Top Stories

Who should start vs. the Czech Republic?

USMNTCamp (HowardCSmithISI)

Photo by Howard C. Smith/ISIphotos.com

 

The most important non-World Cup match of the year for the U.S. national team will take place on Tuesday, when the United States faces the Czech Republic in a friendly in East Hartford, Connecticut. That match will be the last one U.S. coach Bob Bradley will have to evaluate his 30-man provisional World Cup roster and make the necessary cuts to the squad.

The match is also important because it will give some American players coming off injuries a chance to see their first national team action in some time.

With that in mind, it's time to start thinking about the squad Bradley will trot out against the Czechs. Will he start veterans, or will he start the fringe players fighting for their World Cup lives?

Here is one group we could see on Tuesday:

POTENTIAL USA Lineup vs. Czech Republic

STARTING LINEUP

————-Johnson———Buddle—————

Donovan———————————–Beasley

————-Bradley——–Feilhaber————-

Pearce—–Bocanegra—-Onyewu——-Spector

———————–Howard———————–

SECOND HALF (subs in bold, limit is six subs.)

—————Findley———Gomez——————

Bedoya—————————————–Kljestan

—————–Bradley——-Torres——————-

Bornstein—–Bocanegra—Onyewu———-Spector

———————–Howard—————————-

So why this starting lineup and these substitions? Here are some thoughts:

I do want to clarify that the subs listed above are subs you could see in the second half, not necessarily halftime subs.

With Bradley needing to look at his forward options aside from Altidore, it would seem to make sense to sit Altidore for this one and to play the other forwards in camp. The sense I get is that Ching is a good bet to make the team, so he might be the forward who doesn't play along with Altidore.

I thought about the idea of Michael Bradley sitting, but if we can assume both Maurice Edu and Ricardo Clark are strong bets for the 23, then it would make sense to give Benny Feilhaber and Jose Torres their chances to show what they can do playing alongside Bradley.

Sacha Kljestan and Alejandro Bedoya get looks in the second half, though Bob Bradley could decide to give Stuart Holden some minutes. I think Holden's a safe bet for the 23 so his chance to play should come in the Turkey and Australia matches. Robbie Rogers is also in the mix, though as of right now, I'd project him to be one of the players least likely to make the 23.

As expected, Oguchi Onyewu gets the start (and goes 90 here). He needs to get game action under his belt so look for him to get the whole match, with Carlos Bocanegra as his partner. With Chad Marshall looking like the odd man out among central defenders, Jay DeMerit and Clarence Goodson can expect minutes in the other friendlies.

Heath Pearce is also on the fringes and will either get the start, or the second half to convince Bradley to bring eight rather than seven defenders to the World Cup. Bornstein is a safe bet for the roster, as much as some fans don't want him to be.

Tim Howard has been treating a quad strain so he could be rested in favor of Marcus Hahnemann or Brad Guzan, but he insisted it wasn't that serious. If he can't go, it will be very interesting to see who gets the nod. Guzan hasn't played recently so Bradley could give him the 90 minutes. It might sound like it makes more sense to give Guzan and Hahnemann each a half, but with the three goalkeepers for South Africa already decided, and so many other roster battles going on, Bob Bradley will be more likely to use his six subs elsewhere.

So who won't be playing on Tuesday in this scenario? Clint Dempsey, Jozy Altidore, Brian Ching, Stuart Holden, Maurice Edu, Ricardo Clark, Steve Cherundolo, Jay DeMerit, Clarence Goodson, Marcus Hahnemann and Brad Guzan get rest for this match. Chad Marshall and Robbie Rogers miss out.

———

What do you think of this proposed starting lineup? Who would be in your starting lineup?

Share your thoughts below.

Comments

  1. Steven Goff’s blog says:

    “The very early — and very unconfirmed, unofficial — buzz is that several regulars will remain in street clothes. The names I hear are Jozy Altidore, Landon Donovan, Clint Dempsey, Michael Bradley and Carlos Bocanegra. Other veterans will be in reserve.”

    I’d post the link but Ives has said before they are generally deleted.

    Reply
  2. It is hyperbole. How does that excuse your saying it? The point is that you are the only person I’ve ever heard say that, so you’ve got some gall to be using quotation marks when you’re not quoting anybody. No Ching defender has ever said that, so stop making stuff up in order to try to bash Ching defenders.

    Reply
  3. First, why copy my username? Second, it matters because it would signal a willingness to forgo wider play and focus on two players cutting in. And I’d say position matters when you have players like Dempsey stating their preferred spots. And Donovan dominating on the right. It seems to me that Holden starting is more likely, with the only real reason you’d go with Beasley is if you wanted Donovan to play on the right side.

    I’d rather have width personally, but for a friendly I can see why they’d do it this way.

