Assuming we get reasonably healthy, DC United is in pretty good shape in the midfield. Clyde Simms showed well in the D-Mid role, and got himself a fatter contract as a result. On the left flank we have Guererro, who has shown he can flat-out play. In the middle we have Marcelo 'El Muneco' Gallardo, who I reallly hope gets healthy and maintains form. On the right we have the Brazilian Fred, who I have always liked.
Up front I hope we have a healthy Jaime Moreno and a healthy Luciano Emilio. I think with Moreno's age he'll have to be used as a pure striker and not so much as a MF/F. Get him or Emilio the ball in the box and let them take care of the rest.
I neglected to mention in my previous post that there is some defensive help in the offing. Janicki, a pickup from the minor leage Pittsburgh Riverhounds, has been a revelation. He appears to my untrained eye as one who is capable of starting in defense on the MLS level.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Whither DC United?
So, where does DC United go from here?
Like Stanford, DCU needs help in the back. The club has given up on Columbian defender Gonzalo Martinez. When the club was winning last summer I thought Martinez was playing very well. Even before that, when the club was losing, I thought Martinez more often than not was one of the bright spots.
But, like the club, Gonzalo faded down the stretch. The club has also apparently given up on Argentine defender Gonzalo Peralta. Last I heard they were trying to bring him back, but on a lower salary. Read into that what you will. What I read into that is he is either not coming back at all, or he is coming back but as a substitute. The question remains: Who will anchor our backline?
Of course, our bggest need is to get people healthy. Injuries are what did us in last year more than anything.
In a subsequent post I'll comment on the situation in the midfield. After that, we'll assess our prospects up front.
Like Stanford, DCU needs help in the back. The club has given up on Columbian defender Gonzalo Martinez. When the club was winning last summer I thought Martinez was playing very well. Even before that, when the club was losing, I thought Martinez more often than not was one of the bright spots.
But, like the club, Gonzalo faded down the stretch. The club has also apparently given up on Argentine defender Gonzalo Peralta. Last I heard they were trying to bring him back, but on a lower salary. Read into that what you will. What I read into that is he is either not coming back at all, or he is coming back but as a substitute. The question remains: Who will anchor our backline?
Of course, our bggest need is to get people healthy. Injuries are what did us in last year more than anything.
In a subsequent post I'll comment on the situation in the midfield. After that, we'll assess our prospects up front.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Whither Stanford?
Where does the Stanford womens' soccer team go from here?
Well, I'd say they are in pretty good shape. They challenged for the Cup this past season. They have achieved the status of an elite program, and are poised stay in the hunt.
If I am reading their roster correctly, they apparently lose two starting senior defenders in Falk and Abegg. Instead of throwing freshmen in there, maybe they can have a couple experienced D-Mids slide to the backline.
They might also try, as I said previously, to put KO in as central attacking midfielder charged with serving balls to the forwards as well as getting some goals herself. She has good vision and anticipation, she can hold the ball in traffic, and she makes nice, accurate, crisp passes to runners in or entering high-value space.
The problem is, I doubt the Stanford coach will do it. There seems to be a pervading mentality in college soccer that attacking midfield needs to be done by committee. College coaches seem to be loath to have one Carlos Valderrama. That is why, in college soccer, the #10 shirt doesn't really mean anything. It's just another number. College coaches seem more comfortable with multiple Steve Ralstons than one Carlos Valderrama. That is not a slight against a fine player like Steve Ralston. If you have multiple Ralstons, of course you play them. But if you have one Carlos Valderrama you play him, and you play him in position. If you have some Ralstons also, al the better, but they would play in support of your Valderrama.
One big way to improve as a team is to play at their high level but play even faster. The very best teams in the country from the UNC's to the UND's to the UCLAs reaaallly struggled when Stanford would start to swoop and swarm and play very fast with accurate passes with pace on them. The build-up to KO's tying goal against UNC during the regular season is an example of what I am talking about. Movement, movement, movement, both on the ball and off. This is one of Stanford's strengths they can build on by doing it faster.
Defensively, Stanford can pressure the ball better. Of course, its easy to make a "genius" statement like that. It is like saying a company ought "to improve its cash flow". The question is, "How?". Well, in this regard, Stanford can learn from the final four match against UND. UND pressured the ball extremely well, and they did it an a very coordinated fashion. A a result, Stanford felt the heat the entire game, and this was a big barrier to Stanford finding the back of the net. For example, Stanford wide midfielders repeatedly found themselves surrounded by a pressuring midfielder, a high pressuring defender, with strikers often checking back to help out. UND was well organized positionally. Everyone knew what their defensive assignments were, and they carried them out very efficiently.
Well, I'd say they are in pretty good shape. They challenged for the Cup this past season. They have achieved the status of an elite program, and are poised stay in the hunt.
