Follow me on Twitter! @AReynolds70

This post announces a new series that will be posted on this website. Rather than one-off analysis pieces on a more popular team, these “chapters” as they shall be referred to from now on, will feature multiple games from a wide variety of competitions, levels, and age groups. In addition, some personal anecdotes may be added from time to time (including today). For those asking, “Hey, isn’t this really similar to what TR does at Spielverlagerung”? Yeah, it’s quite similar. But as the old saying goes, “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”.

An Homage to the Company and Federations That Began My Coaching/Analysis Journey

For those unaware of my life’s story, to put it simply, I would have no idea that I wanted to be involved in the profession of football if it wasn’t for a crazy series of events. In summary, Nike arranged for my club at the time to be affiliated with Celtic, and shortly after, a trip was planned right before my 16th birthday. On that trip during a tour of Lennoxtown, it clicked into my head that I wanted to coach because I was mesmerized by the setup.

Sometime after, I made my first foray into coaching, fortunate enough to help out with the club I played for, a member of the Development Academy run by the US Soccer Federation. Around the same time I began this website and with that my analysis component too, with Brazil under Dunga being my first “real” analysis piece.

The way I have decided to open this series is through a match that ties all three of them together. A couple weeks back, the United States U-17 National Team defeated Brazil’s U-17 team 3-0 to clinch their victory in the Nike Friendlies, hosted in Lakewood Ranch, Florida in conjunction with the annual Development Academy Showcase. The Nike Friendlies are held every year to showcase young American talent in comparison to traditionally strong footballing nations; however, it is unknown to me whether or not each visiting team brought their best group of for this tournament.

Brazil’s Interesting System & Execution Flaws

Brazil aligned themselves in a 5-4-1, with each line of defense positioning themselves in a straight line from a horizontal standpoint. Their line of confrontation was roughly 5-10 yards above the center circle, while the rest of the team was set up in a medium block. This block was targeted by the US as they hoped to play in behind, and some early long balls did stretch out the distance between the midfield and defense, but most of Brazil’s wounds were self-inflicted.

In attack, the most central of the three center backs Vitor Eduardo would step up to play as a conventional number 6 in attack. Combined with the full backs pushing themselves further up the touchline and wide forwards moving a bit inside, Brazil’s 5-4-1 underwent a metamorphosis into a 4-3-3.

Brazil found it easy to go forward due to some serious compactness issues from the host nation, and when they did so their attack was restricted to wider areas thanks to the fullbacks in attack and the disconnected positioning of the hybrid 6 that was Vitor Eduardo. This led to Brazil playing a bit more direct that what is often found from the samba loving nation, as Rodrigo Nestor featured mainly as a target man who linked up with wide players Vinicius Jr and Paulo Henrique rather than face goal with his movements.

However, the personnel in the team I don’t think quite matched the vision of the manager. The technical abilities of the three center backs were shaky at best, meaning they couldn’t really progress forward in the manner that they hoped since they couldn’t play the passes with the required accuracy. There was an instance where Stockl couldn’t even have been bothered to open his body to receive the ball, leading to a poor first touch and they were fortunate to not concede following Sargent’s pressure and subsequent opportunity. Even if Brazil could comfortably set up shop in the American defensive half, they failed to capitalize due to their reliance on the wide areas.

After going 2-0, substitutions were made and Brazil shifted to a conventional 4-3-3. This did little to alter the pattern of the game, as Brazil’s chance creation methods were clumsy long shot attempts and speculative crosses. The up-and-down nature of the game favored the Americans greatly and Brazil didn’t adapt to that circumstance, instead playing into the hands of the host team.

American Attack

The United States played a conventional 4-3-3 on both sides of the ball, as has been taught throughout the country in the federation’s efforts to develop a homogenous “American” style of play. The federation is hoping to reach a style that emulates the more attractive clubs and national teams in the world, essentially an attacking minded style that is heavily oriented through the midfield with technically sound players from the goalkeeper onwards. However, classic American characteristics could be seen throughout this national team (that’s not a complement), despite the US midfield having a solid tactical dynamic.

Even if the Baby Nats won the competition, that does not mean that they are exempt from critical analysis. The main trends in the attack didn’t quite serve up to the type of style of play that has been sought after from the federation, but instead was more of the same that has been seen stateside for years now, showing little sign of advancement.

