Here it is, people. The winner of the first MFUSA contest. Jason Kuenle has tackled the tactical concerns of the USMNT, and makes a strong case for why the dreaded long ball isn't going anywhere.
Thanks to all that submitted for the contest, and if you didn't get in under the wire this time around, I'm sure there will be more opportunities in the future.
Jason's thoughts after the jump.
By Jason Kuenle
Brian Ching. No US player elicits a stronger response from US soccer fans than Brian Ching. He stands for so much of what is “wrong” with the national team and MLS. He lacks flare, he plays best receiving long balls, he doesn’t score, his assets are physical not technical.
Meanwhile, a World Cup starting XI with ten foreign stationed players is a real possibility; the technical ability of the US player pool has never been higher; young players including Adu, Altidore, Bradley, and Torres look poised to take the US to the next level; and the US continues to rely on the long ball. It is a frustrating situation for many fans
But, the US will continue to use the long ball. When high pressure is put on our backs, they panic and pump balls long. No amount of playing time in Europe or coaching is going to cure that by 2010. Currently, the player pool in the back is not deep. There are not four backs that have the defensive ability to defend against a top team and the technical ability to effectively dribble or pass around a team of the same caliber. Therefore, for the foreseeable future US backs are going to serve up long balls. Because of this, Bradley has consistently made the decision to place a target striker up top. There is no reason to think he will change that tactic.
…Nor should he. Few countries in the world can match the United States in terms of athleticism. The strength and speed of the US player pool rivals any in the world. The physical advantages inherent in the US player pool should be exploited, with strength being used up the middle and speed on the sides. Emerging players such as Marshall, Cooper, Wynne, and Rogers show the diversity that these physical assets bring. One place that physicality can be exploited is in the target striker position. To abandon an area where the US has an international advantage in order to play “pretty” soccer is to leave points on the field unnecessarily.
For soccer powers, their natural styles of soccer have evolved over generations of players, learning what works and what does not for their talent pool. The Brazilian, English, Italian, and German styles have remained unchanged for so long because the talent pools in these countries have remained virtually unchanged. Players come and go, but the combined physical and technical abilities of the player pool remains about the same. However, the US talent pool is evolving. The lineup employed in the last third of the El Salvador game and the entire Trinidad game may show the beginning of an evolution in style to match the change in the talent pool. This style merges the long ball style and the quick ground passing game in a hybrid style that allows an attack to be built from the middle with technique, but allows for the ball over the top from the back.
By selecting backs based primarily on defensive rather than technical ability, a true defensive midfielder is not necessary. This allows the US to play two of the younger creative midfielders to work the ball up to wingers with a nose for goal and a striker whose sole job is to score. If the eventual replacement for Ching is a target striker that can also put home his share of goals, the US becomes a very dangerous squad capable of playing both long and short, with five or six players on the pitch capable of scoring in the run of play.
I believe that Bradley is on the right track to finding a US soccer style that fits what the US team will be in 2010 and well beyond; one that will continue to use the long ball, but do so as part of a more comprehensive attack.