    And if you were able to grasp any meaning at all, I wasn’t being critical of the proposed lineup, I was just asking if that’s actually what it was supposed to be and not a typo.

    Don’t come at me with the idea that you know more. If I wanted mindless condescension I’d go to BigSoccer.

    Reply
  4. They have indeed been playing scrimmages, though not quite full field. Looks like they’ve been playing with 3 teams of 10 each and rotating with one team sitting out. I suspect that you’re right and that there aren’t quite as many choices to be made as we think.

    Reply
  5. Yeah… except he is one of the top four, for reasons that are very tangible. He takes a lot of pressure off of whoever is playing alongside him. He’s a good passer. And how many times does he have to draw fouls in dangerous positions before people admit that he’s actually doing something useful? He’s good for two dangerous free kick attempts per game.

    And don’t toss up straw men. No one here has ever said that Ching is world class.

    Reply
  6. Altidore cannot play as a lone striker. Every time this has been attempted, whether with club or country, it has rendered him completely ineffective.

    Reply
  7. I’d rather see one of the other forwards play with Jozy for a half than seeing Findley at all. To me, he’s the longest of the forward longshots and hasn’t shown anything in his time with the Nats to merit inclusion. I can’t believe I’m saying this, but EJ would clearly be a better choice.

    I wish Clark were not a lock. I like him, and I trust him to get the job done when he’s out there, but I think Edu, Feilhaber, and Torres are all better, and if I had to drop one of the four, it’d be Clark.

    Rogers and Kljestan both have to be on the outside looking in.

    Marshall as the odd CB out is a good call. The other four are better.

    I’m fine with Bornstein over Pearce. I do not think Pearce should be on the squad. Bornstein is an exceedingly good dude and Pearce is a huge jerk. If Pearce were a much better player than Bornstein that wouldn’t be an issue, but he’s not, so I think the fact that Pearce could be such a cancer for team chemistry is significant.

    I personally would rather pass on playing either Donovan (lock of locks) or Kljestan (almost a sure cut) in this game and give Bedoya and Beasley each a half on each wing.

    Unless this game drastically changes things, my picks would be:

    Altidore, Ching, Johnson, Gomez
    Donovan, Beasley, Bedoya, Bradley, Edu, Feilhaber, Torres, Dempsey
    Bornstein, Bocanegra, Onyewu, DeMerit, Goodson, Spector, Cherundolo
    Howard, Hahnemann, Guzan

    Cut: Kljestan, Rogers, Buddle, Findley, Pearce, Marshall, Clark

    I could be convinced to leave off Johnson or Gomez for Clark.

    Reply
  8. Rogers is a better candidate for LB. If he wants a better future for the USMNT he should ask the Crew to move him there.

    Reply
  9. “The point is, we’re not good enough of a nation to be able to sacrifice better talent for intangibles.”

    “Once, i don’t care if he makes the roster, it’s just the mind set of naming a player of his caliber a lock that just disturbs me and can trouble our national team. Why, because its the same cases that people bring up to justify Bornstein or Kljestan, or beckerman, when ever they’re in consideration. “Oh they bring intensity, and they know the national team culture, Bornstein’s a dependable mainstay” I’ll i wish is for everyone to stop, and let the proof be in the pudding, let the skill and gameplay do the talking, and if one players offers more than another, there no if and buts about it.”

    _____________

    Joe,

    First,I’ve never heard anyone on the UMNST staff say “So and so is a lock to start”. Those statements come from the media and the fans. So if they bother you, ignore them. It’s clear to me that Bradley plays the players he feels suit his purpose best for the particular game.

    Second, bear in mind that the only games that have counted during Bradley’s time have been the World Cup qualifiers. Those were the only “money” games. Every other game was a prep exhibition game designed to give Bradley an idea for who could give the US the best shot at doing well in the World Cup. The World Cup is the only tournament that matters to the US. So I would look at the qualifiers for the guys who produced UNDER PRESSURE as having an edge. After that I would look at the guys who played well in the Confederations Cup.

    Third, the US talent pool is limited and if, for example, Buddle is “more talented” than Ching it’s not like Buddle is at Drogba’s level. In terms of talent, all the forward candidates are about on the same level. But they are all just a bit different.

    For Bradley the choice boils down to (A)health and conditioning (B) Who best fits tactically.

    The US has two above average international level outfield players, Donovan and Dempsey.

    After that it’s a matter of the team playing well together as a unit. So I really don’t care who the remaining 21 players are. They all about at the same level and will sort themselves out.

    I do confess to one bias, I hope Gomez makes it because he offers the one thing no one else has done for the US for a long time. He’s the only legitimate late sub, goal scorer, an instant offense guy, that the US has seen in some time. And Bradley needs that option.

    Reply
  10. Does it really matter?