Starting from the back first, while the US started their attacks through passing with their center backs, to call their build-up effective would be a bit of a stretch. The center backs were timid in their pass selection, as they elected not to take on some risk by passing through the center through their midfielders. Even if they were excellent positions, the wings were favored instead either through playing the ball up the line for the winger to chase, a long diagonal across the field towards the far-side full back or winger, or playing the closest full back to just get the ball of their feet.

There was little true penetration from the back, and this trait extended to some of the midfielders as well. Andrew Carleton, who will be discussed again shortly, was fantastic his movement all night long but was passed to sparingly in such positions, with his teammates preferring a more direct style where they played flighted balls in behind Brazil’s back five towards the forwards.

This wing-orientation in attack was greatly reflected in the full backs contribution in the middle and final third. Both Lindsey and Gloster partnered with their wingers well along the touchline, which often led to crossing attempts from one of the wide players into the box or a cutback attempt. None of these opportunities yielded anything of note though.

An encouraging behavior that led to a lot of success for the Americans was Gloster’s higher positioning as Carleton drifted inside to the 10 space. This not only created a diamond in the midfield for the US with an option in between Brazil’s defensive lines, but it also did not compromise their presence on the wing, giving them a numerical and positional superiority in the center zones. An example of this trait can be found in the graphic to the right .

The front three of Akinola, Sargent, and Carleton interchanged regularly throughout the evening, but they each spent the most amount of time on their respective sides as seen in the starting graphics above. Akinola and Sargent each possess a good deal of pace, which meant they were the primary targets of the long passes sent from their teammates. These passes were somewhat “textbook long ball” at times, as both the runs and the passes were completely vertical, which does little to imbalance opponents and just stretches out the game for both yourself and your opponent. If not aerial, some impressively weighted through balls were played from Acosta and Carleton.

When Akinola and Sargent did make more angular runs, they were often targeted towards the right half space, most likely due to a preference of shooting on their dominant foot across goal. All three of the goals the US scored on the evening (from the two of them plus substitute Timothy Weah, the son of Ballon d’Or winner George), came from such means. This shows the locomotive advantage up front that this ground of US players has at the U-17 age group, but I don’t think that this reliance on speed is a sustainable model of player development or will lead to any silverware for this team in the U17 World Cup next year.

Standout Players

Andrew Carleton was the most impressive player by some distance in my opinion. Carleton displayed very intelligent movement throughout the night and timed his runs excellently in the final third. He was unfortunate not to score from any of his chances on the evening, but the space he managed to create for himself in the crowded penalty area was admirable and showed an understanding for the game beyond his years. He found himself between Brazil’s lines over and over again and was the most dangerous creative source for the US, while also possessing some tricks to fool defenders. The diminutive attacking midfielder seems almost like an outlier in this squad considering his profile, but his talent is undeniable and is definitely a player to keep tabs on in the coming years as new MLS side Atlanta United snatched him up for their inaugural season.

Chris Durkin also impressed me in his role as the number 6 in terms of his defensive positioning and anticipation, which led to numerous interceptions on the night for him. Due to his performance, Brazil struggled to seriously generate any attacks through the middle. He is a technically sound player at that role and DC United have a solid product of their academy there, however his game could be greatly improved if he could play forward passes into his midfielders more so they can advance, rather than play long passes into the forwards and risk losing possession and the momentum of the attack.

For Brazil, Vinicius Junior was the most dangerous attacking threat, as his acceleration off the dribble and explosive movement posed problems for the US throughout the night before Brazil deflated after the US doubled their lead in minute 50.

From America to América (By Way of Japan)

Now we move to Japan, the hosts of the most recent playing of the Club World Cup, technically the highest honor there is at the club level. Club América is our next team of focus. The North American representative in the tournament hoped to cap off their centennial year with an unforgettable victory. Club América faced off against Real Madrid in the semifinals of the tournament, and even though they came up short losing 2-0, interesting defensive tactics were used by Ricardo La Volpe’s team. After they conceded on the stroke of halftime, América couldn’t muster anything in response.

América lined up in a 5-3-2 against Real Madrid, as has been custom under La Volpe’s tenure. The Mexican side posed an interesting tactical problem for the Spanish side, as they had to find a way to supply their star men with the crowded back line.

Early on, the metronomic Kroos and Modric struggled to find their foothold in the match and bring in their teammates. This was due to the forwards involvement in defense and their screening, which blocked access to these players. Plus with the intensity of the three, Real Madrid found it difficult to play through and around the midfielders, as any entry passes were quickly pressured and possession was generally recovered. In response, Modric would move into wider zones, near where Carvajal would occupy, just so he could get a sniff of the ball.

