Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can’t guarantee anything because you’re an anonymous poster on a soccer mom board

I'm pretty sure dads are the ones dominating the board. We all know the types: they show up in soccer pants and live vicariously through their special little chuckleheads.

,
Actually, the board says "dc urban moms and dads" so it is totally fine for dads to post.

Anonymous wrote:You can’t guarantee anything because you’re an anonymous poster on a soccer mom board

I'm pretty sure dads are the ones dominating the board. We all know the types: they show up in soccer pants and live vicariously through their special little chuckleheads.

Anonymous wrote:You can’t guarantee anything because you’re an anonymous poster on a soccer mom board

Sure, that's almost every single poster on this board, except RSD and the admin. We could say that to almost any poster on any thread about anything on this forum.

You can’t guarantee anything because you’re an anonymous poster on a soccer mom board

Anonymous wrote:Croatia and France had two of the best, if not the best, midfields in the competition, which was a big factor in their making it to the final.
French fontline was nothing as good, having a big Giroud-shaped hole in his middle. It seems the French team tried to hide his weak player there.

We can go back and forth until the end of time, and indeed professional commentators do. I don't think either time hid any player anywhere. They played the best they had for each psoition. Croatia had the gaps they had, which enabled France to exploit them and win. i'll cry BS to anyone who says the gap was in tthe midfield. If midfield was the key, they should have won. The key is not to have a gap. Other teams with outstanding midfields but weaknesses in the front or back also didn't advance. Just changing the goalkeeper would have changed everything for Croatia, so if we were going to argue based on the WC, then goalkeepr is the position to build from.

I guarantee you a strong midfield with a defensive gap isn't advancing anywhere. I also guarantee you a team that can't score won't either.

Croatia and France had two of the best, if not the best, midfields in the competition, which was a big factor in their making it to the final.
French fontline was nothing as good, having a big Giroud-shaped hole in his middle. It seems the French team tried to hide his weak player there.

The teams with a stronger 11 advanced. And what positions in the end made the difference between France and Croatia? Goalkeeper was probably the linchpin, but France's forward attacking line was also decidedly better, even though Croatia had the better midfield.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A team would use the wings in the absence of a strong midfielder. The problem is American Soccer is built on size, speed and athleticism and that is not a style that respects or utilizes the value of quality mids. And if in your experience teams are hiding their weakest player at mid and bypassing a central position almost entirely we will never be competitive on the world stage again.

You are entitled to your opinion. I don't see how we can be competitive on the world stage if our world stage teams have players that need hiding, regardless of where you put them. If you hide them as forward, you won't be competitive either because you will never be able to control the final third.

Any time a player isn't quite at the right level, it will be a gapp when that player is out there. Youth soccer gives time to players in an effort to develop them. These situations aren't what should hbe happening at the world stage level.

I watch the World Cup. The teams with the strongest midfield play advanced. It like having a great quarterback. A great quarterback makes everyone better.

Anonymous wrote:
A team would use the wings in the absence of a strong midfielder. The problem is American Soccer is built on size, speed and athleticism and that is not a style that respects or utilizes the value of quality mids. And if in your experience teams are hiding their weakest player at mid and bypassing a central position almost entirely we will never be competitive on the world stage again.

You are entitled to your opinion. I don't see how we can be competitive on the world stage if our world stage teams have players that need hiding, regardless of where you put them. If you hide them as forward, you won't be competitive either because you will never be able to control the final third.

Any time a player isn't quite at the right level, it will be a gapp when that player is out there. Youth soccer gives time to players in an effort to develop them. These situations aren't what should hbe happening at the world stage level.

Anonymous wrote:Goalkeepers are always in high demand. It is one of the few positions that require height (CB the other) which immediately limits the pool of players. Then it is hard to find players with the desire and skill to play at a high level. A great GK willl make an average team excellent and has a huge impact on the ability to win games. Name a great international team and you will almost always find a great GK on that team.

They also have to be fearless to the point of bring crazy! Lots of injuries for these guys and gals too.

Anonymous wrote:I think you haven't been following the thread. Read back over it. Midfield is not necessarily the place of the most potential touches with the way wingbacks and wingers have increased territory they cover and midfielders have less now. This has been explained in a few posts.

Sorry it seems to remain confusing for you. It does require a shift from the old way of thinking about midfield, wingbacks, and so forth.

A team would use the wings in the absence of a strong midfielder. The problem is American Soccer is built on size, speed and athleticism and that is not a style that respects or utilizes the value of quality mids. And if in your experience teams are hiding their weakest player at mid and bypassing a central position almost entirely we will never be competitive on the world stage again.

I think you haven't been following the thread. Read back over it. Midfield is not necessarily the place of the most potential touches with the way wingbacks and wingers have increased territory they cover and midfielders have less now. This has been explained in a few posts.

Sorry it seems to remain confusing for you. It does require a shift from the old way of thinking about midfield, wingbacks, and so forth.