Which positions are most in demand

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The hardest to find is GK. This does not make them more valuable than MF or OB, just harder to find. The reason is that good field players are flexible and it is easier to transition a strong holding MF to play defense. F is a hard to find skill but attacking midfielders and wingers can sometimes transition to F. Almost nobody else on the team can play GK effectively besides the GK. It’s just the most specialized skill set which makes it harder to find. This increases as teams get older.

If you look at the USMNT, there are two positions that we traditionally struggle to fill: left back and no.10 playmaker. Goalkeeper is normally a strength.

I disagree. The men’s team has not been able to effectively replace Tim Howard at GK, he has left a big hole. At the same time, they have the next modern 10 in Pulisic who is considered their top prospect and is breaking records in the Bundesliga.

On the USWNT, Julie Ertz transitioned from back to the 10 last year rather well, good enough to win Soccer Player of the Year that same year. Crystal Dunn transitioned from MF to to Left OB successfully as well. The team has still not found a GK the caliber of Solo since her departure in 2015.

US Soccer probably didn't do a good job of grooming replacements. That doesn't mean they aren't replaceable, but they were there for so long, they became iconic. I do think it is a tougher spot to fill than midfielder or winger, but if anything stands out from many of the less dominant countries in the world cup, it is often the strength of their goalies. The US is no exception.

However, you make a good point at how easily we can come up with midfielders.

It’s not like US Soccer decided they would have competition at every position except GK. Not year after year. FIFA rules require you to roster 3 GKs for every match so there were options but the backups were never close. The issue was that their skill sets were so rare that nobody else played as well as them - for a decade. US Soccer still cannot replace them and they have had years to do so without them. And of course no other player on the team can transition to GK unlike the other positions, that is not even a consideration. Those two have not been replaceable, not until the next great ones come along. Great GKs are the hardest position to find, and you can’t create one overnight.

Need a left outside back? Crystal Dunn proves you can create one.

Name the last great left back that played for the USMNT. For goalkeepers, there were plenty pretty decent goalkeepers: Keller, Howard, Friedel, Meola, etc.

DeMarcus Beasley, Fabian Johnson, Greg Garza were/are decent left backs. When did anyone hear that a team did not advance because the left back was no good?

"Anybody can play left back." - Jurgen Klinsmann

Oh right, and he was such a fantastic coach, he really turned the whole US soccer program around. Said no one.

Anybody can play left back, just like in Ratatouille, anybody can cook. The question is: should anyone? I have seen some terrible left backs that directly cost their teams goals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The hardest to find is GK. This does not make them more valuable than MF or OB, just harder to find. The reason is that good field players are flexible and it is easier to transition a strong holding MF to play defense. F is a hard to find skill but attacking midfielders and wingers can sometimes transition to F. Almost nobody else on the team can play GK effectively besides the GK. It’s just the most specialized skill set which makes it harder to find. This increases as teams get older.

If you look at the USMNT, there are two positions that we traditionally struggle to fill: left back and no.10 playmaker. Goalkeeper is normally a strength.

I disagree. The men’s team has not been able to effectively replace Tim Howard at GK, he has left a big hole. At the same time, they have the next modern 10 in Pulisic who is considered their top prospect and is breaking records in the Bundesliga.

On the USWNT, Julie Ertz transitioned from back to the 10 last year rather well, good enough to win Soccer Player of the Year that same year. Crystal Dunn transitioned from MF to to Left OB successfully as well. The team has still not found a GK the caliber of Solo since her departure in 2015.

US Soccer probably didn't do a good job of grooming replacements. That doesn't mean they aren't replaceable, but they were there for so long, they became iconic. I do think it is a tougher spot to fill than midfielder or winger, but if anything stands out from many of the less dominant countries in the world cup, it is often the strength of their goalies. The US is no exception.

However, you make a good point at how easily we can come up with midfielders.

