inconsistent, and so has Cameron. Hard to tell who will be the starting combo come June. If I was a betting man I would put my money on Gonzo and Besler starting against Ghana.


This is why Brooks should still be in the lineup come Brazil. Its not like we have rock solid alternatives. If Im going with an inconsistent, inexperienced CB (which they all are at the international level). I want the one who has a higher ceiling. If Brooks is on his game he's head and shoulders above the other 3 options. If hes off then we're probably toast anyways. To compete with the big boys we need to give our team the best chance to suceed and that means playing the most talented players and hope the coaching staff/training staff gets them the most ready they can possibly be

Bshredder
Post #27
Sunday December 15, 2013 2:37pm

Joined Aug 2011
Total Posts: 1,459
Original post from MSantoine

This is why Brooks should still be in the lineup come Brazil. Its not like we have rock solid alternatives. If Im going with an inconsistent, inexperienced CB (which they all are at the international level). I want the one who has a higher ceiling. If Brooks is on his game he's head and shoulders above the other 3 options. If hes off then we're probably toast anyways. To compete with the big boys we need to give our team the best chance to suceed and that means playing the most talented players and hope the coaching staff/training staff gets them the most ready they can possibly be


Concerning Brooks, he freely admits to being extremely nervous playing for the US. It's actually a problem & one I'm not sure he'll fix before the World Cup. I'd take Brooks to Brazil based on his huge upside. I'm far from certain he starts.

rainORshine
Post #28
Sunday December 15, 2013 2:41pm

Joined Dec 2012
Total Posts: 1,764
Original post from MSantoine

This is why Brooks should still be in the lineup come Brazil. Its not like we have rock solid alternatives. If Im going with an inconsistent, inexperienced CB (which they all are at the international level). I want the one who has a higher ceiling. If Brooks is on his game he's head and shoulders above the other 3 options. If hes off then we're probably toast anyways. To compete with the big boys we need to give our team the best chance to suceed and that means playing the most talented players and hope the coaching staff/training staff gets them the most ready they can possibly be


msantoine - most of your ideas are spot on.

but you have this bizarre notion that USMNT should award minuted based inversely on a players age - younger players should be given more minutes

if everything is equal, this is a reasonable argument (as is saying a player with more experience should get more minutes)

but playing for your club is a basic rule of thumb that is only FAR more important when you are 20 years old

brooks has played 146 bundesliga minutes over hertha's last 11 games. less than 2 games worth of minutes since the middle of september

he is simply not an option unless/until he is playing far more regularly

navi8132
Post #29
Sunday December 15, 2013 3:29pm

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 1,830
Every once in a while I get the feeling there exists a person who thinks the below is the answer to our world cup:

---Agudelo
Taylor-Adu-Gyau
Adu-Bradley
Klute-Abousmonde-O'Neil-Yedlin



Mojofc
Post #30
Sunday December 15, 2013 3:46pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 665
Original post from navi8132

Every once in a while I get the feeling there exists a person who thinks the below is the answer to our world cup:

--Agudelo
Taylor-Adu-Gyau
Adu-Bradley
Klute-Abousmonde-O'Neil-Yedlin



Adu and Adu? That wouldn't even be fair.. World domination would be the result.
Rain, rain, go away Come again another day - USMNT, MUFC
Page 2 of 3
« Previous 1 2 3  Next »