If I am reading their roster correctly, they apparently lose two starting senior defenders in Falk and Abegg. Instead of throwing freshmen in there, maybe they can have a couple experienced D-Mids slide to the backline.
They might also try, as I said previously, to put KO in as central attacking midfielder charged with serving balls to the forwards as well as getting some goals herself. She has good vision and anticipation, she can hold the ball in traffic, and she makes nice, accurate, crisp passes to runners in or entering high-value space.
The problem is, I doubt the Stanford coach will do it. There seems to be a pervading mentality in college soccer that attacking midfield needs to be done by committee. College coaches seem to be loath to have one Carlos Valderrama. That is why, in college soccer, the #10 shirt doesn't really mean anything. It's just another number. College coaches seem more comfortable with multiple Steve Ralstons than one Carlos Valderrama. That is not a slight against a fine player like Steve Ralston. If you have multiple Ralstons, of course you play them. But if you have one Carlos Valderrama you play him, and you play him in position. If you have some Ralstons also, al the better, but they would play in support of your Valderrama.
One big way to improve as a team is to play at their high level but play even faster. The very best teams in the country from the UNC's to the UND's to the UCLAs reaaallly struggled when Stanford would start to swoop and swarm and play very fast with accurate passes with pace on them. The build-up to KO's tying goal against UNC during the regular season is an example of what I am talking about. Movement, movement, movement, both on the ball and off. This is one of Stanford's strengths they can build on by doing it faster.
Defensively, Stanford can pressure the ball better. Of course, its easy to make a "genius" statement like that. It is like saying a company ought "to improve its cash flow". The question is, "How?". Well, in this regard, Stanford can learn from the final four match against UND. UND pressured the ball extremely well, and they did it an a very coordinated fashion. A a result, Stanford felt the heat the entire game, and this was a big barrier to Stanford finding the back of the net. For example, Stanford wide midfielders repeatedly found themselves surrounded by a pressuring midfielder, a high pressuring defender, with strikers often checking back to help out. UND was well organized positionally. Everyone knew what their defensive assignments were, and they carried them out very efficiently.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
NSR...
...not soccer related,
but this kid is excellent. At 7 years old he is already soloing in front of an orchestra, and he already has that trumpet players' swagger.
but this kid is excellent. At 7 years old he is already soloing in front of an orchestra, and he already has that trumpet players' swagger.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Terps Take Two
The Maryland Terrapins mens program wins another College Cup. I say, if Virginia Tech ain't in it, and UVA ain't in it, but if the Terps ARE in it, Go Terps.
The Men's College Cup did not have a lot of attractive soccer, and the NCAA's inexplicable decision to host the thing in Frisco Texas, of all places, meant the matches would be played in front of a few hundred relatives, scouts, MLS coaches and hard-core partisans in a stadium that holds 20,000+.
But none of that means it is easy to win the thing. Congrats, Maryland.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Stanford 0:1 UND
In my pre-game analysis, I said:
"Stanford needs to fly from the get-go, play fast and incisively, maintain possession, and stretch the field. All three strikers need to get the ball in or near the box and run at people. Midfielders, that means they need service and that means you. All SU's attackers need to take a page from Kelley O'Hara's book and take shots on the volley, because at this level you don't always have time to trap, set, and shoot. I say let 'er rip. All of Stanford's strikers and a-mids need to be menacing. They need to run at people, they need to shoot. Pressure the UND backline and I think they will eventually tire and break. Defensively, Stanford needs to mark the UND strikers out of the match, deny their CAM the ball, and keep things wide."
Taking it a thought or so at a time:
Stanford needs to fly from the get-go, play fast and incisively, maintain possession, and stretch the field.
Stanford did come out flying, and UND struggled a bit as a result. But after 12 minutes or so UND began to pressure the ball well, and get some possession of its own. Stanford had trouble playing sharply and incisively in its attacking third. SU stretched the field but could have used even more support from the flanks in the form of overlapping runs.
All three strikers need to get the ball in or near the box and run at people. Midfielders, that means they need service and that means you. All SU's attackers need to take a page from Kelley O'Hara's book and take shots on the volley, because at this level you don't always have time to trap, set, and shoot. I say let 'er rip. All of Stanford's strikers and a-mids need to be menacing. They need to run at people, they need to shoot. Pressure the UND backline and I think they will eventually tire and break.
Kelly O'Hara terrorized their backline all game long and was unlucky not to get on the scoresheet. KO was the only forward who was not intimidated by the UND backline and ran at them with abandon. Levin was largely ineffective. Taylor was tracking way back into midfield for the ball, contributed defensively with several nice check-backs and takeaways, but her offensive runs were stymied. Several midfielders with space approaching the final third elected not to dribble but make passes into the heavily fortified UND bunker. I believe if you have space and the ball, run at people. Make them come out and defend you. You still have the option to pass into the box, and likely there will be fewer defenders there once you do. Things went better as the second half went on, as SU threw numbers forward. Alas, real chances were right at the keeper.