It’s not like US Soccer decided they would have competition at every position except GK. Not year after year. FIFA rules require you to roster 3 GKs for every match so there were options but the backups were never close. The issue was that their skill sets were so rare that nobody else played as well as them - for a decade. US Soccer still cannot replace them and they have had years to do so without them. And of course no other player on the team can transition to GK unlike the other positions, that is not even a consideration. Those two have not been replaceable, not until the next great ones come along. Great GKs are the hardest position to find, and you can’t create one overnight.

Need a left outside back? Crystal Dunn proves you can create one.

Name the last great left back that played for the USMNT. For goalkeepers, there were plenty pretty decent goalkeepers: Keller, Howard, Friedel, Meola, etc.

DeMarcus Beasley, Fabian Johnson, Greg Garza were/are decent left backs. When did anyone hear that a team did not advance because the left back was no good?

"Anybody can play left back." - Jurgen Klinsmann

Oh right, and he was such a fantastic coach, he really turned the whole US soccer program around. Said no one.

Anybody can play left back, just like in Ratatouille, anybody can cook. The question is: should anyone? I have seen some terrible left backs that directly cost their teams goals.

Agree. The outside backs are very important. So where does that leave us?

[Anonymous]

We need a full team of 11 players, all of whom know how to play their positions. They should all have speed, technical skill, tactical knowledge and work ethic. That's the goal.

When you don't have that, you can hide your weaker players in midfield. If you put them in the back, it's hard for a team to keep motivated when they are behind by several goals.

Not that this is all things, but I know a player who was always an attacker: midfield, winger, somewhere on the attack. She's skillful too. Their team though was getting hammered from the left. He tried several players. Finally, the coach moved her to left back, and she went from a decent player to an exceptional one and was snatched up by Florida State for her work there.

Her moving to left back raised the level of competitiveness of her entire team.

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:Defense, defense, defense, defense and defense.

Simple reason: In this area, any half-decent player thinks playing defense is beneath him/her. So if you find someone who actually embraces it, you've struck gold.

I agree. My son has been at tryouts where 2 kids were trying out as defenders out of 40-50 kids. Do you think mls should focus more on developing defenders? Focus their scouting and play ups on defenders? Chris durkin is a good example. I think he is a great defender and I don’t understand why we can’t develop more players at that level every year.

[Anonymous]

You are too caught up on the USMNT. There are many other teams with many great left backs including the USWNT. Same at the youth level. A team takes 11 players and backs are typical less in demand than other positions because moving midfielders to the back is common. Very common to move holding mids to CB and shift over CBs to outside. Or a mid to left back. Crystal Dunn again is a great recent example of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:Defense, defense, defense, defense and defense.

Simple reason: In this area, any half-decent player thinks playing defense is beneath him/her. So if you find someone who actually embraces it, you've struck gold.

I agree. My son has been at tryouts where 2 kids were trying out as defenders out of 40-50 kids. Do you think mls should focus more on developing defenders? Focus their scouting and play ups on defenders? Chris durkin is a good example. I think he is a great defender and I don’t understand why we can’t develop more players at that level every year.

Maybe this is a gender thing. I see no shortage on the girls side of players at any level that want to play defense and are good at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need a full team of 11 players, all of whom know how to play their positions. They should all have speed, technical skill, tactical knowledge and work ethic. That's the goal.

When you don't have that, you can hide your weaker players in midfield. If you put them in the back, it's hard for a team to keep motivated when they are behind by several goals.

Not that this is all things, but I know a player who was always an attacker: midfield, winger, somewhere on the attack. She's skillful too. Their team though was getting hammered from the left. He tried several players. Finally, the coach moved her to left back, and she went from a decent player to an exceptional one and was snatched up by Florida State for her work there.

Her moving to left back raised the level of competitiveness of her entire team.

Our coaches, possession out of the back club, are very choosy and hold the wingbacks and center D as some of the most coveted positions. They do hide weaker players as wings/forwards.

