Observations from an old guy who doesn't like the Mexican style of play (choking, faking, etc.). I grew up playing against them in South Texas....but anyway....

Mexico has a good team. I was impressed by the ball control from end to end. They played a controlled game and didn't waste time hoping a long ball would be corralled. I said during the game it's only a matter of time until Mexico scores and they did on a beautiful back heel and quick shot. The right wing for Mexico was spreading apart the defense in the second half. He controlled the ball perfectly almost every time and the Mexicans went to him over and over. Even the score for Mexico started from the right. If you watch it again you will see how they spread the defense out from far right to far left. The US never did that.

My bullet points:

• If the US had players like Mexico that could receive a long ball with such control, then the US would have had a 4 goal win. Mexican defenders displayed far more ball control than the US offense. I was even pointing out to my son to watch how closely the Mexicans held the ball while dribbling.
• Mexico's defense rarely let a ball get away from them and when they did, 2 defenders were getting back to cover the goal line. See the saves by Mexico on the too few shots on target.
• The US defense/midfield played the ball through from too far back, not just at the end in desperation time, but the whole game. Most of their through balls were too short and the offense had to come back to the ball instead of running up to them.
• The US did not play well as a team especially in the midfield. Not enough motion off the ball.
• Relying on 2 young guys will not get it done at this level. They need some young legs that can keep going or they need to quit with a game plan that requires full field wind sprints every 2 minutes.

Furlock Bones said:

---

technical ball skills continue to be the US's biggest issue. we have 2-3 players that are comfortable with the ball at their feet anywhere on the pitch. 2-3 players out of the entire player pool. until that changes, we won't win anything of substance.

---

Totally agree. Watching the Mexican (or top South American or European teams) receive the ball is different than what our guys do. It's just so natural for the better soccer nations. Like they can receive the ball without having to think about it so they are already in the midst of executing their next move. Our guys it's like they have to trap it first and then do the next thing next.

bagger05 said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

technical ball skills continue to be the US's biggest issue. we have 2-3 players that are comfortable with the ball at their feet anywhere on the pitch. 2-3 players out of the entire player pool. until that changes, we won't win anything of substance.

---

Totally agree. Watching the Mexican (or top South American or European teams) receive the ball is different than what our guys do. It's just so natural for the better soccer nations. Like they can receive the ball without having to think about it so they are already in the midst of executing their next move. Our guys it's like they have to trap it first and then do the next thing next.

---

Nothing new. USMNT has always relied on their athleticism and fitness.

Which is why they flounder.

To develop into a world class team, the US has to put an emphasis on techanical development, even if it means sacrificing some of the athleticism and fitness. At the highest levels, technical skills are more valuable than sheer athleticism.

carl spacklers hat said:

---

Which is why they flounder.

To develop into a world class team, the US has to put an emphasis on techanical development, even if it means sacrificing some of the athleticism and fitness. At the highest levels, technical skills are more valuable than sheer athleticism.

---

Why would we adjust our strategy when what we've been doing has been working so well?

Which is why soccer is such a great game. You don't have to be 7' tall or Usain Bolt. You can be a little guy with great skills and be a world class player. I say this as a 6'2" dude.

bagger05 said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

technical ball skills continue to be the US's biggest issue. we have 2-3 players that are comfortable with the ball at their feet anywhere on the pitch. 2-3 players out of the entire player pool. until that changes, we won't win anything of substance.

---

Totally agree. Watching the Mexican (or top South American or European teams) receive the ball is different than what our guys do. It's just so natural for the better soccer nations. Like they can receive the ball without having to think about it so they are already in the midst of executing their next move. Our guys it's like they have to trap it first and then do the next thing next.

---

I had the benefit of going to a German run soccer camp back in high school. It changed my playing forever. The whole week was about ball-control. We had to be able to juggle the ball with every part of our foot and with all legal parts of our bodies. Right foot- Inside, instep, outside, knee, shoulder, head, and down the other side and back. We were required to be able to dribble with ball close to our bodies and to be able to stop the ball on a dime and change direction instantly. It was methodical and repetitive. Something I think we lack in all kinds of practice these days.

It is amazing what you can do after you master the ball in the air. You can direct it fluidly and with great efficiency even when your opponent thinks you have already lost control.

Even into my forties, I can make a youngster whiff on the ball until I get winded and then I'm done. They got me after that and it's not a long wait for them.

That is the nice thing about the most recent U-20 team, and a lot of the young players breaking through. They are all comfortable with the ball under pressure. On a similar note, it's not just that player being comfortable, your teammates have to be willing to work to provide you outlets. And that outlet needs other players working off the ball. Being able to see the play happen before its there, being connected.

I think you can see that we have emphasized this heavily in our youth ranks for a while, it just takes a while for those players to matriculate up.

No.

It appeared to me that Mexico was clearly the better team. The USA had opportunities to steal the game, but 90 minutes was too much time to allow the larceny.

sharpdressedman said:

---

It appeared to me that Mexico was clearly the better team. The USA had opportunities to steal the game, but 90 minutes was too much time to allow the larceny.

---

I'd say we had the better of the first half by a close margin, and especially the first 10-15 minutes. We came out fine the first 5-10 minutes of the 2nd, then they dominated the game for about 30 minutes and capitalized on it.

Their kids play soccer the way we played football and baseball and the way the kids after us (or our age cohort that grew up in the Midwest) played basketball.

When we moved to Indonesia in 1973 we played with badminton or soccer every day except Friday (when we still played with ethnic Chinese) and Sunday (when our parents wouldn't let us play...my parents were appointed missionaries by the Southern Baptist (now) International Mission Board.)

But more broadly: ALL of the missionary kids played outside 2-4 hours per day and when we were with each other it was soccer, tennis, capture the flag, badminton, volleyball. Not much basketball other than CAT/HORSE. And most of my friends could have played intercollegiate (some did) or club (more did.)

Now what did I see as the difference? Lightning fast decisions, precise passes, and passion. Which of those three did we have?

PatAg said:

---

sharpdressedman said:

---

It appeared to me that Mexico was clearly the better team. The USA had opportunities to steal the game, but 90 minutes was too much time to allow the larceny.

---

I'd say we had the better of the first half by a close margin, and especially the first 10-15 minutes. We came out fine the first 5-10 minutes of the 2nd, then they dominated the game for about 30 minutes and capitalized on it.

---

I agree with this, and I'd even go so far as to say it mimicked most of the US/Mexico games I've seen.

Yes, they had over 50% of the possession. And yes, we rarely strung long passing sequences together and we were forced to hit them on the counter. But we also caused them problems on the edge and forced a high number of corners/set pieces, which are always advantages for us in this game.

We're bigger, we're faster, and we're better on set pieces. They possess better, and they have better movement.

It's just a clash of styles. Always has been.

I'll see if I can find an article I read yesterday, but they we actually had some nice sequences of possession and creating chances that actually built from the back. Someone mentioned here, or another thread, but we gotta just keep getting more guys on the field who are confident on the ball. It's getting there