The U.S. Men’s National Team struggled mightily in their Copa America opening loss against Colombia, but it was one of the squad’s younger defensive options that had himself a solid evening.
U.S. centerback John Brooks put in a good shift in the team’s 2-0 defeat to open Group A play, making several vital challenges in the defensive third. Brooks’ stout effort defensively earned the 23-year-old SBI USMNT Man of the Match honors.
The Hertha Berlin defender broke up several key attacks throughout the match, while also slowing down the Colombia offense by drawing multiple fouls in the U.S. end. Brooks looked comfortable next to centerback partner Geoff Cameron and remained steady throughout the night on a night where few USMNT players could say the same.
Brooks’ performance earned him honors as SBI USMNT Man of the Match over Darlington Nagbe, Clint Dempsey and Cameron.
What did you think of Brooks’ performance? Which player stood out to you against Colombia?
Share your thoughts below.
The score ended up being 2 – 0 but lets not forget:
1. The goals where not well put together goals (one, a defender lost Cameron off a set piece that could have been stopped by Guzan and two, they were given a penalty that could have gone either way)
2. They did not out play or dominate us as a team (regardless of the QUALITY on their team).
3. Our backline held up and stood their ground against Carlos Bacca, James RodrÃguez and Juan Cuadrado .
4. We put together a series of passes and moved the ball around well.
5. Also let us not forget WE JUST STOOD TOE TO TOE WITH A STACKED COLUMBIA ranked 3rd in the World (we got beaten by Jamaica and Panama not too long ago)!!!! In this game we just didn’t sit back, bunker down and get run over like the Belgium game in the WORLD CUP. We at least tried to hit back, with purpose and conviction (Surprisingly….they are starting to believe!!!!)
We lost and are very disappointed(especially at certain players) and its understandable, but the mare fact that our team played in a way that gave us hope that we could win or could get some goals, especially against a team like Columbia, means we are pointed in the right direction, and at least our team is doing something positive.
Very well said and wonderful perspective!
I agree with most of it Bizzy (can’t believe I’m saying that), I think you are being slow motion harsh on Guzan, that was a near perfect strike exactly in between Guzan and FJ at the post, would have been an amazing stop.
I have no problem giving it to JB, he looked sharp defensively and had a good edge to him all night. I was not as low on Cameron as others, his passing was certainly off, but I thought he covered well and make some nice emergency stops. With a little more time together these two should work well until Miazga is ready to step in.
I’m actually glad to see this. Thought JAB was rock solid last night, and nobody seemed to be mentioning it.
I thought for whatever reason, Colombia pretty much let Brooks have the ball when the US was in possession. He was seldom challenged, except when he was defending, and was given all day on the ball when the US had possession; despite that, he did very little positive with all those touches.
It was as if Colombia thought, we have a lead, their CB has the ball and no idea what to do with it, let’s let him keep the ball back there and wind down the clock.
Brooks looked a class above tonight, but the rest of the team save Dempsey was poor. Bradley in particular had a unusually bad game — and in his preferred position no less — , and I thought JK made a mistake taking a lively Jones off instead of Bradley (and why take off Wood, who has scored late goals in the past, when Zardes wasn’t unlocking the defense?). The US was not the better team last night, but they did look like they belonged there despite their many unforced errors. They need to play better if they want the next 6 points.
Interestingly at Soccer America they gave Brooks a very low rating saying: “Delivered a couple of crunching tackles that could have been cautions. Very slow and hesitant at critical moments, tried to use muscle on quicker, savvier players at inopportune times. Gave the referee stick on multiple occasions.”
Never having heard of that website, and visiting it for the first time I was appalled by it’s visual presentation and that they gave Dempsey the second highest rating of any player.
There’s nothing interesting about that website or their ratings.
Contrary to many comments Ive seen, I didnt think Cameron played horrible. The goal was one bad play, which at this level one play can win or lose a game. But besides for the mis-marked corner and some poor desperation balls late in the game, I think he had an overall good showing. He made some last minute tackles and interceptions that could have easily lead to more goals. Players did make runs in behind both Cameron and Brooks that looked like they were caught either not high enough up or flat footed, but almost every single one of those were off a give away in the midfield (many by our holding midfielder and captain) which had our backline out position and struggling to cover.
I think Brooks was one of our better players and I dont see why he doesn’t deserve the MOTM for the US, but i dont think he had to play at a high level to earn the title when most of our team was being out classes by a well disciplined, but not spectacular Columbia team
I agree on Cameron. If Bradley doesn’t have the sloppy turnover then the second goal doesn’t happen and who knows.
I also disagree that we struggled mightily. Colombia only had two good opportunities in the run of play. They were better but not that much better.
I think we struggled, but not because Columbia was so much better, but because our individual players played poorly. Columbia didnt look good either, giving up possession about as many times as we did in the midfield, and they had a gaping hole between the midfield and defense that we didnt exploit enough. It was a pretty even game, but thats not saying much because neither team looked to be playing up to their full potential. I dont think the team as a whole was terrible, but i think we could have been way better if key players would have played up to their potential and the connection between our midfield and forwards was more effective.
I would have like to see the game had we not giving up that early first goal. Colombia laid-back after that and played counter attack. I would have liked to see if we could play with them, but we didn’t get the opportunity to find out due to the early Goal. Hopefully we will take it to Costa Rica. Are they as good as they were with the last coach in the World Cup? I don’t think so. Or maybe I should say I hope they are not
The early goal certainly changed Colombia’s tactics a bit, but they play that counter attack strategy quite a bit anyway giving up possession in hopes of spring their big three.