[Anonymous]

^ but this is still the development years where they want highly intelligent defenders and midfielders to build and control. The smartest kids are there. Down the road they can easily add in forwards to finish. But, it’s getting the tactical down first and you need smart players to guide the team in doing that.

Kick and run clubs tend to value all chasers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need a full team of 11 players, all of whom know how to play their positions. They should all have speed, technical skill, tactical knowledge and work ethic. That's the goal.

When you don't have that, you can hide your weaker players in midfield. If you put them in the back, it's hard for a team to keep motivated when they are behind by several goals.

Not that this is all things, but I know a player who was always an attacker: midfield, winger, somewhere on the attack. She's skillful too. Their team though was getting hammered from the left. He tried several players. Finally, the coach moved her to left back, and she went from a decent player to an exceptional one and was snatched up by Florida State for her work there.

Her moving to left back raised the level of competitiveness of her entire team.

Our coaches, possession out of the back club, are very choosy and hold the wingbacks and center D as some of the most coveted positions. They do hide weaker players as wings/forwards.

I also hide my weaker players at wings/forward. Putting them in defense or midfield is not smart. It destroys the build up and causes turnovers in bad areas of the field. On the other hand, advanced attacking positions are more forgiving to mistakes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need a full team of 11 players, all of whom know how to play their positions. They should all have speed, technical skill, tactical knowledge and work ethic. That's the goal.

When you don't have that, you can hide your weaker players in midfield. If you put them in the back, it's hard for a team to keep motivated when they are behind by several goals.

Not that this is all things, but I know a player who was always an attacker: midfield, winger, somewhere on the attack. She's skillful too. Their team though was getting hammered from the left. He tried several players. Finally, the coach moved her to left back, and she went from a decent player to an exceptional one and was snatched up by Florida State for her work there.

Her moving to left back raised the level of competitiveness of her entire team.

Our coaches, possession out of the back club, are very choosy and hold the wingbacks and center D as some of the most coveted positions. They do hide weaker players as wings/forwards.

I also hide my weaker players at wings/forward. Putting them in defense or midfield is not smart. It destroys the build up and causes turnovers in bad areas of the field. On the other hand, advanced attacking positions are more forgiving to mistakes.

No way would I put my weaker players at midfield. This is were you put your best(technical skills, field vision, etc) player. These players control the game. You want the ball at their feet as much as possible. Forwards and defenders can go a large portion of the game without touching the ball. Of those two positions, you will put the weaker player at forward and hope your mildfielders will be creative enough to give them easy scoring opportunities.

[Anonymous]

I've never seen any club hide its weaker players as wings or forwards at any level of travel or for any gender. A lot of clubs now have outside backs and wings control the outside lines of the field and make the build up from there. The midfielders are literally just in the middle because the entire border of the field is handled by others. And if your wingers and forwards aren't good ball handlers, forget any tactical offense.

[Anonymous]

To be clear, it's not kickball. The outside backs dribble up to the wingers. And the wingers also track back to the back. When I say they are covering it, I mean they are covering it.

I know that's a shift from old school strategies, but it's becoming fairly common practice.

[Anonymous]

To add on, the territories and roles of outside backs and wingers are expanding. They used to have a much more limited role with heavier midfield emphasis as a result. Now that's changing. Teams want a fast outside back who can be part of the attack and track back to defend as well. I've even seen it at the pro level.

[Anonymous]

And thus Midfielders such as Dunn are increasingly finding themselves as outside backs to support the attack and transitions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be clear, it's not kickball. The outside backs dribble up to the wingers. And the wingers also track back to the back. When I say they are covering it, I mean they are covering it.

I know that's a shift from old school strategies, but it's becoming fairly common practice.

Yep. The Wingbacks can come all the way up the flank and act like a true wing/forward. Old school outside left/right backs never used to do this. There are lots of over-lapping runs. Guardiola uses this tactic. He likes his defenders to really be part of the attack.