The U.S. Men’s National Team’s 2-0 loss to Colombia on Friday night certainly wasn’t the ideal way to begin this summer’s Copa America, particularly the way the squad’s attack underperformed.
The U.S. found a number of half chances on the night, and did hold an edge in possession, but generally speaking, the Americans didn’t do much to seriously threaten Colombia’s defense.
Clint Dempsey was one of the team’s lone bright spots in the final third against Colombia, and he felt that the U.S. was very much in the game, something that his coach also reiterated after the match.
“Conceding on a set piece, that’s frustrating,” Dempsey said. “I thought the penalty call was a little harsh. We can create more chances in the attacking third, but I still thought at times we played well.”
The U.S. was quickly left on the back foot Friday night, allowing the first of two goals just eight minutes into the match. As Dempsey alluded to, the game’s second finish came off of a James Rodriguez spot kick, after the ball struck DeAndre Yedlin in the arm prior to halftime.
While the defensive lapses were troubling because of the game’s result, the U.S. backline was the least of the team’s worries against their South American opponent. The squad’s attack, led by Dempsey, posted just two shots on goal throughout the 90 minutes compared to Colombia’s seven.
Ironically enough, the USMNT’s three most dangerous attempts on the night all came through Dempsey.
Second-half substitute Darlington Nagbe was brought in to provide a spark to the match, but with a little over 20 minutes to work with the Portland Timbers midfielder failed to change the complexion of the game.
“I don’t think it’s a single player or anything like that, but as a whole team keeping the ball a little bit more, more possession, which I feel like we did in the first half against Colombia,” Nagbe said. “It was just unlucky going down two goals early, you’re kind of playing on the back foot, but before that goal I think we were doing a good job.”
To Nagbe’s point, when the U.S. takes on Costa Rica Tuesday night the team will not only have to continue to keep possession but find ways to make the best use of it. Against Colombia, Klinsmann’s side held more of the ball than Colombia, boasting about 54 percent.
Colombia’s second half shape had a lot to do with that statistic, but the U.S.’ next opponent is in need of points as well, so the host nation can surely expect a more open game which will allow the team to find more space to create opportunities in front of net.
“It’s not so much what you say, it’s what you do,” Dempsey said. “You’ve got to go out and motivate the crowd. You have to work hard and we have to inspire them and get them on our side. We appreciate the fan support. It’s always awesome so be in a stadium and have a pro-American crowd. But at the same time actions speak louder than words. We’re going to go out there and show what we can do.”
While Dempsey recognized the importance of Costa Rica’s draw against Paraguay on Saturday, the veteran attacker knows that the U.S. must handle their end of the deal in Chicago.
“It was the best result for us,” Dempsey said, “but still the situation hasn’t changed in terms of this game being a must-win.”
Only changes I would make:
– Nagbe in for Bedoya (who replaces Jones at 60 mins)
– Pulisic in at 60 mins
Other than that, I don’t see what else we can do. Pele, Maradona, etc aren’t sitting on the US Bench
We do have a Fafà in our pool, though. He has that one name potential to be the difference maker the US National team has always wanted.
/s
We have been told endlessly that we Americans need to learn from the big boys. We need to stop playing like the little kids.
OK, let’s learn from Jose Pekerman. His approach to the game was to have his team sit back, play defense, let the US have the ball in its own half, and then when opportunities arose push forward quickly. Hope your few stars had a good day, execute your set plays and guess what? You win! Of course, it helps to have some superior players, but it is not as if Colombia was trying to emulate total soccer.
I doubt that Pekerman cared much about time of possession. If Brooks and Cameron wanted to pass the ball back and forth in their own half, let them.
Happily Costa Rica is not nearly as good as Colombia, but if the US cannot dominate the midfield it could be a long night. Jonathan Wilson is prone to arguing that the team that puts more players in midfield is likely to win. I suspect that he has a point.
Isn’t that what we did v Ghana in WC2014? Scored early and then just bunkered and let them have the ball. I don’t think we were trying to play total football but when your midfielders can’t win aerial balls then it makes no sense for the keeper to blast the ball on every opportunity. Playing out of the back is not the problem. We just had a few weaknesses where they had strength and could not finish.
Isn’t that what we did v Ghana in WC2014? Scored early and then just bunkered and let them have the ball. I don’t think we were trying to play total football but when your midfielders can’t win aerial balls then it makes no sense for the keeper to blast the ball on every opportunity. Playing out of the back is not the problem. We just had a few weaknesses where they had strength and could not finish…
When you use the word “bunker” you are apt to lose me. There’s a big difference between defending only in your half and lining up five or six players on the 18 yard line. And I don’t think that Colombia would have played any more expansively even if they had not scored early.