In my mind, Cameron’s failure to mark on the first goal was the death knoll early on. He seems to make one glaring mistake every big game he plays at CB. this time it deflated the whole team. I still think he is the best we have at CB besides Brooks, so i dont know what to do. You just can’t relax mentally, especially while defending a corner.
“the death knoll”
Now you’re going to bring in the Kennedy assassination? Was the game that bad? 😉
There’s yet another thing people can blame Klinsmann for.
I believe the term is actually “death knell” referring to the bells at a funeral.
After seeing the replays, Cameron is the easy one to blame but Bradley made a defensive error by sticking to his mark instead of following the runner. His bear hug was the reason Cameron could not follow his mark.
I thought the play of Michael Bradley and Geoff Cameron was just woeful tonight. Additionally, I don’t see the value in starting Zardes out wide against quality opponents like Colombia.
For Bradley, his passing was very poor by any central midfielder’s standards. Even routine pass outs seemed labored, slow, and not crisp. His service was poor, his set pieces (save one) were below average, and while he put in a good shift defensively (as he always does) and covered a lot of space (as always), it’s difficult to look at his game now vs his standard when at Chievo or Roma and think that he hasn’t regressed. To be honest, I think JK’s defining decision in this tournament will be whether he sits Jones and goes with Bradley as a sole destroyer in a midfield trio of Nagbe and Bedoya or not, as Bradley and Jones together was utilitarian at best 4 years ago. Now, with older legs and dropping standard for them both, I think the choice needs to be made to go with one of the other, and for me (despite what I see to be a clear regression) Michael is that DCM you want to start.
With Cameron, this was one of his worst games in a while. While I don’t think his game has regressed, his marking was generally poor, his decisions on the ball were poor, he played too many longballs to nowhere (bypassing open mids and channels wide for a Stoke City special [aka long ball to a long forward between to CBs]), and was careless in the defensive third of the pitch. I like Cameron a lot and he is a talented player, but Brooks was head and shoulders above him tonight in terms of play.
Zardes? Touch of stone on the far right of a 4-3-3 is never a good thing. The guy works really hard, but against teams in this kind of tourney, that’s not nearly enough. He doesn’t see the game develop fast enough, and his best contributions seem to be when tracking back to cover or when a ball is played to open space, where in which he uses speed to get to it first in hopes of winning a corner or attacking throw. I like the kid and he really does work hard, but tap ins against poor opponents are good poaching instincts to employ if playing a central attacking forward role when those scrappy CONCACAF games come up. But for a tourney of this standard? I think we’d be far better off starting Pulisic.
+1
I thought Cameron did just as well. Both Yedlin and F Johnson were a bit disappointing as they did little going up the flanks.
I thought that was Cameron’s worst game in recent memory.
Yeah Gary, respectfully, Cameron was very poor with countless long balls to nowhere, careless turnovers in the back 3rd, and poor marking at times. He’s usually very solid, but this was a poor showing.
i blame Klinsi for completely ignoring the sides.
Both Cameron and Brooks were solid defending but playing the ball out of the back was critical for possession. The US had more of the ball and frequently both CB were the ones bringing the ball past midfield. The attack stalled in the midfield with ineffective disjointed passing and could not create attacking third link ups. Johnson and Yedlin could rarely get forward on over laps because most the time the US had already turned the ball over in the attacking third. With counter responsibilities Yedlin and Johnson were busy but the attack was lacking out wide.
What confuses me is the left and right sides personal lacked consistent link up possibilities? Starting from back on the right Cameron can hold the ball and pass. Yedlin is okay but not all that accurate passing and best on stretching the field with overlapping runs. Bedoya, is pretty well rounded with the ball and defending but not that great. Zardes, is work in progress but not a possession player. The right side with this personal really needs to focus on stretching the field and look to counter or expect long angular switches from the left side.
The left side is were the US should be able to build the attack with possession. Brooks is good with the ball and can run. Johnson, might be the best US player with all his various talents and IQ combined, Jones, does not fit on the left with his hasty decisions and spontaneity of sprayed turnovers. Jones routinely plays the low percentage long pass over a quick short ball into space? Wood, is a good target guy even on the left. He can link up on give and goes in tight spaces and great speed into space. Pulisic and Nagbe would make Bradley’s life easier and make the right side relevant.
We all know who this award should have gone to… But Jergun don’t wanna give Kyle his chance.
I honestly thought JK leading up to the game saying how he would need a beckerman at 6 to stop players like James was a decoy to get them to think they’d play counter ball; then he had them try to just go right at them
Kyle wouldn’t have made any difference tonight. At least we don’t have to go down that rabbit hole second guessing
My thought also; he fooled me. He adopted the formation that almost everyone here was calling for, but the usual suspects will still complain.
Bedoya was the best US player tonight
“Brooks’ performance earned him honors as SBI USMNT Man of the Match over Darlington Nagbe, Clint Dempsey and Cameron.”
I mean, I like Nagbe a lot and think he did alright and think he should start. But if he was one of your contenders for man of the match tonight for the US, it just shows that it was sliiiim pickens….
Sure. Brooks did well. Can’t think of anyone else to give it to.
Dempsey was clearly our best player. He’s the only player we have with any skill.
I vote for Roberto Garcia. He really put in a solid shift for Colombia…