    If you have ever played you would realize that the game is fluid and dynamic and that

    just because you start the game labeled as a “left midfielder” you actually can windup on the right wing on occasion. Particularly if you are Donovan and Dempsey who switch wings almost unconciously all the time.

    Reply
  11. Ives I like your line-up but I will definitely rest Howard. Give the others a chance. I will definitely try out one half Bornstein and other half Pearce and then make my decision who to take. Same goes with Goodson vrs Marshall. Finally obviously the forwards. Give them all a chance so rest Altidore. It will be a good game.

    Reply
  12. Updating, in light of the fact that Spector and DeMerit are still recovering: they’re both locks to go, so the starting backline will be
    Bornstein-Bocanegra-Onyewu-Pearce
    (with Pearce getting a “last chance”), and it will likely be
    Bocanegra-Marshall-Goodson-Pearce (with a few minutes for Cherundolo for Pearce) in the second half.
    It’s also likely he has decided to cut both Kljestan and Bedoya, but will give Marshall another chance (unlike Arena, Bradley might prefer to take 8 defenders, with a red card or injury always threatening to happen with our inconsistent back line).

    Reply
  13. Right. And keep in mind that this is not just to find the 7 to cut, but also to get the first team working together well as a unit. So don’t expect to see *any* fringe players to get a start. Most likely, Bradley will have 20 names sent to the travel agent, decided 4 names to drop, and have six players competing for the last three spots (likely one pair of defenders, one pair of mid-fielders, and one pair of forwards).

    Starters, who will play 45:
    Howard
    Bocanegra-DeMerit-Onyewu-Spector
    Edu-Clark-Bradley
    Donovan-Altidore-Dempsey

    to start; the second-half subs will primarily be players who get a last chance (i.e. 5 or 6 of the players that will be competing for 3 spots); I am guessing:
    Goodson on defense
    Bedoya v. Kljestan in midfield;
    Gomez v. Buddle at forward.

    Will be cut, and won’t see any time on Tuesday:
    Marshall, Pearce on defense;
    Rogers in MF;
    Findley at forward.

    Unlikely to see any time on Tuesday and safe for the WC roster:
    Guzan, Hahnemann
    Bornstein, Cherundolo in defense,
    Feilhaber, Torres, Holden, Beasley in midfield,
    Ching and Johnson up front.

    Reply
  14. I saw a training session Thursday, neither DeMerit or Spector participated in anything that might have involved contact. DeMerit did quite a bit of running, Spector mostly sat. I expect neither will be risked on Tuesday. Onweyu looked like he was hurting at the end, limping during the runs. I expect he will see at most a half, again to give him more time to heal. Not sure who will join Boca in the middle when Onweyu leaves, maybe Edu or Bornstein.
    Mids, I thought other than the obvious 3, Edu and Clark looked strong while both Torres and Feilhaber looked solid, and Holden was a threat. Beasley, Sasha and Bedoya are a conundrum, each had stong moments and each had times he struggled.
    At Forward, I thought Gomez and Buddle looked the best.
    If the game is to see who works best together: We know that Donavon, Dempsey, Altidore, Bradley, Bocanegra and Onweyu will start. With DeMerit and Spector injured, that means that Pearce and Bornstein will share some time at LB, and Cherundolo will be RB Bornstein could slide in for Onweyu when he leaves and Pearce comes in.
    At midfiled, with 3 starters pretty much fixed, that leaves only one place to play with, expect Edu to get some time along with Clark. Later Torres, Feilhaber or Holden will get a look.
    Up top, Altidore and Buddle/Gomez with a late sub for Altidore
    Of course, I saw only 1 session and it might not be representative of how the week has gone as a whole.
    From what I saw, I think the toughest decisions will be in the midfield where after the first 5 there was not a lot of difference.
    Surprisingly for the forwards, things looked simpler Altidore, Buddle and Gomez were pretty much the class of the day, Findley looked weakest, Johnson or Ching are different players, which would work better?

    Reply
  15. Obviously there are difficult decisions to make and the US doesn’t have a lot to choose from. But, answer this, in a game that might be 1-0 either way off a set piece or corner, who do you want marking the other team’s central defenders? (Often a forward’s responsibility).

    Reply
  16. copy, paste mistake ^ I just wanted to say that. these friendlies will be our proof. until then, every forward candidate is virtually unjustified, and undeserving really of a spot in the 23, except for Jozy.