Within the midfield 3, either Ibarra or Sambueza would push higher and join the forwards in their formation to create a situational 5-2-3 whenever Varane or Ramos had possession in the halfspace. If a player was left open as a result of this maneuver, one of the members of the back 5 was encouraged to pick up and mark that man depending on who was closest in the zone. So, América had clear man-orientations within the back 5 given the zone, while the midfield were less governed by that principle.

These structures left space open on the wings for Real Madrid to attack, and they used them as much as they could. Marcelo and Carvajal had a great deal of space for them to advance in front of them when they got the ball. Their passes into Vasquez and Ronaldo led to the most successful opportunities of the half before América began to tire, highlighted by Ronaldo hitting the post following a header from a cross.

This led to La Volpe encouraging the wing backs to be more man oriented for the remainder of the first half, creating a structure resembling a lopsided 4-4-2. This did succeed in limiting the full backs involvement in the attack. However, due to the forwards no longer participating as much in defense due to the fatigue derived from América’s counter attacks, Kroos and Modric began to find more space for themselves inside, allowing for Madrid to push higher up the field. Madrid found the lead through Benzema due to Kroos and Modric’s increased influence along with an imbalance which formed in the last line of America because of the earlier mentioned man-orientations.

Madrid began to progress the ball faster and faster throughout the evening, adjusting nicely by beginning to push their fullbacks higher and letting their skill in wide areas be the deciding factor, as they cut though América’s wing backs in 2v1 scenarios easily. After the goal was conceded, the underdogs could hardly muster any challenge on the European giants, as they coasted for the rest of the match before Cristiano Ronaldo put the nail in the coffin in second half added time.

A Tangent: Rest Days in Youth Tournaments

Periodization is always an interesting topic to discuss among the footballing community, particularly how some leagues and set-ups are very unaccommodating to such a practice. I would like to offer some grievances of mine when it comes to how some high level youth tournaments are when it comes to giving athletes rest days. In the footage for the Nike Friendlies and across the Development Academy showcase, players were often pulling up with injuries. Now before a certain Dutch figure beats me to it, I would like to perhaps offer a resolution.

I understand the logic that younger players can undergo muscle recovery faster, which means that the space between games can be reduced. However, towards the end of these tournaments, the quality of play among the players reduces due to fatigue. John Hackworth, the US U17 coach, used the same starting XI for all three matches of the Nike Friendlies. While he could’ve rotated his team to rest players, he chose to stay with the same selection because of the good performances the unit put in, so there was no need to change it. Also, he is rewarding the good displays of his players as any manager would do by not changing the starting XI. But the match against Brazil was not their best performance overall, which is expected if they were the best opposition they played against. However, this drop-off I feel was heightened by fatigue.

In the Development Academy Showcase, U16 and U18 teams played 3 games in 4 days, with some of those players logging 270 minutes during that time. Again, if you rotate your squad, may not be a huge issue. However, the whole point of a showcase is to put forth your best talent to show off their abilities. If they are at risk of injuries due to the frequency of matches, there is no chance you can expect their best performances, even if a wonderful recovery team assists their players.

This problem is not distinctly American. In the last playing of the Al Kass U17 tournament played in Qatar, teams typically had one day in between their games, or two if they were lucky given the draw in later rounds. In the SuperCupNI (formerly known as the Milk Cup), U17 teams play five games in five days, regardless of their standing after the three initial matches.

I understand that tournaments are an interesting travel experience for young players, and that they cannot last forever given that they are oftentimes taken out of school to attend them. However, if one wants to see these players perform at their best levels and have the best players stay healthy, then additional days off have to be included as part of the schedule. In summary, youth tournaments, especially friendly youth tournaments, should not aim to overload the match schedule. Rather, they should be accommodating to the travel and fitness demands that the tournament requires, and reduce the overall workload on those who will be playing a large majority of the minutes in the competition.

Conclusion

We enter the Christmas period now where a series of interesting months lie ahead all over the globe as domestic seasons begin in the beginning half of the year, and the second period of European leagues commences as well. Around The World will go over the competitions that are often overlooked by many, so more often than not it will be matches that few “mainstream” fans would have seen. Or they will be classic matches that have intrigued me enough to be worthy of publication. With that in mind, regular scheduled analysis of bigger clubs will continue to take place on this site. The next chapter shall come relatively soon, so now to play us out…