Pekerman was simply following the standard recipe for many national teams — focus first on defense, install a rudimentary offense, hope your most dangerous attackers have a good day, execute your dead ball plays well.
Bradley had a poor game, therefore the US had a poor game. Its not complicated. Bradley needing to have a good game remains fundamental no matter where he plays. And if you play with a #6 against a better quality offense, you probably won’t look too good if the #6 has a bad game.
You can add Johnson as having a below par game as well.
The hallmarks of Klinsmann’s team since Brazil have been playing flat offensively (outside of a few overly hyped friendlies) and playing scared.
That’s absolutely on Klinsmann. He needs to find an effective way to motivate his squad. They looked exceptionally toothless and listless against Colombia.
Klinsmann should work out his own nueroses in therapy, and not take it out in his squad.
Getting early goals made a huge difference for Colombia and the game. They bunkered in and really clogged up the play in their final third. Even so we came close 3 different times. I think the biggest US problem was the US passing wasn’t quick enough. You shouldn’t discolunt the value of the opposition either.
What? No snappy, retro epithets today?
Equivocate all you want, but you’re still just fabricating excuses for what was overall a piss-poor performance not only against Colombia, but stretching over the last two years as well.
Klinsmann is making 3.5 million to figure this stuff out. If he’s still cashing paychecks, then there ain’t nothing wrong with leveling deserved criticism against him.
He has become Gulatti’s Folly, so chances are, Gulatti won’t do the rational thing and let him go before the next WC.
Amazing how we somehow we finally get an important match (upcoming vs Tico’s) where we’re not influenced by yet another Mexican (or Venezuelan) officiating unit. Thanks for not inducing politics for a change Fifa..
We need Fabian in the attack, if that means playing Besler/Castillo, even Bedoya at left back so be it. Put Wood in the middle. After that performance you could bench both Jones and Bradley for Nagbe and Beckerman . I don’t think they could do any worse anyway.
Did you watch the Mexico/Uruguay game? So much dirty play, so much play acting.Completely unbearable to watch. I think I am OK with losing as long as we don’t turn the game into that BS.
But you still watched it? I don’t understand.
It was actually a pretty food game. The best so far.
I watched the 20 minutes of actual play, and skipped the 75 mins of rolling around on the ground.
You should’ve watched the other75 minutes. There was no rolling around in the ground at all. Only great football by two great teams. Too bad you missed it.
I thought it was the best of the tournament so far. Classic case of a team putting pressure on the other team but any loose ball was gonna go to the other team. Last 2 goals was from broken plays.
The work rate by Uruguay after going down to 10 was incredible. That match was a scrap and showed how intense S.American teams can bring it.
That’s real American Football. If you want tiddlywinks there are controlled Euro leagues where they mostly play nicer with each other but outside of the US and Canada they play for keeps on this continent. I can’t see how a real fan of the game can’t admire the INTENSITY of that match. I just wish Suarez was playing.
You read me wrong, brother, it’s not the rough play or intensity, it’s the play acting. I enjoy watching the US more because there is less of it, minus Dempsey. Same complaint that everyone has, I know, and I don’t have the solution, but the Mexico game seemed especially bad.
What have SBI posters mostly been calling for? (1)Don’t bunker down, play a more attacking formation. (2)Have Bradley play in the #6 position. Well, so Klinsmann puts them in a 4-3-3 with Bradley in the #6 and now they are “questionable tactical decisions.”
The grass is always greener on the other side of the touchline.
Exactly. Since when is playing Bradley as a holding midfielder a “questionable tactical decisions by head coach Jurgen Klinsmann”???
It’s hardly Klinsmann’s fault that Bradley stunk it up. (Nor does it seem to be Klinsmann’s fault that Bradley decided to take the $$$ from TFC, leading to his incredible decline in play.)
Gary, you forgot pushing for starting a less skilled or experienced player as a savior at a particular position!
Questionable tactical decisions by head coach Jurgen Klinsmann highlighted the USMNT’s struggles on the night
We know the echo-chamber of SBI posters that are anti-anything Klinsmann does aren’t the most insightful but I thought this statement by SBI staff might be one of the more ignorant statements I’ve seen in recent memory.
I’d love to hear “Matt’s” reasoning for it because it comes off as simply trolling or tone-deaf to reality. He literally played the players and tactics people were calling for. The revisionist history syndrome is laughable and all too common on here.
I thought it was a good formation, the problem was players didn’t play to their potential, specially Bradley. Dempsey played his usual game, strolling around most of the game and then knowing where the ball was going to be. The ball to him over the top has to end, Dempsey is not going to beat anyone or their mother in a race. I thought he was going to come out since we needed to press to get the ball but instead Wood came out, can’t score if you don’t have the ball.
I really hope they are practicing how to punch the other team in the mouth. That’s our only hope.