    Reply
  17. You know what Isaac, you bring up good points, not many on our roster are world class. I simply was saying these things for hyperbole. The point is, we’re not good enough of a nation to be able to sacrifice better talent for intangibles. You see what I’m saying? You that on teams where there’s enough talent surrounding the player. Right now we are in a sort of desperate situation with our strikers. Now’s the time to think about how Ching’s a “reliable veteran”, and “holds up play” or whatever ambiguous terms I here people bring up time to time when discussing this player, whom i have nothing against. Because you must think of a high pressure game like the one against Mexico in Azteca. How did all those qualities help. From my prospective, they didn’t. I didn’t notice Ching was on the field until he got substituted. Furthermore, in the World cup, every game is high pressured, highly intense, with the highest skill available needed. So with that in mind, i don’t understand why Ching would be a “sure bet” to make the squad. If he made the squad would i raise hell? No. But to say that he’s a good bet, from what I’ve seen, compared to what’s needed to succeed against international competition such as England (and I know England isn’t every game)Ching is in know sense of the word, a guarantee. I understand beggers can’t be choosers, but come on. Also, as far as mixing together. You mentioned mixing together in a short amount of time, all the strike candidates have a chance to do that, and i never said it’s unimportant. But to constantly bring it up, as a compliment and justification for why Ching should be on the roster is a little delusional to me. Once, i don’t care if he makes the roster, it’s just the mind set of naming a player of his caliber a lock that just disturbs me and can trouble our national team. Why, because its the same cases that people bring up to justify Bornstein or Kljestan, or beckerman, when ever they’re in consideration. “Oh they bring intensity, and they know the national team culture, Bornstein’s a dependable mainstay” I’ll i wish is for everyone to stop, and let the proof be in the pudding, let the skill and gameplay do the talking, and if one players offers more than another, there no if and buts about it. I want this to happen, because i am a U.S.A. fan I want to see the best of the U.S. represent us well. Other than that, Ching is alright with me.

    Reply
  18. Lol this is so funny, because i brought this up on this same message board. “Target forward”, right. That makes me feel better.

    Reply
  19. You know what Isaac, you bring up good points, not many on our roster are world class. I simply was saying these things for hyperbole. The point is, we’re not good enough of a nation to be able to sacrifice better talent for intangibles. You see what I’m saying? You that on teams where there’s enough talent surrounding the player. Right now we are in a sort of desperate situation with our strikers. Now’s the time to think about how Ching’s a “reliable veteran”, and “holds up play” or whatever ambiguous terms I here people bring up time to time when discussing this player, whom i have nothing against. Because you must think of a high pressure game like the one against Mexico in Azteca. How did all those qualities help. From my prospective, they didn’t. I didn’t notice Ching was on the field until he got substituted. Furthermore, in the World cup, every game is high pressured, highly intense, with the highest skill available needed. So with that in mind, i don’t understand why Ching would be a “sure bet” to make the squad. If he made the squad would i raise hell? No. But to say that he’s a good bet, from what I’ve seen, compared to what’s needed to succeed against international competition such as England (and I know England isn’t every game)Ching is in know sense of the word, a guarantee. I understand beggers can’t be choosers, but come on. Also, as far as mixing together. You mentioned mixing together in a short amount of time, all the strike candidates have a chance to do that, and i never said it’s unimportant. But to constantly bring it up, as a compliment and justification for why Ching should be on the roster is a little delusional to me. Once, i don’t care if he makes the roster, it’s just the mind set of naming a player of his caliber a lock that just disturbs me and can trouble our national team. Why, because its the same cases that people bring up to justify Bornstein or Kljestan, or beckerman, when ever they’re in consideration. “Oh they bring intensity, and they know the national team culture, Bornstein’s a dependable mainstay” I’ll i wish is for everyone to stop, and let the proof be in the pudding, let the skill and gameplay do the talking, and if one players offers more than another, there no if and buts about it. I want this to happen, because i am a U.S.A. fan I want to see the best of the U.S. represent us well. Other than that, Ching is alright with me.

    Reply
  20. Totally agree. We know what the players give us. Do we really need to give them 45 minute auditions? Let’s play the fellas who are likely to play next month.

    Reply
  21. almost posted that stuff. we’ve never tried it, but think of Stuart in there in the middle…I like it. the kid has got game. he did it well for the Dynamo

    Reply
  22. I think this could work, but I don’t think Clark should start as the defensive mid. I think you have Bradley and Edu start as the two defensive mids, make sure Bradley focuses on D and doesn’t play as a box to box. Clark, Edu and Bradley in the mid is too defensive. Have Clark come in for Bradley or Edu, whichever has a yellow card or is not playing as well.

    Additionally, I think you have a more offensive minded player Torres/Felli/Holden as one of the mids, so that the O has an attacking style. This could be a good mix.

    Reply
  23. I think this could work, especially versus England. However, I would want Bradley to play a holding midm not roaming box to box. I think Feli is very capable, but Holden might be a little better in this role, he will track back some on D, but more importantly I think he could be play closer to Jozy and give him some help so he is not all alone, not a forward, but in between mid and forwaRD.

    Reply

Leave a Comment