Defensively, Stanford needs to mark the UND strikers out of the match, deny their CAM the ball, and keep things wide.
Stanford was successful defensively. They held UND to one goal, and other than that one forgivable lapse they absolutely shut down the UND offense. The Stanford defense was nothing short of heroic.
All in all, two pretty evenly matched teams, and this particular time Stanford came out on the short end. Alas, in a single-elimination tournament, that means you go home.
"Stanford needs to fly from the get-go, play fast and incisively, maintain possession, and stretch the field. All three strikers need to get the ball in or near the box and run at people. Midfielders, that means they need service and that means you. All SU's attackers need to take a page from Kelley O'Hara's book and take shots on the volley, because at this level you don't always have time to trap, set, and shoot. I say let 'er rip. All of Stanford's strikers and a-mids need to be menacing. They need to run at people, they need to shoot. Pressure the UND backline and I think they will eventually tire and break. Defensively, Stanford needs to mark the UND strikers out of the match, deny their CAM the ball, and keep things wide."
Taking it a thought or so at a time:
Stanford needs to fly from the get-go, play fast and incisively, maintain possession, and stretch the field.
Stanford did come out flying, and UND struggled a bit as a result. But after 12 minutes or so UND began to pressure the ball well, and get some possession of its own. Stanford had trouble playing sharply and incisively in its attacking third. SU stretched the field but could have used even more support from the flanks in the form of overlapping runs.
All three strikers need to get the ball in or near the box and run at people. Midfielders, that means they need service and that means you. All SU's attackers need to take a page from Kelley O'Hara's book and take shots on the volley, because at this level you don't always have time to trap, set, and shoot. I say let 'er rip. All of Stanford's strikers and a-mids need to be menacing. They need to run at people, they need to shoot. Pressure the UND backline and I think they will eventually tire and break.
Kelly O'Hara terrorized their backline all game long and was unlucky not to get on the scoresheet. KO was the only forward who was not intimidated by the UND backline and ran at them with abandon. Levin was largely ineffective. Taylor was tracking way back into midfield for the ball, contributed defensively with several nice check-backs and takeaways, but her offensive runs were stymied. Several midfielders with space approaching the final third elected not to dribble but make passes into the heavily fortified UND bunker. I believe if you have space and the ball, run at people. Make them come out and defend you. You still have the option to pass into the box, and likely there will be fewer defenders there once you do. Things went better as the second half went on, as SU threw numbers forward. Alas, real chances were right at the keeper.
Defensively, Stanford needs to mark the UND strikers out of the match, deny their CAM the ball, and keep things wide.
Stanford was successful defensively. They held UND to one goal, and other than that one forgivable lapse they absolutely shut down the UND offense. The Stanford defense was nothing short of heroic.
All in all, two pretty evenly matched teams, and this particular time Stanford came out on the short end. Alas, in a single-elimination tournament, that means you go home.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Good Football and Good Music
Years have gone by and I've finally learned to accept myself for who I am: a beggar for good football. I go about the world, hand outstretched, and in
the stadiums I plead: "A pretty move [please...]."And when good football
happens, I give thanks for the miracle and I don't [care] which team or
country performs it. Eduardo Galeano
I have to admit I feel that way not only about futbol, but about music. Today I had a hankering to find a video of a great performance of Chopin's Polonaise in A Flat Major. I really tried to find a good combination of flawless technical playing together with tremendous depth of artistry and feeling.
Naturally, I first went to Horowitz:
Ah, that is artistry par excellence. Oh, my, it was soaring, it was sublime, it was just heart-meltingly beautiful. Ah, but I could not help but to note that by the time this video was made, Horowitz was well on in years, and he makes minor technical misses in 8 or 10 places.
So, I pulled up a video of Rubinstein playing the same piece, and again the artistry was powerful, but it was not technically flawless. And so my search continued, looking at some younger players who played more cleanly, but artisitcally they did not really know what they were doing, so once again I felt as if I were missing something.
Maybe I need to look at music a little more like I look at soccer. After all, I have never seen a soccer ball perfectly struck, but I have seen many that were very beautifully and sumptuously struck. I have never seen a perfect dribbling display, but Maradona's famous syncopated slalom through the England defense in World Cup 1986, though perhaps not technically perfect down to the millimeter, was nonetheless, a masterpiece.
At some point you have to let the flaws vanish, and then all you are left with is something dazzling.
I think I'll watch that Horowitz video again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
